Loading...
10-27-71 PacketAN 0RDINANCE to amend and re-enact the first sentence of the 'first paragraph of Chapter 16, Section 16-6 of the Code of the County of~ Cheslterfield, Virginia, by changing the filing requirements 'from 6 to 12 .months. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA: That the first sentence 'of the first' paragraph~of Chapter 16, Section 16'6 of the 'CO:de of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia be 'and it is hereby amended and re-enacted to read as follows: T.he .owner or proprietor of the subdivision, following the itent.ative approval of the 'preIiminary subdivision plat and st:r.eet profile With 'prop'ose~d grades (~if required), shall' file with the iagent Within tweIve months' five prints on' cloth or cloth mounted prints of the ~final subdivision plat. COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA X~ XXX. V. VI:. 971 SXC;D~; l~oreXval S~roet 400.00 $. F/X $4D G31fton Ifa, b~n "2" 0,907.00 Soat~on "I" ii 32,&29.J0 14queot by I~. ~ A. Ibumoek of $9X~ ILLver I{oid for rodueed .le freu ~entra! srJt4 (A~T~ o.f ;.resoht~ou a~ibXnlj~ ,ewr ~s (7S-360) and Coun~ ~ VIRGINIA: At a regular meeting of the Chesterfield County School Board held Wednesday evening, October 1S, 1971, at 8 o'clock in the board room o£ the School Administration Building PRESENT: Mr. [. W. RusseLl, Chairman Mr. G. L. Crump, Vice-chairman Mr. C. E. Curtis Mr. C. C. Wells 1Vfr. 1o. T. Holmes On motion o£ Mr. Crunap, the school board directed that the board of supervisors be respectfully requested to authorize the county treasurer to borrow the sum o5 $678, 000 in anticipation o5 the sale of the school bond issue. In looking at our current building program, the necessity of purchasing additional school sites, and in moving ahead on the recomrnendatic for school renovations as stated by the School Facilities Study Committee, it has become apparently clear that additional monies will be need~l before the end o5 this year (1971). We are moving ahead on all of these projects; however, the sum of $678~ 000 will be needed at this time. A copy: teste- Robert A. Lux, Clerk VIRGINIA: A% a regular me~ting of the ChesterTield County School Board held Wednesday evening, October 13, 1971, at 8 o'clock, in the board room of the School Administration Building PRESENT: Mr. J. W. Russell, Chairman Mr. G. L. Crunap, Vice-chairman Mr. C. C. WeLls Mr. C. E. Curtis Mr. P. T. Holmes On motion o£ Mr. Holmes, the t'ol~owinu resolution was passed by the Chesterfield County School Board: WHEREAS, the President of the United States, the Honorable Richard M. Nixon, has decreed a waue-price fr~eze on all salaries for a ninety day period~ and WHEREAS, employees of the Chesterfield County School Board find themselves with contracts entered into before the wage-price freeze, yet unable to receive their proper remuneration; and WHEREAS, these fine employees have given of themselves for the benefit of the children of Chesterfield County and to education in ueneral; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the School Board o£ Chesterfield County does hereby ask its elective officials to support every legal means available to see that all county personnel receive their full contract salary for the 1971-72 school year. copy: teste- PRESENT: VIRGINIA: At a regular meeting o[ the Chesterfield County School Board held Wednesday evening, October 13, 1971, at 8 o~clock in the board room o~ the School Administration Building Mr. Y. W. l~ssell, Chair~ Mr. G. L. Crump, Vice-chairman Mr. C. C. Wells Mr. C. E. Curtis 1Vfr. P. T. Holmes On motion of Mr. Holmes, seconded by Mr. Curtis, the school board directed that the board of supervisors be respectfully requested to permit the school board to exceed the original budget allocation for the 1971-?~ school year by a. 10 teaching positions b. $15, 000 for transportation costs c. $15, 000 for special school trips {a) This r~quest is necessary in order to keep our pupil-teacher ratio within the limit set by the Virginia State Department of Education and the Southern Association for Elez~entary and Secondary Schools. {b) Because o~ the unusual numbers o~ special education students, distances involved in transporting children to and from the annexes of main buildings, new routes, the opening o~ tee new junior high schools, and the over-loading o£ certain buses, it has been necessary for the transportation department to put into operation five of its spare buses on regular daily runs. The additional allocation is needed in order to continue this transportation service. (cD Due to an oversight in the origina~ budget request, mories for educational field trips for both elementary and secondary school students were omitted. These trips have been an intricate part of our educational program for manylyears, and they are considered an inupoz-~ant pam~ o£--~ our students' ove~.l educational program. A copy: teste- Robert A. Lux, Clerk A COLONEL E. P, GILL CHIEF OF POLICE E. T. S~TH CAPTAIN OF DETECTIVES COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA POLICE DEPARTMENT October 18, 1971 Honorable Board of Supervisors County of Chesterfield Chesterfield, Virginia 23832 Gentlemen: I would like to recommend Dispatcher Earl Lee Stewart for appointment as a police officer for the County of Chesterfield and also, John Royce Bucka as a police dispatcher. Respectful ly yours, Colonel E. P. Gill Chief of Police EPG/jc COLONEL E. P. GILL CHIEF OF POLICE E. T. SMITH CAPTAIN OF DETECTIVES COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA POLICE DEPARTMENT October 18, 1971 Mr. Melvin W. Burnett Executive Secretary County of Chesterfield Chesterfield, Virginia 23832 Dear Sir: Earl Lee Stewart, who I am recommending as a police officer has been a dispatcher for Chesterfield County Police Department since May 16, 1969. He was 21 years old on October 2, 1971, and can now qualify. He will fill the vacancy created by Patrolman M. V. Moore, who resigned October 15, 1971. I would also like to recommend John Royce Bucka as a Police Dispatcher to fill the vacancy of Earl Lee Stewart. John Bucka was a police dispatcher with Chesterfield County Police Department December 15, 1966 until Octoberl~, 1969, at which time he resigned to take another position. He has now express- ed a desire to return to the department as a dispatcher. He is now 25 years of age and will not require any additional training at this time. These changes will not effect our budget. Very truly yours, Colonel E. P. Gill Chief of Police EPG/jc BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ~RVIN G. HORNER, CHA1RMAN CLOVER HILL DISTRICT C. J. PURDY BERMUDA DISTRICT J. RUFFIN APPERSON DALE OISTRICT BOARD OF SUPERVISORS HERBERT O. BROWNING,VICE CHAIRMAN MATOACA DISTRICT F. F. DIETSCH MANCHESTER DISTRICT ANDREW R. MARTIN MIDLOTRIAN DISTRICT COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA M. W. BURNETT EXECUTIVE SECRETARY '~ ~i .~ October 19, 1971 ,,._~?' C::~_~ The Honorable Board of Suoe~lsors' ,~ '~ ~~ County of Chesterfield ~~,~~ M. W. Burnett, Executive Secretary ~~~/ Attention: Mr. Subject: Lighting of the Softball Field We have surveyed our county facilities for a place to have adult softball games at night and found that all of the lighted fields are in use every night in the week. This has forced several of our county teams to use Richmond facilities that are already over-taxed for softball play. It would be very desirable to have the field at the Court- house and make this somewhat of a center for recreation. We have the space here, not being used, which could be converted into a playing field. The other two fields at the Courthouse are used every night in the week with little league baseball. We have at least fifteen organized teams in the county with- out a place to play, including our local policemen. Also, I have had several calls from the ladies desiring glplace to play at night. The field would be used every night in the week exclusively for men and women softball games in the county. Little league teams could use it prior to night games for baseball. The softball season usually begins in early April and continues into September. The estimated cost on the lights from Rabe Electric Co. was $15,800.00. Construction of the field from Shoosmith Bros. was 1,750.00. For the backstop and fencing the estimate was 2,500.00. -2- Bleachers for the field were estimated at 1,100.00. The total cost (estimated) would be $21,150.00. I feel we definitely need another lighted field since annex- ation deprived us of three lighted fields and I recommend we pre- pare the field at Chesterfield Courthouse. I believe we can get a field lighted (less than estimated 108 lights) for less than $15,800.00. Sincerely, Carl Wise Recreation Director CW/be i ! WELFARE AND INSTITUTIONS BLDG. z~29 South Belvidere Street Richmond, Virginia 2B220 C;OMNioNWEALTH' OF VIR61Ni&. DEPARTMENT OF WELFARE AND INSTITUTIONS October 15, 1971 Mr. E. Wingo, Sheriff County of Chesterfield Chesterfield Courthouse, Virginia Dear Sheriff Wingo: October 12, 1971 at 1:30 PM, a representative of this Department called at the Chesterfield County Jail to perform a routine inspection. Upon arrival, you a~d your Jail staff were contacted and Sergeant Wilson accompanied our representative. At the conclusion of the inspection you and Lt. Meacham, Chief Jailor, were contacted. A check of the records indicated a total population of 37 which included 7 Juveniles. Our representative was advised that all female prisoners are now being incarcerated in the Richmond City Jail. This will continue until construction is completed on the Chesterfield County Jail. There had been no changes made within the building since the last inspection. During the inspection a number of complaints were received in regards to the lack of heat. Our representative was informed that there was a change over being mm~e in the heating system and as soon as this was completed the heat would be turned back on. The condition of cleanliness and sanitation throughout the Jail was good. U.,.on ~spectLng the kitchen, the menu was presented to o~mr represen+~tive and it appeared to be adequate in both quality and quantity. During the inspection no legitimate complaints were received from the inmates in regards to food. Prior to the inspection your chief Jailor, Lt. Meacham, conducted our representative on a tour of the new construction. Progress is being made, however, he advised our representative that the construction was approximately four weeks behin~ schedule. During the inspection a number of workmen were noted in the security area of the Jail laying cinder blocks. Your chief Jailor advised our representative that the admission of workers into the security area has created a considerable amount of anxiety on the part of the jail staff in fear that items would be left behind which could be used to effect an escape. He further advised our representative that shakedowns are conducted each day after the workers and construction crew leaves the Jail. Mr. Meacham ~formed our representative that two additional Jailors had been authorized. Chesterfield County Jail Page 2 You further expressed your desire for more Jail personnel as you are still below the needed number. It is strongly reco~ended that additional Jail personnel be employed if possible. At the present time your Jail population is running high and the physical layout of your institution requires additional personnel for adequate operation. undOU and you~- personnel are to be commended for your efforts in keeping this Jail in such good condition and adhering to the rules and r~gulations of this Department especially er the adverse conditions that now exist. If this Department can be of an~ assistance to you, please call on us. Yours very truly, R. P. Mason Jails Superintendent JBT: Jb Board of Supervisors Honorable E. P. Gates, Judge of the Circuit Court State Compensation Board Board of Supervisors for the County of Chesterfield Chesterfield, Virginia Gentlemen: It is with deep regret that I submit to you my resignation as Chairman of the Chesterfield County-Colonial Heights Department of Social Services effective November 1, 1971. I have served on this Board more than twenty years and I have enjoyed my associations throughout these years with the members of the Board of Supervisors and all persons connected with the county government for this entire period. I have reached the age of retirement and feel that it is time to let a younger man take over on the Board. I would like to express to the Board my appreciation for all the courtesies that have been extended to me through- out my stay on Miss Lucy's Board. I look with pride on the fact that the welfare program in Chesterfield County throughout my stay on the Board has been run, I feel, in the most efficient and conservative manner which was still in keeping with providing for the needy in Chesterfield. I could not close this letter without advising the Board that the mmnner in which the welfare program has been handled has been due mainly to the efforts of the person whom I consider to be the leading superintendent of public welfare in the State of Virginia, Miss Lucy Corr. The time she has given to the County and her feeling for the people of this County is reflected in the excellent reputation that our Department has throughout the state. Very truly yours, Stanley M. Crump CC' Hon. Ernest P. Gates Miss Lucy Corr MACK T. DAN1E~-S CLEI~ K LEE R. GORDON COMMONWEALTH ATTORNEY CIRCUIT COURT CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA October 18, 1971 ERNEST P- GATES JUDGE {:)AVID MEADE WHITE JuDGe Mr. M. W. Burnett Executive Secretary County of Chesterfield Chesterfield, Virginia Dear Mel: I am enclosing a copy of an order the Judge entered in the Shoosmith land acquisition this morning. I would appreciate it if you would place this in line for payment. Very truly yours, Oliver D. Rudy Commonwealth's Attorney bhg Enclosure DOUGLAS B, FUGATE, ("OMMIIB~BIONER G, L. BAUGHAN, L. URAY, VA, L. R. TREAT, JR. DISTRICT ENGINEER DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS .. mc. Mo.o, VA. .f~~~,~&ctober 15, 1971 ~. M. W. Burnett, Executive Secretar~ Board of Supe~isors ~esterfield Courthouse ~esterfield, Virginia 23832 JOHN E, HARWOOD, OEPUT¥ COMMISSIONER & CHIEF ENGINEER Bon Air, Virginia 23235 OFFICE OF DISTRICT ENGINEER PETERSBURG, VIRGINIA 23S04 Route 711 (Robious Road) Proj. 0711-020-140-C,501, C-502 Chesterfield County Routes 647 (Walmsley Boulevard) and 650 (Turner Road) Proj. 0647-020-105-C-501 Chesterfield County Dear Mr. Burnett: Attached, please find copies of Location and Design Notifications of Public Hearings to be held November 16.r 1971, and November 26r 1971, at 10:00 a.m. in the State Police Administration Headquarters located on Route 60 (Midlothian Turnpike) approximately one mile west of Richmond, Virginia, for the purpose of considering the proposed location and design ~f Route 711 (Robious Road) from 0.254 mile west of the intersection of~ Route 147 (Huguenot Road) to 0.214 mile east of the Powhatan County Line in Chesterfield County, and Routes 647 (Walmsley Boulevard) and 650 (Turner Road) from the intersection of Route 360 (Hull Street Road) to the intersection of Route 150 (Chippenham Parkway) in Chesterfield County. We are planning to hold an open house to present the layouts and other supporting data in the Chesterfield Residency Office from 7:30 to 9:00 p.m., on the evening of November 18, 1971 for Routes 647 (Walmsley Boulevard) and 650 (Turner Road) project, and during the same time on the evening of November 23, 1971, for Route 711 (Robious Road) project. You are cordially invited to attend these meetings, and we look forward to seeing you. If you desire further information before these dates, please advise, and we will attempt to answer your questions. ELC:ll attachments Ve ry~uly~ yo3%rs, E. L. Coving~, Jr. / Resident EnQ~Taeer A HIGHWAY IS AS SAFE AS THE USER MAKE~ IT VIRGINIA: IN IltE CIRCUIT COURT OF CIiESTERFIELD COUNTY IN RE: Purchase b~ the r. zrg~n~a, ,ounty of Chesterfield, V' ' ' of a  arcel of land in Matoaca District, Chesterfield County, Irginia., containing 57,37 acres, owned by Jack T. Shoosmith for use in connection with the proposed Chesterfield County Landfill. This day Oliver D. Rudy, ~he Attorney at Law desi.~nated Dy ~his court 'by order c~rcere~ .~ep'~emi)er ~g~ 1971, to exa~t'ne cae tiale to that certain parcel of land in ~toaca District, 6hes~erkield Gou[lgy, Virgi[~ia, owned by Jack T. Shoosmith and '.ql[~a ~hoosmtn~ his wife~ proposed to be purchased by the County u,~.3~ez'~ield., ~'Lrgiuia, f~.led h~s ?eport ~hereon in ~rtttng, ~'~,~'~ ~.,~:; he ~Lc-~, ,:::i.~ app~ova~ (~: the ~itle ~o the said parcel ;~::..'~...,~,,.~ ",~-:~,~., '~;ith cez~aia exce~)tious, set forth in said report. The t, ourc doth~ therefore~ authorize ~'~d direc~ the said ~;",: ~ ..... ~i:~'~" ~ Lrazn=a, ~c :my Oliver D. kudy, the ..... ~L,' "~"' ' ' ~'~ " ~ ~;~' ci~i~ <:~_~',c~:, the su~? of $ 483.63 .... ,~,i ...er..i ~,~t..~lt the report of c!~r P. ,:,a~c, ..~ar~e.,. of laaJ oe a~:ched -'~.oosi~i~:h, ~is wife, to the County of Chesterfield, Vfrginia. s/ Ernest; P. (;at:es ~ ' Jud~'~ ....... October 18, 1971 LD-66-71 PUBLIC NOTICE PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT ROUTE 711 (ROBIOUS ROAD) CHESTERFIELD COUNTY A Location and Design Public Hearing will be held by a representative of the Virginia Department of Highways on November 26, 1971, at 10:00 a. m., in the State Police Administration Headquarters located on Route 60 (Mid- lothian Turnpike) approximately one mile west of Richmond, Virginia, for the purpose of considering the proposed location and design of Route 711 from 0.254 mile west ofthe intersection of Route 147 (Huguenot Road) to 0.214 mile east of the Powhatan County Line in Chesterfield County. All interested parties are urged to attend and give the Department the benefit of their comments and suq- gestions relative to the proposed highway improvement. Maps, drawings, an environmental impact statement, and other information are available for public review and copying in the Department of Highways Central Office located at 1221 East Broad Street in Richmond, in its District Office lo- cated on Route 1144 (Pine Forest Drive) just north of Colonial Heights and east of Route l, and in its Residency Office located on Route 60 at the intersection of Route 650 (Turner Road) approximately one mile west of Richmond. A repre- sentative of the Department will be present with layouts and other supporting data in the Chesterfield Residency Office from 7:30 to 9:00 p. m. on the evening of November 23, for informal viewing by interested persons. Written statements and other exhibits relative to the proposed project may be presented in place of, or in addition to, oral statements at the hear- ing. Such written statements and exhibits may also be submitted to the Depart- ment of Highways at any time within ten days after the public hearing. At this location and design public hearing, relocation assistance pro- grams and tentative schedules for right of wa~ acquisition and construction will also be discussed. Douglas B. Fugate, Chairman G. L. Baughan Morrill M. Crowe W. Fred Duckworth Le Roy Eakin, Jr. Earl A. Fitzpatrick Thomas R. Glass Rufus T. Hairston Douglas G. Janney State Highway Commission of Virginia October 4, 1971 DEPARTMENT OF TRA~SPORTATION FEDERAL HIG}~AY ADMINISTRATION NEGATIVE DECLARATION ROUTE 711 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY STATE PROJECT 0711-020-140,C-501,C-502 FAS PROJECT S-1613 FROM: TO: 0.254 MI. W. INT. RTE. 147 0.214 MI. E. POWHATAN COUNTY LINE This Statement Prepared By The LOCATION AND DESIGN DIVISION VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS PURSUANT TO SECTION 102 (2)(C) PL 91-190 SEPTEMBER 1, 1971 1. LOCATION, DESCRIPTION AND PURPOSE OF PROJECT The project consists of the reconstruction of approximately 3.30 miles of Route 711 (Robious Road) near Midlothian in Chesterfield County, Virginia. Construction will begin 0.25 mile west of Route 147 (near the intersection of Wiesinger Drive) and end 0.21 mile east of the Powhatan County Line. The primary purpose of the project is to improve the facility to handle present traffic volumes and acquire the necessary right of way for future expansion of the facility. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRON~ENTAL IMPACTS The highway improvement will provide an overall environmental enhancement in that the new facility will afford a maximum degree of safety for efficient transportation of people and goods. This project does not encroach upon any public lands, parks, recreation areas, historic sites or wildlife and waterfowl refuges. There will be no families, businesses, farms or non-profit organizations displaced nor will any neighborhood or developed property be fragmented. There will be no disruption of orderly, planned development. Z 0 z 0 Ld -2- ' Careful consideration has been given to the effects of pollution, siltation, erosion and fugitive dust. The plans and specifications will provide for measures to be taken during construction to reduce or eliminate these problems. All disturbed areas including shoulders and slopes will be seeded for purposes of aesthetics and erosion contro 1. BASIS FOR NEGATIVE DECLARATION Construction of this project will have no significant effects upon the quality of human environment. Z 0 L~I I-0 SONI~dS UJ I-- 0 I.~ cD I~ -J z ~- ,c~ 0 Cl. 0 0 ROUTES PUBLIC NOTICE PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT 647 (¥~ALMSLEY BLVD.) & 650 (TURNER ROAD) C~ESTERFIELD COUNTY LD-58-71 A Location and Design Public Hearing will he held by a representative of the Virginia Department of IIighways on November 19, 1971, at lO:O0 A. M., in the State Police Administration Headquarters located on Route 60 (Midlothian Turnpike) approximately one mile west of Richmond, Virginia, for the purpose of considering the proposed location and design of Roul~$ 650and 647 from the inter- section of Route 360 (Hull Street Road) to the intersection of Route 150 (Chip- penham Parkway) in Chesterfield County. All interested parties are urged to attend and give the Department the benefit of their comments and suqgestions relative to the proposed highway improvement. Maps, drawings, an environmental impact statement and other information are available for public review and copying in the Department of Highways Central Office located at 1221 East Broad Street in Richmond; in it's District Office located on Route 1144 (Pine Forest Drive) just north of Colonial Heights and east of Route 1, and in it's Residency Office located on Route 60 at the intersection of Route 650 (Turner Road) approximately one mile west of Richmond. A represen- tative of the Department will be present with layouts and other sunportinn data in the Chesterfield Residency Office from 7:30 to 9:00 P. M. on the evenino of November 18, for informal viewing by interested persons. Written statements and other exhibits relative to the proposed project may be presented in place of, or in addition to, oral statements at the hearing. Such written statements and exhibits may also be submitted to the Department of Highways at any time within ten days after the public hearing. At this location and design public hearing, relocation assistance programs and tentative schedules for right of way acquisition and construc- tion will also be discussed. Douglas B. Fugate, Chairman G. L. Baughan Horrill Iq. Crowe W. Fred Duckworth Le Roy Eakin, Jr. Earl A. Fitzpatrick Thomas R. Glass Rufus T. Hairston Douglas G. Janney State Highway Commission of Virginia September 30, 1971 PROPOSED HIGHWAY DEVELOPMENT ROUTES 647 8~ 650 CHESTERFIELD FEDERAl PROJ. S-I!.'56 ( ) PROJECT; 0647- 020- 105,C- 501 FROM'. INT, RTE. 360 TOi INT, RTE. 150 SCALE OF MILES LENGTH; 1,204 MI. PROPOSED PROJECT Route 647 Project 0647-020-105,C501 Chesterfield County LOCATION AND DESIGN STUDY REPORT The project begins at the intersection of Route 360 and runs along Route 650 (Turner Road) to the intersection of Route 647, then along Route 647 (Walmsly Boulevard) to the intersection of Route 150, a total distance of 1.024 mile. Land use in the area is predominantly residential with numerous dwellings in close proximity to the existing roadway. The route is classified as a Secondary Arterial and serves as a major access for subdivisions in the area to Route 360 and Route 150. The primary purpose of the project is to improve~a route of substandard capacity to a standard for present traffic volumes. The existing roadway has an 18' to 20' wide surface-treated pavement with l' and 2' shoulders. Grade and curvature are for the most part acceptable. The location recommended for the improvement follows the existing centerline throughout the project except for minor relocations near the intersections of Routes 650 and 647. This alignment is the most feasible since any other alignment would do considerable damage to the adjacent roadside development. A major relocation along an entirely new alignment would not increase the standards for design speed, grade and curvature sufficiently to Justify the considerable damage which would result. The alignment recommended meets AASHO standards for existing traffic and is compatible with the Richmond Regional Area Transportation Plan as it concerns location and design. The relocation at the intersection of Routes 650 and 647 improves a poor alignment problem (reverse curve) and eliminates two T-intersections by combining them into one X-inter- section. The minor increase in damage to adjacent property is more than offset by the increased safety and convenience afforded the traveling public. A negative declaration concerning environmental considerations on this project has been submitted to the Federal Highway Administration. This statement indicates that no individuals, families, businesses, or non-profit organizations will be displaced by this project and that the improvement will have no adverse effect upon the quality of human environment. AASHO criteria for improvements in rolling terrain on routes with traffic in excess of 400 vehicles per design hour recommend a minimum 40 mph design speed. Other cirteria are as follows: Minimum surface width - 24' Minimum shoulder width - 8' N~ximumpercent grade - Maximum degree of curvature - ll.5° Minimum stopping sight distance - 275' Ydmtmum intersection sight distance - 400' The improvement recommended ~ill have two 12' wide lanes with 10' cut° and fill shoulders. All other criteria as listed above have been met. A 60' minimum right of°waywidth will include all cut and fill slopes. There will be no limited or controlled access features within the limits of the project. ,. PROPOSED PROJECT PROPOSED HIGHWAY DEVELOPMENT ROUTES 647 8, 650 CHESTERFIELD FEDERAL PROd. S-II36 ( ) PROdECT: 0647-020-105,C-501 FROM' INT. RTE. 360 TO: INT. RTE. 150 SCALE OF MILES ~/4 LENGTH: 1.204MI. WEST DEPAE~NT OF TRANSP0~ATION FEDERAL HIGHWAY ~ISTRATION N~GATIVE DECLARATION FOR R~E. 647 CHESTERF1U~,D COUNTY STATE PROJECT 0647-020-105, C-501 ~AS ?~O~C~ ~-~36( ) This Statement Prepared By The LOCATION AND DESIGN DMSION VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS August 9, 1971 1. LOCATION, DESCRIPTION AND PURPOSE OF PROJECT This project is located id Chesterfield County and begins at the intersection of Routes 360 and 650 and proceeds in a southerly direction on Route 650 for 0.374 miles to its intersection with Route 647, then extends 0.650 miles in an .easterly direction on Route 647 to its intersection with Route 150 (Chippenham Parkway). The existing corridor Mill be used and the work will consist of grading, drain,_ge and paving. The primary purpose of this project is to upgrade the facility to current standards to provide maximum traffic service for the present and anticipated traffic volumes. 2. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONM~tTAL I~.~PACTS No detailed studies Mere made of alternate locations for this road; however, alternates were discussed at the prelimin~__ry field inspection. Major conside- rations were the volume and safety of traffic and the adjacent economic land use. A complete relocation of the route is unfeasible in that extensive land damage, both economic and physical, would occur. Also, substantially the same maintenance along the existing road would be req,~f~ed since traffic along the existing road would re~ma~__in considerable. Relocations away from the existing alignment will be made to meet AASHO Standards. There will be no individuals, families, businesses or nonprofit organizations displaced by this project. This project does not encroach upon any public lands, parks, recreation areas or wildlife and waterfowl refuges. PROPOSED HIGHWAY DEVELOPMENT ROUTES 647 ~ 650 CHESTERFIELD FEDERAL PROJ. S-I156 ( ) PROJECT' 0647- 020-105,C- 501 FROM' INT. RTE. 360 TO: INT. RTE. 150 SCALE Of MILES 0 I/4 LENGTH: 1.204 MI. PROPOSED PROJECT WEST -2- Careftul consideration has been given to problems of erosion, siltation, pollution and fugitive dust. The plans and specifications will provide for measures to be taken during construction to reduce and/or eliminate these problems. All disturbed areas including shoulders and slopes will be seeded for purposes of aesthetics and eroding. 3. BASIS FOR NEGATIVE STATI~J/~T Construction of this project will have no significant affects upon the quality of human environment. Form 38---5M--12-1-60. ~IRGINIA DIVISION OF FORESTRY DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND ECONOMIC; DEVELOPMENT BOX CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA Expenses incurred for forest tire control activities in Chesterfield County: Chief Warden H. F. Hancock~ Winterpock~ Services to September 29~ 1971 Truck Travel Va@ 19~-~ days @ ¢~32.00 1564 miles @ .10 524.00 156,40 ~780.40 780.40 I hereby certify that the foregoing account of expenses, in the amount of $.__ , which were incurred in accordance with the provisions of the law for forest fire control in Chesterfield County, is correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. An itemized statement of the expenses is herein attached. Subscribed and sworn to before me this the 15th day of Geor ~l~. Dean, State Forester October 19 71 ' -- ~Notary Public - My conmfission expires HARRISON & BATES  I NCOR PORATE D ROSS BUILDING · 801 E. MAIN ST., RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23219 · AREA CODE 703 · 644-2965 REALTORS October 22, 1971 Mr. M. W. Burnett Executive Secretary Chesterfield, Virginia Dear Mr. Burnett: It has come to my attention from various sources that there has been a rumor circulating that it is the intent o£ Harrison & Bates Inc. to locate an FHA 236 rent subsidy apartment project on North Arch Road. Please make it knowa to those who should ask you,that Harrison & Bates Inc. has a wholly owned subsidiary known as Chipmar~ Inc., of which I am president. The property in question is owned by Chipmar, Inc. I can state to you as president of the corporation that owns the site that there is no intention or plan to build FHA 236 (rent subsidy) on North Arch Road. Once again, I want to reiterate and make it absolutely clear that the apartment project that is to be located upon the site is not rent subsidized type housing. I am requesting that the architect involved also sign this letter~ indicating that the plans which we have made on the site will not have rent subsidy. Very truly yours, HWH/mg CHIPMAR, INC. Board of Supervisor''~' ~ounty of Goochland Goochland, Virginia Resolution At a regular meeting of the Goochland County Board of Supervisors held in the County Courtroom at the Goochland Courthouse at 10:00 A. M., Tuesday, Oct- ober 5, 1971, the following action was taken: Present: Earl H. Henley· Chairman John R. Haden Cecil R. Harris Vote: On motion of Mr. Harris and carried unanimously adopted: seconded by Mr. Haden , · the following resolution was WHEREAS the Virginia General Assembly, through the 1968 Virginia Area Development Act, provided for the creation of regional planning districts to provide for· among other noble pursuits, the physical development of regions of the Commonwealth on a sound and orderly basis and within a governmental framework which will promote constructive growth and efficient administration; and WHEREAS the Richmond Regional Planning District Cormnission, acting on the basis of the aforementioned legislation and in recognition of the need to pro- vide adequate water resources for future regional development, has produced the Richmond Regional Water Plan and the Richmond Regional Sewerage Plan, docu- menting regional water resource needs and a coordinated approach towards meet- ing those needs; and W}{EREAS the future growth of the County of Goochland will in large part be determined by the efficient and orderly provision of necessary water and sewerage facilities; NOW, THEREFORE· BE IT RESOLVED by the Goochland County Board of Supervisors this 5th day of October· 19717 that the Richmond Regional Water Plan and the Richmond Regional Sewerage Plan of March, 1970 are hereby adopted. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be dispatched to the Richmond Regional Planning District Commission and to each governing body now a party to the Agreement which created the Commission. Earl H. Henley;~Chairman 20UNTY OF CHESTERFIELD INTRACOUNTY CORRESPONDENCE October 22, 1971 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Mr. M. W. Burnett J. R. Condrey~~/ Budget for Emergency Employment Grant Please ask the Supervisors on October 27 to approve a budget as stated below for this grant.  Show as revenue $63,400.00 for account 11-000-618.4, . Grant Emergency Employment. $5,029.00 for reimbursement for Services-Employment ~-~-- Grant, account number 11-000-916.0. Appropriate $2,021.00 from the unappropriated surplus to function 11-190-000.0, Employment Grant. Show as expenditures: j~2~7!'? $55,538.00 for account 11-190-100.0, Participant Wages. $ 4,583.00 for 11-190-295.0, Participants Fring~Benefits. $ 1,250.00 for account 11-190-102.0, Counseling Service. $ 3,359.00 for account 11-190-101.0, Staff Salaries. $ 420.00 for account 11-190-296.0, Staff Fringe Benefits. $ 300.00 for account 11-190-220.0, Staff Travel. ~$ 5,000.00 for account 11-190-220.1, Participants Travel. 7 ~,~o This will permit us to charge all expenses directly to accounts within the function for the Emergency Employment Grant. JRC:gc COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD INTRACOUNTY CORRESPONDENCE October 22, 1971 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Mr. M. W. Burnett J. R. Condrey ~/ Probation Department Grant The Supervisors on J~ne 23, 1971 appropriated $2,700.00 to the Probation Department for 71-72 for upgrading the Probation office as a result of a grant. We recently received $5,000.00 on this grant and Bob George is interviewing applicants for the two positions authorized by the grant. Please ask the Supervisors on October 27 to approve accounts for this grant. Increase Revenue Account 11-000-618.5, Grant-Probation Department, by $10,619.00 and increase the Revenue Account 11-000-618.6, State Share of Probation Department Grant, by $9,700.00. This is an increase of $20,319.00 in the estimated revenue side of the budget. Also, the Supervisors should appropriate funds to the following accounts in the amounts indicated: $7,400.00 to account 11-054-104.1, Intake Officer $12,000.00 to account 11-054-104.2, Court Psychologist $ 414.00 to account 11-054-403.2, Equipment-Grant $ 505.00 to account 11-054-319.1, Supplies-Grant This is a total appropriation of $20,319.00. JRC:gc RESOLUTION: IDirect the Treasurer as of ~ ...... c~ =-~ ............ nc~ en June 30, 1971, to close out and transfer accounts and balances of the Sewer Service Installation Fund (76-360) and the accounts and balances of the Sewer County Construction Fund (74-340) to the Sewer Improvement, Replacement, & Extension Fund (73-330) so that the accounts, balances, purposes, and functions of these funds (76-360 end 74-340) can be combined into one Fund (73-330)t~he purposes of this fund (73-330)will be as follows: To account for amounts set aside for the improvement, replacement, and extension of the County sewer system and the expenditures therefor. To account for sewer connection revenues and expenditures applicable to sewer connections. To account for the revenues and expenditures applicable % to the installation of county sewer lines. COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD I NTRACOUNTY CORRESPONDENCE October 22, 1971 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Mr. M. W. Burnett J. R. Condrey~_/ Petty Cash for Schools The reasons for the request of the School Board for $1,500.00 petty cash fund are: The school cafeterias now have $1,200.00 in petty cash and change funds. This $1,200.00 is issued to the cafeteria managers to use as a change fund and to buy miscellaneous items such as scouring pads, paper products or small quantities of food such as bananas, head of lettuce, etc. when the items are low in cost and needed immediately. This $1,200.00 was originally charged to expense,reimbursements of money spent is charged to expense, and settlement is made at the end of the school year. As of now, the $1,200.00 is in miscellaneous accounts receivable. The School Board needs $100.00 for Summer Schools and this check has always been charged to expense until a final accounting is made at which time expense is adjusted. The School Board has $200.00 in the Central Office which was obtained by issuing checks charged to expense. By treating the above as petty cash up to $1,500.00, we will adjust the records, have personnel sign for petty cash, and know exactly where the petty cash funds are located. JRC:gc COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD INTRACOUNTY CORRESPONDENCE October 11, 1971 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Mr. M. W. Burnett, Executive Secretary James R. Condre~ Petty Cash for Schools Please see the attached resolution regarding a Petty Cash Fund for the School Board. I suggest that the Supervisors authorize Mr. Moore to establish a Petty Cash Fund for the School Board up to $1,500.00 rather than the specific amount of $1,500.00 as stated in the resolution. The amount of petty cash needed by the School Board fluctuates during the year. As of now, the cafeterias have $1,100.00 and there is $100.00 in the School Board. During the summer the School Board needs about $200.00 for summer school operation. Please ask the Board to pass a resolution on October 13 authorizing Mr. Moore to establish a petty cash fund u~ $1,500.00 for the School Board. JRC:gc Enclosure VIRGINIA: At a regular meeting of the Chesterfield County School held Wednesday evening, Sept. 22, 1971, at 8 o'clock, in the board room of the School Administration Building PRESENT: Mr. ~[. W. Russell, Chairman tVfr. G. L. Crump, Vice-chairman Mr. C. E. Curtis, ~r. 1Vfr. C. C. Wells 1Vfr. P. T. Holmes On motion o[ Mr. Holmes, the school board directed that the board o£ supervisors be respectfully requested to authorize the cotmty treasurer to set up a petty cash ~und ~or the school board in the amount of $1500, said sum lo be under the direction and control o~ the clerk of the school board. A copy: teste- J. V. BOWEN, JR. CHESTERFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT COMPANY # 4 2723 bUfOrd ROAD BON AIR. VIRGINIA 23~_35 DIST. ASST. CHIEF R. L. ZENTMEYER October 25, 1971 Chief Robert L. Eanes Chief of Department Chesterfield Fire Department Chesterfield, Virginia 23832 Dear Chief Eanes: On October 21, 1971, Company 4 received a silent alarm to respond to Robindale Road for a controlled burning. When we arrived the contractor had a piece of heavy equipment with a front-end loader at the scene of a large pile of logs burning. Apparently, he had set the fire to dispose of the logs and citizens, concerned about the smoke and the fire, called the State Air Pollution Control Board. When we arrived Mr. Robert L. Beasley was also on the scene. He is the local representative for the Control Board. He stated that he had ordered the fire extinguished. The contractor would nQt extinguish the fire for the alleged reason of setting his dozer on fire. Mr. Beasley did not request that we put out the fire, but the contractor requested that we put out the fire. Roughly 18,000 gallons of water was used by Unit 42 to extinguish the fire. Unit 42 was tied up for over an hour in this operation. I would recommend that the Board of Supervisors consider better air pollution laws and possibly the incorporation of a suppression fee for those who are required to put the fire out and have no means other than the fire department for this purpose. Obviously, the fire department cannot extinguish all such fires without great inconvenience and expense. Thank you very much. Sinceret~y, ?,9. Bowen, J:~' :)w . District Chiel .: COUNTY OF (3HESTEF~FIELD OFFICE OF THE: TREASURER CH ESTER FI ELD, VI RG I N IA OEO, W. MOORE~ JR. October 27, 1971 Mr. M. W. Burnett, Executive Secretary Board of Supervisors Chesterfield, Virginia 23832 Dear Mr. Burnett: The cash balances in the General County and School Operating funds are not sufficient to pay operating expenses for the month of October and Second Half of 1971 real estates will not be due until December 5, 1971. I respectfully request that the treasurer be authorized to negotiate a short-term loan in accordance with Sec. 15.1-545 and 15.1-546 of the Code of Virginia not to exceed $1,000,000. very truly yours, ~-~""~ /~X/~//Z//~z~ "~.~:~ ''×~' ' ~.'!/, Geo. W. Moore, Jr. Treasurer ~M/mcg BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IRVING. HORNER, CHAIRMAN CLOVER HILL DISTRICT C. J. PURDY BERMUDA DISTRICT J. RUFFIN APPERSON DALE DISTRICT BOARD OF SUPERVISORS F. F. DIETSCH MANCHESTER DISTRICT HERBERT O. BROWNING MATOACA DISTRICT ANDREW R. MARTIN MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT COUNTY Of CHESTERFIELD CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA ROBERT'A. PAINTER. COUNTY ENGINEER M.W. BURNETT ENGiNEERiNG AND UTILITIES DEPARTMENT EXECUTIVE SECRETARY October 27, 1971 Mr. Morris Mason Assistant Commonwealth Attorney, County of Chesterfield, Chesterfield, Va. Re: Map Section: 52-16 Property: Little Creek Lane Dear Morris: Attached find deed that has been executed by Ray Eugene Grubbs and his wife. Mr. Armstrong will not agree to this dedication. It is suggested that a resolution be passed by the Board of Supervisors guarantying a Fifty (50') right-of-way whenever required. Sirra erely, A. J. Bridges Right of Way Engineer AJB/mb cc: Robert A. Painter, County Engineer Encl. 1 October 25, 1971 County of Chesterfield Central Accounting Office Room 301 Chesterfield, Virginia 23832 Gentlemen: Your annual Blue Cross and Blue Shield rate renewal was October 1, 1971, however, as previously communicated, the rates presented were affected by the Wage-Price Freeze announced by President Nixon in Executive Order 11615 on August 15, 1971, and there- fore rate implementation was withheld, pending clarification of the Order. Clarification of the Price Freeze (Phase I) for experience-rated accounts such as yours is contained in the Cost of Living Council Policy statement number 16 which says "Insurance Premiums" - Experience-rating formulas - "In the determination of premiums based on experience- rating formulas, those factors in the formulas that reflect anticipated cost or price increases beyond the base period (e.g., inflation trend factors) may not be applied. Factors that reflect experience on actual costs (e.g., average cost per claim, insurance company expenses, daily hospital reimbursement levels) may be entered into the formulas only to the extent tl~at the exporience would have been entered into the formula had the calculation been made during the base period. However, factors that reflect changed conditions of risk (e.g., the ago-sex distribution of groups, number of claims) may be applied normally. New experience-rating formulas that would result in an increased premium may not be introduced during the freeze period." In compliance with the Executive Order and the Cost of Living Council Policy statement, your Blue Cross and Blue Shield rates have been recomputed for an effective date of December 1, 1971 and will be guaranteed until October 1, 1972. Accordingly, your new Blue Cross and Blue St'field rates are shown on the attached rate infor- mation sheet. Sincerely, Robert A. Hughes \/ice Presieent, MarP~ting ,. .,. ~ vA L ,/ ,/ I ~o~ ~D~ r r o bQ V COUNTY Of CHESTERFIELD CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA July 9, 1971 Mr. Oliver D. Rudy Commonwealth's Attorney County of Chesterfield Chesterfield, Va. 23832 Dear Skit ch: As you may recall, I dimcussed with you earlier the Planning Commission's resolution with regard to a rezonin~ request for George H. Smith (Case #71-42C) in which the Commission recommended that the property in question be rezoned to Local Business and further resolved that the Commonwealth's Attorney's office give written opinion to the Board of Supervisors prior to that Board's he~ring with regard to the legality of allowing the operation of the Sea and Ski shop to continue under the Local Business clas- sification. If I can provide any additional information with regard to this matter, I would be most happy to do so. Sincerely, SRBJr:lw cc: Mr. M. W. Burnett/ ~/'' Executive Secretary Board of Supervisors Stanley R. Balderson, Jr. Senior Planner Chesterfield County Planning Department MACK T. DANIELS CLIrRK LEE R. GORDON CO M M O N WF~AL.TI-&aATTO R N L-y CIRCUIT COURT CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA July 9, 1971 ~rRN~:ST P. OATEe~ DAVID M'F-ADE WHITE JUDOIr Mr. Stanley R. Balders~n,"Jr. Senior Planner Chesterfield County Planning Department Chesterfield, Virginia Dear Start: This is written in reply to your letter of July 9, 1971, in which you requested an opinion from me as to whether or not the Sea and Ski Shop mentioned in your letter would be a permitted use in a C-1 district. It is my opinion that this business would not be a neighborhood use envisioned by our C-1 zoning district and should be conducted on premises which have been zoned C-2 for general business. bhg Very truly yours Oliver D. Rudy Commonwealth' s AttOrney cc: Mr. M. W. Burnett 2 3. 4 5. 11. !5. ~: ', ,,.c..,:.r (By Req,,':<t)