The URL can be used to link to this page

01-12-83 PacketCHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGE NDA MEETING DATE' ,'FRnuary 12; 1983 ITEM NUMBER: 1. A & B. SUBdECT: Election of Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Board of Supervisors COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION PREPARED BY; ATTACHMENTS: YES I'1 NO I~~ SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ,/ CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: January 12, 1983 ITEM NUMBER: 1.C. SUB4ECT: Set Meeting Dates and Times for Regular Meetings of Board of'Supervisors COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Last year the Board set 10:00 a.m. of the second and fourth Wednesdays of each month except for December, only the second Wednesday, for its regular meetings. This same schedule can be adopted or the Board can make changes. PREPARED ATTACHMENTS: YES [3 SIGNATURE: O~~UNTY ADMINISTRATOR CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF' SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: January 12, 1983 ' ITEM NUMBER: 1.D. SUBJECT: Adopt Robert's Rules of Order for Governing Organization and Parliamentary Procedure for Board of Supervisors Meetings COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION PREPARED BY;, ATTACHMENTS: YES [] NO '~ COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Co co co 0 ~0 0 0 0 ~. 0 0 m · ¢u 0 O0 I 0 0 0" i'D 03 0 0 Cb fD 0 r't' fl- U~ f~ 0 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 f'f i-'l' i...u f~ fD 0 Oo CHEStERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETINGDAIE' January 12, 1983 iTEM NUMBER: 4oao SUBJECT: Resolution Recognizing Sergeant Lawrence C. Hamner, Jr. Upon His Retirement COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Whereas, Sergeant Lawrence C. Hamner, Jr. retired from the Chesterfield County Police Department effective January 1,.1983; and Whereas, Sergeant Hamner provided over twenty-five years of quality service to the citizens of Chesterfield County; and Whereas, Chesterfield County and the Board of Supervisors will miss Sergeant Hamner's diligent service. Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved, that this Board publicly recognizes Sergeant Hamner and extends on behalf of its members and the citizens of Chesterfield County their appreciation for his many years of service to the County. And, Be It Further Resolved, that a copy of this Resolution be present- ed to Sergeant Hamner and that this Resolution be permanently recorded among the papers of this Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia. Sergeant Hamner will be present at the meeting and the framed resolution will be given to him at that time. PREPARED BY;~ Robert B. Galusha Personnel Director ATTACHMENTS: YES E] NO [] SIGNATURE: '~" COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF' SUPERVISORS AG E NDA January 12, 1983 MEETING DATE: ITEM NUMBER; 4.3. SUBdgCT: Resolution Recognizing Mrs. Marie Beach COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION WHEREAS, Mrs. Marie Beach, has served as a member ~of the Chesterfield County Community Services Board from January 1, 1977, to December 31, 1982; and WHEREAS, Mrs. Beach served as Chairman of the Chesterfield County Community Services Board from January 1, 1981, to December 31, 1982; and WHEREAS, Mrs. Beach has generously devoted many hours of her time in conscientious manner to developing and monitoring Mental Health, Mental Retardation and Substance Abuse programs in the County; and WHEREAS, Mrs. Beach has demonstrated a strong commitment to the provision of quality Mental Health, Mental Retardation and Substance Abuse services for the residents of Chesterfield County; and WHEREAS, Mrs. Beach has provided strong and insightful leadership to the members of the Community Services Board during a period of significant program development; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County hereby expresses its sincere appreciation to Mrs. Marie Beach for her loyal and dedicated service to the citizens of Chesterfield County. Mrs. Beach will be present at the meeting. ATTACHMENTS: YES SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADM I N I STRATOR ,/ CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: ~ SUBdECT: January 12, 1983 ITEM NUMBER; Recognizing the Chesterfield County Employee-of-the-Year for 1982. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: The Employee-of-the-Year will receive a $50 Savings Bond, a silverplated Revere bowl appropriately engraved, a framed copy of the Board resolution and a designated parking space at the Courthouse. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Departments were requested to select one candidate to represent the department for the Employee-of-the-Year Award. Selection criteria was performance on the Job during the calendar year 1982. Candidates were submitted to the Incentive Awards Committee, which in turn, selected the one candidate whose performance and individual contribution to the mission of the department set him or her above the others. This year there were ten candidates recommended: Fred W. Dolezal ............... Fire Department Deborah F. Lau ................ Planning Department Kimberly J. Joyner ............ Nursing Home Josie M. Robinson ............. Parks and Recreation ~aul J. Regan ................. Mental Health/Mental Retardation Rose M. Lynch ................. Treasurer Berryman L. Hicks ............. Environmental Engineering Louis W. Moore ................ Police Department John P. Price ................. Sheriff's Department Eloise B. Thweatt ............. General Services Ail candidates will be at the Board meeting to be recognized for their accomplishment. The Employee-of-the-Year will be announced for the first time at the Board meeting. ATTACHMENTS: YES r"l NO Er SIGNATURE:. PREPARED BY: ,~w.~----- R. B. Galusha Personnel Director COUNTY ADMI NISTRATOR THE CHESTERFIELD COUNTY EMPLOYEE-OF-THE-YEAR AWARD On June 30, 1976, Mr. Melvin W. Burnett, upon his retirement as Chester- field County Administrator, generously established a fund for the pur- pose of recognizing outstanding performance of County service by County e~ployees. That special employee who performs the duties and responsi- bilities of his or her position in a sustanined outstanding manner and whose work is continuously well above expectations shall be recognized accordingly and designated as the Chesterfield County Employee-of-the- Year. The candidates for the 1982 Chesterfield County Employee-of-the-Year are as follows: Fred W. Dolezal ............ Fire Department Berryman L. Hicks ........... Environmental Engineering Kimberly J. Joyner ........... Nursing Home Deborah F. Lau ............. Planning Department Rose M. Lynch ............. Treasurer's Office Louis W. Moore ............. Police Department John P. Price ............. Sheriff's Department Paul J. Regan ............. Mental Health and Mental Retardation Services Josie M. Robinson ........... Parks and Recreation De- partment Eloise B. Thweatt ........... General Services Depart- ment The Employee-of-the-Year for 1982 is FRED WESLEY DOLEZAL. Wesley will receive an engraved Revere Bowl, a $50.00 Savings Bond, a reserved park- ing space at the entrance of the Administration Building and a framed resolution, Signed by each member of the Board of Supervisors, recogniz- ing this occasion which reads: (RESOLUTION TO BE READ AT THIS POINT) Congratulations to each of you for being selected as a candidate for this most prestigious honor and a special congratulations to you, Wesley, for being named the 1982 Chesterfield County Employee-of-the- Year. CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: January 12, 1983 ITEM NUMBER: SUB~IECT: Public Hearing to Consider an Amendment to an Ordinance Relating to Parking in Spaces Reserved for the Handicapped COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION Pursuant to Section 46.1-181.4:1 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, the County has the authority to adopt an ordinance prohibiting a non-handicapped operator of a motor vehicle from parking in a space reserved for the handicapped.. The current ordinance provides for a fine of Five Dollars ($5.00) if voluntary payment is made to the County Treasurer within five (5) days of the violation and a Ten Dollar ($10.00) fine if payment is not made within that period. The amendment increases the fine in both situations to Twenty-Five Dollars ($25.00) in an effort to deter these violations. The City of Richmond currently charges $15.00 for illegally parking in a handicapped space. Mr. Daniel requested the ordinance and our Police Department has no objection to the proposed change. ATTACHMENTS: YES /NO ri Steven L. Micas County Attorney SIGNATURE: C~NTY ADMI NI STRATOR AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, 1978, AS AMENDED BY AMENDING SECTION 14.1-14 RELATING TO PARKING REGULATIONS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY AND INCREASING THE PENALTY FOR PARKING IN A SPACE RESERVED FOR THE HANDICAPPED BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County: 1. That Section 14.1-14 of the Code of the County of Chesterfield is amended and reenacted as follows: Sec. 14.1-14. Unlawful parking, generally. (b) It shall be unlawful for any person to park a vehicle on private property, including private parking lots open to the public and designated to accommodate more than fifty vehicles, in violation of the provisions of this subsection (b) and every person receiving written notice from a police officer, that he has committed any of the offenses herein listed, may waive his right to appear and be formally tried for the offense set forth in the notice. Such waiver shall be effective upon voluntary payment of five dollars (except that violations of subsection (b)(15) shall require voluntary payment in the amount of twenty-five dollars) to the county treasurer's office within five days after receipt of such notice or upon voluntarily placing five dollars (or twenty-five dollars if violation of subsection (b)(15)) in the reply mail envelope on which the notice of violation is printed and mailing it to the county treasurer's office so that it is postmarked within five days after receipt of such notice. Such person shall not be thereafter required to appear before the general district court for trial upon the charge set forth in such notice. Such offenses shall include parking a vehicle: (15) In a parking space reserved for the handicapped at privately owned shopping centers and business offices, except persons possessing and properly displaying a special vehicle parking permit issued by the division of motor vehicles pursuant to section 46.1-254.2 of the Code of Virginia; handicapped persons driving a motor vehicle displaying a state license plate or decal issued pursuant to section 46.1-104.1 of the Code of Virginia or a person transporting a handicapped person displaying such plate or decal; and disabled veterans driving a motor vehicle displaying special license plates issued pursuant to section 46.1-149.1 of the Code of Virginia or a person transporting a disabled veteran in a motor vehicle displaying such special license plates. (e) Any person who has received a notice pursuant to subsection (a) or (b) of this section, and fails to comply with subsections (a) through (d) of this section within five days shall be subject to the following fines, and, in addition, a summons or arrest warrant may be issued for such person pursuant to Code of Virginia, section 45.1-179.01: (1) Failure to comply with notice issued pursuant to subsection (a): Ten Dollars. (2) Failure to comply with notice issued pursuant to subsection (b): Ten Dollars, except that violations of subsection (b)(15) shall be punishable by a fine of twenty-five dollars. // ~.~ Take Notie DATB~ OF' II~LI~L~:AT~3N CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AG E NDA MEETING DATE SUBJECT: January 12, 1983 ITEM NUMBER; Request from Social Services to appropriate funds for the Fuel Assistance Program - $61,582 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION Applications for the regular Fuel Assistance Program terminated statewide on December 10, 1982, due to an increase in the number of households applying and the fact that the majority of the mon~ had been encumbered at that time. Currently there is an emergency program for fuel assistance allowing eligible families to receive a one-time payment of a maximum of $150 for fuel. Our agency has received an additional allotment of $61,582 to handle the regular program as well as the emergency component. This will be reimbursed to the County at 100%. Board Action Requested: Appropriate $61,582 in additional State revenue to the Fuel Assistance program. Budget Comments: Funding is 100% reimbursable and an appropriation of $61,582 in State funds will be necessary if approved by the Board. Prepared . ~.. Budget & Accounting ATTACHMENTS: YES r'l NO ~E~ED Robert~L. ~asden, Directo--~ Human Services SIGNATURE: ~'~C-OUNTY ADM I NI STRATOR CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AG E NDA MEETING DATE' January 12, 1983 ITEM NUMBER:, 7.B. SUBJECT: Request from Social Services to appropriate funds for Employment Services to ADC and Food Stamp Recipients. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION The Department of Social Services will initiate in January 1983 the mandatory Employment Services Program for recipients of the Aid to Dependent Children Program and Food Stamp Program. This requires specific activities to be performed by certain applicants and recipients such as individual job search, work experience, and training. In addition, the agency must interview and screen all mandatory registrants as well as reassessing the cases at various intervals. Employment counseling and supervision must be provided. The department has been allocated $27,940 from the State to run this program for the Aid to Dependent Children Program from January through June, 1983. The funds must be utilitized for staffing and must also take care of any training expenses, transportation and day care for the clients. This is 100% reimbursable with the exception of day care, transportation and other purchased services which requires 10% local match. The agency has in the current budget sufficient funds for the local match. The Food Stamp Program has been allocated $8,950 to be used for personnel in interviewing and screening work registrants. This is also 100% reimbursable. Board Action Requested: Appropriate $36,890 in additional state funding for employment services to ADC and Food Stamp Recipients and transfer $1,144 within the Social Services budget. ATTACHMENTS: YES E] NO [] SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMI NISTRATOR Boar~ of Supervisors 'Social Services Budget Requests January 12, 1983 Page 2 Budget Comments: The mandated employment services program will be generally 100% reimbursed by the State. An additional appropriation of $36,890 from the State is necessary and a transfer of $1,144 within the Social Services budget will be necessary if approved by the Board. Prepared by:~ ~- ~ Lane B. Ramsey, Direc~r Budget and Accounting CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AG E NDA MEETING DATE: mi january 12~ 1983 ITEM NUMBER: SUBJECT: Federal Job Training Partnership Act COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Congress recently passed the Job Training Partnership Act which replaces the current CETA Program which will expire September 30, 1983. .Our current consortium activities with Henrico and Hanover will continue at least through that time. The principal features of the new act are: 1. Funds flow through the State to local areas rather than direct from the Federal Department of Labor. 2. Governor has some options in designating Service Relivery Areas and funding levels within parameters contained in the new law. 3. Requires local governments to appoint Private Industry Councils with at least 51% representation from Business and Industry. 4. Program plans must be approved jointly by the local governments and the Private Industry Council. 5. Emphasis will be on training the disadvantaged in areas of need identified by the Private Industry Council. 6. Funding for our consortium under the new act for FY 1984 should be similar to funding in our current program year under CETA. PREPARED BY;, ATTACHMENTS: YES ~ NO [] SIGNATURE: w~M~U N TY ADMINISTRATOR Federal J6b Training Partner January 12, 1983 Page 2 p Act The Policy Committee for the Chesterfield-Henrico-Hanover Consortium has recommended that these three counties be designated as a Service Delivery Area by the Governor so that our current working arrangements and momentum can be continued under the new Act. Board Action Requested: Authorization to develop a consortium arrangement with the Counties of Henrico and Hanover under the new Act to include assessment of operating structures and staffing requirements and to develop recommendations for appointments to the Private Industry Council for the consortium by this Board. The attached evaluation letters from the U. S. Department of Labor on our Consortium operations over the past year indicateg that we have one of the very best operations in the country out of approximately 500 prime sponsors nationwide. U.S. Department of Labor BEG 0 8 198° Mr. Frank Faison County Manager Henrico CETA Consortium 4879 Finlay Street Richmond Virginia 23231 Dear Hr. Faison: At the end of Fiscal Year 1982, the Employment and Training Administration completed its annual review of Comprehensive Employment and Training Act (CETA) prime sponsors. The review covered all aspects of CETA operations including financial and administrative systems as well as participant services. When the results of this annual assessment are coupled with key participant outcome measures, certain prime sponsors stand out as having achieved noteworthy performance. I am pleased to announce that your Title IIB/C program has earned special recognition as a superior performing CETA operation. Please accept my congratulations an(] extend the same to your CETA staff for a job well done in serving the disadvantaged population of Henrico, Chesterfield, and Hanover Counties. Specifically, designations as superior performing prime sponsors were based on high assessment scores (your Title IIB/C program received 148 out of a possible 150 points) and exceeding the third quarter regional average for placements of 54 percent (your Title IIB/C program achieved a placement rate of 65 percent). It is heartening to note the success your program has attained in placing CETA clients during these difficult economic times. The new Job Training Partnership Act recognizes the continued need for training assistance for the disadvantaged. While there will be changes in the administrative structure and a beneficial increase in private sector involvement, I believe the accomplishments of programs such as yours have demonstrated the value of job training. Thank you for your efforts and those of your CETA staff in providing effective employment and training services. Sincerely, WILLIAM ~' HALTIGA~ Regional Administrator cc: Mr. Herbert T. Sink *-*U.S.'Department of Labor Employment and Training Administration P.O. Box 8796 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101 Reply to the Attention of: III-TG Mr. Frank Faison County Manager Henrico CETA Consortium Laburnum Square Office Park 4879 Finlay Street Richmond, Virginia 23231 Dear Mr. Faison: The Comprehensive Employment and Training Act (CETA) program is assessed annually to determine the status of prime sponsors for future funding and to identify problem areas. It has long been held that the assessment should go further and identify superior performance. Region III of the Employment and Training Administration has established a system for prime sponsor awards that uses the assessment process to determine outstanding achievements by prime sponsors. ,,,I am extremely pleased to announce that the Henrico Consortium CETA pro~ram ~as earned a superior performance award in the areas of Pro~ram Management ~nd Title VII operations. ,~,t is significant to note that the criteria ~or the awards were established by pr.%Me__pponsor representatives and ~eflect .,common agreement on what constitutes ~ood performance. The CETA program is all too often brought into the spotlight when something goes wrong..,~,~ is indeed a pleasure to reco~nize~ through this award~ the ~aluable contribution made ~ ~0~_P~Pg~ t~,YoU~, ~urisdiction and to say, ~hank you for a .~ob well done., I will shortly contact your CETA Director to arrange a suitable presentation. I sincerely hope you will be able to participate. Again, congratulations to you and your CETA staff for effectively meeting the employment and training needs of the disadvantaged population. Sincerely, WILLIAM J./~L~LT. IGAN ~ Regional A~minist rator U.S/Department of Labor Employnler/t and Tra!ning Adrrfinish'ation P.O. Box 8796 Philadelph a. PermsylvarurT 19101 Reply to the Attenlion of: TlI TGCA-3 May 25, 1982 Mr. Herbert T. Sink CETA Administrator Henrico-Chesterfteld-Hanover CETA Consortium Laburnum Square Office Park 4879 Finlay Street Richmond, Virginia 23231 ~'FISCAL · "' M(~MT SERV ,,,"J CHRON ./M OPNS *' GRANT Dear Mr. Sink: Each quarter, the Regional Office of the Employment and Training Administration performs an analysis of the quarterly reports of activities under the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act (CETA). The purpose of this activity is to review the level of performance which prime sponsors achieve in relation to the goals con- tained in their approved CETA grants and thus identify areas where corrective actions are needed. In addition, significant performance indicators are compiled from the reports in order to help evaluate overall program, effectiveness. Based upon a review of your reports for the second quarter of Fiscal Year 1982, we find the following: Title IIB/C We are pleas~, t° not~....ghat~.performance in this title remains ~9od with high rates ~f positive outcomes (~p__la_c_e..M~_n.~ ~_n__d~p_t_h_~e!_positive terminations) and low cost ratios ~cost per entered emp!~yment a~positive terminations) ' Y ETP ~erformance in Title IV is also good with all.gg~:~.:=~p~.enrollments and termina- ...tions be$~g met or exceeded. A positive termination rate of 77 percent is well ~bove your plan. Title VII As stated in your response to the first quarter analysis, enrollment levels in Title VII have shown improvement. As expected, however, the entered employment and positive termination rates remain low due to the startup problems discussed in previous correspondence. - 2 - We appreciate the corrective actions taken by your office in Title VII. However, in order to attain the performance levels for entered employment and positive terminations by the third quarter, diligent efforts must be made to assist the ongoing Title VII programs to achieve their objectives. The goals for the third quarter are: Positive Termination Rate - Entered Employment Rate - 69 percent 51 percent Please advise us by June 15, 1982, of the progress being made thus far to improve performance in the Private Sector Initiative Program. S in c~e~ly, ~ELDON J.ZBAKER Deputy Associate Regional Administrator for CETA Area Operations Office No. 3 ~', ~'U S .Q-epa~tment of Labo September 10, 1982 Mr. Frank Faison County Manager Henrico CETA Consortium Laburnum Square Office Park 4879 Fin]ay Street Richmond, Virginia 23231 Dear Mr. Faison: The purpose of this letter is to convey to you the final results of the Fiscal Year 1982 Annual Assessment of the Henrico-Chesterfield-Hanover CETA Consortium. The final ratings are based upon the prime sponsor's Third Quarter data sub- mission and upon the onsite reviews conducted by the assigned Federal Representa- tive. The possible ratings which may be awarded to each segment of the program (Titles II B/C, IV and VII) are Eli~_ible for Immediate Funding, Problems Identified or Serious Problems Identified. These ratings are briefly d~scribed in the attachment to this letter. ~ am ~leased to announce that the Henrico-Chesterfield-Hanover CETA Consortium received an Eli ible for Immediate Fundin rating for each se ment of the ass ment. It is further recognized m ~a~u u~lUL tlt~prime sDonsor s fi Tltles in each ~ oints for --- section, the Consortium was awarded 148 in Title II ~B~ and 148 in Title IV. ~his achievement is especially noteworth~when viewed in the light of the severe~ funding restrictions which have been imposed duri~ The following is a brief description by Title of the assessment results: Title II B/C he rime s onsor's fine erformance in Title II is reflected in the Third ~arter data. Although the Consortium is still experiencing some difficulty in its service to youth, the Third Quarter has evidenced a significant improvement in this area. Similarly, the Second Quarter deficiency in service to the Black/ non-Hispanic population has been corrected in the Third Quarter. indices were exceeded seriousl . This is evidenced b the fact that the rime rece____ived 68, out of a p__ossible 70mpoints for the section. Title IV-A The prime sponsor's Youth Employment and Training Program (YETP) activities have been implemented in accordance with the approved plan, and the Third Quarter evidenced an improvement in the percentage of white/non-Hispanic youth served, even though the figure is still slightly be]ow plan. - 2 - It is the key performance indicators, however, z_which verift~~rime's com- ~mendable effort in YETP: None of the indices were exceeded significantly w~ic~ _resulted in the receipt of 70 out of a possible 70 points for the section. Title VII Although the Henrico-Chesterfield-Hanover CETA Consortium received an Eligible for Im~nediate FundinR rating in Title VII, it is experiencing difficulty in this area. The Third Quarter statistics show some improvement over the Second Quarter, and it is expected that further gains will be made in the Fourth Quarter. However, a significant number of points were lost in the following numerical performance indicators: The Entered Employment Rate, the Indirect Placement Rate, the Cost per Entered Employment and the Cost per Indirect Placement. In addition, point reductions occurred in Recruitment and Selection and in Job Development and Transition. Our initial assessment letter dated June 30 1982 indicated that the so iu was functioning well ~d~mi~ nis~t~atiyel_, des ite the cutbacks in Fede ~olds and Mr Herber~ ~ --~-~.-----T---. ~ ~eder_a~_funds. ~or doin a fi ..... ~ ................. ~ .............. ~-~*~~!S~ ~t~f should be commen V . ~ ~ .ne job, ~heir achievements in ~ ~_ - ........................ ~de_~d ~servxn8 o~ recognition T~e difficul+~ ~_~t]_e~s. I~__a~_~V ~re especiall~ · ~¢~ endemic Eo Title VII are being-addressed the prime sponsor and-we are in receipt of a corrective action plan. Therefore, no response to this letter wil] be required. Whil: it is anticipated that Fiscal Year 1983 will be a transition year under the current system, basic requirements and definitive instructions must await the outcome of the legislative process. In the interim, we must plan and work with whatever information is presently available. We are looking forward to a success- ful year in 1983. Sincerely, JAMES L. WHITSETT Grant Officer Attachment U~S. D'dparftnent of Labu, Employment and Training Administration PO Box 8796 Philadelphia. Pennsylvania 1910t I'~eply 1() [ho Attention uh III TGCA-3 Mr. Frank Faison County Manager Henrico CETA Consortium Laburnum Square Office Park 4879 Finlay Street Richmond, Virginia 23231 DIST:"~¢ '~ ~/IGMT SE~V ""~HRON '~ ~'~GM OPNS ,'~RANT Dear Mr. Faison: The U. S. Department of Labor conduct8 an assessment of each prime sponsor every fiscal year. As you know, the Fiscal Year 1982 Assessment has begun and your Federal Representative's initial onsite review was conducted on June 9-11, 1982. The purpose of this letter is to convey the results of that review: ..Key Program Management Areas No major problems were discerned during the Fiscal Year 1981 Assessment and, to date, that finding appears to hold true for Fiscal Year 1982. ~ ~ ~ ma~~ provide an efficient, comprehensive operation: the IMU, although reduced in staff~ ~it-~rrs' ~-~ients as well as ~rformin~ ~verification of ~ fiscal~~ ~ im~d wit~ t--~e recent conversion to the county's automated accounti~ ~ of the Man~er Planning. Council meets all re~uirements; the procedures for selecting and monitorin~subrec!~ients conform to ap~plicable ........ _ ~here is ~n es~bl~'~ ~O ~i~'~ ............................................. regulations and Title II B/C The prime sponsor has experienced some difficulty in servicing the Consortium's significant segments: The percentage of youth served in actuality exceeds the planned figure by a variance of 129 percent; and the Black/non-Hispanic population was underserved by a variance from plan of -20 percent. These variances are signi- Q ficant and, if not corrected, could affect the Consortium's final assessment score. The prime sponsor's assessment procedures (including Employability Development Plans) and Job Development and Transition Services are satisfactory~ No major discrepancies have been discerned to date. The Classroom Training and Work Experienc~e components have been implemented according to plan. Adequate controls exist to insure that evaluations are regularly conducted and the prime monitors the number of participants, their progress, costs, and training sites on a monthly basis. -2- Title IV The prime sponsor's Youth Employment and Training Program (YETP) activities have ~been implemented in accordance with the approved plan. The negative Second Quarter ~variance in White/non-Hispanic youth served is not as significant as it may seem because of the relatively small universe from which the numbers are culled. How- ever, this does not mean that improvement is neither expected nor warranted. Youth are assessed by a counselor during several interview sessions subsequent to the initial intake interview. During these sessions, the youth are tested for interest and aptitude, given a chance at occupational exploration, and counseled on goals and the necessary requirements for obtaining and maintaining a Job. An Employability Development Plan (EDP) is begun and updated during these sessions. Title VII Analysis of Second Quarter data indicates that the prime sponsor is experiencing difficulties in its Title VII program. As a result of Second Quarter statistics, fthe Consortium lost a significant number of points in the following numerical ~Performance Indicators: Entered Employment Rate, Indirect Placement Rate, and /Private Sector Placements. Additional point reductions occurred in Recruitment k, and Selection and in Job Development and Transition. }n~S,rmma~ion: The p~ ~ponso[~ p__ro~_ams and procedures appear to be in order ana are ~unctionin~ in accordance with a i-i~C~i -~-~i ~ ...................... PP ..... ~.reg~lations and directives. The Key Program Manasement Sections of the Assessment indicai'e~that the Consortium~ ~ontinues to function we_l.! a_d~jnistrativel~ despite the recent reduction in Federal (~Bds, and~ip~therefore,.to ~ l-.o~gn-d-~ ......... The prime's di[fi'cu~ties in II B, IV, and VII, however, need to be addressed further. It is understood thaK the problems have been recognized and that corrective actions have been instituted.'~;,~ Thus, hopefully, the II B deficiency in service to the C°ns°rtium's'Black'/nongHispanic population and the IV A deficiency in service to White/non-Hispanic youth, should be corrected by the end of the Third Quarter. Therefore, thes~,~eas'.,.are not presently considered to be major concerns and should not affect Yoqr °vera~i assessment rating. It is the Job Placement area which generates't~,~his office's concern. The prime/PIC should look at the Recruitment, Selection', and.~r~i~ing components in Title VIii in order to ascertain the most fappropriate models for your Jurisdiction. Further, the prime has allotted 18 percent jof its total Title VII allocation for Employment Generating Services although cur- ~rent regulations allow primes to designate up to 30 percent in this area. It is /therefore suggested that consideration be given to an expansion in Employment ~Generating Services. .~' Please forward a Title VII corrective action plan to this office by July 30, 1982. Questions should be forwarded to your Federal Representative. / Sincerely,/..~ /.'//JAMES L. W~ITSETT ~ Director, Office of CETA Programs TO: COUNTY OF HENRICO VIRGINIA INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM County Manager SUBSECT- JLARC Review of CETA FROM:. CETA Administrator DATE: .... May 7, 1982 About a month ago I sent a memo to you regarding a Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission (JLARC) Staff Study which looked at the performance and management of CETA programs by the VEC/Balance of State (BOS). At that time I stated that I had recommended that the staff look at several Prime Sponsors to get an idea of how programs are run in metropolitan/urban areas. During the period since the April 6, 1982 JLARC meeting, the Commission staff visited all 10 local Prime Sponsors in Virginia and compiled an overview. The results of this effort were briefed to a sub-committ,ee of the JLARC on May 4, 1982. Although the staff made clear that a comparison between BOS and local Prime Sponsors could not be drawn from the "quick look" they had done, the members were aware that there were significant differences. Most of the discussion centered around ~he attached table showing performance indicators for Title IIB, adult programs only. At the end of the briefing, the sub-con~nittee mer~bers asked some questions of the Prime Sponsor Directors present (there were six of us). Most important, I think, is that this meeting ended on a much more positive note than the first one. The members have a better understanding of CETA and of the impact thmt local conditions can have on the programs. HTS/mm ~H~erbert T. Sink CC: Deputy County Manager for Human Services 18 U.S. Department of Labor Employment and Training Administration P.O. Box 8796 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101 Reply to the Attention of: 'M~ 16 1982 Mr. Herbert T. Sink CETA Administrator Henrico-Chesterfield-Hanover CETA Consortium Laburnum Square Office Park 4879 Finlay Street Richmoni~.r inia 23231 Dear M~,.,-~$ink: brief note of congratulations about the very high entered employment ,rate (61 percent) for Title IIB/C you recorded for the first quarter 9f Fiscal Year 1982. ,,,,It was one of the highest in the Re~ion~ and ,~ontributed significantly to the Re~ion itself reaching an all-time high for Title IIB/C. ago it was 39 percent. T__his year our rate averaged 52 percent; a year Sincerely, WILLIAM J. HALTIGAN Regional Administrator DISTRIBUTION TO: ~/~' 5 .... ~_e_r vice Cen. I PPY Filc U.S. Department of Labor Employmenl and Training Administration P.O. Box 8796 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101 Reply to the Attontion of: TTI TGCA-3 June 2, 1982 Mr. Herbert T. Sink CETA Administrator Henrico-Chesterfield-Hanover CETA Consortium Laburnum Square Office Park 4879 Finlay Street Richmond, Virginia 23231 Dear Mr. Sink: On May 27, 1982, I visited the Henrico Consortium for the purpose of reviewing the planning and design activities for this year's Summer Youth Employment Pro- gram (SYEP). The areas reviewed were the following: 1. Worksite Agreement and Worksite Development 2. Time, Attendance and Check Payment Systems 3. Eligibility Determination Process 4. Worksite Supervisor Orientation 5. Program Information for Participants 6. Labor Market Orientation for Participants 7. Prime Sponsor Monitoring System ~s the result of my review, I found all systems to be adequately prepared for t_he SYEP,. and in conformance with the SYEP monitoring guide. The efforts of you and your staff in making careful, preparation for the SYEP are commendable. During the summer, reviews of the SYEP onsite operations will be conducted by a summer intern. You will be contacted in advance of those visits and given more information. I wish you success in this year's Summer Program. Sincerely, FRANCIS R. ZINN~ Federal Representative DIST: '~ - FIS6AL !PIC MG~M~ERV -,~CHRON - ~ gRGM OPNS ~. GtS._ANT -- U.S. Department of Labor Emrqoyn'um ~r~,¢ Tr,dning ,"",dmirdstration Box 8?90 iadolphia Ponr],.:ylvnnia 19101 [leply to the Attention ol: III-TGCA-3 MONITORING REPORT Henrico-Chesterfield Prime Sponsor Hanover Consortium Date oF Visit 7/21 -22/82 Visit Number 1 Serious Problems IdentiFied Yes Hunitor Mary Brinkman DaLe Report Prepared 7/23/82 No X II. Scope off Review Follow-up Review Yes A. Pre-operational. Review: No X Number oF Files reviewed For eitgibi!it,/ On-Site Review: Number oF WorksiLes Visi%ed Number of Supervisors InLerv[ewed 8 12 Number oF ParLieipanLs Interviewed 19 Finding~ Reviewed monitoring implementation. It is scheduled to begin this week by P/S and subrecipient staff. Next week IMU will monitor worksites. Reviewed 8 worksites~__4 in Chesterfield Co. and 4 in Henrico Co. No problems were found at an~_ of the worksites. III. Problems IdentiFied None IV. Recommendations A. Corrective AcLion Needed; including Lime frame for compteLion. None needed B. Follow-up Report N/& £xiL Interview Date 7-22-82 PS/Worksite Staff: Herbert Sink, CETA Director VI. Exemplary Findings VII. Summary of Findings Discussed ,,Informed Mr. Sink that the ~r_o~.._a_p_p~.ared to be running well according to the worksites I reviewed. U.S. Department of Labor August 3, 1982 Mr. Herbert T. Sink CETA Administrator Henrico-Chesterfield-Hanover CETA Consortium Laburnum Square Office Park 4879 Finlay Street Richmond, Virginia 23231 Employment and Training Administration P.O. Box 8796 Philadelphia. Pennsylvania 19101 Reply to the Attention of: III-TGCA-3 Dear Mr. Sink: As you are aware, the purpose of my recent visit to the Henrico-Chesterfield- Hanover CETA Consortium was to continue with the Annual Assessment and to monitor the operational phase of the Summer Youth Employment Program. This latter aspect was conducted in conjunction with the assigned Department of Labor Summer Monitor, Mary Brinkman. The Fiscal Year 1982 Assessment has been virtually completed and, with the exception of the problems we discussed in Title VII, it appears that your Consortium has done well. A detailed delineation of my findings will be forthcoming in a final Assessment letter, however, %ou will be pleased to ,~now that I have recommended ~our Consortium for performa~'ce awards in Titles II and IV. ,Summer monitorin~ was accomplished thro~: visits to several worksites and _interviews with supervisors-'and participants ,Neither I nor Ms. Brinkman found any serious discrepancies, theref~ it can be concluded that your Summer Youth Employment Program is operationally in $ood shape. You and ~our staff are to be commended. - - Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (2]5) 596-6247. Sincerely, Federal Representative U.S. Department of Labor Emptoyrr~cmt and Training AdFninistration PO. Box 8796 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19!0I Reply to the Attention o!: I ~ I-TGCA-5 HONITORING REPORT Prime Sponsor Henrico-Chesf_.erFie]d- Hanover Consortium Date of Visit Aug 4 & 5, 1982 Visit Number Serious Problems Identified Yes Noni[or Mary Rrinkman DaLe Report Prepared 6UqUSt 6, 1982 No X II. llI. Scope of Review Follow-up Review A. Yes No X ..... Pre-opera[ional Review: Number of files reviewed for eligibi].ity On-Site Review: Number of VorksiLes Visited Number of Supervisors Interviewed Number of Participants Interviewed 7 la Finding~ RevJ~;wed monitoril~g reports corr~pleted by l-ICtt staFF. They were in order. Reviewed 7 ~orksi[es (a Few From each oF U~e ~ count_ies 5. n the consor[Sum) ~p problems ~erc idenLifiied counties is o crated ' · " o~arr seem ~o nave excelIen[ rap~g~[ ~Lh Problems IdenLiried None IV. Recommendations A. Corrective Action Needed; including time Frame for eompleLion. None needed Follow-up Report N/^ Exit Interview Date 8/5/82 Met with Herbert Sink to discuss my worksite visiLs. PS/Worksite Staff: VI. Exemplary Findings The overall HCH SYEP can be considered exemplary. It is operated without even t_he smallest of problems., '" .HCH includes many handicapped youth in their_~yEP, providinq a qoo~ work ~experience to those..persons who are frequently overlooked by employment-and ~raininq proqrams~, VII. Summary oF Findings Discussed N/A U.S. Department of Labor Employment and Training Administration PO. Box 8796 Philadelphia, Pennsylwmia 19t 01 Reply to the Attention of: TTT December 11, 1981 Mr. Herbert T. Sink CETAk~ministrator Henrico-Chesterfield-Hanover CETA Consortium Laburnum Square Office Park 4879 Finlay Street Richmond, Virginia 23231 Each quarter, the Regional Office of the l~plo~t and Training ~fm~inistraticn performs an analysis of the q~a~rly reports of activities under the Cc~prehen- sive Employment and Training Act (CETA). The purpose of this analysis is to review the level of performance which prime spc~ors achieve in relatic~ to the goals contained in their approved CETA grants and thus identify areas where corrective actions are needed. The re~orts reflect the fact that the HenricoConsortil~n continues to.~erform 'well in meeting the goals for enrolln~_nt, termination and expenditure~ ?~ appreciate your continued efforts in this area. The only area where significant variance frcmplan in the fourth quarter of Fiscal Year 1981 was in Title VII,PSIP, where the entered employment rate was 37 percent versus a planned level of 60 percent. This matter was discussed withyouby telephone and whilewewere unable to arrive at any specific causes or solutions, it was agreed that you woutd investi- gate to determine the nature of the problem and report your findings to us. Please advise us by December 31, 1981, of your plans to correct this situation. i~]eputy Associate t%egional Af~linistrator for CETA Area Operations Office No. 3 DISTRIBU'T!ON TO: ~ Accounting ,~PPY Audit PIC ""!MU/MIS Grant File · -" Sbvdcc Con."~Chron '"' Other ,','~..~ TO: COUNTY OF HENRICO VIRGINIA INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM County Manager SUB3ECT. Consortium Awards FROM: CETA Administrator DATE: January 5, 1982 This is a follow-up to my memo to you on this subject dated December 31, 1981 (copy attached). The letter Addressed to you announcing the award did not give any statistics on t~ proq~_am overall. .Since then I. have learned the following which I believe add meaning to the""~ard. j,Of the 67 prime sponsorsl only 15 will r~eceive..,., an award and of these 1_5, only ..~our will receive two-awards. ..~Of the 11 prime sponsors in Virginia,_ we are the only prime sponsor to get a _combined award~, and one other prime will receive a single award. ~ink HTS/mm Attachment cc: Deputy County Manager for Human Resources CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: SUBJECT: January 12, 1983 ITEM NUMBER: Renewal of Property, Casualty and Liability Insurance Coverage for County and School System COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION In January, 1982 property, casualty and liability coverage was consolidated for County and Schools through Marsh & McLennan. Chesterfield saved approx- imately $196,000 the first year of consolidation through combined coverage, elimination of duplication and increased deductibles. It is now time to renew this coverage and very favorable rates have been nego- tiated with Marsh & McLennan. Total annual cost for the renewal will increase from $363,074 to $382,101 or 5.2%. The County had an excellent loss control record during the year and the increase is due primarily to the following: Increase in property values; Addition of Vehicle Maintenance Facility and fire stations; Addition to several school facilities; Additional water tanks and pump station; and Improved coverage in the program. The very favorable renewal rates can be attributed to an excellent loss control record, and the additional fire protection provided by two new fire stations. CONTINUED ATTACHMENTS: YES [] NO ~ PREPARED By; ~/~"'~ ~-- Buddy Pittman Risk Manager SIGNATURE:, COUNTY ADM I N! STRATOR Renewal of Property, Casualty and Liability Insurance Coverage for County and School System January 12, 1983 Page 2 In order to improve the planning process in future years, the staff recommends changing the renewal date from January to July of each year to coincide with the budget and fiscal year. Permission is requested to: Renew property, casualty and liability coverage with Marsh & McLennan. Extend the coverage period to 18 months this time only, to allow future renewals to coincide with the fiscal year. No additional funding will be required for the renewal or the extension as payments are made on a quarterly basis. · Ramsey, ~rect'or of Budget and Accounting CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA January 12, 1983 MEETING DATE: ITEM NUMBER; 10. SUBJECT: Request for Board Approval of Financing for Civil Air Patrol Headquarters B uil din g COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION On March 25, 1981, Civil Air Patrol, Inc. and the County entered into a 150 year lease of a 2.08 acre parcel at the Chesterfield Airport adjacent to the fuel farm. The lease provides that the tenant, the C.A.P. can assign the lease and borrow money secured by the lease, but that County approval must first be obtained. The C.A.P. is now seeking financing for additional facilities to include expansion of the headquarters and administrative office facility, (see attached initial plans that are now being reviewed by the Planning Department), and the lender has requested that the Board of Supervisors consider the following actions: 1. Approval by the Board of an assignment of the lease by the C.A.P. to the lender; and 2. Approval by the Board of the proposed financing. The C.A.P. intends to borrow approximately $55,000 from the Bank of Virginia to finance the new headquarters facility and the assignment of the lease will permit the C.A.P. to sign a deed of trust for the lease as security for the loan. ATTACHMENTS: YES I~ NO I-I PREPARED Steven L. Micas County Attorney SIGNATURE COUN/ TY ADM I NI STRATOR V~H~44~ 0 i FI,L[ A ~ PIINI,S TFI,R'TI~ ~ 0 ~r~_ ,t CUCKLF'~ ~OJ ~ IB.O' OFFICE 1~ ¢LA35 ROOM~ CUCKLER 80'x 80' H~NC~EIR T'I£ DOWN 270' ~1.85 Ac~s SCALE 40TO/ PI~ELIHINARY AS NOTED ~k/S: _.i. S1¥£ PLAN VIRG,.NIA WI.~G · HEADQ~JART£F~S · CHESTERFIELD COUk/TY A~I-RpO/?T, ,3'OB NC, 476~ i~LE ~0. I CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE : January 12, 1983 ITEM NUMBER: ,SUBJECT: Report on Fire Prevention Code 11. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION See Attached Information. There will be a brief presentation at this time for informational purposes and for your review. This item will be placed on the agenda for January 26, 1983 at which time the Board will be requested to set a date for a public hearing. PREPARED BY;, ATTACHMENTS: YES I~1 NO [] SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADM I NI STRATOR CHESTERFIELD COUNTY CHESTERFIELD , VIRGINIA 2~,832 MEMO TO FROM DATE SUBJECT Dennis C. Turlington, Fire Marshal 12-29-82 Update of County Fire Prevention Code In an effort to stay abreast of the progressive changes in our growing County and to continue to improve fire protection, we feel it is timely to update our present fire prevention code. During the process of doing so we would like to transition to the model fire prevention code published by BOCA (Building Officials and Code Administrators). We are currently using the model fire prevention code published by the American Insurance Association (AIA); their 1970 edition. We adopted this code in 1974. When the first fire prevention code was adopted in 1967 and also when the present code was revised in 1974 the AIA model fire prevention code was the one being used by most jurisdictions. Now the majority of localities in Virginia who are either adopting or revising their code are going with the model fire prevention code by BOCA. The American Insurance Association published their last model fire prevention code in 1978. Some of the reasons we feel it is advantageous to adopt the BOCA Fi re Prevention Code are outlined below: So that the fire prevention code used in Chesterfield will be more compatible with the Uniform Statewide Building Code which is made up of codes published by BOCA and which was adopted by the State, September 1, 1973. It is written to avoid conflicts with the building code requirements; it has been written to coordinate with the Uniform Statewide Building Code. 3. It deals more with the maintenance of the building than the AIA code does. e The organization of the contents and references makes it easier to find and understand information, therefore al lowing better enforce- ment. Mr. Richard L. Hedrick, County Administrator 12-29-82 Page 2 SUBJECT: Update of County Fire Prevention Code 5. Reference standards in the appendix of BOCA are more current. 6. Richmond, Henrico and Petersburg, as well as, many other jurisdictions around the State have adopted the BOCA Fire Prevention Code. Training sessions provided by the State and the Virginia Fire Prevention Association use the BOCA Fire Prevention Code as their text or reference. The Virginia State Fire Services Commission has recommended that localities adopt the BOCA Code for both uniformity and so that adjoining localities can discuss code interpretations. lO. It reflects the latest state of the ar.t concerning fire/life safety; includes fire safety items identified over the past 10 years. The contents of the BOCA Fire Prevention Code are basically the same as the AIA with regards to authority and requirements imposed on the business community. ll. Regardless of the code being used its impact on the business community is directly proportional to the manner of enforcement. At the outset of our review process of the BOCA Fire Prevention Code, with consideration for adoption, we felt it was important to solicit input from both the business community as well as the general public. With this thought in mind we established a Fire Prevention Code Review Committee to assist us in this process. The membership of this committee is as follows: J. W. "Bill" Daniels, Jr. P re s i den t The Jackson Company Edward B. Douberly, Jr. Fire Protection Engineer VEPCO Billy H. Johnson G. H. Johnson & Associates, Inc. Independent Insurance Adjusters Jay B. Lafler District Manager Cloverleaf Mall John A. Gorman Associate Administrator Johnston-Willis Hospital Thomas E. Harris Chief Investigator - Security Dept. Safeway Stores, Inc. Richmond Division Office Robert S. Hodder Chief Building Official A. T. "Al" Norton Security and Safety Sears - Cloverleaf Mall T. E. "Tuck" Perkins Executive Vice-President Commonwealth Propane Ken Quigley Director of Risk Management Hechinger Company, Landover, MD Mr. Riwhard L. Hedrick County Administrator 12-29-82 ' Page 3 SUBJECT: Update of County Fire Prevention Code Thomas Q. Reynolds Safety and Fire Protection Supervisor E. I. DuPont Denemours & Company Spruance Textile Fibers Plant Dale Rogers Store Manager Hechinger Company V. C. Sutton Assistant Plant Superintendent Texaco Terminal, Chesterfield G. Warren Vaughan Architect In order to collectively discuss the code and associated amendments we held two meetings with the Committee. Prior to, during and after the meetings they had the opportunity to review the code and the proposed amendments to it. With feedback generated by the committee we finalized the proposed amendments. The fire prevention code package was then submitted to the County Attorney's Office for review and drafting of a proposed ordinance to adopt the BOCA Fire Prevention Code as the County Fire Prevention Code. bb cc: Chief Robert L. Eanes AN ORDINANCE TO ~4END THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, 1978, AS AMENDED, BY REPEALING CHAPTER 9, AND BY ADDING CHAPTER 9.1 CONTAINING SECTIONS 9.1-1 THROUGH 9.1-9 RELATING TO FIRE PREVENTION AND PROTECTION AND PROVIDING FOR A PENALTY BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County: (1) That Chapter 9 of the the Code of the County of Chesterfield, 1978, as amended, is repealed. (2) That the Code of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia, 1978, as amended, is amended by adding Chapter 9.1, Sections 9.1-1 through 9.1-9 as follows: CHAPTER 9.1 FIRE PROTECTION Sec. 9.1-1 Fire Prevention Code Adopted. There is hereby adopted by the board of supervisors for the purpose of prescribing regulations covering conditions hazardous to life and property from fire or explosion, that certain code known as The BOCA Basic Fire Prevention Code, 1981 Edition, save and except such portions as are hereinafter deleted, modified or amended. Not less than three copies have been and are now filed in the office of the county administrator. The BOCA Basic Fire Prevention Code, 1981 Edition, as hereinafter modified and amended, is hereby adopted and incorporated as fully as if set out at length herein, and from the date on which this chapter shall take effect, the provisions thereof shall be controlling within the limits of the county. Sec. 9.1-2 Definitions. (a) Wherever the words "name of jurisdiction" are used, it shall be held to mean Chesterfield County, Virginia. (b) Wherever the term "fire official" is used, it shall be held to mean the chief of the Fire Department of Chesterfield County, Virginia or his duly authorized representative. (c) Wherever the term "legal counsel of the jurisdiction" is used, it shall be held to mean the county attorney for Chesterfield County, Virginia. Sec. 9.1-3 Amendments. The'BOCA Basic Fire Prevention Code, 1981 Edition is hereby amended and changed in the following respects: (a) Article 1 is hereby amended by adding the following sections: Sec. F-101.6. Plans Review and Certificate of Occupancy. It shall be the responsibility of the fire official to assist the County building inspector in the review of construc- tion plans for compliance with the fire protection provisions of the Uniform Statewide Building Code for all structures and/or facilities, except detached one and two family dwellings, prior to the issuance of a building permit. Furthermore, the fire official shall assist the County building inspector in performing pre-occupancy inspections of new structures and/or facilities prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. Sec. F-101.7. Fire Hydrants. During the site and/or construction plans review process for new construction, or alteration thereof or change in use as originally permitted of any building or structure, the fire official shall have the authority to require the installation of fire hydrants as he deems necessary to have water available for fire fighting purposes. The need for such fire hydrants will be determined by the use, and size of the s~ructure involved and the availability of water in the area of the property. The number of fire hydrants, their placement and the desired fire flow shall be determined by regulations established from nationally recognized standards. Sec. F-102.1.1. Inspection by Others. The fire official may designate such other persons as he deems necessary, to make fire safety inspections. Such persons shall use this Code as the basis for such inspections. Sec. F-102.2.3. Impersonations. It shall be unlawful for any unauthorized person to use a badge, uniform or any other credentials so as to gain access to any building, structure, vehicle or premises or to otherwise falsely identify himself as the fire official or his designated representative. Sec. F-102.8. Authority to Take Photographs. The fire official or his duly authorized representative is authorized to make such sketches and take such photographs as he may find necessary to document conditions observed that are apparent or actual violations of the provisions of this code~ Subsequent to a fire, explosion, or other emergency, such photographs may be taken as are necessary to adequately depict the conditions for the purpose of investigation. No person shall interfere with, refuse, or obstruct such sketching or photograph making. Sec. F-105.4.1. Exception. If the observed violation is of such a nature as to present an imminent or severe fire or life safety hazard, a summons may be issued, at the discretion of the fire official, in lieu of a notice of violation. Sec. F-108.0. Notification of Fire Official. Sec F-108.1 General. In any building, structure or premise subject to inspection under any provision of this code, when a fire or evidence of there having been a fire is discovered, even though it has apparently been extinguished, it shall immediately be reported to the fire official or his designee. This shall be the duty of the owner, manager or person in control of such building, structure or premise at the time of discovery. This requirement shall not be construed to forbid the owner, manager or person in control of said property from using all diligence necessary to extinguish such fire prior to the arrival of the fire department. (b) Article 1 is hereby amended by deleting Sections F-104.1, F-104.2 and F-105.5.1 in their entirety. (c) Article 1 is hereby amended by amending Sections ~ F-102.1, F-103.1, F-103.2, F-105.3.2 and F-105.5 to read respec- ~ tively, as follows: -2- Sec. F-102.1 Enforcement Officer. It shall be the duty and responsibility of the chief of the fire department or his duty authorized representative to enforce the provisions of the fire prevention code as herein set forth.' The designated enforcement officer of this code is herein referred to as the "fire official". Sec. F-i03.1. General. It shall be unlawful to engage in any activity involving the handling, storage or use of hazardous substances, materials or devices; or to maintain, store or handle materials; to conduct processes which produce conditions hazardous to life or property without first obtaining a permit for each activity from the fire official. Sec. F-103.2. Permits Required. Permits are required for the various uses and activities as provided in Article 27 and 28 of this code. Permits shall at all times be kept on the premises designated therein and shall at all times be subject to inspection by the fire official. Sec. F-105.3.2. Unlawful Continuance. Any person who shall refuse to leave, interfere with the evacuation of other occupants, or continue operation after having been given an evacuation order or order to cease operation except such work as he is directed to perform to remove a violation or unsafe condition, shall be in violation of this section and subject to the penalties as set forth in Section 9.1-7, Code of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia, 1978, as amended. Sec. F-105.5. Failure to Correct Violations. If the notice of violation is not complied with within the time specified by the fire official, the fire official may issue a sun%m, ons for said violation or any offenses against the code. · Further, the fire official shall request the county attorney to institute the appropriate legal proceedings to restrain, correct or abate such violation or to require removal or termination of the unlawful use of the building or structure in violation of the provisions of this code or of any order or direction made pursuant thereto. (d) Article 2 is hereby amended by adding the following definitions to Section F-201.0: Fire Lanes: An area designated by clearly visible signs and/or markings in which parking shall be prohibited, whether on public or private property, to ensure ready access for and to fire fighting equipment and facilities. Occupant: Any person physically located or situated in or :~ on any property, structure or vehicle irrespective of the length of time or the reason for such occupancy. Overcrowding: Exceeding the maximum occupancy load of any occupancy as described by this Code or the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code; or the arrangement of occupants in such a manner as to block any means of egress. (e) Article 3 is hereby amended by adding the following sections: Sec. F-301.7. Endanqering Other Property. No person shall kindle or authorize to be kindled nor maintain any permitted fire in such a manner that it will endanger the property of another. Sec. F-303.1.1. Sweating Joints. Any person using a torch or other flame-producing device for sweating pipe joints in any building or structure shall have available in the immediate vicinity where the sweating is done one approved fire extinguisher or water hose connected to a.water supply. Combustible material in the close proximity of the work shall be protected against ignition by shielding, wetting, or other approved means. In all cases, the person performing the work shall remain in the vicinity of the sweating operation for one-half (1/2) hour after the torch or flame producing device has been used. Sec. F-306.2. Storage or'Display in Roofed-Over Malls. Combustible goods, merchandise, decorations or vehicles may be displayed or placed in the common areas of a roofed-over mall only if such display or placement is in compliance with r'egula- tions established by the fire official. It shall be the respon- sibility of the owner, manager or his designated representative to notify the fire official prior to such usage of the roofed-over mall. Sec. F-311.3. Signs and Markings.. Signs and markings to delineate fire lanes as designated by !ithe fire official shall be provided and installed by the owner or 'his agent, of the property involved. Sec. F-311.4. Illegal Use. !. It shall be unlawful for any person to park or leave an unattended vehicle in or to otherwise obstruct such designated and marked areas. 2. It shall be unlawful for any person to place, locate any equipment, materials, or any other object in or otherwise obstruct such designated and marked areas. 3. Penalty for violation of this Section shall be the same ~'as outlined for other parking violations in the Chesterfield County Code. Sec. E-313.0. Cooking Devices. Sec. F-313.1. General. No charcoal cooker, brazier, hibachi or grill or any gasoline or other flammable liquid or liquefied petroleum gas fired stove or similar device, except gas fired ranges designed for indoor use, shall be ignited or used within or on the balcony or covered patio of any residential buildings, except detached one and two family dwellings, or similar occupancy unless more ilthan eight feet from said structures. The management shall ?notify their tenants in writing of this code requirement at the time the tenant initially occupies the apartment and from time to time thereafter as may be necessary to ensure compliance. Sec. F-314.0. Sales of Equipment. Sec. F-314.1. General. It shall be unlawful for any person, directly or through an agent, to sell, or offer for sale fire extinguishers, fire extinguishing systems, local fire alarm systems and fire detection devices or systems in the County without being "LISTED" by Factory Mutual Laboratory, Underwriters' Laboratories, Inc. or any other testing laboratory approved by the fire official. -4- Sec. F-315.0. Storage, Park or Repair. Sec. F-315.1. General. It shall be unlawful to store, park or repair any vehicle, tool or equipment that has a fuel tank that contains a flammable or combustible liquid or liquefied petroleum gas as a source of fuel within or on any residential building or structure, or part thereof, unless such building or structure is built for the purpose of such storage, parking or repairing as provided above in accordance with and in compliance with all requirements of the Uniform Statewide Building Code and this code. This Section shall not apply to detached one and two family dwellings unless such storage, parking or repairing is conducted asa business. Such businesses shall then comply with all applicable provisions of the Building Code and the Chesterfield County Code. Sec. F-316.0. Fire/Smoke Dampers. Sec. F-316.1. General. Ail required fire and/or smoke dampers, including all hardware or equipment necessary for the proper operation thereof, shall be maintained in proper working order. The use of any unapproved hold open device(s) is prohibited. Sec. F-317.0. Fire/Separation Walls. Sec. F-317.1. General. Ail fire walls and/or fire separation walls shall be maintained to the integrity and fire resistance rating required for the use and occupancy of the building or structure involved. (f) Article 3 is hereby amended by deleting Sections F-301.4 and F-311.2 in their entirety. (g) Article 3 is hereby amended by amending Sections F-301.0, F-301.1, F-301.2, F-301.3, F-301.5, F-301.6, F-303.0, and F-311.1 to read, respectively, as follows: Sec. F-301.0. Outdoor Fires. Sec. F-301.1. General. The provisions of this section pertain to outdoor fires permitted by the State Air Pollution Control Board and Chapter 10, Article IV of the Code of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia, 1978, as amended. Sec. F-301.2. Permitted Fires. Ail outdoor fires permitted by the State Air Pollution Control Board and Chapter 10, Article IV of the Code of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia, 1978, as amended are deemed to be permitted fires as that term is used herein. Sec. F-301.3. Location Restricted. No person shall kindle nor authorize to be kindled any permitted fire unless the fire is not less than fifty (50) feet from any structure and adequate provision is made to prevent the fire from spreading to within fifty (50) feet of any structure. Sec. F-301.5. Attendance at Open Fires. Permitted fires shall be constantly attended by a competent person until such fire is extinguished. This person shall have fire extinguishing equipment readily available for use as deemed necessary by the fire official. -5- Sec. F-301.6. Prohibited Outdoor Fires. The fire official may prohibit any or all outdoor fires which are or could be offensive or objectionable due to smoke or odor emissions when atmospheric conditions or local circumstances make such fires hazardous. The fire official shall order the extinguishment, by the permit holder or the fire department, of any outdoor fire which creates or adds to a hazardous or objectionable situation. Sec. F-303.0. Joints. Torches for Removing Paint or Sweating Pipe Sec. F-311.1. Designation. When he deems it necessary, The fire official shall designate fire lanes on public streets and on private property, devoted to public use such as, but not limited to, commercial, industrial or residential buildings, for the purpose of preventing parking in front of or adjacent to fire hydrants or providing access for fire fighting equipment. Ail buildings less than forty-eight (48) feet in height shall have an all weather fire lane twenty (20) feet in width within thirty (30) feet of the longer side or as required to provide access for fire fighting activities and equipment or as specified on an approved site plan. Ail buildings more than forty-eight (48) feet in height shall have an all weather fire lane twenty (20) feet in width parallel to each of two opposing sides of the building fifteen (15) to twenty (20) feet away from the building or as required to provide access for fire fighting activities and equipment or as specified on an approved site plan. (h) Article 4 is hereby amended by adding the following sections: Sec. F-402.6. Tampering. It shall be unlawful for any person to tamper with, damage, destroy or to use without just cause or authorization any fire protection system, fire extinguisher, fire alarm system, hydrant, ~. etc., installed in or on any building, structure or property within the County. Sec. F-402.7. Blocking Fire Hydrants and Fire Department Connections. It shall be unlawful to obscure from view, damage, deface, obstruct or restrict the access to any fire hydrant or any fire department connection that is located on public or private streets, access lanes or on private property. Sec. F-403.8.1. Heat, Smoke, Flame and Other Fire Output Detectors. Each automatic detector, system of detectors and associated equipment shall be continuously maintained in reliable operating condition at all times. All detection devices and systems shall be inspected, tested and maintained in accordance with the requirements of NFiPA 72E. Sec. F-403.9.1. Submission of Test and Inspection Records. It shall be the responsibility of any person or firm providing or conducting testing and/or inspections of fire protection systems within the County, to submit a copy of the results of the aforementioned tests and/or inspections to the fire official. -6- Sec. F-403.10. Requirements of Fire Protection Systems Service Personnel. It shall be the responsibility of any and all fire protection system service firms and persons performing service or maintenance work on fire protection systems or devices whether suppression or detection, in the County to be qualified by the fire official to perform service or maintenance on said systems, !equipment and devices. FailUre to do so shall cause inspections, tests or maintenance work to be deemed unacceptable and in noncompliance with the requirements of this code. Sec. F-407.2.5. Other Buildinqs. The fire official shall survey all other structures and .premises, except one and two family dwelling units, and shall .require that fire extinguishers be provided so as to afford reasonable safety to persons and property in accordance with NFiPA 10. (i) Article 4 is hereby amended by amending Sections F-400.2, F-402.1, F-403.4, F-407.1, F-407.2 and F-407.2.4 to read as follows: Sec. F-400.2. Installations. Before any fire alarm, detection or fire suppression system is installed, enlarged or extended, a permit shall be secured from the building official. Plans and specifications shall be reviewed by the fire official prior to the issuance of the imechanical and/or electrical permit. Sec. F-402.1. General. Ail fire protection systems, devices, units and service equipment shall be maintained in an operative condition at all times, and it shall be unlawful for any owner or occupant to ~reduce the effectiveness of the protection; except this shall not prohibit the owner or occupant from temporarily reducing or discontinuing the protection where necessary to make tests, repairs, alterations or additions. The fire official shall be notified before disconnection and interruption of protection, tests, repairs, alterations or additions are started and upon its'completion and shall be advised of the extent of and reason >for such work. The restoration of the protection shall be !diligently pursued. Sec. F-403.4. Suppression System Tests. Ail suppression systems shall be inspected, tested and maintained in accordance with the appropriate NFiPA Standard listed in Appendix A. Sec. F-407.1. General. Ail hand operated portable fire extinguishing equipment shall be of an approved size and type suitable to the occupational use of the building and shall be installed in corridors or other locations visible, unobstructed and readily accessible to the occupants of the building in accordance with NFiPA 10 listed in Appendix A. The installation, maintenance and recharging of fire extinguishing equipment shall be in accordance with NFiPA 10 listed in Appendix A. Sec. F-407.2. Required Auxiliary Fire Appliances. Auxiliary fire appliances shall be provided as set forth in the following Sections F-407.2.1 through F-407.2.5. Sec. F-407.2.4. Construction Operations. Ail building operations during construction shall be provided with not less than one approved fire extinguisher, suitable for the hazard, in every storage or construction shed or office, whether said shed or office is inside or outside of a building, and at each usable stairway on all floor levels. During demolition, portable fire extinguishers shall be available in the locations listed above. section: Article 5 is hereby amended by adding the following Sec. F-501.2.1. The marking of means of egress through storage areas may be required as deemed necessary and appropriate by the fire official. It shall be the responsibility of the owner or his 'agent to mark and maintain such aisles as required. (k) Article 5 is hereby amended by amending Section F-503.5 to read as follows: Sec. F-503.5. Elevator Warning Signs. Ail elevator lobby call stations on all floor levels in 'buildings shall be marked with approved signs reading as follows:~ [~Use Stairways in Case of Fire - Do Not Use Elevators. The ~ · requirements of this section shall apply to existing as well as i new buildings. (1) Article 27 is hereby amended by amending Section F-2700.3 to read as follows: Sec. F-2700.3. Insurance Required for Blasting. Before a permit to do blasting is issued, as required under Section F'2700.2, the applicant for such permit shall file, with the fire official, a certificate or proof of insurance in such form, amount and coverage as determined by the county attorney to be adequate, in each case, to idemnify the County against any damages arising from the permitted blasting. (m) Article 28 is hereby amended by adding the following sections: Sec.. 2802.0. Unmanned Rockets. Sec. 2802.1. The Design, Construction and Use of Model Rockets. The design, construction and use of unmanned rockets shall be reasonably safe to persons and property. Evidences that the ~design,.~ construction and use of unmanned rockets are in accor- i[dance with NFiPA 1122L, shall be evidences that'such design, construction and use provides reasonable safety to persons and property. (n) Article 28 is hereby amended by amending Sections F-2801.1 and F-2801.2 to read as follows: Sec. 2801.1. General. It shall be unlawful for any person to store, to offer for sale, expose for sale, sell at retail, or use or explode any fireworks, except as provided in the rules and regulations issued by the fire official for the granting of permits for supervised public displays of fireworks by the jurisdiction, fair associ- ations, amusement parks and other organizations. -8- Every such display shall be handled by a competent operator approved by the fire official and fire department of the juris- diction and shall be of such a character and so located, dis- charged or fired as in the opinion of the fire official, after proper inspection, shall not be hazardous to property or endanger any person. Public displays shall be in general accord with the applicable sections of NFiPA 494L. Sec. 2801.2. Insurance Required for Display. Before a permit is issued for a fireworks display, as 'required under Section 2800.2, the applicant for such permit shall file, with the fire official, a certificate or proof of insurance in such form, amount and coverage as determined by the legal department of the jurisdiction to be adequate, in each case, to indemnify the jurisdiction against any damages which may be caused either to a person or persons or to property by reason of the permitted display, and arising from any acts of the permittee, the permittee's agents, employees or subcontractors. (o) Article 29 is hereby amended by adding the following sections: Sec. F-2902.2. Loading Rack Fire Protection. At bulk storage terminals where the loading of tank vehicles with flammable or combustible liquids is accomplished through automation and there is not a terminal employee in attendance during the loading, the loading rack area shall be protected by a completely automatic fire suppression system approved by the fire official. This system shall be designed to provide fire pro- tection to both the loading rack and tank vehicles located in the loading rack. These systems shall be supervised by an accredited central station facility. Sec. F-2902.3. Receivinq Product by Barge and/or Pipeline. Any bulk storage terminal receiving flammable or combustible liquid products by barge and/or pipeline shall have an attendant on the terminal site during the time flammable or combustible liquids are being received. Sec. F-2904.5(6) . Testinq. Whenever it shall come to the knowledge of the fire official that there is underground seepage of flammable or combustible liquids in any area within the County, the fire official shall serve notice, within that area, on the owners, tenants or occu- pants of all lots where underground tanks and/or pipelines containing flammable or combustible liquids are maintained that such seepage exists. Upon receipt of such notice, the owners, tenants or occupants shall immediately cause tests, as required by the fire official, to be made on all such underground tanks, and assorted underground pipelines. Sec. F-2905.4.2.7.. Rental Storage Occupancies. Storage of flammable and combustible liquids in rental storage facilities shall be prohibited. (p) Article 29 is hereby amended by amending Sections F-2901.6 and F-2905.4.2.2 to read as follows: Sec. F-1901.6. Disposal of Waste. A person shall not permit, cause to be permitted or partic- ipate in the pouring, dumping or discharging of flammable or combustible liquids, or any waste liquid containing petroleum or its products into or upon any street, pavement, highway, drainage -9- canal ditch, storm or sanitary drain or flood control channel, lake or waterway, or upon the ground. Ail petroleum products shall be stored and disposed of in accordance with regulations set forth by the fire official. Sec. F-2905.4.2.2. Assembly Occupancies and Residential Occupancies Not Covered Under F-3905.4.2.1. Storage of flammable and combustible liquid shall be prohibited. (q) section: Article 31 is hereby amended by adding the following Sec. F-3014.5. Emergency Services. Ail companies who have liquefied petroleum gas equipment in 'service in Chesterfield County shall have a qualified maintenance person available at all times to respond and assist fire department personnel with emergency incidents involving their equipment. (r) Appendix A is amended by changing the following NFiPA standard reference numbers to those numbers as indicated hereafter: 1) 12-77 changed to 12-80 2) 12a-77 changed ~o 12a-80 3) 12b-77 changed to 12b-80 4) 13-78 changed to 13-80 5) 13a-78 changed to 13a-81 6) 14-78 changed to 14-80 7) 16-74 changed to 16-80 8) 17-75 changed to 17-80 9) 20-78 changed to 20-80 10) 30-78 changed to 30-81 11) 54-74 changed to 54-80 12) 96-78 changed to 96-80 13) 211-78 changed to 21].-80 14) 231c-75 changed to 231c-80 15) 231d-75 changed to 231d-80 (s) Appendix A is amended by adding the following standard reference numbers and titles as follows: NFiPA 72E-78 NFiPA 24-77 Automatic Fire Detectors Outside Protection Sec. 9.1-4. Modifications. The chief of the fire department shall have power to modify any of the provisions of the BOCA Basic Fire Prevention Code, 1981 Edition, as herein amended, upon application in writing~by an owner or lessee, or his duly authorized agent, when there are practical difficulties in the way of carrying out the strict letter of the code; provided, that the spirit of the code shall be observed, public safety secured, and substantial justice done. The particulars of such modification when granted or allowed and the decision of the chief of the fire department thereon shall be entered upon the records of the department and a signed copy shall be furnished the applicant. Sec. 9.1-5. Establishment of office of fire chief; duties of fire chief. (a) The BOCA Basic Fire Prevention Code, 1981 Edition, as herein amended, shall be enforced by the chief of the fire department of the county which is hereby established and shall be operated under his supervision. -10- (b) The chief of the fire department shall be appointed by the board of supervisors on the basis of examination to determine his qualifications. Such fire chief shall serve at the pleasure ~ of the board of supervisors at a salary to be fixed by them. (c) The chief of the fire department shall be charged with the prevention of fires and the protection of life and property against fire, and he shall be responsible for the maintenance and care of all property and equipment used by his department, the planning and directing of all fire fighting and fire prevention activities, the performance of various miscellaneous public services of an emergency nature and the management of personnel and all operations of the fire department. (d) The chief of the fire department may detail such members of the fire department as inspectors as shall from time to time become necessary. He shall recommend to the board of supervisors the employment of technical inspectors, who shall be selected through an examination to determine their fitness for the position. (e) The chief of the fire department shall make a report annually to the county administrator of the activities of the fire department; it shall contain all proceedings under this code, with such vital statistics as the chief of the fire department may wish to include therein; the chief of the fire department shall also recommend any amendments to the fire code which he deems necessary and desirable in the public interest. Sec. 9.1-6. Appeals. When it is claimed that the provisions of the BOCA Basic Fire Prevention Code, 1981 Edition, as herein amended, do not apply or that the true intent and meaning of the code have been misconstrued, or wrongly interpreted, the aggrieved party may appeal the decision of the fire chief to the board of supervisors within thirty days from the date of the final decision. Sec. 9.1-7. Penalties. (a) Any person who shall violate any of the provisions of the BOCA Basic Fire Prevention Code, 1981 Edition, as herein amended, or fail to comply therewith, or who shall violate or fail to comply with any order made thereunder, or who shall build in violation of any detailed statement of specifications or plans submitted and approved thereunder, or who shall fail to comply with such an order as affirmed or modified by the board of supervisors or by a court of competent jurisdiction, shall severally for each and every such violation and noncompliance respectively be guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of not more than one thousand do]_lars or by imprisonment of not more than thirsty days or by both such fine and imprisonment. The imposition of one penalty for any single violation shall not excuse the violation or permit it to continue and each day that such violation continues shall constitute a separate offense. (b) In addition to the penalties specified in Section 9.1-7(a), the chief of the fire department or his duly authorized representative may invoke any other lawful procedure, such as injunction, abatement, or otherwise, as may be necessary to prevent, restrain, correct or abate any violation of this chapter. -11- Sec. 9.1-8. Authority of fire marshal and assistant fire marshals, i The county fire marshal or his assistants, appointed pursuant to Section 27-36 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, shall have the authority to arrest, to procure and serve! warrants and to issue summonses in the manner authorized by general law for violations of this chapter and of all fire safety, fire prevention and related ordinances, as permitted by Section 27-34.2 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. Sec. 9.1-9. Severability. If any provision of this ordinance or any application thereof to any person or circumstances .is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of this ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are declared to be severable. -12- BOARD OF SUPERVISORS E. MERLIN O'NEILL,CHAIRMAN MATOACA DISTRICT JOAN GIRONE,VICE CHAIRMAN MIDLOTNIAN DISTRICT C.L. BOOKMAN CLOVER HILL DISTRICT HARRY G. DANIEL DALE DISTRICT R. GARLAND DODD BERMUDA DISTRICT CHESTERFIELD COUNTY CHESTERFIELD ,VIRGINIA 2:5832 Fire Prevention Bureau P. O. Box 40 (804) 748-]426 F RE PREVENT ON CODE REVIEW COMMITTEE J. W. "Bill" Daniels, Jr. President The Jackson Company P. O. 9088 Richmond, VA 23225 320-]702 Edward B. Douber]y, Jr. Fire Protection Engineer VEPCO P. O. Box 26666 Richmond, VA 23261 77]-4537 John A. Gorman Associate Administrator Johnston-Willis Hospital ]40] Johnston-Willis Dr. Richmond, VA 23235 320-2900 Thomas E. Harris Chief Investi9ator - Security Dept, Safeway Stores, Inc. Richmond Division Office 1301 West Hundred Rd. Chester, VA 23831 748-3459 Robert S. Hodder Chief Building Official Chesterfield County P. O. Box 40 Chesterfield, VA 23832 748-]057 Billy H. Johnson G. H. Johnson & Assoc., Inc. Independent Insurance Adjusters 17 S. Sheppard St. P. O. Box 7167 Richmond, VA 23221 358-9116 Jay B. Laf]er District Manager Cloverleaf Mall 7201Midlothian Turnpike Richmond, VA 23225 276-8650 A. T. "Al" Norton Security & Safety Sears - Cloverleaf Mall 7]0] Mid]othian Turnpike Richmond, Virginia 23225 276-7710 Fire Prevention Code Review Committee Page 2 10. 11. T. E. "TuckTM Perkins Executive Vice-President Commonwealth Propane 1701 Brook Road Richmond, VA. 23260 644-4581 Ken Quigley Director of Risk Management Hechinger Company 3400 Pennsy Drive Landover, MD 20784 (30]) 341-1000, ext. 277 Thomas Q. Reynolds Safety and Fire Protection Supervisor E. I. DuPont DeNemours & Company Spruance Textile Fibers Plant P. 0. Box 2700] Richmond, Virginia 23261 743-2440 12. 13. 14. Dale Rogers Store Manager Hechinger Company 8535 Mid]othian Turnpike Richmond, VA 23235 320-2000 V. C. Sutton Assistant Plant Superintendent Texaco Terminal P. O. Box 34707 Richmond, VA 23234 275-1403 G. Warren Vaughan Architect I07 E. Cary St. Richmond, VA 23219 644-0822 CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: January 12, 1983 ITEM NUMBER: SUBJECT: Chesterfield County Planning Commission COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION Mr. Daniel was appointed to the Chesterfield County Planning Commission Until December 31, 1983 because the County Attorney ruled that was the proper Way in which to handle the unexpired term of Mr. O'Neill. In the past, it has been the Board's desire to make this appointment on an annual basis. PREPARED BY;_ ATTACHMENTS: YES E] NO ~ SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGE NDA MEETING DATE' SUBJECT: January 12, 1983 ITEM NUMBER: Richmond Regional Planning District Commission COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION A% the Board meeting of October 27, 1982, Mr. Dodd resigned from the Richmond Regional Planning District Commission and Mr. Daniel was appointed to serve until the first organizational meeting. If the Board reappoints M~. Daniel or appoints someone else, the term of office would be until December 31, 1983. PREPARED BY; ATTACHMENTS: YES !'3 NO ~ SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADM I NI STRATOR CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: January 12, 1983 SUB4ECT: Airport Advisory Board Members ITEM NUMBER: 12.A. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Terms of appointment for the Airport Advisory Board Members shown below have expired: D~e/District: ~d~lover Hill District: Matoaca District: Bermuda District: Mr. Melvin Shaffer Mr. Roger Burns Mr. John Mazza Honorable William R. Shelton In addition, Mr. William F. Whitaker representing Midlothian District has moved away from Chesterfield County. Board Action Required: Above members or replacements need to be appointed/ reappointed as appropriate for a three year term. The appointments and/or reappointments would be effective until February ]4, 1986. All have expressed an int~rest~in serving another term should the Board reappoint them. ATTACHMENTS: YES r'l NO SIGNATURE: ~~ADMINISTRATOR CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AG E NDA MEETINS DATE: January 12, 1983 SUBJECT: Community Services Board ITEM NUMBER: 12.B. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Mr. Dodd has requested that Mr. Wendell Cheatam, Jr. be reappointed representing Be:~muda District. The term of office would be effective January 1, 1983 and would expire December 31, 1985. PREPARED BY: ATTACHMENTS: YES [] NO r',-,3 SIGNATURE: '/ -~JOUNTY ADMI NISTRATOR CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: January 12, 1983 SUBJECT: Transportation Safety CQ-~-,~ssion ITEM NUMBER: 12.C. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION No special criteria is needed for appointees. Dale District is needed. Appointee from Mrs. Girone is the Board's representative to this Commission. Staff is looking, at the request of Mr. Daniel, for a County employee who lives in Dale District to possibly be appointed as his representative. PREPARED ATTACHMENTS: YES I-I NO [~ SIGNATURE: ~,~ f COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 3571 Clintwood Road Midlothian, Va. 23113 January 1, ]983 Mr. C. L. Bookman Board of Supervisors 1048 South Providence Road Richmond, Virginia 23235 Dear Mr. Bookman: Pursuant to our recent conversation, I herewith tender my resignation as member of the Board of Mental Health/Mental Retardation effective immediately. As we discussed, Z have been thinking of this for some time. I appreciate the opportunity you afforded me to serve with this fin~ group of people, and I have nothing but the highest praise for those of the staff. I have been awe-struck at the operation there at the Center, and am very glad to have been a part of it for the past several years. As a replacement, I would appreciate your considering Mrs. Mary Jo Lux to serve on the Board. I approached her some time ago when it was suggested that the Board members offer names to serve on the various committees, not as members, but as additional in-put from the citizens. She was most receptive to the suggestion at that time and eager to serve as she stated that as a teacher, she was familiar with the work of the Center with the various students. Thanking you, and with kind personal regards, I am, Sincerely, Ann C. Stubblefield cc: Dr. Butt Lowe Dr. Mort Horwitz Dr. Clinton W. Pettus CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AG E NDA L. MEETING DATE: , January 12, 1983 SUBJECT: State Road Acceptance ITEM NUMBER: 13 .A. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: CLOVER HILL DISTRICT Solar II, Sections B and C ATTACHMENTS: YES :~2: NO [] PREPARED BY:./~ ~ c ~ Richard ~. McElfish, P.E. Director, Environmental Engineerinq SIGNATURE: COI.JN~I~Y ADM I N i STRATOR MEMORANDUM FROM: SUBJECT: MEETING DATE: Board of Supervisors Environmental Engineering State Road Acceptance - Solar II, Sections B and C January 12, 1983 Condrey Ridge Drive: Beginning where State maintenance ends, Condrey Ridge Drive, State Route 2722, and going northerly to intersection with Bethany Ridge Road, then continues northwesterly to intersection with Condrey Ridge Court, then continuing northwesl:erly to a dead end. Bethany Ridge Road: Beginning at intersection with Academy Drive, State Route 767, and going westerly to intersection with Bethany Ridge Court, then continues westerly to intersection with t~thany Ridge Terrace, then continues westerly to intersection with Condrey Ridge Drive, then continues westerly to a cul-de-sac. Condrey Ridge Court: Beginning at intersection with Condrey Ridge Drive and going westerly to a cul-de-sac. Bethany Ridge Terrace: Beginning at intersection with Bethany Ridge Road and going northwesterly to a cul-de-sac. Bethany Ridge Court: Beginning at intersection with Bethany Ridge Road and going northwesterly to a cul-de-sac. CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AG E NDA January 12, 1983 MEETING DATE: SUBdECT: Request for Bingo/Raffle Permits ITEM NUMBER: 13.B. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION This office has reviewed the applications listed below and has determined that these applications meet all statutory requirements. 2. 3. 4. Chester Civic Association Thomas Dale Music Booster Club Bensley-Bermuda Rescue Squad Saint Augustine Roman Catholic Church PREPARED BY; ATTACHMENTS: YES I-I NO BI Steven L. Micas County Attorney SIGNATURE ' COUNTY ADM I NISTRATOR APPLICATION FOR A P'ERMIT TO CONDUCT B~ C~v~mS OR RAFFLES The undersigned applicant, pursuant to Section 18.2-340.1, et. seq. of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, requests the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County to issue a permit to conduct bingo games or raffles during the 1983 calendar year. In support of this application, the applicant offers the follc~ing information under oath: 1. A. Proper name of org~nization: ~S DALE MUSIC BOOSTER CLUB . B. Address of organization's headquarters: ?HfMAS DALE HIGH SCH00L, CHESTER, ~A. 23831. C. Address where all records of receipts and disbursements are permanently filed: The President who is elected in May shall have custody of records 1_/ . D. Name and address of cwner of the property described in C above: President 82 - 83 Richard A. Ukrig, 12710 percival St., Chester, VA 23831 . E. Type of permit applied for: Bingo games X~ Raffles XX . F. Address or addresses where bingo games will be held or raffle drawings conducted: TH(~AS DALE HIGH SCT{0OL, CHESTER, VA. 23831 NOTE: This permit is valid only at the above location. G. Dates or days of ~=ek and times of day when bingo gs~es or raffles will be held at above address or addresses.~HURSDAY - BINGO; RAFFLES - Maximum 2X annuall~ . A. Date when organization was founded: approx. 1973 - B. Has your organization been in existence and met regularly in Chesterfield County for two years ~iately prior to making this application? Yes XX No . C. Is your organization currently and has y~ur organization always been operated in the past as a nonprofit organization? Yes No _. D. Tax Exempt Status No. (If Applicable): Not Appl~nable ' E. State the specific type and purpose of your organization: To promote the welfare and boost the morale of the Thomas Dale Music Department and auxiliary units of the marching band by providing financial aid, assisting in supervision of studauts, and supporting music program as requested. e F. This application is for a new permit or a renewal .permit Iu~ (if for renc~al -permit, answer G below) . G[ ' ~r3D~ss receipts frcm all sources related to the operation of bingo games or instant bihgo by calendar quarter for the 12 month period iamlediately prior to the date of t~pplication: 1982 198 2 ls~.~arte~8,235 2nd quarter $8,132 3rd quarter -O- 4t_]it'~°'quarter $1 O, 529 --Officers of Organization: Address: President: Richard A. Uhrig . 1;2710 Percival St., Chester, VA. 23831 . Vice President: Tim Damiels 13001 Birchleaf ~d., Chester, VA. 23831 Secretary: Ann Quartermaine . 2650 Blithe Br., Chester, VA. 23831 . Treasurer: Clare Polson 3670 Hemlock Rd., Chester, VA.. 23831 Member authorized with th~ organization to be responsible for conducting and operation of bingo games or raffles: Name: Richard A.' Uhrig . Address :12710 Percival St., Chester, VA.23831 Hcme Telephone Number 748-J+729 Business Telephone Mumber: . Do you, each officer, director and member of the organization fully understand each of the following: 2_/ A. It is a violation of law to enter into a contract with any person, firm, a~Sociatic~, organization, partnership or ~orporation of any classification, whatsoever, for the purpose of organizing, managing or conducting bingo games or raffles? Yes XX No B. The organization must maintain and file with the County Internal Auditor on or before November 1, complete records and disbursements pertaining to bingo games and raffles and that such records are subject to audit by the County Internal Auditor? Yes X~ No Since the club does not have a permanent headquarters, records required by the various officers and committee chairman in performance of their duties are kept at their private residence. 6. }{as A. e C. Any organization found in violation of Section 18.2-340.10 of the Code of Virginia authorizing this permit is subject to having such permit revoked and any organiza- tion or person, shareholder, agent, n~ber or ~xployee of such organizatio~ who violated Section 18.2-340.10 or Article 1.1 of Chapter 8 of Title 18.2 of the Code of Virginia may be guilty of a felony? Yes ZZ No . y~r organization attached to this application each of the following? A copy of the organization's charter, articles of incorporation, bylaws, and other legal documents which describe the s~=cific purposes for which the organization is chartered or organized? Yes XX No . B. A copy of a resolution of the organization's board of directors authorizing the under- signed to apply for this permit? Yes XZ No . C. A cheCk in the amount of $25.00 payable to Treasurer, Chesterfield County as an application fee? Yes ZX No . D. Additional pages where r~cessary to ~ully complete this application? Yes XX No Have you and each officer of your organization read the attached permit and do you and each of you agree on behalf of the organization to cc~ply with each of the oonditions therein? Yes XX No . I hereby swear or affirm under the penalties of perjury as set forth in Section 18.1-434 of the Code of Virginia, that all the above questions have been oc~pletely answered and that all the statemm=_nts herein are true to the best of my knowledge, information and beliefs. ~W ~I~t~nat~ f~low~'~q. ~gnatures and seals: ~' ~'~'""% ~ President, Thomas Dale Music Boostsr Club gna ute of Applicant ~- ~itle 12710 Percival St., Ches~r, VA 23831 kklress e said, ~do hereby certify that ~_~,~. 'U/~£~ in his capacity as foregoing appeared before me this day and acknowledged, subscribed and swore the same b~f~re me in the jurisdiction aforesaid. My C~,~ssion Expires: Notary Public ~ ~_ . · Membership is automatic for all parents of students in the music department, marching band auxitliary units, directors and sponsers thereof, the school Principals of Thomas Dale, as well as any person interested in the music program. The officers, particularly the President (Applicant) is aware of the requirements and will endeavor to see that they sre carried out. If s Bingo Chairman is appoint~ed, said person will be fully briefed on the requirements which must be maintained as a condition of the permit. THOMAS DALE MUSIC BOOSTER CLUB CHESTER, VA. 23831 DECemBER 14, 1982 The tuudersigned executive board members of the Thomas Dale Music Booster Club have reviewed the application for a permit to conduct Bingo games snd raffles for the 1983 calendar year. The signatories believe the data to be accurate and will endeavor to see that the requirements of the permit are fully carried out. It is resolved that the president of the club (Richard A. Uhrig) shall submit the application, necessary enclos~zres, and fee ($25.-) to the County Administrator for processing and approval by the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors. Richard A. Uhrig, President Tim Daniels, Vice President Ann Quartermaine, Secretary Clare Poison, Treasurer Yeriko Sklute, Concession Chrmn. Richard A. Uhrig, Actg. Bingo Chrmn. ~.'HOHAS DALE MUSIC BOOSTER CLUB BY LAYS Article I: The nmue of this association shall be: The Thomas Dale Music Booster Club. Article II: Object and Responsibility Section The objective,of this association shall be to promote the welfare and boost the morale of the Thomas Dale Music Department and auxiliary units of the Harchin$ Band. The responsibilities are to provide financial assistance when needed to the Music Department of Thomas Dale and all auxiliary units of the Narchin$ Band; to assist the Directors and Sponsors in discipli- nary supervision of the students when in transit or when performin$ at any location; and to assist the music prosram in any way as requested by the Music Department, Directors and Sponsors. Article III: Section Section Membership and Dues Parents of all students in the Music Department and the Narchins Band auxiliary units automatically become members of the Thomas Dale Music Booster Club. All Directors and Sponsors of musical groups and their auxiliary units and Principals of Thomas Dale are also members. Persons interested in the school music prosrammay also become members. The annual dues may be assessed by and payable in such manner as mey be fixeul by the Executive Board for each school year. Article 'IV: Section Section Meetings I: The annual meeting shall be held in Nay of each year. II: All other general membership meetings shall be scheduled by the Executive Board. Article V: Officers and Their Election Section The officers of this association shall be a president, a vice- president, a secnetary and a treasurer. The term of office shall be for one year. Section Section III: A vacancy occurring in an office shall be filled throush an appoint- ment by the Executive Board. The officers shall be elected annually hYballot at the last regular meeting of the school year. If there Is only one candidate for any office, the election for that office may be by voice vote by motion from the floor. BY LAIJS Page Section IV: In February, three ~onths prior to the annual- meeting in ~lay, the ~ec~tiv~ Board shall appoint a nominating comittee consisting of three members, one of which shall be from the Executive Board. This comittee will report to the club at its next regular moeting a slate of officers for the ensuing year. After the slate is read, there will be a call for nominations fro~ the floor. No a~ber shall be nomin- ated who has not consented to serve if elected. Article VI: Duties of the Officers Section I: The president shall preside at all meetings of the association and of the Executive Board, shall be a me~ber of all coumittees except the nominating coa~ittee and shall perfor~ all other duties usually pertaining to the office. He shall see that the obJective~nd responsibilities of the association as outlined in Article II are carried out. Section The vice-president shall act as ~tde to the president and shall perform the duties of the president in the absence of that officer. His obligation is to help the president with the leadership of the association and to relieve him of smae responsibility. Section III: The secretary shall keep a correct record of all ~eetings of the association and the Executive Board and shall perform such other duties as ~ay be delegated. Section IV: The treasurer shall receive all ~oney of the association, shall keep an accurate record of receipts and expenditures, and shall pay out funds only as authorized by the ~xecutive Board. At the first general meeting of the association the treasurer will read the auditors report of the previous year. Section v: The officers shall create standing comittees and subco~ittees as needed and appoint the chairmen of those comaittees. Article VII: Section Executive Board I: Section II~ The Executive Board shall consist of:the elected officers of the association, the chairmen of the standing cosittees, and one ~ember representing the School Husic Department and Band auxiliary units. Regular ~eetings of the Executive Board shall be held as necessary during the year. A ~aJority shall constitute a quortm. A meeting of the ~xecutive Board may be called by the president or by a majority of the members of theBxecutive Board. Section a. Transact association business as necessary between general membership meetings. b, Authorize all expenditures paid by the treasurer. c. The Executive Board must discuss and recommend a course of action for any request mede involving $100 or more. BY LA~S Page 3 d. Discuss and approve work plans and projects of the standing committees and sub-committees. Provide those committees with rules by which to operate. e. ExeCutive Board members should attend all general membership meetings, arrange Prograsm for those ~eetings, and provide membership with information concerning the activities of the association. f. Appoint in Hay a committee of not less than three members whose responsibility it shall be to audit the financial books of the association. The auditors' report shall be given at the meeting of the old and new Executive Boards. g. Neet with the incoming Executive Board at which time all records and balanced and agited treasurer's books are turned Article VIII: Standing Committees Section I: Standing committees (Ways & Heans, Telephone, Nembership, Publicity or any other committee deemed necessary) shall be created by the association elected officers. The chairmen of such com~ittees shall be appointed for a one year term by the elected officers. Section II: The standing committee chairman shall appoint and supervise his comnittee and shall see that the members of the sub-coumittee are chosen, Section III: The chaireen of all standing comaittees shall present a plan of work to the Executive Board for their approval before being undertaken. Section Iv: It is the duty of the chairmen of the standing co~ittees to keep an accurate record of all earnings and expenditures. Written financial reports should be submitted to the association treasurer for palment. Article IV: A~endments: These BY LAWS mey be amended at any regular meeting of the association by a two-thirds vote of those members present, provided the a~endment has been subae[tted in writing at the previous meeting of the association. Amendments shall become effective upon adjournment of the meeting at which they are adopted. Article X: Rules of Order: THE RULES contained in "Robert's Rules of Order Newly revised" shall govern this association in all cases in which they are not in conflict with the BY LA~S of the association. APPLICATION FOR A PERM/T TO CONDUCT BINCK~ CJ~4ES OR RAFFLES The undersigned applicant, pursuant to Section 18.2-340.1, et. seq. of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, requests the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County to issue a permit to conduct bingo games or raffles during the/~83 calendar year. In support of this application, the applicant offers the following information under oath: 1. a. Proper name of organization: ~5-~/,~J,~,~¢~, ~,~,~ ~,~,l~/z~ [~/,t3/~l~ ' B. Address of organization s headquarters: ~D(; 2~//~ _~; -~~4 ~." ~%Z$? · C. Address where all records of receipts and disbursements are permanently filed: D. Name and address of owner of the property described in C above: E. Type of permit applied for: Bingo games /'Raffles Fo Address or addresses where bingo games will be held or raffle drawings core,ed: NOTE: This permit is valid only at the above location. G. Dates or days of week and times of day when bingo games or raffles will be held at above address or addresses: __~.,~_~_f.~ /~,n/~,, /~,~,~,~ /2/ ~LO0 /~/// · 2. A. Date when organization was founded: /gg,f~ . B. Has your organization been in existence and met regularly in Chesterfield County for two years ~iately prior to making this application? Yes / No . C. Is your organization currently and has your organization always been operated in the past as a nonprofit organization? Yesw,z No D. Tax Exempt Status No, (If Applicable):__ -- ~ ~ . E. State the specific type and purpose of your organization: ~ ~7JJ~ ,~,zmr/f Gm This application is for a new permit or a renewal .permit / (if for renewal permit, answer G below). Gross receipts from all sources related to the operation of bingo games or instant bingo by calendar quarter for the 12 month period ~iately prior to the date of this application: 1st quarter ,~,. ~ 70 ~..72nd quarter ~L~. ~/~,~3rd quarter 4th quarter Officers of Organization: President: ,~~~, ~ Vice Pres ident .-~v~;~ ,, ~ret~ :~~ ~~er: Address: Member authorized with the organization to be responsible for conducting and operation of bingo games or raffles: Hcme Telephone Number ~f- ~F Z ~ Business Telephone Number: 7 ~'~ ~'~ V~-J3/ . - DO you, each officer, director and member of the organization fully understand each of the following: A. oIrt la,sis .v%o~.ion.of~ l~w .~t~o enter int.o a_contract with any person, firpl.., associ~ion, g zatzon, partnership or corporation ~ anY~el-a~s~-ficatiOn, wh~ purpose of organizing, managing or conducting bingo games or raffles? Yes w/ No B. The organization must maintain and file with the County Internal Auditor on or before November 1., conl01ete records and disbursements pertaining to bingo games and raffle~ and that such records are subject to audit by the County Internal Auditor? Yes v' No C. Any organization foun.d i~. viola, tion of Section 18.2-340.10 of the Code of Virginia authorizing this permit is subject to having such permit revoked and any organiza- tion or person, shareholder, agent, member or employee of such organization who violated Section 18.2-340.10 or Article 1.1 of Chapter 8 of Title 18.2 of the Code of Virginia may be guilty of a felony? Yes ~No _ . 6. }{as your organization attached to this application each of the following? A. A copy of the organization's charter, articles of incorporation, bylaws, and other legal doctm~_nts which describe the specific purposes for which the organization is chartered or organized? B. A copy of a resolution of the organization's board of directors authorizing the under- signed to apply for this permit? Yes / NO . C. A check in the amount of $25.00 payable to Treasurer, Chesterfield County as an application fee? Yes ~-~ No . D. Additional pages where necessary to fully complete this application? Yes ~/ NO 7. Have you and each officer of your organization read the attached permit and do you and each of you agree on behalf of the organization to cc~ply with each of the oonditions therein? Yes / No 8. I hereby s-~ar or affirm under the penalties of perjury as set forth in Section 18.1-434 of the Code of Virginia, that all the above questions have been completely answered and that all the state3~_nts herein are true to the best of my knowledge, information and beliefs. WITNESS the following signatures and seals: Signature of Applidant// Title COUNTY OF CHESTERFIRIn I, ~y~~_~~, a Notary Public in and for the County and State afore- said, do hereby certify'that _~/~.~/~ ~. ~y~/ in his capacity as U~-~~ of ~. ~x~~ ~65~t4_ ~c' ~. organiza~'on and whose name is signed to the foregoing appeared before me this day and acknowledged, subscribed and ~ore the same before me in the jurisdiction aforesaid. Given under my hand this ~F~lay of Notary Public RES0~UTION It was hereby resolve~ at the meetin~ef the officers of the Saint Augustine Roman Catholic Church?is Ways and Means Committee, held on Sunday, December 19, 1982, that Thomas B. Leafy would p~esent an application to the Oounty of Chesterfield requesting the privilege to continue its regular weeEly Bingo. THOMAS J~ HOQ~ 0hairm ~ ~ULIA HOOF secre/gary PERMIT By Resolution of the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors duly adopted on , permission to conduct bingo games or raffles is to conduct hereby granted to bingo games and raffles during %he calendar yeart .. This permission is granted subject to the following conditions: 1. That no part of the gross receipts derived from bingo games or raffles inures directly or indirectly to the benefit of any private shareholder, member, agent or employee of your organization. 2. Your organization shall not enter into a contract with any person or firm, association, organization, partnerships or corporation of any classifica- tion whatsoever, for the purpose of organizing, managing or conducting bingo games or raffles. 3. No person, except a bona fide member of your organization who shall have been a member of the organization for at least ninety days prior to such partici- pation, shall participate in the management, operation or conduct of any bingo game or raffle, and no person shall receive any remuneration for participating in the management, operation or conduct of any such game or raffle, provided that the spouse of any bona fide member or a firefighter or rescue squad member employed 'by a political subdivision with which the volunteer firefighter or rescue squad member is associated may participate in the operation and conduct of a bingo game or raffle if a bona fide member is present. 4. Your organization shall not enter into any contract with or otherwise ~mploy or compensate any member of that organization regarding the sale of bingo supplies or equipment. 5. Your organization shall not award any prize money or merchandise valued in excess of the following amounts: (a) no door prize shall exceed twenty-five dollars ($25.00), (b) no regular bingo or special game shall exceed one hundred dollars ($100.00), and (c) no ~iackpot, of any nature whatsoever, shall exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000.00). In no event shall your organization join with any other organization in establishing or contributing to the maintenance of any jackpot. 6. Your organization shall maintain a record in writing of the dates on which bingo is played, the number of people in attendance on each date and the amount of the receipts and prizes paid on each such day. The organization shall also maintain a record of the name and address of each individual to whom a door prize, regular or special bingo game prize or jackpot from the playing of bingo is awarded, as well as the amount of such award. The organization shall also maintain an itemized record of all receipts and disbursements, including operating costs and use of proceeds incurred in operating bingo games. 7. Your organization shall not place or permit to be placed on the f~remJsos, or within one hundred yards of the premises, where such bingo qame is to be con- ducted, any sign or signs advertising such bingo game. 8. Records of all bingo and raffle receipts and disbursements sha]~ be' kept and shall be filed annually under oath with the County Internal Auditor on a form furnished by the auditor. All such reports shall be submitted to the Internal Auditor not later than the first day of November of each calendar year for which a permit has been issued and such records shall be a matter of public record. Each report shall include a record of the gross receipts and disburse- ments of said organization for the year period which commenced on the first day of October of the previous year and ended on September 30 of ~the current year. 9. No person shall pay or receive for use of the premises to conduct the bingo games or raffles a sum of money in excess of the current fair market value of the premises and in no event shall such sum of money be based upon or deter- mined by a percentage of the proceeds derived from the bingo games or raffles. 10. The organization shall not hold bingo games more frequently than two calendar days in any one calendar week unless a special permit is granted by the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County for more frequent games. 11. The organization is authorized to play instant bingo as a part of the bingo games; provided, however, that: (a) Instant bingo may be conducted only at such time as a regular bingo game, as defined in Section 18.2-340.1(2) of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amen- ded, is in progress and only at such locations and at such times as are specified in the bingo application permit; (b) The organization shall not derive more than thirty-three and one- third percentum (33 1/3%) of its gross receipts from the bingo games by the play- ing of "instant bingo" or "bingo in any rotation;" (c) The organization which conducts the playing of instant bingo shall maintain complete and accurate records of the date, quantity and card value of instant bingo supplies purchased as well as the name and address of the supplier of such instant bingo supplies. Th~ organization shall also maintain a written invoice or receipt from a non-member of the organization verifying any information required by law; and (d) The organization shall not sell an instant bingo card to an individ- ual below sixteen years of age. 12. The proceeds from the operation of the bingo games or raffles shall neither be used for the purchase of real estate or improvements for a meeting place for the organization, nor shall the proceeds be used for the maintenance or benefit of a private organization which does not exist exclusively for reli- gious, charitable, scientific, literary, community or educational purposes, nor shall the proceeds directly or indirectly benefit any member of the organization. 13. Except for reasonable and proper operating costs and prizes, no part of the gross receipts derived by an organization permitted to conduct bingo games or raffles may be used for any purpose other than those lawful religious, char- itable, community or educational purposes for which the organization is specifi- cally chartered or organized. 14. In addition to the conditions contained in this Per'mit, the orq,lnization will comply with all provisions of the Code of Virginia and the Code of the ~ount[ of Chesterfield regarding Bingo Games and Raffles. 15. The Board of Supervisors may deny, suspend or revoke the permit of your organization for any non-compliance with these conditions, with the Code of the County of Chesterfield or the Code of Virginia. 16. ANY PERSON, SHAREHOLDER, AGENT, MEMBER OR EMPLOYEE OF SAID ORGANIZATION VIOLATING ANY OF THESE CONDITIONS SHALL BE GUILTY OF A MISDEMEANOR AND UPON CON- VICTION THEREOF SHALL BE SUBJECT TO A FINE OF NOT MORE THAN ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS OR BY CONFINEMENT IN THE COUNTY JAIL FOR NOT MORE THAN TWELVE MONTHS OR BOTH. A VIOLATION OF CONDITION 13 ABOVE SHALL BE PUNISHABLE BY IMPRISONMENT OF NOT LESS THAN ONE YEAR, NOR MORE THAN FIVE YEARS OR BY A FINE OF NOT MORE THAN ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS OR CONFINEMENT IN THE COUNTY JAI~--FOR NOT MORE THAN TWELVE MONTHS OR BOTH. ANY ORGANIZATION VIOLATING CONDITION~5 ABOVE SHALL HAVE ITS PERMIT AUTOMATICALLY REVOKED. 17. THIS PERMIT MUST BE RENEWED AT THE END OF EACH CALENDAR YEAR BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS. 18. THIS PERMIT IS VALID ONLY AT THE LOCATION PROVIDED ON THE APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO HOLD BINGO GAMES AND RAFFLES. 19. THIS PERMIT OR A COPY THEREOF MUST BE POSTED ON THE PREMISES WHERE BINGO GAMES OR RAFFLES ARE CONDUCTED. THIS PERMIT IS NOT ASSIGNABLE. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS By Chairman Attest: County Administrator 1950, as amended, requests the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County to issue a permit to conduct bingo games or raffles during the 19'8~ calen~]ar year. In support of this application, the applicant offers the following information under oath: 1. A. Proper name of organization: Bentley Be~nuda Vol. Rescue Squad B. A~ldress of organization's headquarters: 2500 Rio Vista Rear Ch~.er~ Va. 23831 C. Address where all records of receipts and disbursements are permanently filed: 2500 Rio Vista Roa~ Oheste~, Va. 23~3I APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT TO CONDUCT BINGO GAMES OR RAFFLES The undersigned applicant, pursuant to Section 18.2-340.1, et. seq. of the Code of Virginia, D. Name and address of c~ner of the property described in C above: Benaley Bermuda V01. Rescue Squad 2500 RioVista~ Rd.~ Chester, Va. 25851 E. Type of permit applied for: Bingo games yes~ Raffles yes~. F. Address or addresses where bingo games will be held or raffle drawings conducted: 2500 RioVis~a Roa~ au~ a~jaoe~t properties NOTE: This permit is valid only at the above location. G. Dates or days of w~ek and tin~s of day when bingo games or raffles will be held at above address or addresses: Fridays. 7:00 pome Normally A. Date when organization was founded: Jul~ 1954 B. Has your organization been in existence and r~t regularly in Chesterfield County for two years ~iately prior to making this application? Yes X No . C. Is your organization currently and has your organization always been operated in the past as a nonprofit organization? Yes X No . D. Tax Exempt Status No. (If Applicable): A 208673 E. State the specific type and purpose of your organization: Charitable~ Cemmm unity Servi~es~ F. This application is for a new permit or a renewal .permit X (if for renewal permit, answer G below). G. Gross receipts frc~ all sources related to the operation of bingo games or instant bingo by calendar quarter for the 12 month period immediately prior to the date of this application: 19~2 lstl~TM 32~31~.75 2nd quarter 30,942.65 3rd ~er 31,992.00 4th198q~larter 51,,421.00 Officers of Organization: Address: President: _~_~:, ~m~_: T~ w~.m,~ey 4227 Hickory Rd. PetersbuF~ Va. 25805 Vice President: FLy. Gilbert Wild. lek 5529 Thornington Dr. Richmond, Va. 25257 . E ' Secretary: M~s.. Linda sQu~hel - 53~5 Thorn~n~ton Dr. Richmoz~d~ Va. 232~7 . Treasurer: ~' J~'¥'ender 4505 W~aywo0d Ave. Chs~er~ Va., 25851 Member authorized with the organization to be responsible for conducting and operation of bingo games or raffles: Name: Mr. Gilbert Wildrick Address: 5329 Thornington Dr. Richmon$, Va Hc~ Telephone Number 748 4154 Business Telephone Number: 7325222 Ext. 461 Do you, each officer, director and member of the organization fully understand each of the followLug: A. It is a violation of law to enter into a contrac~ with any peg'.son, firm, association, organization, partnership or corporation of any classification, whatsoever, for the purpose of organizing, managing or conducting bingo games or raffles? Yes X No B. The organization must maintain and file with the County Internal Auditor on or before November l, complete records and disbursen~ts pertaining to bingo games and raffles and that such records are subject to audit by the County Internal Auditor? Yes X No 6 C. Any organization found in violation of Section 18.2-340.10 of the Code of Virginia authorizing this permit is subject to having such permit revoked and any organiza- tion or person, shareholder, agent, member or ~ployee of such organization who violated Section 18.2-340.10 or Article 1.1 of Chapter 8 of Title 18.2 of the Code of Virginia may be guilty of a felonY? Yes X No Has your organization attached to this application each of the following? A. A copy of the organization's charter, articles of incorporation, bylaws, and other legal documents which describe the s~ecific purposes for which the organization is '? ~hartered or organized? Yes X No B. A copy of a resolution of the organization's board of directors authorizing the under- signed to apply for this permit? Yes F No . C. A check in the amount of $25.00 payable to Treasurer, Chesterfield County as an application fee? Yes X No . D. Additional pages where necessary to fully complete this application? Yes NO Have you and each officer of your organization read the attached permit and do you and each of you agree on behalf of the organization to cc~ply with each of the conditions therein? Yes X No I hereby swear or affirm under the penalties of perjury as' set forth in Section 18.1-434 of the Code of Virginia, that all the above questions have been completely answered and that all the starts herein are true to the best of rmZ knowledge, information and beliefs. WITNESS ,.the followiqg signatures and seals: Signature of Applicant I, /~//~// , a Notary Public in and for the County and State afore- said, do hereby certi t Mr. Gi~ez~b. Wildhria~. in his ca ci Vice kresiRen~ ~ofr B~ BeI~u~la ¥o/1~ Reso.%%e Squad organization and whose nam~ is signed'to the eg j appeared b~fore me this day and acknowledged, subscribed and swore the same be,~ _me _in ~ jurisdiction aforesaid. , My Ommission Expires: Given under my hand this /~ day of Not~. ']ic L ~NTY OF CHESTERFIELD~ VIRGINIA BINGO-RAFFLE PROCEEDS Certificate of Use (Must be verified under oath by Fiscal Officer, President, and Members of the Board of Directors) Bens~!y Be~nuda Vo,1 Rescue SQuad Name of Organization We each certify that the proceeds of all Bingo Games or Raffles reported in attached financial report have been used to support those lawful, religious, charitable, community or educational purposes for which this organization is specifically chartered or organized and that the operation of such Bingo Games or Raffles has been in accordance with the provisions of Article 1.1 of Chapter 8 of Title 18.2 (Section 18.2-340.1 et seq.) of the Code of Vir$inia, as amended. Signature: _ (PreSident or Chief 0ffic~r) Date /J Address:.~ ~'~ ';~'r z--~/~(&~II, ~'~ 'j/~:~z~'- :~. ~/~..~.~' ,. ~./ /~/ Signature: %~i~,~-- :~ f~L~:~Jl~R~(:~.,,- (Title) Address: (Titl'e) - l&.. Date Date Address: ba~e - I /'he above signed Officer(s) and/or Directors hereby swear or affirm under penalties of perjury as set forth in Section 18.2-434 of the Code of Virsinia, that the above state- ment is true to the best of their knowledge, information and beliefs. Subscribed and sworn to me, this . day of _ 19 . My commission expires: , //-/?· Notary Publid BENSLEY BERMUDA VOL. I~ESCUE SQUAD P. O. BOX 657 PH. 748-6122 CHESTER, VA. 23831 Dec~nber 16, 1982 EESOLUTION The Executive Board of the: Bensely .,Bermuda Vol. Rs~ue Squad have ~eviewed the Application fora Bingo/Raffle permit for the Calendar yea~ 1983 and direct that Mr. Gilbert R. Wild~ick submit said Application with necessary enclosures and fees, to the Chesterfield County Admir~tstration for preeessing and approval by the Board of Supervisors P.O.Boxx 643 Chester,Virginia November 30,1982 Board of Supervisors Chesterfield ~ounty,Virginia Gentlemen: The Board of Dire6tors of the Chester Civic Association has voted to direct the treasurer to apply for a bingo permit for the next calendar year. Our Charter instrucSs the board to operate and improve the Communtl~y Center of Chester and it is for this purpose that we request the permit. There was some question on our part as to whether we wished to continue omr game, but we have decided to do so;hence the delay in applying this year. Thank you, 13008 S. Chester Rd. Chester, Va. APPLICATION FOR A PERMIT TO CONDUCT BIBR?~ CJkMES OR ~ The undersigned applicant, pursuant to Section 18.2-340.1, et. seq. of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, requests the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County to issue a Permit to conduct bingo games or raffles during the Iq ~calendar year. In support of this application, the applicant offers the follc~ing information under oath: 1. A. Proper nan~_ of organization: ~.4~.~ ~.~ B. Address of organization's headquarters: Sh~91p .~- ~.~ ~ · E. Type of pe~ ap~l'ied for: Bingo F. Address or addresses where bingo games will be held or raffle drawings conducted: NC/I~: This permit is valid only at the above location. G. Dates or days of ~L=ek and times of day when bingo games or raffles will be held at above address or addresses: ~~ 2. A. Date when organization was founded:/~[~,,J ~/ /~y . B. Has your organization been in existence and met regularly in .Chesterfield County for two years ~iately prior to making this application? Yes ~ No . C. Is your organization currently and 'has your organiZation always been operated in the past as a nonprofit organization? Yes A-" No . D. Tax Exempt Status No. (If Applicable): E. State the specific type, and purpose of your organization: F. This application is for a new permit or a renewal .Permit ~ (if for renewal ~t,~ answer G below). G. Gr. oss ~e~.~iPts frcrn all sources related to the operation of bingo games or instant bingo 'by '~klendar quarter for the 12 month period inml~liately prior to the date of this aPPlication: is~ quar~er.~ 2nd qnktrter 3rd c~aarter Officer~ of Organization:--~ ~'~'a~ctress: -- ,~0 ~ President: J~ d ,~L~O~ . ~ . Vice President:~f%7~,~ ~;~{ . t~-~} ~t~~M~__ S~ ~.%~ ~r au~oriz~ wi~ ~ org~ization to ~ res~ns~le for ~ndu~g ~d o~ation of b~go g~s or raffles: ~ you, each officer, director ~d ~ of ~e org~ization f~lly ~derst~d each of ~e foll~mg: A. It is a viol~ti= of law to ent~ into a ~ntr~ct wi~ =y ~rson, fim, ass~iation, org=ization, ~ers~p or ~ration of =y classification, ~ts~ver, for ~e p~e~ org~izNg, ~g~g or ~nducting bNgo g~s or raffles? Yes ~ ~ . B. 5e org=ization mst min=~ ~d file with ~e ~=W Intemal A~i~r on or ~fore ~v~r 1, ~lete records ~d disb~s~ts ~a~Ng to b~go g~s ~d raffl~d ~t 'su~ reoords Yes ~ C. Any organization found in violation of Section 18.2-340.10 of the Code of Vir~in/a authorizinq this permit is subject to having such permit revoked and any organiza- tion or person, shareholder, agent, mmmber or ~m~ployee of such organizatio~ who violated Section 18.2-340.10 or Article 1.1 of Cha.ute~ 8 of Title 18.2 of the Code of Virginia may be guilty of a felony? Yes ~' No . }{as your organization attached to this application each of the following? A. A copy of the organization' s charter, articles of inoorporation, bylaws, and other legal documents which describe the specific purposes for which the organization is chartered or organized? Yes ~' No ' O~ ~ L~., ~; ~ ~(~A., B. A copy of a resolution of the organization's board of directors authorizing the under- signed to apply for this permit? Yes ~' No . C. A check in. the amount of ~5.00 payable to Treasurer, CJnesterfield County as an application fee? Yes D. Additional pages where r~cessary to fully cc~plete this application? Yes No Have you and each officer of your organization read the attached permit and do you and each of you agree on behalf of the organization to ccmply with each of the conditio~%s therein? Yes ~ NO . I hereby swear or affirm under the penalties of perjury as set forth in Section 18.1-434 of the Code of Virginia, that all the above questions have been completely answered and that all the' stateJ~_nts herein are true to the best of my knowledge, information and beliefs. ~S the following ~i~9%m.tures and seals: S£gnat~'e of hppiicant COUNTY OF CHESTERFIEL~ ~ foregoing appeared before me this day and acknowledged, subscribed and.~re.-the before, in the juri ction a oresai , un er my CHESTERFIELD COUNTY CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA 23832 (804) 748-1491 COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE Ibp CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AG E NDA MEETING DATE: January 12, 1983 SUBJECT: APPOINTMENT OF POLICE OFFICERS ITEM NUMBER: 13 ,C, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: I respectfully request the approval of the following applicants for appointment as Police Officers with the County of Chesterfield beginning January 31, 1983. Back- ground information on each is attached. Michael B. Sorensen Edward F. Fuzy Anthony T. Williamson John K. Craig James B. Herring Steven L. Southworth Galen B. Hartless Daniel K. Giardini Lisa A. Llewellyn William F. O'Daire David M. Beasley Robert B. McLean Alan S. Kellam James M. Elliott Edward S. Guice Paul H. Blocker William C. George PREPARED BY; ~ol. J. E. Pittman~ Jr. ATTACHMENTS: YES [] NO [] SIGNATURE: ~Y ADM I NI STRATOR Michael Bruce Sorensen Police Officer Applicant Michael Bruce Sorensen was born on January 22, 1960, in Richmond, Virginia. He graduated from Highland Springs High School in June, 1978 with a 3.59 grade point average. He then attended Virginia Commonwealth University in RichmOnd, Virginia, majoring in the Administration of Justice. He was on the Dean's list each of his four years at VCT and graduated Magna Cum Laude with a 3.80 grade point average in May, 1982. The applicant was a charter member and past president of Henrico Police Department Explorer Post 608, from 1977 to 1980. He served his college internship with the Richmond Bureau of Police in 1980. The applicant is single. William Frank O'Daire Police Officer Applicant William Frank O'Daire was born on July 28, 1959, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. He has lived with his parents in Colonial Heights, Virginia since 1964. Applicant graduated from C.olonial Heights High School in June, 1978. He served in the United States Air Force from December, 1978, to September, 1982. His duties were air security police and he reachedthe rank of sergeant. The applicant is married to Theresa Annette O'Daire and she is employed as a receptionist at the CheSterfield Indoor Tennis Club. Edward Francis Fuzy Police Officer Applicant Edward Francis Fuzy was born on December 7, 1960, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The applicant graduated from Haverford Senior High School, Haverford, Pennsylvania, in June, 1978. He served active duty with the United States Coast Guard and recei~ved and honorable discharge in January, 1979. He is currentlY employed as a police and fire dispatcher with the Haverford Police Department in Haverford, Pennsyl~ania~and has held that position since March, 1979. He bas taken various police and fire training courses at Delaware County Community College. He has received firearms training and certification from the state of Pennsylvania. He is an EmergencY Medical Technician and has recei~ved training in arson investigations and detection. Mr. Fuzy is not married. David Michael Beasley Police Officer Applicant David Michael Beasley was born on April 13, 1960, in Richmond, Virginia. He graduated from Gill School on June 9, 1978 and attended John Tyler Community College from the Fall, 1978 to the Spring of 1982. While attending John Tyler Community College, he attained a grade point average of 3.77 out of a possible 4.0. The applicant was on the Dean's list in the Spring of 1982 and has a total of 144 quarter hours. The applicant is single and lives in Chesterfield County with his father. Anthony Traina Williamson Police Officer Applicant Applicant Williamson was born on March 30, 1957. He attended Midlothian High School and was awarded a GED from the City of Richmond School Board in 1974. He is presently attending J. Sargeant Reynold's Community College and is enrolled in the administration of justice curriculum. Mr. Williamson served in the United States Marine Corps from March 30, 1974, until February 8, 1978, and~achieved the rank of E4. He was a security guard at the Bank of Virginia and served as a security manager for Jefferson-Ward, 1508 Parham Road, From May, 1980 until November, 1982. He effected numerous arrests while employed at Jefferson- Ward and has established a positive reputation in the Henrico County courts. Anthony Williamson has a strong desire to be a Chesterfield County Police Officer. He has the motivation and energy to be a fine officer. Robert Baldwin McLean Police Officer Applicant Robert was born on April 24, 1961, in Edinburgh, Scotland. He graduated from Midlothian High School on June 8, 1978, and holds an A.A.S. in the Administration of Justice from J. Sargeant Reynold's Community College. Robert is public service oriented. He has served as a volunteer fire- fighter and is employed as an emergency services dispatcher with the Chesterfield Fire Department. Robert has been interested in law enforcement since high school. He has prepared himself by attaining an A.A.S. degree in hiS chOsen field and by working in a related area. Robert should prove to be a fine Chesterfield Police Officer. John Keith Craig Police Officer Applicant Keith was born on June 16, 1959, in Oldham County, Kentucky. He graduated from King George High School, King George, Virginia in June, 1977. He is presently attending J. Sargeant Reynold's Community College and is enrolled in the'criminal justice curriculum. Keith is public service oriented and enjoys working with people. He is currently a member of the Ashland Volunteer Rescue Squad. He was a seasonal employee at Kings Dominion for approximately five years and progressed from rides operator to rides supervisor and ultimately to rides manager. While working in the rides department,~Keith was faced with many crisis and emergency situations. He reacted well under stressful situations. Keith's orientation to the public and his background at Kings Dominion should be of invaluable service to him as a Chesterfield County Police Officer. Alan Stephen Kel lam Police Officer Applicant Steve was born on April 25, 1949, in Nassawadox, Virginia. He served in the United States Navy for four years and achieved the rank of E5 Radioman 2nd Class. Mr. Kellam has extensive law enforcement experience. He served as a patrolman with the Middletown TownshiP Police Department, Levittown, Pennsylvania from April, 1973 to Junq 1975. From Middletwon he went to the Fort Lau~erdale Police Department, Fort Lauderdale, Florida in June, 1975 to present. While at Fort Lauderdale he worked in communications, patrol, the detective division, and presently the organized crime division. He has worked in both the narcotics squad and the vice squad and has served in undercover capacities within these units. Steve is also a member of the police department's Underwater Search, Rescue, and Recovery Team and is certified as an instructor in that area. Mr. Kellam wishes to remove his family from the extremely fast pacid life style that now permeates southern Florida, particularly the Fort Lauderdale- Miami area. He is interested in establishing roots in a traditional community setting; one in which he can raise his family in a clean wholesome environment. He wants to establish himself in a medium sized police department, which is both positive and progressive in nature. Steve Kallam is a thirty four year old career law enforcement officer, who is seeking a home for his family and for his professional needs. His work experiences and his desire to live and work in our community should prove to establish a very fine Chesterfield County Police Officer. James Bradford Herring Police Officer Applicant The applicant was born on August 13, 1961, in Fairfax, Virginia. He attended J. R. Tucker High School and was awarded a GED on May 5, 1980. Applicant Herring is on active duty with the United States Army at Fort Myer, Virginia, where he serves as a military police officer. He holds the rank of Specialist 4th Class. His active duty con~nitment ends on January 3, 1983. He has been trained in and serves as security for foreign diplomats, kings, queens, and presidents. He is a licensed Commonwealth of Virginia breathalyzer operator. He has completed numerous police training courses to include the United States Air Force's SWAT training sChool. The applicant's experiences should provide a fine background for entry into the field of public law enforcement. James Martin Elliott Police Officer Applicant The applicant was born on February 19, 1961. He graduated from Colonial Heights High School in June, 1980. Mr. Elliott is currently in the United States Marine Corps Reserve and is assigned to a reserve unit on Strathmore Road. The applicant is community oriented and has coached city league baseball, football, and basketball in the City of Colonial Heights. He is depicted as being a caring person who should do well in the field of law enforcement. Steven Lee SouthWorth Police Officer Applicant The applicant was born on August 10, 1960, in Richmond, Virginia. He graduated from J. R. Tucker High School on June 7, 1978. He has an AAS degree from J. Sargeant Reynolds Community College and he has a BS degree from Virginia Commonwealth University with a major in the administration of justice and a minor in psychology. Steve was a member for ten (10) years of Law Enforcement Explorer Post 608, which is sponsored by the Henrico County Division of Police. He was an auxilliaryofficerwith the VCU Police Department from September, 1980 to May, 1982. He is currently employed by Jefferson-Ward in Henrico County in a security capacity. Mr. Southworth has prepared himself extensively for a career in the field of law enforcement and should be an excellent chOi'ce for the position of police officer with the Chesterfield County Police Department. Edward Shaun Guice Police Officer Applicant Edward Shaun Guice was born on September 8, 1958 in Kingsport, Tennessee. The applicant graduated from Douglas S. Freeman High School in June, 1977. He served in the United States Marine Corps from July, 1977 to July, 1981, and was discharged honorably. He Served as a military police officer and squad leader. He is married to Rebekah Jordan Guice and they do not have any children. Mrs. Guice is attending nursing schOOl at J. Sargeant Reynold's Community College at this time. Galen Blake Hartless Holice Officer Applicant Galen Blake Hartless was born on November 12, 1957, in Lynchburg, ¥irginia. Applicant graduated from Brook ville High School in Lynchburg in June 1976. Also attended Central Virginia Community College, Lynchburg, Virginia, graduated in June 1981 with an ~Associates in Applied Sciene in Police Sciene Degree. He has been employed with a Detective and Security Agency for the last five years and he is engaged to be married very soon. Paul H. Blocker Police Applicant The applicant was born at the Walter Reid Medical Center, Washington, D.C. on June 5, 1952. He graduated from Northwood High School in Silver Springs, Maryland in June of 1970, and continued his education at the University of Maryland, where he earned a Bachelors Degree in Law Enforcement in May of 1976. He is currently emlpoyed with the Richmond Bureau of Police as a patrolman. The applicant is married and has a son Daniel K. Giardini Police Officer Applicant The applicant was born on April 4, 1957, in Olean, New York. He graduated from Allegany Central School in June of 1975 and continued his education at Monroe Community College and Alfred University where he earned a Bachelors Degree in Criminal Justice Studies in May of 1979. He is presently employed with the All~gany, New York Police Department where he holds the position of Sergeant. The applicant is married and has no children. William Courtney George l~olice Officer Applicant The applicant was bo~n in Fredericksburg, Virginia on February 7, 1961. He graduated from King George High School in June of 1979 and continued his education at J. Sargent Reynolds Community College. He is currently attending school there with 86 hours completed in their Criminal Justive Program. He is currently employed with the Zoology department at Kings Dominion as a ranger. The ~pplicant is single and has no children. Lisa Ann Llewellyn Police Officer Applicant The applicant was born in Norfolk, Virginia on September 2, 1961. She graduated from Manchester H~gh School on JUne of 1978 and continued her education at North Carolina State University where she earned a Bachelors Degree in Political Sciene in August of 1982. She is currently employed with Sears as a catalog sales clerk. The applicant is single and has no children, CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: SUBJECT: January 12, 1983 ITEM NUMBER: VEPCO Easement, Buford Road Fire Station 13.D. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION VEPCO requires an easement in order to install electrical service for this project. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the County Administrator be authorized to grant this easement. ATTACHMENTS: YES I~ NO [] William B. Correll Construction Coordinator SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMI NISTRATOR No. 97556810 Rev./~ ~ < :?' G2200 . ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~:~. ~' 700~20. 7~ THIS AGREEMENT, Made this day of. , 19 ' ~otmty o~ Chesterfield. ActLng by ~nd th~oush its board o~ Supervisors hereinafter called "Owner" ["Owner" wherever used herein being intended to include the grantors whether one or more or masculine or feminine]; and Virginia Electric and Power Company, a Virginia corporation, hereinafter called "Company." WI TN ESS E TH: That for the sum of One Dollar (:!;1.00) and other valuable considerations, the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, Owner grants unto Company, its successors and assigns, the prepetual right, privilege and easement of right-of-way fifteen [15] feet in width to lay, construct, operate and maintain one or more lines of underground conduits and cables and one or more lighting supports and lighting fixtures, as Company may from time to time deem expedient or advisable, located on the right-of-way hereinafter described, for the purpose of transmitting and distributing electric power by one or more circuits; for telephone, television and other communication purpc~es; and for lighting purposes; to~ther with all wires, conduits, cables, transformers, transformer enclosures, concrete pads, manholes, handholes, connection boxes, ground connections, meters, attachments, equipment, accessories and appurtenances desirable in connection therewith [hereinafter referred to as "facilities"], over, under, through and across certain lands of Owner situated in COtl~ty o:[ Chesterfield, Virginia , as shown on Plat No..CE82-249 hereto attached and made a part of this agreement; the location of the center line of said right-of-way being shown in broken lines on said plat. The facilities constructed hereunder shall remain the property of Company. Company shall have the right to inspect, re- build, remove, repair, improve, relocate on the right-of way described above, and make such changes, alterations, substitutions, additions to or extensions of its facilities as Company may from time to time deem advisable. Company shall at all times have the right to keep the right-of-way clear of all buildings, structures and other obstructions [except fences], trees, roots and undergrowth. All trees and limbs cut by Company at any time shall remain the property of the Owner. For the purpose of constructing, inspecting, maintaining or operating its facilities on the right-of-way on the property of Owner or on its right-of-way on any other property, the Company shall have the right of ingress and egress over, upon and along such right-of-way. If the Company is unable reasonably to exercise the right of ingress and egress over, upon or along the right-of-way on the property of Owner, the Company shall have such right of ingress and egress over the property of the Owner adjacent to the right-of-way. Company shall have the further right of inCress to and egress from the rights-of-way over such private roads as may now or hereafter exist on the property of Owner. The right, however, is reserved to Owner to shift, relocate, close or abandon such private roads at any time. If there are no public or private roads reasonable convenient to the rights-of-way, Company shall have such right of ingress and egress over the lands of Owner adjacent to the rights-of-way and lying between public or private roads and the rights-of-way in such manner as shall occasion the least practicable damage and inconvenience to Owner. Company shall be liable for all damages resulting from its exercise of the right of ingress and egress. Owner, its successors and assigns, may use the right-of-way for any purpose not inconsistent with the rights hereby granted, provided such use does not interfere with or endanger the construction, operation and maintenance of Company's facilities and provided that no buildings, structures or other obstructions [except fences] may be constructed on the right-of-way. Owner covenants that it is seised of and hag the right to convey the said easement of right-of-way, rights and privileges; that Company shall have quiet and peaceable possession, use 'and enjoyment of the aforesaid easement of right-of-way, rights and priv- lieges; and that Owner shall execute such further assurances thereof as may be required. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Owner has caused its name to be signed hereto by its and its corporate seal to be hereunto affixed and attested by its... as of the day and year above written. BY ?oos;zo. ?~ . ¢o..TX, c, ------ LOC~TION OF CENTER No. 97556030 Rev. E LINE OF RIGHT OF WAY VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY PLAT TO ACCOMPANY RIGHT-OF-WAY AGREEMENT C~,~o e,v / ~/-/~,~ DISTRICT D I 5TR f'C'f-T 0WN SH I P- COUNTY-CITY STATE ,~,,~o:~.~,~, c~.~F,../~' ~1 CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: January 12, 1983 ITEM NUMBER: 14 .A. SUB4ECT: Consideration of East Avenue as a Rural Addition Project COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION The Atlantic Baptist Bible College in Enon is planning to expand its facility and increase enrollment by building residential dormitories to house additional students. In order to build the dormitories, the College must extend sewer and water lines through the adjacent property owned by Glen Butler. (See attached map showing location of College and proposed easements.) Currently no appropriate access exists to reach the College from Route 10, and users of the College have been travelling through a residential subdivision and then trespassing over Mr. Butler's property to gain access to the School. Officials from the College were informed on several occasions prior to purchasing the property that no legal access existed to the property. Because of what Mr. Butler considers to be the unreasonableness of the College in using his property for access without permission after having been informed of the lack of a legal right of way, Mr. Butler adamantly refuses to grant the necessary sewer and water easements for the new buildings until the College's right of way problem from Route 10 has been resolved. The College has now requested that the County condemn Mr. Butler for the sewer and water easements and Mr. Butler promises to vigorously oppose the condemnation. (continued on next page) PREPARED BY; ATTACHMENTS: YES NO SIGNATURE: Steven L. Micas County Attorney COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Consideration of East Avenue as a Rural Addition Project January 12, 1983 Page 2. Both the College and Butler's property adjoin the East Avenue area of Enon, a Iow-density single-family residential area that has been developed in a "hop-scotch" fashion without normal subdivision controls by the use of individual variances granted by the Board of Supervisors and Board of Zoning Appeals. None of the homes in the area front on a public road and the road as it deteriorates because of increased use will create further pressures for the County to maintain what is in reality a private road serving an unplanned subdivision. Staff strongly recommends against condemning for sewer and water easements because the availability of sewer and water will continue the inappropriate practice of permitting extensive use of property without proper publicly-maintained access. Rather, staff recommends the following approach to obtaining utility service to the College and solving the access problems in the East Avenue area: 1. Defer the Oaklawn Boulevard and Treely Road rural addition projects and substitute the East Avenue project as the County's first priority. East Avenue could then be constructed to state secondary standards from Route 10 southwardly a sufficient distance to serve the College. The County has previously prepared plans to improve the East Avenue access and the necessary rights of way have been obtained except for a small section fronting on Route 10. The East Avenue homes would then have the capability of obtaining public access to Route 10 and the College could stop trespassing on Mr. Butler's property by rerouting traffic through East Avenue. The rerouted access to the school will necessitate additional expenditures by the schoo! and acquisition of right of way by the County and the College. Once a mechanism for solving the access problem is agreed upon by the County, Mr. Butler will dedicate the necessary sewer and water easements. 2. The East Avenue Project is expected to cost at least $300,000 while $240,000 is currently available to the County for rural access projects. Any cost in excess of the anticipated cost would be funded by an appropriation from the County 3¢ road funds or from the general fund contingency. The staff is investigating the possible use of either voluntary or involuntary assessments from the benefited property owners to pay for the cost of any amount in excess of available rural access funds. If such an approach is feasible, staff will at a later date request use of a modified assessment approach by the Board for a portion of the cost of the project. 0 I I " I / BLrTLEE --PROPERTY ' ~"(::) LL. CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: January 12~ 1983 ITEM NUMBER: SUBJECT: Right of Way and Utility Relocation Costs on the Bellwood Road Industrial Access Project 14 .B. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Bellwood Road Industrial Access Project is complete. Right of way and utility relocation costs on this project has exceeded the estimated budget by $9,000.00. The balance in the Huguenot Park Recreational Access Account is approximately $10,400. In order to balance the Bellwood Road Industrial Access Account, $9,000 should be transferred from the Huguenot Park Recreational Access Account. RECOMMENDATION: Staff requests Board action to transfer $9,000 from the Huguenot Park Recreational Access Account to the Bellwood Road Industrial Access Account. AGENDA/JAN17/B ATTACHMENTS: YES / NO ~ ~.udget Comments: Due to reduced expenses in the Huguenot Park Access project, the $9,000 is available to be transferred to the Bellwood Road Acc~s project. Lane B. Ramsey, Dlrec~ Budget & Accoun.~epartment / stanley R.~alderson, Jr. Director of Planning SIGNATURE: /t~~Y~,,~ COUNTY ADM I NI STRATOR /- -,CHESTERFIELD COUNTY -, JAMES 7 RI~ ' BELLWOOD' ':RD. ' '.END"PROJ PROJEC 7: '.:-:,LOCATION SCALE .- ::'- ' 't CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: January 12, 1983 ITEM NUMBER: 14.C. SUBJECT: Osborne-Wilton Revenue Sharing Project COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: on7L8-81 at ~. Dodd's request, the Doard of Supervisors approvedthe road improvements and the construction of a sidewalk at Osborne Road and Wilton Drive in Bermuda District. The project was to be funded by Revenue Sharing Funds to be matched by the State Highway Department. The Highway Department has notified us that the right-of-way portion of the project cannot be matched by State funds. If the Board wishes to continue with the project it will be necessary for the County to pay total cost of acquisition which totals $10,500. In addition the project will have to be designated as a "no-plan" project as opposed to being included in the Secondary Road budget. The Board is therefore requested to do the following: t Transfer $10,500 from the Osborne Road and Wilton Drive Revenue Sharing Fund account for right-of-way acquisition. Transfer $7,000 from the Osborne Road and Wilton Drive Revenue Sharing Fund Account for payment of one-half the actual cost for a sidewalk along Osborne Road (Route 616) between Wilton Drive (Route 1528) and Cliff Lawn Drive (Route 807). Adopt the attached ATTACHMENTS: YES i~ NO E! resolution. ~..,,~/~.~,/'~. PREPARED SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMI NI STRATOR WHEREAS, The Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors has allocated County revenue-sharing funds pursuant to Section 33.1-75.1 of the Code of Virginia for the purpose of reconstructing the Osborne Road (Route 616) and Wilton Drive (Route 1528) intersection; WHEREAS, The Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors appropriated $45,000 from the FY81-82 Revenue-Sharing Fund for the reconstruction of the Osborne Road and Wilton Drive intersection and $48,800 from the FY82-83 Revenue-Sharing Fund for supplemental funding for this project, which are to be equivalently matched by State funds; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors reduces their revenue-sharing contribution, allocated to the Osborne Road and Wilton Drive Intersection Project, by $17,500 for right of way acquisition and one-half the actual construction cost for the sidewalk; AND FURTHER, That the Osborne Road and Wilton Drive Intersection Project be changed from a Budget Item to a no plan project; AND FURTHER, That Osborne Road shall be closed to through traffic during the construction of the project. AGENDA/D85/B CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE; January 12, 1983 SUBJECT: Savoy Road Sidewalk ITEM NUMBER: 14. D. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION; BACKGROUND: On December 8, 1982, at Mrs. Girone's request, the Board of Supervisors appropriated $3,800 from the Midlothian District 3¢ Road Fund for one-half the actual construction cost (State to pay other half) of a concrete sidewalk along the south side of Savoy Road and for just compensation of any property improvements. This Agenda Item included a request for the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation (VDH&T) to construct the above mentioned sidewalk. CURRENT SITUATION: The VDH&T responded that policy would not allow funding of this project within a subdivision. ATTACHMENTS: YES [] NO ~ Director of Planning SIGNATURE: ~ v//.... COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION: If the Board wishes to pursue this project, staff requests Board action on the following recommendations: 1. Request the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation to construct, to State standards for acceptance, a sidewalk along the southside of Savoy Road at the terminus of the existing sidewalk which would extend to Greenfield Drive and Wrens Nest Road, on an accounts receivable basis for actual construction costs. 2. Appropriate an additional $4,200 from the Midlothian District 3¢ Road Fund which would total $8,000 for the installation of the sidewalk. AGENDA/D88/B Budget Comments: Midlothian District 3¢ Road account had a balance of $7,927 at January l, 1983. Lane B. Ramsey', Direc~r Budget & Accounting Oepartment CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AG E NDA MEETING DATE: January 12, 1983 SUBJECT: Granada Road ITEM NUMBER: 14.E. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: BACKGROUND: Greenfield Subdivision, Section D, was recorded on June 28, 1967. Along with this recordation the developer dedicated to the County a 50 foot wide stub road (See attached map). This stub road is an eastern extension of Granada Road (Route 2539) which is in the State system. The Highway Department did not accept this section of Granada Road because there were no houses which front or driveways accessing to this stub road. This stub is an access road for a parking lot, constructed by the Parks and Recreation Department, which serves their organized activities on the parcel to the east and south. CURRENT SITUATION: The Midlothian District Supervisor requested Planning staff to investigate the possibility of upgrading this deteriorating stub road to VDH&T standards for acceptance into the State system. Planning staff held a preliminary field review with a representative of the Highway Department to discuss the scope of the project. The Highway Department then submitted a schematic design of the necessary improvements. The Highway Department has estimated the reconstruction cost to be $7,000.00 using State forces. Continued next page - ATTACHMENTS: YES F:I NO I-I / S~anl~R. Balderson, Jr. Director of Planning SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR This project cannot be funded entirely by the Midlothian District 3¢ Road Fund, due to insufficient funds. The option available for additional funds for this project would require reducing the County's contribution to the Robious Road Revenue-Sharing Project. On June 9, 1982, the Board of Supervisors adopted a resolution reducing the County's contribution to the Robious Road Revenue-Sharing Project by $22,500 for the Salisbury Drive Reconstruction Project. Funding the estimated $7,000 for the Granada Road Project would include withdrawing $5,000 from the remaining $22,500 for Robious Road Revenue-Sharing Project and appropria~ng $2,000 from the Midlothian District 3¢ Road Fund. The $5,000 that is withdrawn from the Revenue-Sharing Account will not be State- matched. RECOMMENDATION: If the Board wishes to pursue this project, staff requests Board action on the following recommendations: Request the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation (VDH&T) to reconstruct Granada Road, from Greenfield Drive (Route 2544) east to terminate in a cul-de-sac, to State standards for acceptance, on an accounts receivable basis. me Transfer $2,000 from the Midlothian District 3¢ Road Fund to the Granada Road Account for the reconstruction to State standards. Transfer $5,000 from the Robions Road Revenue-Sharing Account to the Granada Road Account for the reconstruction to State standards. e Adopt the attached resolution reducing the County's contribution to the Robious Road Revenue-Sharing Project. AGENDA/D8/B Budget Comments: Midlothian District 3¢ Road fund balance at January 1, 1983 was $7,927. Also, there is a total of $22,500 revenue sharing funds in the Robious Road account. B. Ramsey, Director Budget and Accountin~ O I I WHEREAS, The Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors has allocated County Revenue-Sharing Funds pursuant to Section 33.1-75.1 of the Code of Virginia, for the purpose of clearing trees, adding shoulders and moving ditches on Robious Road from Huguenot Road to Woodmont Drive; WHEREAS, The Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors appropriated $45,000 from the FY81-82 Revenue-Sharing Fund for the Robious Road Project, which is to be equivalently matched by State funds; WHEREAS, The Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors adopted a resolution reducing the County's contribution, allocated to the Robious Road Project, by $22,500 for the Salisbury Drive Reconstruction Project; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors reduces their revenue-sharing contribution, allocated to the Robious Road Project, by $5,000 for the reconstruction of Granada Road. AGENDA/D8/B CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA 'L. MEETING DATE: January 12_. 1083 ITEM NUMBER: SUBJECT: Changes in the State Secondary Road System 14 .F. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION BACKGROUND: On December 15, 1980, the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation (VDH&T) accepted from their contractor, the completion of improvements to the Hull Street (Route 360) and Genito Road (Route 604) interchange (see attached map). CURRENT SITUATION: As a result of these improvements, certain changes should be made in the identification of the State secondary road system. These changes include: ae Abandoning, as a public road, the old location of Genito Road, south of Hull Street, for a distance of 0.24 mile. Abandoning, as a public road, the old location of Stigall Road, south of Hull Street, for a distance of 0.10 mile. ATTACHMENTS: YES ~ NO [] jStanley~./ Balderson, Jr. Directo~~ of Planning S,G.ATURE: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Ce Discontinuing, as a part of the secondary road system, the old section of Genito Road, north of Hull Street, for a distance of 0.02 mile. Adding, to the State secondary road system, the new section of Genito Road, north and south of Hull Street, for a total distance of 0.66 mile. Mo Adding, to the State secondary road system, the new section of Stigal Road, west of the newly located Genito Road, for a total distance of 0.10 mile. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board adopt the attached resolution requesting the VDH&T to undertake necessary actions to change the State secondary road system identifications. AGENDA/Y/N72 WHEREAS, Genito Road (Route 604), from 0.24 mile south of Hull Street (Route 360) to 0.39 mile north of Hull Street (Route 360), a distance of 0.65 mile, has been altered, and a new road has been constructed and approved by the State Highway Commissioner, which new road serves the same citizens as the road so altered; and WHEREAS, certain sections of this new road follow new locations, due to the relocation and construction on Genito Road (Route 604), State project 0360-020-112, C501. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED That Genito Road (Route 604) of the old location 0.24 mile south of Hull Street (Route 360) and Stigall Road (Route 759) of the old location 0.10 south of Hull Street (Route 360), a total distance of 0.34 mile, be and the same hereby is, abandoned as a public road pursuant to Section 33.1-155 of the Code of Virginia of 1976, as amended. AND FURTHER, That the State Highway Commission be requested to take the necessary action to discontinue the Genito Road (Route 604) of the old location 0.02 mile north of Hull Street (Route 360), as a part of the secondary road system of State Highways as provided in Section 33.1-150 of the Code of Virginia of 1976, as amended. AND FURTHER, That Genito (Route 604) of the new location 0.39 mile north of Hull Street (Route 360) and 0.27 mile south of Hull Street (Route 360), a total distance of 0.66, be and hereby is, added to the Secondary system of State Highways, pursuant to Section 33.1-229 of the Code of Virginia of 1976, as amended. AND FURTHER, That Stigall Road (Route 759) of the new location, 0.10 mile west of the newly located Genito Road (Route 604), be and hereby is, added to the Secondary system of State Highways, pursuant to Section 33.1-229 of the Code of Virginia of 1976, as amended. AND FURTHER, That Genito Road (Route 604) of the old location, beginning 0.02 mile north of Hull Street (Route 360) and ending 0.18 mile north of Hull Street (Route 360) be left in the State secondary road system, a total distance of 0.16 mile. AGENDA/Y/N72 CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGE NDA MEETING DATE: January 12, 1983 SUBJECT: Street Light Requests ITEM NUMBER: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION MATOACA DISTRICT A petition requesting eleven (11) street lights was received frcm 64 residents who reside in River Road Estates. They are as follows: 1. Brickhouse Drive and Brickhouse Court 2. River Road and Truth Drive 3. River Road and Attucks Drive 4. Truth Drive and Attucks Drive 5. Between 20910 and 20911 Truth Drive (does not meet criteria) 6. Brickhouse Drive, Near 20914 (does not meet criteria) 7. Between 4210 and 4211 Brickhouse Court (does not meet criteria) 8. Sasha Court and Shaker Drive 9. Between 20907 and 20908 Sasha Court (does not meet criteria) 10. Sacks Lane and Shaker Court 11. Brickhouse Drive and Sacks Lane ATTACHMENTS: YES E~ NO [] PREPARED BY;_ ~"~-~/'~'/ RichardM/McElf. ish, P.E. Director, Environmental Engineering SIGNATURE:. C '~O0~TY ADM I N I STRATOR /- ( · (- ~ I~000~1~ ~U I ~0~0~00 ! 0 ~1 I ~ I I ~ I I I I ~1 00000010 ~1 ~1 I UI I Zl I ~1 I I I ..J I I'--0 · ,~ I ,oo t-- I-- I I&.l <[ i 0,-4 uJ I ~1~ 0 Zl Zl C L STREET LIGHT REQUEST Matoaca District DATE OF REQUEST December 27, 1982 TAX MAP 181-15 and 16 NAME OF REQUESTOR River Road Estates Neighborhood Association ADDRESS 20904 Truth Drive, Ettrick, Virginia PHONE NUMBER - HOME N/A WORK REQUEST IS LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF AND Note Attachmsnt REQUEST IS NOT AT AM INTERSECTION. PLACED IT IS REQUESTED TO BE PLEASE INSTALL LIGHT ON POLE # Note'Attachment OR SET POLE CO.M3~ENTS All the followinG street liqht requests meets County criteria with the exception of the ones noted on the attached sheet. These request were made by petition from 64 area residents. ATTACHMENT: (Vicinity Sketch) 1. Brickhouse Drive and Brickhouse Court 2. River Road and Truth Drive 3. River Road and Attucks Drive 4. Truth Drive and Attucks Drive 5. Between 20910 and 20911 Truth Drive 6. Brickhouse Drive, Near 20914 7. Between 4210 and 4211 Brickhouse Court 8. Sasha Court and Shaker Drive 9. Between 20907 and 20908 Sasha Court 10. Sacks Lane and Shaker Court 11. Brickhouse Drive and Sacks Lane PROPOSED STREET LIGHTS FOR RIVER ROAD ESTATES NOTE ASTA~ FOR PROPOSED LOCATIONS 0 0 0 5o 0 0 10. 11. Brickhouse Drive and Brickhouse Court: street light on concrete pole. River light River light Truth light Proposed 3300 M.V. Road and Truth Drive: Proposed 8000 H.P.S.V. street on treated pole. Road and Attucks Drive: Proposed 8000 H.P.S.V. street on treated pole. Drive and Attucks Drive: Proposed 3300 M.V. street on concrete pole. Truth Drive, between 20910 and 20911: Proposed 3300 M.V. street light on concrete pole (does not meet criteria). Brickhouse Drive, near 20914: Proposed 3300 M.V. street light on concrete pole (does not meet criteria). Brickhouse Court, between 4210 and 4211: Proposed 3300 M.V. street light on concrete pole (does not meet criteria). Sasha Court and Shaker Drive: Proposed 3300 M.V. street light on concrete pole. Sasha Court, between 20907 and 20908: Proposed 3300 M.V. street light on concrete pole (does not meet criteria). Sacks Lane and Shaker Court: Proposed 3300 M.V. street light on concrete pole. Brickhouse Drive and Sacks Lane: Proposed 3300 M.V. street light on concrete pole. ./ 4 ./ 6 ~0905 o I ../,. $ o Sho L)r iv~ / 16 Ct. I / CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE : January 12, 1983 SUBJECT: Street Name Change ITEM NUMBER: 14.H.!. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT; Salisbury, Marlborough Downes Second Section This office has received a request from the developer/owner of Salisbury, Marlborough Downes Second Section to change the name of Southwell Drive. We have issued no building permits and the name change would affect no citizens. The proposed street name change has been approved by both Richmond Regional and our office. Change Southwell Drive to Chilmark Road. ATTACHMENTS: YES El NO [] PREPARED BY', ._ ~' "~ ~ ¢ ~ Richard ~. McElfish, P.E. Director, Environmental Engineering SIGNATURE: - ~/~~NTY ADM I N I STRATOR · December 6, 1982 Mr. Richard M. McElfish Environmental Engineering Chesterfield County Chesterfield, Va. 23832 Dear Mr. McElfish: Due to a conflict of names, we are requesting the changing of Southwell Drive in Marlborough Downes Second Section to Chilmark Road. There are no lots facing Southwell Drive and there should be no other conflict with this change. Sincerely, l.? Emmett D. Harris Executive Vice President EDH/ks 14005 Steeplestone Drive, Midlothian,Virginia 23113 Tel. (804)794-6886 RICHMiOND REGIONAL PLANNINg DISTRICT COMMISSION January 5, 1981 Mr. Don I]alzer, Jr. J. K. Timmons & Associates, 711 North Courthouse Road Richmond, VA 23235 Dear Mr. Balzer: Inc. The following Street Names have been approved and assigned for your use as indicated below. This document should be submitted with the plat to the appropriate local official when it goes in for a calculation check. e Subdivision Name and Number SA LISB'URY Jurisdiction CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VA. Street Names approved and assigned this date: CASTLEFORD ..CHILM ARK_ CHRISTENDOM CRIPPLEGA TE DANELAW DOMESDAY DOMFRONT DORSETSHIRE ETHELRED FA R LEIGH FULFORD GA LLOWA Y GILDENBOROUGH HATFIELD CHASE HEATHLAND MONTACUTE MORT EM ER NEWGATE ROCHESTER ,. SEN LA C ' SOUTHWELL THORNEY TOSNY TREPORT TUNSB ERG VIBURG WORCHESTER The following street names were disapproved due Bishopsgate Norwich Godwin Osbern Lemans to duplication: Ramsbury Shetland Sincerely, RRPDC Street Name Coordinator 6 NOR'tH SIXTH STRE'E'T, SUITE 500, RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23Z~9 * PHONE (804) 644-8566 CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA L. MEETING DATE' January 12, 1983 SUBJECT: Street Name Change ITEM NUMBER: 14.H.2. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION BERMUDA DISTRICT The Board of Supervisors on October 13, 1982 approved a street name change for State Route ~898 (Pine Bark Road) to Ware Bottom Spring Road with the effective date of March 1, 1983. Several of the businesses located along the road have requested that the effective date of March 1, 1983 be changed to September 1, 1983. Staff recommends approval. ATTACHMENTS: YES [] NO :ID SIGNATURE: Richard M. McElfish, P.E. Director, Environmental Engineering COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: January 12, 1983 ITEM NUMBER: 15 .~,. SUB,JECT: Claim of Billy T. Clark Regarding Water Damage to His Property. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ,,__ ~. r, L~ .-,_;.'. ~ t"-' .~~ 70,. ~ ~ ,f~., ~ ~,-,~. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION. ~ .... . . At its November 14, 1982 meeting, the Board e'~nsidered & claim brought by Billy T. Clark in the amount of $2,500.00 for water damage to his property. Mr. Clark is claiming that the damage was caused by a leaking water line which serves an adjacent property. The Board deferred this matter to the December 8, 1982 meeting and again deferred the claim to the first meeting in January. In the interim, County staff members have continued their investigation of this matter and have determined the follo win g: 1) During the time that Mr. Clark discovered water damage to his property, the area was experiencing unusually high rates of rainfall. Total rainfall for June, July and August of 1982 was 37% higher than average (30 year average) rainfall for this period. For the month of August alone, the month the water line leak was reported, the total rainfall was 38% higher than average. 2) Rainfall during this period was very steady, rather than coming in major downpours. Environmental Engineering reports that this type of rainfall tends to saturate soils more completely and therefore, increases the likelihood of ground water seeping into foundations. (Continued) PREPARED BY; ~' ATTACHMENTS: YES [] NO Sloven L. Micas County Attorney SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ,Y Claim of Billy T. Clark Regarding Water Damage to his Property January 12, 1983 Page 2. 3) The ground around the dwelling slopes toward the dwelling causing the ground water, accumulating from constant, steady rains, to flow toward the foundations and into the basement. 4) The dwelling has a downspout in the vicinity of the water meter which empties rainwater onto the property close to the foundation. Not only did the unseasonable high rate of rainfall cause the soils around the dwelling to become, and remain saturated, but the added influx of water draining off the roof of the dwelling added to the problem and helped to cause the water damage. 5) Utilities Department reports that the leak occurred at a leather sealing gasket between the water main and the meter, in an area known as the meter yoke, approximately 18 inches to 2 feet under the surface. It is their experience that this type of leakage is generally minor. 6) County soil maps show the soils around the area to be sandy in nature. These soils would be expected to drain this type of water line leak before the leaking water could cause the damage reported by ~]r. Clark. In summary, it is the opinion of staff that the water leaking from a water meter in the front yard of Mr. Clark's dwelling did not cause the damage to the dwelling's basement. Instead, the damage to the dwelling was caused by unseasonably heavy rainfall during the summer of 1982. Furthermore, under the doctrine of sovereign immunity, the County would not be held liable for this claim. I can find no basis for the payment of ~,{r. Clark's claim for damages in the amount of $2,500.00 and, therefore, recommend denial. CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGE NDA MEETING DATE: January 12, 1983 ITEM NUMBER' SUBJECT: Award of Contract No. W82-92B/6 (8) 2927 - Hollyberry Hills Subdivision 15.B.1. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION Award of Contract W82-92B/6(8)2927 to Virginia Utilities, Inc. in the amount of $29,126.54 based on Bid Schedule "B" using P.V.C. pipe for the installation of water lines to serve existing homes in Hollyberry Hills Subdivision. Transfer $2,727.36 from 380-1-61000-4393 (fire hydrants) to 380-1-62927-4393 and appropriate $29,311.83 from 367 to 380-1-62927, 4393. This action includes a 10% contingency. There are sixteen (16) of the twenty-two (22) residents in Hollyberry Hill Subdivision that have requested public water and have signed contracts to connect to public water. This extension is a portion of the overall plan to serve the area. District: Matoaca ATTACHMENTS: YES [] NO [] SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMI N ISTRATOR 12.."w'/Z. , :iOJECT W82-92~76 (8) 292rl \TER IMFROV F~MENT S OLLYBERRY HILLS SUBDIVISION .~ME OF CONTRAC'fOR ID BOND LME IN DAYS ID SCHEDULE "A" %EM INSTALL L~NIT 1 12" Ouctile Iron Water Pipe 1490 L.F 2 6" Ductile Iron Water Pipe 130 L.F 3 Fire Hydrant 2 EA. ~ 12" Gate Valve (M.J.) 1 EA. 5 6" Gate Valve (M.J.) 3 EA. .o 12" x 6" Tee (M.J.) 3 EA. 7 12" Blind Cap (M.J.) 1 EA. 5 6" Blind Cap (M.J.) i EA. ? 2" Blow-Off Complete 2 EA. ]0 Tie-In to Existing 12" Water Line 1 EA. Il 5/8" Water Meter on Same Side of Road 7 EA. ,12 5/8" Water Meter on Opposite Side of Road 9 EA. ~13 Staked Straw Bales for Erosion Control 10 EA. .14 Replace Pavement 305 S.Y OTAL ITEMS A1 - Al4 ' Certified Check 5% 100 5% 180 15.02 8.69 820.80 869.60 341,20 311.91 119.89 86.92 180.00 460.00 143.65 394.63 8.12 3.83 $35,856.41 13.78 14.20 14.00 7.49 6.00 820.80 800.0~ 23.773.3~ 23,240.0£ 9,662.31 10,250.0£ $33,435.61i $33,490.9! NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BiD NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID 5% 5% 180 90 16.66 22.45 8.86 16.55 820.64 8aO. 00 810.00 845.00 320.00 345.00 250.00 265.00 ] O0. O0 125.00 70.00 60.00 200.00 220.00 750. OO 980.00 180.00 335.00 500.00 345.00 4.00 3.00 2.00 4.65 $37,866.48 S48,460.25 20.45 13.60 830.00 33,898.50 I~,178.25 jg5~076.7~ NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID ~O BID ~O BID ]~O BID ~0 BID ~O BID ~O BID MO BID 5% 5~ 75 13.30 6.25 1~000.00 1,050.00 375.00 300.00 90.00 50.00 150.00 ~60.00 225.00 325.00 4.00 6.00 $33,174.50 12.55 5.50 1~100.00 21,614.50: 10,345.O0 $31,939.50 ~0 BID NO BID ~0 BID ~O BID NO BID NO BID NO BiD NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID 5% 5% 90 120 15.00 17.00 8.50 10.00 840.00 1,000.0~ 740.00 950.00 289.00 375.00~ 269.68 300.00~ 9~.00 53.00 75.00 225.00 250.00 600.00 350.00 200.00 200.00 250.00 275.00 8.00 3.00 2.5O 8.O0 833,180.54 83g,985.00 12.50 1~.5~ 6.20 S25.00 21,081.00 2~,515.0~ 8,0~5.5~ 10,355.0~ $29,126.5~ RO BID 15.00 NO BID 7.25 ~O BID 1,000 ~O BID 950.0( ~O BID 375.0~ ~O BID 300.01 ~O BID 1~0.00 ~O BID 100.0~ ~O BID 28,~97.5f ~O BID 7,195.0r ~O BID $35~,692.5~ ID SCHEDUL~ "B" ]IEM INSTALL 1 12" P.V.C. Water Pipe 6" P.V.C. Water Pipe Fire Hydrant OTAL OF ITEMS B1 - B3 )'IAL OF ITEMS A4 - ~O%AL OF ITEMS B1 - B3 AND A4 - Al4 lid SCHEDULE "C" TEM INSTALL i1 12" Asbestos-Cement Water Pipe 2 6" A~bestos-Cement Water Pipe ]3 Fire Hydrant 4 12" Gate Valve (R.T.) 15 6" Gate Valve (R.T.) ~6 12" x 6" Tee (R,T.) ]7 12" Blind Cap (R.T.) · 8 6" Blind Cap (R.T.) OTAL OF ITEMS CI - C8 OTAL OF IT~ A9 - A~4 .OTAL OF IT~'MS C1 - C8 AND A9 UNIT 1490 L.F. 130 L.F. 2 EA. UNIT 1490 L.F 130 L.F 2EA. 1 EA. 3EA. 3 EA. 1 EA. 1 EA. 15.06 6.00 1~000.00 1,100.00 500.00 400.00 200.00 150.00 150.00 600.00 150.00 300.00 2.00 8.00 $36,479.40 5.77 1~000.00 23.282.30 12,460.00 i $35~743.31 NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID NO BID 9O 16.50 9.50 800.00 800.00 300.00 275.00 !25.00 100.00 150.00 400.00 175.00 375.00 10.00 I0.00 $38,620.00 15.00 8.00 800.00 24,990.00. 11,200.00 _$36~190.00 15.50 8.50 825.00 750.00 300.00 250~.00 100~00 75'.00 28~425.00 8,450~00 $36 ~ 875% 00 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AG E NDA MEETIN(;DATE: January 12, 1983 ITEM NUMBER: 15.B.2. ,SUBJECT: Rejection of a Counteroffer from Garland E. & Dorthy T. Worsham for a Water Easement across their property at 2030 South Providence Road COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION Mr. and Mrs. Worsham made a counteroffer of $500 to our offer of $122.60 for an easement across their property along South Providence Road. This easement is necessary to complete the 16-inch water line along Providence Road from Sharpstead Road to Poco Lane. Since we feel that the $500 counteroffer is excessive, we recommend that the Board reject the counteroffer. The contract for this project has been aswarded; so to prevent delay, we request that the Board authorize the County Attorney to proceed with condemnation. An emergency existing, we ask that the resolution be in full force and effect upon passage. This action will allow the County to proceed with the project, and we will continue to negotiate with Mr. and Mrs. Worsham. District: Clover Hill ATTACHMENTS: YES Bi' NO [] SIGNATURE:, ~Y ADM I NI STRATOR -C PLAT SHOWING PROPOSED VARIABLE ~,'/IDTH WATER EASEMENT AND 10' TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT ON PROPERTY BELONGING TO GARLAND E. & DOROTHY T. %;ORSHAM AS RECORDED IN DEED BOOK 7'~5 PG. ]~56. CLOVER HILL DISTRICT CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIRGINIA / z,'=_..-.O UTILITIES DEPARTMENT CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIRGIN A RI~VISION$ DATE DATE TA.X CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: January 12, 1983 ITEM NUMBER: 15.B.3. SUBJECT: Consideration of a request from two (2) property owners on Melville Drive for the extension of the water line to serve their property. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION' Two (2) residents on Melville Drive have requested that water service be made available to their property on Melville Drive since their wells are inadequate. The estimated cost of this extension is as follows: 250 feet of 6" water line @ $10.00/ft. = $2,500.00 The County will receive $1,000 from connection fees on this project. If a fire hydrant is required on this project, the hydrant will cost approximately $1,000. We recommend that this extension be made if the two (2) property owners sign contracts agreeing to connect to public water. District: Dale ATTACHMENTS: YES I~ NO [] SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMI NISTRATOR November 16, 1982 Mr. Birdsong Untilities Department Chesterfield County Chesterfield, Virginia Dear Sir, In regard to our telephone conversation of Monday, November 15th, I am putting in writing the request of our neighbor, Miss Nancy Brown, and my husband and myself for Chesterfield County Utilities Department to consider extending the water line now existing on Ghent I~ive to the southeast end of Melville Drive for the purpose of providing service £or our two families. A third family, the Nelson's, residing in this oul de sac area, does not appear to be interested in a county water connection at this time. However, Miss Brown and ourselves earnestly seek your immediate attention to the possibility of this request as our present well systems are inadequate. We have consulted Parks Plumbing and Heating Company for an estimate on completing the hook- up to our respective houses once the water is made available. Please advise us as to your decision as soon as possible. Thank you. Sincerely 4 \ \ 5 ST[LLA RO CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA L. MEETING DATE' January 12, 1983 ITEM NUMBER: 15.c.1. SUBJECT: Consideration of a Request for Sewer Service to 143 and 151 Ironwood Road COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF iNFORMATION We received a letter from Mrs. Ralph A. Bates, 143 Ironwood Road, advising that the drainfield has ruptured causing sewage to surface in her yard. The Health Department recommended installing a new drain- field but could not guarantee this would completely eliminate the problem. Mrs. Bates advised that they would like to connect to the public system. There are seven (7) existing homes on Ironwood Road. We have estimated the cost to extend public sewer to be $45,000, for a per unit cost served of $6,428. We advised Mrs. Bates, that because of the high per unit cost, it was not economically feasible to install public sewers. We suggested that since she was having septic tank problems, sewer service could be provided from Heppel Road by acquiring a private egsement from the property owner at the rear of her property and installing a private sewer service lateral to her property. The estimated cost of this work is $2,100 and the connection fee is $1,700, for a total cost of $3,800. In a later telephone conversation with Mrs. Bates, she advised that the property owner at 151 Ironwood Road is also having septic tank problems. We have estimated the cost to ea~tend public sewer to PREPARED BY:. _/-~ ~/-'~~ ATTACHMENTS: YES I~ NO [] SIGNATURE: "'/"d~UNTY ADMI NI STRATOR /- - 2 - 143 and 151 Ironwood Road to be approximately $7,000+, assuming the sewer easement would be dedicated. - We recommend approval of this extension provided both property owners sign contracts agreeing to connect to the public system and agreeing to dedicate sewer easements along the rear of their property. District: Clover Hill ~4 26 ~ ~ 33 15 %~0 ~ I1 80o i 16 ~6 ,© , / · ~ 106 9 / t2 14 / / 'ebu r'g 21 7 DIS I C"l' FUW CLOVER H;LL CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: .3~,,~ry 1 ? _ 1 qR~, ITEM NUMBER* 15.C. 2. SUBJECT: Authorization to proceed with condemnation for the necessary sewer easements to serve Falling Creek Farms, Project No. S82-21C COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARYOFINFORMATION: Since the following owners have refused the offer as shown next to their name, we are requesting that the Board authorize the County Attorney to proceed with condemnation: 1. Mr. and Mrs. Kenneth R. Martin $318.00 9251 Gregory Drive Chesterfield, Virginia 23236 S82-21C/A 2. Mr. and Mrs. Gus M. Betzares $275.00 9301 Gregory Drive Chesterfield, Virginia 23236 S82-21C/B 3. Mr. and Mrs. Bennie H. Reese $402.00 4124 Paul Hill Road Chesterfield, Virginia 23236 s82-21c/c 4. Mr. and Mrs. Anthony Longo $375.00 9331 Gregory Drive Chesterfield, Virginia 23236 S82-21C/H Clover Hill District PREPARED BY: ATTACHMENTS' YES J~' NO [] SIGNATURE: "~)UNTY ADMINISTRATOR · ? o 4 ......... ~ ~£ 9 Bo I UTILITIES DEPARTMENT C~HESTE_..____R FI ELD COUNT~IA $C~,LE I"~ Ioo' DATE (J'F I LJ TIF_.5 I0/ 1-F_,/~O~.Ap..y r-J3~J%TE. UC'-FIOU ~$t~--~A'~=N~T~./-'1 o 8 b.-'f5. I~1% / HILL UTILITIES CHESTERFIELD 'sc~u~ I" = /oo 'DATE DAI'E DE PARTMENT COUNTY, VIRGINIA RISVISIONS &SONS D~AWl~3 NO. CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: January 12~ 1983 ITEM NUMBER' 15.D.1. SUB4ECT: UTILITIY PUBLIC HEARING: Ordinance to vacate portion of a 30' easement across lots 55 and 56, Block E, Smoketree, Section B. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARYOFINFORMATION: We have received a petition from J. K. Timmons and Associates requesting the vacation of a 30' easement across lots 55 and 56, Block E, Smoketree, Section B, as shown on the attached plat. This has been reviewed by staff,and approval is recommended. A new easement will be dedicated. District: Midlothian ATTACHMENTS: YES I~ NO [] SIGNATURE: ~3~' COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR /v/ //j O(__) Ti-Iid=Vy /DI~T,~/0 7' ~ "' PREVIOUS JOB No. J. K. TIMMONS & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS · SUIVEYOIS · ~ 711 N. COURTHOUSE RD. RICHMOND, VA. 880;5 STAPLES MILL RD. HENRICO CO~ 14.005 STEEPLESTONE DR. MIDLOTHIAN, VA, p^'rz. 'D-//-/-SC' SCALr.= DRAWN BY. CHECKED BY- JOB NO. ~0~7~_~ CHESTERFIELD COUNTY: At a regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors held at the Courthouse on January 12, 1983, at 10:00 a.m. AN ORDINANCE to vacate a portion of a 30' ease- ment across lots 55 and 56, Block E, Smoketree Section B, Midlothian Magisterial District, Chesterfield County, Virginia, as shown on plat thereof duly recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County in Plat Book 31, at page 36. WHEREAS, J. K. Timmons and Associates, Incorporated, has peti- tioned the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia to vacate a portion of a 30' easement across lots 55 and 56, Block E, Smoketree, Section B, Midlothian Magisterial District, Chesterfield, Virginia more particularly shown on a plat of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of said County in Plat Book 31, at page 86, made by J. K. Timmons and Associates, Incorporated, dated July 25, 1978. The portion of easement petitioned to be vacated is more fully described as follows: A portion of a 30' easement across lots 55, and 56, Block E, Smoketree, Section B, as shown shaded in red on a plat made by J. K. Timmons and Associates, Engineers, Surveyors, and Planners, dated September 17, 1982, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part of this ordinance. WHEREAS, .notice has been given pursuant to Section !5.1-451 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, by advertising; and WHEREAS, no public necessity exists for the continuance of the easement sought to be vacated and the vacation will not abridge the rights of any citizen. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIRGINIA: That pursuant to Section 15.1-482(b) of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, the above described portion of easement is hereby vacated and no longer necessary for public use. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect in accordance with Section 15.1-482(b)-of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, and a certified copy of this Ordinance, together with the plat attached hereto shall be recorded no sonner than thirty days here- after in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Chesterfield, Virginia pursuant to Section 15.1-485 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. The effect of this Ordinance pursuant to Section 15.1-483 is to destroy the force and effect of the recording of the portion of the plat vacated. Accordingly, this Ordinance shall be indexed in the names of the County of Chesterfield as grantor and Rochus M. Ritchie, Jr. and Nancy C. Ritchie, husband and wife, and Midlothian Development Cor- poration or their successors in title, as grantees. Certified by: Richard L. Hedrick County Administrator .J PL(~T 6tlOILI/PiC~ t~ ~0' C/-/~T~_F/~ c_Z~)VT-~ v/~~/0 PR£VIOU~ JOE} No. J. K. TIMMONS & ASSOClAT~ INC., ENGINEERS .SUIWIYC~S. ~ 711 N. COURTHOUSE RD. RICHMOND~ VA. 8803 STAPLES MILL RD. HENRICO CO, VA, 14005 STEEPLESTONE DR. MIDLOTHIAN~ V.~ DRAWN BY- CHECKED BY- JOB NO. ¢~0/7~-~:~ ./ CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE' January 12 ~ 1983 SUBJECT: UTILITY PUBLIC HEARING: in Wilkinson 'Terrace. ITEM NUMBER: 15.D. 2. Ordinance to vacate a right of way with- COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARYOFINFORMATION: We have received a petition from Charles J. and Ruth N. Sobrito, requesting the vacation of a right of way within Wilkinson Terrace, as shown on the attached plat. This has been reviewed by staff, and approval is recommended. A drainage and utility easement will be retained. District: Dale ATTACHMENTS: YES [] NO [] SIGNATURE: v ~.~~-' COUNTY ADM I NISTRATOR .° · · I~OD ON LINE: l.':J~' SHOWING PROPERTY WITH NO IMPROVEM~ENTS THEREON SITUATED ON THE EASTEtd~ SIDE OF SMMR~iAN ROAD SOUTH OF SHER~LAN COURT BEING CHESTERFIELD COUNTY: At a regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors held at the Courthouse on January 12, 1983 at 10:00 a.m. AN ORDINANCE to vacate a right of way within Wil- kinson Terrace subdivision Dale Magisterial Dis- trict, Chesterfield County, Virginia, as shown on plat thereof duly recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County in Plat Book 8, at page 285. WHEREAS, Charles J. Sobrito and Ruth N. Sobrito have petitioned the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia to vacate a right of way within Wilkinson Terrace Subdivision, Dale Magister- ial District, Chesterfield, Virginia more particularly shown on a plat of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of said County in Plat Book 8, at page 285, made by Foster and Miller, dated November 9, 1954. The portion of right of way petitioned to be vac- ated is more fully described as follows: A right of way within Wilkinson Terrace Subdivision adjacent to Lot 1, Block F, as shown shaded in red on a plat made by Barton-Corso and Associates, Limited, Certified Land Surveyors, dated May 21, 1975, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part of this ordinance. WHEREAS, notice has been given pursuant to Section 15.1-431 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, by advertising; and, WHEREAS, no public necessity exists for the continuance of the right of way sought to be vacated and the vacation will not abridge the rights of any citizen. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDIANED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIRIGNIA: That pursuant to Section 15.1-482(b) of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, the above described right of way is hereby vacated and no longer necessary for public use, except as herein stated. The grantee hereby conveys unto the County and the County here- by reserves the entire length~th of the right of way vacated as a perpetual drainage and u~iltiy~sement. This Ordinance shall be ~qT-f%'I1 force and effect in accordance with Section 15.1-482(b) of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, and a certified copy of this Ordinance, together with the plat at- tached hereto shall be recorded no sooner than thirty days here- after in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Chesterfield, Virginia pursuant to Section 15.1-485 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. The effect of this Ordinance pursuant to Section 15.1-483 is to destroy the force and effect of the recording of the portion of the plat vacated. Since the portion of right of way vacated is located on the periphery of the recorded subdivision plat, this ordinance shall vest fee simple title of the entire right of way located in the owners of the abutting lot on the northern side of the right of way free and clear of any ri~ht~ of public use, except as stated above. Accordingly, t~~hall be indexed in the names of the County of Chesterfiel'd~m~_~rantor and Charles J. Sobrito and Ruth N. Sobrito, husband and wife, or their sucessors in title, as grantees. Certified by Richard L. Hedrick County Administrator 1,~~ SHOWING PROPERTY WITH NO IMPROVEMENTS THEREON SITUATED ON THE EASTERN SIDE OF SMRRMAN ROAD SOUTH 0~ SHERMAN COURT BEING LOT 1, BLOCK "F" PLAN OF "WILKINSON TERRACE", SECTION "A" IN CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIRGINIA. Scale: 1" = 50' May 21, 1975 BARTON - COR$O & A.~OClATES, LTD. CERTIFIED LAND SURVEYORS RICHMOND, VIRGINIA ,..1. KI. - 7505 -ZO CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGE NDA MEETINGDATE: January 12, 1983 ITEM NUMBER: 15.D.3. SUBJECT: UTILITY PUBLIC HEARING: Ordinance to vacate a portion of an 8' easement across lot 53, Block B, Reams Run, Section B. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OFINFORMATION: We have received a petition from D. Edward Swar- brick and Iris A. Parham requesting the vacation of a portion of an 8' easement across lot 53, Block B, Reams Run, Section B, as shown on the attached plat. This has been reviewed by staff, and approval is recommended. District: Clover Hill ATTACHMENTS: YES I~ NO [] SIGN AT URE: .- I 54 7~D 9TO.'~ Y " PL~7 OF LOT' ~3, CHESTERFIELD COUNTY: At a regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors held at the Courthouse on January 12, 1983, at 10:00 a.m. AN ORDINANCE to vacate a portion of an 8' easement across Lot 53, Block B, Reams Run, Section B, Clover Hill Magisterial District, Chesterfield County, Virginia, as shown on plat thereof duly recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County in Plat Book 27, at page 12. WHEREAS, D. Edward Swarbrick and Iris A. Parham have petitioned the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia to vacate a portion of an 8' easement across Lot 53, Block B, Reams Run, Sec- tion B, Clover Hill Magisterial District, Chesterfield, Virginia more particularly shown on a plat of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of said County in Plat Book 27, at page 12, made by J. K. Timmons and Associates, Incorporated, dated July 2, 1976. The portion of easement petitioned to be vacated is more fully described as follows: A ~ortion of an 8' easement across Lot 53, Block B, Reams Run, Section B, as shown shaded in green on a plat made by Robert M. Blankenship III, dated October 23, 1979, a copy of which is attached here- to and made a part of this ordinance. WHEREAS, notice has been given pursuant to Section 15.1-431 of the Code of Vir. g.inia, 1950, as amended, by advertising; and WHEREAS, no public necessity exists for the continuance of the p~rtion of easement sought to be vacated and the vacation will not abridge the rights of any citizen. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIRIGNIA: · That pursuant to Section 15.1-482(b) of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, the above described portion of easement is here- by vacated and no longer necessary for public use. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect in accordance with Section 15.1-482(b) of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, and a certified copy of this Ordinance, together with the plat at- tached hereto shall be recorded no sooner than thirty days hereafter in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Chesterfield, Virginia pursuant to Section 15.1-485 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. The effect of this Ordinance pursuant to Section 15.1-483 is to destroy the force and effect of the recording of the portion of the plat vacated. Accordingly, this Ordinance shall be indexed in the names of the County of Chesterfield as grantor and D.~ward~arbrick and Iris A~ Parham, or their successors in title, as gr~nte~,. Certified by: Richard~L. Hedrick County Administrator ¢7' CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGE NDA L. MEETINGDATE: January 12, 1983 ITEM NUMBER' 15.E.11. SUBdECT: Vacation of Drainage Easement in proposed Pocoshock Hills Section 4. ~ ' COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENT-q: SUMMARYOFINFORMATION: We are requesting a resolution authorizing the Chairman of the Board and the County Administrator to execute a Quit Claim Deed vacating a 16' drainage easement in proposed Pocoshock Hills, Section 4 as shown on the attached plat. This is a requirement of Environmental Engineering and approval is recommended. Clover Hill District ATTACHMENTS: YES ~ NO [] SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR / / / .s-,99 *..a.4 ~ - , r~ pO C O.b'i¥O c',[~' ]']l'jj..5 " PLAT SHOWING A 16 FOOT DRAINAGE EASEMENT, TO tzg VACATED, ACROSS THE PROPERTY OF BARBARA B. HUNNICUTT AND CHARLES W. HUNNICUTT IN THE CLOVER HILL DISTAICT OF CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIRGINIA. CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE : January 12, 1983 ITEM NUMBER: 15.E.1. SUBJECT: Request Approval of Change Order 1 in the Amount of $10,147.38, Project 6(8)2551 -Addition to Swift Creek Water Plant COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION During the drilling of holes for the foundation caissons, it was found that the three holes adjacent to the existing plant were half rock and half backfill. This oc.currecL since the rock next to the existing clearwell was overm+_~d--to allow installa- tion of the clearwell. The problem was analyzed by our consultants, and it was determined that it would be more cost effective to con- tinue with the caisson installation than to redesign the foundation. The contractor has submitted a $9,182.18 request for the additional work. The review of the shop drawings for the reinforcing steel determined that additional steel was required for the splices. The cost for this work is $965.20. Our consultants have reviewed the contractor's submittal and have recommended approval. No appropriations required. District: Clover Hill ATTACHMENTS: YES L] NO 121 SIGNATURE: ~-- COUNTY ADMI NISTRATOR CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: January 12 ~ 1983 ITEM NUMBER; 15.E,2. SUBJECT: Approval of Sewer Contract No. S82-63CD/7(8)2632 - Smoketree, Section I, Onsite Sewers COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This project proposes oversized sewers to accommodate the anticipated flows from other existing and future developments within this drainage area. The developer is paying for the entire cost of the sewer and will be eligible to receive refunds from sewer connection fees collected from his property, up to the cost of oversizing the improvements. Developer: Midlothian Enterprises, Inc. Contractor: R.M.C. Contractors, Inc. Total Construction Cost: $52,412.00 Estimated County Cost: 1,301.00 - Code: 574-1-11781-7221 No. of Connections: 29 Refunds Through Sewer Connection Fees District: Midlothian ATTACHMENTS: YES B NO [] SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMI NISTRATOR <_.____ --~ LUCKS BER CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: January 12~ 1983 ITEM NUMBER: SUBJECT: Request Approval of an Agreement in the Amount of $24,736 with Virginia Electric & Power Company for power service to the Little Tomahawk Creek Sewage Pumping Station COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION VEPCO's original cost for providing electric service was $31,419. After discussing the costs and alternate methods of pro- viding power service, VEPCO agreed to reduce the cost to $24,736. AlthoUgh this amount is more than we had anticipated, it appears that this figure accurately reflects VEPCO's cost for providing electric service; and we recommend approval. No additional appropriations are requested. District: Clover Hill ATTACHMENTS: YES I~ NO [] SIGNATURE: ~UNTY ADMINISTRATOR No, 97834740 Rev. C VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY ~tmt~ of C~esterfield Department of Utilities Chesterfield. Virginia 23832 December 9. 1982 (DATE) Thank you for your request for underqround service made throuqh your inquiry doted June. 14 , 19.~82. The Aomement below covers the conditions under which the service facilities you requested will be furnished. We can net complete your request until a copy of this Agreement has been properly executed and ~eturned by you. ]~efore under~'ound service facilities can be installed, tt will be necessary for you tn idenUfy proper~ line control pc4nte and ~rade your property to within six inches of final orade along installation route. ' THE UNDERGROUND SERVICE TO BE FURNISHED FOR Little Tomahawk Creek P.,-p Station ~.OCATED*? 14321 Sprin~ Gate Road. Midlothian. Virginia 23113 WlI.~JE 277/480 ,vat. vi, 3 4 PHAIIP, .. WIRE, [] DI~/TA? [] WYE, SO HrRTZ A.C. FOR Tnlr FO//OWiNG. LOA~): PRESENT P ROPOS Lr~ . PRESENT PROPOSED LOAD LOJK) NUMBER K,W NUMBER KW NL."~--n~-R' HP * ~BER HP 'bighting ~ , , Heat Pump ~oklno Equip, ~ Air ~ndltionlh8 Wirer Hewt~ Single Phase ~mrs '. ~Clo~t! D~er ~rh Phase ~tors X Ol~kwo~her OTHER KW KW OR Al IHOWN ON ATTACHED EXNlll?~ · Wi Ire looking forward to working with you. If you have 8ny questions, please contact us referring to the Project Number. Ihown below, AGREEMENT FOR UNDEFIGFIOUND,SERVICE The Vlrginil Eleatrio led Power Company will fumish underground electric service at the above location in Iooordenoe with Ippllalbll ttmll lad oondiflom of service filed with, .rid nuthorized by, the Piroper r~lulatory DOmES#Ion for e one-time underground servJol charge of $ 24) 736.00 -- After the #rvioe oablfl have been Installed, it ~hall be your responsibility to adequately wamrmal dl conduit entranoe$ (Including spares) within the building, in accordanoe with the latest edition of the NmJoed Ele~trlael Code. The watermaling eompound muK be compatible with the cro~linked polyethylene insulation of the llwioe oablll, The Ivllleblg fault ourrent et the service panel will be approximetaly, 11~500 Amps, symmetrical. Appli0lble regulations and ordinenoel require the installation of e suitable rated service panel to interrupt this fault 0urrent ind It II your responsibility to advise your contractor of the characteristics of the electricity to be provided IO that proper equipment may be installed. If you agree to the foregoing,plague check the appropriate blocks below, sign one copy and return it in the enclosed postage paid return envelope. If wo do not receive a signed copy within 6~0 days from the above date, your request for service will be canceled, Vir top,ny Project No. _05-54026. O0 [] INCLOIEO Il FULl. PAYMENT OF THE ONE-TIME UNDERGROUND SERVICE CHARGE SHOWN ABOVE, [] FLEAIE DO, [] 00 NOT, CONNECT THE BERVIC:E IN MY NAME. my,, IIGNATURE (BUILDER, DEVELOPER OR CUITOMER) TELEPHONE NO. CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AG E NDA MEETING DATE: .T~,,,~v 12, 1983 ITEM NUMBER; 15.E.4. SUBJECT: Approval of an easement to VEPCO for electrical service to the Little Tomahawk Creek Sewage Pumping Station. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: To provide electrical service to the Little Tomahawk Creek Sewage Pumping Station, VEPCO is requesting a 15-foot wide easement. We are requesting a resolution authorizing the Chairman of the Board and County Administrator to execute the necessary easement agreement.' District: Clover Hill ATTACHMENTS: YES ri NO [] SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR P4o. 975, B6030 F~ev. E LOCATION OF CENTER LINE OF RIGHT OF WAY VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY PLAT TO ACCOMPANy RIGHT-OF-WA) AGREI[Ii~ENT &'~///P,~z:- N//,~/vT DISTRICT DISTRICT-TO~NSHi F- COUNTT-CITT SLATE BOROUGH J ~ - I~ OFFICE I CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: January 12, 1983 ITEM NUMBER: 15.E.5. SUBJECT: Approval of Water Contract No. W83-JCD/6(8)3042 - Chalkley Road COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Depositor: Thomas M. and Frances M. Hicks Contractor: County Forces Estimated Project Cost: $2,800 Depositor's Actual Cost: $1,500 Estimated County Cost: $1,300 Appropriate $1,300 from 563 surplus to 380-1-63042-4393 and transfer $1,500 from 559-1-00640-0000 (advances by developers) to 380-1-63042- 4393. No. of Connections: 1 The property owner has requested a water line extension to serve his new home on Chalkley Road. The depositor's contribution to the extension is for an 8" water line. The County's overall plan in this area will require a 12" water line. The County's share in this extension will be for the oversize water line. District: Bermuda PREPARED BY;. ATTACHMENTS: YES [] NO [] SIGNATURE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR THIS PROJECT ~IOG£ DR. VIC! N ITY .M A P CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETINGDATE: January 12, 1983 ITEM NUMBER:, 15.E.6. SUBJECT: Agreement with the Seaboard Coast Line Railroad for a water line crossing to serve Millside Subdivision. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION We request a resolution authorizing the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to execute an agreement with the Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company for installation of a 6" water line across the Seaboard Coast Line Railroad approximately 1790 feet south of Mile Post A-18, at Pine Forest Drive near Dunlop, Virginia. This 6" water line is being installed by the developer to service Millside Subdivision. District: Matoaca PREPARED BY:. ~//~_c~.~ ATTACHMENTS: YES I~ NO [] SIGNATURE: ~'~' COUNTY ADM I NI STRATOR N V ,'e //v/ 7-?/ Form 3530-Sheet 4 Revised March 1982 ~inutes of meeting of the Board of Supervisors of day of _, 19 · Virginia, held on the ~ -- RESOLUTION Be it resolved by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Chesterfield in regular meeting assembled that the Chairman of said Board be, and he hereby is, authorized to enter into an agreement with the SEABOARD COAST LINE RAILROAD COMPANY, and to sign same on behalf of said County whereby said Railroad Company grants'unto said County the right or license to install and maintain, for the purpose of conducting (POTABLE) WATER, a line of 6-inch pipe across the right of way and underneath track or tracks of said Railroad Company, at Pine Forest Drive, at or near DUNLOP, VIRGINIA; as more particularly described in said agreement, which agreement is dated October 28, 1982, a copy of which agreement is filed with the Board of Supervisors. I certify the above to be a true and correct copy. Clerk CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: January 12, 1983 ITEM NUMBER; 15.E.7. SUBJECT: Request Adjustment of Appropriations for Water Projects COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Adjustment of appropriations for the following water projects: 1. W82-60C - Perkinson Heights Water Line. Transfer $12,022.09 from 380-1-62601-4393 to 563 fund balance. At the time of appropriations for this project, 20-inch Ductile Iron Pipe was proposed. The project was changed; and 8-inch pipe was installed in lieu of 20-inch pipe, resulting in half of the original estimate. This action will finalize the project. 2. W82-68CD - Temple Baptist Church. Transfer $1,660.28 from 563 surplus to 380-1-62682-4393. This projeCt Was installed by County forces with $1,500.00 contributed by the developers. This action will finalize the project. W82-71CD - Chesswood, Section D, Cash Refund. Transfer $60.00 from 563 surplus to 380-1-62712-7212. M°~-~ 12-inch pipe was installed than originally estimated. This action will finalize the project. - cont. - ATTACHMENTS: YES I-'1 NO [] SIGNATURE: .... COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR - 2 - 4. W82-72CD - Moorefield Park. Transfer $8,858 72 from 563 surplus to 380-1-62722-7212. A large line, with cash refund provisions, was installed under this project. The County furnished some of the materials. This appropriation represents, mainly, the cost of the materials to the job. This action will finalize the project. 5. S80-43C - Harrowgate Road Sewer. Transfer~ $55,369.77 from 380-1-70431-4393 to 574 fund balance. ~ThiS project was originally planned to extend further at the time the money was appropriated. Ivey Memorial United Methodist Church also participated in the cost of this project. It is requested that $3,047.50 be transferred from 574-1-00640-0000 (Advances by Developers) to 574 fund balance. CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: January 12~ 1983 ITEM NUMBER: 15.E.8. SUBJECT: Acceptance of a Deed of Dedication from Hugh Emanuel Leonard and Mabel Taylor Leonard for a 30-foot wide strip of land along Berrand Road. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARYOFINFORMATION: Berrand Road extends across the Leonards? Property and is in the state maintenance system. The right of way for this road has never been dedicated, however, in order to have the right of way removed from the tax rolls the LeOnard$ have executed a Deed of Dedication to the County. We recommend the Board authorize the County Administrator to execute this Deed of Dedication accepting it on behalf of the Board of Supervisors. District: Midlothian ATTACHMENTS: YES I:K NO [] SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMI NISTRATOR 1 CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGE NDA MEETING DATE' January 12, 1983 ITEM NUMBER; 15.E.9. SUBJECT: Church of God, Faith Heritage Fellowship Clover Hill Dis- trict, Tax Map 64-9. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARYOFINFORMATION: Dedication of a 15' strip to the County of Chester- field. This is a Planning Department requirement in order that the church may expand their facilities. Approval recommended. District Clover Hill PREPARED By; ,~~--~ ~ ATTACHMENTS: YESx[~ NO [] SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMI NISTRATOR Across property of Church of Faith Heritage Fellowship Plat showing a fifteen (!S')foot strip to be dedicated to Chesterfield County, Virginia God - Revision November CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: January 12~ 1983 ITEM NUMBER: 15.E.10. SUBJECT: Congregation of the West End Assembly of God, Bermuda District, Tax Map 97-6 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARYOFINFORMATION: Vacation and rededication of a drainage ease- ment to the County of Chesterfield. This is a requirement from Environmental Engineering in order for the Church to make site im- provements. Approval recommended. District: Bermuda ATTACHMENTS: YES ][]K NO [] SIGNATURE /(~)U'NTY ADMI NISTRATOR / BREMNER ,YOUNGBLOOD,& KING, INC CONSULTING ENGINEERS P O BOX 517 MECHANICSVILLE VA 23;'~' :,~', -~zi?l,~,/9,~ZSCAt[: /" z I~' ~,~ ~..,,~ ~._ _.:__ :~ CH~CKED r,~O 7.7 9-~/ CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: January 12, 1983 ITEM NUMBER: 15.~.. 12. .SUBJECT: Approval of a quit claim deed from the County to the Estate of John H. Randolph for easement rights in the Centralia Gardens ~ell tot. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: On April 23, 1955 John H. Randolph Jr.~President of Homesite$ Inc.~ conveyed a perpetual easement for the installation of a well and appurtenances to the County on a portion of Lot 29 of Centralia Gardens Annex. In February of 1982, Homesites Inc. was voluntarily dissolved and the assets distributed to the Estate of John H. Randolph. Since the well on this easement has been abandoned; and since the County no longer needs the easement, we are requesting a resolution authorizing the Chairman of the Board and County Administrator to execute a quit claim deed, conveying the County's rights back to the owner. District: Dale ATTACHMENTS: YES ~// NO [] SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADM I NI STRATOR CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA 'L MEETING DATE: January 12~ 1983 ITEM NUMBER: 15.F. SUBJECT: Report of Water and Sewer Contracts by Developers COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION The following water and sewer contracts were executed by the County Administrator: 1. W82-95D/6(8)2950 Three Pines, Section II $36,899.40 Developer: William B. & Gene H. DuVal Contractor: Bookman Construction Company No. of Connections: 65 Clover Hill 2. W82-98D/6(8)2980 Smoketree, Section I $18,390.00 Developer: Midlothian Enterprises, Inc. Contractor: R.M.C. Contractors, Inc. No. of Connections: 28 Midlothian W83-2D/6(8)3020 Winslow Road Water Extension Developer: Steven Marsh, Inc. Contractor: Lyttle Utilities, Inc. No. of Connections: 1 $1,600.00 Midlothian - cont. - ATTACHMENTS: YES r-I NO SIGNATURE: ~' 'CbUNTY ADMI NI STRATOR - 2 - W83-3D/6(8)3030 360 Office Park Developer: Roger L. Lewis Contractor: I.P.K. Excavating, Inc. No. of Connections: 12 W83-6D/6(8)3060 Rolling Hill, On-Site Developer: Rolling Hill Development Company Contractor: W. T. Curd Jr. Contractor, Inc. No. of Connections: 48 S82-59D/7(8)2590 Kentucky Fried Chicken Rest. 12321 Jefferson Davis Highway Developer: Elmer R. Batey Contractor: Monroe E. Yoder Sub-Contractor: D. T. & T., Inc. No. of Connections: 2 S82-65D/7(8)2650 Rock Creek Park, Lot 18, Block A Developer: Billy R. Clark Contractor: Lyttle Utilities, Inc. No. of Connections: 1 $7,492.37 Matoaca $27,200.00 Midlothian $8,150.00 B e rmuda $2,1oo.oo Midlothian BOARD OF SUPERVISORS E.MERLIN O'NEILL~CHAIRMAN MATOACA DISTRICT JOAN GIRONE,VICE CHAIRMAN I~IDLOTHIAN DISTRICT C.L. BOOKMAN CLOVER HILL DISTRICT HARRY G. DANIEL DALE DISTRICT R. GARLAND DODD BERMUDA DISTRICT CHESTERFIELD COUNTY CHESTERFIELD ,VIRGINIA COMMUNITY DIVERSION INCENTIVE PROGRAM (804) 748- 130;5 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: Mr. Robert L. Masden, Director of Human Resources Mr. Glen R. Peterson, Coordinator, CDI DATE: December 16, 1982 SUBJECT: CDI Audit As per your request of December 15, 1982, enclosed are seven (7) copies of our audit prepared for the period January 1, 1981 through June 30, 1982. /jb Enclosure CHESTERFIELD/COLONIAL HEIGHTS COb~UNITY DIVERSION INCENTIVE PROGRAM REPORT ON AUDIT FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 1, 1981 THROUGH JUNE 30, 1982 Community Corrections Resources Board Mr. Duane C. Watson, Chairman Mr. J. P. Murphy Mrs. J. R. Booton Mr. Jack Snyder Mr. Erick F. Yarchin, Jr. Project Administrator Mr. Robert L. Masden Project Coordinator Mr. Glen R. Peterson Table of Contents Auditor's Opinion Balance Sheet Statement of Revenue, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance-Estimated and Actual Notes to Financial Statements 4 Mr. A. T. Robinson Regional Administrator Department of Corrections 302 Turner Road Richmond, Virginia 23225 We have examined the Balance Sheet of the Chesterfield/Colonial Heights Community Diversion Incentive Program as of June 30, 1982 and the related Statement of Revenue, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance-Estimated and Actual from January 1, 1981 through June 30, 1982. Our examination was made in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and, accordingly, included such tests of the accounting records and such other auditing proce- dures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly the financial position of the Chesterfield/Colonial Heights Community Diversion Incentive Program as of June 30, 1982, and the results of its operations for the period then ended, in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. Chesterfield, Virginia October 29, 1982 CHESTERFIELD/COLONIAL HEIGHTS Community Diversion Incentive Program Balance Sheet June 30, 1982 ASSETS Cash $57,651 LIABILITIES Accounts payable Accrued wages payable Other accrued liabilities Deferred revenue $ 2,938 677 88 53,948 Total liabilities $57,651 The Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of the statements. CHESTERFIELD/COLONIAL HEIGIITS Community Diversion Incentive Program Statement of Revenue, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance-Estimated and Actual For the Period January 1, 1981 through June 30, 1982 Revenue: From the Commonwealth Expenditures: Salaries and wages Fringe benefits Office equipment, furniture and fixtures Office supplies Telephone Travel and vehicle operation Other costs Client evaluations Client diversions Total expenditures Excess of revenue over expenditures Fund balance, January 1, 1981 Fund balance, June 30, 1982 Estimated Revenue/ Authorized Expenditures Actual Variance- Favorable (Unfavorable) $ 188,682 $ 54,980 $(133,702) 32,650 24,098 8,552 5,832 4,581 1,251 2,025 2,190 ( 165) 1,325 1,173 152 600 700 ( 100) 2,250 779 1,471 - 152 ( 152) 36,000 2,741 33,259 108,000 18,566 89,434 188,682 54,980 133,702 $ - $ - $ - The Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of the statements. 3 NOTE 1. CHESTERFIELD/COLONIAL HEIGHTS Community Diversion Incentive Program Notes to Financial Statements June 30, 1982 Summary of Significant Accounting Policies The financial statements of the Chesterfield/Colonial Heights Community Diversion Incentive Program (the Program) are prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles applicable to governmental units as prescribed by the National Council on Governmental Accounting (NCGA). A. Background Ce The Chesterfield/Colonial Heights Community Corrections Re- sources Board was established in accordance with resolutions passed by the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors and the Colonial Heights City Council on September 24, 1980 and October 14, 1980, respectively, pursuant to Chapter 5, Article 2, Community Diversion Incentive Act of Title 53 of the Code of Virginia (the Act), to develop, establish and maintain communi- ty corrections resources programs to provide the judicial system with sentencing alternatives for certain non-violent offenders. The Act provides direct funding to allow partici- pating localities flexibility in developing program alterna- tives which are appropriate for the community and the diverted felon, including work release and restitution centers, inten- sive community supervision and treatment and group residential care programs. Basis of Accounting The accounting records of the Program are maintained in the accounting system of Chesterfield County, Virginia as a Special Revenue Fund, which is accounted for using the modified accrual basis of accounting. Under this basis of accounting, revenues are recognized when they are measurable and available to finance operations during the year, and expenditures, .except for accrued sick leave pay, are recorded as the liabilities are incurred. Accumulated Unpaid Vacation and Sick Leav~ Accumulated unpaid vacation pay, which amounted to approxi- mately $350 at June 30, 1982, is recorded in the General Long-term Debt Account Group of Chesterfield County, Virginia. Sick leave pay does not vest for County employees; accordingly, it is recognized when paid. L [ L NOTE 2. CHESTERFIELD/COLONIAL HEIGHTS Community Diversion Incentive Program Notes to Financial Statements (Continued) June 30, 1982 Retirement and Pension Plans Ail full-time employees of Chesterfield County (the County) partici- pate in the Virginia Supplemental Retirement System (VSRS). VSRS is administered by the Commonwealth, which bills the County for its contributions. Contributions are determined every two years by VSRS actuaries using the entry age normal cost method. The County contributes the five percent of salaries and wages normally paid to VSRS by participating employees. In addition, the County makes an employer contribution at an actuariaily determined rate of 3.46 percent. VSRS is obligated to pay an monthly benefit to participants upon retirement with the amount of benefit depending on length of service and earnings. The Program's share of the County's VSRS contri- butions for the period from January 1, 1981 through June 30, 1982 was approximately $1,775. Actuarial and net asset information for the Program is not available from VSRS. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS dOAN GIRONE, CHAIRMAN MIDLOTHIAN OISTRICT HARRY G. DANIEL, VICE CHAIRMAN OALE DISTRICT C.L. BOOKMAN CLOVER HILL DISTRICT R. GARLAND DODD B ERMLIOA DISTRICT d. ROYALL ROBERTSON MATOACA DISTRICT CHESTERFIELD COUNTY CHESTERFIELD ,VIRGINIA 25852 MEMORANDUM TO: F ROM: DATE: RE: The Honorable Members of the Board of Supervisors ~ ~drick, County Administrator Elmer C.' Hod~e, Assistant County Administrator January 5, 1982 Expansion of Airport Runway On January 3, 1982, Chesterfield County was notified by the State Department of Aviation that the County's request for a permit to operate a 5500' runway has been approved. Anyone wishing to oppose the extension now has 30 days to take action through the Circuit Court. The application will now be reviewed by the Federal Aviation Association for justification and funding. pay CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGE NDA MEETING DATE: January 12, 1983 ITEM NUMBER; 16.A.,B., & C. SUBJECT: Reports A. Roads Accepted into the State Secondary Syste~ B. Community Diversion Incentive Program on Audit C. Update on Airport Runway Extension COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: A. I~formational Purposes Only. B. Informational Purposes Only. C. Informational Only. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION A. See Attached. B. See Attached. C. See Attached. PREPARED BY; ATTACHMENTS: YES :El NO [] SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADM I NI STRATOR BOARD OF SUPERVISORS dOAN GIRONE, CHAIRMAN MIDLOTHIAN OISTRICT HARRY G. DANIEL, VICE CHAIRMAN DALE OISTRICT C.L. BOOKMAN CLOVER HILL DISTRICT R. GARLAND DOOD ~ ERMIJOA DISTRICT ,J. ROYALL ROBERTSON MATO ACA DISTRICT CHESTERFIELD COUNTY CHESTERFIELD,VIRGINIA 25852 TO : FROM : DATE : SUBJECT: The HonOrable Members of the Board of Supervisors Robert L. Masden, Director of Human Services~~ January 7, 1983 Resolution from Charlotte County Board of Supervisors I am enclosing copy of a Resolution from the Charlotte County Board of Supervisors concerning qualifications of members of Volunteer Resque Squads. The Resolution petitions all counties, cities and towns in the Commonwealth to support Charlotte County in its efforts to change state legislation giving local governments the option of setting minimum qualifications of members. Title 32.1 Article 5, Chapter 5 of the Code of Virginia, re- quires all emergency medical services agencies (EMS) to be licensed by the State Department of Health, Division o£ Emergency Medical Services. In 1979, the State Board of Health revised the requirements governing licensure for EMS agencies (Rules and Regulations Governing EMS). One of the regulations adopted requires the attendant in charge of the patient to be a certified Emergency Medical Technician (EMT). Although this requirement was promulgated in 1979, it will not become effective until March 1, 1983. The rescue squads and other EMS providers requested and were granted a four-year grace period, during which each agency has had an opportunity to secure the requisite training. This requirement, specifically section 5.02.02 of the regulations, does not require every member of a rescue squad or EMS agency to be an EMT. Only the attendant in charge or at least one person on every emergency run has to hold EMT certification. It is our understanding that the rescue squads in the County generally £avor the regulatiOns of the Health Department. We also believe that it is essential that those responding to emergency calls meet minimum qualifications. Under the current regulations of Th6-Honorable Members January 7, 1983 Page 2 the Board of Supervisors the State Health Department, there are procedures whereby agencies which have a problem with these requirements may be granted either a variance or an exemption if it is deemed to be in the public interest. If you would like to pursue this matter further, either individually or collectively, please let us know by January 12, 1983; otherwise we will drop it from further consideration. 'bk ATTACHMENT A RESOLUTION TO PARTITION ALL COUNTIES, CITIES AND TOWNS IN THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA TO PROVIDE SUPPORT TO THE COUNTY OF CHARLOTTE IN ITS REQUEST TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO PASS APPROPRIATE LEGISLATION ENABLING LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO HAVE THE OPTION OF DETERMINING WHAT RESTRICTIONS SHOULD BE PLACED ON VOLUNTEER RESCUE SQUAP PERSONNEL AS A PREREQUISITE TO MEMBERSHIP IN A LOCAL RESCUE SQUA~ UNIT. WHEREAS, Voluntary Rescue Squads are a vital part of the safety and well-being of Virginia Communities and, WHEREAS, these Rescue Squads depend solely on volunteers from the community to provide their membership and, WHEREAS, it is often difficult to obtain enough personnel to adequately staff these units, and WHEREAS, placing undue restrictions and regulations on these volunteer units from the State level could severely jeopardize their existence, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Charlotte County Board of Supervisors this 17th day of November, 1982 that the Virginia General Assembly be and it is hereby earnestly and respectfully petitioned to pass appropriate Legislation providing the governing body of each locality the option to determil~e what restrictions, if any, be placed on local Rescue Squad Units regarding qualifications for membership and that the local option should in no way effect State and Local funding of said unit. Copy Teste: ~puty Clerk - Board of CHARLOTT~COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Supervisors BY: Russell B. Clark, Clerk ~corded in Board of Supervisors Book #13. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS JOAN GIRONE, CHAIRMAN ME)LOTHIAN DISTRICT HARRY G. DANIEL, VICE CHAIRMAN DALE: DISTRICT C, L. BOOKMAN CLOVER HILL DISTRICT R. GARLAND DODD BERMUOA DISTRICT d. ROYALL ROBERT,SON MATOACA DISTRICT December 13, 1982 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY CHESTERFIELD ,VIRGINIA 2~,852 (804) 748-1211 OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Mr. Russell B. Clark County Administrator Charlotte County Court House Virginia 23923-0206 Dear Mr. Clark: This will acknowledge receipt of the memorandum from the Charlotte County Board of Supervisors regarding restrictions for volunteer rescue squads. I have forwarded the information to appropriate County agencies requesting their input regarding this matter. Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention and I will notify you of any action by our Board. Sincerely, Richard L. Hedrick County Administrator jsd M. ]~ RICE, ~'F~', CHAIRMAN Election District F J. WAYLAND DUNN, M.D., VICE CHAIRMAN Election D/strict A RUSSELL B. CLARK County A~mlnistrator t:OUNTY OF CHARLOTTE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CHARLOTTE COURT HOUSE, VA 2392~0206 (804) 542-5117 BILLY RUTLEDGE Election District B JAMES D. HOLT Election District C JAMES D. RAMSEY, JR. Election District D CHARLES S. THARPE Election District E December 6, 1982 TO: FROM: All County Administrators Commonwealth of Virginia Charlotte County Board of Supervisors Attached please find a Resolution which was passed by the Charlotte County Board of Supervisors on November 17, 1982. We respectfully request that your Board consider adopting a similar resolution and that you assist us in bringing this matter to the attention of our Legislators. Your time and cooperation is greatly appreciated. RBC/dkw Attachment A RESOLUTION TO PARTITION ALL COUNTIES, CITIES AND TOWNS IN THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA TO PROVIDE SUPPORT TO THE COUNTY OF CHARLOTTE IN ITS REQUEST TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO PASS APPROPRIATE LEGISLATION ENABLING LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO HAVE THE OPTION OF DETERMINING WHAT RESTRICTIONS SHOULD BE PLACED ON VOLUNTEER RESCUE SQUAD PERSONNEL AS A PREREQUISITE TO MEMBERSHIP IN A LOCAL RESCUE SQUAD UNIT. WHEREAS, Voluntary Rescue Squads are a vital part of the safety and wel}being of Virginia Communities and, WHEREAS, these Rescue Squads depend solely on volunteers from the community to provide their membership and, WHEREAS, it is often difficult to obtain enough personnel to adequately staff these units, and WHEREAS, placing undue restrictions and regulations on these volunteer units from the State level could severely jeopardize their existence, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Charlotte County Board of Supervisors this 17th day of November, 1982 that the Virginia General Assembly be and it is hereby earnestly and respectfully petitioned to pass appropriate Legislation providing the governing body of each locality the option to determine what restrictions, if any, be placed on local Rescue Squad Units regarding qualifications for membership and that the local option should in no way effect State and Local funding of said unit. A Copy Teste: Deputy Clerk - B~ard of CHARLOTT~ COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Supervisors BY: .~/~./~~~jj C~~ R~ss~ll B' Clark, Clerk .... Re-corded in Board of Supervisors Book #13. & HAROLD C, KING, COMMISSIONER EUGENE M. SANE, GRUNDY, BRISTO£ DISTRI~F T. GEORGE VAUGHAN, JR., GALAX, SALEM DISTRICT COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS & TRANSPORTATION 1221 EAST BROAD STREET RICHMOND, 23219 LEO E. BUSSER, III DEPUTY COMMISSIONER JOHN M. WRAY, JR. CHIEF ENGINEER J. T. WAR REN DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATION OSCAR K. MABRY DIRECTOR OF PLANNING HAROLD W. WORRALL DIRECTOR OF FINANCE J, S. HODGE ASSISTANT CHIEF ENGINEER SALLY H. COOPER DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION iN REPLY PLEASE REFER TO December 7, 1982 Secondary System Addition Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors County of Chesterfield Chesterfield, Virginia 23832 Gentlemen: As requested in your resolution dated October 13, 1982, addition to the Secondary System of Chesterfield County approved, effective December 7, 1982. ADDITION CHESTERFIELD COUNTY INDUSTRIAL PARK White Bark Terrace: Beginning at its intersection with Whitepine Road, State Route 701 and running in a southwesterly direction for 0.12 mile then turning in a northwesterly direction and continuing for 0.07 mile to a permanent cul-de-sac. the following is hereby LENGTH 0.19 mile Si ncerely, Leo E. Busser, III Deputy Commissioner TRANSPORTATION -- AMERICA'S LIFELINES HAROLD C, ~(ING, COMMISSIONER EUGenE M, BANE, GRUNDY, BPJSTOL DISTz~CT T. GEORGE VAUGHAN, JR., GALAX, SALEM DISTRICT WILLIAM R. WATK~NS, SOUTH BOSTON, LYNCHBURG DI,~TR1CT WILLIAM F. MOHR, RICHMOND, ~CHMO~VD D/STRiCT RICHARD G, BRYDGES. VIRGINIA BEACH, SHFFOLK D/,qTRfCT COMMONWEALTH o[ VIRQINIA DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS & TRANSPORTATION 1221 EAST BROAD STREET RICHMOND, 23219 December 7, 1982 Secondary System Additions Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors County of Chesterfield Chesterfield, Virginia 23832 Gentlemen: As requested in your resolution dated October 13, 1982, the following additions to the Secondary System of Chesterfield County are hereby approved, effective December77, 1982. ADDITIONS LENGTH CLARENDON~ SECTION F Timbercrest Court: Beginning where State maintenance ends on State Route 2150 and going 0.2 mile southeasterly to a cul-de-sac. 0.20 mile McManaway Drive: Beginning at the intersection with Brookforest Road (State Route 2115) and going 0.27 mile southeasterly to tie into existing McMamaway Drive, State Route 2113. 0.27 mile Sincerely, Leo E. Busser III Deputy Commissioner LEO E. BUSSER, Ill DEPLITY COMMISSIONER & CHIEF ENGINEER J. T. WARREN DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATION J. M. WRAY, JR, D~RECTOR OF OPERATIONS W. L. BRITTLE, JR. DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING OSCAR K. MARRY DIRECTOR OF PLANNING H, W. WORRALL DIRECTOR OF FINANCIAL AFFAIRS IN REPLY PLEASE REFER TO TRANSPORTATION -- AMERICA'S LIFELINES HAROLD C, I~NG, COMMISSIONER %. EUG~:NE M. BANE, GRUNDY, BR]$TOr. DISTRICT T. GEORGE VAUGHAN, JR., GALAX. SA£EMDISTRIC~ WILLIAM R. WATK[NS, SOUTH BOSTON, £¥NCHB[~7~G DISTRICT WILLIAM F. MOHR, RtCHMOND, ~[CHMOND DI$TRI'CT RICHARD G. ;tRYDGES, VIRGINIA BEACH, $[,rFFO£K COMMONWEALTH o[ V IR INIA DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS & TRANSPORTATION 1221 EAST BROAD STREET RICHMOND, 23219 December l, 1982 Secondary System Addition Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors County of Chesterfield Chesterfield, Virgimia 23832 Gentlemen: As requested in your resolution dated September 8, 1982, the following addition to the Secondary System of Chesterfield County is hereby approved, effective December ], ]982. ADDITION LENGTH LOST FOREST~ SECTION D Lost Forest Drive: Beginning at the morth end of State Maintenance Route 1910 (Lost Forest Drive) and running westerly 0.21 mile to tie into State Maintenance Route 1910 im Chesswood Sub- division. 0.21 mi. Sincerely, Leo E. Busser III Deputy Commissioner LEO E. BUSSER, III DEPUTY COMMISSIONER & CHIEF ENGINEER J. T. WARREN DIRECTOR OF ADMINiSTRATiON J. M. WRAY, JR. DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS W. L. BRITTLE, JR. DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING OSCAR K. MABRY DIRECTOR OF PLANNING H. W, WORRALL DIRECTOR OF FINANCIAL AFFAIRS IN REPLY PLEASE REFER TO TRANSPORTATION -- AMERICA'S LIFELINES HAROLD ~ ~ANG, COMMISSIONER EUGENE M. BANE, GRUNDY, BRL~TOL DLYTPJCT T. GEORGE VAUGHAN, JR., GALAX, ,qALEMDISTRICT WILLIAM R. WATK~NS, SOUTH BOSTON, £¥NCHBURG DISTRICT W~ LLIAM F. MOHR, RICHMOND, J~CHMOND DISTinCT RICHARD G. BRYDGES, VIRGINIA BEACH, S~FFOL~ DIST~ COMMONWEALTH o[ VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS & TRANSPORTATION 1221 EAST BROAD STREET RICHMOND, 23219 December 1, 1982 Secondary System Additions Chesterfield County LEO E. BUSSER, III DEPUTY COMMISSIONER & CHIEF ENGINEER J. T. WARREN DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATION J. M. WRAY, JR. DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS W, L. BRITTLE, JR. DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING OSCAR K. MASRY DIRECTOR OF PLANNING H. W. WORRALL DIRECTOR OF F~NANClAL AFFAIRS IN REPLY PLEASE REFER TO Board of Supervisors County of Chesterfield Chesterfield, Virgimia 23832 Gentlemen: As requested in your resolution dated September 8, 1982, the following additions to the Secondary System of Chesterfield County are hereby approved, effective December ], ]982. ADDITIONS LENGTH HILLANNE~ SECTION B Hillanne Drive: Beginning at intersection with Fairlington Lane, State Route 1230 and going 0.17 mile northerly to intersection with Stlbyrd Drive. 0.17 mile Silbyrd Drive: Beginning at intersection with Hillanne Drive and going 0.08 mile easterly to a temporary turnaround. Again, beginning at inter- section with Hillanne Drive and going 0.04 mile westerly to a temporary turnaround. 0.12 mile Sincerely, Leo E. Busser III Deputy Commissioner TRANSPORTATION -- AMERICA'S LIFELINES cHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE' January 12, 1983 SUBJECT: Executive Session to Discuss ITEM NUMBER: 17. Personnel Matters COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: PREPARED BY; ,,, ATTACHMENTS: YES [] NO I~ SIGNATURE.v' ~/~-~' ~/~' '/~O- ' UNTY ADMI NISTRATOR BOARD OF SUPERVISORS E. MERLIN O'NEILL,CHAIRMAN MATOACA OISTRICT JOAN Gl RONE,VICE CHAIRMAN M IDLOTHIAN OISTRICT C.L, BOOKMAN CI[.OV~R HILL DISTRICT HARRY G. DANIEL DALE DISTRICT R. GARLAND DODD BERMUDA DISTRICT CHESTERFIELD COUNTY CHESTERFIELD ,VIRGINIA 2383£ MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: R. L. Hedrick, County Administrator yMuzzy, Director, Community B. Development January 14, 1983 1-95/295 Statement Bermuda District Supervisor Mr. Garland Dodd suggests the attached comments to be included in the 1-95/295 Statement to be given January 18, 1983. He is concerned about the impact on the Point of Rock and Enon Church Roads area. If this meets with the approval of the Board, we will incorporate it into the proposed statement. Attachments JANUARY 18, 1983 1-95/295 STATEMENT GOOD EVENING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I AM REPRESENTING THE CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, AS I AM SURE YOU ARE AWARE, CHESTERFIELD COUNTY HAS SPENT A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF TIME AND EFFORT REVIEWING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW INTERSTATE HIGHWAY CONNECTING 1-95 NORTH OF RICHMOND AND SOUTH OF PETERSBURG, ALTHOUGH WE HAVE SERIOUS RESERVATIONS ABOUT THE NEED FOR ANY NEW NORTH-SOUTH INTERSTATE ROUTE LOCATED TO THE EAST OF THE CITY OF RICHMOND, WE CERTAINLY DO NOT SUPPORT OR AGREE WITH THE NEED FOR SIX LANES OF PAVEMENT BETWEEN BYRD AIRPORT AND HOPEWELL, WE NOW HAVE, IN 1983, THE RATHER UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY TO CHECK THE 1995 TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS THAT WERE GENERATED ON THE BASIS OF 1972 DATA AND TRENDS. IT IS THESE TRAFFIC TRENDS THAT WERE USED TO JUSTIFY A NEW LOCATION FOR 1-95 AND THE NEED FOR SIX LANES OF PAVEMENT, WE BELIEVE THESE PROJECTIONS ARE IN ERROR AS THEY'OVERESTIMATE TRAVEL TRENDS IN THE STUDY CORRIDOR. ALTHOUGH WE HAVE DISCUSSED OUR CONCERNS IN THE PAST, IT APPEARS THAT NO ONE HAS SERIOUSLY REVIEWED AND RE-EVALUATED THE ESTIMATED TRAVEL IN THE STUDY CORRIDOR. IN ADDITION~ CHESTERFIELD COUNTY IS EXTREMELY CONCERNED ABOUT THE POTENTIAL IMPACT OF AND ON THE EXTENSIVE MARSH AREAS LOCATED ALONG THE ROUTE OF THE PROPOSED 1-295, A LOCATION IN THIS CORRIDOR HAS THE POTENTIAL OF SERIOUSLY IMPACTING THE SENSITIVE NATURAL ENVIRONMENTj DISRUPTING THE DESIRABILITY AND USEFULNESS OF PRIME INDUSTRIAL LANDSj CAUSING THE NEEDLESS EXPENDITURE OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS AND YET NOT AIDINGj TO ANY DEGREE~ THE REGION'S SERIOUS LOCAL TRAVEL PROBLEMS. CHESTERFIELD COUNTY CONTINUES TO BE APPALLED AT THE LACK OF SERIOUS ATTENTION GIVEN TO VIABLE ALTERNATES TO THE SELECTED ROUTE - VIABLE ALTERNATIVES WHICH WOULD RESULT IN LESS EXPENDITURE OF PUBLIC DOLLARSj LESS ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGEj LESS IMPACT TO EXISTING AND POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT~ AND WHILE STILL SERVING THE ORIGINAL PURPOSE OF THE ROAD - THE INTERSTATE TRAVELERS - ALSO HELPING TO ALLEVIATE EXISTING LOCAL TRAVEL PROBLEMS, THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY OF PRESENTING OUR CONCERNS, PCB FURTHERMORE, THE DESIGN OF THE HIGHWAY IN .THE VICINITY OF POINT OF ROCK ROAD AND ENON CHURCH ROAD PRESENTS A SERIOUS IMPACT ON PRESTWOULD FARM SUBDIVISION RESIDENTS AND OTHERS, IF THIS HIGHWAY IS TO BE BUILT IN THIS LOCATION, THEN SOME MEANS OF BUFFERING THESE RESIDENTS FROM THE NOISE AND POLLUTION OF THE ROAD MUST BE ESTABLISHED, /.,,~..~, JANUARY ]~8. 1983 VDH&T 7:30 P,M, 1-95/295 STATEMENT GOOD EVENING. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. I AM GARLAND DODD. VICE- CHAIRMAN OF THE CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONTINUES TO HAVE A NUMBER OF CONCERNS ABOUT THE PROPOSED EASTERN BY-PASS ROUTE OF 1-95, WE BELIEVE THAT THE EASTERN ROUTE WILL CAUSE SOME ADVERSE EFFECTS UPON THE REGIONAL ECONOMY WHICH MAY OUTWEIGH ITS BENEFITS AND, IN ADDITION, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONTINUES TO BE CONCERNED THAT THERE ARE OTHER MORE IMPORTANT ROAD NEEDS IN THE REGION, HOWEVER, IN THE INTEREST OF COOPERATION. CHESTERFIELD COUNTY HAS DECIDED NOT TO PURSUE LEGAL ACTION TO BLOCK THE ROUTE, LAYING ASIDE THE COUNTY'S CONCERNS ABOUT THE REGIONAL EFFECTS OF THE 1-95 BY-PASS. THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS HAS SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE ROUTE DESIGN THROUGH CHESTERFIELD, THE ROUTING PAST PRES~;OULD FARMS SUBDIVISION IN THE ENON AREA WILL CREATE CONSIDERABLE DISRUPTION FOR RESIDENTS. AND WILL PRESENT AN UNWANTED INTRUSION INTO THIS RESIDENTIAL AREA, SOME MEASURES MUST BE TAKEN TO MINIMIZE THE EFFECTS OF NOISE ON RESIDENTS' WHO MUST LIVE WITH THIS NEW ROAD, -2- ANOTHER CONCERN IS THE LACK OF ACCESS TO THIS NEW INTERSTATE ROUTE THROUGH CHESTERFIELD. IN PARTICULAR, THE AREA AROUND THE DISRUPTION CAUSED BY THE ROUTE. THIS AREA CONTAINS PRIME RIVERFRONT INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY WHICH HAS A TREMENDOUS POTENTIAL FOR REGIONAL ECONOMIC GROWTH. ALTHOUGH THE PROPOSED CORRIDOR WILL BISECT THE LARGEST REMAINING TRACT OF INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY IN THE AREA, THE IMPACT CAN BE MINIMIZED BY PROVIDING ADEQUATE ACCESS FOR DEVELOPMENT. IN CONCLUSION, CHESTERFIELD COUNTY HAS CHOSEN TO FOREGO ACTIONS TO BLOCK THE EASTERN I-g5 BY-PASS IN THE INTEREST OF REGIONAL .COOPERATION AND BECAUSE OF THE STATE'S COM~ITMENT AT ALL LEVELS TO SOLVE THE OVERWHELMING ROAD PROBLEMS IN CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, WE TRUST THAT THE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT WILL WORK WITH THE COUNTY TO RESOLVE OUR CONCERNS ABOUT THE DESIGN OF THIS ROADi THANK YOU, PCB I~::)ARO OF SUPERVISORS ~OAN GIRONE, CHAIRMAN HARRY G. OANtEL~ VICE CHAIRMAN OALE OIS~ICT C.L. B~KMAN cLov[R HILL DISTRICT R. GARLAND O~O BER~ oISTRICT J, ROYALL ROBERT~N MATOACA oISTRICT CHESTERFIELD .COUNTY CHESTERFIELD ,ViRGiNiA 2'585?- (B04) 748-121i OFFICE OF THE couNTY ADMINISTRATOR December 21, 1982 Mr. Anthony E. Dowd, AAE, Executive Director Capital Region Airport Commission Box A-3 Richmond, Virginia 23231-5999 Dear Tony, In your letter of October 7, 1982, you outlined two methods by which Chesterfield County might join the Airport Commission. Chesterfield has a sincere interest in developing regional partnerships such as the Airport Commission, and we are, there- fore, interested in defining terms whereby the County may join the Commission. As you know, Chesterfield has taken significant initiative in providing general aviation facilities for the region. As in the past, we plan to continually reinforce our commitment to the Chesterfield County Airport. At the same time, we are willing to assume more responsibility for regional air transportation facilities through involvement in the Airport Commission. As part of membership on the Commission, we would consider supporting a proportionate share of any annual operating subsidy provided for the Commission by the member localities. This represents a different approach than the methods you have suggested, which require a cash or cash plus equity contribution from the County. I look forward to discussing with you our approach for achieving agreement on this important issue. Warmest regards, Richard L. Hedrick County Administrator /jrg Capital Region Airport Commission Box A-3, Richmond Virginia 23231 - 5999 804 · 222.7361 October 7, 1982 Richard L. Hedrick, Administrator Chesterfield County Post Office Box 40 Chesterfield ,i ~Vi~g~nia 23832 Following are my approximmtions and raticrmle for membership in the CaPital Region Airport Con~nission by Chesterfield Cotmty. There are at least t~o methods by %hich Chesterfield Cotmty might become a mem- ber of the Airport Conmission, assuming an agreement acceptable to the Commis- sion wss produced. I. Ment~ership by Chesterfield achieved by a cash contributiom to the Airport Conmlission. II. A cash c~ribution to the Airport Commission offset by contribution of the Chesterfield County Airport to the Co~-,~ssion. It might be helpful to review these two methodologies in general principle as a ~s of further developing our mtual line of thought. M~nb.~ship by Cash Contribution - At the present time the Airport Conmission has an estimated "equity" in Byrd Airport of $6,300,351. This figure is arrived at by reducing the conveyed v~lue of Byrd Airport at January 1, 1976 of $10,484,954 by the outstanding lcmg term debt of $4,184,603 as of June 30, 1982. You realize, of course, the c~ed value of Byrd Airport vms a '~olitical" figure arrived at by determining the mmunt of bonds issued for Byrd Air- port dtrring the twem. ty year period prior to Jar~mry 1, 1976. To the above "equity" figure should also be added the value of capital improvenmmts purchased by funds of the Airport Oa,~,'~ssicm from January 1, 1976 through June 30, 1982. This amtmts to approxinmtely $1,888,000. The sum of this figure plus the previ- ous "equity" figure equals $8,188,351. It is this amo~t against vhich the most recent population percentage of Chesterfield Cotmty ccmpared to Richmond and Henrico should be applied. The percentage is apprcximmtely 26.1. By n~ltiplying the "total equity" figure of $8,188,351 by 26.1 we arrive at $2,137,160 ~hich represents an estimated cost of 'knembership ches" to the Airport -2- October 7, 1982 Richard L. Hedrick, A~ .~zstrator /~esterfiel d County C~issicn as of July 1, 1982. /herefore, the first method of Chester- field County obtaining m~bership in the Airport Ccnmission %oald require a cash contribution to the Commission of $2,137,160. II. Mmfoership by Cash Cc~.~ribution Offse.t by... the Dcrmticn of the Chester- .field. County A~[.r~ort - Assun~tion - In order t° arrive at estimates bf this intangible and complex possibility, certain assumptions mst be nmde. Anmng the assumptions ~ nust mmke are: (1) Estimated market value of the fhesterfield Airport ($6,000,000). (2) Estimated transfer value of the Chesterfield Airport. Byrd Airport was transferred by the City of Richmond to the Capital Region Airport Cc~nission at a contrived .vmlue which resulted in conveyance at approxinmtely 17% of the estinmted market value at the date of transfer. (3) By applying 17% to the estimated nmrket value of the Chester- field Airport of $6,000,000, ~ arrive at the conveyed value of $1,020,000. It would seem logical and proper to expect conv~yarme of the (t~esterfield Airport at the same percentage of esti- minted market value as Byrd Airg~ort ~s conveyed, i.e., 17%. (4) The estinmted cost of merbership in the Capital Region Air- port Conmissiion then would be: (a) Cash Contributien of $2,137,160 Co) (c)~ Less conveyed ~lue of Chesterfield Airport of $1,020,000 Mm~bership with cmtribution of Chesterfield Airport plus a cash contribution of $1,117,160. III. Given the abov~ assumptions, Chesterfield's entrange fee to the Airport Cc~nission would be $2,136,160 without conveyance of their airport, or $1,117,160 with conveyance of ~r~ort. As ~ discussed, th~se figures are developed only as a parallel to the mmthodology used to convey Byrd Airport to the Airport Cc~mission. Gbviously, the n~bers of ~-he Airport Cc~missi~ and the members of the Chesterfield Board can agree on any alternative they may wish to select. However, frcm a st~f point of view, the above %~ld appe_~_r to be a more consistent method of arriving at m~bers~p costs. ~d L. Hedrick, A(' ,~strator /~ ~hesterfield Cotmty -3- October 7, 1982 There are, of course, mmny other factors which mst be considered in arriving at a decisicm of so complex a subject and I am available to meet with your at your con- Kindest perscrml regards, aed:nhg