Loading...
2020-10-28 Agenda PacketCHESTERFIELD COUNTY CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA 23832 AGENDA October 28, 2020 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS   LESLIE A.T. HALEY CHAIR MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT KEVIN P. CARROLL VICE CHAIR MATOACA DISTRICT JIM A. INGLE BERMUDA DISTRICT CHRISTOPHER M. WINSLOW CLOVER HILL DISTRICT JAMES M. HOLLAND DALE DISTRICT JOSEPH P. CASEY, Ph.D. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 1.Approval of Minutes  2.Requests to Postpone Agenda Items and Additions, Deletions or Changes in the Order of  Presentation  3.Work Sessions   A.Everyday Excellence ­ Social Services      B.2020 Public Safety Pay Study Report      C.Proposed 2021 Legislative Program      D.Election Preparedness Update       E.Community Development Consent Agenda Overview     4.Reports      A.District Improvement Funds (DIF) Monthly Report     5.Fifteen­Minute Citizen Comment Period on Unscheduled Matters  6.Closed Session     Page 1 of 394 Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors Meeting October 28, 2020   A.Pursuant to 1) § 2.2­3711(A)(19), Code of Virginia, 1950, as Amended, for a) Discussion of  Reports or Plans Related to the Security of any Governmental Facility, Building or Structure,  or the Safety of Persons Using Such Facility, Building or Structure, and b) Discussion of  Information Subject to the Exclusion in Subdivisions 2 or 14 of § 2.2­3705.2, Where  Discussion in an Open Meeting Would Jeopardize the Safety of any Person or the Security of  Any Facility, Building, Structure, Information, Technology System, or Software Program,   2)  § 2.2­­3711(A)(3), Code of Virginia, 1950, as Amended, to Discuss the Acquisition by the  County of Real Estate for a Public Purpose Where Discussion in an Open Meeting Would  Adversely Affect the Bargaining Position and Negotiating Strategy of the Public Body, and  3)  § 2.2­­3711(A)(5), Code of Virginia, 1950, as Amended, to Discuss or Consider  Prospective Businesses or Industries or the Expansion of Existing Businesses or Industries  Where no Previous Announcement Has Been Made of the Businesses’ or Industries’ Interest  in Locating or Expanding Their Facilities in the Community, and 4) § 2.2­3711(A)(1), Code  of Virginia, 1950, as Amended, Relating to the Performance of the Chief of Police     7.Recess for Dinner     6:00 p.m. Evening Session ­ Public Meeting Room    8.Invocation      The Honorable Chris Winslow, Clover Hill District    9.Pledge of Allegiance      Deputy County Administrator Matt Harris    10.County Administration Update     11.Board Member Reports     12.Resolutions and Special Recognitions      A.Resolution Recognizing Mr. Michael C. Turner, Department of Utilities, Upon His  Retirement     13.New Business      A.Appointments      1.Board of Building and Fire Code Appeals       2.GRTC Transit System Board of Directors       B.Consent Items      1.Adoption of Resolutions     Page 2 of 394 Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors Meeting October 28, 2020  a.Resolution Recognizing Ms. Jody Schurman, Utilities Department, Upon Her  Retirement      b.Resolution Recognizing Mr. Michael W. Smith, Department of General  Services, Fleet Services Division, Upon His Retirement      c.Resolution Recognizing Mr. Lester A. Katzer, Utilities Department, Upon His  Retirement      d.Resolution Recognizing Ms. Sue S. Hubbell, Fire & EMS, Upon Her  Retirement      e.Resolution Recognizing Ms. Debra Gates, Department of Social Services,  Upon Her Retirement      f.Resolution Recognizing Ms. Daisy Cabas, Department of Social Services,  Upon Her Retirement      g.Resolution Recognizing Firefighter Earnest N. Llewellyn, Fire & EMS, Upon  His Retirement      h.Resolution Recognizing Mr. George L. Rivera, Utilities Department, Upon  His Retirement      i.Resolution Recognizing Ms. Tommie S. Clare, Department of Utilities, Upon  Her Retirement      j.Resolution Recognizing Mr. Garret T. Flynn, Department of General Services  Printing Center, Upon His Retirement      k.Resolution Recognizing Mrs. Brenda D. Manuel, Planning Department, Upon  Her Retirement      l.Resolution Recognizing Mr. Greg Fulk, Department of Mental Health Support  Services, Upon His Retirement      m.Resolution Recognizing Corporal Johnny A. Capocelli, Police Department,  Upon His Retirement      n.Resolution Approving Request of Delta Response Team, LLC to Operate  Non­Emergency Ambulance Service      2.Real Property Requests      a.Acceptance of Parcels of Land      1.Acceptance of a Parcel of Land Adjacent to Le Gordon Drive from  Berk and Alp LLC     Page 3 of 394 Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors Meeting October 28, 2020  2.Acceptance of a Parcel of Land Along Rivers Bend Boulevard from  Rivers Bend Townhomes Association, Inc.      3.Acceptance of a Parcel of Land Along Rivers Bend Boulevard from  Rivers Bend Community Association, Inc.      4.Acceptance of Three Parcels of Land Along Ecoff Avenue from  Virginia Electric and Power Company      5.Acceptance of Parcels of Land Adjacent to Lewis Road from Trevor  and Deborah Ball      b.Requests to Quitclaim      1.Request to Quitclaim a Portion of a Variable Width Water Easement  Across the Property of Westchester Apartments, LLC       2.Request to Quitclaim a Portion of a Variable Width SWMBMP  Easement and a 20’ SWMBMP Access Easement across the Property  of Midlothian Huguenot AT LLC and VA Hokies Realty Associates,  LLC       3.Authorize the Receipt and Appropriation of State Opioid Response (SOR) Grant  Funding Year 3 for Treatment, Recovery and Prevention from the Department of  Behavioral Health & Developmental Services      4.Appropriation of Funds and Authorization to Award a Construction Contract for the  Route 360, Eastbound (Lonas Parkway ­ Castle Rock Road) Widening Project      5.Transfer and Appropriation of Revenue Sharing Fund Balances from Completed  Projects to Active Projects       6.Set Public Hearing to Consider Code Amendment Relative to Route 1 Residential  Overlay and Northern Jefferson Davis Highway Design District Development  Standards (20PJ0119)      7.Set Public Hearing Date to Consider the FY2021­FY2026 Central Virginia  Transportation Authority Improvement Plan and FY2021 Budget       8.Initiate an Application for a Conditional Use to Permit the use of a Manufactured  Home as a Sales Office and a Conditional Use Planned Development to Permit  Ordinance and Development Standards Exceptions on 1.3 Acres Located at 9900  Jefferson Davis Highway and 2611 Woodfin Drive.      9.Authorize the Receipt and Appropriation of 2020 State Homeland Security Grant  Funds from the Department of Homeland Security      10.Acceptance of FY2020 Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance, Edward  Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant.     Page 4 of 394 Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors Meeting October 28, 2020  11.Approval of Youth Citizen Board Volunteer Process       12.Appropriate Schools Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act  Funding Through the Governor's Emergency Education Relief (GEER) Set­Aside  Fund and a Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) School Violence  Prevention Program Grant      13.Award of Construction Contracts      a.Award of Construction Contract for Project IFB #ADMN20000539: I­95 /  Route 10 Interchange, Phase 1 Improvements and Appropriation of Funds      b.Award of Construction Contract for County Project #15­0346 Huguenot Pump  Station and Tank      c.Award and Execute Construction Contract for Dutch Gap Kayak Storage  Facility      d.Award of Construction Contract for County Project #19­0231 Proctors Creek  Wastewater Treatment Plant Electrical Buildings 4 and 13      e.Authorization to Award a Construction Contract for the Route 10 (Whitepine  Road to Frith Lane) Widening Project      14.Changes in the Secondary System of State Highways      a.Changes in the Secondary System of State Highways, N. Rhodes Lane, State  Route 631 Chesterfield County, Virginia      b.Changes in the Secondary System of State Highways, Nash Road, State Route  636 Chesterfield County, Virginia      c.Changes in the Secondary System of State Highways, Meadowville Landing  Section 7 Chesterfield County, Virginia      d.Changes in the Secondary System of State Highways, Nash Road, State Route  636 Chesterfield County, Virginia      15.Acceptance of State Roads     14.Fifteen­Minute Citizen Comment Period on Unscheduled Matters     15.Deferred Items      A.20SN0604 ­ Diana and Stephen Berkshire ­ Dale District      Page 5 of 394 Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors Meeting October 28, 2020 16.Requests for Manufactured Home Permits and Rezoning Placed on the Consent Agenda to be  Heard in the Following Order:  Withdrawals/Deferrals Cases Where the Applicant Accepts the Recommendation and There is No Opposition Cases Where the Applicant Does Not Accept the Recommendation and/or There is  Public Opposition Will Be Heard at Section 18     A.20SN0572 ­ Nathaniel and Gabrielle Harris ­ Bermuda District      B.20SN0584 ­ Rams Holding LLC ­ Midlothian District      C.20SN0610 ­ Ian Brown, Harold G. Driver III, and Kathy B. Driver ­ Midlothian District      D.20SN0614 ­ Hickory Estate, LLC ­ Matoaca District     17.Public Hearings      A.Conveyance of an Easement to Virginia Electric and Power Company for a 15' Underground  Easement for Service at Chesterfield County Airport      B.To Adopt an Ordinance to Vacate a Portion of a 50' Unimproved Right of Way Known as  Fonda Street Within Revised Plan of Rayon Park      C.To Consider Code Amendment Relative to Townhouse and Multiple Family Unit Parking  (20PJ0125)      D.To Consider Second Amendment to Lease Agreement with 5G Air, LLC for Construction of  Aircraft Hangars at the Chesterfield County Airport       E.To Consider the Exercise of Eminent Domain for the Acquisition of Permanent Water and  Temporary Construction, Electric and Communication Easements for the Huguenot Pump  Station Transmission Main Project       F.To Consider Amendments to County Code Sections 9­29, 9­30, 9­31 and 9­32 Relating to  Rehabilitated Historic Residential and Commercial Real Estate and Partial Exemption for  Certain Rehabilitated, Renovated or Replaced Commercial, Industrial and Residential  Structures     18.Remaining Manufactured Home Permits and Zoning Requests     19.Fifteen­Minute Citizen Comment Period on Unscheduled Matters     20.Adjournment      A.Adjournment and Notice of Next Scheduled Meeting of the Board of Supervisors     Page 6 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 3.B. Subject: 2020 Public Safety Pay Study Report Board Action Requested: Hold a work session to present the 2020 Public Safety Pay Study to the Board. Summary of Information: A summary update will be provided to the Board of Supervisors on the results of the county's 2020 Public Safety Pay Study. Attachments: 1.DraftReport - Chesterfield 2.3B - Chesterfield County - Presentation of Results Preparer:Mary Martin Selby, Director Approved By: Page 7 of 394 Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA DRAFT REPORT October 20, 2020 Page 8 of 394 PAGE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................... i 1.0 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 1-1 1.1 Analysis Methodology ........................................................................................ 1-1 1.2 Report Organization........................................................................................... 1-2 2.0 ASSESSMENT OF CURRENT CONDITIONS ................................................................ 2-1 2.1 Pay Plan Analysis ............................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Employee Salary Placement by Grade ............................................................. 2-3 2.3 Salary Quartile Analysis ..................................................................................... 2-6 2.4 Employees by Department ............................................................................. 2-13 2.5 Employee Survey Results ............................................................................... 2-13 2.6 Summary ............................................................................................... 2-21 3.0 MARKET SURVEY RESULTS ....................................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Market Data ....................................................................................................... 3-3 3.2 Market Survey Conclusion ............................................................................. 3-11 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................ 4-1 4.1 Compensation System ...................................................................................... 4-1 4.2 Compensation and Classification System Administration .............................. 4-7 4.3 Summary ....................................................................................................................... 4-9 APPENDICES Appendix I: Market Results Appendix II: Engagement Survey Documents EVERGREEN SOLUTIONS, LLC Table of Contents Page 9 of 394 Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page i In the spring of 2020, Chesterfield County, VA (the County) contracted Evergreen Solutions, LLC to perform a Compensation study of its public safety departments. The results of this study provide the County’s leadership and other key stakeholders with information related to the fairness and competitive standing of the County’s current compensation structure, as well as recommendations for improvement moving forward. Key Findings  Evergreen found that the County possesses a unique compensation plan for each respective public safety department currently. While the plans are designed fairly well, they have not performed well in preventing pay compression from occurring for a wide variety of public safety ranks below the midpoint of the range. Evergreen found that the overwhelming majority of employees possessed a salary below their midpoint, with the majority being located in the first quartile of the salary range, which is not indicative of the organizational tenure employees have.  Employees were surveyed for their perceptional feedback on the current compensation structure; the highest ranked concern by employees was that of salary compression, with additional concern about the lack of salary progression also being cited.  When comparing against the market average on a structural level, the County possessed fairly competitive salary ranges, with the notable exception of the Sheriff’s office;  However, the County’s average actual salary comparison against market peers showed the County lagged the market average in a number of ranks. This further reinforces the notion that the County’s ranges themselves while fairly well designed, have not allowed for any significant salary progression and the County is dealing with clustering of employee salaries at the beginning portions of its ranges.  This clustering and overall compression of salaries has occurred by way of the lack of salary mobility provided by the current open-range compensation structures. The open- range structures have not allowed for the County to easily identify compression issues as they arise, as there is no context of employee or expected salary versus tenure built into the range. Key Recommendations 1. Revise the current salary ranges, and adopt a new, step-based pay plan for the Fire, Police, and Sheriff departments; and slot all classifications into their respective pay plans based on years of experience. EVERGREEN SOLUTIONS, LLC Executive Summary Page 10 of 394 Executive Summary Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page ii a. Evergreen has developed a new pay structure for the existing public safety classifications based on the market data and peer practices. The updated pay structures can be found in Exhibits 4-1, 4-2, and 4-3. The exhibits are also reflective of starting salaries for higher positions at higher starting steps. This was designed to be realistic with requirements on years of experience at each position and to reduce rank compression between reporting relationships. 2. Evergreen recommends the County adopt a methodology to transition employee salaries into the proposed pay plan that aligns with its established compensation philosophy and the availability of resources. a. Evergreen further recommends the County opt for a phased approach where by in phase 1 the County maintains the current open range structure and increases compensation by a tenure-based percentage increase, in order to mitigate some of the range compression present in the current structure. In phase 2, Evergreen recommends the County implement the step plan, assigning all incumbents to the appropriate step based on total tenure parity. b. The total cost to implement both phase 1 and phase 2, accounting for both salary and benefits costs, is $22,384,270.34. 3. Conduct small-scale salary surveys on a regular basis to assess the market competitiveness of all public safety positions, and make adjustments to pay grade assignments, if necessary. 4. Conduct a comprehensive classification and compensation analysis every five to seven years. 5. Adopt a philosophical approach to adjusting the new step-based structures on an annual basis. a. This can be done by way of several methods: i. An annual small-scale survey of the peer organizations for their newest rates for each rank or a subset of ranks ii. An annual survey of peer organizations attaining the anticipated compensation structure percentage movements iii. Tying the adjustment of the plans to a reliable and easy to follow metric such as the change in local CPI. iv. A combination or hybrid of the above approaches 6. Revise policies and practices for moving employees’ salaries through the pay plan, including procedures for determining salaries of newly hired employees and employees who have been promoted, demoted, or transferred to a different classification. Page 11 of 394 Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 1-1 In the spring of 2020, Chesterfield County, VA (the County) contracted Evergreen Solutions, LLC to perform a Compensation study of its public safety departments. The results of this study provide the County’s leadership and other key stakeholders with information related to the fairness and competitive standing of the County’s current compensation structure, as well as recommendations for improvement moving forward. The focus of this analysis is to determine and further enhance the level of internal and external equity of the current compensation structure. Internal equity is defined as the fairness of compensation between the different positions inside of the organization, whereas external equity is defined as the difference between how an organization’s classifications are compensated and valued in the marketplace for similarly performed work. 1.1 ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY Through a qualitative and quantitative methodology, the analysis’s purpose is to maximize both the competitiveness and fairness of the County’s compensation and classification structure. This was completed through the following activities in the project:  Conducting a project kick-off meeting;  Conducting on-site meetings with public safety leadership;  Conducting employee compensation satisfaction survey;  Conducting an external market salary survey;  Developing recommendations for compensation management;  Designing implementation plans; and  Creating draft and final reports. Kick-off Meeting The kick-off meeting for the project was performed to develop a work plan for the study and begin the process of collecting the County’s data. This included things such as the County’s current pay plans, pay policies, job descriptions, organizational charts, and information on organizational culture. Employee Survey Employees from all three agencies were provided the opportunity to complete a survey on a variety of topical questions related to the compensation study. Employees provided information related to demographics of the workforce, satisfaction with the compensation EVERGREEN SOLUTIONS, LLC Chapter 1 - Introduction Page 12 of 394 Chapter 1 – Introduction Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 1-2 structure, and identified concerns related with the current approach to compensation at the County. Market Survey A survey was developed with the intent to solicit salary information from market peer organizations. These peers were identified by geographic proximity, population served, input from leadership, and similar organizational characteristics. The survey tool collects salary information by utilizing benchmarks selected across region. All ranks from each of the three public safety departments were included in this survey for comparison. Recommendations and Implementation Plan For the recommendations and implementation, Evergreen made a final assessment on the current pay plan and also provided recommendations to each rank and pay grade assignment. Due to the nature of the recommended plans, Evergreen also provided the County various implementation scenarios for consideration, until a best fit approach was identified. The County was also provided information on how to implement the recommended salary adjustments over a multiple phase approach as well. 1.2 REPORT ORGANIZATION This report includes the following additional chapters:  Chapter 2 – Assessment of Current Conditions  Chapter 3 – Market Summary  Chapter 4 – Recommendations Page 13 of 394 Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 2-1 Prior to conducting an analysis of market data, employee classifications, compensation structure, employee salary progression, policies or other organizational information, Evergreen Solutions performed an assessment of current conditions within the County’s Public Safety departments and provided an overall assessment of our findings. This overall assessment is divided into the following sections: 2.1 Pay Plan Analysis 2.2 Employee Salary Placement by Grade 2.3 Quartile Tenure Analysis 2.4 Employee Counts by Department 2.5 Employee Survey Results 2.6 Summary When reviewing this chapter, it is important to recognize this information reflects the conditions when the study began and should be considered a snapshot in time. Conducting an overall review of the County’s Public Safety’s current compensation structure, philosophies, and employee demographics, was instrumental in providing Evergreen with a better understanding of the structures and methods the County currently has in place. Our review helped to identify any issues that may require further review and potential revision. The results of this evaluation were considered during the analysis of internal equity and peer market data. Subsequently, appropriate compensation related recommendations were developed for the County’s Public Safety departments and are described later in this report. 2.1 PAY PLAN ANALYSIS Three open range pay plans were administered by the County. As reflected in Exhibits 2A – 2C, the minimum, midpoint, and maximum salaries of each grade are shown. The pay plans consisted of 23 total grades for 1,258 employees. Range spread is a measurement of the width of a pay grade range and is defined as the percentage difference between the minimum and the maximum of a pay grade, relative to the grade minimum. Each pay grade within the plans had a range spread ranging from 66 percent to 73 percent, with the exception of Grade PO which has a set amount without a range due it being dedicated to recruits. EVERGREEN SOLUTIONS, LLC Chapter 2 – Assessment of Current Conditions Page 14 of 394 Chapter 2 - Assessment of Current Conditions Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 2-2 EXHIBIT 2A FIRE PAY PLAN Source: Created by Evergreen Solutions from data provided by the County as of February 2020. EXHIBIT 2B POLICE PAY PLAN Source: Created by Evergreen Solutions from data provided by the County as of February 2020. EXHIBIT 2C SHERIFF PAY PLAN Source: Created by Evergreen Solutions from data provided by the County as of February 2020. Rank Grade Minimum Midpoint Maximum Range Spread Employees Firefighter I F1 $44,289.00 $58,989.00 $73,688.00 66% 181 Firefighter II/III F2 $50,605.00 $68,509.00 $86,413.00 71% 157 Firefighter IV F3 $57,690.00 $78,101.00 $95,511.00 66% 24 Firefigter Lieutenant F01 $65,767.00 $89,036.00 $112,304.00 71% 65 Fire Captain F02 $74,974.00 $101,500.00 $128,026.00 71% 31 Battalion Chief F03 $85,470.00 $115,710.00 $145,949.00 71% 16 Assistant Fire Chief F04 $97,436.00 $131,909.00 $166,382.00 71% 5 Deputy Fire Chief F05 $111,077.00 $150,376.00 $189,675.00 71% 1 Rank Grade Minimum Midpoint Maximum Range Spread Employees Recruit P0 44,289$ 44,289$ 44,289$ 0% 39 Officer/First Class/Senior P1 47,000$ 62,600$ 78,199$ 66% 209 Master/Career/Corporal P2 53,909$ 72,982$ 92,055$ 71% 188 Sergeant P3 58,982$ 79,850$ 100,718$ 71% 60 Lieutenant P4 67,387$ 91,229$ 115,070$ 71% 22 Captain P5 76,990$ 104,229$ 131,468$ 71% 13 Major P6 87,961$ 119,082$ 150,202$ 71% 4 Deputy Chief P7 100,495$ 136,050$ 171,605$ 71% 2 Grade Minimum Midpoint Maximum Range Spread Employees Deputy/Deputy First Class S1 42,075$ 57,513$ 72,950$ 73% 161 Master/Career S2 45,441$ 62,114$ 78,786$ 73% 39 Sergeant S3 53,125$ 71,921$ 90,716$ 71% 22 Lieutenant S4 60,695$ 82,169$ 103,643$ 71% 11 Captain S5 69,344$ 93,878$ 118,412$ 71% 5 Major S6 79,226$ 107,256$ 135,286$ 71% 1 Deputy Chief S7 90,516$ 122,541$ 154,565$ 71% 2 Page 15 of 394 Chapter 2 - Assessment of Current Conditions Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 2-3 2.2 EMPLOYEE SALARY PLACEMENT BY GRADE An important factor to consider is the analyses of where employees’ salaries fell within each pay range when assessing the effectiveness of the County’s Public Safety pay plans, its administration and application or practices. It is equally important to determine where there may have been clusters of employees’ salaries within the current pay plans, illuminating potential pay progression concerns. Of note, employees’ salaries, and the progression of the salaries, are associated with an organization’s compensation philosophy—specifically, the method of salary progression, merit pay and the availability of resources. Therefore, the placement of employees’ salaries should be viewed in this context. Exhibits 2D – 2F illustrate the placement of employees’ salaries relative to pay grade minimums and maximums and contain the following:  the pay grades,  the number of employees in classifications assigned to the pay grade,  the number and percentage of employees with salaries below the minimum,  the number and percentage of employees with salaries at the minimum,  the number and percentage of employees with salaries at the maximum, and  the number and percentage of employees with salaries above the maximum. EXHIBIT 2D SALARY PLACEMENT - FIRE BELOW MINIMUM AND ABOVE MAXIMUM BY GRADE Source: Created by Evergreen Solutions from data provided by the County as of February 2020. Grade Employees # < Min % < Min # = Min % = Min # = Max % = Max # > Max % > Max F1 181 2 1.1% 84 46.4% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% F2 157 1 0.6% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2 1.3% F3 24 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% F01 65 0 0.0% 28 43.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% F02 31 1 3.2% 10 32.3% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% F03 16 0 0.0% 6 37.5% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% F04 5 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% F05 1 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Total 480 4 0.8% 128 26.7% 0 0.0% 2 0.4% Page 16 of 394 Chapter 2 - Assessment of Current Conditions Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 2-4 EXHIBIT 2E SALARY PLACEMENT - POLICE BELOW MINIMUM AND ABOVE MAXIMUM BY GRADE Source: Created by Evergreen Solutions from data provided by the County as of February 2020. EXHIBIT 2F SALARY PLACEMENT - SHERIFF BELOW MINIMUM AND ABOVE MAXIMUM BY GRADE Source: Created by Evergreen Solutions from data provided by the County as of February 2020. Typically, employees with salaries at the grade minimum are new hires or new to the classification and following a recent promotion; also, employees with salaries at the grade maximum are typically highly experienced and proficient in the classification. As Exhibits 2D – 2F illustrate, at the time of this study, there was a total of five employees with a salary below their position’s grade minimum (with 265 employees at the minimum). There were also 12 total employees with a salary above their position’s grade maximum. Exhibits 2G – 2I illustrate the placement of employees’ salaries relative to pay grade midpoints. The exhibits contain the following:  the pay grades,  the number of employees in classifications assigned to the pay grade,  the number and percentage of employees with salaries below the midpoint,  the number and percentage of employees with salaries near the midpoint (within five percent), and  the number and percentage of employees with salaries above the midpoint of each pay grade. Grade Employees # < Min % < Min # at Min % at Min # at Max % at Max # > Max % > Max P0 39 0 0.0% 30 76.9% 30 76.9% 9 23.1% P1 209 0 0.0% 33 15.8% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% P2 188 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2 1.1% 0 0.0% P3 60 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 1.7% 0 0.0% P4 22 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% P5 13 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% P6 4 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% P7 2 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Total 537 0 0.0% 63 11.7% 33 6.1% 9 1.7% Grade Employees # < Min % < Min # at Min % at Min # at Max % at Max # > Max % > Max S1 161 1 0.6% 41 25.5% 0 0.0% 1 0.6% S2 39 0 0.0% 33 84.6% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% S3 22 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% S4 11 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% S5 5 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% S6 1 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% S7 2 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Total 241 1 0.4% 74 30.7% 0 0.0% 1 0.4% Page 17 of 394 Chapter 2 - Assessment of Current Conditions Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 2-5 EXHIBIT 2G FIRE EMPLOYEES SALARY PLACEMENT AROUND MIDPOINT BY GRADE Source: Created by Evergreen Solutions from data provided by the County as of February 2020. EXHIBIT 2H POLICE EMPLOYEES SALARY PLACEMENT AROUND MIDPOINT BY GRADE Source: Created by Evergreen Solutions from data provided by the County as of February 2020. Grade Employees # < Mid % < Mid # Near Mid % Near Mid # > Mid % > Mid F1 181 180 99.4% 1 0.6% 0 0.0% F2 157 141 89.8% 14 8.9% 2 1.3% F3 24 22 91.7% 1 4.2% 1 4.2% F01 65 60 92.3% 4 6.2% 1 1.5% F02 31 27 87.1% 3 9.7% 1 3.2% F03 16 14 87.5% 2 12.5% 0 0.0% F04 5 4 80.0% 1 20.0% 0 0.0% F05 1 1 100.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Total 480 449 93.5% 26 5.4% 5 1.0% Grade Employees # < Mid % < Mid # Near Mid % Near Mid # > Mid % > Mid P0 39 0 0.0% 39 100.0% 0 0.0% P1 209 209 100.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% P2 188 119 63.3% 41 21.8% 28 14.9% P3 60 41 68.3% 14 23.3% 5 8.3% P4 22 9 40.9% 9 40.9% 4 18.2% P5 13 6 46.2% 6 46.2% 1 7.7% P6 4 2 50.0% 2 50.0% 0 0.0% P7 2 0 0.0% 2 100.0% 0 0.0% Total 537 386 71.9% 113 21.0% 38 7.1% Page 18 of 394 Chapter 2 - Assessment of Current Conditions Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 2-6 EXHIBIT 2I SHERIFF EMPLOYEES SALARY PLACEMENT AROUND MIDPOINT BY GRADE Source: Created by Evergreen Solutions from data provided by the County as of February 2020. Employees with salaries close to the midpoint of a pay range should be fully proficient in their classification and require minimal supervision to complete their job duties while performing satisfactorily. Therefore, it is important to examine the percentage and number of employees with salaries above and below the calculated midpoint. Of the 1,258 employees within the County’s Public Safety pay plans, 1,061 total employees (84.3 percent) had salaries below the midpoint of their respective range, 148 employees (11.8 percent) had salaries near the midpoint (defined as within five percent of either side of the midpoint), while 49 employees (3.9 percent) had salaries above the midpoint range. 2.3 SALARY QUARTILE ANALYSIS The quartile analysis section provides an additional analysis of the distribution of employees’ salaries across the pay grades at the time of this study. Examining employee salary placement by grade quartile provided insight into whether clustering of employees’ salaries existed within each pay grade. For this analysis, employees’ salaries were slotted within one of four equal distributions. The first quartile (0-25) represents the lowest 25 percent of the pay range. The second quartile (26-50) represents the segment of the pay range above the first quartile up to the pay range’s midpoint. The third quartile (51-75) represents the part of the pay range above the midpoint up to the 75th percentile of the pay range. The fourth quartile (76-100) is the highest 25 percent of the pay range. This analytical method provided an opportunity to assess how employees’ salaries are disbursed throughout each grade (pay range). The quartile analysis is used to determine the location of employee salary clusters. Quartile analysis helps identify whether clusters exist in specific quartiles of pay grades. Additionally, the amount of time the employee has spent at the organization is also analyzed, in order to observe any relationship between organizational tenure and salary progression. This information, while not definitive alone, can shed light on any root issues within the current Grade Employees # < Mid % < Mid # Near Mid % Near Mid # > Mid % > Mid S1 161 159 98.8% 0 0.0% 2 1.2% S2 39 30 76.9% 6 15.4% 3 7.7% S3 22 20 90.9% 1 4.5% 1 4.5% S4 11 10 90.9% 1 9.1% 0 0.0% S5 5 5 100.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% S6 1 0 0.0% 1 100.0% 0 0.0% S7 2 2 100.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Total 241 226 93.8% 9 3.7% 6 2.5% Page 19 of 394 Chapter 2 - Assessment of Current Conditions Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 2-7 compensation and classification plan when combined with market data and employee feedback. Of note, tenure alone is not a determinant of employee’s compensation, other variables such as merit pay influence employee’s compensation. According to the United States Merit Systems Protection Board, the growing customer expectations for delivery of efficient and effective public services are driving government agencies around the nation to better align pay with performance and create organizational cultures that emphasize performance over tenure. Exhibits 2J – 2L provide a breakdown of placement of employees’ salaries relative to salary quartile and provide the following:  the pay grades,  the number of employees per pay grade,  the counts of the employees by quartile within each grade, and  the average total tenure by quartile within each grade. The County’s employees’ salaries were overall clustered in the first two quartiles of their pay range. In order of employee concentration, 905 employees (71.9 percent) had salaries in the first quartile of their respective pay ranges, 249 (19.8 percent) in the second quartile, 73 employees (5.8 percent) in the third quartile and 31 employees (2.5 percent) in the fourth quartile. This distribution leads to a conclusion that significant compression has occurred over time at the County. Data for average tenure do lead to determinations on the relationship between tenure and salary. It is common for the overall average tenure to increase as quartile increases and is the case for Chesterfield County Public Safety employees. The average tenure in Quartile 1 is 8.5 years for Fire, 4.8 years for Police, and 7.2 years for Sheriff employees. The average tenure in Quartile 2 is 20.3 years for Fire, 15.8 years for Police, and 18.3 years for Sheriff employees. The average tenure in Quartile 3 is 29.1 years for Fire, 23.3 years for Police, and 26.3 years for Sheriff employees. Finally, the average tenure in Quartile 4 is 33.9 years for Fire, 20.0 years for Police, and 3.6 years for Sheriff employees. Even though the employees are clustered in the first two quartiles, there is a general positive linear relationship between tenure and pay, with the main exception of the 4th quartile for Sheriff employees, which is only reflective of one employee with a lesser tenure than many others. Page 20 of 394 Ch a p t e r 2 - A s s e s s m e n t o f C u r r e n t C o n d i t i o n s Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n a n d C o m p e n s a t i o n S t u d y a n d Pa y P l a n D e v e l o p m e n t f o r P u b l i c S a fe t y f o r C h e s t e r f i e l d C o u n t y , V A Ev e r g r e e n S o l u t i o n s , L L C P a g e 2 - 8 EX H I B I T 2 J FI R E E M P L O Y E E S QU A R T I L E A N A L Y S I S – T E N U R E B Y G R A D E So u r c e : C r e a t e d b y E v e r g r e e n S o l u ti o n s f r o m d a t a p r o v i d e d b y t h e C o u n t y a s o f F e b r u a r y 2 0 2 0 . EX H I B I T 2 K PO L I C E E M P L O Y E E S QU A R T I L E A N A L Y S I S – T E N U R E B Y G R A D E So u r c e : C r e a t e d b y E v e r g r e e n S o l u ti o n s f r o m d a t a p r o v i d e d b y t h e C o u n t y a s o f F e b r u a r y 2 0 2 0 . # E m p l o y e e s A v g T e n u r e # E m p l o y e e s A v g T e n u r e # E m p l o y e e s A v g T e n u r e # E m p l o y e e s A v g T e n u r e F1 1 8 1 3 . 0 1 7 5 2 . 6 6 1 4 . 3 0 - 0 - F2 1 5 7 1 3 . 0 1 0 6 1 0 . 4 4 7 1 7 . 5 2 2 3 . 8 2 3 3 . 9 F3 2 4 1 6 . 9 1 8 1 5 . 2 5 2 2 . 1 1 2 1 . 8 0 - F0 1 6 5 1 7 . 1 5 6 1 5 . 2 6 2 7 . 7 3 3 0 . 9 0 - F0 2 3 1 2 0 . 8 2 2 1 6 . 8 7 2 9 . 2 2 3 4 . 3 0 - F0 3 1 6 2 0 . 6 1 2 1 7 . 1 3 3 1 . 3 1 3 0 . 7 0 - F0 4 5 2 5 . 5 3 2 2 . 2 2 3 0 . 4 0 - 0 - F0 5 1 1 7 . 3 1 1 7 . 3 0 - 0 - 0 - Ov e r a l l 4 8 0 1 0 . 9 3 9 3 8 . 5 7 6 2 0 . 3 9 2 9 . 1 2 3 3 . 9 4th Quartile Av e r a g e Te n u r e Gr a d e To t a l Em p l o y e e s 1s t Q u a r t i l e 2 n d Q u a r t i l e 3 r d Q u a r t i l e # E m p l o y e e s A v g T e n u r e # E m p l o y e e s A v g T e n u r e # E m p l o y e e s A v g T e n u r e # E m p l o y e e s A v g T e n u r e P0 3 9 0 . 5 3 0 0 . 5 0 - 0 - 9 0 . 8 P1 2 0 9 4 . 0 2 0 1 3 . 9 8 7 . 3 0 - 0 - P2 1 8 8 1 5 . 5 6 4 9 . 2 7 5 1 5 . 3 3 3 2 2 . 2 1 6 2 8 . 1 P3 6 0 1 6 . 4 4 8 . 8 4 0 1 4 . 1 1 4 2 3 . 2 2 3 2 . 5 P4 2 2 2 1 . 2 1 1 2 . 6 1 5 1 9 . 7 6 2 6 . 3 0 - P5 1 3 2 4 . 0 1 1 5 . 6 1 0 2 3 . 1 1 2 8 . 6 1 3 7 . 1 P64 2 5 . 1 0 - 3 2 3 . 3 1 3 0 . 4 0 - P72 3 2 . 1 0 - 1 3 1 . 9 1 3 2 . 4 0 - Ov e r a l l 5 3 7 1 0 . 6 3 0 1 4 . 8 1 5 2 1 5 . 8 5 6 2 3 . 3 2 8 2 0 . 0 3r d Q u a r t i l e 4 t h Q u a r t i l e Gr a d e To t a l Em p l o y e e s Av e r a g e Te n u r e 1s t Q u a r t i l e 2 n d Q u a r t i l e Page 21 of 394 Ch a p t e r 2 - A s s e s s m e n t o f C u r r e n t C o n d i t i o n s Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n a n d C o m p e n s a t i o n S t u d y a n d Pa y P l a n D e v e l o p m e n t f o r P u b l i c S a fe t y f o r C h e s t e r f i e l d C o u n t y , V A Ev e r g r e e n S o l u t i o n s , L L C Page 2-9 EX H I B I T 2 L SH E R I F F E M P L O Y E E S QU A R T I L E A N A L Y S I S – T E N U R E B Y G R A D E So u r c e : C r e a t e d b y E v e r g r e e n S o l u ti o n s f r o m d a t a p r o v i d e d b y t h e C o u n t y a s o f F e b r u a r y 2 0 2 0 . # E m p l o y e e s A v g T e n u r e # E m p l o y e e s A v g T e n u r e # E m p l o y e e s A v g T e n u r e # E m p l o y e e s A v g T e n u r e S1 1 6 1 5 . 7 1 5 2 5 . 1 7 1 4 . 4 1 3 0 . 2 1 3 . 6 S23 9 1 4 . 6 2 5 1 1 . 1 9 1 7 . 9 5 2 5 . 8 0 - S3 2 2 1 1 . 6 1 9 9 . 9 1 1 6 . 1 2 2 5 . 7 0 - S4 1 1 1 7 . 0 8 1 4 . 3 3 2 4 . 0 0 - 0 - S5 5 2 0 . 1 5 2 0 . 1 0 - 0 - 0 - S6 1 3 4 . 1 0 - 1 3 4 . 1 0 - 0 - S7 2 2 6 . 1 2 2 6 . 1 0 - 0 - 0 - Ov e r a l l 2 4 1 8 . 8 2 1 1 7 . 2 2 1 1 8 . 3 8 2 6 . 3 1 3 . 6 Gr a d e To t a l Em p l o y e e s Av e r a g e Te n u r e 1s t Q u a r t i l e 2 n d Q u a r t i l e 3 r d Q u a r t i l e 4 t h Q u a r t i l e Page 22 of 394 Ch a p t e r 2 - A s s e s s m e n t o f C u r r e n t C o n d i t i o n s Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n a n d C o m p e n s a t i o n S t u d y a n d Pa y P l a n D e v e l o p m e n t f o r P u b l i c S a fe t y f o r C h e s t e r f i e l d C o u n t y , V A Ev e r g r e e n S o l u t i o n s , L L C Page 2-10 EX H I B I T 2 M FI R E E M P L O Y E E S QU A R T I L E P L A C E M E N T B Y P A Y G R A D E 0. 0 % 25 . 0 % 50 . 0 % 75 . 0 % 10 0 . 0 % F1 F 2 F 3 F 0 1 F 0 2 F 0 3 F 0 4 F 0 5 P e r c e n t o f E m p l o y e e s Pa y G r a d e 1S T Q U A R T I L E 2N D Q U A R T I L E 3R D Q U A R T I L E 4T H Q U A R T I L E Page 23 of 394 Ch a p t e r 2 - A s s e s s m e n t o f C u r r e n t C o n d i t i o n s Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n a n d C o m p e n s a t i o n S t u d y a n d Pa y P l a n D e v e l o p m e n t f o r P u b l i c S a fe t y f o r C h e s t e r f i e l d C o u n t y , V A Ev e r g r e e n S o l u t i o n s , L L C Page 2-11 EX H I B I T 2 N PO L I C E E M P L O Y E E S QU A R T I L E P L A C E M E N T B Y P A Y G R A D E Page 24 of 394 Ch a p t e r 2 - A s s e s s m e n t o f C u r r e n t C o n d i t i o n s Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n a n d C o m p e n s a t i o n S t u d y a n d Pa y P l a n D e v e l o p m e n t f o r P u b l i c S a fe t y f o r C h e s t e r f i e l d C o u n t y , V A Ev e r g r e e n S o l u t i o n s , L L C Page 2-12 EX H I B I T 2 O SH E R I F F E M P L O Y E E S QU A R T I L E P L A C E M E N T B Y P A Y G R A D E Page 25 of 394 Chapter 2 - Assessment of Current Conditions Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 2-13 2.4 EMPLOYEES BY DEPARTMENT At the time the study commenced, the County’s Public Safety departments employed 1,258 individuals across three departments within the study. Exhibit 2P depicts the number of employees and the number of classifications in each department. This information is intended only to provide basic information regarding how employees are distributed among departments. Also provided is the percentage breakdown of employees by department. As the exhibit illustrates, the largest department within the study was Police, with 537 employees representing 43 percent of the County’s Public Safety workforce. EXHIBIT 2P EMPLOYEES BY DEPARTMENT Source: Created by Evergreen Solutions from data provided by the County as of February 2020. 2.5 EMPLOYEE SURVEY RESULTS As part of the process of assessing the current state of compensation in the County’s public safety departments, Evergreen also surveyed employees for perceptional feedback on a variety of topics related to the compensation and classifications structure currently in place. Below is a summary of the questions asked of employees, and a summary of the employee responses. Questions varied in format, with some asking for employee satisfaction in the form of agreement or disagreement with a phrase, while others asked employees to rank concerns in order of importance. A total of 629 employees participated in the survey from the public safety departments. Department Employees Classes % of Total Fire 480 7 38% Police 537 21 43% Sheriff 241 13 19% Total 1258 41 100% Page 26 of 394 Chapter 2 - Assessment of Current Conditions Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 2-14 Demographics of Respondents While the survey was made available to all public safety employees, participation was anonymous and voluntary. The responses were comprised of 290 responses from employees in the fire department, 264 employees from the police department, and 61 employees from the Sheriff’s office. Some respondents, a total of 14, elected not to reveal what department they worked for. Police Fire Sheriff 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% 40.00% 45.00% 50.00% I am a sworn/uniformed staff member in the following department: Responses 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00% What is your position in your department? Responses Page 27 of 394 Chapter 2 - Assessment of Current Conditions Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 2-15 Of the respondent employees, a total of 422 (68.4 percent) were frontline ranks from their respective departments (Firefighters, Officers, Deputies). A total of 153 (24.8 percent) and 42 (6.8) percent were from frontline supervisory staff and command staff respectively. Additionally, employees were asked to identify their experience level with the County’s public safety department they belonged to. The largest demographic, at roughly a quarter of the employees, reported they had been with their respective department for five or less years; however, there was strong representation from employees of all experience levels, understanding that employees with highest volumes of experience are less common. 0‐5 years 6‐10 years 11‐15 years 16‐20 years 21‐25 years 26‐30 years >30 years 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% I have the following years of service with Chesterfield County in a sworn/uniformed position: Responses Page 28 of 394 Chapter 2 - Assessment of Current Conditions Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 2-16 General Questions Employees were asked to rank the reasons why they sought employment with the County, with a range of six Improved career opportunities:  Location.  Career development and growth opportunities.  Stability.  Competitive salary.  Other The highest overall rated reason for employees seeking employment with the County was stability, closely followed by the location, improved career opportunities, and career development & growth opportunities. The lowest rated reason for seeking employment with the County was competitive salary. Page 29 of 394 Chapter 2 - Assessment of Current Conditions Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 2-17 As a follow up to why employees sought employment with the County, they were additionally asked to rank the reasons employees have remained with the County. Employees had the following options available to rank:  Good work environment.  Career development and growth opportunities.  Good team dynamics and working relationships.  Accessibility of supervisors.  Opportunity to give back to the community.  Job stability.  Competitive salary.  Other Once again, the overall highest rated factor was job stability. The second highest rated factors were a good work environment and good team dynamics. The lowest rated factors were competitive salaries and accessibility of supervisors. Page 30 of 394 Chapter 2 - Assessment of Current Conditions Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 2-18 Lastly, employees were asked if they anticipate spending the rest of their career with their respective County department. Just under 85 percent of employees cited they did anticipate spending the remainder of their career with their department; with the remaining 15 percent stating they did not believe that would be the case. Page 31 of 394 Chapter 2 - Assessment of Current Conditions Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 2-19 Compensation Satisfaction When asked if employees were satisfied with the County’s current pay plans, only 1.1% strongly agreed that they were satisfied, 15.1% stated they agreed, 41.8% stated they disagree, 32% stated they strongly disagree, and 10% stated they neither agreed or disagreed. When asked if employees felt they were compensated fairly relative to the local market, only 1.2% strongly agreed that they were, 17.7% stated they agreed, 44.9% stated they disagree, 28.5% stated they strongly disagree, and 7.6% stated they neither agreed or disagreed. 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00%20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% 40.00%45.00% I am satisfied with the County's current pay plan. Responses 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% 40.00% 45.00% 50.00% I am compensated fairly relative to my local market. Responses Page 32 of 394 Chapter 2 - Assessment of Current Conditions Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 2-20 Employees were asked to rank their top concerns with the County’s current pay plan. A list of concerns was provided to employees to select from and provide a rank ordering on. Below were the areas available for selection –  Starting salaries  Pay incentives  Pay supplements  Pay compression  Lack of progression through pay scale  Jobs performing similar duties are compensated at different rates  Transferring to another department will not provide compensation similar to your current position  Inability to reach top of pay scale by the end of career  Ability to understand pay plan  Other Amongst the various options, pay compression was identified by 43.5 percent of respondent employees as the highest ranked concern, whereas no other concern received more than 13 percent of top ranked concern. Furthermore, 74% of respondents listed compression amongst their top three concerns. When Evergreen reviewed the open responses that employees 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 What are your top concerns regarding the County’s current pay plan? Score Page 33 of 394 Chapter 2 - Assessment of Current Conditions Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 2-21 submitted (those that selected other), a fair number of the submissions pertained to compression as well. Evergreen included several engagement questions in the compensation survey, but in addition to conducting this survey, Evergreen has reviewed the most recent Chesterfield County Employee Engagement surveys of the County’s public safety departments and were able to draw some comparisons from the County’s survey and the one conducted by Evergreen. The Engagement survey is conducted by the County every three years. Those commonalities include questions regarding employee satisfaction with a number of areas of employment such as career pathing, work environment, overall positives of working with the County. The results of both surveys overall suggest that public safety employees enjoy working for the county but that compensation/compression are primary concerns for the majority of this segment of the workforce. For a full review of the survey conducted by Evergreen, along with the results, please see Appendix 2 in this report. In addition, the results from the Engagement Survey conducted by the County of the three public safety departments is attached also. 2.6 SUMMARY Chesterfield County Public Safety’s overall compensation structure offered a firm foundation on which to improve. The key points of the current structure were:  There are three open-range pay plans for Fire, Police, and Sheriff employees; in contrast to a step plan where employees’ salaries would be moved within the pay plan in steps based on the time an employee has worked for the County or time in their current position. The County’s current pay plans include 1,258 employees employed by the County as of the time of this report.  Best practices in Human Resources suggest that range spreads are generally recommended to be between 50-70 percent, the Minimum of the pay grade to the Maximum of the pay range. Range spreads present in the County are between 66 percent and 73 percent.  Within this study, there is a significant number (84.3 percent) of employees’ salaries that are currently considered to be clustered below the midpoint of the salary range; with the overwhelming majority of employees in the first quartile of the salary range.  This significant clustering of salaries at the beginning of the salary range, combined with the longer average tenure of employees indicates the County’s public safety pay plans are experiencing a large degree of pay compression.  This finding aligns with the perceptional feedback provided by employees via the employee survey, where compression was identified as the most pressing compensation concern for employees. Page 34 of 394 Chapter 2 - Assessment of Current Conditions Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 2-22  Overall, the current open-range structures have allowed for significant compression to occur at the lower end of the pay ranges; this can be attributed to a number of causes, but from strictly looking at the County’s structure, the open-ranges have not allowed the County to easily identify pay compression that has occurred because there is no element of service time tied into the open-range to provide that context. The County’s Public Safety departments’ current compensation plans provided their employees with a pay structure. Evergreen found there is evidence of clustering of employees’ salaries that has occurred over time. In the following chapters of this report, Evergreen will provide specific information to explain how the information gained from the review of current compensation conditions, in addition to the market salary data analysis, and along with the review of internal equity helped us to develop recommendations for a competitive compensation plan. The objective is to provide analysis and recommendations that will best align the County’s Public Safety departments’ current compensation foundation with its compensation philosophy. These recommendations are provided in Chapter 4 of the County’s Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety report. Page 35 of 394 Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 3-1 The best and most direct method of determining an organization's position relative to the market is through comparisons of the market. Market comparisons focus on the average of the market and range characteristics. This allows the market data to be used to evaluate an organization’s entire structure including overall market competitiveness, ranges, and minimum and maximums of the pay plan at the current point in time. The market comparison analysis presented below should be considered a snapshot of the current market conditions. In essence, this means that the market conditions will continue to change, and in some cases can change rapidly; while market surveys are important and useful in making updates to a compensation structure, they must be completed at regular intervals to ensure the organization remains current with the market. Evergreen Solutions conducted a comprehensive market salary survey for the County’s public safety classifications. As part of this survey, Evergreen Solutions collected pay range and pay structure information (such as number of steps, career development plan systems, etc.), actual pay distributions, and supplemental pay data from peer organizations in the County’s competitive market utilizing a survey tool. The salary survey contained benchmark classifications that were selected as a representative of the County’s Fire, Police, and Sheriff public safety positions. Benchmark classifications are designed to be a cross-section of the County’s positions, and vary by department, pay grade, and work area and level to ensure they are representative of the overall County’s public safety. A total of 40 classifications were surveyed for each market peer. When seeking to compare the County to its peers, a number of factors were taken into account, such as geographic location, relative population size, and departmental sizes. A list of 24 survey targets was developed and approved by the County prior to commencing the survey. Of the total, 19 organizations were able to provide salary data for the purpose of the survey. The list of participant organizations is shown in Exhibit 3-1. It is additionally important to note that while competitors were selected for a number of like factors, not every peer shared the same operational services with the County with respect to their specific departments. For instances, not all fire departments necessarily possessed fire suppression services as well as emergency medical services, and sheriff’s offices varied in providing both law enforcement and detention services versus strictly detention services. EVERGREEN SOLUTIONS, LLC Chapter 3 – Market Survey Results Page 36 of 394 Chapter 3 – Market Survey Results Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 3-2 EXHIBIT 3-1 PARTICIPANT ORGANIZATIONS As many of the peer organizations are located outside of the County’s immediate region, it was necessary to adjust the peer responses relative to the County based on cost of living. For any peer organization that fell outside the County’s immediate region, a cost-of-living adjustment was applied to the reported pay ranges to ensure a market average was attained in terms of the spending power an employee would have in the County. The cost-of-living index information utilized came from the Council for Community and Economic Research. The cost of living index figures for the County and each of the respondent market peers are located in Exhibit 3-2. Target Respondents Cities City of Alexandria, VA City of Fairfax, VA City of Hopewell, VA City of Jacksonville, FL City of Raleigh, NC City of Richmond, VA City of Virginia Beach, VA Counties Anne Arundel County, MD Arlington County, VA Fairfax County, VA Frederick County, VA Hanover County, VA Henrico County, VA Montgomery County, MD Loudoun County, VA Spotsylvania County, VA Stafford County, VA Prince William County, VA Other Agencies/Organizations State of Virginia (PD) Page 37 of 394 Chapter 3 – Market Survey Results Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 3-3 EXHIBIT 3-2 COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENTS BY PEER Market Peers Cost of Living Index Cities City of Alexandria, VA 135.5 City of Colonial Heights, VA 91.3 City of Fairfax, VA 115.4 City of Hopewell, VA 92.3 City of Jacksonville, FL 98.5 City of Raleigh, NC 98.7 City of Richmond, VA 105.1 City of Spotsylvania, VA 96.9 City of Virginia Beach, VA 102.0 Counties Anne Arundel County, MD 127.2 Arlington County, VA 134.5 Fairfax County, VA 115.4 Frederick County, VA 97.7 Hanover County, VA 101.5 Henrico County, VA 103.6 Loudoun County, VA 107.8 Montgomery County, MD 138.4 Stafford County, VA 99.1 Prince William County, VA 100.5 Other Agencies/Organizations State of Virginia (PD) 98.3 3.1 MARKET DATA The results of the market analysis are displayed in Exhibits 3-3, 3-4, and 3-5, which include the benchmark job titles and the market average salaries for each position at the minimum, midpoint, and maximum points of the pay ranges. Also included within the exhibits are the percent differentials of the County’s pay ranges at each respective point, relative to the market average pay. A positive percent differential is indicative of the County’s pay range exceeding that of the average of its market peers; alternatively, a negative percent differential indicates the County’s compensation for a given position lagging behind the average of its peers. The exhibits also include the average pay range for the market respondents for each position, as well as how many responses each benchmark received. Additional data related to pay additives and supplements were also collected from peer respondents; this information has been provided to the County under separate cover. Page 38 of 394 Chapter 3 – Market Survey Results Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 3-4 While all benchmarks are surveyed by each peer, not every peer organization possesses an appropriate match to supply salary information for. Consequently, the benchmarks receive varying levels of response. Due to some of the classifications for the Fire, Police, and Sheriff departments at the County having multiple levels, direct market comparisons could not be drawn for all benchmarks. Depending on the classification, the functions provided in the job descriptions were performed across less classifications at the peer organizations. The rationale behind some positions being excluded in the summary of results is that insufficient responses can lead to unreliable averages that may skew the aggregated data, blurring the reality of the County’s actual position in the market. Of the 40 positions surveyed, 28 positions surveyed had a sufficient response for inclusion. It should also be noted that Paramedic- specific matches were not collected for Fire positions in order to not skew data. Paramedic pay was collected as an incentive and is addressed later in this chapter. An additional comparative analysis was performed in which the highest compensating locality that responded on each benchmark was removed and the averages and market differential recalculated. The results of removing the highest outlier are shown on Exhibits 3-6 through 3- 8. Page 39 of 394 Chapter 3 – Market Survey Results Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 3-5 EXHIBIT 3-3 MARKET SURVEY RESULTS - FIRE Classification Survey Minimum Survey Midpoint Survey Maximum Survey Avg Range Width # Resp. Average % Diff Average % Diff Average % Diff FIREFIGHTER RECRUIT $45,061.58 -1.7% $59,452.63 -0.8% $74,204.15 -0.7% 67.9% 17 FIREFIGHTER I $45,277.57 -2.2% $61,084.90 -3.5% $76,892.22 -4.3% 70.3% 16 FIREFIGHTER II $49,462.24 2.3% $65,197.65 5.0% $80,933.06 6.5% 63.9% 12 FIRE LIEUTENANT $59,303.68 10.3% $78,701.81 12.3% $98,099.93 13.5% 65.9% 16 FIRE CAPTAIN $64,026.84 15.8% $83,860.43 19.0% $103,694.01 21.0% 63.0% 17 BATTALION CHIEF $71,645.79 17.6% $95,646.53 19.0% $119,647.27 19.8% 67.7% 16 ASSISTANT FIRE CHIEF $84,374.17 14.4% $112,149.55 16.2% $139,924.93 17.3% 66.7% 15 DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF $91,719.89 19.1% $123,258.71 19.8% $154,797.53 20.2% 70.1% 10 Overall Average 9.4% 10.9% 11.7% 66.9% 14.9 EXHIBIT 3-4 MARKET SURVEY RESULTS - POLICE Classification Survey Minimum Survey Midpoint Survey Maximum Survey Avg Range Width # Resp. Average % Diff Average % Diff Average % Diff POLICE OFFICER $43,361.10 8.1% $58,502.11 6.8% $73,643.11 6.0% 70.0% 13 POLICE OFFICER (FIRST CLASS) $44,152.77 6.2% $59,307.82 5.4% $74,462.87 4.9% 68.9% 12 POLICE OFFICER (SENIOR) $44,971.06 4.4% $60,308.01 3.7% $75,644.96 3.3% 68.5% 12 POLICE OFFICER (CORPORAL) $47,438.27 12.8% $63,601.97 13.7% $79,765.68 14.3% 68.5% 10 DETECTIVE $50,413.06 -7.0% $68,353.32 -8.8% $86,293.57 -9.8% 71.5% 8 DETECTIVE (FIRST CLASS) $51,276.55 -8.7% $69,505.85 -10.5% $87,735.15 -11.5% 71.4% 8 DETECTIVE (SENIOR) $52,272.97 -10.6% $70,903.79 -12.4% $89,534.62 -13.5% 71.6% 7 SERGEANT $56,422.13 4.4% $74,477.95 7.0% $92,533.76 8.5% 64.5% 13 LIEUTENANT $65,092.50 3.5% $88,217.42 3.4% $110,020.68 4.5% 67.5% 12 CAPTAIN $73,811.15 4.2% $100,014.78 4.1% $124,410.93 5.5% 67.4% 12 MAJOR/ASSISTANT CHIEF $85,110.40 3.3% $115,220.53 3.3% $143,007.56 4.9% 66.6% 9 LIEUTENANT COLONEL/DEPUTY POLICE CHIEF $94,749.75 5.9% $127,220.86 6.7% $159,691.96 7.2% 69.4% 8 Overall Average 2.2% 1.9% 2.0% 68.8% 10.3 EXHIBIT 3-5 MARKET SURVEY RESULTS - SHERIFF Classification Survey Minimum Survey Midpoint Survey Maximum Survey Avg Range Width # Resp. Average % Diff Average % Diff Average % Diff SHERIFF DEPUTY $43,151.78 -2.5% $58,047.93 -0.9% $72,944.08 0.0% 68.6% 12 SHERIFF DEPUTY FIRST CLASS $44,053.93 -4.6% $59,149.50 -2.8% $74,245.08 -1.8% 68.3% 11 SHERIFF SERGEANT $54,009.94 -1.7% $72,065.59 -0.2% $90,121.25 0.7% 67.0% 12 SHERIFF STAFF SERGEANT $54,009.94 -1.7% $72,065.59 -0.2% $90,121.25 0.7% 67.0% 12 SHERIFF LIEUTENANT $63,901.72 -5.1% $85,818.37 -4.3% $107,735.01 -3.9% 68.5% 12 SHERIFF CAPTAIN $74,346.43 -7.0% $99,162.58 -5.5% $123,978.74 -4.6% 67.4% 12 SHERIFF MAJOR $85,957.17 -8.1% $114,357.23 -6.4% $142,757.30 -5.4% 67.1% 10 SHERIFF CHIEF DEPUTY $90,402.02 0.1% $120,988.52 1.3% $151,575.02 2.0% 68.9% 9 Overall Average -3.8% -2.4% -1.5% 67.8% 11.3 Page 40 of 394 Chapter 3 – Market Survey Results Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 3-6 EXHIBIT 3-6 MARKET SURVEY RESULTS (HIGHEST RESPONDENT REMOVED)– FIRE EXHIBIT 3-7 MARKET SURVEY RESULTS (HIGHEST RESPONDENT REMOVED - POLICE EXHIBIT 3-8 MARKET SURVEY RESULTS (HIGHEST RESPONDENT REMOVED – SHERIFF Average % Diff Average % Diff Average % Diff 1 FIREFIGHTER RECRUIT $44,347.36 -0.1% $59,452.63 -0.8% $74,204.15 -0.7% 67.9% 17 2 FIREFIGHTER I $44,780.22 -1.1% $60,296.58 -2.2% $75,812.95 -2.8% 70.3% 16 3 FIREFIGHTER II $48,387.47 4.5% $63,875.94 7.0% $79,364.42 8.5% 63.9% 12 7 FIRE LIEUTENANT $57,618.07 13.2% $78,093.87 13.1% $98,569.68 13.0% 65.9% 16 8 FIRE CAPTAIN $62,072.21 18.8% $82,834.68 20.3% $103,597.15 21.1% 63.0% 17 9 BATTALION CHIEF $70,332.76 19.4% $94,234.70 20.5% $118,136.65 21.1% 67.7% 16 10 ASSISTANT FIRE CHIEF $82,025.63 17.2% $109,448.40 18.6% $136,871.18 19.5% 66.7% 15 11 DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF $86,710.15 24.6% $118,190.08 24.0% $149,670.01 23.6% 70.1% 10 Overall Average 12.1% 12.6% 12.9% 66.9% 14.9 # Resp.ID Classification Survey Minimum Survey Midpoint Survey Maximum Survey Avg Range Width Average % Diff Average % Diff Average % Diff 12 POLICE OFFICER $42,675.00 9.6% $57,344.81 8.8% $72,014.62 8.2% 70.0% 13 13 POLICE OFFICER (FIRST CLASS) $43,454.01 7.8% $58,582.41 6.6% $73,710.81 5.9% 68.9% 12 14 POLICE OFFICER (SENIOR) $44,201.79 6.1% $59,136.33 5.7% $74,070.87 5.4% 68.5% 12 17 POLICE OFFICER (CORPORAL) $46,533.07 14.7% $61,900.16 16.4% $77,267.26 17.5% 68.5% 10 18 DETECTIVE $49,368.50 -4.9% $66,754.65 -6.4% $84,140.79 -7.3% 71.5% 8 19 DETECTIVE (FIRST CLASS) $50,355.34 -6.9% $68,071.82 -8.4% $85,788.31 -9.3% 71.4% 8 20 DETECTIVE (SENIOR) $50,581.29 -7.3% $68,260.68 -8.7% $85,940.06 -9.4% 71.6% 7 24 SERGEANT $55,171.17 6.7% $74,003.70 7.6% $92,836.23 8.1% 64.5% 13 25 LIEUTENANT $63,657.45 5.7% $86,101.79 5.8% $107,358.53 6.9% 67.5% 12 26 CAPTAIN $71,921.35 6.8% $97,719.08 6.4% $121,790.61 7.6% 67.4% 12 27 MAJOR/ASSISTANT CHIEF $81,813.22 7.2% $111,551.67 6.5% $139,181.70 7.6% 66.6% 9 28 LIEUTENANT COLONEL/DEPUTY POLICE CHIEF $90,248.67 10.7% $122,735.75 10.3% $155,222.84 10.0% 69.4% 8 Overall Average 4.7% 4.2% 4.3% 68.8% 10.3 # Resp.ID Classification Survey Minimum Survey Midpoint Survey Maximum Survey Avg Range Width Average % Diff Average % Diff Average % Diff 29 SHERIFF DEPUTY $42,552.43 -1.1% $57,378.31 0.2% $72,204.19 1.0% 68.6% 12 30 SHERIFF DEPUTY FIRST CLASS $42,987.53 -2.1% $57,869.04 -0.6% $72,750.55 0.3% 68.3% 11 33 SHERIFF SERGEANT $52,900.92 0.4% $70,701.97 1.7% $88,503.03 2.5% 67.0% 12 34 SHERIFF STAFF SERGEANT $52,900.92 0.4% $70,701.97 1.7% $88,503.03 2.5% 67.0% 12 37 SHERIFF LIEUTENANT $62,814.21 -3.4%$84,309.33 -2.6% $105,804.45 -2.1% 68.5% 12 38 SHERIFF CAPTAIN $72,700.54 -4.7% $98,182.64 -4.5% $123,664.74 -4.3% 67.4% 12 39 SHERIFF MAJOR $83,379.21 -5.1% $113,193.95 -5.4% $143,008.70 -5.6% 67.1% 10 40 SHERIFF CHIEF DEPUTY $88,057.42 2.8% $120,508.75 1.7% $152,960.07 1.0% 68.9% 9 Overall Average -1.6% -1.0% -0.6% 67.8% 11.3 # Resp.ID Classification Survey Minimum Survey Midpoint Survey Maximum Survey Avg Range Width Page 41 of 394 Chapter 3 – Market Survey Results Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 3-7 Market Range Minimums A typical starting point when analyzing the market survey information is comparing the County’s market minimums to the market. This is because market minimums are most often representative of entry level salaries for employees who have the minimum qualifications of a classification. Incumbents usually do not have the required knowledge and experience required to be fully proficient in their position. When reviewing the data, several conclusions can be drawn:  For Fire benchmarks, the County was competitive at the minimum with an organizational average of 9.4 percent above market.  For Police benchmarks, the County was slightly competitive at the minimum with an organizational average of 2.2 percent above market.  For Sheriff benchmarks, the County was slightly less than competitive at the minimum with an organizational average of 3.8 percent below market. Market Range Midpoints This section explores the comparison between the average peer midpoints and the midpoints for classifications at the County. Market midpoints are important to consider because they are commonly recognized as the salary point at which employees have achieved full proficiency, and are performing satisfactorily in their classification. As such, midpoint is often considered as the salary point at which a fully proficient employee could expect their salary to be placed. Based on the collected data, the following observations can be made:  For Fire benchmarks, the County’s position when compared to the market midpoint was 10.9% above the market.  For Police benchmarks, the County’s position for the midpoint was 1.9 percent above market.  For Sheriff benchmarks, the County’s position for the midpoint was 2.4 percent below the market. Page 42 of 394 Chapter 3 – Market Survey Results Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 3-8 Market Range Maximums In this section, the peer salary range maximums are compared to the County’s range maximums for each benchmarked classification. The market maximum is significant as it represents the upper limit salary that an organization might provide to retain and/or reward experienced and high performing incumbents. Based on the collected data, the following observations can be made:  For Fire benchmarks, the County was competitive at the minimum with an organizational average of 11.7 percent above market.  For Police benchmarks, the County was slightly competitive at the minimum with an organizational average of 2.0 percent above market.  For Sheriff benchmarks, the County was slightly less than competitive at the minimum with an organizational average of 1.5 percent below market. Market Actual Salaries The results of the market analysis includes data collected on average actual salaries for a few of the lower-level benchmarks in each department. The preceding market charts depict only salary range comparisons between the County and the market average. Exhibits 3-9 through 3-14 reflect average actual salaries of the market versus the County’s actual salary. The data collection included information on organizational tenure in addition to the actual salaries so that Evergreen could compare how well the County’s salaries progress in comparison with the market. Exhibits 3-9 through 3-14 illustrate these comparisons for various benchmark classifications. Each exhibit shows the tiers of tenure and the corresponding salary data. Page 43 of 394 Chapter 3 – Market Survey Results Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 3-9 EXHIBIT 3-9 MARKET AVERAGE ACTUAL SALARIES – FIREFIGHTER/EMT EXHIBIT 3-10 MARKET AVERAGE ACTUAL SALARIES – FIRE LIEUTENANT $0.00 $10,000.00 $20,000.00 $30,000.00 $40,000.00 $50,000.00 $60,000.00 $70,000.00 $80,000.00 $90,000.00 $100,000.00 0 ‐ 0.9 1 ‐ 1.9 2 ‐ 2.9 3 ‐ 3.9 4 ‐ 4.9 5 ‐ 5.9 6 ‐ 6.9 7 ‐ 7.9 8 ‐ 8.9 9 ‐ 9.9 10 ‐ 10.9 11 ‐ 11.9 12 ‐ 12.9 13 ‐ 13.9 14 ‐ 14.9 15 ‐ 19.9 20 ‐ 24.9 25 ‐ 29.9 30+ Av e r a g e   A c t u a l   S a l a r y Years of Tenure Average Salary by Tenure Market Chesterfield County, VA $0.00 $10,000.00 $20,000.00 $30,000.00 $40,000.00 $50,000.00 $60,000.00 $70,000.00 $80,000.00 $90,000.00 $100,000.00 7 ‐ 7.9 8 ‐ 8.9 9 ‐ 9.9 10 ‐ 10.9 11 ‐ 11.9 12 ‐ 12.9 13 ‐ 13.9 14 ‐ 14.9 15 ‐ 15.9 16 ‐ 16.9 Av e r a g e   A c t u a l   S a l a r y Years of Tenure Average Salary by Tenure Market Chesterfield County, VA Page 44 of 394 Chapter 3 – Market Survey Results Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 3-10 EXHIBIT 3-11 MARKET AVERAGE ACTUAL SALARIES – POLICE OFFICER EXHIBIT 3-12 MARKET AVERAGE ACTUAL SALARIES – POLICE SERGEANT $0.00 $10,000.00 $20,000.00 $30,000.00 $40,000.00 $50,000.00 $60,000.00 $70,000.00 $80,000.00 $90,000.00 $100,000.00 0 ‐ 0.9 1 ‐ 1.9 2 ‐ 2.9 3 ‐ 3.9 4 ‐ 4.9 5 ‐ 5.9 6 ‐ 6.9 7 ‐ 7.9 8 ‐ 8.9 9 ‐ 9.9 10 ‐ 10.9 11 ‐ 11.9 12 ‐ 12.9 13 ‐ 13.9 14 ‐ 14.9 15 ‐ 19.9 20 ‐ 24.9 25 ‐ 29.9 30+ Av e r a g e   A c t u a l   S a l a r y Years of Tenure Average Salary by Tenure Market Chesterfield County, VA $0.00 $20,000.00 $40,000.00 $60,000.00 $80,000.00 $100,000.00 $120,000.00 7 ‐ 7.9 8 ‐ 8.9 9 ‐ 9.9 10 ‐ 10.9 11 ‐ 11.9 12 ‐ 12.9 13 ‐ 13.9 14 ‐ 14.9 15 ‐ 15.9 16 ‐ 16.9 17 ‐ 17.9 18 ‐ 18.9 19 ‐ 19.9 20 ‐ 24.9 25 ‐ 29.9 30+ Av e r a g e   A c t u a l   S a l a r y Years of Tenure Average Salary by Tenure Market Chesterfield County, VA Page 45 of 394 Chapter 3 – Market Survey Results Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 3-11 EXHIBIT 3-13 MARKET AVERAGE ACTUAL SALARIES – SHERIFF DEPUTY $0.00 $10,000.00 $20,000.00 $30,000.00 $40,000.00 $50,000.00 $60,000.00 $70,000.00 $80,000.00 $90,000.00 $100,000.00 0 ‐ 0.9 1 ‐ 1.9 2 ‐ 2.9 3 ‐ 3.9 4 ‐ 4.9 5 ‐ 5.9 6 ‐ 6.9 7 ‐ 7.9 8 ‐ 8.9 9 ‐ 9.9 10 ‐ 10.9 11 ‐ 11.9 12 ‐ 12.9 13 ‐ 13.9 14 ‐ 14.9 15 ‐ 19.9 20 ‐ 24.9 25 ‐ 29.9 30+ Av e r a g e   A c t u a l   S a l a r y Years of Tenure Average Salary by Tenure Market Chesterfield County, VA Page 46 of 394 Chapter 3 – Market Survey Results Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 3-12 EXHIBIT 3-14 MARKET AVERAGE ACTUAL SALARIES – SHERIFF SERGEANT As seen in the exhibits above, the County was found to be generally behind its peers with respect to average actual salaries for the first two levels of each department (not counting Recruit). This finding would lead to the conclusion that although the County has implemented competitive ranges for two out of the three departments, the County has generally not progressed salaries as well as market peers. Incentives Furthermore, information on incentives provided by peer organizations was collected to supplement the pay range and actual salary data. Possible incentive offerings included but were not limited to shift differential, Fire specialty teams (i.e. HazMat or SCUBA), Advanced Life Support, Paramedic Certification, and education incentives. Responses were diverse, as results varied by hourly additions, percentage-based additions, and annual lump sums. Incentives findings are summarized below:  Shift differential ranged from $0.70 to $1.19 hourly.  Field Training Officer/Preceptor varied between 3% of salary, approximately $1.34 hourly addition or overtime pay, and a $2,000 annual lump sum.  Fire Specialty Teams varied between 3% of salary, $1.38 hourly addition, and $1,500 to $2,500 annual lump sum. $0.00 $20,000.00 $40,000.00 $60,000.00 $80,000.00 $100,000.00 $120,000.00 5 ‐ 5.96 ‐ 6.97 ‐ 7.98 ‐ 8.99 ‐ 9.9 10 ‐ 10.9 11 ‐ 11.9 12 ‐ 12.9 13 ‐ 13.9 14 ‐ 14.9 15 ‐ 15.9 16 ‐ 16.9 17 ‐ 17.9 18 ‐ 18.9 19 ‐ 19.9 20 ‐ 24.9 25 ‐ 29.9 Av e r a g e   A c t u a l   S a l a r y Years of Tenure Average Salary by Tenure Market Chesterfield County, VA Page 47 of 394 Chapter 3 – Market Survey Results Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 3-13  Bilingual varied between $0.68 hourly addition and $1,000 to $1,770 annual lump sum.  While pay supplement practices for ALS varied; most peers had an annual supplement that varied between $4,300 to $15,000 with most peers providing a supplement between $5,000 and $7,000. Additionally, some peers leveraged hourly rate differentials in the range of $2.00 per hour to $3.50 per hour.  Education incentives varied between $500 to $660 for an Associate’s degree and $1,000 to $1,500 for a Bachelor’s degree annually. On a percentage of salary basis, 1.5% was offered for an Associate’s degree, 3% for Bachelor’s, 4.5% for Master’s, and 6% for PhD.  K9 incentives varied between 5% of salary, one extra hour for days off, and $80 per pay period.  Marine Patrol was offered by one peer as 3% of salary.  Detention positions incentives was offered by one peer as $1.25 hourly addition for training staff. 3.2 MARKET SURVEY CONCLUSION Based on the findings of the market survey, the following major conclusions can be drawn regarding the County’s competitive position to the market average:  The County’s pay plans were ahead of the market at the minimum, midpoint, and maximum for Fire and Police classifications, and below market for Sheriff classifications.  However; this is directly contrasted by the average actual salary comparison, which showed the County behind the market by and large.  The furthest behind classifications among all three departments were the Detective, Detective (First Class), and Detective (Senior).  The most competitive classifications among all three departments were within the Fire benchmarks, at the Captain rank through the Deputy Fire Chief.  Range spreads at the County were found to be slightly higher than the market average, as the Survey Average Range Width among all three departments ranged from approximately 67 to 69 percent.  Overall, the County’s largely competitive ranges, when contrasted against average actual salaries at the County lagging its peers, speaks to the issue of the County lacking the salary progression that has occurred at other peer organizations. Page 48 of 394 Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 4-1 After reviewing the information collected over the course of the study, Evergreen developed recommendations to improve the County’s current compensation system. The recommendations, as well as the findings that led to each recommendation, are discussed in detail in this section. The recommendations are organized into two sections: compensation and administration of the system. 4.1 COMPENSATION RECOMMENDATIONS The compensation analysis consisted of two parts: an external market assessment and an internal equity assessment. During the external market assessment, the County’s compensation for selected benchmark classifications was compared to average compensation offered in the market the County competes for employees in. The external assessment consisted of comparing the County against its peer institutions and organizations within its market. During the internal equity assessment, consideration of the relationships between and the type of work being performed by the County’s employees in their classifications was reviewed. Specifically, Position Description Questionnaires (PDQs) for each of the County’s public safety classifications in the study were provided to Evergreen, which quantified the classifications’ level of five separate compensatory factors. FINDING Evergreen found that the overall design of the plan, while well-conceived from an internal equity standpoint places the County at a disadvantage compared to its peers. Specifically, most county level public safety functions within Virginia utilize a step-based method of compensation management and provide regular increases. As a result, the County while being generally competitive with its range structure or earning potential falls short of its peers in actual compensation when considering tenure of actual incumbents. Furthermore, the County’s current open range structured has failed to prevent widespread compression in its public safety pay plans; while it is possible to address compression in open range structures, the discreet nature of a step plan can be particularly helpful in determining an ordinally correct salary placement of employee salaries relative to their experience. RECOMMENDATION 1: Revise the current salary ranges, and adopt a new, step-based pay plan for the Fire, Police, and Sheriff departments; and slot all classifications into their respective pay plans. EVERGREEN SOLUTIONS, LLC Chapter 4 - Recommendations Page 49 of 394 Chapter 4 – Recommendation Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 4-2 Evergreen has developed a new pay structure for the existing public safety classifications based on the market data and peer practices. The updated pay structures can be found in Exhibits 4-1, 4-2, and 4-3. The exhibits are also reflective of starting salaries for higher positions at higher starting steps. This was designed to be realistic with requirements on years of experience at each position and to reduce rank compression between reporting relationships. Currently, the County’s public safety salary ranges averaged a rank amongst its market peers in the 57th percentile, 58th percentile, and 58th percentile for its minimums, midpoints, and maximums respectively. Should the County adopt the step plans as proposed, the County’s market position ranking would improve to the 68th percentile, 67th percentile, and 69th percentile for its minimums, midpoints, and maximums, respectively. Implementation of the new compensation structure requires two steps. First, all positions were assigned to an appropriate pay grade within the overall plan. To determine what pay grade each position was assigned, Evergreen used the following factors: the results of the PDQ review and the results of the market analysis. Assigning pay grades to classifications requires a balance of internal equity and desired market position, and recruitment and retention concerns also played a role in the process. Thus, the market results discussed in Chapter 3 were not the sole criteria for the proposed pay ranges. The second step involves placing individual employees on the appropriate step. RECOMMENDATION 2: Evergreen recommends the County adopt a methodology to transition employee salaries into the proposed pay plan that aligns with its established compensation philosophy and the availability of resources. While placing employees into the appropriate grade ensures that the incumbent possesses the correct earning potential based on the market, placement within the grade ensures that the incumbent is recognized for his or her knowledge, experience, and contribution to the organization. This step can be done via a variety of methods, each with their own strengths and drawbacks. After discussion with County leadership, Evergreen has presented the following options that the County should consider for implementation: Bring to Minimum This option ensures that all employees at the County are placed into their new pay grades, but does not make any other adjustments. If an employee was reassigned to a higher pay grade this implementation option would run a check to ensure the employee was making at least the minimum of the new pay range. If the employee is above the minimum, there is no change to his or her salary. If an employee is making less than their new minimum, they would be realigned to set their new salary equal to their pay grade minimum. The estimated cost for this adjustment is $599,363 affecting a total of 308 employees. Page 50 of 394 Ch a p t e r 4 – R e c o m m e n d a t i o n Cl a s s i f i c a t i o n a n d C o m p e n s a t i o n S t u d y a n d Pa y P l a n D e v e l o p m e n t f o r P u b l i c S a fety for Chesterfield County, VA E v e r g r e e n S o l u t i o n s , L L C Page 4-3 EX H I B I T 4 - 1 PR O P O S E D F I R E P A Y P L A N EX H I B I T 4 - 2 PR O P O S E D P O L I C E P A Y P L A N EX H I B I T 4 - 3 PR O P O S E D S H E R I F F P A Y P L A N Rank G r a d e 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 91 0 1 1 1 2 13 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 18 1 9 2 0 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 5 Fi r e f i g h t e r   R e c r u i t F 0 $ 4 4 , 2 8 9 $ 4 5 , 6 1 8 Fi r e f i g h t e r   I F 1 $ 4 6 , 5 0 3 $ 4 7 , 8 9 9 $ 4 9 , 3 3 6 $ 5 0 , 8 1 6 $ 5 2 , 3 4 0 $ 5 3 , 9 1 0 $ 5 5 , 5 2 7 $ 5 6 , 6 3 8 $ 5 7 , 7 7 1 $ 5 8 , 9 2 6 $ 6 0 , 1 0 5 $ 6 1 , 3 0 7 $ 6 2 , 5 3 3 $ 6 3 , 7 8 4 $ 6 5 , 0 6 0 $ 6 6 , 3 6 1 $ 6 7 , 6 8 8 $ 6 9 , 0 4 2 $ 7 0 , 4 2 3 $ 7 1 , 8 3 1 $ 7 3 , 2 6 8 $ 7 4 , 7 3 3 $ 7 6 , 2 2 8 $ 7 7 , 7 5 3 $ 7 9 , 3 0 8 Fi r e f i g h t e r   I I F 2 $ 5 1 , 8 0 2 $ 5 3 , 3 5 6 $ 5 4 , 9 5 7 $ 5 6 , 6 0 6 $ 5 8 , 3 0 4 $ 5 9 , 4 7 0 $ 6 0 , 6 59 $ 6 1 , 8 7 2 $ 6 3 , 1 0 9 $ 6 4 , 3 7 1 $ 6 5 , 6 5 8 $ 6 6 , 9 7 1 $ 6 8 , 3 1 0 $ 6 9 , 6 7 6 $ 7 1 , 0 7 0 $ 7 2 , 4 91 $ 7 3 , 9 4 1 $ 7 5 , 4 2 0 $ 7 6 , 9 2 8 $ 7 8 , 4 6 7 $ 8 0 , 0 3 6 $ 8 1 , 6 3 7 $ 8 3 , 2 7 0 Fi r e f i g h t e r   I I I F 3 $ 5 7 , 7 0 5 $ 5 9 , 4 3 6 $ 6 1 , 2 1 9 $ 6 2 , 4 4 3 $ 6 3 , 6 9 2 $ 6 4 , 9 6 6 $ 6 6 , 26 5 $ 6 7 , 5 9 0 $ 6 8 , 9 4 2 $ 7 0 , 3 2 1 $ 7 1 , 7 2 7 $ 7 3 , 1 6 2 $ 7 4 , 6 2 5 $ 7 6 , 1 1 8 $ 7 7 , 6 4 0 $ 7 9 , 193 $ 8 0 , 7 7 7 $ 8 2 , 3 9 3 $ 8 4 , 0 4 1 $ 8 5 , 7 2 2 $ 8 7 , 4 3 6 Fi r e f i g h t e r   I V F 4 $ 6 4 , 2 8 0 $ 6 5 , 5 6 6 $ 6 6 , 8 7 7 $ 6 8 , 2 1 5 $ 6 9 , 5 7 9 $ 7 0 , 9 7 1 $ 7 2 , 3 90 $ 7 3 , 8 3 8 $ 7 5 , 3 1 5 $ 7 6 , 8 2 1 $ 7 8 , 3 5 7 $ 7 9 , 9 2 4 $ 8 1 , 5 2 2 $ 8 3 , 1 5 2 $ 8 4 , 8 1 5 $ 8 6 , 5 11 $ 8 8 , 2 4 1 $ 9 0 , 0 0 6 $ 9 1 , 8 0 6 Fi r e f i g h t e r   V F 5 $7 0 , 2 2 2 $ 7 1 , 6 2 6 $ 7 3 , 0 5 9 $ 7 4 , 5 2 0 $ 7 6 , 0 1 0 $ 7 7 , 5 3 0 $ 7 9 , 0 8 1 $ 8 0 , 6 6 3 $ 8 2 , 2 7 6 $8 3 , 9 2 2 $ 8 5 , 6 0 0 $ 8 7 , 3 1 2 $ 8 9 , 0 5 8 $ 9 0 , 8 3 9 $ 9 2 , 6 5 6 $ 9 4 , 5 0 9 $ 9 6 , 3 9 9 Fi r e   L i e u t e n a n t F O 1 $ 7 2 , 5 2 6 $ 7 4 , 7 0 2 $ 7 6 , 9 4 3 $ 7 8 , 4 8 2 $ 8 0 , 0 5 2 $ 8 1 , 6 5 3 $ 8 3 ,2 8 6 $ 8 4 , 9 5 2 $ 8 6 , 6 5 1 $ 8 8 , 3 8 4 $ 9 0 , 1 5 2 $ 9 1 , 9 5 5 $ 9 3 , 7 9 4 $ 9 5 , 6 7 0 $ 9 7 , 5 8 3 $ 9 9 ,535 $ 1 0 1 , 5 2 6 $ 1 0 3 , 5 5 7 $ 1 0 5 , 6 2 8 $ 1 0 7 , 7 4 1 $ 1 0 9 , 8 9 6 Fi r e   C a p t a i n F O 2 $ 8 9 , 4 6 9 $ 9 1 , 2 5 8 $ 9 3 , 0 8 3 $ 9 4 , 9 4 5 $ 9 6 , 8 4 4 $ 9 8 , 7 8 1 $ 1 0 0 , 7 57 $ 1 0 2 , 7 7 2 $ 1 0 4 , 8 2 7 $ 1 0 6 , 9 2 4 $ 1 0 9 , 0 6 2 $ 1 1 1 , 2 4 3 $ 1 1 3 , 4 6 8 $ 1 1 5 , 7 3 7 $ 1 1 8 , 052 $ 1 2 0 , 4 1 3 $ 1 2 2 , 8 2 1 $ 1 2 5 , 2 7 7 Ba t t a l i o n   C h i e f F O 3 $1 0 8 , 2 3 8 $ 1 1 0 , 4 0 3 $ 1 1 2 , 6 1 1 $ 1 1 4 , 8 6 3 $ 1 1 7 , 1 6 0 $ 1 1 9 , 5 0 3 $ 1 2 1 , 8 9 3 $ 1 2 4 , 3 3 1 $ 1 2 6 , 8 1 8 $ 1 2 9 , 3 5 4 $ 1 3 1 , 9 4 1 $ 1 3 4 , 5 8 0 $ 1 3 7 , 2 7 2 $ 1 4 0 , 0 1 7 $ 1 4 2 , 8 1 7 As s i s t a n t   F i r e   C h i e f F O 4 $1 2 8 , 3 7 7 $ 1 3 0 , 9 4 5 $ 1 3 3 , 5 6 4 $ 1 3 6 , 2 3 5 $ 1 3 8 , 9 6 0 $ 1 4 1 , 7 3 9 $ 1 4 4 , 5 7 4 $ 1 4 7 , 4 6 5 $ 1 5 0 , 4 1 4 $ 1 5 3 , 4 2 2 $ 1 5 6 , 4 9 0 $ 1 5 9 , 6 2 0 $ 1 6 2 , 8 1 2 De p u t y   F i r e   C h i e f F O 5 $1 4 6 , 3 5 0 $ 1 4 9 , 2 7 7 $ 1 5 2 , 2 6 3 $ 1 5 5 , 3 0 8 $ 1 5 8 , 4 1 4 $ 1 6 1 , 5 8 2 $ 1 6 4 , 8 1 4 $ 1 6 8 , 1 1 0 $ 1 7 1 , 4 7 2 $ 1 7 4 , 9 0 1 $ 1 7 8 , 3 9 9 $ 1 8 1 , 9 6 7 $ 1 8 5 , 6 0 6 Ra n k Grade 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 13 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 5 Re c r u i t P 0 $ 4 5 , 5 0 0 Of f i c e r P 1 $ 4 7 , 4 7 0 $ 4 8 , 8 9 4 $ 5 0 , 3 6 1 $ 5 1 , 8 7 2 $ 5 3 , 4 2 8 $ 5 5 , 0 3 1 $ 5 6 , 6 8 2 $ 5 7 , 8 16 $ 5 8 , 9 7 2 $ 6 0 , 1 5 1 $ 6 1 , 3 5 4 $ 6 2 , 5 8 1 $ 6 3 , 8 3 3 $ 6 5 , 1 1 0 $ 6 6 , 4 1 2 $ 6 7 , 7 4 0 $ 6 9 , 0 95 $ 7 0 , 4 7 7 $ 7 1 , 8 8 7 $ 7 3 , 3 2 5 $ 7 4 , 7 9 2 $ 7 6 , 2 8 8 $ 7 7 , 8 1 4 $ 7 9 , 3 7 0 $ 8 0 , 9 5 7 OF C P 2 $ 5 1 , 8 7 2 $ 5 3 , 4 2 8 $ 5 5 , 0 3 1 $ 5 6 , 6 8 2 $ 5 8 , 3 8 2 $ 5 9 , 5 5 0 $ 6 0 , 7 4 1 $ 6 1 , 9 5 6 $ 6 3, 1 9 5 $ 6 4 , 4 5 9 $ 6 5 , 7 4 8 $ 6 7 , 0 6 3 $ 6 8 , 4 0 4 $ 6 9 , 7 7 2 $ 7 1 , 1 6 7 $ 7 2 , 5 9 0 $ 7 4 , 0 4 2 $ 7 5,523 $ 7 7 , 0 3 3 $ 7 8 , 5 7 4 $ 8 0 , 1 4 5 $ 8 1 , 7 4 8 $ 8 3 , 3 8 3 Se n r P 3 $ 5 6 , 6 8 2 $ 5 8 , 3 8 2 $ 6 0 , 1 3 3 $ 6 1 , 3 3 6 $ 6 2 , 5 6 3 $ 6 3 , 8 1 4 $ 6 5 , 0 9 0 $ 6 6 , 3 9 2 $ 67 , 7 2 0 $ 6 9 , 0 7 4 $ 7 0 , 4 5 5 $ 7 1 , 8 6 4 $ 7 3 , 3 0 1 $ 7 4 , 7 6 7 $ 7 6 , 2 6 2 $ 7 7 , 7 8 7 $ 7 9 , 3 4 3 $ 80,930 $ 8 2 , 5 4 9 $ 8 4 , 2 0 0 $ 8 5 , 8 8 4 Ma s t P 4 $ 6 1 , 9 3 7 $ 6 3 , 1 7 6 $ 6 4 , 4 4 0 $ 6 5 , 7 2 9 $ 6 7 , 0 4 4 $ 6 8 , 3 8 5 $ 6 9 , 7 5 3 $ 7 1 , 1 4 8 $ 72 , 5 7 1 $ 7 4 , 0 2 2 $ 7 5 , 5 0 2 $ 7 7 , 0 1 2 $ 7 8 , 5 5 2 $ 8 0 , 1 2 3 $ 8 1 , 7 2 5 $ 8 3 , 3 6 0 $ 8 5 , 0 2 7 $ 86,728 $ 8 8 , 4 6 3 Ca r e e r P 5 $6 6 , 3 7 2 $ 6 7 , 6 9 9 $ 6 9 , 0 5 3 $ 7 0 , 4 3 4 $ 7 1 , 8 4 3 $ 7 3 , 2 8 0 $ 7 4 , 7 4 6 $ 7 6 , 2 4 1 $ 7 7 , 7 6 6 $7 9 , 3 2 1 $ 8 0 , 9 0 7 $ 8 2 , 5 2 5 $ 8 4 , 1 7 6 $ 8 5 , 8 6 0 $ 8 7 , 5 7 7 $ 8 9 , 3 2 9 $ 9 1 , 1 1 6 Co r p o r a l P 6 $7 3 , 0 5 9 $ 7 4 , 5 2 0 $ 7 6 , 0 1 0 $ 7 7 , 5 3 0 $ 7 9 , 0 8 1 $ 8 0 , 6 6 3 $ 8 2 , 2 7 6 $ 8 3 , 9 2 2 $ 8 5 , 6 0 0 $87,312 $ 8 9 , 0 5 8 $ 9 0 , 8 3 9 $ 9 2 , 6 5 6 $ 9 4 , 5 0 9 $ 9 6 , 3 9 9 Se r g e a n t P 7 $ 7 4 , 7 0 2 $ 7 6 , 9 4 3 $ 7 8 , 4 8 2 $ 8 0 , 0 5 2 $ 8 1 , 6 5 3 $ 8 3 , 2 8 6 $ 8 4 , 9 5 2 $ 8 6 , 65 1 $ 8 8 , 3 8 4 $ 9 0 , 1 5 2 $ 9 1 , 9 5 5 $ 9 3 , 7 9 4 $ 9 5 , 6 7 0 $ 9 7 , 5 8 3 $ 9 9 , 5 3 5 $ 1 0 1 , 5 2 6 $ 1 0 3,557 $ 1 0 5 , 6 2 8 $ 1 0 7 , 7 4 1 $ 1 0 9 , 8 9 6 Lt P 8 $9 1 , 2 5 8 $ 9 3 , 0 8 3 $ 9 4 , 9 4 5 $ 9 6 , 8 4 4 $ 9 8 , 7 8 1 $ 1 0 0 , 7 5 7 $ 1 0 2 , 7 7 2 $ 1 0 4 , 8 2 7 $ 1 0 6 ,9 2 4 $ 1 0 9 , 0 6 2 $ 1 1 1 , 2 4 3 $ 1 1 3 , 4 6 8 $ 1 1 5 , 7 3 7 $ 1 1 8 , 0 5 2 $ 1 2 0 , 4 1 3 $ 1 2 2 , 8 2 1 $ 1 2 5,277 Ca p t a i n P 9 $1 1 2 , 6 1 1 $ 1 1 4 , 8 6 3 $ 1 1 7 , 1 6 0 $ 1 1 9 , 5 0 3 $ 1 2 1 , 8 9 3 $ 1 2 4 , 3 3 1 $ 1 2 6 , 8 1 8 $ 1 2 9 , 3 5 4 $ 1 3 1 , 9 4 1 $ 1 3 4 , 5 8 0 $ 1 3 7 , 2 7 2 $ 1 4 0 , 0 1 7 $ 1 4 2 , 8 1 7 Ma j o r P 1 0 $1 2 8 , 3 7 7 $ 1 3 0 , 9 4 5 $ 1 3 3 , 5 6 4 $ 1 3 6 , 2 3 5 $ 1 3 8 , 9 6 0 $ 1 4 1 , 7 3 9 $ 1 4 4 , 5 7 4 $ 1 4 7 , 4 6 5 $ 1 5 0 , 4 1 4 $ 1 5 3 , 4 2 2 $ 1 5 6 , 4 9 0 $ 1 5 9 , 6 2 0 $ 1 6 2 , 8 1 2 De p   C h i e f P 1 1 $1 4 6 , 3 5 0 $ 1 4 9 , 2 7 7 $ 1 5 2 , 2 6 3 $ 1 5 5 , 3 0 8 $ 1 5 8 , 4 1 4 $ 1 6 1 , 5 8 2 $ 1 6 4 , 8 1 4 $ 1 6 8 , 1 1 0 $ 1 7 1 , 4 7 2 $ 1 7 4 , 9 0 1 $ 1 7 8 , 3 9 9 $ 1 8 1 , 9 6 7 $ 1 8 5 , 6 0 6 Ra n k G r a d e 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 6 1 7 1 8 1 9 2 0 2 1 2 2 2 3 2 4 2 5 De p u t y   R e c r u i t S 0 $ 4 2 , 9 2 4 De p u t y S 1 $ 4 5 , 5 0 0 $ 4 6 , 8 6 5 $ 4 8 , 2 7 1 $ 4 9 , 7 1 9 $ 5 1 , 2 1 1 $ 5 2 , 7 4 7 $ 5 4 , 3 2 9 $ 5 5 , 4 1 6 $ 5 6 , 5 2 4 $ 5 7 , 6 5 4 $ 5 8 , 8 0 7 $ 5 9 , 9 8 3 $ 6 1 , 1 8 3 $ 6 2 , 4 0 7 $ 6 3 , 6 5 5 $ 6 4 , 9 2 8 $ 6 6 , 2 2 7 $ 6 7 , 5 5 2 $ 6 8 , 9 0 3 $ 7 0 , 2 8 1 $ 7 1 , 6 8 7 $ 7 3 , 1 2 1 $ 7 4 , 5 8 3 $ 7 6 , 0 7 5 $ 7 7 , 5 9 7 De p u t y   F i r s t   C l a s s S 2 $ 4 9 , 7 1 9 $ 5 1 , 2 1 1 $ 5 2 , 7 4 7 $ 5 4 , 3 2 9 $ 5 5 , 9 5 9 $ 5 7 , 0 7 8 $ 58 , 2 2 0 $ 5 9 , 3 8 4 $ 6 0 , 5 7 2 $ 6 1 , 7 8 3 $ 6 3 , 0 1 9 $ 6 4 , 2 7 9 $ 6 5 , 5 6 5 $ 6 6 , 8 7 6 $ 6 8 , 2 1 4 $ 69 , 5 7 8 $ 7 0 , 9 7 0 $ 7 2 , 3 8 9 $ 7 3 , 8 3 7 $ 7 5 , 3 1 4 $ 7 6 , 8 2 0 $ 7 8 , 3 5 6 $ 7 9 , 9 2 3 Ma s t e r   D e p u t y S 3 $ 5 5 , 9 5 9 $ 5 7 , 6 3 8 $ 5 9 , 3 6 7 $ 6 0 , 5 5 4 $ 6 1 , 7 6 5 $ 6 3 , 0 0 0 $ 6 4 , 2 6 0 $ 6 5 , 5 4 5 $ 6 6 , 8 5 6 $ 6 8 , 1 9 3 $ 6 9 , 5 5 7 $ 7 0 , 9 4 8 $ 7 2 , 3 6 7 $ 7 3 , 8 1 4 $ 7 5 , 2 9 0 $ 7 6 , 7 9 6 $ 7 8 , 3 3 2 $ 7 9 , 8 9 9 $ 8 1 , 4 9 7 $ 8 3 , 1 2 7 $ 8 4 , 7 9 0 Ca r e e r   D e p u t y S 4 $6 3 , 6 1 8 $ 6 4 , 8 9 0 $ 6 6 , 1 8 8 $ 6 7 , 5 1 2 $ 6 8 , 8 6 2 $ 7 0 , 2 3 9 $ 7 1 , 6 4 4 $ 7 3 , 0 7 7 $ 7 4 , 5 3 9 $7 6 , 0 3 0 $ 7 7 , 5 5 1 $ 7 9 , 1 0 2 $ 8 0 , 6 8 4 $ 8 2 , 2 9 8 $ 8 3 , 9 4 4 $ 8 5 , 6 2 3 $ 8 7 , 3 3 5 Se r g e a n t S 5 $ 6 8 , 9 0 0 $ 7 0 , 9 6 7 $ 7 3 , 0 9 6 $ 7 4 , 5 5 8 $ 7 6 , 0 4 9 $ 7 7 , 5 7 0 $ 7 9 , 1 2 1 $ 8 0 , 70 3 $ 8 2 , 3 1 7 $ 8 3 , 9 6 3 $ 8 5 , 6 4 2 $ 8 7 , 3 5 5 $ 8 9 , 1 0 2 $ 9 0 , 8 8 4 $ 9 2 , 7 0 2 $ 9 4 , 5 5 6 $ 9 6 , 447 $ 9 8 , 3 7 6 $ 1 0 0 , 3 4 4 $ 1 0 2 , 3 5 1 $ 1 0 4 , 3 9 8 St a f f   S e r g e a n t S 6 $ 7 5 , 2 8 9 $ 7 6 , 7 9 5 $ 7 8 , 3 3 1 $ 7 9 , 8 9 8 $ 8 1 , 4 9 6 $ 8 3 , 1 2 6 $ 8 4 , 7 89 $ 8 6 , 4 8 5 $ 8 8 , 2 1 5 $ 8 9 , 9 7 9 $ 9 1 , 7 7 9 $ 9 3 , 6 1 5 $ 9 5 , 4 8 7 $ 9 7 , 3 9 7 $ 9 9 , 3 4 5 $ 1 0 1 , 332 $ 1 0 3 , 3 5 9 $ 1 0 5 , 4 2 6 $ 1 0 7 , 5 3 5 Se r g e a n t   F i r s t   C l a s s S 7 $8 0 , 6 8 1 $ 8 2 , 2 9 5 $ 8 3 , 9 4 1 $ 8 5 , 6 2 0 $ 8 7 , 3 3 2 $ 8 9 , 0 7 9 $ 9 0 , 8 6 1 $ 9 2 , 6 7 8 $ 9 4 , 5 3 2 $9 6 , 4 2 3 $ 9 8 , 3 5 1 $ 1 0 0 , 3 1 8 $ 1 0 2 , 3 2 4 $ 1 0 4 , 3 7 0 $ 1 0 6 , 4 5 7 $ 1 0 8 , 5 8 6 $ 1 1 0 , 7 5 8 Ma s t e r   S e r g e a n t S 8 $8 6 , 4 5 7 $ 8 8 , 1 8 6 $ 8 9 , 9 5 0 $ 9 1 , 7 4 9 $ 9 3 , 5 8 4 $ 9 5 , 4 5 6 $ 9 7 , 3 6 5 $ 9 9 , 3 1 2 $ 1 0 1 , 2 9 8 $ 1 0 3 , 3 2 4 $ 1 0 5 , 3 9 0 $ 1 0 7 , 4 9 8 $ 1 0 9 , 6 4 8 $ 1 1 1 , 8 4 1 $ 1 1 4 , 0 7 8 Li e u t e n a n t S 9 $9 6 , 2 4 6 $ 9 8 , 1 7 1 $ 1 0 0 , 1 3 4 $ 1 0 2 , 1 3 7 $ 1 0 4 , 1 8 0 $ 1 0 6 , 2 6 4 $ 1 0 8 , 3 8 9 $ 1 1 0 , 5 5 7 $ 112,768 $ 1 1 5 , 0 2 3 $ 1 1 7 , 3 2 3 $ 1 1 9 , 6 6 9 $ 1 2 2 , 0 6 2 Fi r s t   L i e u t e n a n t S 1 0 $1 0 2 , 9 8 8 $ 1 0 5 , 0 4 8 $ 1 0 7 , 1 4 9 $ 1 0 9 , 2 9 2 $ 1 1 1 , 4 7 8 $ 1 1 3 , 7 0 8 $ 1 1 5 , 9 8 2 $ 1 1 8 , 3 0 2 $ 1 2 0 , 6 6 8 $ 1 2 3 , 0 8 1 $ 1 2 5 , 5 4 3 $ 1 2 8 , 0 5 4 $ 1 3 0 , 6 1 5 Ca p t a i n S 1 1 $1 0 6 , 9 8 1 $ 1 0 9 , 1 2 1 $ 1 1 1 , 3 0 3 $ 1 1 3 , 5 2 9 $ 1 1 5 , 8 0 0 $ 1 1 8 , 1 1 6 $ 1 2 0 , 4 7 8 $ 1 2 2 , 8 8 8 $ 1 2 5 , 3 4 6 $ 1 2 7 , 8 5 3 $ 1 3 0 , 4 1 0 $ 1 3 3 , 0 1 8 $ 1 3 5 , 6 7 8 Ma j o r S 1 2 $1 2 1 , 9 5 5 $ 1 2 4 , 3 9 4 $ 1 2 6 , 8 8 2 $ 1 2 9 , 4 2 0 $ 1 3 2 , 0 0 8 $ 1 3 4 , 6 4 8 $ 1 3 7 , 3 4 1 $ 1 4 0 , 0 8 8 $ 1 4 2 , 8 9 0 $ 1 4 5 , 7 4 8 $ 1 4 8 , 6 6 3 $ 1 5 1 , 6 3 6 $ 1 5 4 , 6 6 9 Li e u t e n a n t   C o l o n e l S 1 3 $1 3 9 , 0 3 3 $ 1 4 1 , 8 1 4 $ 1 4 4 , 6 5 0 $ 1 4 7 , 5 4 3 $ 1 5 0 , 4 9 4 $ 1 5 3 , 5 0 4 $ 1 5 6 , 5 7 4 $ 1 5 9 , 7 0 5 $ 1 6 2 , 8 9 9 $ 1 6 6 , 1 5 7 $ 1 6 9 , 4 8 0 $ 1 7 2 , 8 7 0 $ 1 7 6 , 3 2 7 Page 51 of 394 Chapter 4 – Recommendation Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 4-4 Tenure-Based Percentage Increases Percentage adjustments are given to all employees based on their total tenure. Larger percentages are attributed to higher tiers of tenure in order to directly address pay compression between new hires (Exhibit 4-4). EXHIBIT 4-4 TIERED INCREASES BASED ON TENURE TENURE INCREASE LESS THAN 5 YEARS 3% 5-10 YEARS 4% 11-15 YEARS 5% 16-20 YEARS 6% 21-25 YEARS 7% 26+ YEARS 8% The estimated salary-only cost for this adjustment is $4,432,116.90 affecting a total of 1,237 employees. The estimated total cost (when accounting for benefits-related costs) is $5,877,873.43. Total Tenure Parity A calculation is performed where each year of total tenure directly correlates with the step number. Salaries are then placed at those amounts. Salaries above these parity amounts are simply brought up to the nearest step salary. The estimated salary-only cost for this adjustment is $12,446,385.85 affecting a total of 1,157 employees. The estimated total cost, including benefits, is $16,506,396.91. While the best implementation strategy would be to fully implement the recommendations during the same fiscal year, most public organizations adopt phased approaches to addressing their needs due to resource availability and competing needs. With this in mind, Evergreen worked with the County project team to examine several different implementation strategies. The implementation strategy identified to best meet the County’s needs includes two phases:  Phase 1: Maintain the current open range structure and increase compensation by a tenure-based percentage increases, in order to mitigate some of the range compression present in the current structure.  Phase 2: Implement the step plan, assign all incumbents to the appropriate step based on total tenure parity.  The total cost to implement phases 1 and 2 (accounting for salary & benefits) is $22,384,270.34. Page 52 of 394 Chapter 4 – Recommendation Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 4-5 By first instituting tenure-based increase, the County will create some initial spacing between employees who may be clustered in salary but vary significantly in experience level. Furthermore, by performing this adoption in two phases, the County reduces the volume of expenditure in a single year needed to implement the proposed step structures. The second phase of adoption will help alleviate the pay compression that has built up in the lower portions of the salary ranges. By placing assigning employees to steps that correlate with their experience level, the County will rectify longstanding issues with employees with less experience earning highly similar or the same salary as those who have considerable experience with the County. A full cost-breakdown by department and rank-level is shown in Exhibit 4-5: Page 53 of 394 Chapter 4 – Recommendation Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 4-6 EXHIBIT 4-5 COST BREAKDOWN BY DEPARTMENT & RANK Department Rank Phase 1 Phase 2 Total FIRE ASSISTANT FIRE CHIEF $42,809.14 $200,847.86 $243,657.00 FIRE BATTALION CHIEF $99,550.61 $508,580.39 $608,131.00 FIRE DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF $7,365.00 $34,699.00 $42,064.00 FIRE FIRE CAPTAIN $177,090.26 $812,435.74 $989,526.00 FIRE FIRE LIEUTENANT $308,842.44 $1,524,147.56 $1,832,990.00 FIRE FIREFIGHTER I $160,583.01 $341,990.52 $502,573.53 FIRE FIREFIGHTER II $190,622.69 $560,444.31 $751,067.00 FIRE FIREFIGHTER III $292,362.41 $861,123.15 $1,153,485.56 FIRE FIREFIGHTER IV $95,334.75 $258,185.04 $353,519.79 FIRE FIREFIGHTER RECRUIT $142,771.70 $28.38 $142,800.08 $1,517,332.00 $5,102,481.96 $6,619,813.96 POLICE CAREER POLICE DETECTIVE $18,909.60 $29,785.40 $48,695.00 POLICE CAREER POLICE OFFICER $51,139.76 $127,798.24 $178,938.00 POLICE CORPORAL POLICE DETECTIVE $247,757.21 $481,844.19 $729,601.40 POLICE CORPORAL POLICE OFFICER $319,818.27 $807,233.13 $1,127,051.40 POLICE DEPUTY POLICE CHIEF $21,940.56 $75,014.44 $96,955.00 POLICE MASTER POLICE DETECTIVE $24,422.13 $35,359.87 $59,782.00 POLICE MASTER POLICE OFFICER $99,877.31 $228,960.69 $328,838.00 POLICE POLICE CAPTAIN $91,045.99 $384,300.01 $475,346.00 POLICE POLICE DETECTIVE FIRST CLASS $5,668.56 $16,150.44 $21,819.00 POLICE POLICE LIEUTENANT $136,054.25 $542,447.75 $678,502.00 POLICE POLICE MAJOR $33,959.40 $165,758.60 $199,718.00 POLICE POLICE OFFICER $259,803.29 $285,783.20 $545,586.49 POLICE POLICE OFFICER FIRST CLASS $120,973.44 $293,349.56 $414,323.00 POLICE POLICE RECRUIT $36,064.00 $0.00 $36,064.00 POLICE POLICE SERGEANT $268,237.88 $972,122.12 $1,240,360.00 POLICE SENIOR POLICE DETECTIVE $8,965.16 $14,751.84 $23,717.00 POLICE SENIOR POLICE OFFICER $78,858.13 $197,068.87 $275,927.00 $1,823,494.94 $4,657,728.35 $6,481,223.29 SHERIFF CAREER SHERIFF DEPUTY $59,213.26 $252,536.74 $311,750.00 SHERIFF MASTER SHERIFF DEPUTY $76,273.84 $307,214.16 $383,488.00 SHERIFF SHERIFF CAPTAIN $46,890.88 $204,605.12 $251,496.00 SHERIFF SHERIFF CHIEF DEPUTY $12,865.21 $64,662.79 $77,528.00 SHERIFF SHERIFF DEPUTY $411,841.15 $387,164.55 $799,005.70 SHERIFF SHERIFF DEPUTY FIRST CLASS $177,020.93 $627,152.07 $804,173.00 SHERIFF SHERIFF LIEUTENANT $112,112.30 $362,174.70 $474,287.00 SHERIFF SHERIFF MAJOR $15,719.60 $97,123.40 $112,843.00 SHERIFF SHERIFF MASTER SERGEANT $5,697.88 $28,405.12 $34,103.00 SHERIFF SHERIFF SERGEANT $125,261.63 $188,642.17 $313,903.80 SHERIFF SHERIFF SERGEANT FIRST CLASS $19,396.22 $79,443.78 $98,840.00 SHERIFF SHERIFF STAFF SERGEANT $28,997.07 $87,050.93 $116,048.00 $1,091,289.96 $2,686,175.54 $3,777,465.50 $4,432,116.90 $12,446,385.85 $16,878,502.75 $5,877,873.43 $16,506,396.91 $22,384,270.34 Fire Department Total Police Department Total Sheriff Department Total Salary Only Total Salary & Benefits Total Page 54 of 394 Chapter 4 – Recommendation Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 4-7 4.2 COMPENSATION AND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM ADMINISTRATION Any organization’s compensation system will need periodic maintenance. The recommendations provided in this chapter were developed based on conditions at the time the analysis was conducted. Without proper upkeep of the system, the potential for recruitment and retention issues may increase as the compensation system becomes dated and less competitive. RECOMMENDATION 3: Conduct small-scale salary surveys on a regular basis to assess the market competitiveness of all public safety positions, and make adjustments to pay grade assignments, if necessary. The public safety market operates in a more dynamic fashion than many other public occupational groups. The level of competition and sensitivity of the workforce to changes in the market requires that a competitive organization regularly collect and analyze peer data and practices. The County’s human resource function should collect peer compensation data on an annual basis to determine market position and to utilize for planning purposes. RECOMMENDATION 4: Conduct a comprehensive classification and compensation analysis every five to seven years. While small-scale salary surveys can improve the market position of specific classifications, it is recommended that a full classification and compensation analysis be conducted every five to seven years to preserve both internal and external equity for the County. Changes to classification and compensation do occur, and while the increments of change may seem minor, they can compound over time. A failure to react to these changes quickly has the potential to place the County in a poor position for recruiting and retaining quality employees. While the previous two recommendations intend to maintain the competitiveness over time of the classification and compensation structure as a whole, it is also necessary to establish procedures for determining equitable pay practices for individual employees. RECOMMENDATION 5: Adopt a philosophical approach to adjusting the new step-based structures on an annual basis. While adopting the step plans and re-aligning employee salaries based on experience will go a long way towards resolving the current compression issues that hinder the County, compensation structures by their nature become out of date naturally as other organizations shifts their rates to remain competitive with the overall market. As a result, the County will need to develop a defined review methodology for assessing the upcoming or anticipated market movement in any given year in order to establish the amount by which the County should adjust its own step plans. A few examples include –  An annual small-scale survey of the peer organizations for their newest rates for each rank or a subset of ranks  An annual survey of peer organizations attaining the anticipated compensation structure percentage movements Page 55 of 394 Chapter 4 – Recommendation Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 4-8  Tying the adjustment of the plans to a reliable and easy to follow metric such as the change in local CPI.  A combination or hybrid of the above approaches While the County may not be able to financially support moving the plans every year, measuring the movement of the market by some capacity is crucial even in years where adjustments cannot be made in order to monitor the competitive standing of the County’s ranges for public safety. RECOMMENDATION 6: Revise policies and practices for moving employees’ salaries through the pay plan, including procedures for determining salaries of newly hired employees and employees who have been promoted, demoted, or transferred to a different classification. The method of moving salaries through the pay plan and setting new salaries for new hires, promotions, demotions, and transfers depends largely on an organization’s compensation philosophy. However, it is important for the County to have established guidelines for each of these situations, and that they are followed consistently for all employees. New Hires A new employee’s starting salary largely depends on the amount of education and experience the employee possesses beyond the minimum requirements for the job. Typically, an employee holding only the minimum education and experience requirements for a classification is hired at or near the classification’s pay grade minimum or the first step. An upper limit to the percentage above minimum that can be offered to a new employee with only the minimum requirements should be established, where approval is needed to offer a starting salary that is a higher percentage above minimum. Another threshold should be established as the maximum starting salary possible without approval for new employees with considerable experience and/or education above the requirements for the position. It is common for the midpoint to be used as the maximum starting salary for most classifications. Once the County has performed the initial implementation adjustment for current employee salaries, new employee starting salaries should take into consideration internal equity, meaning that new hires should be offered comparable salaries (step placement) to existing employees in the classification with similar levels of education and experience. Promotions/Demotions When an employee is promoted to a new classification, it is important to have guidelines for calculating the employee’s new salary that rewards the employee for his or her new responsibilities, moves the salary into the new pay grade, and ensures internal equity in the new classification. It is common for organizations to establish a minimum percentage salary increase that depends on the increase in pay grade as a result of the promotion. Regardless of the minimum percent increase, the employee’s new salary should be within the new pay grade’s range, and internal equity of salaries within the classification should be preserved. Page 56 of 394 Chapter 4 – Recommendation Classification and Compensation Study and Pay Plan Development for Public Safety for Chesterfield County, VA Evergreen Solutions, LLC Page 4-9 Transfers An employee transfer occurs when an employee is reassigned to a classification at the same pay grade as his or her current classification or when an employee’s classification stays the same, but his or her department changes. In either of these cases, it is likely that no adjustment is necessary to the employee’s salary. The only situation in which a salary adjustment would be needed for a transferred employee would be if his or her current salary is not aligned with the salaries of employees in the new classification or department. If that occurs, it may be necessary to adjust the salary of the employee or the incumbents of the classification to ensure salary equity within the new classification. 4.3 SUMMARY The County should be commended for its desire and commitment to provide competitive and fair compensation for its employees. The recommendations in this report establish a new competitive pay plan, externally and internally equitable pay grade assignments, and system administration practices that will provide the County with a responsive compensation system. While the upkeep of this recommended system will require concrete effort, the County will find that having a competitive compensation system that encourages strong recruitment and employee retention is worth this commitment. Page 57 of 394 APPENDIX I: MARKET RESULTS Page 58 of 394 Appendix I Market Results - Prince William County Removed Sheriff's Office Average % Diff Average % Diff Average % Diff 29 SHERIFF DEPUTY $42,628.71 -1.3%$57,204.03 0.5%$71,779.36 1.6%67.9%11 30 SHERIFF DEPUTY FIRST CLASS $44,053.93 -4.6%$59,149.50 -2.8%$74,245.08 -1.8%68.3%11 33 SHERIFF SERGEANT $53,403.04 -0.5%$71,162.53 1.1%$88,922.02 2.0%66.7%11 34 SHERIFF STAFF SERGEANT $53,403.04 -0.5%$71,162.53 1.1%$88,922.02 2.0%66.7%11 37 SHERIFF LIEUTENANT $62,865.26 -3.5%$84,539.71 -2.8%$106,214.16 -2.5%68.8%11 38 SHERIFF CAPTAIN $73,348.96 -5.6%$97,889.34 -4.2%$122,429.72 -3.3%67.6%11 39 SHERIFF MAJOR $86,028.13 -8.2%$114,489.34 -6.5%$142,950.56 -5.5%67.3%9 40 SHERIFF CHIEF DEPUTY $89,256.57 1.4%$118,977.44 3.0%$148,698.32 3.9%68.0%8 Overall Average -2.9%-1.3%-0.4%67.7%10.4 Police Department Average % Diff Average % Diff Average % Diff 12 POLICE OFFICER $42,675.00 9.6%$57,344.81 8.8%$72,014.62 8.2%69.0%12 13 POLICE OFFICER (FIRST CLASS)$44,152.77 6.2%$59,307.82 5.4%$74,462.87 4.9%68.9%12 14 POLICE OFFICER (SENIOR)$44,971.06 4.4%$60,308.01 3.7%$75,644.96 3.3%68.5%12 17 POLICE OFFICER (CORPORAL)$47,438.27 12.8%$63,601.97 13.7%$79,765.68 14.3%68.5%10 18 DETECTIVE $50,244.32 -6.7%$67,776.69 -7.9%$85,309.07 -8.7%70.2%7 19 DETECTIVE (FIRST CLASS)$51,231.15 -8.6%$69,093.87 -9.9%$86,956.59 -10.6%70.1%7 20 DETECTIVE (SENIOR)$52,386.08 -10.8%$70,656.15 -12.1%$88,926.22 -12.8%70.2%6 24 SERGEANT $55,788.80 5.6%$73,339.25 8.5%$90,889.70 10.3%63.6%12 25 LIEUTENANT $63,657.45 5.7%$86,101.79 5.8%$107,358.53 6.9%66.9%11 26 CAPTAIN $71,921.35 6.8%$97,719.08 6.4%$121,790.61 7.6%67.8%11 27 MAJOR/ASSISTANT CHIEF $81,813.22 7.2%$111,551.67 6.5%$139,181.70 7.6%67.9%8 28 LIEUTENANT COLONEL/DEPUTY POLICE CHIEF $90,248.67 10.7%$122,735.75 10.3%$155,222.84 10.0%72.7%7 Overall Average 3.6%3.3%3.4%68.7%9.6 Fire Department Average % Diff Average % Diff Average % Diff 1 FIREFIGHTER RECRUIT $44,653.28 -0.8%$58,719.60 0.5%$73,230.46 0.6%67.7%16 2 FIREFIGHTER I $44,856.46 -1.3%$60,509.55 -2.5%$76,162.64 -3.3%70.3%15 3 FIREFIGHTER II $48,387.47 4.5%$63,875.94 7.0%$79,364.42 8.5%64.2%11 7 FIRE LIEUTENANT $58,520.77 11.7%$77,786.99 13.5%$97,053.22 14.6%66.3%15 8 FIRE CAPTAIN $63,136.60 17.1%$82,730.69 20.4%$102,324.79 22.3%63.2%16 9 BATTALION CHIEF $70,332.76 19.4%$94,234.70 20.5%$118,136.65 21.1%68.7%15 10 ASSISTANT FIRE CHIEF $82,025.63 17.2%$109,448.40 18.6%$136,871.18 19.5%67.7%14 11 DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF $86,710.15 24.6%$118,190.08 24.0%$149,670.01 23.6%73.6%9 Overall Average 11.6%12.7%13.4%67.7%13.9 Survey Avg Range Width # Resp. ID Classification Survey Minimum Survey Midpoint Survey Maximum Survey Avg Range Width # Resp. ID Classification Survey Minimum Survey Midpoint Survey Maximum # Resp.ID Classification Survey Minimum Survey Midpoint Survey Maximum Survey Avg Range Width 1/1 Page 59 of 394 APPENDIX II: ENGAGEMENT SURVEY DOCUMENTS Page 60 of 394 1 Electronic Survey/Questionnaire Sample Questions : 1. I am satisfied with the County’s current pay plan. Please select from the following: a. Strongly agree. b. Agree. c. Disagree. d. Strongly disagree. e. Neutral/Neither agree nor disagree. 2. I am compensated fairly relative to my local market. Please select from the following: a. Strongly agree. b. Agree. c. Disagree. d. Strongly disagree. e. Neutral/Neither agree nor disagree. 3. Why did you come to work for the County? Please rank the following responses in order of importance: a. Improved career opportunities. b. Location. c. Career development and growth opportunities. d. Stability. e. Competitive salary. f. Other. Please explain: 4. Why have you continued to work for the County? Please rank the following responses in order of importance: a. Good work environment. b. Career development and growth opportunities. c. Good team dynamics and working relationships. d. Accessibility of supervisors. e. Opportunity to give back to the community. f. Job stability. g. Competitive salary. h. Other. Please explain: 5. Do you see yourself spending your entire career with Chesterfield County Police, Fire Department or the Sheriff’s Office? a. Yes b. No 6. What are your top concerns regarding the County’s current pay plan? Please rank the following responses in order of importance a. Starting salaries. b. Pay incentives. c. Pay supplements (incentive pay for additional duties, d. Pay compression. e. Lack of progression through pay scale. Page 61 of 394 f. Jobs performing similar duties are compensated at different rates. g. Transferring to another department will not provide compensation like your current position. h. Inability to reach top of pay scale by the end of career. i. Ability to understand pay plan j. Other. Please identify 7. What is your position in your department? a. Firefighter/Officer/Deputy b. Frontline Supervisor c. Command Staff 8. I am a sworn/uniformed staff member in the following department: a. Police b. Fire c. Sheriff 9. I have the following years of service with Chesterfield County in a sworn/uniformed position: a. 0—5 years b. 6—10 years c. 11—15 years d. 16—20 years e. 21—25 years f. 26—30 years g. >30 years 10. I am in the following age range: a. 20—25 years old b. 26—30 years old c. 31—35 years old d. 36—40 years old e. 41—45 years old f. 46—50 years old g. 51-55 years old h. >55 years old 11. Please provide additional feedback on your current compensation that was not covered in this survey. 12. Do you have any specific recommendations to improve the county’s compensation program? Page 62 of 394 Green - Favorable (4 and 5) Yellow - Neutral (3) Red - Unfavorable (1 and 2) 1 Fire and EMS Full Report Employee Engagement Survey 2017 Questions Count Mean Std. Dev. 0 20 40 60 80 100 Category Percentages Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree N/A 218 4.03 0.933 10.6%10.1%78.9%0.0%10.6%10.1%45.0%33.9%0.5%1.Conditions in my job allow me to be about as productive as I can be. 212 4.61 0.610 94.3%0.0%0.9%3.8%27.8%66.5%0.9%2.My job provides me the opportunity to do challenging and interesting work. 215 4.35 0.790 89.8%0.9%2.8%5.6%41.4%48.4%0.9%3.My job makes good use of my skills and abilities. 217 3.77 1.060 16.6%12.9%69.6%2.3%14.3%12.9%44.2%25.3%0.9%4.There are no significant barriers at work to doing my job well. 218 4.25 0.885 86.2%1.4%4.6%7.3%40.4%45.9%0.5%5.I am treated with respect as an individual. 217 3.83 0.999 14.3%12.4%72.8%1.4%12.9%12.4%47.5%25.3%0.5%6.I receive recognition when I do a good job. 216 4.21 0.755 11.6%84.7%0.0%2.8%11.6%46.8%38.0%0.9%7.I have enough authority to carry out my job effectively. 217 4.23 0.695 9.7%88.0%0.0%1.8%9.7%52.1%35.9%0.5%8.I have the information I need to do my job well. 217 3.99 0.981 9.7%12.0%77.4%2.3%7.4%12.0%44.7%32.7%0.9%9.I am encouraged to come up with new or better ways of doing things. 218 3.89 1.024 13.3%12.4%73.9%1.8%11.5%12.4%43.6%30.3%0.5%10.I receive clear and regular feedback on how well I do my work. 216 4.46 0.578 95.8%0.0%0.5%2.8%46.8%49.1%0.9%11.I understand the results expected of me in my job. 215 3.91 0.979 11.2%14.4%73.5%1.4%9.8%14.4%44.2%29.3%0.9%12.I have opportunities to have my ideas adopted and put into use. 215 4.13 0.757 8.8%86.1%0.5%3.7%8.8%55.8%30.2%0.9%13.I have the resources I need to do my job effectively. 215 2.78 1.222 46.1%20.5%33.5%17.2%28.8%20.5%26.0%7.4%0.0%14.I believe I am paid fairly for the work I do. 215 3.68 0.939 13.5%20.0%66.5%1.4%12.1%20.0%49.8%16.7%0.0%15.Employees who try new ideas and ways of doing things are supported. 215 3.14 1.177 33.0%19.5%45.1%8.8%24.2%19.5%34.4%10.7%2.3%16.There are enough people to do the work in my work group. 216 3.56 0.988 18.1%19.9%61.6%1.9%16.2%19.9%47.2%14.4%0.5%17.The amount of work expected of me is reasonable. 216 4.28 0.838 85.2%0.5%5.1%6.0%40.7%44.4%3.2%18.There is good cooperation and teamwork within my work group. Page 63 of 394 Green - Favorable (4 and 5) Yellow - Neutral (3) Red - Unfavorable (1 and 2) 2 Questions Count Mean Std. Dev. 0 20 40 60 80 100 Category Percentages Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree N/A 216 4.05 0.815 8.8%81.5%0.9%5.1%8.8%55.1%26.4%3.7%19.The work is well organized in my work group. 214 3.99 0.806 11.2%80.8%1.4%4.2%11.2%58.4%22.4%2.3%20.My work group receives high quality support from other units on which we depend. 216 3.18 1.197 32.9%16.7%50.5%10.2%22.7%16.7%39.8%10.6%0.0%21.The County provides employee benefits that meet my needs. 217 4.07 0.939 8.3%83.9%2.8%5.5%6.9%50.2%33.6%0.9%22.I have a good idea of the possible career paths available to me. 215 4.00 1.057 12.1%9.8%78.1%3.3%8.8%9.8%41.4%36.7%0.0%23.My immediate supervisor coaches me in my development. 217 3.90 0.902 10.1%12.9%77.0%0.9%9.2%12.9%53.0%24.0%0.0%24.The County provides training so that I can handle my present job well. 217 4.09 0.814 11.5%80.2%0.5%4.6%11.5%49.8%30.4%3.2%25.New employees in my work group receive the training they need to do their jobs well. Questions Count Mean Std. Dev.0 20 40 60 80 100 Category Percentages Very Poor Poor Average Good Very Good N/A 214 3.81 1.056 11.2%25.7%62.6%2.3%8.9%25.7%30.8%31.8%0.5%26.Your opportunities to achieve your personal career goals at the County. 211 3.96 1.001 8.5%20.9%70.6%1.9%6.6%20.9%35.1%35.5%0.0%27.Your opportunities for learning and development. Questions Count Mean Std. Dev. 0 20 40 60 80 100 Category Percentages Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree N/A 217 4.06 1.008 9.7%11.5%78.3%2.3%7.4%11.5%39.2%39.2%0.5%28.I would recommend my department to others as a place to work. 216 3.92 0.982 10.2%14.8%74.5%2.3%7.9%14.8%45.4%29.2%0.5%29.My department motivates me to contribute more than is required. 215 4.37 0.722 89.3%0.5%1.4%7.0%41.4%47.9%1.9%30.The people in my work group are committed to delivering high quality services. 216 3.89 0.968 11.1%13.4%75.0%1.9%9.3%13.4%48.1%26.9%0.5%31.My department supports me in achieving a reasonable balance between my work life and my personal life. 216 4.59 0.604 95.4%0.0%0.9%3.2%31.5%63.9%0.5%32.My department expects a high level of performance from its employees. 217 4.00 0.908 14.8%75.1%0.9%6.5%14.7%44.2%30.9%2.8%33.Cooperation and sharing of ideas and resources across work groups in my department are encouraged. Page 64 of 394 Green - Favorable (4 and 5) Yellow - Neutral (3) Red - Unfavorable (1 and 2) 3 Questions Count Mean Std. Dev. 0 20 40 60 80 100 Category Percentages Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree N/A 217 4.17 0.891 10.1%83.0%0.9%5.5%10.1%41.9%41.0%0.5%34.All in all, my department is effectively managed and well run. 216 4.00 1.046 12.5%10.2%77.3%2.3%10.2%10.2%40.3%37.0%0.0%35.I feel motivated to go beyond my formal job responsibilities. Questions Count Mean Std. Dev.0 20 40 60 80 100 Category Percentages Very Poor Poor Average Good Very Good N/A 217 4.62 0.677 8.3%90.8%0.0%0.9%8.3%18.4%72.4%0.0%36.The quality of the service provided by your department. 216 4.45 0.752 10.2%88.0%0.0%1.9%10.2%29.2%58.8%0.0%37.The quality of customer support (i.e. responsiveness, flexibility, turnaround) provided by your department. 216 4.28 0.872 13.9%81.5%0.0%4.6%13.9%30.6%50.9%0.0%38.Being effectively organized and structured. 215 3.93 1.050 8.8%22.3%68.4%3.3%5.6%22.3%32.6%35.8%0.5%39.Making decisions in a timely manner. 216 3.92 0.992 24.1%68.1%1.9%6.0%24.1%34.3%33.8%0.0%40.Being innovative in how work is done (using new technologies or creative approaches to improve internal effectiveness). 217 4.05 1.044 8.8%20.3%71.0%1.8%6.9%20.3%26.7%44.2%0.0%41.How would you rate the overall trust and confidence you have in your department's leadership team. Questions Count Mean Std. Dev. 0 20 40 60 80 100 Category Percentages Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree N/A 217 4.01 0.733 12.4%83.0%0.0%4.6%12.4%60.4%22.6%0.0%42.I have a good understanding of the County's strategy and goals. 216 4.02 0.785 14.4%80.6%0.5%4.2%14.4%54.6%25.9%0.5%43.I understand the relationship between my job and the County's strategy and goals. 217 4.13 0.846 10.6%83.4%0.5%5.5%10.6%47.5%35.9%0.0%44.I feel proud to work for Chesterfield County. 217 3.99 0.953 9.7%11.1%79.3%1.8%7.8%11.1%47.9%31.3%0.0%45.I would recommend the County to others as a place to work. 217 3.53 1.072 18.0%21.2%60.8%5.5%12.4%21.2%45.2%15.7%0.0%46.The County demonstrates care and concern for its employees. 216 3.85 0.886 8.3%17.1%74.1%1.9%6.5%17.1%53.7%20.4%0.5%47.All in all, the County is effectively managed and well run. Questions Count Mean Std. Dev.0 20 40 60 80 100 Category Percentages Very Poor Poor Average Good Very Good N/A 215 3.53 0.979 13.0%35.4%50.7%2.3%10.7%35.3%33.5%17.2%0.9%48.Being open and honest in communications to employees. Page 65 of 394 Green - Favorable (4 and 5) Yellow - Neutral (3) Red - Unfavorable (1 and 2) 4 Questions Count Mean Std. Dev. 0 20 40 60 80 100 Category Percentages Less than 1 Year 1-2 Years 3-5 Years 5 + or Until Retireme nt N/A 215 3.54 0.863 13.5%86.5%5.6%7.9%13.0%73.5%0.0%49.Given your choice, how long would you plan to continue working for the County? Questions Count Mean Std. Dev.0 20 40 60 80 100 Category Percentages Poor Fair Good Excellent N/A 208 3.21 0.744 13.5%86.1%2.9%10.6%49.0%37.0%0.5%50.Please rate the overall image or reputation of Chesterfield County. 217 3.01 0.795 22.6%74.2%3.7%18.9%47.0%27.2%3.2%51.Being open and honest in communications with citizens. 217 3.32 0.673 10.6%88.5%0.5%10.1%45.6%42.9%0.9%52.Overall, how would rate the quality of services provided by Chesterfield County? 217 2.89 0.801 27.2%70.5%5.1%22.1%49.3%21.2%2.3%53.How would you rate the overall direction that Chesterfield County is taking? Page 66 of 394 Green - Favorable (4 and 5) Yellow - Neutral (3) Red - Unfavorable (1 and 2) 1 Sheriff EES Full Report Employee Engagement Survey 2017 Questions Count Mean Std. Dev. 0 20 40 60 80 100 Category Percentages Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree N/A 86 3.93 0.992 10.5%10.5%79.1%3.5%7.0%10.5%51.2%27.9%0.0%1.Conditions in my job allow me to be about as productive as I can be. 87 4.08 0.905 16.1%78.2%1.1%4.6%16.1%41.4%36.8%0.0%2.My job provides me the opportunity to do challenging and interesting work. 84 3.95 0.968 10.7%13.1%76.2%1.2%9.5%13.1%45.2%31.0%0.0%3.My job makes good use of my skills and abilities. 86 3.74 1.065 16.3%12.8%70.9%3.5%12.8%12.8%47.7%23.3%0.0%4.There are no significant barriers at work to doing my job well. 86 4.13 0.936 12.8%80.2%2.3%3.5%12.8%40.7%39.5%1.2%5.I am treated with respect as an individual. 86 3.53 1.253 23.3%17.4%59.3%8.1%15.1%17.4%33.7%25.6%0.0%6.I receive recognition when I do a good job. 86 4.12 0.860 10.5%83.7%1.2%4.7%10.5%48.8%34.9%0.0%7.I have enough authority to carry out my job effectively. 85 4.01 0.809 10.6%83.5%1.2%4.7%10.6%58.8%24.7%0.0%8.I have the information I need to do my job well. 87 3.90 1.018 9.2%21.8%67.8%2.3%6.9%21.8%35.6%32.2%1.1%9.I am encouraged to come up with new or better ways of doing things. 87 3.70 1.069 14.9%20.7%64.4%3.4%11.5%20.7%40.2%24.1%0.0%10.I receive clear and regular feedback on how well I do my work. 84 4.29 0.704 91.7%1.2%0.0%7.1%52.4%39.3%0.0%11.I understand the results expected of me in my job. 86 3.85 0.970 11.6%16.3%70.9%1.2%10.5%16.3%45.3%25.6%1.2%12.I have opportunities to have my ideas adopted and put into use. 84 3.86 0.920 10.7%14.3%75.0%1.2%9.5%14.3%52.4%22.6%0.0%13.I have the resources I need to do my job effectively. 84 2.75 1.241 50.0%20.2%29.8%15.5%34.5%20.2%19.0%10.7%0.0%14.I believe I am paid fairly for the work I do. 86 3.62 0.923 11.6%26.7%61.6%2.3%9.3%26.7%47.7%14.0%0.0%15.Employees who try new ideas and ways of doing things are supported. 85 2.96 1.277 43.5%16.5%40.0%12.9%30.6%16.5%27.1%12.9%0.0%16.There are enough people to do the work in my work group. 85 3.68 0.979 14.1%15.3%70.6%3.5%10.6%15.3%55.3%15.3%0.0%17.The amount of work expected of me is reasonable. 85 3.93 1.121 12.9%12.9%74.1%4.7%8.2%12.9%37.6%36.5%0.0%18.There is good cooperation and teamwork within my work group. Page 67 of 394 Green - Favorable (4 and 5) Yellow - Neutral (3) Red - Unfavorable (1 and 2) 2 Questions Count Mean Std. Dev. 0 20 40 60 80 100 Category Percentages Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree N/A 85 3.82 0.966 10.6%17.7%71.8%2.4%8.2%17.6%48.2%23.5%0.0%19.The work is well organized in my work group. 86 3.60 1.002 14.0%24.4%60.5%3.5%10.5%24.4%44.2%16.3%1.2%20.My work group receives high quality support from other units on which we depend. 85 3.36 1.105 21.2%23.5%54.1%8.2%12.9%23.5%43.5%10.6%1.2%21.The County provides employee benefits that meet my needs. 87 3.90 0.958 10.3%9.2%79.3%3.4%6.9%9.2%56.3%23.0%1.1%22.I have a good idea of the possible career paths available to me. 87 3.84 1.088 13.8%16.1%70.1%3.4%10.3%16.1%39.1%31.0%0.0%23.My immediate supervisor coaches me in my development. 87 3.76 0.940 11.5%17.2%71.3%2.3%9.2%17.2%52.9%18.4%0.0%24.The County provides training so that I can handle my present job well. 87 3.80 0.892 23.0%69.0%2.3%4.6%23.0%49.4%19.5%1.1%25.New employees in my work group receive the training they need to do their jobs well. Questions Count Mean Std. Dev.0 20 40 60 80 100 Category Percentages Very Poor Poor Average Good Very Good N/A 84 3.59 1.064 13.1%31.0%51.2%3.6%9.5%31.0%29.8%21.4%4.8%26.Your opportunities to achieve your personal career goals at the County. 86 3.76 0.965 8.1%24.4%65.1%3.5%4.7%24.4%44.2%20.9%2.3%27.Your opportunities for learning and development. Questions Count Mean Std. Dev. 0 20 40 60 80 100 Category Percentages Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree N/A 86 3.83 1.087 11.6%16.3%72.1%5.8%5.8%16.3%44.2%27.9%0.0%28.I would recommend my department to others as a place to work. 86 3.71 1.061 14.0%22.1%64.0%3.5%10.5%22.1%39.5%24.4%0.0%29.My department motivates me to contribute more than is required. 86 3.95 0.944 18.6%74.4%2.3%4.7%18.6%44.2%30.2%0.0%30.The people in my work group are committed to delivering high quality services. 86 3.86 1.031 10.5%18.6%70.9%3.5%7.0%18.6%41.9%29.1%0.0%31.My department supports me in achieving a reasonable balance between my work life and my personal life. 86 4.20 0.852 88.4%2.3%2.3%7.0%50.0%38.4%0.0%32.My department expects a high level of performance from its employees. 86 3.83 0.973 8.1%22.1%69.8%3.5%4.7%22.1%45.3%24.4%0.0%33.Cooperation and sharing of ideas and resources across work groups in my department are encouraged. Page 68 of 394 Green - Favorable (4 and 5) Yellow - Neutral (3) Red - Unfavorable (1 and 2) 3 Questions Count Mean Std. Dev. 0 20 40 60 80 100 Category Percentages Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree N/A 86 3.74 0.996 12.8%16.3%70.9%3.5%9.3%16.3%51.2%19.8%0.0%34.All in all, my department is effectively managed and well run. 86 3.84 1.083 12.8%15.1%72.1%4.7%8.1%15.1%43.0%29.1%0.0%35.I feel motivated to go beyond my formal job responsibilities. Questions Count Mean Std. Dev.0 20 40 60 80 100 Category Percentages Very Poor Poor Average Good Very Good N/A 86 4.19 0.866 15.1%80.2%1.2%2.3%15.1%38.4%41.9%1.2%36.The quality of the service provided by your department. 86 4.08 0.900 14.0%76.7%1.2%4.7%14.0%41.9%34.9%3.5%37.The quality of customer support (i.e. responsiveness, flexibility, turnaround) provided by your department. 86 3.92 0.853 25.6%68.6%1.2%2.3%25.6%43.0%25.6%2.3%38.Being effectively organized and structured. 86 3.71 0.926 11.6%20.9%65.1%1.2%10.5%20.9%47.7%17.4%2.3%39.Making decisions in a timely manner. 85 3.74 0.946 9.4%24.7%64.7%2.4%7.1%24.7%44.7%20.0%1.2%40.Being innovative in how work is done (using new technologies or creative approaches to improve internal effectiveness). 84 3.96 0.981 23.8%69.1%2.4%3.6%23.8%34.5%34.5%1.2%41.How would you rate the overall trust and confidence you have in your department's leadership team. Questions Count Mean Std. Dev. 0 20 40 60 80 100 Category Percentages Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree N/A 87 3.91 0.826 13.8%78.2%2.3%3.4%13.8%59.8%18.4%2.3%42.I have a good understanding of the County's strategy and goals. 86 3.88 0.924 9.3%12.8%75.6%2.3%7.0%12.8%53.5%22.1%2.3%43.I understand the relationship between my job and the County's strategy and goals. 86 4.06 0.938 16.3%76.7%1.2%5.8%16.3%39.5%37.2%0.0%44.I feel proud to work for Chesterfield County. 85 4.01 0.945 15.3%78.8%3.5%2.4%15.3%47.1%31.8%0.0%45.I would recommend the County to others as a place to work. 86 3.63 0.979 10.5%29.1%58.1%3.5%7.0%29.1%40.7%17.4%2.3%46.The County demonstrates care and concern for its employees. 85 3.77 0.923 9.4%20.0%69.4%2.4%7.1%20.0%50.6%18.8%1.2%47.All in all, the County is effectively managed and well run. Questions Count Mean Std. Dev.0 20 40 60 80 100 Category Percentages Very Poor Poor Average Good Very Good N/A 86 3.60 0.954 9.3%34.9%51.2%2.3%7.0%34.9%33.7%17.4%4.7%48.Being open and honest in communications to employees. Page 69 of 394 Green - Favorable (4 and 5) Yellow - Neutral (3) Red - Unfavorable (1 and 2) 4 Questions Count Mean Std. Dev. 0 20 40 60 80 100 Category Percentages Less than 1 Year 1-2 Years 3-5 Years 5 + or Until Retireme nt N/A 85 3.61 0.874 11.8%88.2%7.1%4.7%8.2%80.0%0.0%49.Given your choice, how long would you plan to continue working for the County? Questions Count Mean Std. Dev.0 20 40 60 80 100 Category Percentages Poor Fair Good Excellent N/A 86 3.19 0.702 11.6%86.1%2.3%9.3%53.5%32.6%2.3%50.Please rate the overall image or reputation of Chesterfield County. 87 2.93 0.753 24.1%73.6%3.4%20.7%52.9%20.7%2.3%51.Being open and honest in communications with citizens. 87 3.06 0.679 17.2%80.5%1.1%16.1%56.3%24.1%2.3%52.Overall, how would rate the quality of services provided by Chesterfield County? 86 2.81 0.847 23.3%76.7%11.6%11.6%60.5%16.3%0.0%53.How would you rate the overall direction that Chesterfield County is taking? Page 70 of 394 Green - Favorable (4 and 5) Yellow - Neutral (3) Red - Unfavorable (1 and 2) 1 Police Full Report Employee Engagement Survey 2017 Questions Count Mean Std. Dev. 0 20 40 60 80 100 Category Percentages Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree N/A 151 3.86 1.126 17.2%77.5%4.6%12.6%5.3%47.0%30.5%0.0%1.Conditions in my job allow me to be about as productive as I can be. 152 4.34 0.809 92.8%2.6%0.7%3.3%46.1%46.7%0.7%2.My job provides me the opportunity to do challenging and interesting work. 150 4.15 0.925 86.0%2.0%6.0%6.0%46.7%39.3%0.0%3.My job makes good use of my skills and abilities. 150 3.35 1.248 34.7%9.3%56.0%6.0%28.7%9.3%36.7%19.3%0.0%4.There are no significant barriers at work to doing my job well. 152 4.09 1.006 9.2%84.2%3.9%5.3%6.6%46.1%38.2%0.0%5.I am treated with respect as an individual. 152 3.66 1.173 17.1%17.8%65.1%7.2%9.9%17.8%39.5%25.7%0.0%6.I receive recognition when I do a good job. 153 3.95 0.982 8.5%15.0%76.5%3.3%5.2%15.0%45.8%30.7%0.0%7.I have enough authority to carry out my job effectively. 151 4.07 0.865 9.9%84.8%2.6%2.6%9.9%54.3%30.5%0.0%8.I have the information I need to do my job well. 153 3.79 1.062 12.4%19.6%68.0%3.9%8.5%19.6%40.5%27.5%0.0%9.I am encouraged to come up with new or better ways of doing things. 153 3.63 1.141 17.7%17.7%64.7%6.5%11.1%17.6%42.5%22.2%0.0%10.I receive clear and regular feedback on how well I do my work. 152 4.25 0.808 92.8%2.6%1.3%3.3%53.9%38.8%0.0%11.I understand the results expected of me in my job. 150 3.77 1.055 14.0%15.3%70.0%4.0%10.0%15.3%46.0%24.0%0.7%12.I have opportunities to have my ideas adopted and put into use. 147 3.76 1.002 17.0%75.5%2.0%15.0%7.5%55.8%19.7%0.0%13.I have the resources I need to do my job effectively. 151 2.62 1.199 54.3%16.6%29.1%18.5%35.8%16.6%23.2%6.0%0.0%14.I believe I am paid fairly for the work I do. 152 3.55 1.027 16.5%24.3%57.9%3.3%13.2%24.3%41.4%16.4%1.3%15.Employees who try new ideas and ways of doing things are supported. 152 2.57 1.295 58.6%33.6%24.3%34.2%7.9%27.0%6.6%0.0%16.There are enough people to do the work in my work group. 152 3.32 1.193 27.6%13.8%58.6%10.5%17.1%13.8%47.4%11.2%0.0%17.The amount of work expected of me is reasonable. 152 4.00 0.884 9.2%84.2%3.3%3.3%9.2%58.6%25.7%0.0%18.There is good cooperation and teamwork within my work group. Page 71 of 394 Green - Favorable (4 and 5) Yellow - Neutral (3) Red - Unfavorable (1 and 2) 2 Questions Count Mean Std. Dev. 0 20 40 60 80 100 Category Percentages Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree N/A 151 3.77 0.898 10.6%14.6%74.8%2.6%7.9%14.6%59.6%15.2%0.0%19.The work is well organized in my work group. 152 3.54 1.085 15.8%21.1%63.2%7.9%7.9%21.1%48.7%14.5%0.0%20.My work group receives high quality support from other units on which we depend. 152 3.07 1.295 34.9%19.1%44.1%15.1%19.7%19.1%30.9%13.2%2.0%21.The County provides employee benefits that meet my needs. 153 3.95 0.982 9.8%11.1%78.4%3.3%6.5%11.1%49.7%28.8%0.7%22.I have a good idea of the possible career paths available to me. 152 3.68 1.177 18.4%13.2%68.4%7.2%11.2%13.2%43.4%25.0%0.0%23.My immediate supervisor coaches me in my development. 152 3.70 1.028 14.5%16.5%69.1%3.9%10.5%16.4%49.3%19.7%0.0%24.The County provides training so that I can handle my present job well. 153 3.71 0.985 13.1%16.3%68.6%3.3%9.8%16.3%51.0%17.6%2.0%25.New employees in my work group receive the training they need to do their jobs well. Questions Count Mean Std. Dev.0 20 40 60 80 100 Category Percentages Very Poor Poor Average Good Very Good N/A 151 3.69 1.034 12.6%23.8%63.6%4.0%8.6%23.8%41.7%21.9%0.0%26.Your opportunities to achieve your personal career goals at the County. 151 3.74 0.950 9.3%27.8%62.9%2.0%7.3%27.8%41.1%21.9%0.0%27.Your opportunities for learning and development. Questions Count Mean Std. Dev. 0 20 40 60 80 100 Category Percentages Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree N/A 153 3.69 1.154 17.0%13.7%69.3%7.2%9.8%13.7%45.1%24.2%0.0%28.I would recommend my department to others as a place to work. 153 3.52 1.139 19.6%20.9%58.8%6.5%13.1%20.9%39.9%19.0%0.7%29.My department motivates me to contribute more than is required. 151 4.09 0.912 11.3%82.8%2.6%3.3%11.3%47.7%35.1%0.0%30.The people in my work group are committed to delivering high quality services. 153 3.65 1.161 17.7%18.3%64.1%6.5%11.1%18.3%39.2%24.8%0.0%31.My department supports me in achieving a reasonable balance between my work life and my personal life. 153 4.36 0.795 93.5%2.6%0.7%2.0%47.1%46.4%1.3%32.My department expects a high level of performance from its employees. 153 3.80 1.058 13.1%13.7%71.9%4.6%8.5%13.7%47.1%24.8%1.3%33.Cooperation and sharing of ideas and resources across work groups in my department are encouraged. Page 72 of 394 Green - Favorable (4 and 5) Yellow - Neutral (3) Red - Unfavorable (1 and 2) 3 Questions Count Mean Std. Dev. 0 20 40 60 80 100 Category Percentages Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree N/A 153 3.61 1.198 18.3%13.7%68.0%9.8%8.5%13.7%46.4%21.6%0.0%34.All in all, my department is effectively managed and well run. 152 3.70 1.201 18.4%15.8%65.8%6.6%11.8%15.8%36.2%29.6%0.0%35.I feel motivated to go beyond my formal job responsibilities. Questions Count Mean Std. Dev.0 20 40 60 80 100 Category Percentages Very Poor Poor Average Good Very Good N/A 151 4.22 0.886 14.6%81.5%1.3%2.6%14.6%35.8%45.7%0.0%36.The quality of the service provided by your department. 152 4.05 1.012 18.4%73.0%2.0%5.9%18.4%31.6%41.4%0.7%37.The quality of customer support (i.e. responsiveness, flexibility, turnaround) provided by your department. 151 3.80 1.020 11.9%21.9%66.2%2.0%9.9%21.9%38.4%27.8%0.0%38.Being effectively organized and structured. 152 3.42 1.215 21.1%28.3%50.7%9.2%11.8%28.3%28.9%21.7%0.0%39.Making decisions in a timely manner. 153 3.53 1.091 15.7%32.7%49.7%3.9%11.8%32.7%27.5%22.2%2.0%40.Being innovative in how work is done (using new technologies or creative approaches to improve internal effectiveness). 153 3.44 1.312 26.8%19.0%54.3%9.8%17.0%19.0%27.5%26.8%0.0%41.How would you rate the overall trust and confidence you have in your department's leadership team. Questions Count Mean Std. Dev. 0 20 40 60 80 100 Category Percentages Strongly Disagree Disagree Neither Agree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree N/A 153 3.86 0.963 9.8%14.4%75.2%3.3%6.5%14.4%51.6%23.5%0.7%42.I have a good understanding of the County's strategy and goals. 153 3.89 0.980 10.5%12.4%76.5%3.3%7.2%12.4%51.0%25.5%0.7%43.I understand the relationship between my job and the County's strategy and goals. 152 3.88 1.023 12.5%13.2%74.3%2.6%9.9%13.2%45.4%28.9%0.0%44.I feel proud to work for Chesterfield County. 150 3.78 1.134 16.0%13.3%70.7%5.3%10.7%13.3%42.0%28.7%0.0%45.I would recommend the County to others as a place to work. 153 3.26 1.185 22.9%30.1%47.1%11.8%11.1%30.1%33.3%13.7%0.0%46.The County demonstrates care and concern for its employees. 152 3.49 1.101 16.5%25.0%57.9%7.9%8.6%25.0%42.8%15.1%0.7%47.All in all, the County is effectively managed and well run. Questions Count Mean Std. Dev.0 20 40 60 80 100 Category Percentages Very Poor Poor Average Good Very Good N/A 152 3.12 1.175 29.0%30.9%38.8%10.5%18.4%30.9%26.3%12.5%1.3%48.Being open and honest in communications to employees. Page 73 of 394 Green - Favorable (4 and 5) Yellow - Neutral (3) Red - Unfavorable (1 and 2) 4 Questions Count Mean Std. Dev. 0 20 40 60 80 100 Category Percentages Less than 1 Year 1-2 Years 3-5 Years 5 + or Until Retireme nt N/A 152 3.51 0.906 15.1%84.9%6.6%8.6%12.5%72.4%0.0%49.Given your choice, how long would you plan to continue working for the County? Questions Count Mean Std. Dev.0 20 40 60 80 100 Category Percentages Poor Fair Good Excellent N/A 150 3.11 0.778 20.7%78.0%2.0%18.7%44.0%34.0%1.3%50.Please rate the overall image or reputation of Chesterfield County. 152 2.78 0.926 31.6%67.1%11.8%19.7%45.4%21.7%1.3%51.Being open and honest in communications with citizens. 153 3.11 0.708 17.0%81.7%1.3%15.7%52.3%29.4%1.3%52.Overall, how would rate the quality of services provided by Chesterfield County? 153 2.77 0.869 28.8%67.3%10.5%18.3%50.3%17.0%3.9%53.How would you rate the overall direction that Chesterfield County is taking? Page 74 of 394 Presented by: Compensation Study Chesterfield County, Virginia Presentation of Results 10/28/2020 Page 75 of 394 1 Overview •Study Goals •Our Approach •Current System Findings •Market Results •Recommendations Page 76 of 394 2 Study Goals •Review current compensation system and assess existing  challenges. •Survey peer organizations to ensure external equity. •Produce recommendations to provide the organization with a  compensation system that is equitable, both internally and  externally. Page 77 of 394 3 Current System Findings •Open-range salary structures for Police, Fire & EMS, and Sheriff employees. •Compression across all areas, majority of employees located within the first  and second quartiles. •Very limited number of employees at advanced portions of the salary ranges. •Average tenure across the agencies ranged from 8 to 11 years.  Page 78 of 394 4 Public Safety Employee Survey Results Page 79 of 394 5 Market Targets •Peer organizations were surveyed  for salaries, salary ranges, and  general pay practices. •Salary range and structure design  information was the focal point of  the comparison. •All relevant salary information  was adjusted for regional cost-of- living. Target Respondents   Cities City of Alexandria, VA City of Fairfax, VA City of Hopewell, VA City of Jacksonville, FL City of Raleigh, NC City of Richmond, VA City of Virginia Beach, VA Counties Anne Arundel County, MD Arlington County, VA Fairfax County, VA Frederick County, VA Hanover County, VA Henrico County, VA Montgomery County, MD Loudoun County, VA Spotsylvania County, VA   Stafford County, VA Prince William County, VA Other Agencies/Organizations State of Virginia (PD) Page 80 of 394 6 Market Results Police •Minimum: 2.2% •Midpoint: 1.9% •Maximum: 2.0% Sheriff •Minimum: -3.8% •Midpoint: -2.4% •Maximum: -1.5% Fire •Minimum:  9.4% •Midpoint: 10.9% •Maximum: 11.7% •The market positioning varied by  agency. •The County’s ranges are generally   positioned well to the market average. •However, average actual salaries were  not as competitive. •The County’s compensation structure  design varied from peer practices. •A number of peers leverage step-based  approaches, designed to be competitive  for recruitment. Page 81 of 394 7 Key Recommendations •Adopt step structures for all three  employee groups. •Step structures all consist of 25 steps. •3% increases between steps 1-7. •2% increases between steps 8-25. •More aggressive approach to remain  competitive earlier in career. •Range spreads consisted of a 71%  width. •Designated starting steps for supervisory  ranks, aligned with promotional practices. •Salary range rates adjusted to balance  distance to market and structure design. Page 82 of 394 8 Career Development Integration With Step Plan •Employees move horizontally along the structure for each step. •Vertical movement requires progression through career development plan  (CDP). •Employees receive step increase each fiscal year. •CDPs require both time in position and the required training and performance. •Each CDP level is a new title in the structure.   (Only a portion of the chart shown for illustrative purposes.) Page 83 of 394 9 Implementation •To adopt the new step structures, Evergreen is  proposing a phased approach - •Phase 1: Perform salary percent increases  that scale with tenure (between 3-8%  increases). •Phase 2: Perform a tenure-parity adjustment. •A tenure-parity consists of placing employees  on a step that corresponds with the total tenure  with their respective agency.  Phase 1 Phase 2 Total Salary Only Total $4,432,116.90 $12,446,385.85 $16,878,502.75 Salary & Benefits Total $5,877,873.43 $16,506,396.91 $22,384,270.34 Page 84 of 394 10 Thank you Michael Misrahi, Senior Consultant Evergreen Solutions, LLC 2878 Remington Green Circle Tallahassee, Florida 32308 850.383.0111 ph 850.383.1511 fax www.ConsultEvergreen.com Page 85 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 3.C. Subject: Proposed 2021 Legislative Program Board Action Requested: Summary of Information: This work session will cover a draft version of the county’s 2020 legislative program ahead of scheduled approval in November. The program includes the county’s guiding principles for reviewing potential legislation as well as any specific legislative requests the county may have for the upcoming General Assembly session. Attachments: 1.Legislative Work Session PP Preparer:Mary Ann Curtin, Director Approved By: Page 86 of 394 DRAFT 2021 LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM Board of Supervisors Work Session October 28, 2020 Page 87 of 394 2021 Landscape § Virtual § House of Delegates § Police Reform Legislation § State Budget – Reasons for caution Page 88 of 394 BLUEPRINT CHESTERFIELD What is Blueprint Chesterfield? Blueprint Chesterfield is the framework that organizes longstanding practices related to budget and strategic planning. The Blueprint framework provides an avenue to facilitate communication, collect feedback and input for how we identify priorities, set strategic direction, and allocate resources. Everyday Excellence Safe and Secure Community Robust economy Healthy living and well-being Thriving communities Learning for a lifetime VISIO N VALUE S To be an extraordinary and innovative community in which to live, learn, work, and play Results, Innovation, Service, Ethics Providing a FIRST CHOICE community through excellence in public service Page 89 of 394 PROPOSED 2020 GUIDING PRINCIPLES Maintain Quality Public Education and Public Safety Provide Quality of Life Consistent with Community Expectations Maintain Local Autonomy Page 90 of 394 ONGOING ISSUES AND CONCERNS K-12 State Budget Local Land Use Authority Cost Shifts/Mandates Local Revenue Authority Transportation Page 91 of 394 LEGISLATIVE REQUESTS TO CONSIDER § Data sharing during State of Emergency or Public Health Emergency (Fire and EMS request) Page 92 of 394 LEGISLATIVE REQUESTS TO CONSIDER Support Full funding K-12 education Transportation Funding Stormwater Funding Compensation Board Funding  Court Clerk’s Funding Page 93 of 394 Oppose Legislation that will result in a less safe community Elimination or reduction of local revenue sources Additional mandates/cost shifts Limitations/caps on local land use authorities LEGISLATIVE REQUESTS TO CONSIDER Page 94 of 394 CALENDAR July 20, 2020 •Pre-filing of 2021 legislation began Nov. 18, 2020 •Adopt legislative program Dec. 2020 •Potential meeting with legislative delegation Dec. 16, 2020 •Governor’ s budget released Jan. 13, 2021 •2021 General Assembly convenes Page 95 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 3.D. Subject: Election Preparedness Update Board Action Requested: Summary of Information: This work session will provide an update on the collective efforts of the Registrar’s Office, Electoral Board and County to prepare for the 2020 general election, including all of the work associated with expanded early and absentee voting. Attachments: None Preparer:Christopher "Matt" Harris, Deputy County Administrator Approved By: Page 96 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 3.E. Subject: Community Development Consent Agenda Overview Board Action Requested: Summary of Information: Deputy County Administrator Jesse Smith will provide a brief summary of several Consent Items on the Board’s evening agenda. Attachments: 1.3E - Community Development Update_10-28-2020_BOS Preparer:Jesse W Smith, Deputy County Administrator Approved By: Page 97 of 394 Community Development Update Board of Supervisors Meeting October 28, 2020 Page 98 of 394 4. Authorization to Award a $5.1M Contract Hull Street Widening, Lonas to Castle Rock Page 99 of 394 5. Transfer and appropriation of revenue sharing fund balances. Page 100 of 394 6. Set public hearing to consider amendments to Route 1 overlay and design standards •Changes to make overlay more user-friendly •Expand permitted depth of development •Permit reduction in balconies •Ordinance clean-up Page 101 of 394 7. Set public hearing to consider CVTA Budget and Plan Page 102 of 394 8. Initiate an application for a conditional use at 9900 Jefferson Davis Highway Page 103 of 394 13. Award of construction contracts a.I-95/Route 10 Interchange: $6.5M to Curtis Contracting b.Huguenot Pump Station and Tank: $5.4M to Waco, Inc. c.Dutch Gap Kayak Storage: $167k to David A. Nice Builders, Inc. d.Proctors Creek WWTP: $1.8M to Crowder Construction e.Route 10 Widening: $11.7M vendor TBD Page 104 of 394 17. Public Hearings C. To consider code amendment to townhouse and multi-family unit parking. E. To consider the exercise of eminent domain for easements for the Huguenot Pump Station Transmission Project F. To Consider Amendments to County Code Relating to Rehabilitated Historic Residential and Commercial Real Estate and Partial Exemption for Certain Rehabilitated, Renovated or Replaced Commercial, Industrial and Residential Structures Page 105 of 394 Community Development Update Board of Supervisors Meeting October 28, 2020 Page 106 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 4.A. Subject: District Improvement Funds (DIF) Monthly Report Board Action Requested: Accept the attached District Improvement Funds (DIF) Monthly Report. Summary of Information: The attached report details approved and proposed uses of DIF for FY2021. Acceptance of the report will serve as approval for staff to expend DIF funds for the proposed uses as listed. Attachments: 1.DIF Report - October 28, 2020 Preparer:Gerard Durkin, Acting Budget Director Approved By: Page 107 of 394 1 | Page DIF Report 10/28/2020 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY Monthly Report on District Improvement Funds Report Date: October 28, 2020 Prepared By: Budget and Management The County annually budgets $33,500 in discretionary funds, referred to as District Improvement Funds (DIF), for each of the five magisterial districts that are used to improve the quality of life in each district. The DIF allocations can be used for public improvements, purchase of county-owned equipment, public events or programs, public school programs, and other legally allowable expenses. In addition, if funds remain in DIF accounts at the end of each fiscal year, up to $37,500 may be reserved per district at year-end to be utilized in a future year. On July 22, 2020, the Board authorized a one-time waiver of the rollover cap on District Improvement Funds to make available in FY2021 funds that were unable to be spent due to the COVID-19 pandemic. With approval of this report, the Board consents to the use of available reserve balance, if needed. This report shows the cumulative use of District Improvement Funds for FY2021 as well as the current funding available for each district. Requests to use funds for the current month are detailed below and listed as a proposed use on the summary chart for that district. Upon Board of Supervisors acceptance of this report each month, staff will execute proposed DIF requests. There are three DIF uses proposed this month. Acceptance of this report by the Board constitutes Board approval of these requests. October 2020 Requests: Transfer up to $1,000 from the Clover Hill District Improvement Fund to the School Board to purchase new band uniforms for the Clover Hill High School band. The Board can legally transfer public funds to the School Board to purchase capital equipment to be used in school programs. The uniforms will be owned by the School Board and will become a part of the School Board’s inventory of property. The purchase must be made by the School Board in accordance with the Virginia Public Procurement Act and County purchasing policies. Transfer up to $7,000 from the Clover Hill District Improvement Fund to Community Enhancement to purchase and plant Yoshino Cherry trees, Skip Laurel and construct a 50-foot flower bed at the intersection of Courthouse Road and West Providence Road. The requested funds will be used to purchase the trees, mulch, stakes and support tying for the trees as well as the necessary supplies for the flower bed. The County may use public funds for landscaping in public rights-of-way. The purchase must be made by Community Enhancement in accordance with the Virginia Public Procurement Act and County purchasing policies. Page 108 of 394 2 | Page DIF Report 10/28/2020 Transfer up to $3,000 from the Dale District Improvement Fund to the Department of Parks and Recreation to upgrade and improve the football field at Lloyd C. Bird High School. The Board is authorized to transfer funds to the Department of Parks and Recreation to make improvements to the football field at Lloyd C. Bird High School since these are capital improvements to County property which will be used by the public. The purchase of materials and improvements must be accomplished in accordance with the Virginia Public Procurement Act and County purchasing policies. DIF Balances To Date: Bermuda – Current Balance $54,776.56 (FY21 funding plus available reserves) Request Date Use Amount Total FY2021 Bermuda uses $0.00 Clover Hill – Current Balance $30,120.82 (FY21 funding plus available reserves) Request Date Use Amount 8/26/2020 Communities in Schools mentoring program $2,500.00 Proposed Clover Hill High School new band uniforms $1,000.00 Proposed Courthouse and West Providence Road trees $7,000.00 Total FY2021 Clover Hill uses $10,500.00 Dale – Current Balance $86,469.71 (FY21 funding plus available reserves) Matoaca – Current Balance $64,227.81 (FY21 funding plus available reserves) Request Date Use Amount Total FY2021 Matoaca uses $0.00 Request Date Use Amount Proposed Lloyd C. Bird High School football field upgrades and improvements $3,000.00 Total FY2021 Dale uses $0.00 Page 109 of 394 3 | Page DIF Report 10/28/2020 Midlothian – Current Balance $93,017.00 (FY21 funding plus available reserves) Request Date Use Amount Total FY2021 Midlothian uses $0.00 Page 110 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 6.A. Subject: Pursuant to 1) § 2.2­3711(A)(19), Code of Virginia, 1950, as Amended, for a) Discussion of Reports or Plans Related to the Security of any Governmental Facility, Building or Structure, or the Safety of Persons Using Such Facility, Building or Structure, and b) Discussion of Information Subject to the Exclusion in Subdivisions 2 or 14 of § 2.2­3705.2, Where Discussion in an Open Meeting Would Jeopardize the Safety of any Person or the Security of Any Facility, Building, Structure, Information, Technology System, or Software Program, 2) § 2.2­­3711(A)(3), Code of Virginia, 1950, as Amended, to Discuss the Acquisition by the County of Real Estate for a Public Purpose Where Discussion in an Open Meeting Would Adversely Affect the Bargaining Position and Negotiating Strategy of the Public Body, and 3) § 2.2­­3711(A)(5), Code of Virginia, 1950, as Amended, to Discuss or Consider Prospective Businesses or Industries or the Expansion of Existing Businesses or Industries Where no Previous Announcement Has Been Made of the Businesses’ or Industries’ Interest in Locating or Expanding Their Facilities in the Community, and 4) § 2.2­3711(A)(1), Code of Virginia, 1950, as Amended, Relating to the Performance of the Chief of Police Board Action Requested: Summary of Information: Pursuant to 1) § 2.2­3711(A)(1), Code of Virginia, 1950, as Amended, Relating to the Performance of the Chief of Police, 2) § 2.2­3711(A)(19), Code of Virginia, 1950, as Amended, for a) Discussion of Reports or Plans Related to the Security of any Governmental Facility, Building or Structure, or the Safety of Persons Using Such Facility, Building or Structure, and b) Discussion of Information Subject to the Exclusion in Subdivisions 2 or 14 of § 2.2­3705.2, Where Discussion in an Open Meeting Would Jeopardize the Safety of any Person or the Security of Any Facility, Building, Structure, Information, Technology System, or Software Program, 3) § 2.2­­3711(A)(3), Code of Virginia, 1950, as Amended, to Discuss the Acquisition by the County of Real Estate for a Public Purpose Where Discussion in an Open Meeting Would Adversely Affect the Bargaining Position and Negotiating Strategy of the Public Body, and 4) § 2.2­­3711(A)(5), Code of Virginia, 1950, as Amended, to Discuss or Consider Prospective Businesses or Industries or the Expansion of Existing Businesses or Industries Where no Previous Announcement Has Been Made of the Businesses’ or Industries’ Interest in Locating or Expanding Their Facilities in the Community. Attachments: None Preparer:Jeff Mincks, County Attorney Page 111 of 394 Approved By: Page 112 of 394 RECOGNIZING MR. MICHAEL C. TURNER UPON HIS RETIREMENT WHEREAS, Mr. Michael Turner retired from the Chesterfield County Utilities Department on October 1, 2020, after providing over 34 years of quality service to the residents of Chesterfield County; and WHEREAS, Mr. Turner began his career with Chesterfield County on May 19, 1986, when he was hired by the Chesterfield County Utilities Department as a Senior County Maintenance Worker at the Addison-Evans Water Treatment Plant; and WHEREAS, Mr. Turner was promoted to Utility Worker on May 8, 2004 and faithfully served in that position assisting in hundreds of repairs to water distribution lines and associated appurtenances until his retirement; and WHEREAS, Mr. Turner focused on providing world-class customer service by consistently meeting or exceeding customer expectations; and WHEREAS, Mr. Turner continuously utilized his knowledge and experience with water-line repair techniques to provide water service that was safe, reliable and environmentally sound; and WHEREAS, Mr. Turner willingly and faithfully worked after regular business hours and during emergencies to restore water service to customers regardless of weather conditions or the time of day; and WHEREAS, Mr. Turner was highly respected and liked by his peers and coworkers; and WHEREAS, during his tenure, Mr. Turner was recognized for his excellent customer service by numerous residents that expressed their appreciation for services rendered; and WHEREAS, Mr. Turner’s loyalty and dedication to the Chesterfield County Department of Utilities is recognized and appreciated and his experience and dedication will be missed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors, this 28th day of October, publicly recognizes Mr. Turner and extends on behalf of its members and the residents of Chesterfield County, appreciation for his service to the county, congratulations upon his retirement, and best wishes for a long and happy retirement. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be presented to Mr. Turner, and that this resolution be permanently recorded among the papers of this Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia. Page 113 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.A.1. Subject: Board of Building and Fire Code Appeals Board Action Requested: Nomination and Reappointment of one member to the Board of Building and Fire Code Appeals. Summary of Information: The term of one member of the Board of Building and Fire Code Appeals that fulfills the property management position, expires October 31, 2020. That member is Mr. C. Brown Pearson, III. Reappointment/appointment of Mr. Pearson will maintain the composition of membership as previously established by the Board of Supervisors for the Board of Building and Fire Code Appeals. Mr. Pearson's term would be effective November 1, 2020, and expire October 31, 2023. Under the existing Rules of Procedure, appointments to boards and committees may be nominated and appointed at the same meeting. Nominees are voted in the order in which they are nominated. Attachments: None Preparer:Ron Clements, Director Approved By: Page 114 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.A.2. Subject: GRTC Transit System Board of Directors Board Action Requested: The Board is requested to nominate and appoint three directors to the GRTC Board for one-year terms, effective October 21, 2020, and expiring October 20, 2021, and to authorize the County Administrator or his designee to appear at the GRTC annual meeting to vote for the directors appointed by the Board and by the Richmond City Council. Summary of Information: GRTC is a publicly owned corporation which was formed to provide public transportation services in the Richmond regional area. Chesterfield County and the City of Richmond each own 50 percent of the GRTC as its two sole shareholders. GRTC is governed by a six-member board of directors, three appointed by the Chesterfield Board of Supervisors and three by the Richmond City Council. The terms for the county’s current GRTC Directors will expire on October 20, 2020. Accordingly, staff is recommending that Mr. Gary Armstrong, Mr. Daniel K.Smith and Mr. Ian Millikan be reappointed to the board for new one-year terms ending October 20, 2021. Under the GRTC by-laws, the Board may reappoint the current directors to the next term or may appoint new directors. There are no eligibility requirements to serve as a director on the GRTC Board. Directors are appointed each year for one-year terms beginning in October. The Board is requested to consider nominees for appointment to the GRTC Transit System Board of Directors. Under the existing Rules of Procedure, appointments to boards and Page 115 of 394 committees may be nominated and appointed at the same meeting. Nominees are voted on in the order in which they are nominated. The GRTC Articles require the county and the City of Richmond, as GRTC’s shareholders, to vote at the annual meeting for the three directors appointed by the other jurisdiction. The Board should, therefore, also authorize the County Administrator or his designee to appear at the annual meeting and vote on behalf of the county for the GRTC Directors. Attachments: None Preparer:Jeff Mincks, County Attorney Approved By: Page 116 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.1.a. Subject: Resolution Recognizing Ms. Jody Schurman, Utilities Department, Upon Her Retirement Board Action Requested: Adoption of the attached resolution. Summary of Information: Ms. Jody Schurman retired from the Utilities Department on October 1, 2020, after providing more than 26 years of service to Chesterfield County. Attachments: 1.Ms. Jody Schurman Retirement Resolution Preparer:George Hayes, Director of Utilities Approved By: Page 117 of 394 RECOGNIZING MS. JODY SCHURMAN UPON HER RETIREMENT WHEREAS, Ms. Schurman retired from the Chesterfield County Utilities Department on October 1, 2020, after faithfully serving the county and its citizens for over 26 years; and WHEREAS, Ms. Schurman began her public-service career with Chesterfield County on December 6, 1993, when she was hired by the Chesterfield County Utilities Department as a Data Analysis Technician at the Proctors Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant; and WHEREAS, Ms. Schurman assisted management at the treatment plant in all aspects of administration to ensure the process controls at the plant were not interrupted, thereby ensuring that the effluent was of high quality and environmentally sound; and WHEREAS, Ms. Schurman was promoted to Engineering Assistant on June 26, 1995, within the Industrial Pretreatment section of the Utilities Department; and WHEREAS, Ms. Schurman supported the department’s role of being a responsible protector of the environment by inspecting industries and monitoring industrial facilities to ensure that each industry maintained their compliance with their respective Industrial Wastewater Pretreatment Discharge permits; and WHEREAS, Ms. Schurman was promoted to Senior Engineering Assistant on June 18, 2005, and served faithfully in that position until her retirement; and WHEREAS, Ms. Schurman worked effectively and efficiently as a specialist in her field by analyzing information and updating the LINKO database for current and potential county businesses, ensuring that they were correctly classified and complied with all of the requirements of the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality; and WHEREAS, Ms. Schurman provided world-class customer service, consistently meeting or exceeding expectations by ensuring that all customers’ needs were met in an expeditious, courteous, and effective manner; and WHEREAS, Ms. Schurman was a member of the pretreatment team that won the National First Place Award from the Environmental Protection Agency in 1997 and again in 2002; and WHEREAS, Ms. Schurman’s exceptional customer service and dedication to the department was recognized when she was named the Utilities’ Employee of the Year in 2017; and WHEREAS, Ms. Schurman was highly respected by her peers and co-workers for her knowledge of industrial pretreatment requirements and procedures, and for her dedication and work ethic; and WHEREAS, throughout her career with Chesterfield County, Ms. Schurman displayed dependability, aptitude, good character, and values, and; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors recognizes the contributions of Ms. Jody Schurman, expresses the appreciation of all residents for her service to the county, and extends their appreciation for her dedicated service and their congratulations upon her retirement. Page 118 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.1.b. Subject: Resolution Recognizing Mr. Michael W. Smith, Department of General Services, Fleet Services Division, Upon His Retirement Board Action Requested: Adoption of the attached resolution. Summary of Information: Michael W. Smith retired from the Department of General Services on October 1, 2020, after providing 32 years of service to the citizens of Chesterfield County. Attachments: 1.Retirement Resolution-10.28.2020-Michael W. Smith-BOS Agenda Item Preparer:Clay Bowles, Director Approved By: Page 119 of 394 RECOGNIZING MR. MICHAEL W. SMITH UPON HIS RETIREMENT WHEREAS, Mr. Michael W. Smith joined Chesterfield County Public Schools Department of Pupil Transportation on September 1, 1988 as a Transportation Mechanic I; and WHEREAS, in September 1992, Mr. Smith became an employee of the Department of General Services due to the vehicle fleet maintenance consolidation between Chesterfield County Government and Chesterfield County Public Schools; and WHEREAS, in January 1999, Mr. Smith was promoted from Trades Assistant to Vehicle Technician; and WHEREAS, in June 1999, Mr. Smith’s job title changed to Automotive Technician; and WHEREAS, in June 2008, Mr. Smith’s job classification was regraded to School Bus Technician; and WHEREAS, Mr. Smith contributed to a positive work environment and maintained good working relationships; and WHEREAS, Mr. Smith freely shared his training and experience as he mentored co-workers to help them become the best in their field; and WHEREAS, Mr. Smith exhibited a high quality of leadership skills and was instrumental in creating and initiating several ideas to support the shop and the customers; and WHEREAS, Mr. Smith is a technically qualified, competent School Bus Technician dedicated to providing first-class customer service to Chesterfield County and its citizens; and WHEREAS, Mr. Smith performed his duties and responsibilities in a professional manner and always placed the highest priority on the safety and welfare of Chesterfield County students and bus drivers. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors recognizes the outstanding contributions of Mr. Michael W. Smith, expresses the appreciation of all residents for his service to Chesterfield County, and extends appreciation for his dedicated service to the County and congratulations upon his retirement, as well as best wishes for a long and happy retirement. Page 120 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.1.c. Subject: Resolution Recognizing Mr. Lester A. Katzer, Utilities Department, Upon His Retirement Board Action Requested: Adoption of attached resolution. Summary of Information: Mr. Lester Katzer retired from the Department of Utilities on October 1, 2020, after providing more than 15 years of service to Chesterfield County. Attachments: 1.Retirement Resolution Lester Katzer Preparer:George Hayes, Director of Utilities Approved By: Page 121 of 394 RECOGNIZING Mr. LESTER A. KATZER UPON HIS RETIREMENT WHEREAS, Mr. Katzer retired from the Chesterfield County Utilities Department on October 1, 2020, after faithfully serving the county and its citizens for over 15 years; and WHEREAS, Mr. Katzer began his career with Chesterfield County on February 14, 2005, when he was hired by the Chesterfield County Utilities Department as a Utility Worker at the Proctors Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant and continued to work at that facility until his retirement; and WHEREAS, Mr. Katzer supported the department’s role of being a responsible protector of the environment by providing wastewater treatment that is safe, reliable, and environmentally sound; and WHEREAS, Mr. Katzer’s daily efforts contributed to the county’s wastewater treatment facilities’ receiving numerous awards from the wastewater industry; and WHEREAS, Mr. Katzer helped the Proctors Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant achieve both Silver and Gold Peak Performance Awards from the National Association of Clean Water Agencies’ for exceptional performance at the Proctors Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant; and WHEREAS, Mr. Katzer acted as an exemplary steward of the public trust by working with fellow operators to optimize plant operations in the most cost-effective manner; and WHEREAS, throughout his career with Chesterfield County, Mr. Katzer displayed dependability, aptitude, good character, and values, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors recognizes the contributions of Mr. Lester A. Katzer, expresses the appreciation of all residents for his service to the county, and extends their appreciation for his dedicated service and their congratulations upon his retirement. Page 122 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.1.d. Subject: Resolution Recognizing Ms. Sue S. Hubbell, Fire & EMS, Upon Her Retirement Board Action Requested: The adoption of the attached resolution. Summary of Information: Ms. Sue S. Hubbell retired from Fire & EMS after having provided over forty-four years of service to the citizens of Chesterfield County. Attachments: 1.Consent Hubbell Sue S. (1) Preparer:Loy Senter, Fire Chief Approved By: Page 123 of 394 RECOGNIZING SUE S. HUBBELL UPON HER RETIREMENT WHEREAS, Sue S. Hubbell retired from the Chesterfield Fire and Emergency Medical Services Department, Chesterfield County, on October 1, 2020; and WHEREAS, Ms. Hubbell began her tenure with Fire & EMS in October of 1977, after working for General Services for a year and a half; and WHEREAS, Ms. Hubbell has faithfully served the county for over forty-four years and is the most tenured employee to retire from Chesterfield County Fire and EMS; and WHEREAS, Ms. Hubbell began her career as a Clerk Typist and later served in other positions including Clerk Steno II in 1982, Senior Clerk Typist Receptionist in 1984, Secretary in 1985, Principal Account Clerk in 1989, Administrative Assistant in 1990, Principal Administrative Officer in 1993, Office Administrator II in 2000, Human Resources Analyst in 2001, Administrative Manager in 2006, and Senior Human Resources Analyst in 2011; and WHEREAS, Ms. Hubbell has served with every Fire Chief from Chief Robert L. Eanes to Chief Edward L. Senter and experienced the continual development, expansion, implementation, modernization and transformation of the department to include becoming the first employee of its human resource division; and WHEREAS, Ms. Hubbell was chosen as Chesterfield Fire & EMS Civilian of the Year in 2002 and again in 2015; and WHEREAS, Ms. Hubbell successfully completed numerous certifications in her career, including the Chesterfield University School of Quality and Continuous Improvement in August of 2003, and most recently the Principles of Human Resources Certificate in 2020; and WHEREAS, Ms. Hubbell participated in various focus groups, projects, action teams, work groups and RFP’s during her tenure adding to the depth and breadth of skill and experience; and WHEREAS, Ms. Hubbell was recognized for her commitment and contribution to the development of a fire personnel information database system that was implemented in 1998; and WHEREAS, Ms. Hubbell has been involved in the successful hiring and onboarding process for more than fifty recruit schools Page 124 of 394 representing hundreds of firefighter/EMT recruits over the past four decades including every first responder currently employed by Fire & EMS; and WHEREAS, Ms. Hubbell is known for her calm and pleasant demeanor and has been a stabilizing center for her co-workers and many leaders who rose in rank; and WHEREAS, Ms. Hubbell has provided a superior level of commitment and dedication to her work, to Chesterfield Fire & EMS and the citizens we serve; and WHEREAS, Ms. Hubbell’s personnel file is filled with thank you notes, letters of appreciation, and accolades from co-workers, vendors, previous supervisors and other leaders in the organization. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors recognizes the contributions of Ms. Sue S. Hubbell, expresses the appreciation of all residents for her service to the county, and extends their appreciation for her dedicated service and their congratulations upon her retirement. Page 125 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.1.e. Subject: Resolution Recognizing Ms. Debra Gates, Department of Social Services, Upon Her Retirement Board Action Requested: Adoption of attached resolution. Summary of Information: Ms. Debra Gates will retire from the Chesterfield-Colonial Heights Department of Social Services after 17 years of dedicated service. Attachments: 1.Debra Gates Resolution Preparer:Kiva Rogers, Executive Director Approved By: Page 126 of 394 RECOGNIZING MS. DEBRA GATES UPON HER RETIREMENT WHEREAS, Ms. Debra Gates began her tenure of public service with Chesterfield County as a Principal Account Clerk with the Chesterfield-Colonial Heights Department of Social Services on August 16, 2003, and was promoted to Administrative Analyst on October 22, 2005; and WHEREAS, in her role as Administrative Analyst, Ms. Gates provided vital support and leadership to Finance staff, agency staff, and citizens, ensuring Special Welfare Funds, State Locality Automated System for Expenditure Reimbursement (LASER) month-end closing, accounts payable, receivables, and 1099 functions were performed and timely for the agency; and WHEREAS, Ms. Gates established a reputation of being a team player and was known for her willingness to help her coworkers and for providing exceptional customer service to citizens; and WHEREAS, Ms. Gates was recognized for her excellent teamwork for the coverage of Comprehensive Services payments during a vacancy period while still in training and coverage of the Finance unit during vacancies October 4, 2004; and WHEREAS, Ms. Gates served on the emergency shelter team for Hurricane Isabel in 2003 and Gaston in 2004, and she served on the Administration and Finance division Senior Worker Development workgroup, Partnership of Office Services Support Employees in Social Services (POSSESS), Go Green, Community Outreach committee, and Quality Council; and WHEREAS, Ms. Gates remained flexible and productive while having a vital role in the implementation of system changes from Social Services Mainframe system to Microfocus to Microsoft Dynamics and from IFAS (In Focus system) to OneSolution; and WHEREAS, throughout her career, Ms. Gates has been steadfast in her commitment to the citizens of Chesterfield County and the City of Colonial Heights, and her efforts aided the department in successfully meeting key performance goals. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors recognizes Ms. Debra Gates and extends on behalf of its members and the citizens of Chesterfield County, appreciation for her service to the county, congratulations upon her retirement, and best wishes for a long and happy retirement. Page 127 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.1.f. Subject: Resolution Recognizing Ms. Daisy Cabas, Department of Social Services, Upon Her Retirement Board Action Requested: Adoption of attached resolution. Summary of Information: Ms. Daisy Cabas will retire from the Chesterfield-Colonial Heights Department of Social Services after 19 years of dedicated service. Attachments: 1.Daisy Cabas Resolution Preparer:Kiva Rogers, Executive Director Approved By: Page 128 of 394 RECOGNIZING MS. DAISY CABAS UPON HER RETIREMENT WHEREAS, Ms. Daisy Cabas began her tenure of public service with Chesterfield County as a Senior Account Clerk with the Chesterfield-Colonial Heights Department of Social Services on July 21, 2001, and was promoted to Principal Account Clerk (later titled Accounts Payable Specialist) on January 28, 2006; and WHEREAS, in her role as Accounts Payable Specialist, Ms. Cabas provided vital support to Finance, agency staff, and citizens, ensuring all assigned accounts payable and receivable functions were performed accurately and timely for the agency; and WHEREAS, Ms. Cabas was acknowledged for her assistance as an interpreter for Hispanic clients, and she was recognized for her willingness to take on extra responsibilities and maintaining a positive attitude during times of change; and WHEREAS, Ms. Cabas established a reputation of being a team player with an impeccable work ethic through her willingness to help her co-workers and dedication to providing exceptional customer service to citizens; and WHEREAS, Ms. Cabas served in the emergency shelter during Hurricanes Floyd in 1999, Isabel in 2003, Gaston in 2004, and Isaias in August 2020; and WHEREAS, in addition to timely and accurate processing of accounts payable and accounts receivables, Ms. Cabas monitored her assigned budget, researched and resolved issues, becoming a subject matter expert in the area of payable and receivables; and WHEREAS, Ms. Cabas remained flexible and productive while having a vital role in the implementation of system changes from Social Services Mainframe system to Microfocus to Microsoft Dynamics and from IFAS (In Focus system) to OneSolution; and WHEREAS, Ms. Cabas was a staunch advocate and member of the Partnership of Office Services Support Employees in Social Services (POSSESS), C.A.R.E.D and Cultural Diversity committee, serving as a member for years; and WHEREAS, over the years, Ms. Cabas has volunteered to assist the Christmas Mother in the distribution of toys and gifts to needy families and seniors; and WHEREAS, throughout her career Ms. Cabas has been steadfast in her commitment to the citizens of Chesterfield County and the Page 129 of 394 City of Colonial Heights, and her efforts have aided the department in successfully meeting key performance goals. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors recognizes Ms. Daisy Cabas and extends on behalf of its members and the citizens of Chesterfield County, appreciation for her service to the county, congratulations upon her retirement, and best wishes for a long and happy retirement. Page 130 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.1.g. Subject: Resolution Recognizing Firefighter Earnest N. Llewellyn, Fire & EMS, Upon His Retirement Board Action Requested: The adoption of the attached resolution. Summary of Information: Firefighter Earnest N. Llewellyn retired from Fire & EMS after having provided more than 22 years of service to the citizens of Chesterfield County. Attachments: 1.Consent Llewellyn, Earnest N. 10-1-2020 (FF) Preparer:Loy Senter, Fire Chief Approved By: Page 131 of 394 RECOGNIZING FIREFIGHTER EARNEST N. LLEWELLYN UPON HIS RETIREMENT WHEREAS, Firefighter Earnest “Ernie” N. Llewellyn retired from the Chesterfield Fire and Emergency Medical Services Department, Chesterfield County on October 1, 2020; and WHEREAS, Firefighter Llewellyn began his career with Chesterfield County on July 4, 1998, as a member of Recruit School #27; and WHEREAS, Firefighter Llewellyn has faithfully served the county for more than twenty-two years in various assignments at the Buford, Midlothian, Dale District, Swift Creek, Winterpock and Phillips Fire & EMS Stations; and WHEREAS, Firefighter Llewellyn was recognized with an Emergency Medical Services Lifesave Award for his role in saving the life of a citizen that went into cardiac arrest in February of 2002; and WHEREAS, Firefighter Llewellyn was recognized with an Emergency Medical Services Unit Citation for his actions during a motor vehicle accident with a patient trapped under a vehicle in October of 2007; and WHEREAS, Firefighter Llewellyn was recognized with an Emergency Medical Services Unit Citation for his role in saving the life of a citizen who had overdosed in October of 2013; and WHEREAS, Firefighter Llewellyn was recognized with a Unit Lifesave Award for his actions when his team responded to a structure fire with trapped residents in August of 2014; and WHEREAS, Firefighter Llewellyn was recognized with a Unit Lifesave Award for his role during his team’s response to a call for a patient who had stopped breathing from a seizure in September of 2014; and WHEREAS, Firefighter Llewellyn was recognized with a Unit Lifesave Award for his role in assisting a patient in labor in February of 2017. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors recognizes the contributions of Firefighter Earnest N. Llewellyn, expresses the appreciation of all citizens for his service to the county and extends their appreciation for his dedicated service and their congratulations upon his retirement. Page 132 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.1.h. Subject: Resolution Recognizing Mr. George L. Rivera, Utilities Department, Upon His Retirement Board Action Requested: Adoption of attached resolution. Summary of Information: Mr. George L. Rivera retired from the Department of Utilities on October 1, 2020, after providing more than 15 years of service to Chesterfield County. Attachments: 1.Rivera Retirement Resolution Preparer:George Hayes, Director of Utilities Approved By: Page 133 of 394 RECOGNIZING MR. GEORGE L. RIVERA UPON HIS RETIREMENT WHEREAS, Mr. Rivera retired from the Chesterfield County Utilities Department on October 1, 2020, after faithfully serving the county and its citizens for over 15 years; and WHEREAS, Mr. Rivera began his service to the citizens of Chesterfield County on January 18, 2005, when he was hired by the Chesterfield County Utilities Department as a Utility Locator and faithfully served until his retirement; and WHEREAS, Mr. Rivera continuously utilized his experience and knowledge of the water distribution system throughout his career which played a significant role in preventing damages to the underground water distribution and wastewater collections systems; and WHEREAS, Mr. Rivera focused on providing world–class customer service by consistently meeting or exceeding customer expectations; and WHEREAS, Mr. Rivera used his expertise to represent Chesterfield County when serving as the planning section chief as part of an incident management team that was deployed to Harrison County, Mississippi following Hurricane Katrina in October of 2005; and WHEREAS, Mr. Rivera was highly respected and liked by his peers and coworkers; and WHEREAS, throughout his career with Chesterfield County, Mr. Rivera displayed dependability, aptitude, good character and values; and WHEREAS, Mr. Rivera has provided the Chesterfield County Utilities Department with many years of loyal and dedicated service. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors recognizes the contributions of Mr. Rivera, expresses the appreciation of all residents for his service to the county, and extends their appreciation for his dedicated service and their congratulations upon his retirement. Page 134 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.1.i. Subject: Resolution Recognizing Ms. Tommie S. Clare, Department of Utilities, Upon Her Retirement Board Action Requested: Adoption of the attached resolution recognizing Ms. Tommie S. Clare, Department of Utilities, upon her retirement. Summary of Information: Ms. Tommie S. Clare retired on October 1, 2020, after providing over 33 years of service to the citizens of Chesterfield County. Attachments: 1.Clare BOS Resolution Preparer:George Hayes, Director of Utilities Approved By: Page 135 of 394 RECOGNIZING MS. TOMMIE S. CLARE UPON HER RETIREMENT WHEREAS, Ms. Tommie S. Clare retired from the Chesterfield County Utilities Department on October 1, 2020; and WHEREAS, in September 1987, Ms. Clare began her public-service career with the Chesterfield County Department of Building Inspections as an application permit specialist; and WHEREAS, in February 1990, Ms. Clare was promoted to data entry operator with the department of utilities where she contributed to the accurate recording of utility data; and WHEREAS, in May 1994, Ms. Clare was promoted to secretary within the engineering data management section where she contributed to project management and work-flow efficiency within the section; and WHEREAS, during her tenure as a secretary, Ms. Clare furthered her education in computer technology and was instrumental in the establishment of the department’s first computer help-desk system; and WHEREAS, in March 1996, Ms. Clare was promoted to information retrieval specialist where she contributed to the department’s information technology needs and was instrumental in the development of a nationally recognized brochure for the water industry; and WHEREAS, in June 1999, Ms. Clare was promoted to senior automation technician and was later reclassified to automation specialist where she contributed to the department’s quality work culture by completing and demonstrating all aspects of the county’s Total Quality Initiative program; and WHEREAS, in March 2005, Ms. Clare was promoted to automation analyst where she contributed to the department by completing and demonstrating all aspects of the county’s Employee Leadership Institute; and WHEREAS, during her tenure as an automation analyst, Ms. Clare was recognized for her contributions to the continued refinement of the department’s help-desk system as well as development and publication of the department’s annual performance plan; and WHEREAS, during her 33 years of service, Ms. Clare witnessed and helped to support the technology evolution within the department and was instrumental in supporting the department’s information technology needs; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors recognizes Ms. Tommie S. Clare and extends on behalf of its members and the citizens of Chesterfield County, appreciation for over 33 years of exceptional service to the county. Page 136 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.1.j. Subject: Resolution Recognizing Mr. Garret T. Flynn, Department of General Services Printing Center, Upon His Retirement Board Action Requested: Adoption of the attached resolution. Summary of Information: Garret T. Flynn retired from the Department of General Services on October 1, 2020, after providing 22 years of service to the citizens of Chesterfield County. Attachments: 1.Retirement Resolution-10.28.2020-Garret T. Flynn-BOS Preparer:Clay Bowles, Director Approved By: Page 137 of 394 RECOGNIZING MR. GARRET T. FLYNN UPON HIS RETIREMENT WHEREAS, Mr. Garret T. Flynn joined the Chesterfield County, Department of General Services, Printing Center Division on April 27, 1998 as a Printer; and WHEREAS, in 2015, Mr. Flynn was recognized by his peers as the Department of General Services’ Employee of the Year; and WHEREAS, Mr. Flynn graduated from the School of Quality and Continuous Improvement; and WHEREAS, Mr. Flynn always strived for continuous improvement in the completion of his daily duties; and WHEREAS, Mr. Flynn’s wealth of knowledge and experience with color printing was a welcomed asset to the Printing Center; and WHEREAS, Mr. Flynn’s ability to maintain true color in production lead to the Printing Center starting to offer four-color printing products to customers; and WHEREAS, Mr. Flynn helped implement the high standards of quality that the Printing Center had set, so customers were fully satisfied with finished products; and WHEREAS, Mr. Flynn lived up to his motto, “We get it done no matter what,” as he often went beyond the call of duty to provide reliable and fast service, especially during times of personnel transitions and changes to the operating model of the Printing Center; and WHEREAS, Mr. Flynn was highly regarded by his colleagues and was always enthusiastically willing to “go the extra mile” to learn and perform new tasks; and WHEREAS, Mr. Flynn mastered the operation of all the highly specialized finishing equipment in the Printing Center, providing supplemental staffing when needed to ensure customer satisfaction; and WHEREAS, Mr. Flynn’s knowledge and expertise with shop equipment enabled him to perform many preventive maintenance tasks without the need to consult outside vendors; and WHEREAS, Mr. Flynn projected a positive image of Chesterfield County and always demonstrated dedication to the job and availability to customers. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors recognizes the outstanding contributions of Mr. Garret T. Flynn, expresses the appreciation of all residents for his service to Chesterfield County, and extends appreciation for his dedicated service to the County and congratulations upon his retirement, as well as best wishes for a long and happy retirement. Page 138 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.1.k. Subject: Resolution Recognizing Mrs. Brenda D. Manuel, Planning Department, Upon Her Retirement Board Action Requested: Adoption of the attached resolution. Summary of Information: Mrs. Brenda D. Manuel retires from the Planning Department on October 1, 2020, after providing 26 years of service to the residents of Chesterfield County. Attachments: 1.Brenda Manuel - Retirement (1) Preparer:Andrew Gillies, Director of Planning Approved By: Page 139 of 394 RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING MRS. BRENDA D. MANUEL UPON HER RETIREMENT WHEREAS, Mrs. Brenda D. Manuel retired from the Chesterfield County Planning Department on October 1, 2020, after twenty-six years of dedicated service entirely with the Planning Department; and WHEREAS, Mrs. Manuel began her service with Chesterfield County in 1994 as a Customer Service Representative; and WHEREAS, Mrs. Manuel, as a result of her hard work and dedication to this county and the public, rose through the ranks of the Planning Department, serving in positions of Customer Service Representative, Planning Technician in 1998, and Planner starting in 2005; and WHEREAS, Mrs. Manuel provided outstanding public service to the residents of Chesterfield County, the development community, and the general public; and WHEREAS, Mrs. Manuel served on numerous department committees including the Christmas Mother program, the Planning Department Enhancement Committee, and others; and WHEREAS, Mrs. Manuel actively participated for many months in the re-writing of the Chesterfield County Zoning Ordinance; and WHEREAS, Mrs. Manuel trained and mentored many young planners, always with patience, understanding, and perseverance; and WHEREAS, Mrs. Manuel formed many long-term working relationships with members of the real estate community, the development community, lawyers, surveyors and civil engineers, and members of the general public and Chesterfield County residents; and WHEREAS, Mrs. Manuel continuously displayed a positive attitude and provided exemplary customer service; and WHEREAS, Mrs. Manuel worked diligently to make Chesterfield County a first-choice community to live, work, and play for all citizens, today and in the future and where her mark will be felt by generations in the future. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors recognizes the contributions of Mrs. Brenda D. Manuel and extends on behalf of its members and the citizens of Chesterfield County, appreciation for her service to the County and congratulations upon her retirement. Page 140 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.1.l. Subject: Resolution Recognizing Mr. Greg Fulk, Department of Mental Health Support Services, Upon His Retirement Board Action Requested: Adoption of the attached resolution. Summary of Information: Mr. Greg Fulk retired from the Department of Mental Health Support Services October 1, 2020 after providing 30 years of service to the citizens of Chesterfield County. Attachments: 1.Resolution Greg Fulk Preparer:Kelly Fried, Executive Director Approved By: Page 141 of 394 RECOGNIZING MR. GREG FULK UPON HIS RETIREMENT WHEREAS, Mr. Greg Fulk was hired by Chesterfield County Mental Health Support Services on September 4, 1990 as a Senior Clinician, became a Services Supervisor on November 1, 1999 and then Program Manager for Psychiatric Rehabilitation Services on May 24, 2004 where he served the remainder of his career; and WHEREAS, Mr. Fulk proposed, developed, and managed the implementation of the Intensive Community Treatment Team providing intensive services to adults with serious and pervasive mental illness; and WHEREAS, Mr. Fulk coordinated the Immediate Services Team, the organization’s first self-directed work team, developing and testing innovative brief treatment approaches that provided an immediate high-quality response to our clients and helped to virtually eliminate outpatient waiting lists; and WHEREAS, Mr. Fulk partnered with SUD staff and enhanced the quality of services to clients with mental health and substance use disorders by conducting dual recovery psychoeducational groups and developing a group leader’s manual; and WHEREAS, Mr. Fulk participated in the development and implementation of several initiatives and programs including Same Day Access, the Event Management Reporting System, the Suicide Risk Guidelines, the Chesterfield County Age Wave plan, and worked to establish a cooperative working relationship regarding group programming with Central State Hospital; and WHEREAS, Mr. Fulk was the driving force behind the use of peer specialists by providing training and employment opportunities for individuals who completed the Virginia Human Services Training Program; and WHEREAS, Mr. Fulk served on numerous committees including Health and Safety, Quality Management, the Diversity Advisory Group and the Criminal Justice and Mental Health Partnership for Change; and WHEREAS, Mr. Fulk helped coordinate the Behavioral Health Home Project with Anthem which shifted the focus of case management to physical health care indicators in addition to behavioral health goals in client treatment plans; and WHEREAS, Mr. Fulk partnered with the Department of Social Services to have an eligibility worker on site to assist clients with serious mental illness with timely processing of applications for benefits and renewals; and WHEREAS, Mr. Fulk was twice chosen as the Mental Health Support Services Employee of the Year and nominated a third time; and WHEREAS, Mr. Fulk has exhibited integrity, professionalism and ethical practice while demonstrating the utmost respect to all and will be missed by staff and clients alike. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors recognizes the outstanding contributions of Mr. Greg Fulk and extends appreciation, on behalf of its members and the citizens of Chesterfield County, for 30 years of service, congratulations upon his retirement, and best wishes for a long, happy and healthy retirement. Page 142 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.1.m. Subject: Resolution Recognizing Corporal Johnny A. Capocelli, Police Department, Upon His Retirement Board Action Requested: The adoption of the attached resolution. Summary of Information: Corporal Johnny A. Capocelli will retire from the Police Department after providing nearly 30 years of service to the residents of Chesterfield County. Attachments: 1.Capocelli J - Retirement Preparer:Jeffrey Katz, Chief of Police Approved By: Page 143 of 394 RECOGNIZING CORPORAL JOHNNY A. CAPOCELLI UPON HIS RETIREMENT WHEREAS, Corporal Johnny A. Capocelli will retire from the Chesterfield County Police Department on November 1, 2020 after providing nearly 30 years of quality service to the residents of Chesterfield County; and WHEREAS, Corporal Capocelli faithfully served the county as a Patrol Officer, Detective, Detective First Class, Senior Detective, Master Detective, Career Detective and Corporal; and WHEREAS, Corporal Capocelli has served as a certified radar operator, breathalyzer operator, and for 22 years, as a Department of Criminal Justice Services Certified General Instructor; and WHEREAS, Corporal Capocelli had the distinct honor of being selected as the Police Department's Detective of the Year and Employee of the Year for Chesterfield County in 2007; and WHEREAS, Corporal Capocelli, throughout his detective career, has served as a member of the Tactical Investigation Unit, Crimes Against Persons Unit, Major Case Section and the Multi-jurisdictional Special Operations Group; and WHEREAS, Corporal Capocelli was recognized with multiple Unit Citations and Chief's Commendations in recognition of his dedication, teamwork and investigative skills; and WHEREAS, due to his commitment and tenacity, Corporal Capocelli was instrumental in solving the first "cold case" in Chesterfield County which was a 17-year-old double homicide at a local grocery store; and WHEREAS, Corporal Capocelli was awarded a Chief's Commendation for serving in the Unsolved/Major Investigations Group where his knowledge, skills and abilities contributed to the first conviction of a "no-body" homicide suspect in the history of Chesterfield County, and, three years after this landmark case, a guilty verdict in a second "no-body" homicide case; and WHEREAS, Corporal Capocelli is recognized for his strong work ethic, his teamwork, and excellent communications and human relations skills, all of which he has utilized within the Police Department and in assisting residents of Chesterfield County during his career; and Page 144 of 394 WHEREAS, Corporal Capocelli has received numerous letters of commendation, thanks and appreciation for services rendered; and WHEREAS, Corporal Capocelli has provided the Chesterfield County Police Department with many years of loyal and dedicated service; and WHEREAS, Chesterfield County and the Board of Supervisors will miss Corporal Capocelli's diligent service. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors recognizes the outstanding contributions of Corporal Johnny A. Capocelli, expresses the appreciation of all residents for his service to Chesterfield County, and extends appreciation for his dedicated service to the County and congratulations upon his retirement, as well as best wishes for a long and happy retirement. Page 145 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.1.n. Subject: Resolution Approving Request of Delta Response Team, LLC to Operate Non-Emergency Ambulance Service Board Action Requested: The Board is requested to adopt a resolution approving the request of Delta Response Team, LLC to operate a non-emergency transport service in Chesterfield County. Summary of Information: Delta Response Team, LLC ("Delta") is requesting that the Board of Supervisors adopt a resolution approving its operation of a non-emergency ambulance transport service in Chesterfield County. In accordance with state law, Delta must have Board approval in order to establish a medical service transport operation whose only purpose will be to provide non-emergency transportation to nursing homes, assisted living facilities, dialysis centers, physician’s offices and hospitals. Delta will not be a component of the County’s EMS response system, and it will have no effect on the county’s emergency response operations, including volunteer rescue squad operations. Delta will not respond to calls for emergency medical services, but will, instead, refer those to the county’s 911 system. Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution. Attachments: 1.Delta Response Team, LLC Resolution Preparer:Loy Senter, Fire Chief Approved By: Page 146 of 394 RESOLUTION WHEREAS, Delta Response Team, LLC is requesting approval to establish and operate a non-emergency ambulance transport service in Chesterfield County; and WHEREAS, the County has received a letter from Delta Response Team, LLC stating that this approval is required for compliance with the State Board of Health, Virginia EMS Regulations, Section 12 VAC 5-31-420; and WHEREAS, Delta Response Team, LLC will not be part of the County’s emergency response system or a designated response agency for Chesterfield County; and WHEREAS, Delta Response Team, LLC has developed dispatch polices to ensure that emergency calls are referred to a 911 system and that it will only conduct non-emergency transports. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors hereby approves the request of Delta Response Team, LLC to establish and operate a non-emergency ambulance transport service in Chesterfield County. Page 147 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.2.a.1. Subject: Acceptance of a Parcel of Land Adjacent to Le Gordon Drive from Berk and Alp LLC Board Action Requested: Accept the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 39.63 square feet adjacent to Le Gordon Drive from Berk and Alp LLC and authorize the County Administrator to execute the deed. Summary of Information: Staff requests that the Board of Supervisors accept the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 39.63 square feet adjacent to Le Gordon Drive from Berk and Alp LLC. This conveyance is a condition of zoning case 01SN0221 and has been requested prior to the property being encumbered by a conservation easement and has been reviewed by the Planning and Transportation Departments. Approval is recommended. Attachments: 1.Berk And Alp LL Dedication Sketch 2.Berk and Alp LLC Dedication Plat Preparer:Dean Sasek, Real Property Manager Approved By: Page 148 of 394 MIDLOTHIAN TPKE L E G O R D O N D R C H A R T E R C O L O N Y P K W Y D U N L I N C T WINTERFIELD LN GARNETT LN CHARTER LANDING DR ALDENGATE RD MARTINET XING ABRAHAMS LN B L U E G R A S S R D K E V I N M E A D E D R A L D E N G A T E T E R MIDLOTHIAN WOOD BLVD T A N A G E R W O O D T R L C H A R T E R W A L K L N O L D O T T E R D A L E R D CHARTER LANDING CT LALEE RD C R O F T O N V I L L A G E T R C E SHAWHAN PL MIDLOTHIAN TPKE Board of Supervisors Meeting - October 28, 2020Acceptance of a Parcel of Land Adjacent to Le Gordon Drive from Berk and Alp LLC Chesterfield CountyReal Property Office 1 inch = 500 feet µ 39.63 Square Foot Dedication Page 149 of 394 Page 150 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.2.a.2. Subject: Acceptance of a Parcel of Land Along Rivers Bend Boulevard from Rivers Bend Townhomes Association, Inc. Board Action Requested: Accept the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 0.060 acres along Rivers Bend Boulevard from Rivers Bend Townhomes Association, Inc. and authorize the County Administrator to execute the deed. Summary of Information: Staff requests that the Board of Supervisors accept the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 0.060 acres along Rivers Bend Boulevard from Rivers Bend Townhomes Association, Inc. This conveyance is for the development of Rivers Bend Townhomes and is on the County Thoroughfare Plan and has been reviewed by Planning, Environmental Engineering and Transportation Departments. Approval is recommended. Attachments: 1.Rivers Bend Townhomes Association Inc Vicinity Sketch 2.Rivers Bend Townhomes Association Inc plat Preparer:Dean Sasek, Real Property Manager Approved By: Page 151 of 394 K I N G S T O N A V E P R E S T O N FIE L D D R R I V E R S B A N K B L V D M E A D O W V I L L E R D GREENSIDE CT K I R K H I L L D R GREENSIDE TER H O G A N S A L Y L I V E R P O O L L N R I V E R S B E N D B L V D R I V E R S B E N D B L V D G R E E N S I D E D R LIVERPOOL CIR G R E E N G A R D E N W A Y G R E E N G A R D E N C I R Board of Supervisors Meeting - October 28, 2020Acceptance of a Parcel of Land Along Rivers Bend Boulevardfrom Rivers Bend Townhomes Association, Inc. Chesterfield CountyReal Property Office 1 inch = 200 feet µ0.060 Acres to be dedicated Page 152 of 394 655,919.03 E..11,816,952.15 .523.01 '14't 375.90 LOT LOT 17 18 LOT 16 /14=145,0, ( IN FEET ) 1 inch = 50 ft. N..3,656,082.57 E•11,817,502.23 I U ri\ 5M 5 4 1 6 0 2N 8 C/ C / R I V F R S RF N D F IF 7 C IN T I N G \ S U R V FY l D r a win a s \ 5 41 -60 25 B R W DE D V THIS COMPILED PLAT WAS COMPLIED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF A TITLE REPORT AND MAY NOT SHOW ALL EASEMENTS WHICH MAY AFFECT THE PROPERTIES SHOWN HEREON THE PROPERTY LINE INFORMATION SHOWN ON THE PLAT IS COMPILED FROM RECORD DATA AND MEASUREMENTS. THIS COMPILED PLAT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A BOUNDARY SURVEY NO IMPROVEMENTS AND NOT ALL EASEMENTS MAY BE SHOWN VARIABLE WIDTH VDOT SLOPE AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT DS 2461 PG. 311 16' SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT DS 3035 PC. 523 10' WATERLINE EASEMENT DB. 3325 PG. 970 20' SWM/BMP ACCESS EASEMENT Da 12284 PG 99 \ i;L20 16' WATERLINE •EASEMENT DB. 3230 PG. 560 LOT LOT 14 I 15 OPEN SPACE B LOT 13 KINGSTON AVENUE STATE ROUTE 4841 VARIABLE WIDTH RW COMPILED PL4T SHANG 0.060 ACRE PARCEL TO BE DEDICATED ACROSS THE PROPERTY OF RIVER'S BEND TOWNHOMES ASSOC14110N, INC OP/N: 817655117000000 BERMUDA DISTRICT COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA PLANNERS / ARCHITECTS / ENGINEERS / SURVEYORS ROANOKE /RICHMOND /NEW RIVER VALLEY /STAUNTON / HARRISONBURG / LYNCHBURG 15871 City View Drive, Suite 200 / Midlothian, Virginia 23113 /Phone (804) 794-0571 /www.balzer.cc A - 16' DRAINAGE E4SEMENT DR 3040 PG. 434 --- ' VARIABLE WIDTH DRAINAGE EASEMENT PS 265 PG. 22-25 16 SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT P.B 265 PG 22-25 OPEN \ SPACE N I. 10 WATERLINE (Q EASEMENT PRESTONFIELD DRIVE N31 DB. 3325 PG. 970 47' RW II PR 265 PG. 22-25 0.060 ACRE (26.13.208 SO. a) PARCEL 70 BE DEDICAlED 50 GREENSIDE SECTION ONE OPEN SPACE RIVER'S BEND COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, INC. 08.3997 PG.J7 P.8. 96 PG. 26-28 GPIN: 816655868400000 12601 GREENS/DE DRIVE LINE TABLE LINE BEARING DISTANCE ll N23'01'1411/ 1336' L2 S24'35'421- 10.36' L3 S72.19 117'E 4.46' GRAPHIC SCALE 0 25 50 100 16' WATERLINE EASEMENT PR f65 PG. 22-25 RIVERS BEND TOWNHOMES SECNON ONE OPEN SPACE B RIVER'S BEND TOWNHOMES ASS001770N, INC. DR 12575 PG. 339 PB. 265 PG. 22-25 GPIIV: 817655117000000 600 KIRK//ILL DRIVE S24'35'421- 191.88' BAUER & ASSOCIATES CO. PROY- 17-0018 DATE: 08-26-2020 SCALE: 1" = 50' JOB: 54160258 DRAWN BY: KTL CHECKED BY: KTL SHEET 1 OF 1 362.54' 16' SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT PS 96 PG. 26-28 Page 153 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.2.a.3. Subject: Acceptance of a Parcel of Land Along Rivers Bend Boulevard from Rivers Bend Community Association, Inc. Board Action Requested: Accept the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 0.053 acres along Rivers Bend Boulevard from Rivers Bend Community Association, Inc. and authorize the County Administrator to execute the deed. Summary of Information: Staff requests that the Board of Supervisors accept the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 0.053 acres along Rivers Bend Boulevard from Rivers Bend Community Association, Inc. This conveyance is for the development of Rivers Bend Townhomes and is on the County Thoroughfare Plan and has been reviewed by Planning, Environmental Engineering and Transportation Departments. Approval is recommended. Attachments: 1.Rivers Bend Community Association Inc Vicinity Sketch 2.Rivers Bend Community Association Inc plat Preparer:Dean Sasek, Real Property Manager Approved By: Page 154 of 394 M E A D O W V I L L E R D PRESTONFIELD DR K I N G S T O N A V E GREENSIDE CT K I R K H I L L D R RIV E R S B A N K B L V D G R E E N G A R D E N W A Y GREENSIDE TER R I V E R S B E N D B L V D R I V E R S B E N D B L V D G R E E N S I D E D R G R E E N G A R D E N C I R G R E E N G A R D E N P L B A Y H I L L D R GREEN GARDEN TER G R E E N G A R D E N TE R Board of Supervisors Meeting - October 28, 2020Acceptance of a Parcel of Land Along Rivers Bend Boulevardfrom Rivers Bend Community Association, Inc. Chesterfield CountyReal Property Office 1 inch = 200 feet µ0.053 Acres to be dedicated Page 155 of 394 LOT 59 GREENS/DE SECNON ONE OPEN SPACE RIVER'S BEND COMMUNITY ASSOCA110IV, INC 08.3997 P6'.37 PB. 96 PG. 26-28 GP/N: 816655868400000 12601 GREENS/DE DRIVE NO IMPROVEMENTS AND NOT ALL EASEMENTS MAY BE SHOWN 16' DRAINAGE LOT 57 EASEMENT Pa 96 PG. 26-28Th RIVERS BEND TOWNHOMES SECTION ONE OPEN SPACE B RIVER'S BEND TOWNHOMES ASSOCIA770/V, INC. P8. 265 PG. 22-25 D.B 12575 PG. 339 GPIAI.• 817655117000000 600 KIRKHILL DRIVE GRAPHIC SCALE 50 0 25 50 ( DR FEET ) 1 inch = 50 ft LOT 56 VARIABLE WIDTH SWM/BMP E4SE1IENT / / DB. 12284 PG 99 / /j / / / / 16 DRAINAGE / EASEMENT DB. 3040 PG. 434 / / / / 16' SANITARY 16' SANITAR) SEWER (11 EASEMENT SEWER EASEMENT p p g6 DR 3025 PC.523 PG.. 26-28-- -/- N6524'18E 154.62' RIVER'S BEND BOULEVARD STATE ROUTE 4840 120' RW N:3,655,866.98 E:11,816,806.33 LINE TABLE LINE SEWING DISTANCE Li S2501'14"E 13.36' 16' WATERLINE EASEMENT /2 B. 3230 PG. 560 N:J,655,931.33 E:11,816,946.92 CURVE TABLE CURVE RADIUS LENGTH CHD BEARING CHD LENGTH DELTA Cl 35.00' 31.65' N3930'05E 30.58' 51'48'26" C2 35.00' 2237' N04'42'41'W 21.99' 3637'06" PLANNERS / ARCHITECTS / ENGINEERS / SURVEYORS ROANOKE / RICHMOND / NEW RIVER VALLEY /STAUNTON / HARRISONBURG / LYNCHBURG 15871 City View Drive, Suite 200 / Midlothian, Virginia 23113 / Phone (804) 794-0571 / www.balzer.cc co FRay-17-0018 SITE/- DATE: 8-26-2020 SCALE: 1" = 50' JOB: 541 60258 DRAWN BY: KTL CHECKED BY: KTL SHEET 1 OF 1 THIS COMPILED PLAT WAS COMPLIED WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF A TITLE REPORT AND MAY NOT SHOW ALL EASEMENTS WHICH MAY AFFECT THE PROPERTIES SHOWN HEREON THE PROPERTY LINE INFORMARON SHOWN ON THE PLAN IS COMPILED FROM RECORD DATA AND MEASUREMENTS. THIS COMPILED PLAN DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A BOUNDARY SURVEY COMPILED PL4T SHOWING a05.3 ACRE PARCEL TO BE DEDICATED ACROSS THE PROPERTY OF RIVER'S BEND COMMUNITY ASSOCIA170N, INC GPI/V: 816655868400000 BERMUDA DISTRICT COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA IPA 0 BAUER & ASSOCIATES 7,6 100 i r•-) 10' WATERLINE EASEMENT 50' 50' BUFFER DB. 3325 PG. 970 VARIABLE WIDTH VDOT SLOPE AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT DB. 2461 PG. 311 56524'18"W 181.76' LOT 58 56658'46"W 138.60' aa5,7 ACRES (2319.327 SO. FT) PARCEL TO BE DED/C41ED A Page 156 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.2.a.4. Subject: Acceptance of Three Parcels of Land Along Ecoff Avenue from Virginia Electric and Power Company Board Action Requested: Accept the conveyance of three parcels of land containing a total of 0.100 acres along Ecoff Avenue from Virginia Electric and Power Company and authorize the County Administrator to execute the deed. Summary of Information: Staff requests that the Board of Supervisors accept the conveyance of three parcels of land and containing a total of 0.100 acres along Ecoff Avenue from Virginia Electric and Power Company. This conveyance is for the development of Iron Mill Section 3 and is on the County Thoroughfare Plan and has been reviewed by Planning, Environmental Engineering and Transportation Departments. Approval is recommended. Attachments: 1.Virginia Electric and Power Company Vicinity Sketch 2.Virginia Electric and Power Company plat Preparer:Dean Sasek, Real Property Manager Approved By: Page 157 of 394 I R O N R I V E R D R ECOFF AVE Board of Supervisors Meeting - October 28, 2020Acceptance of Three Parcels of Land Along Ecoff Avenuefrom Virginia Electric and Power Company Chesterfield CountyReal Property Office 1 inch = 200 feet µ Total of 0.100 acres to be dedicated Page 158 of 394 CHECKED BY: DRAWN BY: SLW 66.34' 170.94 30 15 30 60 DALE J. PATTON GPIN: 785656082100000 DB. 12654 PG. 164 5100 ECOFF AVE 16' WATERLINE EASEMENT BY SEPARATE INSTRUMENT POB N:3 656 031.73 PARCEL ® E:11, 784,883.10 16.08' Lei 1422.91 IRON MILL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC GPIN: 784655062000000 DB. 12698 PG. 405 POB 5011 ECOFF AVE PARCEL 0 14) 1ZZ (Zi C.; 8 [xi k 0 c-k3 LAJ (.) 1758'00" 25.12 4.28' EX I S T I N G R o -H -H I 10.33' 6 VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER COMPANY GPIN: 785656088500000 DB. 124 PG. 455 5110 ECOFF AVE ) 16' WATERLINE EASEMENT 1,606.75 SQ. FEET N:3 656 070.52 E:11, 784, 790.53 1505.75' COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD GPIN: 784656718500000 DB. 2055 PG. 710 5200 ECOFF AVE 12.91' 16.01' 25.01' 16.57' N175800 E 70.66' FORMER PARCEL DEDICATED TO CHESTERf7ELD COUNTY z DB. 8529 PG 251 (.1) (PARCEL NO LONGER EXISTS) TS JAMES A. FOWLKES & ERIKA A. FOWLKES GPIN: 784655668600000 DB. 11803 PG. 571 5111 ECOFF AVE 212.28' Nt• WRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER COMPANY GPIN: 785656088500000 DB. 130 PG. 67 5110 ECOFF AVE PROPERTY LINE PER DB. 130 PG. 67 S 6 6 7 0 '4 6 " E tto 7.t CURVE RADIUS ARC LENGTH CHORD LENGTH CHORD BEARING DELTA ANGLE Cl 664.50' 46.26' 46.25' N 68'20'25" W 3'59'18" C2 648.50' 44.64' 44.63' N 68'19'05" W 3'56'38" C3 1378.96' 100.22' 100.19' N 68'41'41'' W 4'09'50" C4 1353.96' 100.18' 100.16' N 68'37'55" W 4'14'22" p,LT H SCOFT L. WILLIAMS LIC. NO. 003184 07-15-2020 44N D SURVC(og- GRAPHIC SCALE ( IN FEET ) 1 inch = 30 ft. THIS PLAT IS SUBJECT TO ANY EASEMENT OF RECORD AND OTHER PERTINENT FACTS WHICH A TITLE SEARCH MIGHT DISCLOSE. THIS DOES NOT REPRESENT A CURRENT FIELD SURVEY CO. PROJECT,.' 09-0134 CO. SITE"' PLAT SHOWING 0.100 ACRES OF LAND TO BE DEDICATED TO CHESTERFIELD COUNTY AND A 16' WATERLINE EASEMENT ACROSS THE PROPERTY OF VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER COMPANY BERMUDA DISTRICT CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, WRGINIA SCALE: 1" = 30' JULY 1ST, 2020 Townes SIME ENGINEEIRING 1 PARK WEST CIRCLE, SUITE 108 MIDLOTHIAN, VIRGINIA 23114 PHONE: (804) 748-9011 FAX: (804) 748-2590 PARCEL A 1,156 SQ. FEET 0.026 ACRES PARCEL B (PREVIOUSLY DEDICATED) PARCEL C 1,105 SQ. FEET 0.025 ACRES PARCEL D Z139 SQ. FEET 0.049 ACRES TOTAL AREA OF DEDICATTON 0.100 ACRES Page 159 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.2.a.5. Subject: Acceptance of Parcels of Land Adjacent to Lewis Road from Trevor and Deborah Ball Board Action Requested: Accept the conveyance of parcels of land containing a total of 5,247 square feet adjacent to Lewis Road from Trevor and Deborah Ball and authorize the County Administrator to execute the deed. Summary of Information: Staff requests that the Board of Supervisors accept the conveyance of parcels of land containing a total of 5,247 square feet adjacent to Lewis Road from Trevor and Deborah Ball. This conveyance is for future road improvements and has been reviewed by the Transportation department. Approval is recommended. Attachments: 1.Trevor and Deborah Ball Dedication Vicinity Sketch 2.Trevor and Deborah Ball Dedication Plat Preparer:Dean Sasek, Real Property Manager Approved By: Page 160 of 394 B R A D L E Y B R I D G E R D L E W I S R D A P A M A TICA L N B E R K L E Y D A V I S D R FIELDWOOD RD Board of Supervisors Meeting - October 28, 2020Acceptance of Parcels of Land Adjacent to Lewis Road from Trevor and Deborah Ball Chesterfield CountyReal Property Office 1 inch = 300 feet µ Total of 5,247 Square Feet Dedication Page 161 of 394 Page 162 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.2.b.1. Subject: Request to Quitclaim a Portion of a Variable Width Water Easement Across the Property of Westchester Apartments, LLC Board Action Requested: Authorize the Chair of the Board of Supervisors and the County Administrator to execute a quitclaim deed to vacate a portion of a Variable Width Water Easement across the property of Westchester Apartments, LLC. Summary of Information: Westchester Apartments, LLC has requested the vacation of a portion of a Variable Width Water Easement as shown on the attached plat. This request has been reviewed by Utilities. New Water Easements have been dedicated. Approval is recommended. Attachments: 1.Westchester Apartments LLC Quitclaim Sketch 2.Westchester Apartments LLC Quitclaim Plat Preparer:Dean Sasek, Real Property Manager Approved By: Page 163 of 394 R T 28 8 S C H O F I E L D D R ST IV ES D R W YLD E R OSE AVE PERIMETER DR N O T T E R D A L E R D W C C O M M O N S D R WC COMMONS WAY WC MAIN ST MIDLOTHIAN TPKE T O T T E N D RWATKINS C E N T R E P K W Y BRID GE CREEK D R P A D D L E C R E E K D R D I A M O N D C R E E K D R E RI N B R O O K C T R T 28 8 WC MAIN ST WC MAIN ST R T 288 WC MAIN ST WC MAIN ST MIDLOTHIAN TPKE Board of Supervisors Meeting -October 28, 2020Request to Quitclaim a Portion of a Variable Width Water Easement Across the Property of Westchester Apartments, LLC Chesterfield CountyReal Property Office 1 inch = 500 feet µ Portion of a Water Easement to be Quitclaimed Page 164 of 394 Page 165 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.2.b.2. Subject: Request to Quitclaim a Portion of a Variable Width SWMBMP Easement and a 20’ SWMBMP Access Easement across the Property of Midlothian Huguenot AT LLC and VA Hokies Realty Associates, LLC Board Action Requested: Authorize the Chair of the Board of Supervisors and the County Administrator to execute a quitclaim deed to vacate a portion of a variable width SWMBMP easement and a 20’ SWMBMP access easement across the property of Midlothian Huguenot AT LLC and VA Hokies Realty Associates, LLC. Summary of Information: Midlothian Huguenot AT LLC and VA Hokies Realty Associates, LLC have requested the vacation of a portion of a variable width SWMBMP easement and a 20’ SWMBMP access easement as shown on the attached plats. This request has been reviewed by Environmental Engineering. New easements will be dedicated. Approval is recommended. Attachments: 1.Midlothian Huguenot AT LLC and VA Hokies Realty Associates LLC Quitclaim Sketch 2.Midlothian Huguenot AT LLC and VA Hokies Realty Associates LLC SWMBMP Plat Preparer:Dean Sasek, Real Property Manager Approved By: Page 166 of 394 H U G U E N O T R D A L V E R S E R D R MIDL OTHI A N TP KE M A L L D RKOGER CENTER BLVD OLD BUCKINGHAM RD S A N D G A T E R DOLDE COACH DR P A C K E R X I N G S A I N S B U R Y D R A L V E R S E R P L Z H U G U E N O T R D M I D L O T H I A N T P K E Board of Supervisors Meeting - October 28, 2020Request to Quitclaim a Portion of a Variable Width SWMBMP Easement and a 20’ SWMBMP Access Easement Across the Property of Midlothian Huguenot AT LLC and VA Hokies Realty Associates, LLC Chesterfield CountyReal Property Office 1 inch = 400 feet µ Portion of SWMBMP Easement to be Quitclaimed SWMBMP Access Easement to be Quitclaimed Page 167 of 394 Page 168 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.3. Subject: Authorize the Receipt and Appropriation of State Opioid Response (SOR) Grant Funding Year 3 for Treatment, Recovery and Prevention from the Department of Behavioral Health & Developmental Services Board Action Requested: Authorize the Chesterfield Community Services Board (CSB) to receive and appropriate $575,000 in the Mental Health budget additional funding from the Department of Behavioral Health & Developmental Services to address opioid prescription and non-prescription drug use and abuse in Chesterfield County. Summary of Information: The Chesterfield Community Services Board/Department of Mental Health Support Services has been notified by the Virginia Department of Behavioral Health & Developmental Services that it has been awarded $575,000 which was approved funding to address the opioid crisis. The funding is a portion of an award provided to the Commonwealth from the Federal Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) for dissemination to the 40 Community Services Boards (CSB). CSBs were awarded funding for prevention, treatment and recovery based on the number of opioid overdoses and deaths in each locality, and funding must be expended by September 30, 2021. The Chesterfield CSB will use this funding to continue its efforts in reducing opioid use and abuse in Chesterfield County. Attachments: None Preparer:Kelly Fried, Executive Director Gerard Durkin, Acting Budget Director Approved By: Page 169 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.4. Subject: Appropriation of Funds and Authorization to Award a Construction Contract for the Route 360, Eastbound (Lonas Parkway - Castle Rock Road) Widening Project Board Action Requested: The Board is requested to take the following actions for the Route 360, Eastbound (Lonas Parkway - Castle Rock Road) Widening Project: 1. Appropriate $2,318,000 in anticipated VDOT reimbursements; and 2. Authorize the Director of Procurement to award a construction contract up to $5,157,055 to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder; and to execute all necessary change orders up to the full amount budgeted for the project. Summary of Information: On August 24, 2016, the Board authorized staff to proceed with the design and right-of-way acquisition for the Route 360, Eastbound (Lonas Parkway - Castle Rock Road) Widening Project. The project involves widening eastbound Route 360, Hull Street Road, from two lanes to three lanes between Lonas Parkway and Castle Rock Road to improve traffic flow and safety. The project also includes construction of sidewalk and cross over modifications within the project limits. The project is funded with Surface Transportation Block Grant (STBG; formerly RSTP) funds from the Richmond Regional Transportation Planning Organization (TPO). Construction is scheduled to start in March of 2021 and end in December of 2021. Attachments: 1.Location Map 9-25-20 Preparer:Brent Epps, Director of Transportation Page 170 of 394 Approved By: Page 171 of 394 PROJECT W A R B R O R D MEMPHIS BLVD N B A I L E Y B R I D G E R D H U L L S T R E E T R D M E R I T G R O V E C THULL S T R E E T R D C L I N T W O O D R D C A S T L E R O C K R D D E H A V I L A N D D RMAZE R U N N E R D R STAMFORD RD L O N A S P K W Y L A R K I N L N C H A T T A N O O G A P L Z Route 360 Eastbound (Lonas Pkwy. - Castle Rock Rd.) Widening v:smithbk/360/Lonas - Castle Rock9-25-20 $ !(288 £¤360 GENITO RD C A STLE R O C K R D L O N A S P K W Y B E L L S O N P A R K D R W A R B R O R D PROJECT B R I D G E W O O D R D Page 172 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.5. Subject: Transfer and Appropriation of Revenue Sharing Fund Balances from Completed Projects to Active Projects Board Action Requested: The Board of Supervisors is requested to authorize the County Administrator to request VDOT to transfer revenue sharing balances on completed projects, estimated at over $2.5 million, to active projects; and authorize the Director of Budget and Management to transfer and appropriate anticipated VDOT reimbursements and local matching funds, as shown on Attachment A, among various funding sources. Summary of Information: Completed revenue sharing projects have surplus funds available for transfer to other active revenue sharing projects. If surplus funds are not transferred in a timely manner, within a six-months of project completion per VDOT policy, the state match is deallocated and no longer available for use on county projects. Staff has reviewed project budgets and determined the surplus funds, from various funding sources, can be transferred and/or appropriated to active projects shown in Attachment A. Attachments: 1.ATTACHMENT A - Surplus RS to Elkhardt, Ecoff & McRae Preparer:Brent Epps, Director of Transportation Approved By: Page 173 of 394 Donor Project: Donor UPC: Recipient Project: Recipient UPC: Total Revenue Sharing Transfer: Beulah (Kingsland- Pineleaf)105673 Elkhardt (Ruthers /Pocoshock - Elmart)108639 $500 Hicks (Mr. Gilead - Cardiff) 107086 Elkhardt (Ruthers /Pocoshock - Elmart) 108639 $5,362 Robious (county line - Robious Forest)107089 Elkhardt (Ruthers /Pocoshock - Elmart)108639 $74,247 Lake Chesdin Trail 107129 Elkhardt (Ruthers /Pocoshock - Elmart)108639 $29,127 Newbys Bridge (Sussex - Falling Creek) 17179 Elkhardt (Ruthers /Pocoshock - Elmart) 108639 $570,850 Bailey Br (Spring Run - Sunday Silence)108641 Elkhardt (Ruthers /Pocoshock - Elmart)108639 $870,728 Subtotal: $1,550,814 Bailey Br (Spring Run - Sunday Silence)108641 Ecoff (Ivywood - Ken)108638 $129,272 Belmont (Whitepine – Courthouse) 108644 Ecoff (Ivywood - Ken)108638 $357,235 Subtotal: $486,507 Belmont (Whitepine – Courthouse) 108644 McRae (Forest Hill - Rockaway)108647 $142,765 Old Centralia Rd. (10 - TDHS) 113315 McRae (Forest Hill - Rockaway) 108647 $405,000 Subtotal: $547,765 TOTAL: $2,585,086 Page 174 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.6. Subject: Set Public Hearing to Consider Code Amendment Relative to Route 1 Residential Overlay and Northern Jefferson Davis Highway Design District Development Standards (20PJ0119) Board Action Requested: Set November 18, 2020 for public hearing on the attached code amendment. Summary of Information: Following a public hearing, the Planning Commission by unanimous vote forwarded a recommendation of approval on the attached code amendment. Since the adoption of standards permitting multifamily and townhouse development within C-3 and C-5 districts along the Jefferson Davis Highway corridor there have been several inquiries seeking to utilize the provisions. Hearing additional feedback regarding the needs of potential projects to successfully integrate this higher density on relatively small infill lots staff undertook a review of certain standards. Among the changes are a potential expansion in development depth, common area allotment, building design and balcony provision. In addition, the proposed change to Sec. 19.1-378 is necessary as this deck parking provision was incorrectly added to that section. The correct section, Sec.19.1-379. is being updated with the adjusted provision to address allowance of residential uses. Attachments: 1.Ordinance Amendment 19.1-53, 19.1-378 & 19.1-379 Rt 1 Res Overlay and N Jefferson Davis HY Design District Development Standards Preparer:Andrew Gillies, Director of Planning Approved By: Page 175 of 394 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, 1997, AS AMENDED, BY AMENDING AND REENACTING SECTIONS 19.1-53, 19.1-378 & 19.1- 379 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE RELATIVE TO ROUTE 1 RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY AND NORTHERN JEFFERSON DAVIS HIGHWAY DESIGN DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County: (1) That Sections 19.1-53, 19.1-378 & 19.1-379 of the Code of the County of Chesterfield, 1997, as amended, are amended and re-enacted, to read as follows: Chapter 19.1 ZONING Sec. 19.1-53. Restricted Uses Listed as “R” or “RS”. Those uses listed as “R” or “RS” in Table 19.1-52.A. shall be permitted in the respective zoning districts provided that the restrictions as outlined below are met. If the restrictions cannot be met, the use may be allowed in the respective zoning district through either a Conditional Use or Special Exception. OOO Dwelling, multifamily OOO 2. C-3, C-5 Districts: a. Project fronts Jefferson Davis Highway north of Osborne Road and property is recommended for Neighborhood Business, Community Business, Suburban Residential II, Residential Mixed Use or Community Mixed Use in the Comprehensive Plan; b. Except as provided herein, uUse is located within 500 feet of Jefferson Davis Highway, this would not preclude accessory parking or buildings from extending beyond the 500 feet. Within a development the director of planning may approve units to be up to 800 feet from Jefferson Davis Highway where: i. no more than 50 percent of the development’s multifamily dwellings are located beyond 500 feet from Jefferson Davis Highway; ii. the project has a building containing a permitted principal use within 50 feet of, and directly fronting, Jefferson Davis Highway; and b.iii. the impact of such project extension on adjacent residentially zoned property is mitigated through increased buffer, walls or other site or building design improvements as approved at time of plan review; c. Project has a minimum of 100 feet of contiguous frontage along Jefferson Davis Highway; d. Project size is no less than 3 acres and no more than 10 acres, provided that projects of 1.5 acres shall be permitted if located at the intersection of a local road with Jefferson Davis Highway; Page 176 of 394 e. Minimum density is 15 dwelling units per acre; f. In addition to buffers required by Table.19.1-263.A.1.b., where use is located adjacent to an occupied C or I property outside of project, a buffer shall be provided between use and the adjacent property as required between the applicable C or I district and a R-MF zoning district; g. Project meets Northern Jefferson Davis Highway Design District (NJDHDD) standards as identified in Sec. 19.1-379 except as otherwise stated within this subsection; h. For projects containing less than 6 acres, buildings shall be a minimum of 3 stories and a maximum of 4 stories. For projects 6 acres or more, buildings shall be a minimum of 3 stories and a maximum of 6 stories. In no case shall the height of a building exceed 3 stories or 40 feet within 100 feet of MH or R districts; i. The greater of 50 square feet per residential unit or 10 percent of total project area shall be provided as hardscaped or landscaped common area. Up to 50 percent of required common area may include rooftop garden space where such space is commonly accessible to, and provides elements designed to facilitate social and activity space for, residents; j. At least 50 percent of residential units located above ground floor shall have a usable balcony consisting of a minimum area of 5 feet by 8 feet. Through the utilization of up to two of the below, the percentage of balconies required may be reduced to no less than 30 percent of residential units located above ground floor as provided below: i. 10 percent reduction for the inclusion of commonly shared internal space a minimum of 20 square feet per residential unit in development with amenities as deemed appropriate at time of plan review for the social and recreational activity of residents. Such areas may also include space intended to serve the educational and occupational needs of residents but shall be exclusive of any area utilized for leasing, maintenance or overall management of the development; ii. 10 percent reduction where project common area is increased by 10 percent and there is the inclusion of outdoor amenities and facilities, for active or passive recreation as deemed appropriate at time of plan review for residents such as playground, pool, outdoor kitchen with patio, patio with furniture, gazebo, walking trails, fitness stations or similar; or iii. 10 percent reduction for the provision of rooftop common area, inclusive of required common area, a minimum of 20 square feet per residential unit in development for social and recreational activity of the residents; At time of plan review, the director of planning may provide proportional adjustment to the percentages of required balconies where determined that elements proposed in i, ii, and iii above are included in combination at less that the provided standards, but in no case shall such adjustment be reduced to less than 30 percent of residential units located above ground floor having the required balconies. j.k. Buildings shall be designed to impart harmonious proportions and avoid monotonous facades or large bulky masses. Buildings containing multifamily units shall possess architectural variety while at the same time have an overall cohesive urban character. Design elements shall be included such as, but not limited to, wall offsets, balconies, terraces, articulation of doors and windows, sculptural or textural relief of facades, banding and patterning of masonry, architectural ornamentation, varied rooflines, other appurtenances such as lighting fixtures and plantings may be used tothat achieve desired design; Page 177 of 394 k.l. The first floor of a building directly fronting Jefferson Davis Highway shall meet applicable commercial building code requirements so as to provide for flexibility to accommodate either commercial or residential uses. The first floor of a building directly fronting a road shall be on grade with such roadadjacent pedestrian walkway and have a minimum of 12 foot ceilings, or a higher standard if required by commercial building code, where fronting Jefferson Davis Highway. This is not intended to preclude the use of an interior elevated floor design for residential uses to provide privacy; l.m. In addition to requirements of the NJDHDD, architecture for buildings containing dwellings shall employ masonry at least to top of first floor on all facades visible from a road; m.n. Commercial uses in the project are limited to those permitted in a C-2 district, excluding automobile accessory store, automobile rental, automobile self service station and automobile self service station, unmanned; n.o.Views of parking areas shall be minimized from public rights of way and/or single family residential properties via a building, landscaping, architectural walls and/or decorative fencing; and o.p.Administrative site plan review times shall be in accordance with Sec.19.1-30 with the exception that initial review for such projects shall not be acted upon any sooner than 21 days from the latter of the date of required sign posting or written notification sent. OOO Sec. 19-.1-378. Zoning Districts and Area of Applicability. OOO C. Other Required Conditions. OOO 11. Deck Parking. Deck parking structures shall have permitted residential, commercial or office uses located along the ground floor or be located behind another building located on the lot. OOO Sec. 19.1-379. Required Conditions Northern Jefferson Davis Highway Design District. OOO C. Other Required Conditions. 11. Deck Parking. Deck parking structures shall have permitted residential, commercial or office uses located along the ground floor or be located behind another building located on the lot. (2) That this ordinance shall become effective immediately after adoption. 1928:117732.1 Page 178 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.7. Subject: Set Public Hearing Date to Consider the FY2021-FY2026 Central Virginia Transportation Authority Improvement Plan and FY2021 Budget Board Action Requested: Set December 16, 2020, as the date to hold a public hearing to consider: FY2021-FY 2026 Central Virginia Transportation Authority Improvement Plan and FY2021 Central Virginia Transportation Authority Improvement Budget. Summary of Information: FY021-FY2026 CVTA Improvement Plan The 2020 General Assembly legislation, House Bill 1541, created the Central Virginia Transportation Authority (CVTA), allowing the Richmond region use specified tax revenues to fund transportation needs of the region (Section 33.2-3700-3713 of the Code of Virginia): The funds for the CVTA are generated through the following sources: • Sales and use tax of 0.7 percent (revenue collection begins October 2020) • Wholesale gas tax of 7.6 cents per gallon of gasoline and 7.7 cents per gallon of diesel fuel (revenue collection began July 2020) These tax generated funds are to be divided accordingly: • 35% to the CVTA for regional transportation projects; • 15% to the Greater Richmond Transit Company (GRTC) to provide transit and mobility services; and • 50% distributed proportionally to each member locality for local projects which may include construction, maintenance, or expansion of roads, sidewalks, trails, mobility services, or transit located in the locality. Chesterfield County’s local CVTA revenue is projected between $20 million and $23 million per year, $133 million over a six-year period. The CVTA will oversee the distribution of member locality revenues and confirm project eligibility. It is anticipated that funds will be distributed on a quarterly basis beginning in January 2021. A summary of the proposed improvement plan is shown on Attachment A. FY2021 CVTA Improvement Budget The FY2021 budget reflects the first year of anticipated CVTA funding for Chesterfield County and identifies Page 179 of 394 specific project allocations for the fiscal year. Projects shown in Attachment B are recommended for FY2021 CVTA funding. Two weeks prior to the public hearing, the draft FY2021-FY 2026 Central Virginia Transportation Authority Improvement Plan and FY2021 Central Virginia Transportation Authority Improvement Budget will be posted on the county’s website: https://www.chesterfield.gov/574/Transportation Attachments: 1.Attachment A - Proposed FY2021-FY2026 CVTA Improvement Plan 2.Attachment B - Proposed FY2021 CVTA Improvement Budget Preparer:Brent Epps, Director of Transportation Approved By: Page 180 of 394 PROPOSED FY2021 - FY2026 CVTA IMPROVEMENT PLAN PROJECT ESTIMATE FY2021 – FY2026 FY2022 Revenue Sharing Match  Nash Road (Beach Road to Route 10) Extension $ 784,162 $ 784,162  Woolridge Road (Route 288 to Old Hundred Road) Extension $ 218,795 $ 218,795 Nash Road (Beach Road to Route 10) Extension $ 30,000,000 $ 10,000,000 Woolridge Road (Route 288 to Old Hundred Road) Extension $ 54,487,100 $ 44,728,718 Woolridge Road (Watermill Parkway to Genito Road) Widening $ 16,882,500 $ 16,882,500 Centralia Road/Old Wrexham Road Roundabout $ 5,000,000 $ 5,000,000 Powhite Parkway Extension $ 54,300,000 $ 27,700,000  Little Tomahawk Creek to Woolridge Road (2 to 4 lanes)  Charter Colony Parkway (Grade-Separation)  Brandermill Parkway (Overpass) Route 10 (Route 288 – Courthouse Road) Weave Mitigation $ 23,000,000 $ 9,863,500 I-95/Willis Road Interchange – PE Only $ 2,000,000 $ 2,000,000 $ 186,672,557 $ 117,177,675 *Outstanding balances to be funded with other sources ATTACHMENT A Page 181 of 394 PROPOSED FY2021 CVTA IMPROVEMENT BUDGET PROJECT FY2021 Nash Road (Beach Road to Route 10) Extension $ 5,000,000 Woolridge Road (Route 288 to Old Hundred Road) Extension $ 3,916,000 Woolridge Road (Watermill Parkway to Genito Road) Widening $ 2,518,000 Centralia Road/Old Wrexham Road Roundabout $ 1,000,000 Powhite Parkway Extension $ 3,263,693  Little Tomahawk Creek to Woolridge Road (2 to 4 lanes)  Charter Colony Parkway (Grade-Separation)  Brandermill Parkway (Overpass) Route 10 (Route 288 – Courthouse Road) Weave Mitigation $ 500,000 I-95/Willis Road Interchange – PE Only $ 2,000,000 Unallocated Funds $ 2,489,164 $ 20,686,857 ATTACHMENT B Page 182 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.8. Subject: Initiate an Application for a Conditional Use to Permit the use of a Manufactured Home as a Sales Office and a Conditional Use Planned Development to Permit Ordinance and Development Standards Exceptions on 1.3 Acres Located at 9900 Jefferson Davis Highway and 2611 Woodfin Drive. Board Action Requested: Initiate an application for a Conditional Use to permit the use of a manufactured home as a sales office, and Conditional Use Planned Development to permit exception to Ordinance and Development Standards requirements in a General Business (C-5) District on two lots, considered as one zoning lot of 1.3 acres, identified as Tax IDs 794-667-4538 and 794-667-3427; appoint Andrew G. Gillies, Director of Planning, as the agent for the Board; and waive disclosure requirements. (Attachment 1) Summary of Information: Mr. Ingle is requesting the Board initiate a conditional use and conditional use planned development to permit a manufactured home to be used as a sales office associated with automobile sales on the premises. The sales office (manufactured home) encroaches into 2611 Woodfin Drive; therefore, this request is being considered as a zoning lot due to the location of the structure within the boundaries of these two properties. This site is subject to Northern Jefferson Davis Highway Design Standards. It is anticipated the use of the manufactured home as a sales office will be on a temporary basis. Virginia law permits the Board of Supervisors to initiate a rezoning application on the principles of good zoning practice and general welfare to consider land uses that are not permitted under current zoning regulations. Consideration of this request will provide for a public process to review and determine if any adverse impacts would be generated on the property(s), on adjacent property owners, or the County in general and, if so, to determine what conditions might alleviate any adverse impacts and enhance land use compatibility. Attachments: 1.Board agenda map JDH and Woodfin Dr Preparer:Andrew Gillies, Director of Planning Page 183 of 394 Approved By: Page 184 of 394 B R A N D Y W I N E A V E V E L D A R D G E NE R A L B LV D B R I G H T W O O D A V E E X P R E S S L N W O N D E R V I E W D R E G E E D R F RIE N D A V E W O O D F I N D R Q U A I L O A K S A V E R E Y M E T C T J E F F E R S O N D A V I S H W Y S E M I N O L E A V E B R A N D Y W I N E A V E REYMET RD P E R L O C K R D I- 9 5 R-7 R-7 C-3 C-5 R-7 AMH-1 C-3C-5 C-3 C-3 C-5 ROSALIE QUAIL OAKS CENTRAL PARK 300 0 300150Feet Map 1: Subject Property Case #: Address: 9900JEFFERSON DAVIS HIGHWAY AND 2611 WOODFIN DRIVETax ID's: 794-667-3427: 4538Acreage: 1.3 / Page 185 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.9. Subject: Authorize the Receipt and Appropriation of 2020 State Homeland Security Grant Funds from the Department of Homeland Security Board Action Requested: Authorize the Fire and EMS Department, to receive and appropriate $363,270 in 2020 State Homeland Security Grant funds from the Department of Homeland Security. Summary of Information: The Board of Supervisors is requested to approve the acceptance and appropriation of grant funds awarded from the Department of Homeland Security for the following regional projects: 1.Funding of $77,270 to manage a regional Division 1 Virginia Search and Technical Rescue/Urban Search and Rescue Project that will support personal protective equipment expenses and technical rescue team training courses. Chesterfield County serves as the sponsoring agency of the Division 1 Virginia Search and Technical Rescue/Urban Search and Rescue team. 2.Funding of $76,000 to manage a regional Division 1 Virginia Search and Technical Rescue/Urban Search and Rescue Swift Water- Flood Project that will support personal protective equipment expenses and technical rescue team training courses. Chesterfield County serves as the sponsoring agency of the Division 1 Virginia Search and Technical Rescue/Urban Search and Rescue team. 3.Funding of $60,000 to manage a local small-Unmanned Aircraft System project that will provide for the purchase of equipment to support aerial imagery and video support that will work in concert with the Mobile Command Center, Technical Rescue/ Urban Search and Rescue Task Force, Dive Team and Hazardous Materials Team. Page 186 of 394 4.Funding of $85,000 to manage a regional project for the Central Virginia All-Hazards Incident Management Team (CVAHIMT) that will support enhanced training of CVAHIMT personnel as well as equipment upkeep and maintenance.Chesterfield Fire and EMS serves as the program manager and fiduciary agent for the CVHIMT. 5.Funding of $65,000 to manage a regional project for the Central Virginia Fire Chief’s Association that will be utilized for rail hazard and flammable liquids response training. Chesterfield County, as a member of the Association, will function as the project manager for the purchase of the materials and associated equipment. No local match of funds is required for any portion of the grant funds. Attachments: None Preparer:Loy Senter, Fire Chief Approved By: Page 187 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.10. Subject: Acceptance of FY2020 Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance, Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant. Board Action Requested: Accept and appropriate FY2020 Edward F. Byrne Memorial Federal Justice Assistance Grant # 2020-DJ-BX- 0593 in the amount of $50,650.00 for the Commonwealth's Attorney's Office. Summary of Information: The Commonwealth's Attorney's office has been notified of a federal grant award through the Department of Justice in the amount of $ 50,650.00. The grant funds will be used in a project to decrease the number of repeat offender cases of domestic violence through the use of vertical prosecution and evidence-based prosecutorial practices by the Commonwealth's Attorney's Domestic Violence prosecutor. This grant requires no county match. Attachments: 1.Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant Award Letter Preparer:Joy Stone, Automation Specialist Approved By: Page 188 of 394 Page 189 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.11. Subject: Approval of Youth Citizen Board Volunteer Process Board Action Requested: Summary of Information: The Youth Citizen Board allows for appointments of youth in the County to serve for up to two years on the Board. Historically the Board of Supervisors also appointed two adults from each district to also serve on the Youth Citizen’s Board with the main purpose to support and facilitate the students. Citizen Information and Resources is recommending rather than appointment that adults who want to serve on the Youth Citizen Board apply through the County volunteer application process. By going through the process adults would be required to have a background check and could potentially serve as facilitators to students for longer than three years which would allow for consistency and mentorship. Currently as Board of Supervisor Appointees the adults are not required to have a background check, therefore Citizen Information and Resources recommends that this be approved to move to a volunteer application process for adults only. Students will continue to apply and be appointed each year. Attachments: 1.Board Memo - YCB Updates Preparer:Emily Ashley, Director, Citizen Information and Resources Approved By: Page 190 of 394 Providing a FIRST CHOICE community through excellence in public service Memorandum Date: September 16, 2020 To: The Honorable Members of the Board of Supervisors From:Emily Ashley, Director Subject: YOUTH CITIZEN BOARD UPDATE The Youth Services division of Citizen Information and Resources (CIR) has reviewed the current Youth Citizen Board (YCB) documents. With input from each of you as the Board of Supervisors, it was determined that the following updates should be made to provide a more robust purpose for YCB that would also allow for a more meaningful experience for the youth appointees. 1.More detailed role descriptions for student and adult participants (attached). This will provide a clearer understanding and structure for applicants and appointees. 2.Adult participants will no longer be appointed for 3-year terms, they will be volunteers selected by CIR. They will complete the typical volunteer application process including a background check. These adults will serve as mentors and project leaders to the youth under the supervision of the Community Engagement Coordinator – Youth Services. Those who would have otherwise been appointed can volunteer for the adult role as it is critical to have adults assist in facilitation of the students. 3.The YCB application will be updated to be more specific to youth and to provide a clearer understanding of the applicant’s interest in and goals for service. 4.Design an education plan for the appointees beginning with the Chesterfield 101 course as foundation and including increased interaction with the Board of Supervisors. 5.CIR will work with county departments to develop project plans to engage YCB members and provide valuable youth input to the departments. 6.YCB members will make a presentation each Spring to the Board of Supervisors to share the outcomes and accomplishments from their annual project. It is the goal of these updates that the YCB provides an experience that allows for youth to learn about local government in their community while having the opportunity to have a voice in material that impacts their peers. These changes also allow for the students to have an annual tangible product that creates a forum for town hall meetings and a presentation to you, The Board of Supervisors each spring. The Youth Services Division of CIR is looking forward to working with the Youth and County Chesterfield County, Virginia Citizen Information and Resources Page 191 of 394 Providing a FIRST CHOICE community through excellence in public service Departments for information sharing and education to our future leaders. Please reach out if you have further questions. CC: Ellen Costlow, Youth Services Coordinator Page 192 of 394 Providing a FIRST CHOICE community through excellence in public service Attachment 1 Youth Citizen Board (YCB) Role Descriptions Youth Citizen Board Appointee (YCBA) Position Summary: The Youth Citizen Board (YCB) provides a unique opportunity for one junior and one senior from each Chesterfield County Public High School (CCPHS) as well as up to eight at-large members who are Chesterfield County residents attending school outside of CCPHS to participate in Chesterfield County government. The YCBA shall provide the youth perspective to the Board of Supervisors as well as county departments in the form of focus groups, service projects, town halls, and more. This is an opportunity for youth to use their voices to serve the community, experience county government first- hand, and gain leadership skills. Responsibilities: Attend monthly YCB meetings with no more than two unexcused absences Participate in special events as needed Attend the May Board of Supervisors meeting Actively engage, honestly and respectfully, in all discussions, providing input consistently Demonstrate an ongoing desire and ability to contribute to the achievement of the board Act as a representative for the YCB in your school and community Act as the liaison for the YCB with the administration of your school Attend a Chesterfield 101 course prior to serving on the board or attend one during your first month of board service Term: Appointees who join the YCB as juniors will serve a two-year term to cover their Junior and Senior years. If a member is appointed as a Senior they will serve a one-year term. Selection Process: Interested juniors and seniors will complete a Youth Citizen Board application which will be reviewed by Citizen Information and Resources (CIR). CIR will make recommendations to the Board of Supervisors who will ultimately appoint their nominees. Page 193 of 394 Providing a FIRST CHOICE community through excellence in public service Attachment 2 Youth Citizen Board Adult Volunteer (YCBV) Position Summary: Youth Citizen Board Adult Volunteers (YCBV) will act as mentors for the Youth Citizen Board Appointees (YCBA). They will attend all meetings and participate in all activities, providing support and guidance for the appointees to increase the YCBA’s ability to serve the community and provide a youth voice to county government. Responsibilities: Attend monthly YCB meetings with no more than two unexcused absences Participate in special events as needed Attend the May Board of Supervisors meeting Reserve personal opinions while supporting to work of the youth appointees Demonstrate an ongoing desire and ability to contribute to the achievement of the board Requirements: Volunteers must complete a background check unless they are a current Chesterfield County employee (government or CCPS) We recommend that applicants complete Government Citizen’s Academy prior to volunteering with the Youth Citizen Board Term: Adult volunteers will serve a one-year term with the option to continue volunteering for subsequent years. Selection Process: Interested adults will complete a volunteer application to determine their experience working with youth, their interest in serving as a YCBV, and their ability to commit to one year of service. Citizen Information and Resources (CIR) will review the applications and select the volunteers. Selected volunteers will then complete a background check. Page 194 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.12. Subject: Appropriate Schools Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act Funding Through the Governor's Emergency Education Relief (GEER) Set-Aside Fund and a Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) School Violence Prevention Program Grant Board Action Requested: Appropriate Schools Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act Funding through the Governor's Emergency Education Relief (GEER) Set-Aside Fund in the amount of $682,265 and a $500,000 grant from the Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) School Violence Prevention Program. Summary of Information: The Board is requested to appropriate $682,265 of CARES Act funding received through the GEER Set-Aside Fund. This is funding provided by the CARES Act to state governors to expend on various types of education at their discretion. Virginia allocated funds to K-12 and higher education, along with other educational programs as designated by the governor’s office. Below are the individual award categories and a description of what the funds will be used for: Special Education Services and Supports - $227,704 - to purchase digital assessments and staff training for Speech and Psychology SE Universal Screener - $156,046 - to purchase a social emotional assessment tool for use with all students School Nutrition - $201,000 - to reimburse Food Services for non-budgeted costs of providing meals during the pandemic VISION - $12,600 - to purchase hotspots and webcams to improve technology related to virtual learning Cleaning Supplies - $47,425 - to reimburse the division for non-budgeted costs related to cleaning school facilities during the pandemic Facilities Upgrade - $37,490- to reimburse the division for non-budgeted costs related to modifying school facilities to address needs during the pandemic Additionally, the Board is requested to appropriate $500,000 from a COPS School Violence Prevention Program grant received. This grant will continue the work begun by the 2018 COPS School Violence Prevention Program grant. The funding will provide increased student security by placing electronic access on doors of middle and high schools. The new locking systems will discourage doors from being propped open, thus deterring unwanted visitors. The locks will also allow first responders to more readily enter buildings during an emergency without having to wait for a key to open the doors. The COPS grant requires a 25% match that will be funded through the school security CIP funds. These items were approved by the School Board on October 13, 2020. Staff recommends the Board of Supervisors appropriate these amounts to Chesterfield County Public Schools. CCPS approval documents are Page 195 of 394 attached. Attachments: 1.CCPS Grant Item 10_13_20 Preparer:Gerard Durkin, Acting Budget Director Approved By: Page 196 of 394 Page 197 of 394 Page 198 of 394 Page 199 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.13.a. Subject: Award of Construction Contract for Project IFB #ADMN20000539: I-95 / Route 10 Interchange, Phase 1 Improvements and Appropriation of Funds Board Action Requested: The Board of Supervisors is requested to authorize the Director of Procurement, upon concurrence from VDOT, to award a construction contract to Curtis Contracting, Incorporated in the amount of $6,552,090, appropriate $426,282 from the Utilities Department Water Betterment Funds and execute all necessary change orders, up to the full amount budgeted, for the I-95 / Route 10 Interchange, Phase 1 Improvements. Summary of Information: This project involves improvements to the I-95/Route 10 interchange to improve safety and congestion issues. The major changes include widening westbound Route 10 from Old Stage Road to I-95 northbound on-ramp to provide dual lanes onto I-95, conversion of the I-95 northbound to Route 10 eastbound off-ramp from a stop condition to a free flow movement eastbound onto Route 10, and widening Route 10 from two lanes to four lanes from the ramp terminal eastbound to Old Stage Road. The existing waterline along Route 10 will also be upgraded. The county received a total of three bids ranging from $6,552,090 to $7,776,777. Staff has evaluated the bids and recommends award of the contract to Curtis Contracting, Incorporated in the amount of $6,552,090. Funds for the project are available in the current VDOT Six-Year Improvement Program along with the requested $426,282 appropriation of the Utility Department's Water Betterment Funds. Attachments: 1.I95atRoute10_BOSExhibit_Map Location Preparer:Brent Epps, Director of Transportation Approved By: Page 200 of 394 1-95 AT ROUTE 10 INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENTS PHASE 1 COUNTY IFB #ADMN20000539 October 28, 2020 @ CONSTRUCT 768' 1-95 NB ACCELERATION LANE @WIDEN ROUTE 10 EB & WB ,-i\ RE-ALIGN NB 95 TO EB ROUTE 10 \.!./ RAMP T A FRE FLOW CONDITIO I I FROM TWO LANES TO FOUR LAN.--� 0 SCALE 400' 800' Page 201 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.13.b. Subject: Award of Construction Contract for County Project #15-0346 Huguenot Pump Station and Tank Board Action Requested: The Board of Supervisors is requested to authorize the Director of Procurement to award the construction contract to Waco, Inc. in the amount of $5,452,949 and execute all necessary change orders up to the full amount budgeted for the Huguenot Pump Station and Tank project. Summary of Information: This project consists of construction of a 2 million gallon ground water storage tank and potable water pump station. Staff received a total of six responsive bids ranging from $5,452,949 to $7,122,000. The county's engineering consultant, Whitman, Requardt and Associates, has evaluated the bids and recommends award of the contract. Funds for the project are available in the current CIP. Attachments: None Preparer:George Hayes, Director of Utilities Gerard Durkin, Acting Budget Director Approved By: Page 202 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.13.c. Subject: Award and Execute Construction Contract for Dutch Gap Kayak Storage Facility Board Action Requested: The Board of Supervisors is requested to authorize the Procurement Director to award and execute a construction contract with David A. Nice Builders, Inc. in the amount of $167,000 and execute all necessary change orders to provide a replacement kayak/canoe storage facility for use by Parks and Recreation Outdoor Section for programs at Dutch Gap Conservation Area. Summary of Information: The Board of Supervisors is requested to authorize the Procurement Director to award and execute a construction contract with David A. Nice Builders, Inc. in the amount of $167,000 and execute all necessary change orders to provide a replacement kayak/canoe storage facility for use by Parks and Recreation Outdoor Section for programs at Dutch Gap. This new facility will provide greater boat capacity, improved security and program support. Funding is available from Parks Improvements capital improvement program dollars. Staff recommends approval. Attachments: None Preparer:Robert Smet, Director, Parks and Recreation Approved By: Page 203 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.13.d. Subject: Award of Construction Contract for County Project #19-0231 Proctors Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant Electrical Buildings 4 and 13 Board Action Requested: The Board of Supervisors is requested to authorize the Director of Procurement to award the construction contract to Crowder Construction Company in the amount of $1,823,000 and execute all necessary change orders up to the full amount budgeted for the Proctors Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant Electrical Buildings 4 and 13 project. Summary of Information: This project consists of construction of a replacement building for Electrical Building 4 including new electrical equipment and wiring, replacement electrical equipment and wiring in Electrical Building 13, and the associated temporary power facilities necessary to maintain operations of the Proctors Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant. Staff received a total of three responsive bids ranging from $1,823,000 to $2,178,900. The county's engineering consultant, Whitman, Requardt and Associates, has evaluated the bids and recommends award of the contract. Funds for the project are available in the current CIP. Attachments: None Preparer:George Hayes, Director of Utilities Gerard Durkin, Acting Budget Director Approved By: Page 204 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.13.e. Subject: Authorization to Award a Construction Contract for the Route 10 (Whitepine Road to Frith Lane) Widening Project Board Action Requested: The Board is requested to authorize the Director of Procurement to award a construction contract up to $11,737,047 to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder; and to execute all necessary change orders up to the full amount budgeted for the Route 10 (Whitepine Road to Frith Lane) Widening Project. Summary of Information: On August 23, 2017, the Board authorized staff to proceed with the design and right-of-way acquisition for the Route 10 (Whitepine Road to Frith Lane) Widening Project. The project involves widening Route 10 from four to six lanes between Whitepine Road and Frith Lane to improve traffic flow and safety. The project also includes construction of sidewalks, traffic signal improvements, and crossover modifications within the project limits. The project is funded with Federal Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) funds. Construction is anticipated to begin in March of 2021 and be completed by July of 2022. Attachments: 1.10(WP-F) Award Up To Exhibit Preparer:Brent Epps, Director of Transportation Approved By: Page 205 of 394 Route 288 Route 288 Courthouse Rd Frith Ln Whitepine Rd L u c y C o r r B l v d Ü Route 10 (Whitepine Road to Frith Lane) Widening Project Page 206 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.14.a. Subject: Changes in the Secondary System of State Highways, N. Rhodes Lane, State Route 631 Chesterfield County, Virginia Board Action Requested: Adoption of a resolution for state road acceptances and abandonments for N. Rhodes Lane, State Route 631. Summary of Information: The Virginia Department of Transportation has requested the acceptances and abandonments of portions of N. Rhodes Lane, State Route 631. This request has been reviewed by the Virginia Department of Transportation, CDOT, Planning and Environmental Engineering Departments. Approval is recommended. Attachments: 1.N Rhodes Lane Vicinity Map 2.N Rhodes Lane Resolution 3.N Rhodes Lane Node Map 4.N Rhodes Lane VDOT Report Preparer:Dean Sasek, Real Property Manager Approved By: Page 207 of 394 . fá( ² f f "b" . ² f " N R H O D E S L N WOODPECKER RD B R A D L E Y B R I D G E R D Changes in the Secondary System of State Highways N. Rhodes Lane, State Route 631 Chesterfield County, Virginia Chesterfield CountyReal Property Office 1 inch = 500 feet µ Portions of N. Rhodes Lane,State Route 631 to beAbandoned and Added Page 208 of 394 GIS Code: ABANDON PIN: 774 632 0000 00000 Document NO.: 2020-0515 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY: At a regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors, held in the Public Meeting Room at the Chesterfield Administration Building on October 28, 2020, at 6:00 p.m. §33.2-705 & §33.2-912 - Addition to Secondary Route & Abandonment with Replacement Road RESOLUTION WHEREAS, portions of Route 631 have been realigned and new segments constructed to standards equal to the Virginia Department of Transportation's Subdivision Street Requirements as a requisite for acceptance for maintenance as part of the Secondary System of State Highways; and WHEREAS, the Virginia Department of Transportation has inspected this street and found it to be acceptable for maintenance; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors, this 28th day of October, 2020, that the old segments of Route 631, identified on the attached Form AM 4.3, are no longer needed as part of the Secondary System of State Highways as the new road serves the same citizens as the old road and is hereby requested to be abandoned by the Virginia Department of Transportation pursuant to §33.2-912, Code of Virginia, 1950 amended. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Virginia Department of Transportation be, and it hereby is, requested to add and maintain the new segments identified on the attached Form AM 4.3 as part of the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to §33.2-705, Code of Virginia, 1950 amended, and the regulatory requirements of VDOT. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Virginia Department of Transportation. Page 209 of 394 Certified By: ___________________________ Sara Hall Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Page 210 of 394 Page 211 of 394 Page 212 of 394 Page 213 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.14.b. Subject: Changes in the Secondary System of State Highways, Nash Road, State Route 636 Chesterfield County, Virginia Board Action Requested: Adoption of a resolution for state roads acceptances and abandonment for Nash Road, State Route 636. Summary of Information: The Virginia Department of Transportation has requested the acceptances and abandonment of Nash Road, State Route 636. This request has been reviewed by the Virginia Department of Transportation, CDOT, Planning and Environmental Engineering Departments. Approval is recommended. Attachments: 1.Nash Road 1 Vicinity Map 2.Nash Road 1 Resolution 3.Nash Road 1 Node Map 4.Nash Road 1 VDOT Report Preparer:Dean Sasek, Real Property Manager Approved By: Page 214 of 394 N A S H R D HICKORY HOLLOW RD Changes in the Secondary System of State Highways Nash Road, State Route 636 Chesterfield County, Virginia Chesterfield CountyReal Property Office 1 inch = 400 feet µ Portion of Nash Road,State Route 636 to be Abandoned and Added Page 215 of 394 GIS Code: ABANDON PIN: 757 642 0000 00000 Document NO.: 2020-0516 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY: At a regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors, held in the Public Meeting Room at the Chesterfield Administration Building on October 28, 2020, at 6:00 p.m. §33.2-705 & §33.2-912 - Addition to Secondary Route & Abandonment with Replacement Road RESOLUTION WHEREAS, a portion of Route 636 has been realigned and new segment constructed to standards equal to the Virginia Department of Transportation's Subdivision Street Requirements as a requisite for acceptance for maintenance as part of the Secondary System of State Highways; and WHEREAS, the Virginia Department of Transportation has inspected this street and found it to be acceptable for maintenance; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors, this 28th day of October, 2020, that the old segment of Route 636, identified on the attached Form AM 4.3, is no longer needed as part of the Secondary System of State Highways as the new road serves the same citizens as the old road and is hereby requested to be abandoned by the Virginia Department of Transportation pursuant to §33.2-912, Code of Virginia, 1950 amended. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Virginia Department of Transportation be, and it hereby is, requested to add and maintain the new segment identified on the attached Form AM 4.3 as part of the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to §33.2-705, Code of Virginia, 1950 amended, and the regulatory requirements of VDOT. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Virginia Department of Transportation. Page 216 of 394 Certified By: ___________________________ Sara Hall Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Page 217 of 394 Page 218 of 394 Page 219 of 394 Page 220 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.14.c. Subject: Changes in the Secondary System of State Highways, Meadowville Landing Section 7 Chesterfield County, Virginia Board Action Requested: Adoption of a resolution for state road acceptances and abandonment for Meadowville Landing Section 7. Summary of Information: The Virginia Department of Transportation has requested the acceptances and abandonment of roads in Meadowville Landing Section 7. This request has been reviewed by the Virginia Department of Transportation and Environmental Engineering Department. Approval is recommended. Attachments: 1.Meadowville Landing Section 7 Vicinity Map 2.Meadowville Landing Section 7 Resolution 3.Meadowville Landing Section 7 Node Map 4.Meadowville Landing Section 7 VDOT Report Preparer:Dean Sasek, Real Property Manager Approved By: Page 221 of 394 A LME R C T RIV ERB OA T DR C H A N N E L M A R K D R S I N K E R C R E E K D R A L M E R L N WINBOLT DR H E L M W A Y C T MEADOWVILLE RD HELMWAY DR ANCHOR LANDING DR N E N O N C H U R C H R DGALLEY PL O N O R A L N R O L LI N G TI D E C T R I V E R B O A T C I R S T E R N W A L K C T MAINSAIL CT T I D E L I N E C I R C H A N N E L M A R K C T D O W N R I G G E R D R ALMER LN N E N O N C H U R C H R D Changes in the Secondary System of State Highways Meadowville Landing Section 7 Chesterfield County, Virginia Chesterfield CountyReal Property Office 1 inch = 400 feet µ State Road Acceptances and Abandonment; Meadowville Landing Section 7 Page 222 of 394 GIS Code: ABANDON PIN: 826 661 0000 00000 Document NO.: 2020-0521 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY: At a regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors, held in the Public Meeting Room at the Chesterfield Administration Building on October 28, 2020, at 6:00 p.m. §33.2-705 & §33.2-912 - Addition to Secondary Route & Abandonment with Replacement Road RESOLUTION WHEREAS, a portion of Route 746 has been realigned and new segments constructed to standards equal to the Virginia Department of Transportation's Subdivision Street Requirements as a requisite for acceptance for maintenance as part of the Secondary System of State Highways; and WHEREAS, the Virginia Department of Transportation has inspected these streets and found it to be acceptable for maintenance; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors, this 28th day of October, 2020, that the old segment of Route 746, identified on the attached Form AM 4.3, is no longer needed as part of the Secondary System of State Highways as the new roads serve the same citizens as the old road and is hereby requested to be abandoned by the Virginia Department of Transportation pursuant to §33.2-912, Code of Virginia, 1950 amended. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Virginia Department of Transportation be, and it hereby is, requested to add and maintain the new segments identified on the attached Form AM 4.3 as part of the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to §33.2-705, Code of Virginia, 1950 amended, and the regulatory requirements of VDOT. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the County Board of Supervisors does hereby guarantee unencumbered rights-of-way plus the necessary easements for cuts, fills, and drainage for this added segment(s); BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Virginia Department of Transportation. Page 223 of 394 Page 2 Certified By: ___________________________ Sara Hall Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Page 224 of 394 Page 225 of 394 VDOT Form AM-4.3 (4/20/2007) Maintenance Division Date of Resolution: Page 1 of 3 In the County of Chesterfield County ICR # 37147074 By resolution of the governing body adopted October 28, 2020 The following VDOT Form AM-4.3 is hereby attached and incorporated as part of the governing body's resolution for changes in the secondary system of state highways. A Copy Testee Signed (County Official): ____________________________________________ Report of Changes in the Secondary System of State Highways Project/Subdivision 20 Meadowville Landing Sec 7 Portion & Abandon N Enon Church Rd Portion Type Change to the Secondary System of State Highways: Abandonment The following facilities of the Secondary System of State Highways are hereby ordered abandoned, pursuant to the statutory authority cited: Reason for Change:Abandonment, Developer Project Related Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute:§33.2-912 Street Name and/or Route Number N Enon Church Road, State Route Number 746 Old Route Number: 0 From: Meadowville Road, (Rt. 618) B To: Helmway Drive, (Rt. 8103) I, a distance of: 0.13 miles. Page 226 of 394 VDOT Form AM-4.3 (4/20/2007) Maintenance Division Date of Resolution: Page 1 of 3 Report of Changes in the Secondary System of State Highways Project/Subdivision 20 Meadowville Landing Sec 7 Portion & Abandon N Enon Church Rd Type Change to the Secondary System of State Highways: Addition The following additions to the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to the statutory provision or provisions cited, are hereby requested; the right of way for which, including additional easements for cuts, fills and drainage, as required, is hereby guaranteed: Reason for Change: New subdivision street Pursuant to Code of Virginia Statute: 33.2-705, 33.2-334 Street Name and/or Route Number Meadowville Road, State Route Number 618 Old Route Number: 0 From: N Enon Church Road, (Rt. 746) B To: 0.01 mi NE of N Enon Church Road, (Rt. 746) C, a distance of: 0.10 miles. Recordation Reference: PB 274, PG 67 Right of Way width (feet) = 70 Street Name and/or Route Number Meadowville Road, State Route Number 618 Old Route Number: 0 From: 0.01 mi NE of N Enon Church Road, (Rt. 746) C To: Riverboat Drive, (Rt. 7740) D, a distance of: 0.05 miles. Recordation Reference: PB 274, PG 67 Right of Way width (feet) = 70 Street Name and/or Route Number Riverboat Drive, State Route Number 7740 Old Route Number: 0 From: Meadowville Road, (Rt. 618) D To: Channelmark Drive, (Rt. 7757) K, a distance of: 0.21 miles. Recordation Reference: PB 274,PG 67 Right of Way width (feet) = 50 Street Name and/or Route Number Sinker Creek Drive, State Route Number 7741 Old Route Number: 0 From: Riverboat Drive, (Rt. 7740) D To: EOM E, a distance of: 0.07 miles. Recordation Reference: PB 274, PG 67 Page 227 of 394 VDOT Form AM-4.3 (4/20/2007) Maintenance Division Date of Resolution: Page 1 of 3 Right of Way width (feet) = 55 Street Name and/or Route Number Channelmark Drive, State Route Number 7757 Old Route Number: 0 From: Riverboat Drive, (Rt. 7740) K To: EOM L, a distance of: 0.03 miles. Recordation Reference: PB 274,PG 67 Right of Way width (feet) = 50 Street Name and/or Route Number Helway Drive, State Route Number 8103 Old Route Number: 0 From: Meadowville Road, (Rt. 618) D To: Existing EOM Helmway Drive, (Rt. 8103) F, a distance of: 0.04 miles. Recordation Reference: PB 274, PG 67 Right of Way width (feet) = 50 Page 228 of 394 VDOT Form AM-4.3 (4/20/2007) Maintenance Division Date of Resolution: Page 1 of 3 Page 229 of 394 VDOT Form AM-4.3 (4/20/2007) Maintenance Division Date of Resolution: Page 1 of 3 Page 230 of 394 VDOT Form AM-4.3 (4/20/2007) Maintenance Division Date of Resolution: Page 1 of 3 Page 231 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.14.d. Subject: Changes in the Secondary System of State Highways, Nash Road, State Route 636 Chesterfield County, Virginia Board Action Requested: Adoption of a resolution for state roads acceptances and abandonment for Nash Road, State Route 636. Summary of Information: The Virginia Department of Transportation has requested the acceptances and abandonment of Nash Road, State Route 636. This request has been reviewed by the Virginia Department of Transportation, CDOT, Planning and Environmental Engineering Departments. Approval is recommended. Attachments: 1.Nash Road 2 Vicinity Map 2.Nash Road 2 Resolution 3.Nash Road 2 Node Map 4.Nash Road 2 VDOT Report Preparer:Dean Sasek, Real Property Manager Approved By: Page 232 of 394 N A S H R D FEDORA DR E U R O P A D R ISADORA DR K A L L I O P E D R APPLEWHITE LN C A L Y P SO L N I S A D O R A P L E A S T F A I R W A Y F E D O R A P L A L D E R A P L E U RO P A C T EASTFAIR CT A L D E R A C T MINERVA TER Changes in the Secondary System of State Highways Nash Road, State Route 636 Chesterfield County, Virginia Chesterfield CountyReal Property Office 1 inch = 600 feet µ Portions of Nash Road,State Route 636 to beAbandoned and Added Page 233 of 394 GIS Code: ABANDON PIN: 764 656 0000 00000 Document NO.: 2020-0517 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY: At a regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors, held in the Public Meeting Room at the Chesterfield Administration Building on October 28, 2020, at 6:00 p.m. §33.2-705 & §33.2-912 - Addition to Secondary Route & Abandonment with Replacement Road RESOLUTION WHEREAS, portions of Route 636 have been realigned and new segments constructed to standards equal to the Virginia Department of Transportation's Subdivision Street Requirements as a requisite for acceptance for maintenance as part of the Secondary System of State Highways; and WHEREAS, the Virginia Department of Transportation has inspected this street and found it to be acceptable for maintenance; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors, this 28th day of October, 2020, that the old segments of Route 636, identified on the attached Form AM 4.3, are no longer needed as part of the Secondary System of State Highways as the new road serves the same citizens as the old road and is hereby requested to be abandoned by the Virginia Department of Transportation pursuant to §33.2-912, Code of Virginia, 1950 amended. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Virginia Department of Transportation be, and it hereby is, requested to add and maintain the new segments identified on the attached Form AM 4.3 as part of the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to §33.2-705, Code of Virginia, 1950 amended, and the regulatory requirements of VDOT. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Virginia Department of Transportation. Page 234 of 394 Certified By: ___________________________ Sara Hall Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Page 235 of 394 Page 236 of 394 Page 237 of 394 Page 238 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 13.B.15. Subject: Acceptance of State Roads Board Action Requested: Adoption of resolutions for the referenced state roads acceptances Summary of Information: Bermuda District: MacLachlan at The Highlands Section Three Matoaca District: Chesdin Harbor Section One and Eagle Cove Section Three Portion Chesdin Landing Section 10 Valhalla at Magnolia Green Section 1 Valhalla at Magnolia Green Section 2 Attachments: 1.2020-10-28 Matoaca - Chesdin Harbor Section One and Eagle Cove Section Three Portion 2.2020-10-28 Matoaca - Chesdin Landing Section 10 3.2020-10-28 Bermuda - MacLachlan at The Highlands Section Three 4.2020-10-28 Matoaca - Valhalla at Magnolia Green Section 1 5.2020-10-28 Matoaca - Valhalla at Magnolia Green Section 2 Preparer:Scott Smedley, Director of Environmental Engineering Approved By: Page 239 of 394 Page 240 of 394 Page 241 of 394 Page 242 of 394 Page 243 of 394 Page 244 of 394 Providing a FIRST CHOICE community through excellence in public service CASE NUMBER: 20SN0604 APPLICANTS: Diana and Stephen Berkshire CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIRGINIA DALE DISTRICT STAFF’S ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION Board of Supervisors (BOS) Public Hearing: OCTOBER 28, 2020 BOS Time Remaining: 365 DAYS Applicant’s Contact: STEPHEN BERKSHIRE (804-716-9392) Planning Department Case Manager: HAROLD ELLIS (804-768-7592)0.3 Acre – 3817 Grizzard Drive REQUEST Conditional use to permit recreational equipment parking and storage in a Residential (R-12) District. Notes: A.Conditions may be imposed or the property owner may proffer conditions. B. Conditions and Exhibit are located in Attachments 1 – 2. SUMMARY Continued parking of a recreational vehicle (Class C motorhome) within the side yard of a residential lot is planned. The applicants do not plan to meet the Ordinance restriction that the recreational vehicle be parked in the rear yard. At the August 18, 2020 Planning Commission public hearing staff recommended denial of this request as screening measures proposed by the applicant did not sufficiently mitigate visual impact from adjacent neighbors and the right of way. The Planning Commission agreed with this recommendation and sent this request to the Board of Supervisor with a unanimous recommendation of denial. On September 23, 2020, the Board of Supervisors, after hearing input from the applicant, deferred this case for 30 days with the applicant’s consent. This deferral allowed the applicant and staff additional time identify any supplemental mitigation measures that could possibly be introduced to assist in reducing the visual impact of the request. Staff met with the applicant on-site and the applicant agreed to increase landscaping in the front yard on both sides of the existing driveway. Details of the proposed additional landscaping are detailed in this report and added (Proffer Condition 5) contained in Attachment 1. With the addition of site landscaping, staff is satisfied that the applicant is mitigating the impacts on adjacent properties and the right of way. Staff is now able to support this request. Page 245 of 394 2 20SN0604-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT RECOMMENDATION PLANNING COMMISSION DENIAL STAFF APPROVAL* New screening measures proposed will help to mitigate visual impact Parking location, with landscaping, reduces the sightline from which the vehicle can be seen from the street * Subsequent to the Board’s deferral on September 23, 2020 (and following the Planning Commission’s action on this case at the Commission‘s public hearing on August 18), the applicant has proposed additional landscaping (detailed in this report) to further mitigate the visual impact of the request. As a result of this change to the application, staff was able to change the recommendation from denial to approval. Page 246 of 394 3 20SN0604-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT Page 247 of 394 4 20SN0604-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT Comprehensive Plan Classification: SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL II The designation suggests the property is appropriate for residential use with a density of 2.0 to 4.0 dwelling units per acre. Surrounding Land Uses and Development West Rd Grizzard Dr Multi-family uses- Belfair TownhousesSingle-family uses- Belmont Hills Page 248 of 394 5 20SN0604-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT PLANNING Staff Contact: Harold Ellis (804-768-7592) ellish@chesterfield.gov Proposal The applicant has been parking a single item of recreational equipment on the property since 2014 without the required zoning. The 30-foot Class C motorhome is currently parked on an asphalt driveway within the front and side yard. In February 2020, the Planning Department received a complaint relative to the parking of the recreational vehicle within the front and side yard of the property. Figure 1, below, is taken at the time of complaint and shows the conditions on-site, in February 2020. Fig. 1 – Site at time of Code Compliance Complaint The Zoning Ordinance permits the parking and storage of recreational equipment within a residential district with certain restrictions: No more than two (2) items of equipment permitted to be stored outside of an enclosed building Equipment is located in the rear yard with minimum setbacks from the rear (10 feet) and side (5 feet) property lines Except for repair, wheels on the equipment are not removed Equipment is not used for living or commercial purposes; and, Equipment is not connected to utility services. These ordinance restrictions are designed to minimize impacts of larger vehicles and equipment on area residential development and the streetscape. If any of these restrictions cannot be met, the use may be allowed by conditional use. Page 249 of 394 6 20SN0604-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT The applicant’s recreational vehicle complies with the ordinance restrictions except that the vehicle is parked within the side yard of the applicant’s driveway and does not meet the minimum side yard setback of five (5) feet. Therefore, the applicant is seeking conditional use approval to permit parking of the recreational equipment at their residence. At the August 18, 2020 Planning Commission meeting, concern was expressed that the request is the result of a complaint filed with code enforcement, and that proposed screening at that time would not adequately screen the vehicle. Further, as the vehicle cannot be adequately screened, the size, height, and location result in it being visible by adjacent properties and vehicular traffic along Grizzard Drive. Based on these findings, the Commission was unable to recommend approval of the case. Following the Board of Supervisor’s deferral of the request, staff met with the applicant on site and has been able to work with the applicant on additional screening measures that are detailed below and better mitigate the visual impact of the Recreational Vehicle. Accordingly, staff is now able to support the request. Screening Measures Subsequent to the Board’s deferral on September 23, 2020 (and following the Planning Commission’s action on this case), the applicant has proposed additional landscaping to further mitigate the visual impact of the request. Specifically, the applicant has proffered a landscaping condition providing for the installation of four (4) shrubs, similar in species to Leyland Cypress or Oakland Holly along the driveway (two on each side) in order to better conceal the Recreational Vehicle. The location of the proposed landscaping and specifications of plantings are contained in Attachment 1 (Condition 5). Staff believes this landscaping will better screen the vehicle and adequately mitigate views from the street and neighboring properties. As a result of this change to the application, staff was able to change the recommendation from denial to approval. Figure 2, below, is a conceptual rendering illustrating the intent of the additional landscaping, as well as the proffered screening gate. Fig. 2 – Conceptual Rendering with Proffered Screening Elements Page 250 of 394 7 20SN0604-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT Staff recommends approval with conditions contained in Attachment 1 of this report. The following table summarizes these conditions. As noted below, condition 5 was added to this report subsequent to the Planning Commission’s review recommendation, following the Board’s deferral of the case on September 23, 2020. General Overview Requirements Details Ownership Limited to the applicants, only. Condition 1 Use Limited to 1 recreational vehicle, not to exceed 2 axles and 30 feet in length. Condition 2 Location & Setback of Vehicle Driveway within side yard as illustrated in Exhibit A (Attachment 2). Condition 3 Screening A 6’ fence shall in installed in front of the recreational vehicle, in line with the front footprint of the home. Condition 4 Landscaping Four (4) (two on each side of driveway) evergreen screening shrubs, similar in species to Leyland Cypress or Oakland Holly shall be provided and maintained as generally depicted in Exhibit A (Attachment 2). The proposed shrubs shall be a minimum of five (5) feet in height at the time of planting and shall reach a minimum height of twelve (12) feet at maturity. This is a new condition offered by the applicant following the Board’s September 23, 2020 deferral of this case. Condition 5 COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Staff Contact: Steve Adams (804) 748-1037 adamsSt@chesterfield.gov VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Staff Contact: Willie Gordon (804-674-2907) willie.gordon@vdot.virginia.gov FIRE AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES Staff Contact: Anthony Batten (804-717-6167) battena@chesterfield.gov UTILITIES Staff Contact: Randy Phelps (804-706-7616) phelpsc@chesterfield.gov ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING Staff Contact: Rebeccah Rochet (804-748-1028) rochetr@chesterfield.gov The proposal will not impact these facilities. Page 251 of 394 8 20SN0604-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT CASE HISTORY Applicant Submittals 05/5/2020 Application submitted 10/07/2020 Proffers Submitted Virtual Community Meeting 08/05/2020 Issues Discussed: Neighbors in attendance expressed support for the case Planning Commission 08/18/2020 Citizen Comments: No citizens spoke to the request. One (1) email from an adjacent neighbor expressed support for the request. Commission Discussion: The Commission noted the following: Request is the result of a complaint filed with code enforcement Proposed screening will not adequately screen the vehicle As the vehicle cannot be adequately screened, the size, height, and location result in it being visible by adjacent properties and vehicular traffic along Grizzard Drive Recommendation – DENIAL Motion: Hylton Second: Petroski AYES: Freye, Sloan, Hylton, Owens, and Petroski Page 252 of 394 9 20SN0604-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT ATTACHMENT 1 CONDITIONS Note: Should the Board determine the request should be approved, staff recommends approval with these conditions. 1.Non-Transferable Ownership. This Conditional Use approval shall be granted exclusively to Diana and Stephen Birkshire, and shall not be transferable nor run with the land. (P) 2.Use. This Conditional Use approval shall be for the parking of one (1) recreational vehicle having no more than two (2) axels and no greater than thirty (30) feet in length. (P) 3.Location of Recreational Vehicle. The recreational vehicle shall be parked within the side yard, behind the front line of the house, as shown on Exhibit A. (P) 4. Fence/Gate Screening. A 6-foot opaque (wood or vinyl type material) fence with gate shall be installed in front of the recreational vehicle, in line with the front footprint of the home, within thirty (30) days of approval. (P) 5. Landscape Screening. Four (4) (two on each side of driveway) evergreen screening shrubs, similar in species to Leyland Cypress or Oakland Holly shall be provided and maintained as generally depicted in Exhibit A (Attachment 2). The proposed shrubs shall be a minimum of five (5) feet in height at the time of planting and shall reach a minimum height of twelve (12) feet at maturity. A landscaping plan and a planting schedule shall be submitted by the Planning Department within fourteen (14) days of approval of this request, and landscaping installed within thirty (30) days of approval of this request. (P) Page 253 of 394 10 20SN0604-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT ATTACHMENT 2 EXHIBIT A Proposed Recreational Vehicle Parking Area Proposed Landscaping for Additional Screening Page 254 of 394 20SN0604 20SN0604 Dale Diana and Stephen Berkshire Conditional Use to permit recreational equipment parking and storage outside the rear yard in a Residential (R-12) District This is case 20SN0604, in the Dale District. Diana and Stephen are requesting Conditional Use to permit recreational equipment parking and storage in a Residential (R-12) District. More specifically, the applicant is requesting to park a Class C motorhome, 30-feet in length, in a side yard. On September 23, 2020, the Board of Supervisor’s deferred the case for 30 days to give the applicant and staff additional time to discuss any potential further mitigation measures which may help to lessen the visual impact of the Recreational Vehicle. 1 Page 255 of 394 20SN0604 The subject property is located at 3017 Grizzard Drive, in the Belmont Hills subdivision, and is zoned R-12. 2 Page 256 of 394 20SN0604 Aerial View This is an aerial of the property. The site is located along a through street in the Belmont Hills Subdivision. 3 Page 257 of 394 20SN0604 Site This is a photo of the house, taken shortly after a complaint was filed with the County, showing the motor home parked in the driveway in front of the home. The applicant has indicated the vehicle was purchased in 2014 and has been stored on-site since then. 4 Page 258 of 394 20SN0604 Conceptual Layout This is a second aerial which also shows where the RV is today, and the yellow area represents the new parking location being proposed by the applicant Initially, the applicant offered a condition to assist in screening, which included an opaque screening fence, with gate, to be installed in front of the vehicle. When the applicant addressed the Board at their September 23 meeting, the Board, by majority vote, chose to defer this case to tonight’s hearing to allow the applicant more time to address the visual impacts of the proposed parking location of the recreational vehicle. Since the Board’s September meeting staff has met with the applicant, and the applicant is now offering to add additional landscaping. Specifically, the applicant is offering to plant 4 shrubs similar to Leyland Cypress or Holly’s, two on either side of the driveway, a minimum of 5’ at planting, Staff believes that when the plantings are mature, they will substantially reduce the visual impact. 5 Page 259 of 394 20SN0604 Planning Commission and Staff Recommended Denial at the Planning Commission hearing August 18, 2020 Location where vehicle is parked has substantial visual impact on adjacent neighbors and the streetscape Screening measures proposed by applicant will not sufficiently mitigate visual impact Staff and CPC recommend denial The located where the vehicle would be parked, though screened with a fence, would still have substantial visual impact on adjoining neighbors. The planning commission, with a unanimous vote, and staff recommend denial of the request. As I stated earlier, the BOS deferred this case for 30 days to permit the applicant more time to mitigate these visual impacts just discussed. 6 Page 260 of 394 20SN0604 Staff Now Recommends Approval New screening measures proposed will help to mitigate visual impact Parking location, with landscaping, reduces the sightline from which the vehicle can be seen from the street Since the Planning Commission public hearing, the applicant has offered to provide additional landscaping on both sides of the driveway in the front yard, in addition to the six foot fence in front of the RV. Therefore, with the addition of the landscaping, combined with fence, staff is now able to change our recommendation from denial, to approval of the request. 7 Page 261 of 394 20SN0604 8 Page 262 of 394 Page 263 of 394 Page 264 of 394 Page 265 of 394 Providing a FIRST CHOICE community through excellence in public service CASE NUMBER: 20SN0572 APPLICANTS: Nathaniel and Gabrielle Harris CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIRGINIA BERMUDA DISTRICT STAFF’S ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION 0.5 Acre – 10600 Ethens Point Court Board of Supervisors (BOS) Hearing: OCTOBER 28, 2020 BOS Time Remaining: 365 DAYS Applicant’s Contacts: GABRIELLE HARRIS (804-698-0211) Planning Department Case Manager: TYLER WALTER (804-318-8893) REQUEST Conditional Use to permit parking and storage of a recreational vehicle (boat on a trailer) outside of the rear yard in a Residential (R-12) District. Notes: A. Conditions may be imposed or the property owner may proffer conditions. B. Conditions and exhibits are located in Attachments 1-3. SUMMARY Continued parking of a recreational vehicle (boat on a trailer) within the front and side yard is planned. The applicants do not meet the Ordinance requirement that the recreational vehicle be parked in the rear yard. RECOMMENDATION PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL STAFF PLANNING – APPROVAL • Sloping topography prevents adequate access to park the boat on a trailer in compliance with ordinance restrictions • Proposed vegetation minimizes visibility of boat from neighboring properties • As conditioned, impacts on adjacent residential development will be minimized Page 266 of 394 2 20SN0572-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT Page 267 of 394 3 20SN0572-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT Comprehensive Plan Classification: RESIDENTIAL (1.5 UNITS/ACRE OR LESS) The designation suggests the property is appropriate for residential uses of 1.5 units per acre or less. Surrounding Land Uses and Development Ethens Castle Dr. Ethens Point Ct. Single-family uses Page 268 of 394 4 20SN0572-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT PLANNING Staff Contact: Tyler Walter (804-318-8893) waltert@chesterfield.gov Proposal The applicant has been parking a recreational vehicle (boat on a trailer) on the property since February 2019. In October 2019, the Planning Department received a complaint relative to the parking of a boat within the front yard, measuring approximately twenty-six (26) feet long, ten (10) feet tall, and six (6) feet wide. The Zoning Ordinance permits the parking and storage of recreational equipment within a residential district with certain restrictions: • No more than two (2) items of equipment permitted to be stored outside of an enclosed building; • Except for loading and unloading, equipment is located in a rear yard and set back ten (10) feet from the rear property line and five (5) feet from the side property line; • Except for repair, wheels on the equipment are not removed; • Equipment is not used for living or commercial purposes; and, • Equipment is not connected to utility services. These ordinance restrictions are designed to minimize impacts on area residential development and the streetscape. If any of these restrictions cannot be met, the use may be allowed by conditional use. The applicants’ recreational vehicle complies with the ordinance restrictions except that the vehicle is parked within the front and side yards. The applicants are seeking conditional use approval to permit parking and storage of the recreational vehicle in primarily the side yard, with a portion of the trailer extending into the front yard. Alternative Parking and Storage Location Upon inspection of the property, staff observed the location of the boat on a trailer parked on a paved driveway within the front yard. The applicant proposes to move the boat and trailer to a new driveway area along the southwest side of the dwelling to minimize the view from the street and other properties fronting the cul-de-sac (Exhibit A). The rear yard is currently fenced with a single detached accessory building and play equipment. The side and rear yards slope downward from the front of the house towards the rear property lines, where wetlands are found in adjoining open space to the north. The change in topography within the rear yard makes it difficult to construct a level parking area to store a recreational vehicle. Due to these existing site constraints, there is no practical alternative location for on-site parking which would comply with the Ordinance. Page 269 of 394 5 20SN0572-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT Recommended Conditions of Approval The following conditions are recommended by staff to mitigate potential impacts on area properties. Recommended Conditions Requirements Details Non-Transferable Use limited to the applicants only. Condition 1 Use Limited to parking of one recreation vehicle (boat on a trailer) no greater than twenty-six feet (26’) in length. Condition 2 Location and Driveway Expansion The recreational vehicle shall be parked within the front and side yards (as depicted in Exhibit A), and no closer than ten (10) feet to the rear property line and five (5) feet to the corner side property line. Expansion to the driveway shall be completed within sixty (60) days of approval. Condition 3 Screening Plant evergreen plantings along the southern property line, as depicted in Exhibit A. Landscaping plan and schedule shall be completed within sixty (60) days of approval. Condition 4 The parking of the recreational vehicle within the rear yard is challenged by the change in topography. Proposed evergreen landscaping and relocating the boat on a trailer to the side of the dwelling will minimize its visual impact to adjoining property owners. Although the new parking location beside the dwelling will have a small encroachment of the trailer hitch into the front yard, the visual impact from Ethens Point Court will still be minimized with the proposed plantings. For these reasons, staff supports this request. FIRE AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES Staff Contact: Anthony Batten (804-717-6167) battena@chesterfield.gov Nearby Fire and Emergency Medical Service (EMS) Facilities Fire Station The Centralia Fire Station, Company Number 17 EMS Facility The Centralia Fire Station, Company Number 17 This request will have minimal impact on Fire and EMS. Page 270 of 394 6 20SN0572-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT UTILITIES Staff Contact: Randy Phelps (804-796-7126) phelpsc@chesterfield.gov Existing Water and Wastewater Systems Utility Type Currently Serviced Size of Closest Existing Lines Connection Required by County Code Water Yes 6” Yes Wastewater Yes 8” Yes Additional Utility Comments: The subject property is located within the mandatory water and wastewater connection area for new residential development. The existing residential structure is connected to the public water and wastewater systems. Chesterfield County has a public wastewater easement along the south property line of the subject property, and any screening or visual mitigation of the conditional use to store a boat in the side yard should be designed so as to not impact the county’s use of the easement. The Utilities Department supports this request. COUNTY TRANSPORTATION Staff Contact: Steve Adams (804-748-1037) adamst@chesterfield.gov ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING Staff Contact: Rebeccah Ward (804-748-1028) wardr@chesterfield.gov PARKS AND RECREATION Staff Contact: Janit Llewellyn (804-751-4482) llewellynja@chesterfield.gov SCHOOLS Staff Contact: Atonja Allen (804-318-8740) atonja_allen@ccpsnet.net VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Staff Contact: Willie Gordon (804-674-2907) willie.gordon@vdot.virginia.gov This request will not impact these facilities. Page 271 of 394 7 20SN0572-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT CASE HISTORY Applicant Submittals 12/30/2019 Application submitted 9/1/2020 Application resubmitted to address parking in front and side yard. Planning Commission 8/18/2020 Action – DEFERRED TO SEPTEMBER 15, 2020 ON THE COMMISSION’S OWN MOTION WITH THE APPLICANT’S CONSENT. 9/15/2020 Citizen Comments: No citizens spoke to this request. Action – APPROVAL SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS IN ATTACHMENT 1. Motion: Petroski Second: Owens AYES: Freye, Sloan, Hylton, Owens, and Petroski Page 272 of 394 8 20SN0572-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT ATTACHMENT 1 CONDITIONS Note: The following conditions are recommended by both the Planning Commission and Staff. 1. Non-Transferable Ownership. This Conditional Use approval shall be granted exclusively to Nathaniel and Gabrielle Harris and shall not be transferable nor run with the land. (P) 2. Use. This Conditional Use approval shall be for the parking of one (1) recreational vehicle (boat on a trailer) no greater than twenty-six (26) feet in length. (P) 3. Location of Recreational Vehicle and Driveway Expansion. The recreational vehicle shall be parked within the front and side yards, as depicted in Exhibit A, and shall meet the following setbacks: ten (10) feet from the rear property line and five (5) feet from the side property line. The proposed expansion to the driveway, as shown on Exhibit A, shall be asphalt or concrete. A construction plan schedule shall be approved by the Planning Department within sixty (60) days of approval of this request (P) 4. Screening. Evergreen plantings shall be planted along the southern property line adjacent to GPIN # 790-663-0141, as depicted in Exhibit A (Attachment 2). Plantings shall consist of evergreen trees as shown on a plan and approved by the Planning Department. Minimum planting height shall be at least eight (8) feet in height at the time of planting and shall reach a height of 10 feet at maturity. A landscaping plan and a planting schedule shall be approved by the Planning Department within sixty (60) days of approval of this request. (P) Page 273 of 394 9 20SN0572-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT ATTACHMENT 2 EXHIBIT A – CONCEPTUAL PLAN (September 3, 2020) Page 274 of 394 10 20SN0572-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT ATTACHMENT 3 EXHIBIT B – EXISTING STREET-VIEW PHOTOS Page 275 of 394 20SN0572 Bermuda Nathaniel and Gabrielle Harris Conditional use to permit parking and storage of a recreational vehicle (boat) outside the rear yard in a Residential (R-12) district This is Case 20SN0572 this is a request in the Bermuda District by Nathaniel and Gabrielle Harris for conditional use to permit parking and storage of a recreational vehicle (boat) outside the rear yard in a Residential (R-12) district. 1 Page 276 of 394 Overview Applicant has been parking recreational vehicle (boat) outside of rear property since February 2019, complaint in October 2019 Requesting to keep boat outside of rear yard Mitigating impact by planting vegetation Given topographical conditions of rear yard and plans to mitigate view of boat, staff is supportive of request 20SN0572 The applicants have been parking a boat outside of the rear yard of their subject property since February 2019. In October 2019, the planning department received a complaint about the parking of a boat outside of the rear yard of the property. The applicants are seeking conditional use to permit the parking of the boat in the side yard. The rear yard is downward topography that will require extensive grading to adequately park the boat in the rear yard. To mitigate the view of the boat being parked in the side yard, the applicants are planning to plant evergreen vegetation along the southern property line to provide year- round screening of the boat from the adjacent property. 2 Page 277 of 394 3 Planning Commission and Staff Recommend Approval 20SN0572 Sloping topography prevents adequate access to park the boat on a trailer in compliance with ordinance restrictions Proposed vegetation minimizes visibility of boat from neighboring properties As conditioned, impacts on adjacent residential development will be minimized Both the Planning Commission and Staff recommend approval of this request. The topography in the rear yard makes parking of the boat in the rear yard impractical. The proposed vegetation along the southern property line helps mitigate the view of the boat from neighboring properties. As conditioned, the impacts on adjacent residential development will be minimized. Page 278 of 394 20SN0572 The subject property is located at 10600 Ethens Point Court in the Brooks Chapel subdivision. 4 Page 279 of 394 5 20SN0572 This is a view of the subject property and the boat that is parked on the subject property. The applicants have been parking the boat in their driveway since February 2019. In October 2019, the Planning Department received a complaint relative to parking of a boat on the property outside of the rear yard. The boat is approximately 26 feet long, 10 feet tall, and six feet wide. The applicant is requesting to continue to park the boat in the side and front yards of the subject property. This is due to saturated soils in the rear yard, which would require deep crushed stone for pavement, as well as topography changes in the rear yard requiring major grading improvements and the construction of a retaining wall. Due to these conditions, there is limited ability for on-site parking which would comply with the ordinance. Page 280 of 394 In order to mitigate the view of the boat from adjacent property owners, the applicants are planning to plant vegetation on the southern border of their property. The applicants plan to plant evergreen trees along the boundary to provide year- round screening of the boat. As depicted in the exhibit, the boat would meet side yard setback requirements. 5 Page 281 of 394 6 20SN0572 In order to mitigate the view of the boat from adjacent property owners, the applicants are planning to expand their driveway by paving in the gray areas on this map, and plant vegetation on the southern border of their property as shown in green. The applicants plan to plant evergreen trees along the boundary to provide year-round screening of the boat. As depicted in the exhibit, the boat would meet side yard setback requirements and the proposed pavement and vegetation would remain outside of an eight (8) sewer easement that runs on the southern perimeter of the property. Page 282 of 394 7 Conditions 20SN0572 Non-transferable ownership Limited to the boat (no longer than 26 feet) and trailer Paving of boat parking area within 60 days of approval Planting of evergreen trees of at least eight (8) feet in height along the southern property boundary; landscaping plan and schedule within 60 days of approval With this request, staff recommends four conditions as shown in Attachment 1 of your staff report. This includes limiting the conditional use to the applicants, limiting the conditional use to the parking of the boat on the trailer, parking the boat and trailer in the area as depicted in Exhibit A (Attachment 2) of your staff report, a 60-day time window to complete the paving, and planting of evergreen trees of at least eight (8) feet in height along the southern property line as depicted in Exhibit A (Attachment 2). Additionally, a landscaping plan and landscaping schedule is to be approved by staff within 60 days. Page 283 of 394 8 Recommend Approval 20SN0572 Sloping topography prevents adequate access to park the boat on a trailer in compliance with ordinance restrictions Proposed vegetation minimizes visibility of boat from neighboring properties As conditioned, impacts on adjacent residential development will be minimized Staff recommends approval of this request. The topography in the rear yard makes parking of the boat in the rear yard impractical. The proposed vegetation along the southern property line helps mitigate the view of the boat from neighboring properties. As conditioned, the impacts on adjacent residential development will be minimized. Page 284 of 394 20SN0572 Thank you. 9 Page 285 of 394 Page 286 of 394 Page 287 of 394 Page 288 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 16.B. Subject: 20SN0584 - Rams Holding LLC - Midlothian District Board Action Requested: Summary of Information: Attachments: 1.20SN0584 Disclosure 2.20SN0584-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT 3.20SN0584-PP Preparer: Approved By: Page 289 of 394 P a g e 2 9 0 o f 3 9 4 P a g e 2 9 1 o f 3 9 4 P a g e 2 9 2 o f 3 9 4 Providing a FIRST CHOICE community through excellence in public service CASE NUMBER: 20SN0584 APPLICANT: Rams Holding LLC CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIRGINIA MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT STAFF’S ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION 0.6 Acre – 280 Charter Colony Parkway Board of Supervisors (BOS) Public Hearing: OCTOBER 28, 2020 BOS Time Remaining: 365 DAYS Applicant’s Agents: ANNE MILLER (804-794-0571) Planning Department Case Manager: DREW NOXON (804-748-1086) REQUEST Amendment of zoning approval (Case 94SN0138) relative to setbacks and landscaping. Specifically, the applicant is requesting a setback reduction for a building and parking areas along Charter Colony Parkway. Notes: A. Conditions may be imposed or the property owner may proffer conditions. B. Proffered conditions, Textual Statement and Exhibits are located in Attachments 1 - 5. SUMMARY A convenience store is proposed on a site containing an existing stand-alone gas station and canopy. The gas station was previously associated with the former Martin’s grocery store. The applicant is requesting exceptions to reduce the required setback of 50 feet from the Charter Colony Parkway right-of-way to 15 feet in order to accommodate the new store on the site while maintaining the existing gas canopy, pumps and drive aisles. An alternative perimeter landscaping scheme has been provided in order to accommodate plantings within the narrower setback area and to minimize the view of parking areas and the existing gas canopy. RECOMMENDATIONS Planning Commission APPROVAL STAFF APPROVAL • Exceptions allow flexibility on a site constrained by existing improvements • Location of the proposed building closer to the street would promote a pedestrian-friendly environment as recommend by the Midlothian Community Special Area Plan • Conditions ensure quality architectural design and materials as well as enhanced landscaping Page 293 of 394 2 20SN0584-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT Page 294 of 394 3 20SN0584-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT Comprehensive Plan (Midlothian Community Special Area Plan) Classification: COMMUNITY MIXED USE Surrounding Land Uses and Development The designation suggests the property is appropriate for an integrated mixture of concentrated commercial and high-density residential uses with public spaces, located pm tracts having sufficient size to accommodate such mixtures. Vacant – zoned for commercial use Commercial uses - Charter Colony Shopping Center Charter Colony Pkwy. Martinet Xing LeGordon Dr. Midlothian Tnpk. Residential uses - Crofton Village at Charter Colony Page 295 of 394 4 20SN0584-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT Zoning History Case Number Request 94SN0138 Approved (8/1994) Conditional Use Planned Development in a Community Business (C-3) District to permit use and bulk exceptions. • Permitted a mix of commercial, office and residential uses within 7 development tracts • Tract 7 permitted C-3 uses, as well as Residential Townhouse (R-TH) and Multi-family Residential Multi-family (R-MF) uses. • Non-residential uses subject to Midlothian Village Fringe District standards (setbacks and perimeter landscaping) Proposal A convenience store, as permitted by existing zoning, is proposed on the subject property. The site is currently occupied by a stand-alone gas station previously associated with the shuttered Martin’s grocery store and including gasoline pumps covered by a canopy measuring 82 feet wide by 45 feet deep. The new convenience store would contain approximately 1,500 square feet within a one-story building and six (6) parking spaces as required by Ordinance. Setback and Perimeter Landscaping Exceptions Case 94SN0138 requires that non-residential development shall comply with the Midlothian Village Fringe standards of the Midlothian Special Design District. These design standards specify a 50-foot setback for buildings from Charter Colony Parkway, with the provision of Perimeter Landscaping E within that setback area. Martinet Xing is a Special Access Street therefore no setbacks or perimeter landscaping are required along that road frontage. The applicant proposes a 15-foot building setback along Charter Colony Road for the new building. An alternative planting scheme within the 15-foot setback and the overall road frontage along Charter Colony Parkway is provided in the Textual Statement and Conceptual Plan (Attachments 2 & 3). This alternative landscaping would significantly enhance the street frontage while mitigating views of proposed parking spaces and the existing gas canopy. While not required by Ordinance, additional trees provided along Martinet Xing would improve views into the gas canopy area and provide additional shade for users of the existing sidewalk. Given the following, staff is supportive of the proposed exceptions: • Exceptions to setbacks and perimeter landscaping will allow for flexibility on a site constrained by the existing gas station canopy, pump islands and drives • Location of the proposed building closer to the street would promote a pedestrian- friendly village environment as recommend by the Midlothian Community Special Area Plan o Proffered conditions (Attachment 1) require a usable entry along Charter Colony Parkway o The proposed building would set the tone for the remaining vacant shopping center outparcels along Charter Colony Parkway • Conditions ensure quality architectural design and materials (Attachments 1 & 5) as well as enhanced landscaping (Attachments 2 & 3) Page 296 of 394 5 20SN0584-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT FIRE AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES Staff Contact: Anthony Batten (804-717-6167) battena@chesterfield.gov Nearby Fire and Emergency Medical Service (EMS) Facilities Fire Station The Midlothian Fire Station, Company Number 5 EMS Facility The Forest View Volunteer Rescue Squad Additional Fire and EMS Comments When the property is developed, the number of hydrants, quantity of water needed for fire protection, and access requirements will be evaluated during the plans review process. UTILITIES Staff Contact: Randy Phelps (804-796-7126) phelpsc@chesterfield.gov The proposal’s impacts on the County’s utility system are detailed in the chart below: Water and Wastewater Systems Currently Serviced? Size of Existing Line Connection Required by County Code? Water No 8” Yes Wastewater No 8” Yes Additional Utility Comments The subject property is located within the mandatory water and wastewater connection areas for new non-residential structures. In Case 94SN0138, in the Textual Statement – General Conditions & Definitions – 4, the use of the public water and wastewater systems was required for all property that was part of the Charter Colony development. An 8-inch water line is located along the western boundary of the subject property. An 8-inch wastewater line terminates at the northern boundary of the subject property. The Utilities Department supports this case. Page 297 of 394 6 20SN0584-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING Staff Contact: Rebeccah Rochet (804-748-1028) rochetr@chesterfield.gov Geography The subject property drains into an existing storm sewer system and then to the existing stormwater pond located behind the shopping center. The pond discharges into an existing culvert under Le Gordon Drive and to an inadequate culvert under Route 60. The entire property is located within the James River Watershed. Drainage The subject property was originally developed as part of the Martin’s Food Store and Retail Shops plan and drains to an inadequate culvert under Route 60. In the design for the existing stormwater management system, the area of the proposed building and sidewalks were accounted for as a pervious, grassy area; therefore, the existing storm sewer system does not account for the area as impervious. As a result, the existing storm sewer system and pond shall be evaluated for capacity. In addition, the 10-year and 100-year post development flows cannot exceed the 10-year and 100-year pre-development flows, respectively, unless otherwise approved by the Department of Environmental Engineering at the time of site plan review. The applicant has offered Proffered Condition 5 to address this impact. Stormwater Management The development of the subject property will be subject to the Part IIB technical criteria of the Virginia Stormwater Management Program Regulations (VSMP) Regulations for water quality and quantity for redevelopment. VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Staff Contact: Willie Gordon (804-674-2907) willie.gordon@vdot.virginia.gov COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Staff Contact: Steve Adams (804-751-4461) adamsst@chesterfield.gov PARKS AND RECREATION Staff Contact: Janit Llewellyn (804-751-4482) LlewellynJa@chesterfield.gov This request will not impact these facilities. Page 298 of 394 7 20SN0584-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT CASE HISTORY Applicant Submittals 3/4/20 Application submitted 2/21, 5/1, 7/27, 8/7, 8/28 & 9/16/20 Proffered conditions, Textual Statement and Exhibits submitted Virtual Community Meeting 8/27/20 Issues Discussed: • Location of proposed building in relation to existing gas canopy and drive aisles on site • Setback of building from Charter Colony Parkway • Signage permitted • Sidewalk connectivity and crosswalks on Midlothian Turnpike • No concerns shared regarding the request • Positive feedback received regarding building appearance and incorporation of the use into the existing sidewalk network Planning Commission 9/15/20 Citizen Comments: No citizens spoke to this request. Recommendation – APPROVAL AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE PROFFERED CONDITIONS IN ATTACHMENT 1 Motion: Petroski Second: Hylton AYES: Freye, Sloan, Hylton, Owens and Petroski The Board of Supervisors on Wednesday, October 28, 2020, beginning at 6:00 p.m., will consider this request. Page 299 of 394 8 20SN0584-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT ATTACHMENT 1 PROFFERED CONDITIONS (September 15, 2020) Note: Both the Planning Commission and Staff recommend acceptance of the following proffered conditions offered by the applicant. The applicant hereby offers the following proffered conditions: 1. Master Plan. The Master Plan for the Property shall consist of the following: a. The development of the property shall generally conform to the Conceptual Plan, Exhibit A, last revised August 27, 2020, prepared by Balzer and Associates, Inc. Minor adjustments to the Conceptual Plan may be approved at the time of site plan review, provided such adjustments substantially retain the relationship between the building, parking spaces, sidewalks and existing structures. If adjustments are deemed to be significant, the Conceptual Plan shall be presented to the Planning Commission for final approval. b. The Textual Statement, last revised September 15, 2020. (P) 2. Conceptual Elevations. In addition to the requirements of the Midlothian Fringe standards of the Midlothian Special Design District, development of the structure shall be in general conformance with the architectural appearance as shown in Exhibit B, last revised July 22, 2020, prepared by Balzer and Associates, Inc. Adjustments to the Conceptual Elevations may be approved at the time of site plan review by the Planning Department, provided such adjustments offer similar style and quality as Exhibit B. (P) 3. Building Materials. Acceptable siding materials shall include brick, stone, fiber cement siding (such as HardiPlank and HardieShingle), wood or engineered wood siding (such as LP SmartSide), or other comparable material as approved by the Planning Director at time of plans review. Vinyl, plywood, and metal siding are not permitted. Other materials may be used for trim, architectural decorations, or design elements, such as cementitious trim, decorative painted wood, aluminum, copper, metal, or PVC, provided they blend with the architecture of the building. Roofing material shall be standing seam metal, dimensional architectural shingles, or better with a minimum of 30-year warranty. Doors and fenestration will be aluminum, wood, or steel. (P) 4. Building Access. A usable entry shall be provided along the east building elevation facing Charter Colony Parkway. As shown on Exhibit A, a minimum of a five-foot (5’) sidewalk shall be provided from the existing sidewalk along Charter Colony Parkway to the usable entry of the building. (P) 5. Environmental Engineering. The 10-year and 100-year post development flows from the site cannot exceed the 10-year and 100-year pre-development flows, respectively, unless otherwise approved at the time of site plan review. (EE) Page 300 of 394 9 20SN0584-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT ATTACHMENT 2 TEXTUAL STATEMENT (September 15, 2020) With this request, Item 2 of Detailed Tract Conditions for Tract 7 of the Textual Statement of Case 94SN0138 shall be amended as shown below. All other conditions of Case 94SN0138 shall remain in force and effect. Tract 7 - C-3 with Conditional Use Planned Development to permit residential multi-family and townhouse uses; recreational uses accessory to residential uses in the development; private schools plus exceptions to C-3 bulk requirements. 1. Development of the convenience store on Tax ID 726-707-6785 shall conform to the requirements of the Midlothian Fringe standards of the Midlothian Special Design District, except for the following standards: a. Building Setbacks. i. A minimum setback of fifteen (15) feet from Charter Colony Parkway. b. Parking Setbacks. i. A minimum setback of thirty (30) feet from Charter Colony Parkway. c. Landscape Requirements. i. The landscaping provided along the Charter Colony Parkway and Martinet Xing frontages shall generally conform to the landscape plan provided on Exhibit A. Landscaping for the setback along Charter Colony Parkway shall include two large deciduous trees, one evergreen tree, and four small deciduous flowering trees. Low foundation shrubs and a maximum three and a half foot (3.5’) high black aluminum fence with a brick column on each end shall be provided between the parking spaces and Charter Colony Parkway. Low shrubs shall be provided along the east building elevation foundation. Existing and proposed small shrubs and flowering perennials shall be used to landscape the remaining setback areas along Charter Colony Parkway. The existing street trees along Martinet Xing shall remain. The exact location, number, and species of plants shall be determined at plans review. Page 301 of 394 10 20SN0584-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT ATTACHMENT 3 EXHIBIT A, CONCEPTUAL SITE LAYOUT Page 302 of 394 11 20SN0584-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT ATTACHMENT 4 EXHIBIT B, EXISTING STREET-VIEW PHOTOS Page 303 of 394 12 20SN0584-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT ATTACHMENT 5 EXHIBIT C, CONCEPTUAL BUILDING ELEVATIONS Page 304 of 394 13 20SN0584-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT Page 305 of 394 20SN0584 Midlothian Rams Holding LLC Amendment of zoning approval (Case 94SN0138) relative to setbacks and landscaping. Good evening Madam Chair, members of the Board and Dr. Casey. This is Case 20SN0584 in the Midlothian Magisterial District. The applicants, Rams Holding LLC request amendment of zoning Case 94SN0138 related to building setbacks and perimeter landscaping. 1Page 306 of 394 Overview Amendment to Case 94SN0138 Reduction of building setback to 15’ from Charter Colony Parkway Alternative landscaping Quality architecture & materials Planning Commission and Staff Recommend approval 20SN0584 A convenience store is proposed on the subject property, which is currently occupied by a free-standing gas station that was associated with the former Martin’s grocery store. Zoning Case 94SN0138 requires that non-residential uses meet the Midlothian Village Fringe standards, which require a 50’ setback from Charter Parkway with Perimeter Landscaping Schedule E within the setback. The applicants wish to amend the Textual Statement of the case in order to reduce the building setback to 15’ to accommodate the new convenience store between Charter Colony Parkway and the existing gas canopy. With this reduced building setback, and alternative planting plan has been provided which would significantly enhance the street frontage while mitigating views of proposed parking spaces and the existing gas canopy. The applicants are providing building elevations with quality materials and have proffered a usable entry along Charter Colony Parkway to help activate the streetscape. 2Page 307 of 394 Staff is supportive of the request as: •the proposed exceptions allow flexibility on a site constrained by existing improvements •Location of the proposed building closer to the street would promote a pedestrian-friendly environment as recommend by the Midlothian Community Special Area Plan, and •Conditions ensure quality architectural design and materials as well as enhanced landscaping. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of this request at their September 15 public hearing . No citizens spoke to the request at the Commission’s September hearing. 2Page 308 of 394 20SN0584 The subject property is located in the northwest quadrant of Charter Colony Parkway and Martinet Crossing. Properties to the north, south, east and west are zoned for commercial uses. 3Page 309 of 394 4 20SN0584 This is an aerial image of the property. Charter Colony Shopping Center (new Publix) to the west Crofton Village townhomes to the south/southwest Undeveloped commercial parcels to east and north Page 310 of 394 5 20SN0584 These are street view images of the existing gas canopy and former Martins store in the background. Page 311 of 394 6 20SN0584 This is a 3-dimensional aerial –as you can see much of the property is occupied by the existing free-standing gas station including pump islands, drive isles and a canopy. Page 312 of 394 7 20SN0584 The applicants are requesting a setback of 15’ from Charter Colony Parkway. An alternative landscaping provision is proposed for the smaller setback area but will also address the sides of the building to help mitigate views of parking and the existing gas canopy. Page 313 of 394 8 20SN0584 Here are the proposed building elevations. Proffered conditions include exterior siding materials as well as a true usable doorway along Charter Colony Parkway. Page 314 of 394 9 Planning Commission and Staff Recommend Approval Allows flexibility on constrained site Building placement would promote pedestrian-friendly environment as recommend by the Midlothian Community Special Area Plan Conditions ensure quality architectural design and materials as well as enhanced landscaping 20SN0584 The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of this request at their September 15 public hearing. Staff continues to recommend approval of this request. •Exceptions allow flexibility on a site constrained by existing improvements •Location of the proposed building closer to the street would promote a pedestrian-friendly environment as recommend by the Midlothian Community Special Area Plan •It is important to note that this project will set the tone for the remaining parcels to the north along Charter Colony Parkway by creating a better relationship with the street and the existing pedestrian network. • Proffered conditions ensure quality architectural design and materials as well as enhanced landscaping No citizens spoke to the request at the Commission’s September hearing. Page 315 of 394 20SN0584 10Page 316 of 394 Providing a FIRST CHOICE community through excellence in public service CASE NUMBER: 20SN0610 APPLICANTS: Harold Driver, Kathy B. Driver, and Ian Brown CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIRGINIA MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT STAFF’S ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION 0.5 Acre – 402 Old Country Terrace Board of Supervisors (BOS) Hearing: OCTOBER 28, 2020 BOS Time Remaining: 365 DAYS Applicants’ Contact: IAN BROWN (901-488-4311) Planning Department Case Manager: TYLER WALTER (804-318-8893) REQUEST Conditional use to permit a business (landscape contractor) incidental to a dwelling in a Residential (R-15) District. Notes: A. Conditions may be imposed or the property owners may proffer conditions. B. Conditions and an exhibit are located in Attachments 1-2. SUMMARY A landscape business, incidental to the dwelling, has operated on the property since January 2020 without requisite zoning. Approval of this conditional use would bring the use into compliance with the Ordinance. RECOMMENDATION PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL • Conditions should minimize anticipated impacts • Twelve (12) month time limit allows time for applicant to find appropriate location for business STAFF DENIAL • The proposed land use is incompatible with the residential use suggested by the Comprehensive Plan • Use represents a commercial encroachment within an established residential neighborhood SUMMARY OF IDENTIFIED ISSUES Department Issue PLANNING • Plan suggests residential uses as appropriate for this area • Use represents commercial encroachment within a residential area Page 317 of 394 2 20SN0610-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT Page 318 of 394 3 20SN0610-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT Comprehensive Plan Classification: SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL II The designation suggests the property is appropriate for residential use of 2.0 to 4.0 dwelling units per acre. Surrounding Land Uses and Development Old Country Ter. Ashtree Rd. Single-family uses: Walton Park subdivision Old Country Ln. Walton Park Rd. Stonehenge Golf and Country Club Page 319 of 394 4 20SN0610-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT PLANNING Staff Contact: Tyler Walter (804-318-8893) waltert@chesterfield.gov Proposal The applicant has been operating a business (landscape contractor) from this property since January 2020 without the required zoning. The property owners’ (Harold & Kathy Driver) son, Ian Brown, operates the business from the property. In April 2020, the Community Enhancement Department received a complaint relative to the operation of a landscape business on the property. Upon investigation, staff observed two (2) company vehicles and two (2) trailers parked on the premises. The operator of the business, Ian Brown, conveyed to staff that he, his brother and another employee (who is not related the applicants) reside in the dwelling with his parents. Part of the residence and property is used as an office and parking area for the equipment involved in the business. These components of the business exceed the ordinance limitations for a permitted home occupation, requiring a conditional use. Although Staff recommends denial, the Planning Commission felt that Condition 3 in this report limiting the approval to one year, would permit the applicant time to find a suitable location for the business. Should the Board of Supervisors wish to recommend approval of this case, staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval with the following overview of conditions: General Overview Requirements Details Use Limited to a landscaping business, incidental to a dwelling Condition 1 Ownership Limited to the applicants only Condition 2 Time Limit 1 Year Condition 3 Hours of Operation Monday – Friday, 8:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m. Saturday – Sunday, 8:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m. Condition 4 Location of Use • Confined to the existing dwelling and paved parking area only • No new buildings/structures related to the use Condition 5 Employees & Clients • One (1) employee, who is not a family member, may reside within the dwelling • No other employees may report to the property, other than those that live on the prem • No clients permitted Condition 6 Signage None permitted Condition 7 Page 320 of 394 5 20SN0610-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT General Overview (continued) Requirements Details Equipment/Vehicles • Two (2) vehicles, not exceed 10,000 pounds or have more than 2 axles • Two (2) trailers, not to exceed 3,200 pounds, 13 feet and have more than 1 axles • Vehicles to be parked on premises, trailers to be parked in the driveway, behind the front plane of the dwelling • No outside storage of equipment Condition 8 Staff finds that the applicants’ request may adversely impact adjoining residential properties by allowing a commercial use to encroach into an established residential area. The continuation of vehicle, trailer and equipment storage on the property as well as having an employee reside on the premises would not be compatible with existing residential development and permitted land uses. FIRE AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES Staff Contact: Anthony Batten (804-717-6167) battena@chesterfield.gov Nearby Fire and Emergency Medical Service (EMS) Facilities Fire Station The Midlothian Fire Station, Company Number 5 EMS Facility The Forest View Volunteer Rescue Squad This request will have minimal impact on Fire and EMS. UTILITIES Staff Contact: Randy Phelps (804-796-7126) phelpsc@chesterfield.gov Existing Water and Wastewater Systems Utility Type Currently Serviced Size of Closest Existing Lines Connection Required by County Code Water Yes 6” Yes Wastewater Yes 8” Yes Additional Utility Comments: The subject property is located within the mandatory water and wastewater connection area for new residential development. The existing residential structure on the property is connected to the County water and wastewater systems. The request to operate a landscaping business in a residential district, including temporary lodging for two employees, will have minimal impact on the Utilities Department. Page 321 of 394 6 20SN0610-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT The Utilities Department supports this case. COUNTY TRANSPORTATION Staff Contact: Steve Adams (804-748-1037) adamst@chesterfield.gov ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING Staff Contact: Rebeccah Rochet (804-748-1028) rochetr@chesterfield.gov PARKS AND RECREATION Staff Contact: Janit Llewellyn (804-751-4482) llewellynja@chesterfield.gov SCHOOLS Staff Contact: Atonja Allen (804-318-8740) atonja_allen@ccpsnet.net VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Staff Contact: Willie Gordon (804-674-2907) willie.gordon@vdot.virginia.gov This request will not impact these facilities. Page 322 of 394 7 20SN0610-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT CASE HISTORY Applicant Submittals 6/5/2020 Application submitted Community Meeting 8/4/2020 Issues Discussed: • Virtual meeting held due to the COVID-19 pandemic • Duration of operation • Parking of company vehicles • Number of employees on site • Anticipated relocation of business, and estimated timeline of relocation Planning Commission 9/15/2020 Citizen Comments: One (1) citizen messaged staff via e-mail having no issues with the request, but stated his preference for the sunset clause (Condition 3) to be granted for a period no longer than six (6) months. Commission Discussion: Mr. Petroski noted that a virtual community meeting was held in August where two citizens attended, both in support of the request. He stated that given the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, and no neighbor opposition, that a one-year sunset clause was an appropriate period for the applicants to find a more suitable location for the landscaping business. Recommendation – APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS IN ATTACHMENT 1. Motion: Petroski Second: Sloan AYES: Freye, Sloan, Hylton, Owens, and Petroski The Board of Supervisors on Wednesday, October 28, 2020, beginning at 6:00 p.m., will consider this request. Page 323 of 394 8 20SN0610-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT ATTACHMENT 1 CONDITIONS Note: The following conditions are recommended by both the Planning Commission and Staff. 1. Use. This Conditional Use approval shall be for the operation of a business (landscape business), incidental to a dwelling. (P) 2. Non-Transferrable Ownership. This Conditional Use approval shall be granted to and for Harold Driver, Kathy Driver, and Ian Brown, exclusively, and shall not be transferable with the land. (P) 3. Time Limitation. This Conditional Use approval shall be granted for a period of one (1) year. (P) 4. Hours of Operation. Hours of operation of the business (landscape business), to include the movement of equipment or vehicles, shall be limited to the following hours: a. Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. b. Saturday and Sunday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. (P) 5. Location of Use. The use shall be confined to the existing dwelling and the paved driveway area. No new buildings/structures shall be permitted to accommodate this use. (P) 6. Employees and Clients. One (1) employee, who is not a family member of the applicants, is permitted to reside on the premises. No other outside employees shall be permitted to work on the premises. No clients shall be permitted on the property. (P) 7. Signage. There shall be no signs identifying this use. (P) 8. Equipment/Vehicles. a. No more than two (2) vehicle associated with the business shall be parked on the premises. The vehicles shall not exceed 10,000 pounds or have more than two (2) axles. Vehicles associated with the business shall be parked in the driveway. b. No more than two (2) trailers associated with the business shall be parked on the premises. The trailers shall not exceed 3,200 pounds, thirteen (13) feet in length, and have more than one (1) axle. Trailers shall be parked, except for during loading or unloading, in the driveway behind the front plane of the existing dwelling. c. Except for equipment stored in a vehicle or on a trailer, equipment associated with the home occupation shall not be stored outside. (P) Page 324 of 394 9 20SN0610-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT ATTACHMENT 2 EXHIBIT A – EXISTING STREET-VIEW PHOTOS Page 325 of 394 10 20SN0610-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT Page 326 of 394 20SN0610 Midlothian Harold Driver, Kathy Driver, and Ian Brown Conditional use to permit a business (landscape company) incidental to a dwelling in a Residential (R-15) District. Case 20SN0610 is a request in the Midlothian District by Harold Driver, Kathy Driver, and Ian Brown for a conditional use to permit a business (landscape company) incidental to a dwelling in a Residential (R-15) District. 1 Page 327 of 394 20SN0610 The subject property is located at 402 Old Country Terrace in the Walton Park subdivision. 2 Page 328 of 394 20SN0610 The Comprehensive Plan suggests that this property is appropriate for Suburban Residential II (2-4 dwellings per acre). The proposed use introduces a commercial use into the subdivision. 3 Page 329 of 394 4 20SN0610 This is a view of the subject property from the cul-de-sac taken in July 2020. Page 330 of 394 5 20SN0610 This is a view of the two trucks and two trailers that are parked on the subject property for the landscaping business taken in July 2020. The applicants have been parking the trucks and trailers in their driveway since January 2020. In April 2020, Community Enhancement received a complaint relative to parking of a dual-axel trailer on the property. The applicant is requesting to continue to park the trailers in the driveway of the subject property. The applicants do not use the site for outside storage of equipment related to their business. The applicant has indicated their plans to relocate their landscaping business to a commercial location in 2021, but the process has been slowed down due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Page 331 of 394 6 Conditions 20SN0610 Limited to the landscape business Non-transferable ownership One (1) year time limitation Limited hours of operation Monday-Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Saturday-Sunday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. No new buildings and structures/signage Limited to one (1) non-family employee No more than two (2) vehicles and two (2) trailers associated with the business to be parked on site With this request, staff recommends eight conditions as shown in Attachment 1 of the staff report. These conditions include a limitation of the use to the applicants, limiting the use to a landscape business, and the number of non-family employees on site. Conditions limit the operation to one (1) year and limited hours of operation on weekdays and weekends. Further, no new buildings or signage is to be built on the property pertaining to the landscape business, and no more than two (2) vehicles and two (2) trailers associated with the business are to be parked on site. Page 332 of 394 7 Planning Commission Recommends Approval 20SN0610 Time Limitation of 1 Year Staff Recommends Denial Use is incompatible with the residential use Represents a commercial encroachment The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of this request at their September 15 public hearing. During the discussion, Commissioners believed that the condition of a 12- month time limit should allow for adequate time for the applicants to locate a more appropriate business location. One citizen sent an e-mail to staff speaking on this request, supporting the request, but requesting that the time limit be reduced from 12 months to six (6) months. Staff continues to recommend denial of this request. The proposed use of a commercial business is incompatible with the residential use suggested by Page 333 of 394 the Comprehensive Plan. The use represents a commercial encroachment within an established residential neighborhood. 7 Page 334 of 394 20SN0610 Thank you. 8 Page 335 of 394 Page 336 of 394 Page 337 of 394 Page 338 of 394 Providing a FIRST CHOICE community through excellence in public service CASE NUMBER: 20SN0614 APPLICANT: Hickory Estate, LLC CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIRGINIA MATOACA DISTRICT STAFF’S ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION 713.5 Acres – 9353 Graves Rd. Board of Supervisors (BOS) Hearing: OCTOBER 28, 2020 BOS Time Remaining: 365 DAYS Applicant’s Contacts: KERRY HUTCHERSON (804-748-3600) Planning Department Case Manager: TYLER WALTER (804-318-8893) REQUEST Rezoning from Residential (R-88) to Agricultural (A). Note: The only condition that may be imposed is a buffer condition. The property owner may proffer conditions. SUMMARY In 2007, the subject properties were rezoned from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-88) to permit the construction of up to 274 single-family dwellings (Cases 07SN0342 and 08SN0108). A conservation easement recorded on the request properties in 2017 now limits residential development to a maximum of ten (10) dwellings. The applicant no longer intends to develop the subject property as a Residential (R-88) single-family subdivision; therefore, rezoning to Agricultural (A) is proposed. RECOMMENDATION PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL STAFF APPROVAL • Proposed zoning and land use comply with the Comprehensive Plan which suggests agricultural uses and larger lot single family developments as appropriate • Conservation easement precludes Residential (R-88) single-family subdivision development Page 339 of 394 2 20SN0614-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT Page 340 of 394 3 20SN0614-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT TABLE A REQUEST PROPERTIES Tax Identification Number Address 760-618-9862 9353 GRAVES RD 761-617-5745 9326 RIVER RD 762-616-3473 19210 EANES RD 762-618-7458 9115 GRAVES RD 763-616-9147 19014 EANES RD 764-617-4550 19006 EANES RD 766-616-8203 19311 EANES RD 766-618-4335 18401 EANES RD 767-617-2600 18901 EANES RD 767-617-8276 18411 EANES RD 767-619-5626 8351 GRAVES RD 767-619-7931 8321 GRAVES RD 768-617-9663 19528 CHURCH RD 768-619-0903 8309 GRAVES RD 769-616-5571 19520 CHURCH RD 769-617-2708 19526 CHURCH RD 769-617-7874 19530 CHURCH RD 769-617-9607 19524 CHURCH RD 769-618-9478 19234 CHURCH RD 770-617-2262 19246 CHURCH RD Page 341 of 394 4 20SN0614-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT Comprehensive Plan Classifications: RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL & SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL II The Residential Agricultural designation suggests the property is appropriate for agricultural and residential uses. Subdivision densities should not exceed a maximum of 0.5 dwelling units per acre. The Suburban Residential II designation suggests the property is appropriate for residential use of 2.0 to 4.0 dwelling units per acre. Surrounding Land Uses and Development River Rd. Graves Rd. Single-family uses Eanes Rd. Church Rd. Agricultural uses Page 342 of 394 5 20SN0614-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT PLANNING Staff Contact: Tyler Walter (804-318-8893) waltert@chesterfield.gov Zoning History Case Number Request 07SN0342* Approved (6/2007) • Rezoning to Residential (R-88) of 689.9 acres plus conditional use to permit keeping of horses on a portion (100 acres) of the development • Estimated development would yield 248 dwelling units • Cash proffer of $15,600 per dwelling unit to address impacts on schools, roads, parks, libraries and fire stations • Option to address transportation impact with road improvements 08SN0108* Approved (10/2007) • Rezoning to Residential (R-88) of 23.9 acres, being property contiguous to that included in Case 07SN0342 • Estimated development would yield 8 dwelling units • Cash proffer of $15,600 per dwelling unit to address impacts on schools, roads, parks, libraries and fire stations • Option to address transportation impact with road improvements 17SN0592* Approved & Denied (8/2017) • Request I: Amend cash proffers from Cases 07SN0342 and 08SN0108 (Approved); • Road improvements to Hickory and Graves Road, in lieu of a cash proffer payment • Architectural and design standards for residential dwellings • Density limited to 274 dwelling units • Request II: Utility exception for public sewer system (Denied) * The staff report for these cases analyzed the impact of the proposed development on public facilities and the applicant’s offer to mitigate that impact. Proposal The request properties are used in part for agricultural uses. Between 2007 and 2017, the subject properties were zoned to permit a single-family residential subdivision with a maximum of 274 dwellings (known as Debonair Acres). A conservation easement was subsequently recorded in October 2017. This easement, held by Chesterfield County, provides for the preservation of open space and restricts development of these properties to a maximum of ten (10) dwelling units. The applicant no longer intends to develop the previously planned Residential (R-88) subdivision. Any future development of dwellings on these properties must conform to requirements in the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances, as well as restrictions outlined in the conservation easement. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the properties are primarily appropriate for agricultural use and larger lot single family residential development. Staff supports this rezoning request. Page 343 of 394 6 20SN0614-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT COUNTY TRANSPORTATION Staff Contact: Steve Adams (804-748-1037) adamst@chesterfield.gov The Comprehensive Plan, which includes the Thoroughfare Plan, identifies county-wide transportation needs that are expected to mitigate traffic impacts of future growth. The anticipated traffic impact of the proposal has been evaluated and it is anticipated to be minimal. FIRE AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES Staff Contact: Anthony Batten (804-717-6167) battena@chesterfield.gov Nearby Fire and Emergency Medical Service (EMS) Facilities Fire Station The Phillips Fire Station, Company Number 13 EMS Facility The Ettrick-Matoaca Volunteer Rescue Squad This request will have minimal impact on Fire and EMS. PARKS AND RECREATION Staff Contact: Janit Llewellyn (804-751-4482) llewellynja@chesterfield.gov Mission The County supports a high-quality park system to provide residents and visitors with balanced access to active and passive recreation opportunities. The 2018 level of service is 7.5 acres of regional, community and neighborhood parkland per 1,000 persons whereas the target level of service is 9 acres per 1,000 persons. Nearby Parks and Schools • Matoaca Elementary School • Matoaca Middle School • Matoaca High School • Appomattox River Canoe Launch/John J. Radcliffe Conservation Area • Matoaca Park Public Facilities Plan The Public Facilities Plan identifies the need for a regional park in the eastern Matoaca area between River and Woodpecker roads. The plan state as park should include approximately 175 acres that would accommodate regional park uses. Bikeways and Trails The Bikeways and Trails Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan recommends provision of pedestrian/bicycle facilities along all routes shown on the Plan and connections from these routes and existing pedestrian/bicycle facilities to adjacent developments. The Plan shows a future separate shared use path segment nearest the property along River Road. Page 344 of 394 7 20SN0614-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT Recommendation The encumbrances on this 713-acre site related to the land conservation and nutrient bank limit park development potential on 163.16 acres. This property should be studied further by Parks to determine if it meets the needs for a regional park. Parks and Recreation are supportive of the request. UTILITIES Staff Contact: Randy Phelps (804-796-7126) phelpsc@chesterfield.gov Existing Water and Wastewater Systems Utility Type Currently Serviced Size of Closest Existing Lines Connection Required by County Code Water No 16” Yes Wastewater No N/A Yes/No Additional Utility Comments: The subject property is located within the mandatory water connection area for new residential development. The majority of the subject property is not located within the mandatory wastewater connection area for new residential development, but a small portion at the easternmost boundary is within the mandatory connection area. The property is subject to an open-space easement that is held by Chesterfield County. The downzoning of the property from R-88 to A will make the applicable zoning district consistent with the purpose of the open-space easement. This will maintain the rural character of the area and not permit extensive development. Since no subdivision of the property will occur, any structures built would be subject to the water and wastewater connection requirements of 18.60.A.1.a and 18.60.A.2.a and based upon distance to the closest available utility line. The potential impact of the public water and wastewater systems would be minimal. The Utilities Department supports this case. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING Staff Contact: Rebeccah Rochet (804-748-1028) rochetr@chesterfield.gov VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Staff Contact: Willie Gordon (804-674-2907) willie.gordon@vdot.virginia.gov SCHOOLS Staff Contact: Atonja Allen (804-318-8740) atonja_allen@ccpsnet.net This request will not impact these facilities. Page 345 of 394 8 20SN0614-2020OCT28-BOS-RPT CASE HISTORY Applicant Submittals 6/15/2020 Application submitted Community Meeting 8/6/2020 Issues Discussed: • Virtual community meeting held due to the COVID-19 pandemic • Six (6) citizens attended the meeting, all supporting the request Planning Commission 9/15/2020 Citizen Comments: No citizens spoke to this request. Action – APPROVAL. Motion: Petroski Second: Owens AYES: Freye, Sloan, Hylton, Owens, and Petroski The Board of Supervisors on Wednesday, October 28, 2020, beginning at 6:00 p.m., will consider this request. Page 346 of 394 20SN0614 Matoaca Hickory Estate, LLC Rezoning from Residential (R-88) to Agricultural (A). Case 20SN0614 is a request in the Matoaca District by Hickory Estate, LLC for rezoning from Residential (R-88) to Agricultural (A). 1 Page 347 of 394 Overview Property rezoned to R-88 in 2007 for single-family subdivision Conservation easement held by the County recorded in 2017 Proposed zoning and easement align with the Comprehensive Plan, staff supportive of request Planning Commission and Staff recommend approval 20SN0614 The area of interest contains 20 parcels totaling 713.5 acres that are currently zoned Residential (R-88). In 2007, these parcels were zoned from Agricultural to Residential R-88 for a single-family subdivision (known as Debonair Acres) to permit the construction of up to 274 single-family dwellings (Cases 07SN0342 and 08SN0108). Ultimately, the subdivision was never developed. In October 2017, a conservation easement (currently held by the County) was recorded on the request properties and limits residential development to a maximum of ten (10) dwellings. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the properties are primarily appropriate for agricultural use and larger lot single family residential development. Staff supports this rezoning request. 2 Page 348 of 394 20SN0614 20SN0614 The subject property is located at 9353 Graves Road. There are 20 parcels in this request that can be seen in Table A in your staff report. In total, there are 713.5 acres of land proposed in this rezoning. The request properties remain vacant and are used in part for agricultural use. Between 2007 and 2017, the subject properties were zoned to permit a single-family residential subdivision with a maximum of 274 dwellings (known as Debonair Acres). A conservation easement was subsequently recorded in October 2017. This easement, held by Chesterfield County, provides for the preservation of open space and restricts development of these properties to a maximum of ten (10) dwelling units. The applicant no longer intends to develop the previously planned Residential (R-88) subdivision. Any future development of dwellings on these properties must conform to requirements in the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances, as well as restrictions outlined in the conservation easement. 3 Page 349 of 394 20SN0614 The Comprehensive Plan primarily calls for Residential Agricultural uses on the property, with Suburban Residential II uses on four of the far eastern parcels. 4 Page 350 of 394 5 20SN0614 This is a view of the northern boundary of the subject properties from Foaling Lane taken in July 2020. Page 351 of 394 6 Planning Commission and Staff Recommend Approval 20SN0614 Proposed zoning and land use comply with the Comprehensive Plan which suggests agricultural uses and larger lot single family developments as appropriate Conservation easement precludes Residential (R-88) single-family subdivision development The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend approval of this request at their September 15 public hearing. Staff continues to recommend approval of this request. The proposed use zoning and land use complies with the Comprehensive Plan, which suggests agricultural use and larger lot single family developments. The conservation easement precludes Residential (R-88) single-family development. No citizens spoke to the request. Page 352 of 394 20SN0614 20SN0614 Thank you. 7 Page 353 of 394 Page 354 of 394 Page 355 of 394 Page 356 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 17.A. Subject: Conveyance of an Easement to Virginia Electric and Power Company for a 15' Underground Easement for Service at Chesterfield County Airport Board Action Requested: Authorize the Chair of the Board of Supervisors and the County Administrator to execute an agreement with Virginia Electric and Power Company for a 15' underground easement for service at Chesterfield County Airport. Summary of Information: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors authorize the Chair of the Board of Supervisors and the County Administrator to execute an agreement with Virginia Electric and Power Company for a 15' underground easement. This is necessary to provide service to two new airplane hangars being constructed by Richmond Executive Aviation Services. This request has been reviewed by Airport staff. Approval is recommended. Attachments: 1.Chesterfield Airport Virginia Power Easement Vicinity Sketch 2.Chesterfield Airport Virginia Power Easement Plat Preparer:Dean Sasek, Real Property Manager Approved By: Page 357 of 394 AIRFIELD DR T A X I W A Y W HITEPINE R D Board of Supervisors Meeting - October 28, 2020Conveyance of an Easement to Virginia Electric and Power Company Chesterfield CountyReal Property Office 1 inch = 400 feetsnowd 10-05-2020 µ Chesterfield Airport - 7427 Airfield Drivefor service to 7521 & 7531 Airfield Drive Page 358 of 394 Page 359 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 17.B. Subject: To Adopt an Ordinance to Vacate a Portion of a 50' Unimproved Right of Way Known as Fonda Street Within Revised Plan of Rayon Park Board Action Requested: Adopt an ordinance to vacate a portion of a 50' unimproved right of way known as Fonda Street within Revised Plan of Rayon Park. Summary of Information: Travis K. Cattenhead, submitted an application requesting the vacation of a portion of a 50' unimproved right of way known as Fonda Street within Revised Plan of Rayon Park. This request has been reviewed by County staff. Approval is recommended. Attachments: 1.Fonda Street Vacation Vicinity Sketch 2.Fonda Street Vacation Sketch 3.Fonda Street Vacation Ordinance Preparer:Dean Sasek, Real Property Manager Approved By: Page 360 of 394 R Y C L I F F A V E F O N D A S T P A G E S T B O T O N E A V E P I O N E E R S T L I B W O O D A V E F O N D A S T Board of Supervisors Meeting - October 28, 2020Adopt an Ordinance to Vacate a Portion of Unimproved Right of Way Known as Fonda Street WithinRevised Plan of Rayon Park Chesterfield CountyReal Property Office 1 inch = 100 feetSnowD 10-08-2020 µ VACATION OF A PORTION OF A 50' UNIMPROVED RIGHT OFWAY KNOWN AS FONDA STREET Page 361 of 394 Page 362 of 394 V:\Real Property Office\EASEMENTS\VACATION ORDINANCE\2020-0512.DOC/jls/lps/Fonda Street GIS CODE:VAC PINS:789 677 4537 00000 789 677 3334 00000 Document No:2020-0512 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY: At a regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors held at the Courthouse on OCTOBER 28, 2020 at 6:00 p.m. AN ORDINANCE whereby the COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA, ("GRANTOR") vacates to TRAVIS K. CATTENHEAD, and MARTIN B. LUNA MORALES, ("GRANTEES"), a portion of a 50’ unimproved right of way known as Fonda Street, formerly known as Madison Street, within Revised Plan of Rayon Park, BERMUDA Magisterial District, Chesterfield County, Virginia, as shown on a plat thereof duly recorded in the Clerk's Office, Circuit Court, Chesterfield County, Virginia in Plat Book 4, at Pages 150-151. WHEREAS, Travis K. Cattenhead petitioned the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia to vacate a portion of a 50’ unimproved right of way known as Fonda Street, formerly known as Madison Street, within Revised Plan of Rayon Park, BERMUDA Magisterial District, Chesterfield County, Virginia more particularly shown on a plat of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of said County in Plat Book 4, Page 150-151, by W. W. LaPrade & Bros. dated July 5, 1928, revised July 11, 16, and 31, 1928, and recorded September 7, 1928. The portion of right of way petitioned to be vacated is more fully described as follows: A portion of a 50’ county right of way known as Fonda Street, formerly known as Madison Street, within Revised Plan of Rayon Park, the location of which is more fully shown on the attached sketch. WHEREAS, notice has been given pursuant to Section 15.2-2204 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, by advertising; and, WHEREAS, no public necessity exists for the continuance of the portion of right of way sought to be vacated. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIRGINIA: Page 363 of 394 V:\Real Property Office\EASEMENTS\VACATION ORDINANCE\2020-0512.DOC/jls/lps/Fonda Street That pursuant to Section 15.2-2272 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, the aforesaid portion of right of way be and is hereby vacated. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect in accordance with Section 15.2-2272 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, and a certified copy of this Ordinance, together with the sketch attached hereto, shall be recorded no sooner than thirty days hereafter in the Clerk's Office, Circuit Court, Chesterfield County, Virginia, pursuant to Section 15.2-2272 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. The effect of this Ordinance pursuant to Section 15.2-2274 is to destroy the force and effect of the recording of the portion of the plat vacated. This Ordinance shall vest fee simple title to the portion of right of way hereby vacated in the adjacent lot owners free and clear of any rights of public use. GRANTEE hereby conveys unto the GRANTOR and GRANTOR reserves a 50’ water and sewer easement, as shown on the attached sketch which is attached hereto and made a part of this ordinance. Accordingly, this Ordinance shall be indexed in the names of the GRANTOR and GRANTEES, or their successors in title. Certified by: DEPUTY COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR APPROVED AS TO FORM: SENIOR DEPUTY COUNTY ATTORNEY Page 364 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 17.C. Subject: To Consider Code Amendment Relative to Townhouse and Multiple Family Unit Parking (20PJ0125) Board Action Requested: Following a public hearing adopt the attached code amendment. Summary of Information: Following a public hearing, the Planning Commission by unanimous vote forwarded a recommendation of approval on the attached code amendment. The amendment proposes adjustment to the required parking for both townhouse and multifamily development. Staff has undertaken a benchmarking exercise evaluating parking requirements within peer localities as well as evaluating the recent trend in multifamily in the county where parking reduction has become a typical zoning request. For multifamily, the parking factor will be now based upon bedrooms per unit and for townhouse the required bonus parking would be allowed within roads. Further, there are proposed allowances for multifamily development in certain design districts to include on- street parking and have reductions in parking for developments that have elements such as connections to pedestrian/bikeway systems. Countywide there is provision for reduction of parking for multifamily units in close proximity to transit stops. In addition, the permitted parking space reduction for the provision of bike storage spaces may now be up to 5 parking spaces. Attachments: 1.Townhouse and Multiple Family Unit Parking Ordinance Amendment 19.1-236 and 19.1-570.BOS 2.BOS PH PowerPoint Oct Townhouse and Multifamily Parking Preparer:Andrew Gillies, Director of Planning Approved By: Page 365 of 394 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, 1997, AS AMENDED, BY AMENDING AND REENACTING SECTIONS 19.1-236 AND 19.1-570 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE RELATIVE TO TOWNHOUSE AND MULTIPLE FAMILY UNIT PARKING BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County: (1) That Sections 19.1-236 and 19.1-570 of the Code of the County of Chesterfield, 1997, as amended, is amended and re-enacted, to read as follows: Chapter 19.1 ZONING Sec. 19.1-236. Required Parking Spaces per Use. OOO Table 19.1-236.A. Required Number of Parking Spaces by Use General Use Category Specific Use or Size of Use Number of Spaces Required All Areas Excluding Special Design Districts [1] [2] [3] [4] Special Design Districts [2] [3] [4] Residential Units[5] Dwelling units except as listed below 2 per dwelling unit 2 per dwelling unit Assisted living with dwelling units (for Assisted living without dwelling units see Health Care, Assisted living) 0.8 per dwelling unit 0.8 per dwelling unit Manufactured home 2 per manufactured home[6] 2 per manufactured home[6] Multiple-family dwelling unit [2] 2 per 3 or more bedroom dwelling unit 1.8 per 2 bedroom dwelling unit 1.5 per 0 to 1 bedroom dwelling unit 1.8 per 2 or more bedroom dwelling unit 1.5 per dwelling unit 0 to 1 bedroom Multiple-family-Occupancy restricted to "housing for older persons" as defined by the Virginia Fair Housing Law with no residents permitted under 19 years of age 1.2 per dwelling unit 1.2 per dwelling unit Townhouses 2 per dwelling unit, plus 1 for each 5 dwelling units to be located in common parking areas or in road if approved at time of plan review 2 per dwelling unit, plus 1 for each 5 dwelling units to be located in common parking areas or in road if approved at time of plan review OOO Page 366 of 394 OOO Sec. 19.1-570. Definitions. For the purposes of this chapter, the following words and phrases shall have the following meanings: OOO Dwelling, multiple-family: Building, not to include a townhouse, designed with 3 or more dwelling units each for occupancy by one family. Term also includes multifamily dwelling. (2) That this ordinance shall become effective immediately after adoption. 1928:117736.1 Notes for Table 19.1-236.A. [1] In the Northern Jefferson Davis Highway Design District, parking requirements for nonresidential uses shall be based upon the lesser of that outlined in the Table or 4.4 per 1000 s/f of gfa. [2] In the Northern Jefferson Davis Highway Design District, Employment Center, Special Design Districts and C-1 Districts, the required number of parking spaces for non-residential uses or multiple family dwelling units may be reduced by 10% if the development contains a sidewalk, or other pedestrian or bikeway system which connects, or will connect, to off-site existing or planned future sidewalks or pedestrian systems or a bikeway required by Sec. 19.1-208. In addition, countywide for any district having established public transit routes, multiple family developments may have the number of required parking spaces reduced by 5% for units located within 1,320 feet of an established transit stop if the development is connected to such stop by a pedestrian or bikeway system. [3] In the Northern Jefferson Davis Highway Design District and Special Design Districts, for nonresidential uses and multiple family dwelling unit parking spaces in a road may be counted toward the required number of parking spaces when more than 1/2 of the space adjoins the use. [4] Within a non-residential or multiple family dwelling unit development adjacent to a bikeway required by Sec. 19.1-208., the number of parking spaces may be reduced by 1 for each 6 bicycle storage spaces, with a maximum reduction of 3 5 and provided a minimum of 5 parking spaces shall be provided. [5] For residential uses, parking spaces within a garage or an enclosed or covered space may be counted toward parking requirements. [6] In an MH-1 District, one of the required parking spaces may be located in a common parking area within the park. [7] If a drop-off or pick-up area is provided directly from vehicles to the building, stacking space shall be provided. If such an area is not provided, 5 additional parking spaces shall be installed. If care is provided for school age children, a sidewalk shall be installed from the building to the school bus stop for the facility. [8] In the Ettrick Special Design District, parking requirements for the use shall be based upon 2.2 parking spaces per 1,000 s/f of gfa. [9] The required number of spaces shall be based upon the square footage of the outside dining that exceeds 20 percent of the gfa of the associated principal use. Page 367 of 394 20PJ0125 Code Amendment Relative to Townhouse and Multiple Family Unit Parking Page 368 of 394 Countywide Parking Review R-MF & R-TH Benchmarking of peer localities Common CUPD request for parking reduction Explore options for credits Consider rise of use in higher density environments Page 369 of 394 Parking Summary 1.68 average for all peer locality parking (not including required guest parking for certain areas) 1.88 average where excluding small unit, one bedroom or efficiency/studio (in red on previous slide) Chesterfield base currently 2.0 and matches regional counties (Hanover, Henrico) Currently no credit other than bike spaces available to multifamily No credit for on-street parking spaces Page 370 of 394 Parking Proposal Calculate parking based upon bedrooms Incentivize parking reductions in areas where higher density multifamily is supported in Plan Permit reductions based upon improvements and connectivity(already exists for commercial) Permit transit credit Permit inclusion of on-street parking in higher density areas Page 371 of 394 Proposal [2]In the Northern Jefferson Davis Highway Design District,Employment Center,SpecialDesignDistrictsandC-1 Districts,the required number of parking spaces for non-residential uses or multiple family dwelling units may be reduced by 10%if thedevelopmentcontainsapedestrianorbikewaysystemwhichconnects,or willconnect,to off-site existing or planned pedestrian systems or a bikeway required bySec.19.1-208.In addition,countywide for areas having established public transitroutes,multiple family developments may have the number of required parkingspacesreducedby5%for units located within 1320 feet of an established transit stop ifthedevelopmentisconnectedtosuchstopbyapedestrianorbikewaysystem. [3]In the Northern Jefferson Davis Highway Design District and Special Design Districts,fornonresidentialusesandmultiplefamilydwellingunitparkingspacesinaroadmaybecountedtowardtherequirednumberofparkingspaceswhenmorethan1/2 of thespaceadjoinstheuse. [4]Within a non-residential or multiple family dwelling unit development adjacent to abikewayrequiredbySec.19.1-208.,the number of parking spaces may be reducedby1foreach6bicyclestoragespaces,with a maximum reduction of 5 and providedaminimumof5parkingspacesshallbeprovided. Parking in Northern Jefferson Davis Highway, Employment Center and Special Design DistrictsUnit Type (Bedrooms ) Current Ordinance Proposed Ordinance With Incentive** 3 plus 2 2[a]or 1.8 1.7[a]or 1.5221.8 1.5121.5 1.3021.5 1.3[a] For Northern Jefferson Davis Highway Design District and Employment Center Page 372 of 394 Other Changes Townhouse Parking Current: 2 per unit plus 1space per 5 units to be located in common parking areas Proposed: Permit bonus parking to include spaces provided in road Definition Clarify that definition dwelling, multiple family includes multifamily dwelling Page 373 of 394 Recommendation Following a Public Hearing Adopt Attached Code Amendment Page 374 of 394 Locality Unit Category/Area Parking (per Unit)Other Albemarle Any unit of 500 square feet or less 1.25 1 Guest space per 4 units(where parking is provided on individual lots) Student suites: 1.25 space per bedroomOne bedroom 1.50Two or more bedrooms 2.00 Chesapeake N/A 2.00 Except that an SRO 2 Facility is similar to our Assisted living facility with dwelling units. Chesterfield N/A 2.00 Bike space reduction 1 per 6 bike spaces up to 3 total parking spaces Allow reduction to 1.2 for “housing for older persons” Fairfax 1.6 Transit Station Areas (very dense areas in county)0 or 1 bedroom: 1.3 spaces per unit; 2 bedrooms: 1.5 spaces per unit; 3 or more bedrooms: 1.6 spaces per unit Fauquier N/A 2.00 Plus 1 per 3 units and 1 per each 5 units for boats, RVs etc. (1/2 must be 12 X 30) Hanover N/A 2.00 Allows reduction by formula with conditions but not in RM Modification by Director like variance (hardship) Henrico N/A 2.00 2 for each dwelling unit; 1.5 for each dwelling unit for multifamily development on property which had an approved plan of development, proffers approved as part of a rezoning case, or previous multifamily development on the property as of November 28, 2000. Attached garages cannot be included in the parking calculations. Manassas Standard 1.75 Allows hardship modification by ZA per state code regs (hardship like variance)Downton (B-3 Zoning)1.50Manassas Landing, Mathis Corridor, Hospital/Sudley 1.60 Prince William --Buildings 50 feet or less in height Efficiency/studio 1.00 Requires 1 bike space per 10 units See parking Credit Allowance 610.03One bedroom unit 1.50Two or more bedroom 2.20 --Buildings more than 50 feet Efficiency/studio 1.00 Plus 1 per 10 units in building Requires 1 bike space per 10 units See parking Credit Allowance 610.03 One bedroom unit 1.25 Two or more bedroom 2.00Spotsylvania1.60 Stafford 2.20 10% reduction if transit stop on site or if in adjacent ROW 20% credit if using parking deck with more than 20 spaces.Page 375 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 17.D. Subject: To Consider Second Amendment to Lease Agreement with 5G Air, LLC for Construction of Aircraft Hangars at the Chesterfield County Airport Board Action Requested: Staff requests the Board hold a public hearing to consider approval of a second amendment to the existing lease agreement with 5G Air, LLC for the construction of aircraft hangars at the Chesterfield County Airport. Summary of Information: The original lease agreement with 5G Air, LLC for the construction of two aircraft hangars at the Chesterfield County Airport required the lessee to complete construction of the hangars by July 1, 2020. This deadline was extended to November 1, 2020 via previous Board action primarily due to weather related delays. Progress continues to be made on the construction of both hangars but the lessee has encountered ongoing significant weather related delays as well as COVID-19 related supply chain challenges for materials essential to the completion of the project. In that the lease, and the 1st Amendment to the lease, has no provision to address weather related construction delays, staff requests that the Board approve a second lease amendment authorizing an additional 90 days beyond November 1, 2020, thus requiring completion of the hangars by February 1, 2021. Further, staff requests the Board authorize the County Administrator to extend the deadline an additional 60 days to April 1, 2021 should unforeseen circumstances, weather and/or supply chain challenges continue to impact the project. Attachments: 1.5G Air, LLC - Second Lease Amendment Preparer:Clay Bowles, Director Approved By: Page 376 of 394 SECOND LEASE AMENDMENT This Second Lease Amendment, dated ___, ______________, 2020, is made and entered into by and between the County of Chesterfield, (“County”) and 5G Air, LLC, a Virginia Limited Liability Corporation (“Tenant”) to amend the Lease entered into between the parties on January 1, 2019 (“Lease”), as follows: 1.Section 9.1 of the Lease, New Hangar Construction, is hereby amended to state that if Tenant fails to complete construction of the New Hangars (as defined in the Lease) by February 1, 2021, then the term of the Agreement shall terminate. 2.All other provisions of the Lease not inconsistent with this Second Lease Amendment shall remain in full force and effect. COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA By: ___________________________________ Name: ________________________________ Title: _________________________________ 5G Air, LLC By: ___________________________________ Name: ________________________________ Title: _________________________________ Approved as to form: ________________________ Michael S. J. Chernau Sr. Deputy County Attorney 0637:117930.1 Page 377 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 17.E. Subject: To Consider the Exercise of Eminent Domain for the Acquisition of Permanent Water and Temporary Construction, Electric and Communication Easements for the Huguenot Pump Station Transmission Main Project Board Action Requested: Authorize the County Attorney to proceed with eminent domain for the acquisition of permanent water, temporary construction, electric and communication easements for the Huguenot Pump Station Transmission Main Project, including the filing of certificates so construction may begin prior to eminent domain proceedings. Summary of Information: Staff has made bona fide, but ineffectual efforts to acquire permanent water, temporary construction, electric and communication easements for the Huguenot Pump Station Transmission Main Project. The following offer has been made: 11304 Midlothian Turnpike, 11500 Midlothian Turnpike and 1121 Mall Drive, RPI Chesterfield LLC, $36,079.00. This offer has not been accepted. It is necessary to proceed with condemnation for the health and safety of the public. Staff will continue to negotiate with this owner in an effort to reach an agreement. Staff has acquired permanent water and temporary construction easements across the following property: 8821 W. Huguenot Road, Steven E. Divers, $2,263.00. However, it is necessary to proceed with eminent domain due to the inability to obtain a subordination or consent from his lender in a timely manner. Approval is recommended. Attachments: 1.Huguenot Water Line Vicinity Map 2.Huguenot Water Line RPI Chesterfield LLC Water 3.Huguenot Water Line RPI Chesterfield LLC Communication 4.Huguenot Water Line RPI Chesterfield LLC Electric 5.Huguenot Water Line Divers Preparer:Dean Sasek, Real Property Manager Page 378 of 394 Approved By: Page 379 of 394 W H U G U E N O T R D ROBIOUS RD M IDLOTH IAN T P K E M A L L D R B U F O R D R D M C R A E R D O L D B O N A I R R D SAVOYRD R O B I N D A L E R D OLD G U N R D E TRADERD N P I N E T T A D R P O C O N O D R SYDELLE DR STATEROUTE 324 P U L L I A M S T ROC K A W A Y R D G E M S T T U X F O RD R D JASON RD L O G A N S T ASHBURN RD P E N R O S E D R M E D I N A RD KOGER CENTERBLVD M O N T O U R D R DOLFIEL D D R W OODM O N T D R B R A N C H W A Y R D BRO O K W OO D R D K N O L L W O O D D R B U S Y S T W I N D I N G W A Y N C O U R T H O U S E R D CAST L E HILLRD FORESTHILLAVE P O W H I T E P K W Y ROB Y S W A Y T R E N T R D S O U T H L A K E B L V D S H O R E H A M D R R E S E A R C H R D B R I G H T O N D R POLOPK W Y RAMSHORNRD GRANADA RD E S Q U I R E R D P O L K S T K E N W I N R D OLYMPICRD REDINGTON DR GUILFORD RD T R A Y M O R E R D W R E N S N E S T R D C A R M I A W A Y D E V E N W O O D R D B I G O A K L N R A T T L E S N A K E R D R Y D E R R D T R E V I L L I A N R D C R O M W E L L R D M C C A W D R C R A N B E C K R D I R E DELLRD S T U R B R I D G E D R ROCKLEDGE RD E L A I N E A V E S C A R S B O R O U G H D R PEGWELL DR HARMAD DR SUGA R B E R R Y L N C O L T O N D R L O T U S D R S U N V I E W L N F A R R L N RED LION PL F E R N L E A F D R E V O N A V E H U G U E N O T R D D R A G O N F L Y L N I R O N MILLRD J O H N S T O N W IL L I S D R D U N B R O O K R D D E A U V I L L E R D GROUNDHO G D R ALDERSMEAD RD QUAKER LNWHITE RABBIT RD F O R K L A N D D R ROB I O U S C R O S S I N G D R L I V E O AKLN TRI T O N D R C H A T S W O R T H A V E D O V E R S H I R E R D L A D Y M A R I A N C T B A N N O N R D O L D F A R M R D MOOREFIEL D P A R K D R BECKHAM DR J A N L A R D R L O C H N E S S R D B R O W N S U M M I T R DCUTTER DR W O R S H A M R D K E I T H W O O D P K W Y E W E L L R D R O C K C R E S T R D D W A Y N E L N T R A B U E R D HAZEN ST N A R C H R D F I N C A S T L E C T COMSTOCKDR DONACHY DR T R E F O I L W A Y B A R G R O V E R D LEAFCRESTLN SEVILLE DR A S T O R I A D R B U L L I N G T O N R D P A C K E R X I N G LANSDOWNE TER C E N T E R V I E W D R BON AIR CREST DR Q U A R T E R S T A F F R D HIGHGATE RD H U N T E R S D E L L T E R E R M A V E D O D R U N I C O R N L N P O L O P L W O O D S H I L L C T MALL CT H A Z E N S T W H U G U E N O T R D MID LOT HIAN TPK E Board of Supervisors Meeting - October 28, 2020Consider the Exercise of Eminent Domain for the Acquisition of Permanent Water and Temporary Construction, Electric and Communication Easementsfor the Huguenot Pump Station Transmission Main Project Chesterfield CountyReal Property Office 1 inch = 2,100 feet µ8821 W. HUGUENOT ROAD 11304 MIDLOTHIAN TURNPIKE11500 MIDLOTHIAN TURNPIKE1121 MALL DRIVE M A L L D R I V E M I D L O T H I A N T U R N P I K E W. HUGUENOT ROAD Page 380 of 394 Page 381 of 394 Page 382 of 394 Page 383 of 394 Page 384 of 394 Page 385 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 17.F. Subject: To Consider Amendments to County Code Sections 9-29, 9-30, 9-31 and 9-32 Relating to Rehabilitated Historic Residential and Commercial Real Estate and Partial Exemption for Certain Rehabilitated, Renovated or Replaced Commercial, Industrial and Residential Structures Board Action Requested: The Board is requested to hold a public hearing on October 28, 2020 to consider amendments to County Code Sections 9-29, 9-30, 9-31 and 9-32 relating to rehabilitated historic residential and commercial real estate and partial exemption for certain rehabilitated, renovated and replaced commercial, industrial and residential structures and to adopt the proposed ordinance amendments, attached, at the close of the public hearing. Summary of Information: The County Code currently allows partial real estate tax exemptions for rehabilitation, renovation, or replacement of older structures countywide. This program requires a property owner to file an application, obtain a building permit, and perform work that meets certain performance criteria. This program encourages reinvestment in older structures and provides an important community enhancement tool. To further incentivize reinvestment in older commercial and industrial structures by property owners, staff requests that Board to hold a public hearing for its October 28, 2020 meeting and to adopt the proposed ordinance amendments at the close of the public hearing. The proposed ordinance amendments: 1) reduce the minimum qualifying commercial and industrial structure age from 25 years to 20 years; 2) reduce the minimum required additional assessed improvement value from 15% to 10% for commercial and industrial structures; 3) increase the partial exemption benefit term from 7 years to 10 years for commercial and industrial structures; and 4) for all exemption categories, increase the time period when an application may be accepted from 12 months to 24 months after applying for a building permit for the rehabilitation. Other minor amendments are also proposed to simplify and make code language consistent across the rehabilitation tax exemption programs. Attachments: 1.Ordinance amending 9-29, 9-30, 9-31 & 9-32 Preparer:Dan Cohen Page 386 of 394 Approved By: Page 387 of 394 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, 1997, AS AMENDED, BY AMENDING AND RE-ENACTING SECTIONS 9-29, 9-30, 9-31 & 9-32 RELATING TO REHABILITATED HISTORIC RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE AND PARTIAL EXEMPTION FOR CERTAIN REHABILITATED, RENOVATED OR REPLACED COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL AND RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County: (1)That Sections 9-29, 9-30, 9-31 and 9-32 of the Code of the County of Chesterfield, 1997, as amended, are amended and re-enacted to read as follows: Chapter 9. FINANCE AND TAXATION ARTICLE II. REAL ESTATE TAX DIVISION 3. EXEMPTIONS Sec. 9-29. - Rehabilitated historic residential real estate. o (a)Historic real estate which has been substantially rehabilitated shall be exempt from taxation subject to the following: (1) All residential improvements shall be approved by the preservation committee. (2) Any residential structure which has been designated as a county historical landmark or is located in an area that has been designated a county historical district shall be deemed to have been substantially rehabilitated if the structure is 50 years old or older and has been improved to increase the assessed value of the structure by 25 percent or more. (3)The base value of the historic residential structure shall be the assessed value of the structure prior to the commencement of the work as determined by the county assessor. (3) (4)The exemption provided for in this section in subsection (a)(1) shall be an amount equal to the increase in assessed value resulting from the rehabilitation of the assessed residential structure, as determined by the county assessor. The exemption shall apply only to any subsequent assessment or reassessment of the structure and shall be limited to the first $500,000.00 of increased value. (4) (5)The exemption shall become effective on January 1 of the year following the determination made by the assessor The exemption and shall run with the real estate for ten years. (b)Within 12 24 months after the filing date of the building permit application for the rehabilitation, the owner of any real estate meeting the criteria stated in this section may Page 388 of 394 apply for an exemption. The application shall be made on forms provided by the county assessor. The application is valid for two years from the date of the application. (c)No property shall be eligible for such exemption unless the appropriate building permits have been acquired, and the county assessor has verified that the rehabilitation indicated on the application has been completed and meets the requirements of this section. The resulting structure may be used for any purpose, including mixed use, that is allowed by the building code and the applicable zoning regulations for the property. Sec. 9-30. - Rehabilitated historic commercial real estate. o (a)Historic commercial real estate which has been substantially rehabilitated shall be exempt from taxation subject to the following: (1)All commercial improvements shall be approved by the preservation committee. (2)Any commercial structure which has been designated a county historical landmark or is located in an area that has been designated a county historical district shall be deemed to have been substantially rehabilitated if the structure is 50 years old or older and has been improved to increase the assessed value of the structure by 25 percent or more. (3) The base value of the historic commercial structure shall be the assessed value of the structure prior to the commencement of the work as determined by the county assessor. (3) (4)The exemption provided for in this section in subsection (a)(1) shall be an amount equal to the increase in assessed value resulting from the rehabilitation of the assessed commercial structure as determined by the county assessor. The exemption shall apply only to any subsequent assessment or reassessment. The exemption shall be limited to the first $500,000.00 of increased value. (4) (5)The exemption shall become effective on January 1 of the year following the determination made by the assessor The exemption and shall run with the real estate for ten years. (b)Within 12 24 months after the building permit application filing date for the rehabilitation, the owner of any real estate meeting the criteria stated in this section may apply for exemption on forms provided by the county assessor. The application is valid for two years from the date of application. (c)No property shall be eligible for such exemption unless the appropriate building permits have been acquired, and the county assessor has verified that the rehabilitation indicated on the application has been completed and meets the requirements of this section. The resulting structure may be used for any purpose, including mixed use, that is allowed by the building code and applicable zoning regulations for the property. Page 389 of 394 Sec. 9-31. - Partial exemption for certain rehabilitated, renovated or replaced commercial or industrial structures. o (a)A partial exemption from real estate taxes is granted to certain commercial or industrial property which qualifies under the criteria listed in subsection (b). (b)For real property to qualify for the partial exemption granted by this section, the following criteria must apply: (1)Any real estate upon which there is an existing commercial or industrial structure shall be deemed to have been substantially rehabilitated, renovated or replaced when a structure 25 20 years old or older has been improved so as to increase the assessed value of the structure by 15 ten percent or more, or increase the assessed value of the structure by five percent or more for structures with an assessed value of at least $10,000,000.00. For a motel or hotel, the structure shall be no less than 35 years of age. For any structure located in an area designated as a technology zone, the structure shall be no less than 15 years of age. Subject to the limitations set forth below, the rehabilitated, renovated or replaced structure may be used for any purpose, including mixed use, that is allowed by the building code and the applicable zoning regulations for the property. (2)The base value of the commercial or industrial structure shall be the assessed value of the structure prior to the commencement of the work as determined by the county assessor. (3)The tax exemption provided in subsection (b)(1) shall apply when the rehabilitation, renovation or replacement is completed and the amount exempt from tax shall be equal to the increase in assessed value, if any, resulting from the rehabilitation, renovation or replacement of the assessed structure, as determined by the county assessor. The exemption shall apply only to any subsequent assessment or reassessment. In any year in which the market value of the qualified real estate decreases below the base value, as determined pursuant to this section, no credit or refund shall be provided to the owner. (4)The exemption shall become effective on January 1 of the year following the determination made by the assessor and The exemption shall run with the real estate for seven ten years. (5)Nothing in this section shall be construed to allow the county assessor to list upon the land book any reduced value or any reduced taxes due to the exemption provided herein. (6)The exemption shall apply to 200 percent of the square footage of the original structure(s) that have been replaced or rehabilitated if the resulting structure is used for residential purposes. For mixed use projects, this limitation shall apply only to the residential portion of the resulting structure. Page 390 of 394 (c)Within 12 24 months after the filing date of the building permit application for the rehabilitation, renovation or replacement the owner of any real estate meeting the criteria stated in this section may apply for the exemption. The application shall be made on forms provided by the county assessor. The application is valid for two years from the date of the application. Upon receiving the application, the county assessor shall determine the base value of the structure. This base value determination shall be effective for two years from the date of determination, but applicants may reapply after this time period expires. (d)Upon completion of the rehabilitation, renovation or replacement, the county assessor shall be notified in writing and shall inspect the property to determine the assessed value of the structure and the amount, if any, of the rehabilitated real estate tax exemption for that structure. No property shall be eligible for exemption unless the appropriate building permits have been acquired, and the county assessor has verified that the rehabilitation, renovation or replacement indicated on the application has been completed and meets the requirements of this section. In determining the base value and the increased value resulting from the substantial rehabilitation, renovation or replacement the county assessor shall employ usual and customary methods of assessing real estate. (e)Where rehabilitation is achieved through demolition and replacement of an existing structure, the partial exemptions provided in subsection (b) shall not apply when any structure demolished is a registered Virginia landmark or is determined by the department of historic resources to contribute to the significance of a registered historic district. Sec. 9-32. - Partial exemption for certain rehabilitated, renovated or replaced residential structures. (a)A partial exemption from real estate taxes is granted to certain residential property which qualifies under the criteria listed in subsection (b) below. Subject to the limitations set forth below, the rehabilitated, renovated or replaced structure may be used for any purpose, including mixed use, that is allowed by the building code and applicable to zoning regulations for the property. (b)For real property to qualify for the partial exemption granted by this section, the following criteria must apply: (1)There must be a residential structure on the property no less than 25 years of age which has been rehabilitated, renovated or replaced; provided, however, that if the real estate tax assessment of the structure is more than ten percent lower than the assessment of similar structures in the immediate area, as determined by the assessor, due to the physical condition of the structure, the structure may be 15 years or older in order to qualify under this subsection. Page 391 of 394 (2)If the existing structure is used solely for multifamily residential use, the rehabilitation, renovation or replacement must not increase the total square footage of the structure being rehabilitated, renovated or replaced by more than 30 percent if the resulting structure is also used solely for multifamily residential use. (3)When the circumstances described in section 9-32(b)(2) are not applicable, the exemption shall apply to 200 percent of the square footage of the original structure(s) that have been replaced or rehabilitated if the resulting structure is used for residential purposes. For mixed use projects, this limitation shall apply only to the residential portion of the resulting structure. (4)The rehabilitation, renovation or replacement must increase the assessment of the structure by ten percent or more and must be complete. (5)The rehabilitation, renovation or replacement must be accomplished with appropriate building permits. (6) The base value of the residential structure shall be the assessed value of the structure prior to the commencement of the work as determined by the county assessor. (c)Within 12 24 months after the filing date of the building permit application for the rehabilitation, renovation or replacement the owner of any real estate meeting the criteria stated in this section may apply for the exemption. The application shall be made on forms provided by the county assessor. The application is valid for two years from the date of the application. Upon receiving the application, the county assessor shall determine the base value of the structure. This base value determination shall be effective for two years from the date of determination, but applicants may reapply after this time period expires. (d)If the assessor determines that the property for which an application has been filed qualifies for the partial exemption under this section, the property shall be exempt from the increase in real estate taxation resulting solely from the rehabilitation, renovation or replacement. This exemption shall become effective on January 1 of the year following the determination made by the assessor and shall run with the real estate for a period of 15 tax years. The amount of the exemption shall not change over such 15-year period. Upon completion of the rehabilitation, renovation or replacement the county assessor shall be notified in writing and shall inspect the property to determine the assessed value of the structure and the amount, if any, of the rehabilitated real estate tax exemption for that structure. No property shall be eligible for exemption unless the appropriate building permits have been acquired, and the county assessor has verified that the rehabilitation, renovation or replacement indicated on the application has been completed and meets the requirements of this section. In determining the base value and the increased value resulting from the substantial rehabilitation, renovation or replacement the county assessor shall employ usual and customary methods of assessing real estate. Page 392 of 394 (e)Nothing in this section shall be construed to permit the county assessor to list upon the land book any reduced value due to the partial exemption provided herein subsection (d). (f)Where rehabilitation is achieved through demolition and replacement of an existing structure, the partial exemption provided in subsection (b) shall not apply when any structure demolished is a registered Virginia landmark or is determined by the department of historic resources to contribute to the significance of a registered historic district. (2)That this ordinance shall become effective immediately upon adoption. 3137:117758.1 Page 393 of 394 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA Meeting Date: October 28, 2020 Item Number: 20.A. Subject: Adjournment and Notice of Next Scheduled Meeting of the Board of Supervisors Board Action Requested: Summary of Information: Motion of adjournment to a Board of Supervisors meeting to be held on November 18, 2020 at 2:00 p.m. Attachments: None Preparer:Sara Hall, Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Approved By: Page 394 of 394