Loading...
06-26-1991 Packet CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA COUNTY ADMINTSTRATOR' $ COMMENTS MEETING DATE: SUBd~CT: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: 4 .a. Mr. Larry Land - Virginia Association of Counties COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Staff members of the Virginia Association of Counties are attending meetings of Boards of Supervisors throughout the State. Mr. Larry Land, Coordinator of Intergovernmental Relations, is the representative to this area. Mr. Land is due to attend another Board meeting in Tidewater area and therefore requests two or three minutes at the beginning of the meeting. ATTACHMENTS: YES r'l NO ~ Doris R. DeHart Assistant County Administrator BOS-9891 SIGNATURE: COUNTY STRATOR 00000L CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF' SUPERVISORS AGE NDA COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS MEETING DATE: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: 4oB. SUB4ECT: Recognition for CSB Prevention Services 1991 Henry V. MCNeill Award - American Psychological Association COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: The Chesterfield CSB has provided excellent prevention programs for many years, and has been recognized statewide as a leader in the prevention field. These prevention programs have now achieved national recognition, as well. The American Psychological Association Community Psychology Division presented the Henry V. McNeill Award which recognizes a community program for fostering excellence, innovation, and community participation in mental health, to the Prevention Service of Chesterfield Community Services Board. The Prevention Service was cited for its strong commitment to prevention, for its innovative approaches, and for fostering extensive community participation. Their programs include prevention activities in every County elementary school; extensive parent education programs, including one in almost every pediatrician's office in the County; substance abuse prevention programs in all County middle schools; a program to prevent depression and anxiety in elderly living alone; and extensive programs to help adults and children cope with divorce. The Prevention Service was developed and managed for many years by Dr. John 'Morgan, now the Director of Clinical and Prevention Services. The current prevention manager is Pat Cullen, who has been with the program for 15 years Both are recognized leaders in Virginia prevention efforts; Dr. Morgan was recently elected as vice-chair of the Prevention Advisory Council of the Virginia Board of the Department of MH/MR/SA, and previously served as chaJrman. Last year Dr. Morgan was the recipient of the Distinguished Contributions to Practice in Community Psychology Award from the American Psychological Association, in recognition of his prevention work. Two recent national publications have featured articles describing our excellen prevention programs. ATTACHMENTS: YES [] NO I~ PREPARED BY;~~~~-~~ Dr. Burt H. Lowe, Director MH/MR/SA Services Department SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMI NI STRATOR 000002 CHESTERFIELD cOUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: 3un~ 26: lqCjl -- ITEM NUMBER: 7.C. SUBd~CT: Resolution Recognizing shirley Layne Upon Her Retirement COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION WHEREAS, Shirley Layne will retire from the Information Systems Technology Department, Chesterfield County, on July 1, 1991; and WHEREAS, Mrs. Layne has provided 25 years of quality service to the citizens of Chesterfield County; and WHEREAS, Mrs. Layne a Data Control Supervisor, demonstrated exceptional leadership skills in providing quality information system services; and WHEREAS, Mrs. Layne's commitment to excellence, energies and total dedication are reflected in each phase of automation throughout County growth; and WHEREAS, due to her dedication and professionalism, Mrs. Layne was selected as the Department "Employee of The Year" in 1976 1977, 1982 and 1987; and , ATTACHMENTS: YES ~ NO 1:3 Frederick W. Willis, Jr., Director Human Resource Management BOS-9891 SIGNATURE: COUNTY~RATOR 000007 Resolution Recognizing Shirley Layne Upon Her Retirement Page 2 WHEREAS, Mrs. Layne has earned the respect and admiration for her work ethic, cheerfulness, enthusiasm and loyalty will be remembered by all; and WHEREAS, Mrs. Layne's active participation in the Christmas Mother program and other community service activities exhibited thoughtful concern for her fellow citizens; and WHEREAS, Chesterfield County and the Board of Supervisors will miss Mrs. Layne's diligent service. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board of Supervisors publicly recognizes Shirley Layne and extends on behalf of its members and the citizens of Chesterfield County their appreciation for her service to the County. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this Resolution be presented to Shirley Layne and that this Resolution be permanently recorded among the papers of this Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia. 000008 CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER; ,, ll.F.3.d. SUB4ECT: Authorization to Exercise Eminent Domain for the Acquisition of a Variable Width Sewer and Water Easement, 5' Temporary Construction Easement, and 5' Drainage Easement for the James River Trunk Sewer COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: Project. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION Staff requests the Board to authorize the County Attorney to exercise eminent domain for the acquisition of a variable width sewer and water easement, 5' temporary construction easement, and 5' drainage Easement, across the property of Thomas W. Strotmeyer and Elise H. Strotmeyer, 4120 Old Gun Road East, Tax Map 3-5(1)19. The construction of this sewer is a County project and is necessary to relieve the over,committed capacity in the Michaux Creek Sewage Pumping Station. This sewer will also serve the schools at the Riverton site. BACKGROUND: On April 10, 1991, an offer of $6,745.00 was made by the Right of Way Section to the above owner for the purchase of a variable width sewer and water easement, 5' temporary construction easement and 5' drainage Easement for the James ATTACHMENTS: YES ~'/NO 12 PREPARED BYe... ,~/- ~c,~"~'"-~ of Utilities SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 0001 ' BOS-9891 Board Agenda June 26, 1991 Page 2 River Trunk Sewer Project. Since this offer has not been accepted and no counteroffer has been made, and since the contract for the installation of the sewer line has been awarded, it is necessary to proceed with eminent domain on an emergency basis for the health and safety of the public. Staff will continue to negotiate with the owner in an effort to reach a settlement. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board authorize the County Attorney to proceed with eminent domain on an emergency basis and exercise immediate right of entry pursuant to Section 15.1-238.1 of the Code of Virginia, and that the County Administrator be instructed to notify the owner by certified mail on June 27, 1991, of the County's intention to take possession of the easement. DISTRICT: Midlothian 000152 VICINI~Z SK~CR AUTHORIZATION TO ~ClSE ~IN~F~ DOMAIN FOR THE ACQUISITION OF EASEMENTS FOR THEJAMES RIVE~T~UNK SEWE~PROJECT (PROJECT %88-0132} 0001~3 N PROPOSED 5; 7~MPORAR Y CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT OEI'¥;'~'"?L/NE Of' PA OLD GUN ROAD E'~S l~ou ?£ ~',~ PROPOSED 5' VDOT DRAINAGE ~ VARIABLE WIDTH SEWER ~: WATER EASEMENT 5' TEMPORARY CONSTRUCT7( PROPOSED VARIABLE EASEMENT --WIDTH SEWER & WA TER EASEMENT 77-lOMAS IlK. STROTMEYER & EL/SE H. STROTMEYER O. B. ¥64 PG. 205 EASEMENT OF R~_W & UT~LI77ES D.B. 1OJ8 PG. 886 O. ~5~- MILE 7'0 REED'S LANDING ROAD R/~ .~ -~-, PROPOSED 5' t~ . .~. ,~. TEMP ORA R Y ',.,, ~ CONSTRUC 770N ~ EA SEMEN T PROPOSED VARIABLE ~ffD TH SEWER & IFA TER EASEMENT / RANDOLPHpLA ?.~LLEN PLA T SHOWING WA ?"ER EA SEMEN 7;, EASEMENT ACROSS THE PROPERTY OF': THOMAS W. STROTMEYER & EL/SE H. STRO77dEYER TAX PARCEL NO.: 5-5' (1,) 19 MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT . CHESTERFIELD COUNT~, VIRGINIA VARIABLE WIDTH SEWER & & TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION KENNETH E COX NO. PREVIOUS JOE NO. PLA T~ J. IC.. TIMMONS & ASSOCIATES, P.C. E1VGINEERS * A~HIT~CTS * S~RVEYORS 7~ ~ N. COUR~OUSE RD. R[CH~OND, VA 8BOJ StAPlES ~tt RD. HENR~CO CO., VA 4411 CROSSINGS BL~. PRINCE GEORGE, VA. DATE: OCTOBER 26, 1990 SCALE: 1" = 100' .1 C£NI~RLiN£ OF POU?u NO. -- 5' VDO T DRAINA GE 0.$~ M~tE TO REED'S LANDIN, ROAD THOMAS W. STRO TMEYER~~ & ~ /.._ ELISE H. STROTMEYER t0' D.B. 464 PG. 205 20' EASEMENT OF R/W & UTILITIES D.8.10,.,=8 PG. 886 / RANDOLPH M. ALLEN PLAT SHOI4/ING A 5' VDOT DRAINAGE EASEMENT ACROSS THE PROPERTY OF: THOMAS W. STROTMEYER m EL/SE H. STROlTWEYER TAX PARCEL NO.: 3-5 (1) 19 MIDLOT/Z-IIAN DISTRICT . CHESTERFIELD COUNT~, VIRGINIA TIMMONS & ASSOCIATES, P.C. ENGINEERS * ARCHITECTS * SURVEYORS 711 N. COURTHOUSE RD. 880J STAPLES MILL RD. 4411 CROSSINGS EL VD. DA TS.. OCTOBER 29, 1990 ,DRAWN BY: B. MORRISON CHECKED BY: JOB NO.: 14242--5 RICHMOND, VA HENRICO CO., VA PRINCE GEORGE, VA. 1" -- 100' I CALC. CHK.: PREVIOUS JOB NO. CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGE NDA MEETING DATE: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: 7.A. SUBJECT: Resolution Recognizing Mr. William H. Goodwyn, Jr. for His Service on the Chesterfield County School Board Representing Bermuda DiStrict COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: See Attached Resolution. Plaque and resolution will be prepared and ready for presentation on the evening of June 25, 1991 at the reception at the School Board in his honor. PREPARED BY;. ATTACHMENTS: YES [3 NO [] BOS-9891 SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 00000, WHEREAS, Mr. William H. Goodwyn, Jr. has served Chesterfield County citizens since 1987 as a member of the Chesterfield County School Board, representing Bermuda District; and WHEREAS, Mr. Goodwyn served as Vice Chairman of the School Board in 1990-91 demonstrating his leadership abilities and confidence of his fellow Board members; and WHEREAS, Mr. Goodwyn and his daughters graduated from Thomas Dale High School and he has followed in the foot steps of his father by serving on the School Board; and WHEREAS, Mr. Goodwyn has served diligently and sincerely, helping to guide the Chesterfield County Public School System through four years of phenomenal growth by adding a calm and steady influence to the decision making process which would affect the quality of education all County students; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors wishes to thank Mr. William H. Goodwyn, Jr. for sharing his knowledge and skills with his fellow citizens as a member of the Chesterfield County School Board. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a plaque inscribed as follows be presented to Mr. Goodwyn: "IN APPRECIATION FOR FOUR YEARS OF DEDICATED SERVICE TO CHESTERFIELD COUNTY WHILE SERVING AS A SCHOOL BOARD REPRESENTATIVE FOR BERMUDA DISTRICT" 00000 :.---: C: H L CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: 7.B. SUBJECT: Resolution Recognizing Mrs. Mary W. McGuire Upon Her Retirement COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: WHEREAS, Mrs. Mary W. McGuire will retire from the Treasurer's Office, Chesterfield County on July 1, 1991; and WHEREAS, during Mrs. McGuire's 43 years of service to the citizens of Chesterfield County, she has been a role model in providing uncompromising customer service of the highest degree; and WHEREAS, from Mrs. McGuire's initial employment by Treasurer William Dance,"her employment with Treasurer George Moore, and throughout her own tenure as Treasurer of Chesterfield County, she haS been a catalyst for progressive, service-oriented change throughout the CountY's government organization; and WHEREAS, Mrs. McGuire has taken the responsibility of service to the public far above and beyond the normal call of duty, from the office environment into every facet of her personal life. This was exemplified by her 1976 County Employee of the Year award, by her service as past president of the Treasurer's Association of Virginia, as 1988 Virginia Treasurer of the Year, and by her extensive involvement with many community service organizations;.and ATTACHMENTS: YES [] NO I1 SIGNATURE Frederick W. Willis, Jr., Director, Human Resource Management CO~STRATOR BOS-9891 ., Resolution Recognizing Mrs. Mary W. McGuire Upon Her Retirement Page 2 WHEREAS, Mrs. McGuire's service, professionalism, and the tremendous care and concern she has shown over the years are a testimony to the benefit of the electoral process, and provide a measure against which coDstitutional officers everywhere should be compared. WHEREAS, as a lifelong resident of Chesterfield County and longtime employee, you will certainly be missed in the ranks of the County's workforce. But it is with great reassurance and pride that we know your vibrant involvement with and contributions to Chesterfield County will certainly continue for many years. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board of Supervisors publicly recognizes Mrs. McGuire and extends on behalf of its members and the citizens of Chesterfield County their appreciation for her service to the County. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a copy of this resolution be presented to Mrs. McGuire and that this Resolution be permanently recorded among the papers of this Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia. CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGE NDA MEETING DATE: June 26: 1991 ITEM NUMBER: 7oDo SUBJECT: Resolution Recognizing Raymond D. Birdsong Upon His Retirement COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION WHEREAS, Raymond D. Birdsong will retire from the Utilities Department, Chesterfield County, on July 1, 1991; and WHEREAS, Mr. Birdsong has provided 32 years of quality service to the citizens of Chesterfield County; and WHEREAS, Mr. Birdsong was employed with Chestefield County in April of 1959 as a draftsman and currently is an engineering supervisor of the support section, which maintains the central file area for all project files as well as the mapping of the 2,457 miles of water and sewer facilities; and WHEREAS, Mr. Birdsong helped to implement an Electronic Document Management System which is capable of storing computerized mechanical drawings which will soon be available through a network for viewing by the department as well as the public; and WHEREAS, Mr. Birdsong was instrumental in the transfer of facilities to the City of Richmond as result of the January 1970 annexation; and ATTACHMENTS: YES/ NO [] Frederick W. Willis , Jr.,~rector Human Resource Management SIGNATURE: O0000,d COUNTY ADM I NI STRATOR BOS-9891 Resolution Recognizing Raymond D. Birdsong Upon His Retirement Page 2 WHEREAS, during the sixties and seventies his knowledge was invaluable in giving assistance to maintaining acceptable water service to our customers with limited treatment and plumbing facilities; and WHEREAS, Chesterfield County and the Board of Supervisors will miss Mr. Birdsong's diligent service. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board of Supervisors publicly recognizes Raymond D. Birdsong and extends on behalf of its members and the citizens of Chesterfield County their appreciation for his service to the County. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this Resolution be presented to Raymond D. Birdsong and that this Resolution be permanently recorded among the papers of this Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia. 0000 ', CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE : June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: 9.A. SI, IBdI~CT: Public hearing to consider leasing a 2,691 square foot parcel and access road at Manchester Fire House No. 2 to Richmond Cellular Telephone Company COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OFINFORMATION: Richmond Cellular Telephone Company ("Richmond Cellular") desires to construct a 195-foot telecommunications tower on a 2,691 square foot parcel, on County owned property, located at the Manchester Fire Station No. 2 on Hull Street Road. Access to the site would be from Walmsley Boulevard during construction and from Hull Street Road thereafter. A copy of a preliminary plat is attached. Richmond Cellular would lease the tower site and access road from the County for $325 per month for a period of up to 20 years,~with annual cost of living escalators. In addition, at no cost to the County, Richmond Cellular would provide space on the tower for a County antenna and remove the County's existing tower, which is in need of maintenance. Construction of the tower will be subject to zoning, substantial accord and site plan requirements. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Board authorize the County Administrator to execute an agreement conveying a leasehold interest to Richmond Cellular. ATTACHMENTS: YES ri 0700:1252:44 NO E! SIGNATURE: PREPARED BY; Steven L. Micas County Attorney COUNTY ADM I NI STRATOR 0000il BOS-9891 LEASE AGREEMENT This LEASE AGREEMENT is made this between THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, day of June, 1991, VIRGINIA, a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia, herein referred to as "Lessor", and RICHMOND CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY, herein referred to as "Lessee". WITNESSETH WHEREAS, Lessor is the owner of the certain real property shown on a plat entitled, "Plat Showing Proposed Lease/Conditional Use Area, + 450' South of Hu]] Street Road at Chesterfield County Fire Station #2, Clover Hill District, Chesterfield County, Virginia," prepared by Jordan Consulting Engineers, P.C., dated April 9, 1991, and attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit A (the "Demised Premises"); and WHEREAS, Lessor desires to lease the Demised Premises to Les- see, and Lessee desires to lease the Demised Premises from Lessor, all on the terms and conditions set forth herein; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and of the mutual covenants and undertakings set forth in this Agreement, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Premises. Subject to applicable easements and restrictive covenants of record, Lessor hereby leases to Lessee, and Lessee does hereby rent from Lessor, on the terms and conditions set forth herein- below, the Demised Premises, together with all improvements thereon, 0000 2 appurtenances thereto, rights, privileges and easements, benefitting, belonging or pertaining thereto (including but not limited to all air rights) and a non-exclusive ingress and egress easement approximately twenty feet in width extending from the Demised Premises to Hull Street Road as more particularly shown on Exhibit A. 2. Ownership. Lessor warrants 0nd represents to Lessee that Lessor is seized of good and marketable title to the Demised Premises. 3. Rent; Term. The initial term of this Agreement shall be for a period of three (3) years (the "First Term") (commencing the day after the contingencies set forth in paragraph 16 below are satisfied) at a rental of Three Thousand Nine Hundred Dollars ($3,900.00) per annum ("Annual Rent"). Annual Rent shall be payable monthly in equal installments of Three Hundred Twenty-Five Dollars ($325.00) in advance on the first day of each month. Annual Rent for the month in which payment of Annual Rent commences shall be prorated. Provided the Demised Premises are not required for any of the purposes mentioned in Section 15.1-258 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, Lessee shall have the option, in its sole discretion, to renew this Agreement for seventeen (17) consecutive additional terms of one (1) year each. Lessee shall exercise its option by giving Lessor written notice thereof not less than thirty (30) doys prior to the expiration of the relevant term. Rental for each successive term shall be increased, if applicable, by the percentage increase of the Consumer Price Index, as hereinbelow defined ("CPI-W") during the SM/bam5289:B48 -2- 0 0 D 0.~. 3 preceding twelve (12) month period. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the rental for for each successive term shall not be less than rental for the previous year. CPI-W shall be defined as the "Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers" (Revised Series), Current Index Reference Base, South Region, All Items, issued by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor in the Labor Statistics Section of the Monthly Labor Review (final publication only). 4. Use. Subject to the conditions stated herein, Lessee shall have the right to use and occupy the Demised Premises for a telecom- munications tower and accessory equipment to be constructed and installed by Lessee on the Demised Premises. 5. Utilities. Lessee shall pay or cause to be paid all water rates and charges for heat, light, power, telephone and other utilities used in connection with the Demised Premises during the term of this Agreement. 6. expense, Compliance With Laws. Lessee shall, at its cost and comply with all laws, ordinances, rules, regulations and requirements of the federal, state, municipal and local governments, and of all departments and bureaus thereof, of the Board of Fire Underwriters, or any other body performing similar functions, and of any other lawful authority relating to Lessor's use of the Demised Premises during the term of this Agreement. Lessee shall have the right to contest the validity of any such law, ordinance, rule or regulation at its own cost and expense. Lessee and its agents may apply to the appropriate govern- mental authorities and public utilities for any governmental or regulatory approvals and easements required of or deemed necessary or useful by Lessee for its use of the Demised Premises, or in order to construct or make improvements or additions, or to install equip- ment, upon or in the Demised Premises. 7. Construction of Improvements. Lessee and its agents shall have the right to construct and install a telecommunications tower and accessory equipment on the Demised Premises subject to the following additional conditions: a. The telecommunications tower to be constructed on the Demised Premises shall be completed within six months after commence- ment of the First Term. b. The telecommunications tower to be constructed on the Demised Premises shall be designed to permit the installation of one DB616 style antenna with LDF5-50A transmission line for Lessor's use at an uppermost limit of 160 feet from ground elevation. Lessee shall promptly upon Lessor's request install such an antenna for Lessor's use at no cost to Lessor for either installation or tower space use. Such antenna shall be purchased and maintained at the Lessor's expense. SM/barn5289: B48 -4- O000.Z c. If requested by Lessor prior to completion of construction of Lessee's telecommunication tower, Lessee shall (1) remove Lessor's existing telecommunications tower in the vicinity of the Demised Premises at Lessee's expense, and (2) provide a trench at Lessee's expense for Lessor's use in installing cables from Lessor's existing telecommunication tower to Lessee's tower on the Demised Premises. d. Lessee's telecommunications tower shall be lighted and painted in accordance with FAA requirements at Lessee's expense if desired by the Lessor provided that upon notification by the Lessor of its desire to light and paint the tower, Lessee shall have 120 days to perform such task. e. Lessee's use of the Demised Premises shall minimize any opportunity for ice from Lessee's telecommunications tower to fall from the Demised Premises onto the adjacent property of Lessor or others. f. Lessee's use of the Demised Premises and its tower shall not adversely affect the Lessor's 800 mhz radio system as currently used or as may be used in the future. g. Lessee agrees to comply with all conditions of zoning, substantial accord or site plan approval as may be imposed by the County of Chesterfield. h. During construction, Lessee's exclusive access to the Demised Premises shall be from Walmsley Boulevard. SM/barn5289: B48 -5- O000.Zt i. Lessee shall pay all zoning, development and recorda- tion fees except as may be required to purchase, install and maintain the Lessor's antenna on the tower. 8. Indemnification. Lessee shall indemnify and hold harmless Lessor, its elected officials, employees and agents from any liability arising from this Lease Agreement. 9. Liability Insurance. Lessee shall, at its own expense, during the term of this Lease Agreement insure Lessor in a company or companies acceptable to the Lessor's Risk Manager authorized to do business in the State of Virginia against any liability which may be incurred by Lessor, its elected officials, employees or agents on account of death, bodily injury or property damage which may be sustained by any person or persons or their property who or which might at any time be in or about the Demised Premises. Said policy or policies of insurance shall be in limits of not less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00), in the event of either bodily injury or death, or property damage, or both, as the result of any one accident or occurrence. Lessee shall deliver a certificate of such insurance to Lessor which certificate shall require the insurers to provide Lessor with thirty (30) days advance written notice in the event of any change, non-renewal or cancellation of any such insurance. 10. Subleases. Lessor shall have the right to approve (which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld) any subleases of either the Demised Premises or tower space on any tower constructed on the SM/barn5289: B48 -6- 0000 ? site and shall have a right of first refusal to enter into any proposed sublease; provided, however, that Lessee may sublease the Demised Premises or tower space without the Lessor's approval or right of first refusal to any controlled affiliate. 11. Encumbrances. Lessee must obtain Lessor's permission (which shall not be unreasonably withheld) to mortgage or encumber its leasehold interest in the Demised Premises; provided, however, that subject to Lessor's rights under this Lease Agreement, Lessee may without Lessor's permission encumber its leasehold interest in the Demised Premises as part of a financing instrument affecting properties owned or leased by Lessee in addition to this parcel so long as all the conditions contained herein are recorded with the deed of conveyance or other financing instrument, and any encumbrance shall be removed upon expiration of the lease term. 12. Ownership of Improvements. Title to any and all equipment and/or improvements installed or erected upon the Demised Premises or attached or appurtenant thereto, including any additions or changes thereto, shall remain the sole property of Lessee or its sublessees; provided, however, that prior to the end of the lease term, after ninety (90) days advance written notice to Lessor, Lessee shall remove all such equipment and improvements from the Demised Premises unless Lessor notifies Lessee prior to the expiration of such ninety (90) day notice period that Lessor intends to exercise its right, which Lessee hereby grants to Lessor, to purchase the telecommunications tower and SM/barn5289: B48 -7- 0000.Z8 any accessory equipment other than the equipment building and telephone switching equipment housed therein for the total sum of One Dollar ($1.00). Any equipment or improvements purchased by Lessor shall be left on the Demised Premises at the end of the lease term. 13. Notices. All notices to be given under this Lease Agreement shall be in writing and may be delivered in person or mailed by United States registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, addressed to Lessor, c/o the County Administrator, P. O. Box 40, Chesterfield, Virginia 23832, and addressed to Lessee at 5909 West Broad Street, Richmond, Virginia 23230, and shall he deemed given when so deliv- ered or mailed. Either party hereto may change the place for the giving of notice to it by like written notice to the other. 14. Quiet Enjoyment. Lessor, on behalf of itself, its successors and assigns, covenants and agrees with Lessee that so long as Lessee pays the rent herein reserved and performs all of Lessee's obligations hereunder, Lessee shall have quiet and peaceful enjoyment and posses- sion of the Demised Premises throughout the term, and any extended term, and shall be entitled to exercise all of its rights hereunder (including, without limitation, its options to extend the term of this Agreement). 15. Local Approvals. Lessee shall be responsible for complying with all local regulations and approved plans as to on-site drainage improvements for the Demised Premises. Any necessary drainage facilities constructed by the Lessee or relocation of streams shall be designed to accommodate the drainage system necessary for the current SM/barn5289 :]~ 48 -8- 0 0 and future development of the area and shall be approved in advance by the County of Chesterfield's Environmental Engineer. 16. Contingencies. This Lease Agreement is expressly contin- gent upon Lessee obtaining appropriate zoning, substantial accord and site plan approval to use the Demised Premises for a telecommunications tower. If such contingencies are not fully satisfied within twelve (12) months after execution of this Lease Agreement, such Agreement shall be null and void. 17. Entire Agr_~e_~e~_n_t. This Lease Agreement embodies the entire understanding between the Lessor and Lessee. This Agreement cannot be varied except by a written agreement signed by the Lessor and the Lessee. 18. Applicable Law. This Lease Agreement shall be interpreted pursuant to the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. WITNESS, the following signatures and seals: Lessee: RICHMOND CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMPANY By: Title: Les sor: COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA By: Lane B. Ramsey County Administrator SM/barn5289: B 48 -9- 000020 State of County of I, , a Notary Public in and for the State and County aforesaid, do hereby certify that the foregoing was acknowledged before me in my jurisdiction aforesaid this ~ day of , 1991, by , (name) , of Richmond Cellular Telephone Company, (title) a Virginia corporation, on behalf of the corporation. My Commission Expires: .... Notary Public COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, to-wit: I, Commonwealth and County , a Notary Public in and for the aforesaid, do hereby certify that Lane B. Ramsey, County Administrator, whose name is signed to the foregoing Lease Agreement, has acknowledged the same before me in my jurisdiction aforesaid on this day of , 1991. My Commission Expires: . Notary Public 00002i SM/barn5289: B 48 -10- \\ z BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MAURICE B. SULLIVAN, CHAIRMAN ,~IIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT C. F. CURRIN, JR., VICE CHAIRMAN BERMUDA DISTRICT G. H. APPLEGATE CLOVER HILL DISTRICT HARRY G. DANIEL DALE DISTRICT JESSE J. MAYES MATOACA DISTRICT CHESTERFIELD COUNTY p.O. Box 40 CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA 23832-0040 LANE B. RAMSEY COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Richmond News Leader Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors May 31, 1991 Meetings and Coming Events One (1) time, Monday, June 10, 1991 Please confirm by calling the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Office at 748-1200. Also, please fax me a computer printout of the ad--Fax number 748-3032. PLRASE SEND TEAR SHEET WITH BILL. Clerk~oD~eeZ~loa~d of Su~isors tp Attachment 'BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MAURICE B. SULLIVAN, CHAIRMAN .~IIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT C. F. CURRIN, JR., VICE CHAIRMAN BERMUDA DISTRICT G. H. APPLEGATE CLOVER HILL DISTRICT HARRY G. DANIEL DALE DISTRICT JESSE J. MAYES MATOACA DISTRICT CHESTERFIELD COUNTY P.O. Box 40 CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA 23832-0040 LANE B. RAMSEY COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Progress Index Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors May 31, 1991 Meetings and Coming Events One (1) time, Monday, June 10, 1991 Please confirm by calling the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Off. ice at 748-1200. Also, please fax me a computer printout of the ad--Fax number 748-3032. PT,EASE SEND TEAR SBEET WITH BII,L. S. DolezaI v {~-- Clerk to the Board of ~dpervisors tp Attachment TAKE NOTICE Take notice that the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia, at a regular meeting on June 26, 1991, at 9:00 a.m., in the County Board Room at Chesterfield Courthouse, Chesterfield, Virginia, will hold a public hearing to consider conveyance of a leasehold inter- est in all that certain tract or parcel of land containing 2,691 square feet, more or less, together with an easement of ingress and egress, located in the Clover tIill Magisterial District of Chesterfield County, Virginia, which parcel is located adjacent to Fire Station #2. The parcel is more fully shown on a plat entitled, "Plat Showing Proposed Lease/Conditional Use Area, +450' South of Hull Street Road at Chesterfield County Fire Station #2, Clover Hill District, Chesterfield County, Virginia," prepared by Jordan Consulting Engineers, P.C., dated April 9, 1991. A copy of the plat is on file in the County Administrator's Office, Chesterfield, Virginia, and may be examined by all interested persons between the hours of 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Rkhmond - Newspapers, lnc. An Affiliate of Media General COUNI'Y OF CHES"FERFIEL. D BOARD OF' SUPERVISORS ATTN: JOAN DOLEZAI .... P.O. BO X 40 CHESTE RF i ELD VA P.O. BOX C-32333 RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23293-0001 804-649-6000 23832. 220806 DATE 06/10/91 B ESCRIPTION RATE CHARGES t CREDITS LINES ..... RUNS 34 1 TOTAL , INCHES i AMOUNT 104.04 Richmond Newspapers, I~c. Publisher of THE RICHMOND ~IMES-.DISPATCH THE RICHMOND NEWS LEADER This is to certify that the attached LEGRL NOTICE was published by Richr~c,r~d Newspapers, of R:ichmc, r~d. State of Virgir~ia, or the T i mes-Di spat Ch 06/10/91 News Leader The first ir~sertior~ beir~g give~ .... 06/10/91 to arid su~ tat irgini ity of Richmond ~or~ expires PLEASE REFER "FO 104.0.4 % CASH DISCOUNT IF PAID ON OR BEFORE 15th OF THE SUCCEEDING MONTH. NO DISCOUNT ALLOWED THEREAFTER. AFFIDAVIT"OF PUBLISHED ADVECISING STATE OF VIRGINIA City of Petersburg I~ S. Atyson Cox, being duly sworn, do, upon my oath, depose and say that I am Advertising Manager of THE PROGRESS-INDEX, a newspaper printed in said City and State. and thaf the advertisemPnt of notice from the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia was published h~ said Daper on June 10, 1991. y CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA k. MEETING DATE: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER:, 9. B. SUB,JECT: Amend Section 20-34 and Sections 20-68 of the Code to Adjust Water and Sewer Connection Fees. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION The Board held a public hearing on the attached ordinance on April 3, 1991, and deferred action at the April 10 and April 24, 1991, meetings. A Board work session was held on June 12, ]991, at which time staff advised that since the preparation of the budget, savings have been realized on recently completed projects as well as savings,on recently bid projects. The increase in the combined water and sewer Capital Cost Recovery fee could be eliminated without undue effect on rate adjustments for FY93 provided the water fee is increased by the same amount the wastewater fee is decreased. This results in no increase in the combined Capital Cost Recovery fee. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the attached ordinance be adopted which increases the water Capital Cost Recovery Fee by the same amount the wastewater fee is reduced. BOS-9891 ATTACHMENTS: YES I"1 NO [] SIGNATURE: David H. Welchons Director of Utilities COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 000023 AN ORDINANCE TO ANEMD THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, ]978, AS AMENDED, BY AMENDING AND REENACTING SECTIONS 20-34 AND 20-68 RELATING TO CHARGES FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER SERVICE BE IT ORDAINED, County: by the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield (]) Chapter 20 of the Code of the County of Chesterfield, 1978, as amended, is amended by amending and reenacting the following sections: o o o ARTICLE II Water o o o Sec. 20-34 Water Connection Fees. (Effective July 1, 1991. The connection fee for water in the County shall be the capital cost recovery charge plus the meter installation charge based on the meter size and type of installation in accordance with the following schedules. (1) The Capital Recovery Charges shall be as follows: Customer Class Meter Number Capital Cost Size of ERU's Recovery (Inches) Per Unit Charge Dwelling, Single (*) Family, Including Townhouses 5/8 ].00 $ ~78~ $ 2,592 Dwelling, Two (*) Family 5/8 1.00 ~78~ 2,592 Dwelling, Multiple Family per unit (**) 0.85 ~7~95 2,203 Individual Trailers or per Trailer Unit in a Park (**) 0.85 ~7~9~ 2,203 0000 , , Ail Other Customer Classes: 5/8 1.00 ~?Sq~ 2,592 ] 2.50 476~ 6,480 1-1/2 5.00 ~?~8~ 12,960 2 8.00 ~8~6 '20,736 3 16.00 ~878~ 41,472 4 25.00 467~ 64,800 6 50.00 ~785~ ]29,600 8 80.00 ~87~6~ 207,360 ]0 115.00 ~8~ 298,080 12 155.00 ~8~ 401,760 Above ]2 inches - to be negotiated at the time of application based upon ERU's. Per unit for a dwelling with a 5/8-inch meter. Dwellings served by larger size meters pay in accordance with the schedule shown for All Other Customer Classes. See Chapter 21 for definition. Per unit, the per unit charge is based on .85 at the 5/8" meter charge. See Chapter 21 for definition. (2) The meter installation charges shall be as follows: a. Service Lines 5/8" ]" ]-1/2" 2" (without meter) $ ~ $ 465 ~8 610 ~O 900 840 1000 b. Meters Only (without service line) 5/8" $ 35.00 ]" 90.00 1-1/2" 200.00 2" 250.00 (3) For all installations not specifically covered in (2) above, the charge shall be the cost of the installation plus 25%. O O O 000025 o o o ARTICLE III Wastewater o o o Sec. 20-68 Wastewater connection charges. ]991 (Effective July The connection fee for wastewater in the county shall be as follows: Existing residences already having a septic tank system or a new' residence connecting to a sewer not installed by the developer of the lot, three thousand six hundred dollars ($3,600.00)-; provided, however that the connection fee rate set forth in Section 20-68(2) shall apply to existing residences that obtain wastewater service through the formation of sewer assessment or development districts. (2) For all other classes, the connection fee shall be the Capital Cost Recovery Charge based on the water meter size as listed below'. Customer Class Number Capital Cost Meter of ERU's Recovery (Inches) Per Unit Charge Dwelling, Single Family, Including Townhouses (*) 5/8" 1.00 $ ~7~88 $ 1,465 Dwelling, Two Family (*) 5/8" 1.00 ~7~88 ],465 Dwelling, Multiple Family (**) 0.85 ~78~ 1,245 Individual Trailers or per Trailer Unit in a Park (**) 0.85 ~78~ 1,245 0000': Ail Other Customer Classes: 5/8" 1.00 ~7~88 1,465 1 2.50 ~74~8 3,663 1-1/2 5.00 ½87~88 7,325 2 8.00 &~448 11,720 3 16.00 ~888 23,440 4 25.00 ~47~88 36,625 6 50.00 ~8~7888 73,250 8 80.00 ~47488 117,200 ]0 115.00 ~87~88 168,475 12 155.00 ~?~88 227,075 Above ]2 inches - to be negotiated at the time of application based on projected ERU's. Per unit for a dwelling with a 5/8-inch meter. Dwelling lines served by larger size meters pay in accordance with the schedule shown for All Other Customer Classes. See Chapter 2] for definition. (**) Per unit, the per unit charge is based on .85 of the 5/8" meter charge. See Chapter 21 for definition. (3) For any dwelling or lot where wastewater service is available but no lateral has been constructed to serve the property, the connection fee will be reduced by $800.00 from the fee shown in (a) above. The responsibility to construct a lateral will be that of the applicant. (4) Construction of a lateral to serve any establishment or property other than residential as listed in item (a) shall be the responsibility of the user. 000027 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA k. MEETING DATE: 991 ITEM NUMBER: 9.C.1 Appointment to Camp Baker Management Board COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Board of Supervisors at their last meeting deferred appointment of Colonel Joseph J. Holicky until such time as his interest of reappointment be determined. Colonel Joseph J. Holicky has agreed to continue to serve if the Board of Supervisors should' so choose to reappoint him. Should the Board of Supervisors decide to reappoint Colonel Holicky, the term of office would be effedtive immediately and expire April 7, 1994. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the reappointment of Colonel Joseph J. Holicky. ATTACHMENTS: YES I-'1 NO I~ M.D. "Pete" Stith, Director, Parks & Recreation SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMI N I STRATOR 0000,:? CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETINGDATE: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: 9.C.2. SUB4ECT: Reappointments of members of the Industrial Development Authority for the County of Chesterfield. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: BACKGROUND Mr. William F. Seymour serves as chairman of the Industrial Development Authority from the Midlothian Magisterial District with his term expiring June 30, 1991. Mr. Seymour has indicated that he would like to continue to serve. Mr. C. Curtis C. Duke serves as a member of the Industrial Development Authority from the Matoaca Magisterial District with his term expiring June 30, 1991. Mr. Duke has indicated that he would like to continue to serve. On June 12, 1991, the Board of Supervisors approved the nomination to reappoint Mr. Seymour and Mr. Duke to serve another term on the Industrial Development Authority. RECOMMENDATION Reappointments should be made effective July 1, 1991 for a 4 year term expiring June 30, 1995. AGI1JN39/erk ATTACHMENTS: YES [] G. Dunn Marketing Manager Economic Development SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADM I NI STRATOR 0000:20 CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA k. MEETING DATE: ,~UBJECT: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: 9.C.3. Reappointment to Central Virginia Waste Management Plan - Citizen Advisory Committee COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION This item requests the reappointment of a representative to the Central Virginia Waste Management Plan - Citizen Advisory Committee. Last year, each local governing body in District 15 appointed one citizen to represent its locality on the Central Virginia Waste Management Plan - Citizen Advisory Committee. This Committee was established to provide citizen input and feedback to the PDC Boards and .staffs in the development of the Central Virginia Waste Management Plan. ATTACHMENTS: YES r"l At the January 23, 1991 Board meeting, the Board of Supervisors appointed Ms. Judy Dunn to the Central Virginia Waste Management Plan - Citizen Advisory Committee. Ms. Dunn's appointment will expire on June 30, 1991. As the committee's work is ongoing, the Richmond Regional Planning District Commission, which is the lead planning agency for this effort, has requested that the local governing bodies extend the terms of the committee members through June 30, 1992. Ms. Dunn has expressed her willingness to continue serving on the committee. At the June 12, 1991 meeting, the Board nominated Ms. Judy Dunn for reappointment to the Central Virginia Waste Management Plan ~ Citizen A~visory Committee. ~/~ PREPARED William H. Howell NO ~ Director of General Services BOS-9891 SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADM I N I STRATOR 000080 June 26, 1991 Page 2 Action Required By the Board: Reappoint Ms. Judy Dunn, of 208 Kristen Lane, Chester, Virginia 23831 as the Chesterfield County representative to the Central Virginia Waste Management Plan - Citizen Advisory Committee, until June 30, 1992. 00003 CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: 10.A. SUB4ECT: Public Hearing on an Amendment to ~ 7.2-9 of the Code of the C~ of Chesterfield, 1978, as amended, Relating to the Fee for Review of an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION On October 10, 1990, as part of the ordinance amendments implementing the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act, the Board of Supervisors increased the fee for review of an erosion and sediment control plan from $600.00 to $800.00. On April 10, 1991, the Board further increased the fee to $1,000.00, effective July 1, 1991. On May 22, 1991, the Board adopted the attached ordinance on~ an emergency basis to clarify that by delaying the effective date of the County's Chesapeake Bay Preservation Ordinance until November 15, 1991, the Board did not intend to reduce the fee for review of an erosion and sediment control plan from $800.00 to $600.00 for the period between May 22, 1991 and July 1, 1991. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Board adopt the attached ordinance setting the review fee for erosion and sediment control plans at $800.00 until July 1, 1991. ATTACHMENTS: YES I~ NO D PREPARED Steven L. Micas County Attorney 0700:1230:44 ( 229. txt) SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 000O,32 BOS-9891 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, 1978, AS AMENDED, BY AMENDING AND REENACTING §7.2-9 RELATING TO EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL BE IT ORDAINED by Chesterfield County: the Board of Supervisors of (1) That Section 7.2-9 of Chapter 7.2 of the Code of the County of Chesterfield, 1978, as amended, is amended and reenacted as follows: Sec. 7.2-9. Fees. ~a~ A program administration fee of s½~ eiqht hundred dollars ($6~00.00) shall be paid to the county at the time of filing of each erosion and sediment control plan for review. No plan shall be accepted for review unless accompanied by this fee. (2) This ordinance shall be effective through June 30, 1991, inclusive. 0705:229.txt - 1 - 5/10/91 000033 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MAURICE B. SULLIVAN, CHAIRMAN MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT C. F. CURRIN, JR., VICE CHAIRMAN BERMUDA DISTRICT G. H. APPLEGATE CLOVER HILL DISTRICT HARRY G. DANIEL DALE DISTRICT JESSE J. MAY'ES MATOACA DISTRICT CHESTERFIELD COUNTY P.O. Box 40 CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA 23832-0040 LANE B. RAMSEY COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Richmond News Leader Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors May 31, 1991 Meetings and Coming Events One (1) time, Wednesday, June 12, 1991 One (1) time, Wednesday, June 19, 1991 Please confirm by calling the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors office at 748-1200. Also, please fax me a computer printout of the ad--Fax number 748-3032. PLRASE SEND TEAR SHEET WITH BILL. -Joa'~ S. Doi~zal ~) --- Clerk to the Board of ~'upervisors tp Attachment BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MAURICE B. SULLIVAN, CHAIRMAN MIE)LOTHIAN DISTRICT C. F. CURRIN, JR., VICE CHAIRMAN BERMUDA DISTRICT G. H. APPLEGATE CLOVER HILL DISTRICT HARRY G. DANIEL DALE DISTR~CT JESSE J. MAYES MATOACA DISTRICT CHESTERFIELD COUNTY P.O. Box 40 CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA 23832-0040 LANE B. RAMSEY COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Progress Index Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors May 31, 1991 Meetings and Coming Events One (1) time, Wednesday, June 12, 1991 One (1) time, Wednesday, June 19, 1991 Please confirm by calling the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Office at 748-1200. Also, please fax me a computer printout of the ad--Fax number 748-3032. PLF. ASE SEND TEAR SHEET WITH BILL. Clerk to the Board of ~6pervisors tp Attachment TAI~E NO'I~ICE Take notice that the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia, at a regular meeting on June 26, 1991 at 9:00 a.m. in the County Board Room at Chesterfield Courthouse, Chesterfield, Virginia; will hold a public hearing to consider an ordinance to amend the Code of the County of Chesterfield, 1978, as amended, by amending and reenacting Section 7.2-9 relating to erosion and sediment control. Copies of the ordinance are on file in the County Administrator's Office, Room 504, 9901 Lori Road, Chesterfield, Virginia, and may be examined by all interested persons between the hours of 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Richmond Newspapers, lnc. An Affiliate of Media General COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ATTN: JOAN DOLEZAL P.O. BOX 40 CHESTERFIELD VA P.O. BOX C-32333 RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23293-0001 804-649-6000 DATE i B RATE TO EROSION CONTROL 2 Richmond Pub THE RICHMON~ THE RICH This is to cert bl ishe, Ri R i ch r~c, nd, T i mes-D i s pat ch The first inserti ,; 0 CREDITS TOTAL INCHES J AMOUNT ~ of Richraond :ommission expires ITTING PI 134.64 % CASH DISCOUNT IF PAID ON OR BEFORE 15th OF THE SUCCEEDING MONTH. NO DISCOUNT ALLOWED THEREAFTER. , AI~FIDAV~-, .OF 'PUBLISHED ADV£RTISING STATE OF VIRCINIA City of Petersburg I, ~. Atyson Cox, being duly sworn, do, upon my oath, depose and say that I am Advertising Manager of THE PROCRESS-INDEX, a newspaper printed in said City and State, and that the advertisement of take notice from the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County. was published in said paper on June 12 19, 1991. Ad~Orti~ing Manager/ ~rn .t~o and subscribed beforo me TAKE NOTICE Board field t~rfi~d: ,teen t;2~9 · ~sedi . control.; (~opies of the: 5:00 t I :t gd ~t, 'tfl? 16 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER; 10 .B. SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARIN~ TO CONSIDER THE AWARD OF AN A~REEMENT FOR FIXED BASE OPERATOR SERVICES AT THE CHESTERFIELD COUNTY AIRPORT AND LEASES WITH DOMINION AVIATION SERVICES, INC. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION; Background In November of 1990, a management study was undertaken for the County by Gellman Research Associates, Inc. recommending "continue County ownership and management of the Airport but contract as many functions as possible". The report recommended that the County pursue a fixed base operator "to operate all of the Airport's underlying businesses such as aircraft maintenance, line and fuel, the restaurant, hangaring and so forth". " The Board of Supervisors received the report and endorsed its recommendations during their November 1990 work session. Based on the consultant's recommendations, the Board of Supervisors requested that staff develop and solicit proposals for FBO services. Staff received five (5) proposals and short-listed three (3) contractors for interview. An evaluation panel comprised of County staff and the Chairman of the Airport Advisory Board evaluated written proposals and conducted interviews with each prospective contractor. The result of this process was the selection of Dominion Aviation Services as the firm to recommend to the Board of Supervisors, contingent on successful contract negotiations. NO I'1 ATTACHMENTS: YES ~ Bradford S. Hammer Deputy County Administrator for Management Services BOS-9891 SIGNATURE COUN STRATOR June 26, 1991 Page 2 Dominion Aviation Services was selected based on their proposal's financial, services, and capital improvement plans. Dominion Aviation Services has strong financial backing and a willingness to expand when and where necessary. The combined net worth of the limited cooperation of Dominion Air Services is $3,605,391. Dominion Aviation Services, the company presently operating air charter services at the Airport has a net worth of $71,391. The legal document necessary to obtain the FBO services is a long-term lease for the maintenance, corporate hangars, T-hangars, the terminal building, and other facilities which includes a service agreement that covers all facets of FBO services at the Airport. Because the FBO service and lease agreement is a long-term endeavor, factors such as cost of money, business risk, fuel prices, and competition were evaluated to negotiate a fair contract for the County and the operator. The following is a summary of the main features of the FBO service and lease agreement. Lease of County Property The fixed base operator will lease the following facilities for a period of five (5) years with three (3) - five (5) year renewable terms: o Terminal facility and Restaurant The FBO will maintain and operate the terminal facility and will be responsible for the restaurant lease management and operation. Certain spaces will be retained by the Airport Manager for County uses. The flight school lease will be retained by the County. Maintenance hangar The FBO will have a lease to perform maintenance services and will lease office space from the maintenance hangar. Corporate hangar The FBO will provide the property and lease management of the corporate hangar. o T-Hangars The fixed base operator will be responsible for all custodial and routine interior building maintenance functions. The County will be responsible to maintain exterior, structural and mechanical systems. June 26, 1991 Page 3 The fixed base operator will handle lease administration, including billing and accounts receivable responsibilities. The County will receive $71,000/year (with a consumer price index "CPI" escalator after three years) for the terminal, maintenance, and corporate hangar. The fixed base operator will remit 95% of the base rents invoiced from all T-hangar rentals as the lease payment. Sale of County Property The fixed base operator will purchase the County's rolling stock and parts inventory for a price of $105,769 to be paid over three years. The Airport fire truck will be assigned to the operator at no cost to the fixed base operator in exchange for operations and maintenance of the vehicle for airside emergencies. Fuel Farm The county will allow the fixed base operator to use the Airport fuel farm. The fixed base operator will share fuel farm revenues with the County based on an annual-tiered approach which will permit the County to share in the growth of fuel sales. The annual tiers are as follows: The Airport presently pumps approximately 400,000 gallons annually. June 26, 1991 Page 4 Fixed Based Operator Services and Standards The fixed base operator will provide the following functions: o Certified F.A.A. maintenance for piston, rotor, and turbine driven aircraft o Avionics Repairs (within 18 months of contract date) o Certified air taxi and charter o Aircraft Rental o Fuel sales o Flight School (to be subcontracted by Air Chesterfield) o Administration and property management of leased space including restaurant, office space, hangars, maintenance facilities, and tie-downs o Ground leased car rentals o Operation of weather advisory and damaged aircraft removal o Restaurant and Banquet Services Future Hangar Construction The County will follow the policy that it will retain land ownership of all undeveloped land and will retain ownership of all existing improvements. If new facilities are built, the County will own the improvements at the end of the lease term. All future facilities are to be privately financed with the possible exception of the use of industrial development bonds. The fixed base operator is required to build new facilities whenever such facilities are needed. Future Fixed Base Operator(s) The Gellman Associates report strongly indicated that the Airport could successfully operate with one FBO at the present time. It quoted a National Air Transportation Association Study that said "unless there is a significant unsatisfied demand for FBO services, the entry of an June 26, 1991 Page 5 additional full-service FBO may cause all of the FBO's at the Airport to loose money because the same amount of business must be spread among additional operators". The report indicated that FBO operators typically operate on "scant" profit margins, thus, "forcing the entry of an additional supplier of a given FBO service, when an optimum already exists is bad policy ..... ". The future of additional FBO's will be largely an economic decision based on the increased activity of the airport. The County cannot preclude competition in the future. The best policy is to promote an opportunity for a FBO to succeed and grow by offering competitive prices and services. Recommendation It is recommended that the Board of Supervisors authorize the County Administrator to approve and execute an FBO Services and lease agreement with Dominion Aviation Services, Inc., subject to review by the Federal Aviation Administration and approval as to form by the County Attorney. A copy of the proposed Agreement will be provided to the Board prior to the public hearing. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MAURICE B. SULLIVAN, CHAIRMAN MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT C. F. CURRIN, JR., VICE CHAIRMAN BERMUDA DISTRICT G, H, APPLEGATE CLOVER HILL DISTRICT HARRY G. DANIEL DALE DISTRICT JESSE J. MAYES MATOACA DISTRICT CHESTERFIELD COUNTY P.O. Box 40 CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA 23832-0040 LANE B. RAMSEY COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Richmond News Leader Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors June 7, 1991 Meetings and Coming Events One (1) time, Tuesday, June 11, 1991 Please confirm by calling the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Office at 748-1200. Also, please fax me a computer printout of the ad--Fax number 748-3032. PLEASE SEND TEAR SHEET WIT~ BILL. Joa~ S. Dolezal ~ ~ Clerk to the Board of Su~e~sors tp Attachment BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MAURICE B. SULLIVAN, CHAIRMAN MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT C. F. CURRIN, JR., VICE CHAIRMAN BERMUDA DISTRICT G. H. APPLEGATE CLOVER HILL DISTRICT HARRY G. DANIEL DALE DISTRICT JESSE J. MAYES MATOACA DISTRICT CHESTERFIELD C 0 UN T Y P.O. Box 40 CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA 23832-0040 LANE B. RAMSEY COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Progress Index Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors June 7, 1991 Meetings and Coming Events One (1) time, Tuesday, June 11, 1991 Please confirm by calling the Clerk to the Board of supervisors office at 748-1200. Also, please fax me a computer printout of the ad--Fax number 748-3032. PLRASE SEND TEAR S~ET WITH BILL. Joan S. Dolezal ~ --' Clerk to the Board of S~visors tp Attachment TAKE NOTICE Take notice that the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia, at a regular meeting on June 26, 1991, at 9:00 a.m. in the County Board Room at Chesterfield Courthouse, Chesterfield, Virginia, will hold a public hearing to consider the conveyance of twenty year leasehold interests in property now used as the Chesterfield County Airport to Old Dominion Air Charter, Inc. for the purpose of conducting a fixed base operation. The Board will also consider authorizing the execution of a contract to perform such fixed base operations by Old Dominion Air Charter, documents are on file in the County Inc. A copy of such A dminist r ator' s Office, Chesterfield, Virginia, and may be examined by all interested persons between the hours of 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. 0800:1221:44 (#2200) SU~Y OF FIXED B~SE OPERATOR CONTI~CT STATUS &T CHESTERFIELD COUNTY &IRPORT Background The concept of privatizing maintenance and fueling operations at the Airport began three years ago when the Airport Advisory Board asked staff to develop a request for proposals ("RFP") to attract a qualified fixed base operator ("FBO") to handle aviation services at the Airport. Staff developed an RFP and received proposals, however, none of the proposals were financially or strategically attractive. In November of 1990, a management study was undertaken for the County by Gellman Research Associates, Inc. recommending "continue County ownership and management of the Airport but contract as many functions as possible". The report recommended that the County pursue a fixed base operator "to operate all of the Airport's underlying businesses such as aircraft maintenance, line and fuel, the restaurant, buildings and grounds, hangaring and so forth". The Board of Supervisors received the report and endorsed its recommendations during their November work session. Based on the consultants recommendations, the Airport Advisory Board requested that staff develop and solicit proposals for FBO services. Staff received XX proposals and short-listed three contractors for interview. A evaluation panel comprised of County staff and the Chairman of the Advisory Board evaluated written proposals and conducted interviews with each prospective contractor. The result of this process was the selection of Old Dominion Air Services as the firm to recommend to the Board of Supervisors, contingent on successful contract negotiations. Old Dominion Air Services was selected based on their proposal's financial, services, and capital improvement plans. Financially, Old Dominion has strong financial backing and a willingness to expand when and where necessary. The combined net worth of the limited partnership of Old Dominion Air Services is $ 3,605,391. Old Dominion Air Charter, the company presently operating air charter services at the Airport has a net worth of $71,391. The legal instruments necessary to contract FBO services involve long-term leases for the maintenance, corporate, t-hangars, the terminal building, and other facilities. Also required will be a performance-based service contract that covers all facets of FBO services and involvement at the Airport. Because the FBO contract is a long-term endeavor, factors such cost of money, business risk, fuel prices, and competition were evaluated to negotiate a fair contract for the County and the operator. A summary of the main features and understandings of the FBO contract follows. Leases of County~_Rr~ The fixe~'~"ase opera~will perio ~~. lease the following facilities for a Terminal facility and Restaurant Maintenance hangar Corporate hangar T-Hangars The fixed base operator will be responsible for all custodial and routine maintenance functions. The County will be responsible to maintain exterior, structural and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems. The fixed base operator will handle lease administration, including billing and accounts receivable responsibilities. The County will receive $80,000/year (with a consumer price index "CHI" escalator) for the Terminal, Maintenance, and Corporate hangar. The fixed base operator will remit 95% of the base rents collected (base rents will be adjusted with a CHI) from all T-hangar rentals as the lease payment. Sale of County Property The fixed base operator will purchase the County's rolling stock and parts inventory for a price of $105,000 to be paid over three years as the stock is used. The Airport fire truck will be assigned to the operator at no cost to the fixed base operator in exchange for manning the vehicle for airside emergencies. Fuel Farm The county will retain the ownership of the fuel farm and lease the fuel facilities to the fixed base operator. The lease will require the fixed base operator to share fuel farm revenues based on a annual-tiered approach will permits the County to share in the growth of fuel sales. The annual tiers are as follows: 0 - 500,000 gallons ........................ 500,000 - 1,000,000 gallons ................ 1,000,001-1,500,000 gallons ................ 1,500,000 and up gallons ................ $0.05/gallon S0.10/gallon $0.125/gallon $0.15/gallon The Airport presently pumps approximately 400,000 gallons annually. Fixed Based Operator Services and Standards The fixed base operator will provide the following functions: Certified F.A.A. maintenance for piston, rotor, and turbine driven aircraft ionics Repairs (within 18 months of start e) O O O O Certified air taxi and charter  light School (to be subcontracted by Air sterfield) Administration and (~nagement of all leased space including r~staurant, office space,~ hangars, maintenance facilities, and tie-down~~ Ground leased car rental~ ~ Operation of weather advisory and airside navigational systems~ ~ Property Management of leased facilities Land Leases and Future Hangar Construction The County will follow the policy that it will retain land ownership of all~n~I~ei~p~-d-~an~and will retain ownership of all existing impr~ements. If new,facilities are built, the County will land leas~f~r20 years_~own the improvements at the end of the lease term. ~f~A%ure facilities are to be privately finance~with the possible exception of the use of industrial development bonds. The fixed base operator is required to build new facilities when and where required based on criteria established under the FBO services contract. Future Fixed Base Operator(s) The Gellman Associates report strongly indicated that the Airport could successfully operate with one FBO at the present time. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MAURICE B. SULLIVAN, CHAIRMAN MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT C. F. CURRIN, JR., VICE CHAIRMAN BERMUDA DISTRICT G. H. APPLEGATE CLOVER HILL DISTRICT HARRY G. DANIEL DALE DISTRICT JESSE J. MAYES MATOACA DISTRICT CHESTERFIELD COUNTY P.O. BOX 4O CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA 23832 (804) 748-1211 MEMORANDUM COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR LANE B. RAMSEY TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: The Honorable Chairman and Members of the Board of L~ne B.~Ramsey County Administrator June 4, 1991 Advertising a Public Hearing for June 26th to Award Lease Contracts to Old Dominion Air Charter for Fixed-Based Operation Services at Chesterfield County Airport County staff is currently negotiating a contract between the successful bidder, Old Dominion Air Charter and the County of Chesterfield for the provision of fixed-base operator services at Chesterfield County Airport. These negotiations involve the drafting and negotiating of the lease and operating contracts for the fixed-base operator. The negotiations involve both the use of County facilities and the provision of aeronautical services at the Airport. The conversion to a fixed-base operator will have an impact of reducing the personnel assigned to the Airport budget and will also involve changing the approved budget appropriation level currently approved by the Board of Supervisors. Naturally, the negotiations are known to County Airport employees who will need to make career decisions either to work for Old Dominion Air Charter or look for work elsewhere in terms of their career ambitions. As a result, it is anticipated that some employees may decide to transfer to other County departments or be employed elsewhere. This change will require temporary personnel services which will fill in the gaps between vacated positions to maintain adequate service levels at the Airport. To provide the necessary fifteen (15) days public advertising period, it will be necessary to begin advertising the public hearing for award of the fixed-base operator contracts and leases prior to June 12th. This is necessary so that the conversion can be handled smoothly and as close to July 1, 1991 as possible. As a result, I am authorizing the County Clerk to begin advertising for the June 26th hearing to meet the fifteen (15) day requirement. The Honorable Chairman and Members of the Board of Sugervisors June 4, 1991 Page 2 If any Board member should take exception to advertising the hearing prior to the Boards' approval on June 12th, please let me know no later than Monday, June 10th. It is my intention to advertise the public hearing so that the Board can approve the lease and service contracts on June 26th. If there should be any questions regarding the status of negotiations or concerns the Board members have regarding the fixed- base operator conversion, please do not hesitate to contact me or Brad Hammer regarding your interests. BSH.ajc.admn23. l 'chmond Newspap rs, lnc. An Affiliate of Media General COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ATTN: JOAN DOLEZAL P. 0. BOX 40 CHESTE RF I ELD VA P.O. BOX C-32333 RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23293-0001 804-649-6000 23832 CUSTOMER ACCOUNT NUMBER 220806 DATE L06/11/91 ~ DATE ~6/i1/~I DESCRIPTION OFLEASEHOLD, PUBLIC RATE HE CHARGES L I NES RUNS 26 1 CREDITS TOTAL INCHES I AMOUNT $79.56 Richmond Newspapers~ I~c. Publisher of THE RICHMOND TiMES-DISPATCH THE RICHMOND NEWS LEADER This zs to certify that the attached LEGAL NOTICE was published by Richmor~d Newspapers, Ir~c., ir~ the of Richmor~d, State of Vir. gir~ia, on the fc, l lowir~g T i roes- D i spat ch News Leader 06711/91 ]'he fi- rst Sworn to arid me this ir~sert ic, r, beir~g of N,z, tary Public irgir, ia R i chmor, d giver~ .... 06/11/91 PLEASE REFER TO YOUR CUSTOMER ~f 220806 $79.56 % CASH DISCOUNT IF PAID ON OR BEFORE 15th OF THE SUCCEEDING MONTH. NO DISCOUNT ALLOWED THEREAFTER. AFFIDAVi OF .PUBLISHED ADVB,,'ISING STATE OF VIRGINIA City of Petersburg I. S.. A~.Yson Cox, being duly sworn, do, upon my oath, depose and sa), that I am Advertising Manager of THE PROGRESS-INDEX, a newspaper printed in said City and State, and that' the adverti.~eme,~t of notice from the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia. June 11, 1991. was published hx said paper on 81: I t~t:d 8- 'ltl? i 6 b%v~rn to and zubscribed before me t~)~ __ cla,, ./l.g'/ VIRGINIA; BgFORE THE CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS June 26, 1991 GOOD MORNING, GENTLEMEN OF THE BOARD and members of the Staff: I ay Charles W. Hundley, a member of the Law Firm of White, Blackbur~ &Conte, 300 West Main Street, Richmond, Virginia 23220 · and a resident of Chesterfield County. I am an attorney representing commercial aviation clients and am a legal services plan attorney for the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association based in Frederick, Maryland. I represent Air Chesterfield, Inc. Air Chesterfield is engaged in the business of air charter, aircraft rental, flight instruction and other aviation-related activities at the Chesterfield County Airport. Air Chesterfield is the largest private employer at the airport. Based on the number og flight students who earn a certificate issued by the Federal Aviation Administration, Air Chesterfield is the largest flight school in Central Virginia. It is one of the largest consumers of aviation fuel at Chesterfield County Airport. The Chesterfield County Airport is known among pilots as one of the finest municipal general aviation airports in the Mid- Atlantic Region. It is featured with justifiable pride in County economic development brochures. With substantial Federal aid, the airport continues to improve. Air Chesterfield does not oppose the policy decision of this Board to place many airport services formerly provided by the County under private control. While placing services under private control, we must remember that each time the County accepted Federal assistance for needed improvements, the County agreed in writing to abide by various policies and procedures concerning, among other things, restrictions improperly imposed upon airport users. The agreements are in writing and on 'file with the Federal Aviation Administration. It is our hope that the County Staff has taken these agreements into account when negotiating the agreement we understaDd is before you today. New~paper notice of this public meeting was ostensibly given several weeks ago. Reference was made to an agreement that was not avai|able for anyone to review. Requests made by Air Chesterfield under 'the Freedom of Information Act for a copy of the agreement was responded to last week by notification to Air Chesterfield that [1] the documents requested did not exist, and [2] no Fixed Base Operator agreement was scheduled to be -presented. Relying upon such notification by the County, no further inquiry was made by Air Chesterfield until a rumour suggested earlier this week that an FBO agreement would be presented today. Another Freedom of Information Act request was sent to the County, with similar response. Yesterday, the County was kind enough to call me with the news that it appeared an agreement would be presented today, but a copy would not be available until later in the day. Yesterday, after business hours, a County employee was kind enough to deliver a partial copy to an office where I could pick it up after 8:00 p.m. I appreciate the assistance of the County with sharing the change in events with me, and with getting a document to a location where I could receive it. However, it should be obvious that the notice given in the newspaper should not be misinterpreted by anyone as notice of the agreement that is being presented today. It was represented to me that a copy of the agreement was available to noone before last evening. If that is true, and I am sure it is because that is what I was told by a County representative, then noone other than Staff members and representatives of the potential Fixed Base Operator have had opportunity to review the agreement. Surely this Board is not going to consider an agreement that noone from the interested public has had opportunity to review prior to this public meeting. Public notice of the agreement calculated to allow interested people opportunity to know what is going on simply was not given by the County. As a result, I have not been able to reasonably confer with either Air Chesterfield or other corporate users of the airport. It is impossible for Air Chesterfield, or any member of the public, to assess what their position, if any, should be with respect to this agreement. The omitted schedules and other agreements referenced in the agreement need to be obtained and reviewed, It is not for lack of expressed interest on the part of Air Chesterfield that, for whatever reason, this agreement was kept from public scrutiny. Under the circumstances, it is not unreasonable for Air Chesterfield to expect the Board to defer action on this agreement for at least several days. WHEREFORE, IT IS RESPECTFULLY REQUESTED that the only action taken by this Board today concerning this matter is to defer it for a short period of time during which a complete copy of the proposed agreement is available to tho public for inspection and copying. AIR By CHEST~ERF I EL~D, INC. RESOLUTION OF THE CHESTERFIELD PILOTS ASSOCIATION, INC. At a regular meeting of the Chesterfield Pilots Association, Inc., a Virginia corporation, on June 20, 1991, the following resolution passed unanimously: RESOLVED, That the Association wishes to express its unanimous support for the privatization of the fixed base operations at Chesterfield County Airport proposed by the Airport Advisory Committee to the Chesterfield Board of Supervisors. The Association feels that the implementation of this proposal will best meet the needs of the users of the facility and the citizens of Chesterfield County, Virginia. The President and Counsel of the Association are requested to convey this resolution of the Association at the hearing set for June 26, 1991, at 9:00 a.m., in the Board of Supervisors meeting room at the government complex. [Extract from the minutes of the Association] ATTEST: STATEMENT BY ROGER S. BURNS TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AT THE PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING AWARDING OF FBO CONTRACT FOR THE CHESTERFIELD COUNTY AIRPORT. JUNE ~ =6, 1991 MY NAME IS ROGER BURNS. I HAVE BEEN A RESIDENT OF CHESTERFIELD COUNTY SINCE 1976. I AM AN ACTIVE PILOT AND HAVE OWNED AND HANGARED AN AIRCRAFT AT CHESTERFIELD COUNTY AIRPORT SINCE 1976. I AM A MEMBER OF THE CHESTERFIELD COUNTY AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD AND HAVE BEEN A MEMBER SINCE 1980. DURING THE 2 YEARS JUST ENDED LAST MONTH I HAD THE HONOR OF BEING THE CHAIRMAN OF THE CHESTERFIELD COUNTY AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD. I FEEL THAT IT IS IMPORTANT, AT THE OUTSET, BECAUSE OF RECENT RUMORS THAT HAVE CIRCULATED, THAT I STATE THAT I AM IN NO WAY ASSOCIATED WITH, NOR DO I HAVE ANY BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP WITH, OLD DOMINION AIR CHARTER OR ANY SUBSIDIARY COMPANIES OF OLD DOMINION AIR CHARTER, NOR DO I HAVE ANY BUSINESS RELATIONSHIPS WITH ANY OF THE PRINCIPALS OF OLD DOMINION AIR CHARTER. I WILL FURTHER STATE THAT I HAVE NEVER CONTEMPLATED A BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP WITH OLD DOMINION AIR CHARTER OR ANY OF ITS PRINCIPALS NOR DO I ANTICIPATE ENTERING INTO SUCH A RELATIONSHIP. I TRUST THAT THE FORGOING STATEMENT BEING PUBLICALLY MADE WILL SERVE TO PUT THESE MALICIOUS RUMORS TO REST, ONCE AND FOR ALL. AS CHAIRMAN OF THE AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD FROM MAY 1989 UNTIL LAST MONTH I AM VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE PROCESS THAT HAS BEEN FOLLOWED THAT LEADS US TO THIS PUBLIC HEARING TODAY. I WOULD RESPECTFULLY REMIND THE BOARD THAT IN JANUARY 1990 A PAPER, WHICH WAS PREPARED BY THE AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD AND PRESENTED TO EACH MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, SERVED AS THE SPRINGBOARD TO LAUNCH A THOROUGH ANALYSIS OF THE DIRECTION THAT CHESTERFIELD COUNTY AIRPORT SHOULD TAKE. IT WAS AT A MEETING BETWEEN THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND THE AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD THAT THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AND HIS STAFF WERE AUTHORIZED TO ENTER INTO A CONTRACT WITH AN INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT TO STUDY THE CURRENT STRUCTURE OF THE AIRPORT AND TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION AS TO THE FUTURE OPERATION OF THE AIRPORT. THIS STUDY WAS CARRIED OUT DURING THE SUMMER OF 1990 AND THE CONSULTANTS REPORT WAS TABLED LAST FALL. THE CONSULTANT'S REPORT IN BRIEF, ESSENTIALLY, RECOMMENDED THAT THE COUNTY RETAIN OWNERSHIP OF ALL THE AIRPORT REAL ESTATE AND TURN THE AIRPORT OVER TO A PRIVATE OPERATOR WHO WOULD BECOME, WHAT IS KNOWN IN AVIATION CIRCLES AS A FIXED BASE OPERATOR, FBO. THE FBO WOULD LEASE FROM THE COUNTY THE APPROPRIATE LAND AND BUILDINGS NECESSARY TO RUN ITS OPERATION. DURING A BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WORK SESSION LAST FALL, WHICH I ATTENDED, THE BOARD MET WITH THE CONSULTANT AND HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS HIS FINDINGS WITH HIM. AT THAT SAME MEETING I STATED THAT IT WAS THE UNANIMOUS OPINION OF THE AIRPORT ADVISORY BOARD THAT THE CONSULTANTS RECOMMENDATION SHOULD BE FOLLOWED AND THE DAY TO DAY OPERATIONS OF THE AIRPORT SHOULD BE TURNED OVER TO A FIXED BASE OPERATOR. AT THAT MEETING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AUTHORIZED THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO PREPARE A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL, (RFP) AND COMMENCE THE SEARCH FOR A SUITABLE FBO. I BELIEVE, THAT IT WAS ALSO AT THAT MEETING THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AUTHORIZED THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO COMMENCE A SEARCH FOR, AND HIRE, A NEW DIRECTOR OF AVIATION. THIS PROCESS WENT FORWARD AND A NEW DIRECTOR OF AVIATION WAS HIRED SEVERAL WEEKS AGO. I MIGHT STATE THAT I WAS ON THE SELECTION COMMITTEE THAT HIRED THE CURRENT DIRECTOR OF AVIATION AND IT WAS MY CLEAR UNDERSTANDING THAT THE INDIVIDUAL SO SELECTED WAS NOT HIRED WITH THE VIEW OF CARRYING ON THE OPERATION OF THE AIRPORT AS WE PRESENTLY KNOW IT. IN OTHER WORDS, WHAT I AM SAYING IS, IF THE COUNTY DOES NOT PROCEED WITH THE AWARDING OF A FIXED BASE OPERATOR CONTRACT, AND INTENDS TO CONTINUE THE AIRPORT OPERATIONS AS IN THE PAST 19 YEARS, THEN THE COUNTY NEEDS TO GO BACK AND REDO THE PROCESS TO HIRE A MANAGER WITH THE PROPER QUALIFICATIONS TO RUN THE AIRPORT AS A VIABLE AND PROFITABLE ENTERPRISE. THE PRESENT DIRECTOR OF AVIATION WOULD NOT HAVE RECEIVED MY VOTE FOR SUCH A POSITION. FOLLOWING THE WORK SESSION WHICH I HAVE JUST REFERENCED AN RFP WAS PREPARED SOLICITING A FBO FOR THE CHESTERFIELD AIRPORT. THIS PROCESS WENT ON DURING A 60 DAY PERIOD EARLIER THIS YEAR AND A TOTAL OF FIVE PROPOSALS WERE RECEIVED. THE SELECTION COMMITTEE, OF WHICH I WAS A MEMBER, DEEMED THAT ONLY TWO OF THESE PROPOSALS WERE WORTHY OF AN INTERVIEW. SUBSEQUENT TO THAT DECISION, HOWEVER, THE SELECTION COMMITTEE WAS REQUESTED TO ALSO INTERVIEW ONE OF THE THREE REJECTED APPLICANTS. ACCORDINGLY ON APRIL 29, 1991 THREE APPLICANTS WERE INTERVIEWED AT THE CHESTERFIELD COUNTY AIRPORT. AS A RESULT OF THESE INTERVIEWS IT WAS THE LL~ DECISION OF THE SELECTION COMMITTEE TO AWARD THE FBO TO OLD DOMINION AIR CHARTER - WHO WOULD OPERATE AS DOMINION AVIATION SERVICES. I BELIEVE THE PROPER PROCESS HAS BEEN FOLLOWED TO BRING US TO THIS HEARING TODAY AND I REQUEST THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD TO ENDORSE THE DECISION REACHED BY YOUR SELECTION COMMITTEE AND EMPOWER THE COUNTY'S ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICERS TO CONTINUE THEIR LEASE NEGOTIATIONS WITH OLD DOMINION AIR CHARTER WITH A VIEW TO HAVING THIS FIXED BASED OPERATOR IN PLACE AND OPERATING THE COUNTY AIRPORT AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. THE AIRPORT NEEDS A TOTAL CHANGE OF DIRECTION. MUCH WORK HAS BEEN DONE IN THE PAST YEAR TO GET US TO WHERE WE ARE TODAY. I IMPLORE THE BOARD TO ACT WITH COURAGE AND VISION AND APPROVE THE SELECTION COMMITTEES' RECOMMENDATION. CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: June 26, 199I ITEM NUMBER:, 10. C. Public Hearing to Revise FY92 School Board Appropriation COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION The Board of Supervisors adopted a resolution to appropriate funds for fiscal year 1991-92 on April 10, 1991. This resolution included an appropriation for the School Operating Fund in the amount of $209,943,500, which excluded $5 million of the approved School Board budget. The School Board adopted a revised budget of $216,755,800 on May 8, 1991 and approved the appropriation categories for School revenue and expenditure classifications (as referenced in section 22.1-94 of the Code of Virqinia on May 30, 1991. The changes approved by the School Board require a revision in the County appropriation resolution for fiscal year 1991- 92. Two separate actions impacted the FY92 School Board budget. Prior to the approval of the School Board budget by the Board of Supervisors, the County Administrator and the Superintendent made several adjustments that resulted in additional available funds (reductions in projected enrollment, risk management payments, trailers, and a health insurance rate change). The 1991 General Assembly actions resulted in additional State funds which are offset to an extent by the projected loss in enrollment of 183 students. Attached is a revised listing, by State appropriation category, for the requested FY92 School Board appropriation. ATTACHMENTS: YES ~a NO [] mEPARE~ Deputy for Project School ~'mprovement SIGNATURE: COUN~TY A~D IN! STRATOR O0008u Attachment FY92 SCHOOL APPROPRIATION 06/19/91 4/10191 5/30191 Adopted Revised Variance Estimated Revenues: From Local Sources $2,516,550 $9,177,800 $6,661,250 From Other Agencies: Food Service 8,391,250 0 (8,391,250) State Sales Tax 0 19,837,000 19,837,000 State 76,532,000 78,526,850 1,994,850 Federal 3,853,700 5,401,150 1,547,450 Total Other Agencies 88,776,950 103,765,000 14,988,050 Transfers From General Fund 118,650,000 98,813,000 (19,837,000) From General Fund (Unappropriated) 5,000,000 5,000,000 0 Total Estimated Revenue =,,,, $214,943,500 $216,755,800 $1,812,300 Appropriations: Instruction $141,311,199 $143,387,150 $2,075,951 Instruction (Unappropriated) 5,000,000 5,000,000 0 Administration and Attendance & Health 6,575,169 6,639,500 64,331 Pupil Transportation 8,544,690 8,466,000 (78,690) Operation and Maintenance 22,617,192 22,337,400 (279,792) Debt Service 22,504,000 22,534,500 30,500 Food Service 8,391,250 8,391,250 0 Total School Operating Fund $214,943,500 $216,755,800 $1,812,300 000040 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MAURICE B. SULLIVAN, CHAIRMAN MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT C. F. CURRIN, JR., VICE CHAIRMAN BERMUDA DISTRICT G. H. APPLEGATE CLOVER HILL DISTRICT HARRY G. DANIEL DALE DISTRICT JESSE J. MAYES MATOACA DISTRICT CHESTERFIELD COUNTY P.O. Box 40 CH ESTERFI ELD, VIRG IN IA 23832-0040 LANE B. RAMSEY COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Progress Index Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors June 14, 1991 Meetings and Coming Events One (1) time, Tuesday, June 18, 1991 Please confirm by calling the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Office at 748-1200. Also, please fax me a computer printout of the ad--Fax number 748-3032. PLRASE SEND TEAR SHEET WITH BILL. Joan~ S. Dolezal ' -- / ~ - '~-~ Clerk to the Board of Su e~isors -~ tp Attachment BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MAURICE B. SULLIVAN, CHAIRMAN MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT C. F. CURRIN, JR., VICE CHAIRMAN BERMUDA DISTRICT G, H, APPLEGATE CLOVER HILL DISTRICT HARRY G, DANIEL DALE DISTRICT JESSE J, MAYES MATOACA DISTRICT CHESTERFIELD CO UNTY P.O. Box 40 CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA 23832-0040 LANE B. RAMSEY COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Richmond News Leader Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors June 14, 1991 Meetings and Coming Events One (1) time, Tuesday, June 18, 1991 Please confirm by calling the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Office at 748-1200. Also, please fax me a computer printout of the ad--Fax number 748-3032. PLRASE SEND TEAR SHEET WITH BILL. Joan S. Dolezal ...... ~A~ ~ Clerk to the Board of Supervisors tp Attachment TAKE NOTICE Take'notice that the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia, at a regular meeting on June 26, 1991, at 9:00 a.m. in the County Board Room at Chesterfield Courthouse, Chesterfield, Virginia, will hold a public hearing to consider: An amendment to the 1991-92 budget to appropriate $1,812,300 in funds to ihcrease the School Board budget. Copies of the amendment are on file in the County Administrator's office, Room 504, 9901 Lori Road, Chesterfield, Virginia, and may be examined by all interested persons between the hours of 8:30 a.m. to 5:00' p.m., Monday through Friday. AFFIDAVI OF PUBLISHED ADVE . 'ISING STATE OF VIRGINIA City of Petersburg /, ~,' Atyson Cox, being duly sworn, do, upon my oath. depose and say that I am Advertising Manager of THE PROGRESS-INDEX. a new~aper printed in said City and State. and that the advertisement of take Rot:ice from the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County. Was publ/shed /n said paper on June 18, 1991. L t :t Fla 8- ']Ar' i 6 Tek: Pdchmond Newspapers, lnc. An Affiliate of Media General COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ATTN: JOAN DOLEZAL P.O. BOX 40 CHESTERFIELD VA P.O. BOX C-32333 RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23293-0001 804-649-6000 23832 DATE DESCRIPTION 06/18/91 B LEGAL NOTICE MEETING JUN 26 AM I CHARGES CREDITS RATE LINES RUNS 9:00 21 1 TOTAL INCHES I AMOUNT 64. ~6 Richmond Newspapers, INc. Publisher of THE RICHMOND TIMES-DISPATCH THE RICHMOND NEWS LEADER This is to certify that the attached LEGAL NOTICE )ublished by Richmond Newspapers. Irlc., in the City ichmcmd, State of Virginia, on the following dates: T i mes-D i s pat ch News Leader 06/18/91 The first insert ion arid subsc~-ibed before irgir, ia of Richmond commission expires Publ i c It~ Commission Expires July 19 PLEASE REFER TO YOUR CUS' =08¢ 6 $64.26 % CASH DISCOUNT IF PAID ON OR BEFORE 15th OF THE SUCCEEDING MONTH. NO DISCOUNT ALLOWED THEREAFTER. CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: SUB4ECT: June 26, 1991 Citizen Landfill Charge ITEM NUMBER: ll.A. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Colonel Mayes has requested~ a review of the scheduled July 1, 1991, implementation of the $2 citizen landfill fee. Backqround: The Sanitation budget submission for FY 91/92 included a $2 per visit fee for citizens who take their trash to County disposal facilities at the Northern Landfill, Southern Landfill and Winterpock Dumpster Site. This fee is intended to collect disposal fees from residents who bring their own municipal waste to the landfill. Presently disposal costs are wholly-funded from commercial tipping fees although 60% of the waste is deposited by private citizens free of charge. This fee is projected to ATTACHMENTS: YES I'1 NO [] PREPARED William H. Howell Director of General Services SIGNATURE: CO'MI N! STRATOR 000041 BOS-9891 June 26, 1991 Page 2 generate $500,000 in revenue which would fund Sanitation Department services: o Public Disposal Area Improvements (Recycling) at Northern Area Landfill o Winterpock Dumpster Site o Sappony Road Dumpster o Brush and Wood Waste Recycling o Household Hazardous Waste Disposal o Four Landfill Attendants If the Board decides to rescind the fee, the following ~ $221,500 ~ ~ $ 75,000 "/ ~ $ 2,5oo / -- $ 7o,ooo,,/ ~' $ 60,000 ~ $ 71,000 / $500,000 the above items will need to be cancelled, removed from the budget or funded from some other source. Action Required by Board of Supervisors Review the budget decision to implement a $2 fee for citizens at the County disposal facilities. BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT COMMENTS: A decision by the Board to rescind this fee will result in a $500,000 reduction in revenues and expenditures to the FY92 budget. ~es J/ .~Stegmale~,~b~rector dget ~/Management // 000042 CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGE NDA k MEETING DATE: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: ll.B. ._.SUBJECT: Consideration of Approval of "Non-School" or "Non-Educational" Uses of Chesterfield County Schools COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION In 1990, the Board of Supervisors and School Board approved a policy governing "non-educational" uses of County schools that provides in part that: 1. Non-school uses of school facilities should not inap- propriately ~.ompete with free enterprise; and 2. Ail non-school uses or categories of non-school uses must be approved in advance by both the School Board and Board of Supervisors. On May 23, 1990, the Board approved for the 1990-91 school year the School Board's certain recommended "non-school use categories". For "latch-key" programs the Board adopted the following resolution: (Continued) ATTACHMENTS: YES [] NO IZ! P~E~ED BY~~, ~ Steven L. Micas County Attorney 0805:1182:44 SIGNATURE ~STRATOR BOS-9891 AGENDA ITEM June 26, 1991 Page Two approve as recommended the six schools recommended by the School Board (Bensley, Crenshaw, Crestwood, Ettrick, Bellwood and Matoaca Elementary Schools with no cap on the number of student enrollment) as submit- ted by the School Board; approve as recommended Curtis, Falling Creek, Gordon, Harrowgate and Salem Church Elementary Schools to be capped at the number previously agreed upon between the day care sector and the YMCA - those numbers being 50 at Curtis, 50 at Falling Creek, 60 at Gordon, 40 at Harrowgate and 40 at Salem Church, with the proviso that those caps could be adjusted upwards no higher than 60 but upwards to accommodate families already in the program; that there be no more school additions to this program by the YMCA without the specific concurrence of the day care private sector; and that the YMCA establish a pilot program in the middle schools where today none exists except for the recre- ational programs of the Parks and Recreation Depart- ment; In addition, the School Board was to keep statistics and report to the Board in 1991 regarding compliance with those caps. For the 1991-92 school year the School Board has approved the attached list of acceptable non-educational uses for schools. (See attached list). The staff has received no statistics relating to use of the "latch-key" program during the 1990/91 school year. The latch-key program for the YMCA for 1991/92 is limited to the schools listed in the first paragraph of the CCPS memo dated May 14, 1991 (See attached memo). Since both the School Board and Board of Supervisors must approve non-educational uses for schools, the Board may reduce or elimi- nate those non-educational uses but may not expand the School Board approved list for YMCA programs. COMMUNITY RELATIONS Appendix 0 (see Policy 617) Non-School Use Cateqories for Use/Rental of Facilitie~ A. Parks and Recreation: C. D. E. Fe Gm - department sponsored recreation activities - co-sponsored recreation activities - latchkey programs Scouting Activities Homeowner Association Meetings and Activities Civic Club Meetings and Activities Board of Supervisors: - constituent meetings - public hearings - planning workshops - award and recognition activities Churches: - religious services - recreation activities Governmental Agencies Community or Service Clubs: - meetings - recreation activities - latchkey programs !. Private Sector: - awards and recognition of employees J. Youth Athletic Associations: - meetings - awards and recognition activities K. Political Activities (require local sponsor) Approved: May 1991 CllESTERFIELD COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS CtiESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA CCPS MEMORANDUM #191 (90-91) TO: FROM: SUBJECT: SCHOOL BOARD OFFICE OF TIlE SUPERINTENDENT YMCA CttILD CARE PROPOSAL,£OR 1991-92 M 14, 1991 'Nj ~ ./ PERTINENT INFORMATION The YMCA has rented school facilities since the 1987-88 school year for the purpose of operating a before and after school child care program. Attached is tile YMCA proposal for the 1991-92 school year. In accordance with the agreement between the YMCA and tile Chesterfield Child Care Association, child care programs will be elimina'Led at Curtis, tlarrowgate, and Salem Church Elementary Schools for tile 1991-92 school year and beyond. The YMCA is requesting approval to continue child care programs at Bensley, Crenshaw, Crestwood, Falling Creek, Gordon, Eltrick, arid Matoaca Elementary Schools for the 1991-92 school year. The programs at Falling Creek and Gordon will be eliminated at the end of the 1991-92 school year. The YMCA is also requesting permission to pilot a school based middle school program at Chester Middle School. The YMCA is requesting that the School Board waive the adult rental rate and allow them to pay the student rental rate. The adult rate would be charged based on the provision in policy //617, Use/Rental of School Facilities, which states that "When an admission is charged, full rental rates and reimbursement of costs · For all services rendered by employees of the school division will be applicable as will facility rental rates." They are al so requesting that the rental fee be eliminated in its entirety for Chester Middle School. [VALUATION/ANALYSIS A reduction in the rental rate fees charged the YMCA from the adult rate to the studen~ rate for tile elementary child care programs would result in a loss in budgeted revenue of $83,350 for the 1991-92 school year. The:elimination of a rental 'fee for tile Chester Middle School program would result in the loss of $15,600 in additional revenue. RECOMMENDED ACTION It is recommended that the School Board approve the YMCA proposal to rent school 'Facilities for child care programs at Bensley, Crenshaw, Crestwood, Falling Creek, Gordon, Ettrick, and Matoaca Elementary Schools ~.for the 1991-92 school year. It is also recommended that a pilot middle school program be approved for Chester Middle School for tile 1991-92 school year. Due to the budgetary constraints confronting tile school system for the 1991-92 school year, it is recommended that the adult rental rate be charged for these rentals. EED/CPO/rrc Attachment PROPOSAL YH~A of ~reater Richmon~ April 1991 Objectives: Process: Prov.[de dependJ~ie, safe child care programs for the childrel'i and families of Chesterfield County. '.['he YMCA w].ll establish, ].ic~nse and direct Before al~d A~ter School Child Care Programs in select Coul~ty Schools under the criteria established in the Legislative Compromise. The YMCA will: 1) Pay a £ac].l.[ty usage fee to the School System for elementary scl~ools of $7.50 per I~our (student rate). 2) Provide all supplies and equipment. 3) Pay for the costs related to training and maintaining a center license. 4) Replace or repair any school equipment to property damaged as a result of the program. 5) Provide a certificate of insurance on the facility. 6) Provide Chesterfield County with a Hold Harmless Agreement relati~g to the program. 7) Channel all paperwork, phone calls and administration relat- ed to the program through the YMCA and outside school office area. 8) Maintain a staff/child ratio of 1 to 15. 9) Meet with School Administration and discuss the program monthly to identify concerns and action plahs. The School would: 1) Provide the program indoor/outdoor space. Provide space for storage equipment (furnished by YMCA). Provide permission and access to establish a phone at the site; total setup and operating costs to be paid by the YMCA. The You~ Christian Association o[ Grea!,er Richmond South Richmond-Chesterfield Family Branch 7540 Hull Slreel Road Richmond, Virginia 23235 (804) 276-9622 April 11, 1991 Dr. Craig Organ Director of Accountability Systems Chesterfield County Public Schools Chesterfield, VA 23832 Dear Craig: Enclosed is the YMCA's proposal to continue before and after school programs in Chesterfield County Schools. This proposal reflects the decision made in consulta- tion with Senator Russell and the Chesterfield Day Care Association. The YMCA will relocate the Harrowgate and Curtis School sites at the Chester YMCA and a local church. The Salem Church School site will be relocated at Camp Thunderbird. This will be the final year for the Falling Creek and Gordon School sites. This will allow for the appropriate time table to relocate these sites for tile 1992-93 school year. I have included for your in£ormation copies of correspondences with Senator Russell. New for 1991-92, the YMCA is seeking approval to con- duct a pilot school based middle school program at Chester Middle School. Currently, this program is run at the Chester YMCA. Space limitations with the relo- cation of the Curtis School site have forced us to seek another facility... The school base pilot could serve as a model for expansion in the future. The YMCA is requesting to pay the student rental fee of $7.5O/hour for elementary schools. Higher rents could make the program cost prohibitive to continue in the area which were identified as being not competitive with private business. Additionally, Gordon and Fall- ing creek have restrictions on enrollment. With the future locations of those programs in question, addi- tional participants to pay higher ra~es is doubtful. '~VBulldlng Body, Mind, and Spirit A Dr. Craig Organ April 11, 1991 Page 2 The middle school program would be priced to cover the direct costs of program staff and supplies. The YMCA is requesting the Sc~l Board waive the rent for this program. If I can provide any additional information please contact me at your convenience. Sincerely, ~illia'~ H. ~o~e Vice President bjr Enclosure cc: Senator Robert E. Russell The IIonorable Members of the Board of Supervisors Mike Faust SENATE OF VlR61NIA COB1MI'rT~ ASSIgNMeNTS: Februar. y, 15, 1991 Mr. Billy George YMCA 7540 Hull Street Road Richmond, Virginia 23235 Dear Mr. George: This will outline ]ny understanding of the conversation and agreement ti]is morning between the YMCA and the Chesterfield Child Care Association: (i) Tile YMCA will adhere to its proposal made to the School Board last spring in which it offers that certain school-based YMCA programs were inconsistent with the School Board policy that "non-related use of school facilities shall not include activities that are perceived to be in direct or inappropriate C ' ' ompetltlon with free enterprise." These are at Curtis, Falling Creek, Gordon, Harrowgate, and Salem Church elementary schools. (2) (3) Accordingly, the YMCA will not apply for use of Curtis, Harrowgate, or Salem Church schools for the 1991-92 school year and beyond. Further, the YM.CA may apply and continue programs in Falling Creek ahd Gordon schools for the 1991-92 year only, provided no alternate site is located in time for its use in those two areas. Thereafter, the YMCA will not apply for use of these two school facilities in future school years. The YMCA at its discretion may apply for continued use of any other school sites in which Lts program is presently being offered. As I explained this morning, I have spoken by phone this morning with school board members Tim Brown, John Cardea, and Beth Davis and outlined this agreement for them. They have each assured me that, provided the YMCA would return to an agreeable Mr. Billy George Page Two F~bruary !5~ 3.991 position; that tile Ches'terfield Child Care Association would agree to the YMCA position; and that I would strike SB 573 from the legislative docket, they would support this agreement and vote accordingly should this matter come before the School Board iii tile future. , I believe this encompasses the main points of the agreement. Let me also note, however, that we agreed that, should the YMCA actually use either Gordon or Falling Creek Schools in 1991-92, they will notify parents at the beginning of the year that the site would not be used in 1991-93 or beyond. This will help ensure that no misunderstanding develops in the spring of 1992. Let ]ne thank you and your colleagues for the positive manner in which everyone approached a solution to this matter. I would appreciate hearing from you on any area of this agreement which might need clarification. aEa/jw I know I speak for tile entire legislative de].egation when I say we are available to assist in facilitating this agreement in Legislative Delegation School Board Board or.Supervisors CC: ROBERT E, ;~USSELL. S~. COMNi,..)NWEALTH OF VIRGI..I:A SENATE COMe.TEE ASSIGNMENTS: AGRI~ML?URE, CONS~VAT ION February 26, 1991 William H. George, Vice Pres. The Young Men's Christian Assn. So. Richmond-Cllesterfleld Family Branch 754~ Hull Street Road Richmond, VA 23235 Dear Billy: Thank you for your letter of February 22. It is lust as well you let some time pass, as I would have found it necessary to finish kite session before getting back to this matter. I have no~ heard from Mr. Beasley, and I canno~ comment on'what lie bas told you. With regard to what you refer to as "slot limits" · assume you are speaking of the enrollment limits the Board o.~ :,pervisors adopted last year. You will recall we did not discuss this matter at all in our negotiations. It is my feeling that these limits are to remain in place, and are not a consideration ii] this matter. Let us remember that is a decision left properly to the Board of Supervisors. Surely I will assist the YMCA in obtaining the lowest cost use of schools ill a[eas where private facilities are not adequate. And I will work to facilitate the involvement of private providers in meeting the needs of special students and of families in need of assistance. If you will give me a few days to catch up at my business office, I will get tl,e various parties together to finalize these important details. Thank you for your cooperation and assistance. ly, Robert B. Russell, Sr. RER: r rn CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AG E NDA MEETING DATE: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: ll.C.1 SUB4ECT: NOMINATIONS FOR REAPPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS TO THE BUILDING CODE APPEALS BOARD COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The terms of two members of the Board of Building Appeals expire on July 31, 1991. Each has expressed a willingness to be reappointed to serve on the Board: J. Van Bowen, Jr., Fire Consultant David L. Carr, Engineer Term 3 Years 3 Years RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board of Supervisors nominate the above named individuals for reappointment to the Board of Building Appeals of Chesterfield County for the terms indicated. ATTACHMENTS: YES n NO ~5[ RI~L%RD C. WITT Acting Building Official SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADM I N! STRATOR 00004 ; ll,,,c. :), CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE' June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: _SUB4ECT: NOMINATION TO THE TRANSPORTATION SAFETY COMMITTEE 11.C.2 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION Mr. Jesse J. Mayes, Matoaca District Supervisor, is resigning from the Transportation Safety Committee and will be nominating Samuel O. Smith, 19213 Woodpecker Road, Matoaca, Virginia 23803 as his representative. The term of office will become effective immediately and serve at the pleasure of the Board. ATTACHMENTS: YES !-1 NO E~/ P~EP~RED BY;_ Bradford S. Hammer Deputy County Administrator for Management Services SIGNATURE: COUNTY NISTRATOR 00004 BOS-9891 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: SUBJECT: June 26, 1991 St feet light Request s ITEM NUMBER; ll.D.1 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENT,q: SUMMARY OFINFORMATION: CLOVER HILL DISTRICT: Intersection of Partridge Lane and Scottingham Drive MATOACA DISTRICT: Intersection of Chesterfield Meadows Drive and Old Wrexham Road Entrance to'Tomahawk Ruritan Club, 4101 Bailey Bridge Road ATTACHMENTS: YES ~ NO [] Richard M. McElfish, P.E. Director Environmental Engineering SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADM I NISTRATOR 00004 BOS-9891 STREETLIGHT REQUEST Clover Hill District DATE OF REQUEST: June 7, 1991 TAX MAP: 28-11 NAME OF REQUESTOR: William Sexton ADDRESS: 8407 Scottingham Drive, Richmond, VA 23236 PHONE NUMBER - HOME: 276-9024 WORK: n/a REQUEST IS LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF Partridge Lane AND Scottingham Drive REQUEST IS NOT AT AN INTERSECTION. FOR THIS LIGHT: THE REQUESTED LOCATION POLE ALREADY EXISTS AT THE SPECIFIED LOCATION. POLICY CRITERIA: 1. INTERSECTION: 2. 3. Qualified VEHICLES PER DAY: Qualified PETITION: Qualified COMMENTS: None. Attachment: Vicinity Sketch 000040, 000050 £~EETLIGHT PETITION at mhe foi!zwinc f129 - 00005~ ~ .....-~.,~? T~um REQ~JEST Mat oaca District DATE OF ~ ' ~: .... RmQbES~ June 5 1~¢~! TAX MAP: 96-09 NAME OF REQUESTOR: William Wright, Presiden~ Wrexham Homeowners' Assoc2azion Chest_~ie!d Meadows Drive Chesterfield, VA 23832 ADDRESS: 6115 ~ e~-~ , PHONE NUMBER - HOME: 751-0236 WORK: 748-5859 REQUEST IS LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF Meadows Drive AND Old Wrext~am Road Chesterfield REQUEST IS NOT AT AN INTERSECTION. FOR THIS LIGHT: THE REQUESTED LOCATION POLE ALREADY EXISTS AT THE SPECIFIED LOCATION. POLICY CRITERIA: 1. INTERSECTION: 2. 3. Qualified VEHICLES PER DAY: Not Qualified PETITION: Qualified COMMENTS: Requestor state's that this is an area where people from outside the subdivision gather to drink, park or meet. The police are called on a regular basis. A street light was recommended to help alleviate the situation. Attachment: Vicinity Sketch 0000 £. / /// // // //// / STREETLI GHT PETITION This petition is in request for the installation of a streetlight at the_following locat.ion:~ f~y~V~ Address ~,/~ ~)11: ~: ~,, ....... /~ ~: ~ ~,>.':' ~-~w :'( ":"~ :'7'-~ /: ~', .. .... . . . f129 0000/54 0000,56 STR=mT,.I~HT REQUEST Mat oaca District DATE OF REQUEST: June 5, 1991 TAX MAP: 62-04 NAME OF REQUESTOR: Mauvin L. Keilam, President Tomahawk Ruritan Club ADDRESS: 4101 Bally Bridge Road, Midlothian, Virginia 23113 PHONE NUMBER - HOME: 477-9117 WORK: n/a REQUEST IS LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION AND REQUEST IS NOT AT AN INTERSECTION. THE REQUESTED LOCATION FOR THIS LIGHT: Entrance to the Tomahawk Rurltan Club property, 3ust south of the intersection of Bailey Bridge Road and Hull Street Road POLE ALREADY EXISTS AT THE SPECIFIED LOCATION. POLICY CRITERIA: 1. 2. 3. INTERSECTION: Not Qualified VEHICLES PER DAY: Qualified · PETITION: Qualified COMMENTS: Requestor states that a streetlight at this location · would improve the safety of those entering or leaving the proper- ty. Attachment: Vicinity Sketch 0000,5' 3 STREETLiGHT PETITION Address Tel. Nc. ~-~- ~ - . _ f129 ,/ 00005~? oJ Z 0 Tomahawk Ruritan Club Marvin L. Kellam - President 4101 Bailey Bridge Road Midlothian, VA 23112 June 3, 1991 Mr. Richard A. Leonard Administrative Analyst Environmental Engineering RE: Tomahawk Ruritan Club Streetlight Request Recently, Mr. Ed Gibson, Jr., inquired about a streetlight on behalf of the Tomahawk Ruritan Club. I have enclosed the completed Streetlight Request and Streetlight Petition forms. The streetlight installation should greatly improve the safety of entering and leaving the Tomahawk Ruritan Club property. This property is frequently used by members of our community (i.e. club activities, various social activities, and regular church activities). Please give this your utmost consideration. any further communications to: Please forward Marvin L. Kellam 4321 Old Hundred Road South Midlothian, VA 23112 Home Phone: (804) 744-9117 Thank you very much for your time and consideration concerning this matter. Sincerely, Tomahawk Ruritan Club Marvin L. Kellam - President 0000 9 CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: ll.E.1 Waiver of the requirements for filing Zoning Disclosure SUB4ECT; Affidavits for the Zoning Application of the Chesterfield Airport Industrial Park initiated by the Board of Supervisors. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION BACKGROUND On May 8, 1991, the Board of Supervisors authorized the filing of a Zoning Application for the Chesterfield Airport Industrial Park. Owners of private property within the Airpark have been notified. The zoning ordinance requires the applicant of a zoning request to disclose the names and addresses of all individuals with a legal interest in the property being rezoned unless the applicant is the Board of Supervisors or the Planning Commission and they determine that an appropriate governmental interest, such as economic development, can best be served by waiving this re- quirement. RECOMNENDATION Since filing of disclosure information can create considerable work on the part of individual Airport Industrial Park property owners who did not actually file this zoning request~ Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors waive the disclosure requirement on zoning case 91SNO222 in order to further the County's economic development program. AGI1JN46/erk ATTACHMENTS: YES n PREPARED BY; Director Economic Development SIGNATURE:: __ COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR O0006'a CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: SUB41~CT: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: Capital Region Taxicab Advisory Board Resolution of Supporfl~ ll.E.2 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION The Board is requested to adopt the attached resolution supporting the Capital Region Taxicab Advisory Board's efforts to address the Richmond taxicab industry's concerns related to the recent enactment of House Bill 2011. BACKGROUND: House Bill 2011 was recently enacted into law. The bill establishes a new executive sedan classification of common carrier which would be.~ subject to the exclusive control, supervision, and regulation of the State Corporation Commission (SCC). Local taxicab permit officers and area taxicab owners are concerned that the carriers will not have driver licensing requirements, minimum vehicle condition standards, rate controls, and other regulations applicable to Richmond taxicab drivers. Continued on next page) ATTACHMENTS: YES NO r'l PREPARED BY;. ~'~ R J cCracken Director of Transportation SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 0000C 9 BOS-9891 Agenda June 26, 1991 Page 2 The Capital Region Taxicab Advisory Board has decided to pursue four basic courses of action to address the taxi industry's concerns with HB 2011: Make known its concerns to the Governor, SCC members, the area assembly delegation including sponsors of the bill. Explore with the SCC staff and local government legal staffs the feasibility of the SCC making regulations to minimize the major deficiencies of the legislation. Explore legislative initiatives with local governments through their legislative liaisons and legal staffs to address apparent deficiencies in the bill. Investigate various strategies with the Capital Region Airport Commission, area tourism and convention industry, local governments and area taxicab companies that may help minimize potential problems arising from the new classification. RECOM~N~DATION: If the Board wishes to support the Capital Region Taxicab Advisory Board's efforts to address the concerns over House Bill 2011, the attached resolution should be adopted. 000070 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY: At a regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors, held at the Courthouse on June 26, 1991. WHEREAS, The Capital Region Taxicab Advisory Board was established by the Richmond Regional Planning District Commission with the cooperation of Chesterfield County, Henrico County, the City of Richmond, Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce, Richmond Metropolitan Convention and Tourism Bureau, and the Capital Region Airport Commission to address area taxicab service issues on the multi government level; and WHEREAS, The Capital Region Taxicab Advisory Board has determined that House Bill 2011 recently enacted into law, creates a new class of passenger carrier (executive sedans) which may adversely affect the taxicab industry in the Richmond area; and WHEREAS, The Capital Region Taxicab Advisory Board agreed at its March 22, 1991, meeting that it should pursue the following strategies to address the impacts of the bill: Make known to the Governor, State Corporation Commission, and members of the General Assembly Delegation including sponsors of the bill, the concerns of the Board, local governments and area taxicab industry. Explore with the State Corporation Commission staff and local government legal staffs the feasibility of the SCC promulgating regulations to minimize major deficiencies of the legislation. Explore with local governments and their legislative liaisons and legal staff appropriate legislative initiatives to address the apparent deficiencies in the legislation. Investigate, if necessary, various strategies with the Capital Region Airport Commission, area tourism and convention industry, local governments and area taxicab companies, which may minimize potential problems arising from the new carrier classification; and WHEREAS, The Chairman of the Capital Region Advisory Board has requested, Chesterfield County's endorsement of these strategies. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors supports the strategies adopted by the Capital Region Taxicab Service Board at its March 22 1991 meeting. ' ' Vote: Certified By: Joan S. Dolezal, Clerk to the Board of Supervisors 000072 CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: SUBJECT: June 26~ 1991 ITEM NUMBER:, Request for Bing6/Raffle Permit ll.E,3 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION The County Attorney's Office has reviewed the following application for a bingo/raffle permit and has determined that the application meets all statutory requirements: Organization T_~ Year Mid-Cities Civic Association, Inc. Bingo to be held Mondays 7:00 p.m. and Saturdays 11:00 a.m. 1991 (NOTE: The Board has previously approved a permit for Mid-Cities Civic Association, Inc. to conduct bingo on Monday nights. They are requesting a change in their existing bingo permit to allow bingo play on Saturdays as well. The closest organization that currently operates bingo on Saturdays at 7 p.m. is the Robert E. Lee Post 2239 VFW at 14703 Jeff Davis Highway.) ATTACHMENTS: YES E] NO~ bingo/b44 (7) PREPARED BY; Steven L. Micas County Attorney 8OS-9891 SIGNATURE: COUNTY INISTRATOR °Ooov Total $ -~. Pa ¥. in VOucher _ ~y, CHESTERFIELD pAyEE COUNTy, VA. -~------______~_ 235 734 Address Form no ?~3 $ ~2~-~"'~'- For $ Dept. Pay-in Voucher Total CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VA. Date PAYEE mo. day 235?34 APPLICATION FOR A FERI~T TO CONDUCT ~I~GO CJ~E$ OR RAFFLES ~e unders/4~ed application, lmreuant to [~.2-~.~, e~ ~. of ~e ~e o~ V~r~inia, ~sts ~e ~ard of ~sors of ~esterfinld ~nty ~ ~ a ~mit to conduct b~o ~s __, rafflu , or both . ~rin~ the ~lendar ~r. ~is ~plication Il t~ a n~--..~ .re~al., ~t. ~ ~upport of ~is ~pli~tiona ~ applicant offers ~e foll~inz info~tion under ~: 1. Froper na~e of organization: 2. dddress of or~anization's headquarters 3. ~ddress where all r~cords of receipts and disbursenents are permanently filed: &. Nane and address of o~mer of the property described in .3 above. 5. ~ddress or addresses ~ere bingo ga~es will be held or raffle drnwings conducted: I~E: THIS 1~ IS VA~D ONLY A~ ~ ABOVE ~ON. 6. Dates or days of~eek and tlnm~d~en b~o g~nes or raffles ~111 be held at the above address(es): 7e ZO. 16. ~ patrons ar~ adnitted and sales l~gin: . ~ ,' ~ ~.. Date uhen or~anization was founded: /~,~-.~ ? .. lbs your organization been in existence and Bet regularly in ~esterfield County for t~o years lnBediately prior to n~.ictn~ this application? Yes /' No ~ Is your or~enizatien currently and h~s~your organization always been operated in the past as a eon-profit or~enization? Yes ~ No . Internal R~venue Code section for tax-exenpt status ~as ~rented (if applicable) State the specific type and purpose of your organization: renewing a permit,~ere financial reports filed on time and in co~pliance with applicable legal requirenents? Yes / No List belo~ gross receipts, if spy, fro~ all sources related to the operation of bingo games or instant bingo by calendar quarter for the il-month period immediately prior to the date of this application: Ist qtr: $ 2nd qtr: $ 3rd qtr: $ &th qtr: $ Officers of Organization: ~a~e Address ~creta~: Treasurer: ltenber authorized within the organization to be responsible for conduct and operation of bingo ganes or Hone ~elephone ~ber ~ffl~)2~ Busin~s Telephone ~b[r:- ~.~ )~/~ . 17. Do you, and each officer, director and nember of the organization fully understand the following: It is a violation of lay to enter into a contract with any person, firln, association, organization (other than another qualified organization pursuant to J18,2-3~0.13 of the Code of Vir~tnia), partnership or corporation of any classification ~d~atsoe~r~. for the purpose of organizing, ~anaging or conducting bingo ganes or raffles? Yes ~No -over- cdl1668:CZ+2 B. ~he organization ~ust emintsin and file ~rlth the County's Internal Audit Departeent complete recorgs of receipts ~d d~r~ts ~rta[ning ~o bingo ~es and raffles ~d C~y ~, ~d ~ ~ch ~cords are ~ubJect ~o ~di~ by the ~n~'~ Inte~l C. ~e organization ~st ~t ~ ~dit fee of 1% of ~oss ~ce[pts ~ith ~e ~~ncial ~p~rt no~ later ~an Nov~ber [ ~less ~oss receipts are less ~an $2,~07 Yes D. ~e organization ~st ~ish ~ c~plete list of its ~m~rsh[p ~n the ~q~s~ of the ~n~y Inte~l Aud~ ~par~ent or other designated representative of ~e ~ard of Supe~isorsT Yes /' No E. ~y organization ~ound In v~ola~on of f18.2-~0.~0 o~ ~e ~e cf V~r~nia, au~hor~z~n~ ~s ~it is subject to hav[~ such ~[t revoked and any organizat~on or person, shareholder, ~en~, ~ber or ~ployee of su~ organ~a~on ~o v~ola~ed ~[8.2-~0 or A~lcle ~.1 of ~apter 8 of Title 18.2 of ~e Code o[ Vlr~nia, may be ~l~y of a [elony~ Yes / F. ~e organization ~st pr~ide ~i~ten ~t~fication ~o the ~nty Inte~al ~dit ~par~nt of any ~ange in, letted o~ficers or b~ngo chai~erson during the ~lendar year c~ered by Yes ~ No ' 18. Your organization ~ust attach a copy of the organization's charter, articles of incorporation, byl~s, or other lesal doctments ~hich describe the Specific purposes for~hich the organization ia chartered or organized and ~st co~lete the Resolution below. Your organization ~ust sub, it · check in the amount of $25.00 payable to Treasurer, Chesterfield County as an application fee. 20. Additional pages where necessary to fully complete this application ~ay be attached. 21. l/~ve you and each officer of your organization read the attached permit and do you and each officer agree o~behalf of the organization to co~ply~r~th each of the conditions therein? Yes / No 22. 23. Sub, it this application to the Chesterfield County Attorney's Office by nail to: P. O. Box &0~ Chesterfield~ ¥irtinls 23832 or by hand to: Route 10 and Lori Roadj Administration Bld~ Room 50% ! hereby ~wear or affirm under the penalties of perjury ss set forth in jiB.2-'&34 of the Code of Virginia, that all of the above questions have been completely answered and that all the statemen:s herein are true to the best of ny knowledge, information and belief? WItNeSS the follo~ing signatures and seals: Business Phone: Notary Public in and for the .P~.SOLUTION BE I~ RESOLVED ~HIS.....//'~day of~,~C/ 19~9/ (date resolution passed), that _JO~/~/~, ~' ~ZZ~J,~ is hereby authorized to apply to the ~esterf/eld ~unty ~ard of Supe~isors for a bingo/raffle pe~t: on behalf of this organization for the ~calendar year. Authorize~igna~re (officer or Direct°~) cd11668:C42 By Resolution of the C~esterfizld County Board, of Supervisors duly adopted on permission is ~re~ ~anted to ~/~ . ~/~ ~/~ .~. /~e, to ~nduc~ ~ri~ the ~lendar ~r )00~ . ~IS PE~ ~ ~ ~ DE~ER 3~ ~ ~ / ~is ~ission is ~an~ed subJec~ to ~e foll~t Except for reasonable and proper operating costs and prizes, no part of the gross receipts derived by your organization may be used for any purpose oCher t~an (i) those lawful religious, charitable, con,unity or educa- tional purposes for Which your organization is specifically chartered or organized and (ii) e~penses relating to the &cquisition, construction, maintenance, or repair of any ~nterest in the real property involving the opera- tion of your organization and used ~or lawful religious, charitable, coununity or educational purposes. Your organization ·hall not enter into · contract v~th or ocher~r~se employ for compensation any person or firm, association, organization (oCher than another qualified organization pursuant to 118.2-3~0.~ of the Code of ¥irxinia, 1950a as amended), ps. tOner·hip or corporation of any classification ~hatsoever, for the purpose of organizing, managing or conducting bingo games or raffles· No person, except a bona fide me~ber of your organization who shall have been a least ninety (90) days prior to ·ugh participation, shall participate ~ the mnag~nC~ ~ration or c~ducc of any bingo g~ or raffle; provided however, that ~e spouse of any b~a fide ~ber or a firefighCer or rescue sq~d ~ber ~loyed by Iss~lstet my ~esont. ~ sttition~ ~o ~rs~ shall ~ceive Iny rmneri:l~ for participiti~ In the ~nat~ent~ operatinE or c~duct of any ~ch · our organization shall mot enter into any contract with or otherwise e~ploy or compensate any member of your organization regarding the sale of bin~o supplies or equipment. Your organization shall not ay·rd any bingo prize ~oney or eerchandiae valued in excess of the foil·yang amounts: (a) no bingo 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 bingo Jackpot, of any nature whatsoever, shall exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000.00), nor shall the total amount of.bingo Jackpot prizes awarded in one calendar day exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000.00). 7® Your organization shall not ay·rd any raffle prize or prizes valued at ~re than one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000.00) during any one calendar year. In no event shall your organization Join with any ocher organization in establishing or contributing to the maintenance of any Jackpot. ; Your organization shall maintain a record in writing of the dates on v~ich bingo is played, the number of people in attendance on each date and Cbs a~ount of the receipts and prizes paid on each ~ch day. Your organization shall also ~in~ain a record of che n~e and address of each individual to ~ ~ door prize, re~lar or special bingo g~e prize or ~ackpoc from che playing of bin~o is awarded, as veil as ~e ~unc of such award. ~e organization shall also mint·in an itemized record of ail receipts and disburs~enCs~ includini ~eracin~ co·cs and ~e of proceeds incu~ed In o~ra~ bingo goes. Your organization shall not place or permit to be placed any sign or signs advertising any bingo game on the premises or within one hundred (100) yards of the exterior of the premises where such bingo ga~e is co be con- ducted. - OVeR - 10. Records of all bingo and raffle ~ lpts and disbursements shall be kept shall be filed annually tmder oa~.h with the County Internal Audit Department on a form furnished by that department. Your report shall be s~bmttted to Inte~al Audit not later ~an the first day of Nov~ber of e~ch calendar year for ~i~ a ~lt has ~en issued and your report shall be a ~tter of public record. Each report shall include a record of the gross receipts and disburs~n:s of y~r Or~nizatton for ~e year ~rtod ~i~ c~enced ~ ~e first ~y of ~tober of the previous year and ended ~epte~er ~0 of the current year. receipts ~ceed $50~000 during ~y calendar q~r~er~ y~ ~st file ~ additl~al acc~:i~E of all receipts and disburs~en~s during ~ch quar:er no later ~an GO ds~s io11~inE the last day of ~ ~arter. ANY ORCANIZATION VIOLATXN~ TI{IS COR'DITION SEAI.I. ~AVE ITS PERMIT No person shall pay or receive for use of any premises to conduct any bingo Seines or raffles a sum of ~o~ey in excess of ~he current faEr market value of ~he premises and in v~ event shall auch sum of money b~ based upon or determined by a percentage of the proceeds derived from the bingo Seines or raffles. Your organization shall not hold bingo games more frequently than ~wo calendar days in any one calendar week unless a special pe~nit i~ granted by the Board of Supervisors of ~hes~erfield County for more frequent ~a~es. 11. Your orl~nization is authorized to play instant bingo as a par~ of ~he bXnEo ~ames; provided however, ~hat: 12o 14. :1.6. 17. (a) Instant bingo may be conducted only at such time as a re~Jlar bingo same, as defimed in ~18.2-3A0.1(2) of ~he Code of Vir~inia, is in progress end only at auch locatio~s and at such tees aa are specified in the bingo permit application; (b) Your organization shall not derive more than thir~y-three and one-third percent (33 1/3'4) of its receipts fro~ the b£ngo g~mes by the playing of "~nstant binso" or "bingo in any ro~ation"; (c) Your orsanization shall maintain complete and accurate records of the date, quantity and card value instant bingo supplies purchased as well as the name and address of the supplier of such instant bingo supplies. Your organization shall also maintain a written invoice or receipt from a non-member of r_he organization verifying any EnformaKlon required by law; and (d) Your orianization shall not sell an instant bingo card to an individual belo~ sXxteen years of age. In addition to the conditions contained in this Permit, your organization shall cc=ply vith all provisions of ~he Code of VirFinia and the Code of the Count,v o~ Ch,staff.laid, 1978, as ~mended, regardinE Bingo Cames and Raffles. The Board of Supervisors may deny, suspend or revoke the permit of your organization for any non-compliance vl~h the conditions of ch, Code of the Count~ of Chesterfield or the Code of Vir~inia. ALT PERSON, SHAREHOLDER, ACE~T, MEHBER OR ~ OF YO~ ~~ON ~O~NG ~ OF ~SE ~ONS ~ ~ ~L~ OF A MISD~OR ~ ~ON C~I~ ~0F S~ ~ ~E~ ~ A ~ OF N~ ~ ~ O~ ~0US~ ~ OR ~ ~h~ ~ ~ ~ JAIL ~R ~T ~ ~ ~ ~S ~ ~. A ~O~ION OF ~L~ITION 1 ~ S~ BE ~S~B~ ~ ~~h~ ~ N~ ~SS ~ O~ ~, NOR ~ ~ ~ ~ OR ~ A ~ OF N~ ~ ~ ~ ~OUS~ ~L~ ~ ~I~ ~ ~E ~ JAIL ~R ~ ~ ~ ~ ~HS OR ~. ~'HIS I:~'R-~ NUS~ BE REN~ A~ ~H~ El~ OF F. ACI4 CA.~I~AR YEAR BY ~ BOARD OF SUPERVISORS. I'HIS FERMI~ IS VALID ONLY AT ~ lOCATION PROVIDED ON l'flE PEP, MIT APPLICATION 1D ROLl) BINGO C~[ES AL'D RAFFLES. THIS I~EEH~'~ OR A COP~' THEREOF MUST I~E POSTED ON T~E PRENIS£S I~I~RE BIEGO GA~S OR RAI~"LES ARE CONDUCED. PERMIT IS [IOT ASSIONABLE. BOARD OF St.?£RVISORS By CEAII~ Attest: CO VA'I'Y ADMINISTPATOR I i /:': :/ ; , CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGE NDA MEETING DATE: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: ll.E.4 SUB,}~CT: Write-off of Uncollectible Accounts Receivable - Other Fees and Charges COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Staff requests the authorization from the Board of Supervisors to write-off accounts totaling $269,995. Background: Each year delinquent accounts receivable which are deemed uncollectible are "charged-off" the accounting records through Board approval. Though charged-off, the accounts are not necessarily extinguished because they are turned over to the County Attorney's Office for further action or turned over to a collection agency. Staff will also attempt to make recoveries of some of these bad debts through the State's Set-off Debt program. The Utility accounts receivable charge-off total is $142,433 which represents 0.6 % of the total annual billings of the department. This is well below the utility industry standard of 1% for uncollectible accounts. Mental Health, Mental Retardation and Substance Abuse has $118,514 in uncollectible accounts. The write-off of these accounts was approved by the Chesterfield Community Services Board on May 16, 1991 and is now being submitted to the Board for approval. Recommendation: charge-off $269,995. ATTACHMENTS: YES Recommend approval uncollectible accounts NO [] of the request to receivable totaling PREPARED BY~ Bradford S. Hammer Deputy County Administrator SIGNATURE: ~ COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 0000 Agenda Ite~ June 26, 1991 Page 2 A. Utilities Ce Wastewater Service Charges Water Service Charges Miscellaneous Darwin Building Corporation B. Southall Waterpointe Associates, Inc. Total Miscellaneous Total Utilities General Fund Mental Health, Mental Retardation and Substance Abuse Lucy Corr Nursing Home Mary Cannon (discharged 8/24/90) Barbee Spindle (discharged 1/25/91) Total Nursing Home Grand Total $ 83,264.24 59,066.80 31.92 43.74 26.00 101.66 142,432.70 118,514.16 23.00 9,024.91 9,047.91 $269,994.77 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: ,.Tune 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: 11. E. 5 _SUBJECT: Awarding of Contract for Geographic Information System (GIS) Hardware and Software COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION The Board of Supervisors is being requested to award a contract to Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI) for providing software, training, documentation, delivery, installation, and maintenance for the ARC/Info geographic information system, and to IBM for hardware, network, documentation, delivery and .installation for the geographic information system. BACKGROUND: On February 15, 1991, the GIS project staff sent out 100 Requests for Proposals for GIS Hardware and Software (RFP ~91-5293-6642) and four firms responded. The responses were reviewed by an evaluation team made up of members of the GIS Implementation Team, IST personnel, and PlanGraphics, Inc., the County's GIS consultant. Oral presentation interviews and user site visits were conducted during the first and second weeks of May 1991. During the shortlist meeting on May 20, 1991, the committee determined that ESRI was clearly the firm most able to provide the required software running on a hardware platform proposed by IBM which is moSt compatible with the existing County mainframe computer. The price for the proposed system is $402,360.00 which (Continued on next page) ATTACHMENTS: YES I-1 NO I~ PREPARED BY; ~~~h, P.E. Director Environmental Engineering SIGNATURE: COUNTY INISTRATOR BOS-9891 Board Agenda Item Environmental Engineering Page Two ~UBJECT: Awarding of Contract for Geographic Information System (GIS) Hardware and Software includes software, hardware, network, training, documentation, delivery, installation and maintenance of the equipment and software. The ESRI portion of the contract totals $166,852.00 and the IBM portion of the contract totals $235,508.00. The ARC/Info system is installed in ten municipalities in Virginia, including Prince William County, Loudoun County, and approximately 400 cities/counties nationwide. The Commonwealth of Virginia's Council on Information Management has established the ARC/Info system as a standard for the state. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board of Supervisors authorize the County Administrator to execute a contract between the County and Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI) in an amount not to exceed $166,852.00 to provide software, training, docu3nenta- tion, delivery, installation, and maintenance for the ARC/Info geographic information system; and to execute a contract between the County and IBM in an amount not to exceed $235,508.00 to provide hardware, network, documentation, delivery and installa- tion for the geographic information system. 00007"2 CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGE NDA MEETING DATE: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: ll.E.6 SUB4ECT: Resolution confirming the proceedings of the Chesterfield Industrial Development Authority for issuance of bonds not to exceed $55,000,000 to Senior Living Choices, Inc. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION BACKGROUND The Industrial Development Authority of the County of Chesterfield, adopted a resolution of inducement on August 8, 1989, for the benefit of Senior Living Choices, Inc. On June 17, 1991, the Chesterfield Industrial Development Authority held a public meeting relating to the issuance of up to $55,000,000 revenue bonds for the purpose of financing the acquisition, construction and equipping of a 60-bed nursing facility, 60 assisted living units and approximately 200 independent living units ("Project") in the County. RECOMMENDATION The Authority recommends approval of the Project and the proposed bond issue not to exceed $55,000,000. AGI1JN38/erk ATTACHMENTS: YES ~ NO [] PREPARED By;~'~,'~ Economic Development SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADM I N! STRATOR 000078 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA The Industrial Development Authority of the County of Chesterfield ("Authority"), has considered the application of Senior Living Choices, Inc. ("Company") requesting the issuance of the Authority's revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed $55,000,000 ("Bonds") to assist in the financing of the Company's acquiring, constructing and equipping a facility for the residence and care of the aged, consisting of a 60-bed nursing facility, 60 assisted living units and approximately 200 independent living units to be located at 14311 Brandermill Woods Trail, Midlothian, Virginia 23112 ("Project") in the County of Chesterfield, Virginia, and has held a public hearing thereon on June 17, 1991. Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, provides that the governmental unit having jurisdiction over the issuer of private activity bonds and over the area in which any facility financed with the proceeds of private activity bonds is located must approve the issuance of the bonds. The Authority issues its bonds on behalf of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia ("County"); the Project is located in the County and the Board of Supervisors of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia ("Board") constitutes the highest elected governmental unit of the County. The Authority has recommended that the Board approve the issuance of the Bonds. A copy of the Authority's resolution approving the issuance of the Bonds, subject to the terms to be agreed upon, a certificate of the public hearing and a Fiscal Impact Statement have been filed with the Board. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA: 1. The Board approves the issuance of the Bonds by the Authority for the benefit of the Company, as required by Section 147(f) and Section 15.1-1378.1 of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended ("Virginia Code"), to permit the Authority to assist in the financing of the Project. 2. The approval of the issuance of the Bonds, as required by Section 147(f) of the Code, does not constitute an endorsement to a prospective purchaser of the Bonds of the creditworthiness of the Project or the Company, and, as required by Section 15.1- 1380 of the Virginia Code, the Bonds shall provide that neither the County nor the Authority shall be obligated to pay the Bonds 000079 or the interest on them or other costs incident to them except from ~he revenues and money pledged for their payment, and neither ~ faith and credit nor the taxing power of the Commonwe&tth, the County or the Authority shall be pledged to their payment. 3. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. Adopted by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia this day of June, 1991. Clerk, Board of Supervisors of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia [SEAL] -2- 0O0O8O June 17, 1991 Board of Supervisors County of Chesterfield Chesterfield, Virginia Industrial Development Authority of the County of Chesterfield Proposed Financing for Senior Living Choices, Inc. Senior Living Choices, Inc. ("Company") has requested that the Industrial Development Authority of the County of Chesterfield ("Authority"), assist the Company in financing the acquiring, constructing and equipping of a facility for the residence and care of the aged ("Project") in the County of Chesterfield, Virginia, by the issuance of the Authority's revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed $55,000,000 ("Bonds"). As set forth in the resolution of the Authority attached hereto ("Resolution"), the Authority has agreed to issue its Bonds as requested. The Authority has conducted a public hearing on the proposed financing of the Project and has recommended that you approve the issuance of the Bonds as required by Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and Section 15.1-1378.1 of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended. Attached hereto is (1) a certificate evidencing the conduct of the public hearing and the action taken by the Authority, (2) the Fiscal Impact Statement required pursuant to Virginia Code Section 15.1-1378.2, and (3) the form of resolution suggested by counsel to evidence your approval. Secretary, Industrial Development Authority of the County of Chesterfield 00008. . RESOLUTION OF THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD RECOMMENDING APPROVAL BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA, OF A PROPOSED $55,000,000 BOND ISSUE FOR THE BENEFIT OF SENIOR LIVING CHOICES, INC. WHEREAS, the Industrial Development Authority of the County of Chesterfield ("Authority"), adopted a resolution of inducement on August 8, 1989, for the benefit of Senior Living Choices, Inc. ("Company"); WHEREAS, such inducement resolution related to the proposed issuance of up to $55,000,000 revenue bonds for the purpose of financing the acquisition, construction and equipping of a 60- bed nursing facility, 60 assisted living units and approximately 200 independent living units ("Project") in the County of Chesterfield, Virginia; WHEREAS, Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, requires that a public hearing be held before the issuance of the proposed bonds; and WHEREAS, a public hearing has been held on the Project and the proposed bond issue, and the Authority desires to recommend approval of the Project and the proposed bond issue to the Board of Supervisors of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD: 1. The resolution of inducement adopted by the Authority for the benefit of the Company and relating to the Project is ratified, reaffirmed and readopted in all respects. 2. The Authority recommends approval of the Project and the proposed bond issue by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia. 3. The distribution and use of the Preliminary Official Statement, dated June , 1991, is ratified and approved. 4. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. Adopted this day of June, 1991. [SEAL] Secretary, Industrial Development Authority of the County of Chesterfield \B~N\B~Uil01 .nSl 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ May 29. ~991 DaC~ Senior LivinK Choices, In9. _ Appt~caac Brandermill Woods Reti~$ment Community ~ar.:L~Cy 2. F. IC~lllced taxable value o~ r~ property co be c~sc~cced ~. ~.C~ci~ perlo~ p~ercy c~ per year . us~ pres~c c~ tach yea~ ~nd baa~s ~. Average a~l aa~a~ par $ 55,000,000 $ 24,150,000 $ 263,000 21,000 $ 21.000 $ 3,000,000 $ _ 109 $ 17 ~4__68 County of Chesterfield Industrial Development Authori[y ,. _ _ Nae~ of Auchor~cY O0008d ECO~EV/T~I}tJSTtZAL ~)EV ALr~ROR:CTY/Jac ~ June 17, 1991 Board of Supervisors County of Chesterfield Chesterfield, Virginia Industrial Development Authority of the County of Chesterfield Proposed'Financing for Senior Living Choices, Inc. Senior Living Choices, Inc. ("Company") has requested that the Industrial Development Authority of the County of Chesterfield ("Authority"), assist the Company in financing the acquiring, constructing and equipping of a facility for the residence and care of the aged ("Project") in the County of Chesterfield, Virginia, by the issuance of the Authority"s revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed $55,000,000 ("Bonds"). As set forth in the resolution of the Authority attached hereto ("Resolution"), the Authority has agreed to issue its Bonds as requested. The Authority has conducted a public hearing on the proposed financing of the Project and has recommended that you approve the issuance of the Bonds as required by Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and Section 15.1-1378.1 of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended. Attached hereto is (1) a certificate evidencing the conduct of the public hearing and the action taken by the Authority, (2) the Fiscal Impact Statement required pursuant to Virginia Code Section 15.1-1378.2, and (3) the form of resolution suggested by counsel to evidence your approval. Secretary, In~us~ Authority of the County of Chesterfield 00008,' RESOLUTION OF THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD RECOMMENDING APPROVAL BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA, OF A PROPOSED $55,000,000 BOND ISSUE FOR THE BENEFIT OF SENIOR LIVING CHOICES, INC. WHEREAS, the Industrial Development Authority of the County of Chesterfield (.Authority"), adopted a resolution of inducement on August 8, 1989, for the benefit of Senior Living Choices, Inc. ("Company"); WHEREAS, such inducement resolution related to the proposed issuance of up to $55,000,000 revenue bonds for the purpose of financing the acquisition, construction and equipping of a 60- bed nursing facility, 60 assisted living units and approximately 200 independent living units ("Project") in the County of Chesterfield, Virginia; WHEREAS, Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, requires that a public hearing be held before the issuance of the proposed bonds; and WHEREAS, a public hearing has been held on the Project and the proposed bond issue, and the Authority desires to recommend approval of the Project and the proposed bond issue to the Board of Supervisors of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD: 1. The resolution of inducement adopted by the Authority for the benefit of the Company and relating to the Project is ratified, reaffirmed and readopted in all respects. 2. The Authority recommends approval of the Project and the proposed bond issue by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia. 3. The distribution and use of the Preliminary official Statement, dated June 7 , 1991, is ratified and approved. 4. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. [SEAL] Adopted this /7 day of June, 1991. SecretarY, Industrial Development- Authority of the County of Chesterfield 000080 \BRAN\BRAN101 .RS1 Senior Livin~ Choices; InF. _ AppLicant Brandermill Woods Retirement Community Eac~aaced c~bla value o~ chi fac~l/~'a Esc~ce~ ~eal property c~ per yu~ pcesuc c~ ~ace8 tac~cad ;i~cMRCs' capital c~ pm~ tit~uced do,la: va~ue pe~ yea~ o~ ;oods and gac~cad a~er o~ re~r employeea 'Averasa a~l sala~~~oyee County of Chesterfield Industrial Development Authority ECODEV/~2~DUSTEZAL DEV AUTROE]~TY/J ac I~xhibiC ¢ May 2~ %991 55,000,000 $ 24,150,000 $ '263,000 21,000 $ 21,000 $ 3,000,000 $ 109 _ _ $ 17,468 00008(5- Exhibit B Summary of Statements Theodore L. Chandler, Jr., Esquire addressed the Industrial Development Authority in support of the Project mpeaking on behalf of Brandermill Woods, Ltd. He introduced members of the group representing the existing Brandermill Woods retirement community. No questions were asked by members of the public. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA The Industrial Development Authority of the County of Chesterfield ("Authority"), has considered the application of Senior Living Choices, Inc. ("Company") requesting the issuance of the Authority's revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed $55,000,000 ("Bonds") to assist in the financing of the Company's ac~airing, constructing and equipping a facility for the residence and care of the aged, consisting of a 60-bed nursing facility, 60 assisted living units and approximately 200 independent living units to be located at 14311 Brandermill Woods Trail, Midlothian, Virginia 23112 ("Project") in the County of Chesterfield, Virginia, and has held a public hearing thereon on June 17, 1991. Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, provides that the governmental unit having jurisdiction over the issuer of priva'te activity bonds and over the ar~a in which any facility financed with the proceeds of private activity bonds is located must approve the issuance of the bonds. The Authority issues its bonds on behalf of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia ("County"); the Project is located in the County and the Board of Supervisors of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia ("Board") constitutes the highest elected governmental unit of the County. The Authority has recommended that the Board approve the issuance.of the Bonds. A copy of the Authority's resolution approving the issuance of the Bonds, subject to the terms to be agreed upon, a certificate of the public hearing and a Fiscal Impact Statement have been filed with the Board. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA: 1. The Board approves the issuance of the Bonds by the Authority for the benefit of the Company, as required by Section 147(f) and Section 15.1-1378.1 of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended ("Virginia Code"), to permit the Authority to assist in the financing of the Project. 2. The approval of the issuance of the Bonds, as required by Section 147(f) of the Code, does not constitute an endorsement to a prospective purchaser of the Bonds of the creditworthiness_~ of the Project or the Company, and, as required by Section 15.1- 1380 of the Virginia Code, the Bonds shall provide that neither the County nor the Authority shall be obligated to pay the Bonds 00008? or the interest on them or other costs incident to them except from the revenues and money pledged for their payment, and neither the faith and credit nor the taxing power of the Commonwealth, the County or the Authority shall be pledged to their payment. 3. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. Adopted by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia this day of June, 1991. Clerk, Board of Supervisors of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia [SEAL] -2- CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AG E NDA MEETING DATE: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: ll.E.7 SUBJECT: Change Order to Whitepine Road Extended, Phase III Contract COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Board is requested to approve a change order to decrease the Whitepine Road Extended contract in the amount of $39,903. BACKGROUND: The total quantities for removal of unsuitable material identified in the original Whitepine Road Extended contract were not needed. As a result, the current total contract amount of $1,484,695 should be reduced to $1,444,792. The decrease, $39,903, should be returned to the Airport Industrial Park Reserve. RECOMNRNDATIONs: Staff recommends the Board approve a change order to decrease the Whitepine Road Extended contract by $39,903. A55 ATTACHMENTS: YES I-1 NO [] R.J. McCracken Director of Transportation SIGNATURE 000088 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BOS-9891 Board of Supervisors Agenda Item June 26, 1991 Page two BUDGET AND MANAGEMRNT COM~T,q Funds from the Industrial Park Reserve Account were transferred to fund Whitepine Road Extension, Phase III. Funds from the decrease in the change order will be returned back to this funding source. Project is complete, however, developer contributions must be appropriated prior to closing out the project. Ail remaining funds in the project will be returned to the Industrial Park Reserve Account. The following Board actions are requested: Appropriate $100,000 in developer contributions for Whitepine Road Extension expenditures; and 2. Decrease the change order for Whitepine Road Extension by $39,903. ..J.~ J. I~ Stegmai~r, Director get and Management 000089 NAME OF PROJECT' CHANGE ORDER Order No. 9 Date: March 7, 1991 Agreement Date: June 29, 1989 Whitepine Road Extended - Phase III OWNER' County of Chesterfield1 Virginia CONTRACTOR: J.H. Martin & Sons Contractors, Inc. The following changes are hereby made to the CONTRACT DOCUMENTS: Justification: See attached for itemization. Changeto CONTRACT PRICE: Original CONTRACT PRICE Current CONTRACT PRICE $1,455,222.00 (and must be executed in accordance with) adjusted by previous CHANGE ORDER: $1,484,695.00 The CONTRACT PRICF due to this CHANGE ORDER will b&' decreased by: The new CONTRACT PRICE including this CHANGE ORDER will be $1,4~4,792.00 Change to CONTRACT TIME: The CONTRACT TIME will be increased by 0 The date for completion of all work will be . $39,903.00 calendar days. July 10, 1990 (Date). -1- CHANGE ORDER Approvals Required: If this Change Order increases the Contract Price by more than $10,000, it must be approved by the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors. Ail other Change Orders must be approved by the County Administrator of Chesterfield County. Additionally, all Change Orders are subject to all applicable provisions of the Contract Documents. Requested by: Recommended by' Accepted by: Ordered and Approved by: R. J. McCracken Aust:±n Brockenbrough & Associates J~~f..<~._~En~i~ er) /  (Contractor) (County Ass~tant County Attorne~ -2- CHANGE ORDER O0009 t WHITEPINE ROAD EXTENDED - PHASE III CHANGE ORDER #9 Undercut (credit) 5608 c.y. @ $10/c.y. #2 stone 964 tons @ $10.30/ton Curb & Gutter (credit) 95 1.f. @ $7.65/1.f. Scarifying & drying subgrade material per J. H. Martin worksheets Net Change Order - Deduct $39,903.00 (-) $56,080.00 (+) 9,929.00 (-) 727.00 (+) 6,975.00 (-) $39,903.00 -3- CHANGE ORDER ( ~ 00003, . 0 ooo09a CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGE NDA MEETING DATE: SUBJECT: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: ,. ll.E.8 Changes in Coalfield Road Functional Classification and Federal Aid System Designation COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Board is requested to approve changes in the Functional Classification and Federal Aid System designation of certain sections of Relocated Coalfield Road and Old Coalfield Road. BACKGROUND: In 1988, Old Coalfield Road was severed with the construction of the Powhite Parkway and Coalfield Road Relocated was constructed. As a result, a 2.17 mile section of Old Coalfield Ro~d, renamed Miners Trail, Lucks Court, and Genito Place, should be deleted from the Federal Aid System. A 2.08 mile section of relocated Coalfield Road should be added to the Federal Aid System and classified as a major collector (see attached map). RECOMN~DATION: Staff recommends the Board adopt the attached resolution 1) approving the deletion of Old Coalfield from the Federal Aid System and 2) adding a section of relocated Coalfield Road to the Federal Aid System and classifying it as a major collector. DISTRICTS: Clover Hill and Midlothian ATTACHMENTS: YES NO D PREPARED BY; R.J. ~C~acken Director of Transportation SIGN AT URE: COUNTY ADMI N! STRATOR 000094 BOS-9891 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY: At a regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors, held at the Courthouse on June 26 1991, at 9 a.m. On motion of resolution: · second by , the Board adopted the following WHEREAS, The construction of Route 76 (Powhite Parkway) necessitates changes in the Federal Aid System. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors requests the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) to delete from the Federal Aid System, 2.17 miles of Old Coalfield Road (Route 754) from relocated Coalfield Road (Route 754) to Genito Road (Route 604), and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board requests VDOT to add a 2.08 mile section of relocated Coalfield Road (Route 754), from Old Coalfield Road (Route 754) to Genito Road (Route 604), to the Federal Aid Secondary System and classify it as a major collector. Vote: Certified By: Joan S. Dolezal, Clerk to the Board of Supervisors O0009U N \\ % LOCATION , LEGEND ADDITION TO THE FAS SYSTEM (2.08 MI.) llillll DELETION FROM FAS SYSTEM (2.17M!.) O0009G CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGE NDA MEETING DATE: SDBd[CT: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER; ll.E.9 Litter and Recycling Grant Proposal and Resolution COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OFINFORMATION: The Keep Chesterfield Clean Corporation requests the approval of the 1991-92 litter prevention and recycling grant proposal and a resolution of support for the program. Keep Chesterfield Clean is requesting $10,028.00 from the Virginia Division of Litter Control and Recycling, Department of Waste Management. As in previous years, the grant money will be used by the Keep Chesterfield Clean Corporation under the coordination~of the Extension Service to conduct public education programming on the county's solid waste issues. These funds have already been appropriated in FY92 adopted budget. A part-time environmental educator has been hired to conduct the educational programs in schools and communities throughout the County. This grant will allow for her continued employment through the next fiscal year. Plans for the upcoming year include the expansion of the school drop off recycling program and educational programming in all elementary schools on litter prevention and recycling. Public education programs for all age groups from day-care centers to senior citizens will be conducted ATTACHMENTS: YES El NO [] Robert L. Masden Deputy County Administrator SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMI NISTRATOR 000097 BOS-9891 Litter and Recycling Grant Proposal and Resolution Page 2 June 26, 1991 to inform citizens on recycling issues, proper handling of household hazardous materials, Adopt-A-Highway, Adopt-A-Spot, and Adopt-A-Street programs, litter prevention, landfill regulations and other solid and hazardous waste issues. Public education offerings will include classroom teaching, workshops, fairs, exhibits and displays, newsletters, and use of all media. 000O9 WHEREAS, The Virginia Waste Management Act provides, through the Department of Waste Management, Division of Litter Control and Recycling, for the allocation of public funds in the form of Grants for the purpose of enhancing local litter control and recycling programs, and WHEREAS, Having reviewed and considered the Regulations and the Application covering administration and use of said funds as outlined in the Guidelines (Form DLCR-1); and BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors HEREBY endorses and supports such a program for Chesterfield County as is indicated in the attached Application Form DLCR-2, and NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the County Administrator plan, budget, and apply for a Grant which if approved, will be used to fund said Program, and HEREBY requests the Department of Waste Management, Division of Litter Control and Recycling to consider and approve said Application and Program, said Program being in accord with the regulations governing use and expenditure of said funds. Adopted on: Date Signature County Administrator Certified by: 000099 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE : June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER:, FY91 Year-end Budget Adjustments ll.E.10 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION At the end of each fiscal year, staff requests revisions in appropriations consistent with year-end budget projections. Attached is a list of increases and decreases that are requested for all funds. ATTACHMENTS: B043/Bos4 YES [] NO [] Management SIGNATURE: ~ COUNTY ADM I N I STRATOR 000i00 80S-9891 BOard.Jr Supervisors agenda Item Page 2 General Fund Reduced Expenditures Police Department-the purchase price of automobiles and vehicle operations expenses were less than anticipated. TOTAL Additional Funds Needed County Attorney-costs for legal services were underbudgeted. General District Court-expenses for Court appointed attorneys to represent indigent clients exceed budget. Sheriff's Department-the FY91 budget assumed an average jail inmate population of 247. The population is 301, or 22% above what was anticipated. Operating expenditures for the jail are directly related~ to numbers of prisoners. $(350,000) 95,000 25,000 230,000 TOTAL GENERAL FUND School Operatinq Fund Debt Service-due to the reallocation of bond proceeds in November 1990, $840,200 in debt service was charged to the School Operating Fund, rather than the County General Fund. Also, revenue in the amount of $99,800 needs to be appropriated for the Governor's Technology Initiative payment for $940,000 computer equipment. Operations and Maintenance-Due to the budget reductions initiated, there are funds in this category to be used to offset the increase needed for debt service. $(940,000) TOTAL SCHOOL OPERATING $(350,000) $350,000 $, 0 $940,000 $(940,000) $ 0 O0010 L A VIRGINIA: At a regular m~eting of the Chesterfield County School Board held Tuesday evening, June 11, 1991, at five o'clock in the Board Room of the School Administration Building. PRESENT: Jean Copeland, Chairman William Goodwyn, Vice-Chairman Elizabeth Davis Timothy Brown John A. Cardea, M. D. RESOLIJTION On motion of Mr. Brown, seconded by Mr. Goodwyn, the School Board requests the Board of Supervisors to revise appropriations by increasing the debt service category by $940,000 and decreasing Operations & Maintenance by $940,000, resulting in no net change to the total appropriations in the School Operating Fund. Pat Bartlam, Clerk to the Board E. E. (Gene) Oavis, Ed.D. Superintendent a copy teste 000102 CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGE NDA MEETING DATE: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: SUBJECT: TO Approve a Grant of $85,800 Special Drug Prosecutions for Positions to Staff the Program. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ll.E.11 from the State for FY92 and to Create SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The localities of Petersburg, Chesterfield, Colonial Heights and Hopewell cooperate in prosecuting drug cases through a multi-jurisdictional task force. The administration of this program is currently housed in Petersburg and is funded by a grant from the State Commonwealth's Attorneys Service and Training Council. Due to turnover among current staff, the Commonwealth's Attorney Office in Chesterfield is requesting to handle administration of the program. To do this will require approval of the grant, appropriation of $85,800 in grant' funds, and creation of two full-time positions (a prosecutor and a secretary). Continuation of the program is contingent upon receipt of state funds. If funds are not allocated from the state in future years, the positions and the program will be terminated or an alternate funding source will have to be identified. BOARD ACTION REQUIRED: Approve the grant and appropriate $85,800 in state revenue as detailed on the attached budget. Create prosecutor and secretarial support positions. ATTACHMENTS: YES I'1 NO [] William W. Davenport ~ Commonwealth Attorney B048/Bos4 SIGNATURE: COUNTY Al INISTRATOR 000108 BOS-9891 Board of Supervisors Agenda Item Page 2 PROPOSED GRANT BUDGET Revenue: CASTC $85,800 Expense: Personnel 2 positions with benefits Office Rent Postage Local Telephone Office Supplies Administrative Charge Audit, Accounting Budget, Purchasing $79,600 1,500 200 1,500 1,000 2,000 $85,800 B048/Bos4 000i04 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: ll.E.]2 SUB4ECT: Change Order to Viking Enterprise, Inc. Addition and Renovation to the Bon Air Library COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENT~: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This item requests the Board of Supervisors approval of a Change Order to Viking Enterprise, Inc. to replace the existing roof at the Bon Air Library in the amount of $43,489. Viking Enterprise, Inc. was the successful contractor to perform the original work for the sum of $1,043,000. Due to the discovery during the renovation demolition process of roof and deck deterioration, it has become necessary to replace the existing roof. This Change Order brings the total construction contract to $1,086,489. Project funds are available to cover this change. ACTION REQUIR~ BY ,BOARD OF SUPERVISOR.q: ATTACHMENTS: YES I-I Approval of the attached Change Order to Viking Enterprise, Inc. contract for the amount of $43,489. William H. Howell Director of General NO [] Services SIGNATURE: 000i0 ' COUNTY ADMI NISTRATOR /- BOS-9891 CHANGE ORDER AIn't DOCUMENT G70I OWNER ARCHITECT CONTRACTOR FIELD OTHER [] [] [] [] [] PROJECT: Bon Air Branch Library Expansion (name, addre~) Chesterfield County, Virginia TO CONTRACTOR: (name, address) Viking Enterprise, Inc. 110 Giant Drive, Suite A Richmond, Virginia 23224 CHANGE ORDER NUMBER: One ( 1 ) DATE: June 13, 1991 ARCHITECT'S PROJECT NO: 89-022 CONTRACT DATE: March 29, 1991 CONTRACT FOR: Renovation/Addition The Contract is changed as follows: See Attachment A Not valid until signed by the Owner, Architect and Contractor. The original (Contract Sum) (Guaranteed Maximum Price) was ........................ S i, 043,000.00 Net change by previously authorized Change Orders ............................... $ -0- The (Contract Sum) (Guaranteed Maximum Price) prior to this Change Order was.: ........ $ 1,043,000 ~ 00 The (Contract Sum) (Guaranteed Maximum Price) will be (increased) (decreased) (unchanged) by this Change Order in the amount of ............................ $ 43,489.3 $ The new (Contract Sum) (Guaranteed Maximum Price) including this Change Order will be .. $ 1,086,489.35 The Contract Time will be (increased) (decreased) (unchanged) by The date of Substantial Completion as of the date of this Change Order therefore is January 22, 1992 NOTE: (-0-)days. This summary does not reflect changes in the Contract Sum, Contract Time or Guaranteed Maximum Price which have been authorized bv Construction Change Directive. · The Design Collaborative Viking EnterpriSe, Inc. Chesterfield County ARCHITECT CONTRACTOR . OWNER 2940 N. Lynnhaven Road 110 Giant Drive, Suite A P.O. Box 40 Addr~s Address Address Virginia Be~ch, CV~. 23452 Richmond, VA 23224 Chesterfield, VA 23860 .... .,//~' /.w'~ ! j,. , BY: . BY "/ -~ /A '~-7 [ DATE ~ / ~ q / DATE ~0A OOC~,~_,.'T ~70i · CHANGE ORDER · 1987 EDrI%ON " AIA® * ©1987 · THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS, 1735 NEW YORK AVE., N.W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20006 CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGE NDA MEETING DATE: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: il.E.13.a. ,~UB,JECT: Set date for public hearing to consider the conveyance of a lease for real property at Ironbridge Park in order to operate food concessions at the youth facility. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION The Board is required to conduct a public hearing for the purpose of considering the conveyance of a lease for real property. The purpose of this public hearing is to consider the leasing of the concession facility at Ironbridge Park. The Parks and Recreation Department has completed construction of a concession building at this site. BACKGROUND Chesterfield Baseball Clubs, Inc. has requested permission to lease this building and to operate it as a concession facility. The purposed leasing agreement, which is similar to the ones for other parks, would apply to December 31, 1991 and includes the standard 10% of gross receipts to be returned to the County for the facility's operation and maintenance. ATTACHMENTS: YES n NO ~) Millard D.' Pete" St'~h, Jr. SIGNATURE COUNTY ADMI NI STRATOR 0010 The revenues, which will be generated from operating this facilit~ shall be utilized by the association to cover part of its operational costs. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors set a public hearing date on July 24, 1991 to consider the conveyance of a lease for real property at Ironbridge Park in order to operate food concessions. 00010d CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGE NDA MEETING DATE: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER' 11 .E.13 .b S,UB4ECT: Set Public Hearing to Consider an Amendment to the Lease Between the County and the Richmond Area Association of Retarded Citizens for Camp Baker COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION' In 1983, the Board of Supervisors agreed to lease the County's Camp Baker property to the Richmond Area Association of Retarded Citizens (RAARC) and to establish the Camp Baker Management Board of oversee RAARC's operation of Camp Baker. The term of the lease which the Board approved in 1983 is fifteen years and will expire on December 31, 1997. RAARC has requested an amendmen{' to the Camp Baker lease which would extend the term of the lease. Under the proposed amendment, the new term would run from January 1, 1991 to December 31, 2005. Furthermore, on January 1, 1996, January 1, 2001 and January 1, 2006 the term of the lease would be automatically extended for five additional years unless RAARC or the County notifies the other than it does not intend to extend the lease term. Pursuant to this proposed amendment, the 15-year lease term beginning on January 1, 1991 could be extended for a maximum of three additional five years (Continued) ATTACHMENTS: YES I'1 NO [] PREPARED Steven L. Micas County Attorney 0403:5280:30 SIGNATURE: C 0~1N I STRATOR BOS-9891 AGENDA ITEM June 26, 1991 Page Two periods. Thus, if each five-year renewal were triggered, the Camp Baker lease with RAARC would remain in effect until December 31, 2020. RAARC has indicated that this amendment is needed so that it can obtain longer-term financing for capital improvements to Camp Baker. A lease containing the proposed amendment is attached. The Board must hold a public hearing to consider this amendment. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Board set a public hearing to consider the amendment of the Camp Baker lease. 0403:5280:30 ooo o THIS DEED OF LEASE, made this of , 1991, by and between the COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA (hereinafter "Lessor") and the RICHMOND AREA ASSOCIATION FOR RETARDED CITIZENS (here- inafter "Lessee"). WITNESSETH : WHEREAS, the Lessor is the owner of a certain parcel of land with improvements thereon commonly known as "Camp Baker"; AND WHEREAS, the Lessor and Lessee desire that Camp Baker be utilized to its fullest potential by providing programs for and services to physically, mentally or otherwise handicapped individuals and the elderly; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the sum of Ten Dollars ($10.00), the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, and of the mutual covenants set out herein, the Lessor does hereby demise and lease unto the Lessee the following described premises (hereinafter referred to as "Camp Baker"), to-wit: All that certain parcel of land with improvements, personal property and appurtenances thereon located or thereto belonging, located in the Bermuda Magisterial District, Chesterfield County, Virginia, containing 22.75 acres more or less, and commonly known as "Camp Baker", being the same property conveyed by W. W. Baker Child Welfare Camp, Incor- porated to the Lessor by deed dated September 7, 1938 and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the County of Chesterfield Virginia in Deed Book 244 at page 304. To have and hold the same subject to the conditions, covenants and restrictions contained herein. ARTICLE I TERM A. The initial term of this lease shall be for a period of fifteen (15) years and shall begin on January 1, 1991 and shall end on December 31, 2005 unless it shall terminate sooner or be extended longer as hereinafter provided. B. At the expiration of each of the three five-year periods of the initial term this lease shall automatically be renewed for a term of five (5) years unless to ensure a continual fifteen (15) year lease either the Lessor or Lessee notifies the other, prior to such expiration date, of its intention not to so extend the term of this lease. ARTICLE II CAMP BAKER MANAGEMENT BOARD A. The responsibilities of managing Camp Baker shall lie overseeing, monitoring, operating and with the Camp Baker Management Board ("Management Board") unless otherwise provided herein. B. The Management Board shall be comprised of the following eight persons, all of which shall be appointed by the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors: 1. e One person from each magisterial district of Chesterfield County. One person who is a representative of the Chester Civitan Club. One person who is a representative of the Lessee. JLM / barn 4701a: B 33 -2- 4. One ex-officio, non-voting representative from the adminis- trative staff of the Lessor who shall act as a liaison between the Management Board and the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors. Appointments for each position on the Management Board shall he for a three-year term. The terms shall be staggered in the same manner as the terms are staggered on the date of this lease. No person shall be appointed to more than two consecutive terms on the Management Board. C. The Management Board shall be authorized to expend funds received pursuant to Article III, E.2 for maintenance of Camp Baker. The Management Board shall be authorized, to expend funds received pursuant to Article III, E.2 for capital improvements to Camp Baker. D. The Management Board shall control and expend the Jeffress Trust Fund and all maintenance and capital improvement funds collected by the Board. Further, any funds raised by the Chester Civitan Club or the Lessee shall be controlled and expended by those organizations. E. The Management Board shall have the responsibility for seeing that annual and long-term budgets and master plans are developed for Camp Baker. Annual budgets shall be completed by December i of each calendar year for use in the following calendar year. Long-term budgets and master plans covering a three-year period shall be completed by December 1 for the three-year period (or portion thereof) following such date beginning in the year 1991. AIl master plans shall comport with provisions for maximizing the use of Camp Baker as stated herein. 0001i 3 F. The Management Board shall present to the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors, at the second meeting of the Board of Supervisors in January of each year, an annual report on the operation and use of Camp The annual report shall include the Baker for the preceding calendar year. following: 1. An accounting of all receipts and expenditures pertaining to the Jeffress Memorial Fund or other funds received by the Board. 2. A summary of the use of Camp Baker by the Lessee and Other Users including, but not limited to the type and duration of each use. 3. An evaluation of the current usage of Camp Baker and recommendations for further use. 4. A report of contributions made to Camp Baker as labor, cash or equipment. ARTICLE III USE A. The use of Camp Baker shall be limited to providing programs for and services to mentally or physically handicapped individuals and the elderly. Use by any other group or organization shall be only with the approval of the Management Board. B. Camp Baker shall be reserved (hereinafter "Reserved Use") for those programs of the Lessee currently in operation, or the expansion of programs in furtherance of Lessee's efforts to provide service to the mentally or physically handicapped. JLM/bam4701a:B33 -4- 0 0 0 ~ ~ C. To the extent that such use does not conflict with the Reserved Use, additional use shall be permitted by organizations or agencies (hereinafter "Other Uses") who have as a primary purpose the benefit and/or treatment of mentally or physically handicapped citizens or senior citizens; scheduling for Other Users shall be arranged through the Camp Ranger or other repre- sentative designated by the Lessee which representative shall be available during normal business hours. D. All requests for uses other than that defined above shall be made to the Management Board for permission to use Camp Baker six (6) weeks prior to the proposed commencement of such use; however, the Management Board shall have full discretion to accept and approve applications filed less than six (6) weeks prior to the proposed commencement of such use. Consistent with the desire of the Lessee and Lessor to utilize Camp Baker to the greatest extent possible, the Management Board shall endeavor to encourage such additional use of Camp Baker. E. As a condition of using Camp Baker, all Users shall comply with the following provisions: 1. All Users shall report to the Camp Ranger during their use of Camp Baker. The Camp Ranger has the duty of enforcing all rules made for the safe use and preservation of the property. 2. Ail Users shall pay to Lessee, in advance of the commencement of their use or as otherwise provided by the Management Board, a user fee to offset the operating expenses, including but not limited to maintenance and utilities, of the facilities used during the period of use. The user fee schedule shall be determined by the Management Board. The Lessor shall not be required to pay any fees for use of Camp Baker in excess of the actual cost incurred by the Lessee as a direct result of such use by the Lessor. 3. All Users shall provide adequate liability insurance coverage during the period of their use, the types and amounts of such coverage being subject to review and approval of the Lessor's Risk Manager. 4. All Users shall have the responsibility to supervise, operate, maintain and clean up the facilities they use during the period of use. All Users shall provide all necessary personnel to meet this responsibility. F. A portion of each user fee, as determined by the Management Board, shall be designated by the Management Board to be expended for maintenance and physical improvements. ARTICLE IV RENTS Lessee shall pay to the Lessor on or before January 1, 1991 and on or before the first year of each calendar year during the initial term and any additional term of this lease, a certain sum for the use of the cabin located on Camp Baker to be used by the Camp Ranger as provided in Article V herein. The amount of this annual rent shall be determined by the Management Board. 000i .0 JLM / ham470 la: B 33 -6- ARTICLE V COVENANTS OF LESSEE A. Lessee shall pay to the Lessor rent in the amount and at such times as provided in Article IV herein. B. Lessee's use of Camp Baker shall be in accordance with the provisions of Article III herein. C. Lessee shall not commit any waste on or to Camp Baker and shall, maintain Camp Baker and all structures, appurtenances, fixtures and personal property located thereon in good condition normal wear and tear excepted. D. Lessee shall, at its expense, hire a full time Camp Ranger who shall reside year round in a cabin at Camp Baker. The Camp Ranger shall oversee and monitor the day-to-day maintenance, security and use-scheduling of Camp Baker as an agent of and for the Lessee. E. Lessee shall, periodically, deliver to the Management Board all user fees collected pursuant to Article III (E) (2) herein. F. Lessee shall permit representatives of Lessor, or members of the Management Board to enter upon Camp Baker to examine or investigate the conditions of the property. G. Lessee shall be responsible for paying all utilities charges incurred in the operation and maintenance of Camp Baker including but not limited to charges for telephone, electricity, gas, fuel oil, kerosene, propane, sewer and water service. H. Lessee shall keep strict financial accounts of all user fees received by it relating to Camp Baker, all moneys delivered to the Management Board, JLMlbam4701a:B33 -7- and all such moneys expended by it for maintenance or improvement of Camp Baker; Lessee shall make such accounting available to the Lessor and the Management Board for inspection and copying upon request. The Lessor's Internal Auditor shall annually audit these financial transactions of the Lessee. I. Lessee shall maintain during the initial term and any additional terms of this lease general, automobile and umbrella liability insurance with coverages, amounts and carriers sufficient to protect the Lessor and Lessee, naming Lessor as an additional insured on the policies for such insurance for that coverage that applies to Camp Baker; additionally, Lessee shall maintain directors and officers liability insurance and Worker's Compensation insurance with adequate and reasonable coverages. Lessee shall furnish to the Lessor certificates of the insurance coverages mentioned above on or before the date of this lease, and shall furnish the Lessor additional certificates of insurance showing current coverages as prior policies may expire at any time during the lease term, initial or additional. J. Lessee shall perform all maintenance and make all improvements on or to Camp Baker required by state or federal law or regulation, now in existence or as later amended or promulgated. In addition, Management Board may required Lessee to make reasonable improvements to the property designed to improve safety or further the purposes of this lease. If Lessee shall fail to perform such required maintensnce or make such improvements within a time period deemed reasonable non-compliance with such maintenance or make such improvements itself, at Lessee's expense. JLM/bam4701a: B 33 -8- by the Management Board, after notice of laws or regulations, Lessor may perform such Lessee 000113 can make application to the Management Board for financial assistance with required improvements. K. Lessee shall perform all maintenance and make all improvements on or to Camp Baker that are requested by representatives agents of any insurance carrier providing insurance coverage relating to Camp Baker if the failure to perform such maintenance or make such improvements may or will result in the reduction or cancellation of such coverage or the increase in the amount of any premium. If Lessee shall fail to perform such maintenance or make such improvements within a time period deemed reasonable by the Management Board, after notice to Lessee of the request by the representative or agent of the carrier, Lessor may perform such maintenance or make such improvements itself, at Lessee's expense. Lessee can make application to the Management Board for financial assistance with required improvements. L. Lessee shall indemnify and save the Lessor harmless from any and all loss, damage and liability occasioned by, growing out of or arising or resulting from any default hereunder, or any tortious or negligent act on the part of the Lessor or its agents, representatives, officials or employees. M. Lessee shall not assign or sublet, transfer or convey, by any means this lease; in the event that the Lessee shall be disabled or shall in any manner cease to exist in its present form, this lease shall immediately terminate. JLM/bam4701a:B33 -9- (~) 0 ~ i :~ ARTICLE VI COVENANTS OF LESSOR A. Lessor shall maintain reasonable property insurance coverages to protect its interest in the real property of Camp Baker. Lessor will maintain appropriate liability protection for its exposure relating to Camp Baker. ARTICLE VII TERMINATION A. If the Lessee shall at any time be in default in the payment of rent or in the performance of any of the covenants, terms, conditions or provisions of this lease, and the Lessee shall fail to remedy such default within one hundred and twenty (120) days after notice of such default from the Lessor, this lease shall terminate, and the Lessor may enter upon Camp Baker and again have, repossess and enjoy the same as if this lease had not been made. B. If the Management Board determines that the Lessee is not utilizing Camp Baker to the maximum extent practicable, the Management Board shall notify the Lessee of this fact; Lessee shall have one year from the date of such notice to increase or improve its utilization of Camp Baker to the satis- faction of the Management Board. If at any time after such one-year period has expired, the Management Board determines that the Lessee is not utilizing Camp Baker to the maximum extent practicable, this lease shall terminate thirty (30) days after such determination. JLM / barn470 la: B33 -10- 000120 ARTICLE VIII ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS A. Lessor shall be permitted to enter Camp Baker to perform any maintenance or to construct capital improvements which the Management Board deems are necessary or advisable. Lessor shall endeavor to prevent unnecessary disruption of the use of Camp Baker while performing such maintenance or improvements. B. Any and all structures erected, improvements made or fixtures affixed to Camp Baker during the initial or additional term of this lease shall become and remain the property of the Lessor. C. Ail employees, agents, representatives, volunteers or officials of Lessee shall not be deemed to be employees, agents, representatives or officials of the Lessor. D. Lessor's liability to Lessee, if any, under this lease shall be limited to the annual rental amount as provided herein. This provision shall not otherwise affect the legal obligations, if any, of the Lessor or Lessee. E. Any and all notices required to be in writing under this lease may be given to the Lessor by mailing said notice, first class mail, postage prepaid, to County Administrator, Chesterfield County, P. O. Box 40, Chesterfield, Virginia 23832 and may be given to the Lessee l)y mailing said notice, first class mail, postage prepaid, to JLM/bam4701a: B 33 -11- {} 0 0.1 2 i COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA By: Title: Approved as to form: Assistant County Attorney RICHMOND AREA ASSOCIATION FOR RETARDED CITIZENS By: Title: JLM/bam4701a :B33 -12- ~) ~} 0 .~ ~ ~ STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY/COUNTY OF , to-wit: a Notary Public in and for the City/County and State aforesaid, do hereby certify that Lane B. Ramsey, whose name as County Administrator of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia is signed to the foregoing and annexed Deed bearing date on the day of , 1991, and has acknowledged the same before me in my jurisdiction aforesaid. Given under my hand this day of , 1991. My Commission expires: Notary Public STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY/COUNTY OF , to-wit: I, , a Notary Public in and for the City/County and State aforesaid, do hereby certify that whose name as of the Richmond Area Association for Retarded Citizens is signed to the foregoing and annexed Deed bearing date on the day of , 1991, and has acknowledged the same before me in my jurisdiction aforesaid. day of , 1991. Given under my hand this My Commission expires: Notary Public JLM/bam4701a:B33 -13- CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGE NDA MEET lNG DATE: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: ll.E.14 SUB41~CT: Approve Agreement 'with Tarmac Mid-Atlantic, Inc. for Lease of Property for Expansion of the Dutch Gap Boat Ramp Facility. Approve transfer of Parks Bond Funds for Site Improvements. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION The Board of Supervisors is requested to approve a lease for approximately .74 acres of property adjacent to the existing Dutch Gap Boat Ramp facility. The Board is requested to authorize transfer of bond funds. BACKGROUND: Tarmac bas tentatively agreed to lease this property to the County. A cooperative effort between the Virginia Division of Game and Inland Fisheries and the Parks and Recreation Department is proposed for construction of additional boat launches and a loop road from the ramps up to the parking area. RECOMMENDATION: ATTACHMENTS: YES r-I Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors give authority to the County Administrator to execute the lease agreement with Tarmac Mid-Atlantic, Inc. Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve transfer of funds from: Goyne Park - $2,500 and Point of Rocks Park - $8,000, to a new Dutch Gap Boat Ramp account to cover costs for this project. M.D. "Pete" Stith, Jr. Director, Parks & NO ~ Recreation SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 000!2 /- BOS-9891 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETINGDATE: June 26~ 1991 ITEM NUMBER: ll.E.15.a. SUBJECT: Approval to shoot fireworks at the 14th annual 4th of July Extravaganza COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Chesterfield County Parks and Recreation Department requests permission to conduct a fireworks display at the 14th annual 4th of July Extravaganza to be held on Thursday, July 4, 1991 at the County Fairgrounds. BACKGROUND: This event which annually attracts approximately 20,000 spectators, 'will be conducted from 6:00 p.m. until 10:00 p.m. with a program that includes a live band, Fabulous Cruisers, recreational games and activities. A number of civic associations including the Ruritans, will provide food concessions for the event. Other county agencies and community organizations will also participate in the event. The Parks and Recreation Department has been working with the Fire Department concerning safety and the actual shooting of the fireworks. Traffic control is being coordinated with the Police Department. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the July 4th E.~~~.~~~ ~ fireworks display as set forth at~JED BY;. ~ , ' ~x Millard D. "Pete" Stith, Jr. Director ATTACHMENTS: YES r'l NO [] SIGNATURE COUN~TRATOR 000128 CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEET lNG DATE: SUBJECT: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: ll.E.15.b. Request for a permit to stage a fireworks display in the Reeds Landing subdivision on July 4, 1991 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Reed's Landing Corporation has applied for a permit to stage a fireworks display at the Community's recreation area on July 4, 1991 at 9:00 p.m. Mr. E. C. Autry has submitted an insurance certificate in the amount of one million dollars, insuring the Reeds Landing Community Association, and naming the County as an additional insured. Dennis "Turlington, Fire Marshal, has reviewed the request and approved the proposed site. Mr. Turlington has also indicated that the manner of staging the display meets all applicable requirements of the Fire Prevention Code. ATTACHMENTS: YES 0900:1258:44 NO D PREPARED BY; Steven L. Micas County Attorney SIGNATURE: COUNTYAD~~MI tSTRATOR O0012G BOS-9891 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MAURICE B. SULLIVAN, CHAIRMAN MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT C. F. CURRIN, JR., VICE CHAIRMAN BERMUDA DISTRICT G. H. APPLEGATE CLOVER HILL DISTRICT HARRY G. DANIEL DALE DISTRICT JESSE J. MAYES MATOACA DISTRICT CHESTERFIELD COUNTY P.O. Box 40 CH ESTERFIELD, VIRGIN IA 23832-0040 MEMORANDUM LANE B. RAMSEY COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Barbara E. King, Assistant County Attorney Dennis C.~on, Fire Marshal June 20, 1991 Fireworks Display - Reeds Landing On June 19, 1991, Sergeant Howe of this office, conducted a site inspection of the commons area in Reeds Landing Subdivision to determine its suitability for a fireworks display. He met with Mr. Machman, from the property owners' association, who will be responsible for the fireworks show and explained the distance requirements for a shooting area. After surveying the site, Sergeant Howe informed Mr. Machman that he would be restricted to shooting only those fireworks permitted to be sold in Virginia, pursuant to Chapter 11, Title 59.1 of the Code of Virginia; sparklers, bottle rockets, etc. Mr. Machman was also told to have the areas adjacent to the display site monitored for hot debris during and after the show. Based on the aforementioned restrictions and monitoring requirements, we do not anticipate any fire problems, so therefore, approve the specific site that Sergeant Howe visited. bb cc: Sergeant Jeffrey A. Howe 000 2 THE REED'S LANDING CORPORATION PLANNERS · DEVELOPERS 2430 PAGEHURST DRIVE · MIDLOTHIAN, VIRGINIA 23113 · TEL. (804) 794~905 · FAX 7944139 June 11, 1991 Mr. Steven L. Micas County Attorney P.O. Box 40 Chesterfield, Virginia 23832 Dear Steve, This is to request permission to have a fireworks display in the Reed's Landing subdivision. This display would be held by the Reed's Landing Community Association for its residents and their guests. The display would take place at the community's recreation area on July 4th at 9 P.M. and would be coordinated by MR. Ken Nachman, resident. Please find attached a copy of the Reed's Landing Community Association Insurance certificate. Thank you for your assistance. tc Enclosures Sincerely, E. C. Autry PRODUCER HRH Richmond T/A James River Financial Group, P. O. Box 35769 Richmond, Virginia 23235 INSURED The Reeds Landing Community CiO J. K, Timmons 2430 ?agehurst Drive Midlothian, Va. 23113 Inc ISSUE DATE (MM/DD/YY) 6-11-91 THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. COMPANIES AFFORDING COVERAGE COMPANY LETTER A Continental Insurance Company COMPANY LE~FER B As s o c 'COMPANY LETTER C COMPANY LETTER COMPANY LETTER THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS, AND CONDI- TIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. m POLICY EFFECTIVE POLICY EXPIRATION] m CO TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER ALL LIMITS IN THOUSANDS LTF DATE (MM/DD/YY) DATE (MM/DD/YY) GENERAL LIABILITY I GENERAL AGGREGATE $ I 3 0 0 0 ~ · COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY I PRODUCTS-COMP/OPS AGGREGATE $ I ~, 0 0 0 ~ · I PERSONAL & ADVERTISING INJURY $ 1, 000 , · A X OWNER'sICLAIMS MAOE& CONTRACTORs~OCCURRENCEpRoTECTIVE 25CBP06086480-91 12-19-90 12- 19-911EACU OCCURRENCE $ 1, ooo,m I FIRE DAMAGE {ANY ONE FIRE) $ 50,· I MEDICAL EXPENSE (ANY ONE PERSON) $ 5, · AUTOMOBILEANY AUTO LIABILITY m ALL OWNED AUIOS -- -- SCHEDULED AUTOS m HIRED AUTOS NON-OWNED AUTOS GARAGE LIABILITY I ~iT EACH AGGREGATE m EXCESS LIABILITY I 0THER THAN UMBRELLA FORM /$ OCCURRENCE sm STA DRY = WORKERS' COMPENSATION (EACH ACCIDENT) · AND (DISEASE-POLICY LIMITF~.m I I DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONSILOCATIONSIVEHICLESIRESTRICTIONSlSPEClAL ITEMS County of Chesterfield, Virginia SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EX. PIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING COMPANY WILL ENDEAVOR TO MAIL DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CE~ ~IO~t.~E~_.R NAMED TO THE 3UT FAILURE TO MAIL SUCH NOTICE SHALL I~IPE~6E-.J~OBLIGATION OR AGENTS OR REPRESENTATIVES. AO4)ltl). PRODUCER HRH Richmond t/a James River Financial P. O. Box 35769 Richmond, VA 23235 ) ISSUE DATE (MM/DD/YY) I THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND I CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE ~ DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE C-roup, Inc. ! POLICIES BELOW, COMPANIES AFFORDING COVERAGE COMPANYA LEttER CONTINENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY COMPANY B LETI-ER INSURED The Reeds Landing Community Assoc. COMPANYC LEal-ER c/o J. K. Timmons 2430 Pagehurst Drive COMPANY D LETTER Midlothian, VA 23113 GOMPANY E LETTER ~c~s CO LTR THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. POLICY EFFECTIVE POLICY EXPIRATION LIMITS TYPE OF INSURANCE POMCY NUMBER DATE (MM/DD/YY) DATE (MM/DD/YY) GENERAL LIABILITY A X COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY CLAIMS MADE X OCCUR. OWNER'S & CONTRACTOR'S PROT. 25CBP06086480-91 GENERAL AGGREGATE $ 1, 0 0 0, 0 0 0 PRODUCTS-COMPJOP AGG. $ 1,0 0 0,0 0 0 12-19-90 12-19-91 PERSONAL & ADV. INJURY $ ].., 000., 000 EACH OCCURRENCE $ 1· 000· 000 FIRE DAMAGE (Any one fire) $ 5 0 , 0 0 0 MED. EXPENSE (Any one person) $ ~ · 000 AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY ANY AUTO ALL OWNED AUTOS SCHEDULED AUTOS HIRED AUTOS NON-OWNED AUTOS GARAGE LIABILITY COMBINED SINGLE $ LIMIT BODILY INJURY $ (Per person) BODILY INJURY $ (Per accident) PROPERTY DAMAGE $ EXCESS LIABILITY UMBRELLA FORM OTHER THAN UMBRELLA FORM EACH OCCURRENCE $ AGGREGATE $ WORKER'S COMPENSATION AND EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY STATUTORY LIMITS EACH ACCIDENT $ DISEASE--POLICY LIMIT $ DISEASE--EACH EMPLOYEE $ OTHER DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS/LOCATIONS/VEHICLES/SPECIAL ITEMS ADDITIONAL INSURED - 4TH OF JULY EVENT: COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA CF.~mRCATE~Lm=J~ County of Chesterfield, Virginia SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING COMPANY WILL ENDEAVOR TO MAIL DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE ~I~I~*a~I-E~DER NAMED TO THE LEFT, BUT FAILURE TO MAIL SUCH NOTICE SI-T-AL~' II~'P'O'SE'NO OBLIGATION OR LIABILITY OF ANY KIND UPON THE COMPANY, ITS AGENTS OR REPRESENTATIVES. AUTHORIZED CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: June 26~ 1991 ITEM NUMBER: ll.E.16 ~UBJECT: Approval of Award of Contract for Construction of a Parks Maintenance Shop at Iron Bridge Park. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION Bids were received for construction of a maintenance shop at Iron Bridge Park. The low bid was $116,500.00 from KBS, Inc. Funds for construction are available in the 1988 Parks Improvements Bond Accounts. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors authorize the County Administrator to contract with KBS, Inc. for construction of the Iron Bridge Park maintenance shop. ATTACHMENTS: YES 0 NO ::~ H.D. "Pete" Stith, Jr. Director, Parks & Recreation SIGNATURE: 000131 COUNTY ADM I NISTRATOR BOS-9891 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: June 26, 1991 SUBJECT: Adoption of a Resolution Approving Richard A. Cordle as the Authorized Signatory for County Checks COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Upon retirement of County Treasurers, State law requires that a "turnover" audit be performed. As part of that audit, the Board should designate Richard A. Cordle as the only County Treasurer authorized to sign County checks. Attached is a draft resolution, list of accounts and the approved list of checks bearing the signature of Mary Arline McGuire that should be honored by local banks. ATTACHMENTS: YES I~ 0805:5321:30 NO [] SIGNATURE PREPARED BY;~ ~ Steven L. Micas County Attorney COUNTY ADM I NISTRATOR BOS-9891 The Board resolves that the depositories of the County change the County accounts from COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD By Mary Arline McGuire, TREASURER to THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD By, Richard A. Cordle, TREASURER. The attached list of checks drawn by the former treasurer are the only checks to be honored by the depositories bearing the signature of Mary Arline McGuire. All banks honoring Chesterfield County checks are requested to send future statements and paid checks to Richard ~ A. Cordle, Treasurer. A certified copy of this resolution shall be sent to all County depositories and other banks honoring Chesterfield County drafts. This resolution shall be effective on July 1, 1991. COUNTY OF CtlESTERFIELD BANK ACCOUNTS BANK ACCOUNT NUMBERS Central Fidelity Bank P.O. Box 27602 Richmond, VA 23261 Central Fidelity Bank Central Fidelity'Bank 7911228100 7911203841 7911008747 7911008798 7919325563 Consolidated Bank & Trust Co. P.O. Box I0046". Richmond, VA 23240 Crestar Bank P.O. Box 26150 Richmond, VA 23260 11O6698600 1005642 Dominion Bank P.O. 26627 Richmond, VA 23261 7486044362 F & M Bank 1776 Staples Mill Road Richmond, VA 23230 6O90011700 First Virginia Bank (Col) P.O. Box 27346 Richmond, VA 23261-73~6 20904193 Jefferson National Bank P.O. Box 26362 Richmond, VA 23269-6362 302069127 Peoples Bank'of Virginia P.O. Box 34877 Richmond, VA 23234 Sign6t Bank P.O. Box 25339 Richmond,'.y~ 23260 1008908700 5719520503 Sovran Bank, N.A. P.O. Box 27026 Richmond, VA 23261 02069586 CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGE NDA MEETING DATE : June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: ll.F.1 UTILITY PUBLIC HEARING: Conveyance of Excess Rights of Way at Breckenridge Shopping Center COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: BNE Land & Development and Breckenridge Associates, have requested the quitclaim of parcels of land at the entrances of Breckenridge Shopping Center. It was originally thought that these parcels were needed for the entrances to Breckenridge Shopping Center, however, they are not needed. This request has been reviewed by staff and approval is recommended. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board approve the conveyance of the parcels and authorize the Chairman of the Board and County Administrator to execute the necessary quitclaim deeds. DISTRICT: Bermuda ATTACHMENTS: YES I1~ NO I-I PREPARED BY; '-~_~,2~ ,~.<~/::~ Willis W. Pope, Manager Right of Way Division Department of Utilities BOS-9891 SIGNATURE 000113.3 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ..... ~ICINITY SKETCH UTILITY ~USLI~.~HEARING. CONVEYANCE OF E~SS RIGHTS OF WAY ,T BRECKENRIDGE SHOPPING C. £ER N 000133 H,~'S 7'E~N S/ZZUN I " 0.206 AC. BRECKENRIDGE ASSOCIA TEE TAX I~AP I~ DS. 2060, PG. 1406 r~---- EXISTIHG VARIABLE WIDTH HOPEWE'LL HOSPITAl ~ AUTHORITY- MedCore Corp. GOLDEN H, DODD TAX MAP ~f PREVIOUS JOB NO. PROPERTY t4R~NIA SC ONE CORP. TAX MAP N 15'48'$0' W 610.27' N 60~J2'$2' W $2.92° $ 741)7'28' W 38.00' N 15~J2'$2' W 100.00' N 741)7'28" E 38.00' N 291)7'28' E ~ 19' N 15'48'50' iV 54~72' N 72~8'10' E 9.00' S 16~54'42' E 263.72' S 181)6'55' E 368.32' S 15'48'$0' E 175.03' t LA T SHO WING ZAN~ TO BE CONV~'YED TO BRECKENRIDGE ASSOCIATES BEING SO~H 0~ STATE RO~K CH~STEMI~ COU~ VIRGINIA B~DA TI1WMON$ & ASSOCIATES, P. BNGIN~P~.~ · ARCI'IITRCT$ · $UR¥~YORN 711 N. COURTHOUSE RD. RICHMOND, VA 8803 STAPLES MILL RD. HENRICO CO., VA 4'111 CROSSINGS BLVD. PRINCE GEORGE, VA. DATE: APR/L 15,1991 SCALE: DRAWN BY: BRG CHECKED BY; WMA 111 :: JOB NO.: 8808-01 CO. OF CHESTERFIET..D FIRE DEPT. D.B. 1547-780 BNE LAND .~ DEI,,ELOPM~T TAX MAP ~ DB 1866, PG. 137,5 BRECKENRIDGE ASSOCIATES TAX MAP ~I DB. 2O60, PR 1406 PREVIOUS JOB NO. NORTH MARKET REAL TY CORP. TAX UAP t~ ns-s-O)-Is ZY-//B L/D 15'18'20' E 20a77' 74'41'40' iV 2ZOO' 76'27'00' E 398.43' 56'25'04" iV 76'27'00= HI 325.51' 58'39'27" W 35.26' 13'39'27' IV 25.00' 76'20°3,3'- IV 35.20' 15'39'27' IV 49.82' 13'39'27" W 13.95' PLA T SHO LAND TO BE CONVEYED TO BNE LA ND ~ DE VEL OPMENT 0.047 THE ~O~H SID~ 0~ ~TAT~ RO~ ~0; CHESTE~IE~ COU~ VIRGINIA BE~DA DISTM~ ~.K.. TIMMONS & ASSOCIATES, ENGINEE}~ * ARCHITECTS * SURVEYORE 711 N. COURTHOUSE RD. 8803 STAPLES MILL RD. 4411 CROSSINGS BLVD. DA TE: APRIL 15,1991 DRAWN BY: BRG CHECKED BY: WMA M JOB NO.: 8808-01 RICHMOND, VA HENRICO CO., VA PRINCE GEORGE, VA. SCALE: 1'~100' CALC. CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGE NDA MEETING DATE: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: ll.F.2 SUBJECT: Consideration of a Request from Trinity United Methodist Church for a Variance from the Requirement to Use Public Sewer. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: The Trinity United Methodist Church is constructing an addition to the Church which will require the use of public sewer unless a variance is granted by the Board of Supervisors upon recommendation by the Director of Utilities subject to the five findings as described in Sec. 20-63 of the Code. The findings are attached. RECOMMENDATION:,, The request does not meet the requirement that it is physically impracticable to connect to the public system; therefore, the Director of Utilities may not recommend approval of the request. ATTACHMENTS: YES ri NO [] David H. Welchons Director of Utilities BOS-9891 SIGNATURE: O0013G COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Trinity United Methodist Church Findings Pursuant to Sec. 20-63 (2) (3) (4) (5) The septic system can serve the property consistent with the requirements of Chapter 20, Article XI. It is not physically impracticable to connect to the public system. The property owner has submitted a report from a soil scientist that demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Health Department that the septic system, will provide adequate wastewater disposal for the intended life. The Health Department has certified in writing that the use of the septic system is not reasonably likely to adversely affect the public health, safety or welfare in the future. The owner has not entered into a contract to connect to the public system at this time. Granting of the variance should be conditioned on executing such a contract. 000137 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGE NDA MEETING DATE: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: ll.F.3.a. ,~UB4ECT: Authorization to Exercise Eminent Domain for the Acquisition of a Permanent Sewer and Temporary Construction Easement for the James River Trunk Sewer Project COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION Staff requests the Board to authorize the County Attorney to exercise eminent domain for the acquisition of a. permanent sewer and temporary construction easement, across the property of Charles F. Midkiff and Sue S. Midkiff, ]0710 Cherokee Road, Tax Map 3-6(2)B-10. The construction of this sewer is a County project and is necessary to ~relieve the over-committed capacity in the Michaux Creek Sewage Pumping Station. This sewer will also serve the schools at the Riverton site. BACKGROUND: On February 13, 1991, an offer of $3,7]4.00 was made by the Right of Way Section to the above owner for the purchase of a permanent sewer and temporary construction easement for the James River Trunk Sewer Project. Since this offer has not been accepted and no counteroffer has been made, and since the ATTACHMENTS: YES {23,/ NO D Assistant Director of Utilities BOS-9891 SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMI NI STRATOR O00i3a Board Agenda June 26, 1991 Page 2 contract for the installation of the sewer line has been awarded, it is necessary to proceed with eminent domain on an emergency basis for the health and safety of the public. Staff will continue to negotiate with the owner in an effort to reach a settlement. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board authorize the County Attorney to proceed with eminent domain on an emergency basis and exercise immediate right of entry pursuant to Section 15.1-238.1 of the Code of Virginia, and that the County Administrator be instructed to notify the owner by certified mail on June 27, 1991, of the County's intention to take possession of the easement. DISTRICT: Midlothian 0001,39 VICINITY SKETCH AD'THORIZATION TO F~RCISE EMINENT DOMAIN EASEMENTS FOR THE JAMES RIVER TRUNKSEWERPROJECT (PROJEC1%88-0132) · tC~M0 ~0 00014O EA~, 20' SEWER EASEMENT--~ PROPOSED 15' TEMPORARY CONSTRUC770N ~SEMENTE 15' TEMPORARY~ CONSTRUCTION F_..AEEME'N TEI PLA T_~ LOT 9 EXI$77NG 16' DRAINAGE mu RECOROATON OF HUGUENOT HUNDRED SECnON "A') 15' TEMPORARY CONS TRUC TIOI~ EASEMENTS CHARLES F. MIDKIFF SLIo~' LOT 10 BLOCK HUGUENOT HUjyD,,RED SEC 770N 'A " L-.-9; 95. O0 ,02 ~S 89'11 CHERROKEE ROAD OUTE NO. 704 (EXISTING 66' R/~/) PROPO.gED 20' SEWER EASEMENT PLA T (~ LOT 11 192. 00' TO THE EAST UNE OF DARBY DRIVE EXT'D. PLAT SHOWING SEWER AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTE ACROSS THE PROPERTY' OF'., CHARLES F.. blIDKIFF &' SUE S. MIDKIFF TAX PARCEL NO.: ,7-6 2 B 10 MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT . CHESTERFIELD COUNTY;, VIRGINI~LA- T~ TIJg~ON$ & ASSOCIATES, P. ~ cox 1039 PREVIOUS JOB NO. 711 N. COURTHOUSE RD. 8805 STAPLES MILL RD. 441~ CROSSINGS BLt4). DA T~.: OCTOBER 17, 1990 DRAWN BY; B. MORRISDN CHECKE~ BY: ,k{',,~ C JO8 NO.: 1~2~2-$ RICHMOND, VA HENRICO CO., VA PRINCE GEORGE, VA. SCALE: I'" ~, 50' CALC. CHH: CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER; ll.F.3.b. SUB4ECT: Authorization to Exercise Eminent Domain for the Acquisition of Permanent Slope, Sewer and Temporary Construction Easements for the James River Trunk Sewer Project COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION; Staff requests the Board to authorize the County Attorney to exercise eminent domain for the acquisition of permanent slope, sewer and temporary construction easements, across the property of Paul M. Spector and Anne T. Spector, 10760 Cherokee Road, Tax Map 3-6(2)B-6. The construction of this sewer is a County project and is necessary to ~elieve the over-committed capacity in the Michaux Creek Sewage Pumping Station. This sewer will also serve the schools at the Riverton site. BACKGROUND: On February 27, ]991, an offer of $4,216.00 was made by the Right of Way Section to the above owner for the purchase of permanent slope, sewer and temporary construction easements for the installation of a 36" sewer line. This offer has not been accepted and no counteroffer has been made. Since the ~EPARED BY;, ~ ~ J'~/ward Beck' Jr' ATTACHMENTS: YES NO D AsSistant Director of Utilities BOS-9891 $1GNAT URE: COUNTY ADMI NI STRATOR 000142 Board Agenda June 26, 1991 Page 2 contract for the installation of the sewer line has been awarded, it is necessary to proceed with eminent domain on an emergency basis for the health and safety of the public. Staff will continue to negotiate with the owner in an effort to reach a settlement. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board authorize the County Attorney to proceed with eminent domain on an emergency basis and exercise immediate right of entry pursuant to Section ]5.1-238.1 of the Code of Virginia, and that the County Administrator be instructed to notify the owner by certified mail on June 27, ]991, of the County's intention to take possession of the easement. DISTRICT: Midlothian 000143 VICINITY SKETCH AUTHORIZATION TO EXERCISE EMINENT DOMAIN FOR EASEMENTS FOR THEJAMES~IVERTRUNK SEWER PROJECT (PROJE~#88-0132) ' YOUNG 000144 / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER' ll.F.3.c. SUB4ECT: Authorization to Exercise Eminent Domain for the Acquisition of a Variable Width Sewer and Water Easement, 5' Temporary Construction Easement, and 5' Drainage Easement for the James River Trunk Sewer COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: Project. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION Staff requests the Board to authorize the County Attorney to exercise eminent domain for the acquisition of a variable width sewer and water easement, 5' temporary construction easement, and 5' drainage Easement, across the property of Michael P. McRaney and Karen E. McRaney, 4200 Old Gun Road East, Tax Map 3-5(1)20. The construction of this sewer is a County project and is necessary to relieve the over-committed capacity in the Michaux Creek Sewage Pumping Station. This sewer will also serve the schools at the Riverton site. BACKGROUND: On April 8, 199], an offer of $8,226.00 was made by the Right of Way Section to the above owner for the purchase of a variable width sewer and water easement, 5' temporary construction easement and 5' drainage easement for the James ATTACHMENTS: YES / PREPARED By~,~~~ /J// Edward ~3.eck,* Jr. ~,~s sistant Director NO [] of Utilities SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADM I NI STRATOR 00014C BOS-9891 Board Agenda June 26, 1991 Page 2 River Trunk Sewer Project. The owner has made a written counteroffer in the amount of $25,000.00. Since staff feels this offer to be excessive, and since the contract for the installation of the sewer line has been awarded, it is necessary to proceed with eminent domain on an emergency basis for the health and safety of the public. Staff will continue to negotiate with the owner in an effort to reach a settlement. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board authorize the County Attorney to proceed with eminent domain on an emergency basis and exercise immediate right of entry pursuant to Section 15.1-238.1 of the Code of Virginia, and that the County Administrator be instructed to notify the owner by certified mail on June 27, 1991, of the County's intention to take possession of the easement. DISTRICT: Midlothian 000147 VICINITY SKETC~ AIFI~ORIZATION TO ~g~CISE ~INI~IT DOMAIN FOR THE ACQUISITION OF EASEMENTS FORT HE JAMEs RIVER~ SEWF~PROJECT (PROJECT ~88-0132) OtD OUN ROAD SAS CENTERIJNE OF PA VEMEN ~ FeOU ?d~ NO. O. ?$~. ~ILE LANmiQo VARIABLE ~4DTH SEWER & wA~ EASEMENT VARIABLE WIDTH WATER PROPOSED 5' TEMPORARY SE~IER EASEIvtEN T CONS~UO~ON EASE~EMT MICHAEL P. McRANEY & KAREN D. 8.2055 PO. 764 5' TEMPORARy ~ CONS TRUC TION EASEMENT PROPOSED VARIABLE ~4D TH SEWER RATER EASEMENT E. McRANEY PROPOSED 5' TEMPORARY CONSTRUCIION EASE~tENT PLA T (~ "JANICE C. REED et al EXISTING 20' EASEMENT--~I OF R/W & U TIU17ES ~ D.B. 1038 PG. 887 I i I PLA T (~ PLA T SHOWING VARIABLE WID TH SEWER ~ WA TER EASEMENT, & TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EA SEMEN T ACROSS THE PROPER TY OF: MICHAEL P. McRANEY & KAREN E. McRANEY TAX PARCEL NO.: ,3-5 (1) 20 MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT ~, CHESTERFIELD COUNT~, VIRGINIA PREVIOUS JOB NO. PLA T J.E. TIMMON27 & ASSOCIATES, P. ENGINeeRS · ~IT~,~'RV~O~ 71'1 N. COUR~OUSE RD. ' RICHMOND, VA 880~ STAPES MILL RD. ~,~ , ~H~HmCO CO., W 441~ CROSSINGS BL~. "~RINCE GEORG~ VA. o~ ~. OCTOBER ~, JOB NO.: 14242-5 OLD GUN ROAD CBNTENUNE OF PA VEMEN '5'VDO T DRA/NA GE EASEMEN ~ANO~-~G MICHAEL P. McRANEY D. B. 2055 PG. 764 & KAREN £ IWcRANEY ' i JANICE C. REED et ol PLA T SHOWING A EXIST1NG 20' EA, OF R/~ &~ U TIUDES D.B. 1038 PG. BB7 5' VDO T DRAINA GE EASEMENT MICHAEL A CROSS THE PROPER TY OF': P. McRANEY & KAREN E. McRANEY TAX PARCEL NO.: ,.7-5 ~1,) 20 MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT ,, CHESTERFIELD COUNT~, VIRGINIA PRE~IOUS JOB NO. J.K.. TIMMON$ & ASSOCIATES, P.C. BNGINBBR$ * A~H~E~ * SURV~O~ 711 N. COUR~OUSE RD. RICHMOND, VA 880~ STAPLES MILL RD. HENRICO CO., VA 44U CROS~NGS BL~. PRINCE GEORG~ VA. DA TE: OCTOBER 31, t990 ~C~L~ DRAH~V BY: B. MORRISON ~K.: J08 NO.: 14242-5 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: ll.F.3.e. SUB~[CT: Authorization to Exercise Eminent Domain for the Acquisition of a Permanent Sewer and Temporary Construction Easement for the James River Trunk Sewer Project COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Staff requests the Board to authorize the County Attorney to exercise eminent domain for the acquisition of a permanent sewer and temporary construction easement across the property of Mancel W. and Betty S. Bradon, 10740 Cherokee Road, Tax Map 3-6 (2)B-7. The construction of this sewer is a County project and is necessary to relieve the over-committed capacity in the Michaux Creek Sewage Pumping Station. This sewer will also serve the schools at the Riverton site. BACKGROUND: On January 31, 1991, an offer of $3,264.00 was made by the Right of Way Section to the above owner for the purchase of a permanent sewer and temporary construction easement for the installation of a 36" sewer line. This offer has not been accepted and the owner has made a verbal counteroffer in the amount of $13,300.00. Since staff feels th~e~to~ J./~dward Beck, Jr. ATTACHMENTS: YES NO ~ Assistant Director of Utilities BOS-9891 SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMI N ISTRATOR 000150 Board Agenda June 26, 1991 Page 2 excessive, and since the contract for the installation of the sewer line has been awarded, it is necessary to proceed with eminent domain on an emergency basis for the health and safety of the public. Staff will continue to negotiate with the owner in an effort to reach a settlement. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board authorize the County Attorney to proceed with eminent domain on an emergency basis and exercise immediate right of entry pursuant to Section ]5.1-238.1 of the Code of Virginia, and that the County Administrator be instructed to notify the owner by certified mail on June 27, 1991, of the County's intention to take possession of the easement. DISTRICT: Midlothian 0001 ? · VICINITY SKETCH AUTHORIZATION TO EXERCISE EMINEN~DOMAIN FOR THEACQUISITION OF EASEMENTS FOR THE JAMES R~VER TRUNK SEWER PROJECT (PROJEC~ #88-0132 ) ~ICHMONO 20' SE~SR EASEMENT PROPOSED 20' SEWER EASEMENT PROPOSED 15' TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTS PLA T (~ LOT 6 15' TEMPORARY CONSTRUCT/ON EA SEMEN TS MANCEL IlK. BRADON BETSY S~. BRADON D.B. 974 PG. JJO LOT 7 BLOCK "B" HUGUENOT HUNDRED SEC T/ON "A " PROPOSED 20' SEWER EASEMENT PROPOSED 15' TEMPORARY CONSTRUCT/ON EASEMENTS PLA T (~ LOT 8 PLAT SHOI~IN~', SEI~R AND EASEMENTS ACROSS THE PROPERTY OF: ~A~C~ ~. ~A~O~ ~ ~E~SY s. ~~ON ,TAX PARCEL NO.: ~-6 (2~ B 7 MIDLO THIAN D/STRICT ~ t~ cox ~ No. 1039 ~ PREVIOUS JOB NO. TEIdPORAR Y CONSTRUCTION 711 N. COURTHOUSE RD. 8803 STAPLES MILL RD. 4411 CROSSINGS BL VD. DA TE: OCTOBER 17. 1990 DRAWN BY: B. MORRI$ON CHECKED BY: JOB NO.: 14242-5 RICHMOND, VA HENRICO CO., VA PRINCE GEORGE, VA. SCALE: 1"' ~= 50' CALC, CHK.: ,K',~E CHESTERFIELD COUNTY;, VIRGINIA PLA Ti I.{. ~'I.~MON'$ &: ASSOCIATES, ENGINEE}~ * ARQtIIY'ECT$ * SURVEYORS CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGE NDA MEETING DATE: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER; ll.F.3, f. SUBJECT: Authorization to Exercise Eminent Domain for the Acquisition of a Variable Width Sewer and Water and Temporary Construction Easement for the James River Trunk Sewer Project COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION Staff requests the Board to authorize the County Attorney to exercise eminent domain for the acquisition of a variable width sewer and water and temporary construction easement across the property of Richard C. McClain and Martha E. McClain, 4010 Old Gun Road East, Tax Map 3-5(1)17. The construction of this sewer is a County project and is necessary to ~relieve the over-committed capacity in the Michaux Creek Sewage Pumping Station. This sewer will also serve the schools at the Riverton site. BACKGROUND: On April 8, 1991, an offer of $500.00 was made by the Right of Way Section to the above owner for the purchase of variable width sewer and water and temporary construction easements for the James River Trunk Sewer Project. The owner has made a verbal counteroffer in the amount of $3,600.00. Since staff PREPARED BY; , ~. .... ~ J. Edward Beck, Jr. ATTACHMENTS: YES UI NO [] Assistant Director of Utilities BOS-9891 SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 000 . c, Board Agenda June 26, 199] Page 2 feels this offer to be excessive, and since the installation of the sewer line has been awarded, it is necessary to proceed with eminent domain on an emergency basis for the health and safety of the public. Staff will continue to negotiate with the owner in an effort to reach a settlement. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board authorize the County Attorney to proceed with eminent domain on an emergency basis and exercise immediate right of entry pursuant to Section 15.1-238.] of the Code of Virginia, and that the County Administrator be instructed to notify the owner by certified mail on June 27, 1991, of the County's intention to take possession of the easement. DISTRICT: Midlothian O001Sl VICINITY SKETCH AUTHORIZATION TO EXERCISE E~IN]giT DOMAIN FOR ~ ACQUISITION OF EASgM~NTS FOR T~E JAMES RIVER TRUNKSEWERpRoJECT (PROJECT %88-0132) N 0001~2 PROPOSED 5' VDOT VARIABLE ~O TH SE~ER & WA TER EASE~4ENT 5.91°__ PROPOSED 5' TENPORAR~ CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT RANDOLPH M. ALL£~V EXISTING 10' INGRESS - EGRESS~ EASEMENT .' PLA T SHOWING A VARIABLE WIDTH SEWER AND WA TER EASEMENT AND TEMPORARY GRADING AND CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT ACROSS THE PROPERTY OF: R/CHARD C. McCLAIN &~ MART HA E. McCLAIN TAX PARCEL NO.: .=-5 ~1) 17 MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT PREVIOUS JOB NO. CHESTERFIELD COUNT~, REVISED: JANUARY 25, 1991 VIRGINIA PLA T(~ J.I{. TIMI~ON~ & A$$OC£~TE$, P.C. ~lCGIAr~RS * Ai~TI~IT~CTS * SU~V~O~ 7~ N. COUR~OUSE RD. R~CH~OND, VA 8803 STAP~S ~/tk RD. HENR[CO CO., VA 4411 CROSS/NGS BL~. PRINCE GEORGE YA. oA TE.. OCTOBER 2S, 7990 SCAL~' ~'= 20' ORA~ aY.. 8. ~ORmSON , ~} ~) D 1 ~ ? CH~CKED 8~' ~ CALC- ~K.~ ~ JOB NO.: 14242--5 .£ SEWER &' WATER 1 EA SEMEN T TEMPORARY GRADING & CONSTRUCTION EA SEMEN T R/CHARD C. McCLA/N MARTHA E. McCLA/N D.B. 1704 PG. J12 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGE NDA MEETING DATE: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: ll.F.3.g. SUBJECT: Authorization to Exercise Eminent Domain for the Acquisition of Variable Width Sewer and Temporary Construction Easements and 15' Slope Easements for the James River Trunk Sewer Project COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION Staff requests the Board to authorize the County Attorney to exercise eminent domain for the acquisition of variable width sewer and temporary construction easements and 15' slope easements across the property of the Huguenot Hundred Community Association, 10761 Cherokee Road, Tax Map 3-6(1)3. The construction of this sewer is a County project and is necessary to ~relieve the over-committed capacity in the Michaux Creek Sewage Pumping Station. This sewer will also serve the schools at the Riverton site. BACKGROUND: On May 2, 199], an offer of $10,599.00 was made by the Right of Way Section to the above owner for the purchase of variable width sewer and temporary construction easements and 15' slope easements for the James River Trunk Sewer Project. Since this offer has not been accepted and no counteroffer has been made, PREPARED BY;. ~ ATTACHMENTS: YES''~// .0 [] ~slstant ~'~'ard Director~Ck'/Jr. of Utilities BOS-9891 $1GNAT URE: COUNTY ADMI ~TRATOR Board Agenda June 26, 1991 Page 2 and since the contract for the installation of the sewer line has been awarded, it is necessary to proceed with eminent domain on an emergency basis for the health and safety of the public. Staff will continue to negotiate with the owner in an effort to reach a settlement. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board authorize the County Attorney to proceed with eminent domain on an emergency basis and exercise immediate right of entry pursuant to Section 15.1-238.] of the Code of Virginia, and that the County Administrator be instructed to notify the owner by certified mail on June 27, 1991, of the County's intention to take possession of the easement. DISTRICT: Midlothian VICINITY AUT~ORIT. ATION TO RXFACISE ~INEFf DOMAIN FOR THE ACQUISITION OF EASEMENTS FOR THE JAMES RIVER TRUNK SEWER PROJECT (PROJECT %88-0132 } 000166 PLA T~ VA. PO BOA T ?'ION, /NC. PROPOSED T~PORAR Y BASEMEN SEWER 15' SLOPE EASEMENTS TEMPORARY TRUC' EASEMENTS EA HUGUENOT HUNDRED COMMUNI 7'7' ASSOCIA lION O.B. 1,347 PG. 760 VARIABLE WIDTH SEWER EASEMENT 10 ~ROPOSED 20' SEWER 15: LOT 215.00' EXISTING ,30' ROAD EA SEM E~I T RECORDA OF T SECTION '*A LOT 3 EXISTING 8' ALLEY EASEMENT ( RECORDA T/ON OF HUNDRED SECTION PROPOSED VARIABLE SEWER EASEME~IT LOT 5 HUGUENOT HUNDRED SEC nON "A " F-,YISTING ,,TO' DRAINA~ EASEMEN~T U77UTY (PER RECORDATION OF HUGUENOT HUNDRED SECTION "A / / / I I 1£4.11' TO THE LANE CHEROKEE, R/~OAD (EXISTING 66 PLAT SHOWING SEk~ER EASEMENTS, SLOPE EASEMENTS, AND, TEMPORARY CONSTRUC770N EASEMENTS A CROSS THE PROPERTY OF: HUGUENOT HUNDRED COMMUNITY ASSOCIA 770N ' TAX PARCEL NO.: .7-6 (1) .7 MIDLOTHIAN D/STRICT . CHESTERFIELD COUNT~, VIRGINIA TIMMON$ & ASSOCIATES, P. ~NGINEEP~ * AP~HI~'ECT~ * ~URV~YORS ~ )J' CO~[ ~'~' 711 N. COURTHOUSE' RD. RI~IdMONO, VA ~"'~' 880.? STAPLES MILL RD. HENRICO CO., VA 4411 CROSSINGS BLVD. PRINCE GEORGE', VA. DA T'E: OCTOBER 2.6, 1990 DRAWN BY,' Bo I~ORRISON CHECKED BY,' .~'-/¢f JO8 NO.: 14242--5 ROUTE NO. 704 PREVIOUS JOB NO. REVISED: APRIL 15, 1991 - ADDED STUB TO LOT 5 HUGUENOT HUNDRED CALC. CHK.: CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGE NDA MEETING DATE' June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER; ll.F.3.h. S[,JBJECT,: Authorization to Exercise Eminent Domain for the Acquisition of a Permanent Sewer and Temporary Construction Easement for the James River Trunk Sewer Project COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR,S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION Staff requests the Board to authorize the County Attorney to exercise eminent domain for the acquisition of a permanent sewer and temporary construction easement across the property of Overton E. Stafford and Phyllis S. Stafford, 10680 Cherokee Road, Tax Map 3-6(2)B-13. The construction of this sewer is a County project and is necessary to .relieve the over-committed capacity in the Michaux Creek Sewage Pumping Station. This sewer will also serve the schools at the Riverton site. BACKGROUND: On March 6, 1991, an offer of $3,146.00 was made by the Right of Way Section to the above owner for the purchase of a permanent sewer and temporary construction easement for the installation of a 36" sewer line. This offer has not been accepted and the owner has made a written counteroffer in the PREPARED BY; . ~~ AsSistant Director ATTACHMENTS: YES~p' NO [3 of Utilities BOS-9891 SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 00018,5 Board Agenda June 26, 1991 Page 2 amount of $7,500.00. Since staff feels this offer to be excessive, and since the contract for the installation of the sewer line has been awarded, it is necessary to proceed with eminent domain on an emergency basis for the health and safety of the public. Staff will continue to negotiate with the owner in an effort to reach a settlement. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board authorize the County Attorney to proceed with eminent domain on an emergency basis and exercise immediate right of entry pursuant to Section 15.1-238.1 of the Code of Virginia, and that the County Administrator be instructed to notify the owner by certified mail on June 27, 1991, of the County's intention to take possession of the easement. DISTRICT: Midlothian 0001 VICINITY SKETCH AUTHORIZATION TO E~RRCISE EMINENT DOMAIN FOR THE ACQUISITION OF EASEMENTS FORT HE TRUNK SEWERPROJECT ( #88-0132) YOUNG /? ~ICHMONO VICL£Gi~ O0017u ~ I \O.a..~5 P~. ~20 $ 8.~.'oe,/2,, £1 I ~,. 15 ~MPORAR Y ~ ~ ~ CONS~UC~ON~ EA SE~EN ~ ~ ~ ~' I ~ PROPOSED 20' SE~R ~ ~~~ ~ -~ ~ ~ ............. ~__ ~ 17' ............ ~--' ~~ ~ ~ ~ 2 LOT 7 ~f~J~, ~mam¢z. 2~ SE~R EASEMENT~/ ~ ~ ~ FARMS ~ D.B. 724 PG. 2~O ~ ,~- .. . ,~ PLA T ~ 0 ~R TON E STAFFORD ~ ~ ~ ~ O,B. ~09~ PC. 84 I ~ ~ ~ ~or l~ B~OC~ "~" ~ ~, ~ HUGUENOT HUNDRED ~ ~ I, ~ ~ SECnON "A~ ~ ~ ..-~ ~ _Z_ _~__ _~__-~ ~-~ ~ o. GO ...... 11"~RBY DRIVE EX?D. ~O~isSNG 66 OF 0 ( PLAT SHO~NG SE~R AND ~MPORARY CONS~UCEON EASEMEN~ ACROSS ~E PROPER~ 0~' O~RTON E. STAFFORD ~ PH~IS S. STA~ORD TAX PARCEL NO.: 3-6 (2) 8 1~ --- ZK TIM~ON~ k AS~OCIATE~, P.C. ENGIN~E~ ~ ~HITE~ ~  Zl ~ N. COUR ~OUSE RD. RICHMOND, VA No, 10~9 ~ 880J STAP~S ~1~ RD. HENRICO CO., VA ~,~4~ CROS$~Ng~ BL ~. ~R~NCE GEORGE, DRA~ B~' ~. MORRISON PRE~OUS dOB NO. dOB NO.: 14242--5 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: June 26, ]991 ITEM NUMBER: ll.F.3.i. SUB,JECT: Authorization to Exercise Eminent Domain for the Acquisition of a Permanent Sewer and Temporary Construction Easement for the James River Trunk Sewer Project COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Staff requests the Board to authorize the County Attorney to exercise eminent domain for the acquisition of a permanent sewer and temporary construction easement across the property of Michael A. Maglis and Suzanne S. Maglis, 10690 Cherokee Road, Tax Map 3-6(2)B-12. The construction of this sewer is a County project and is necessary to ~elieve the over-committed capacity in the Michaux Creek Sewage Pumping Station. This sewer will also serve the schools at the Riverton site. BACKGROUND: On April 4, 1991, an offer of $4,822.00 was made by the Right of Way Section to the above owner for the purchase of a permanent sewer and temporary construction easement for the installation of a 36" sewer line. Since this offer has not been accepted and no counteroffer has been made, and since the P~EPARED BY; '~ard Beck, Jr./~. ~ J. ATTACHMENTS: YES ¢ NO [] Assistant Director of Utilities BOS-9891 SIGNATURE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 00017;? Board Agenda June 26, 1991 Page 2 contract for the installation of the sewer line has been awarded, it is necessary to proceed with eminent domain on an emergency basis for the health and safety of the public. Staff will continue to negotiate with the owner in an effort to reach a settlement. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board authorize the County Attorney to proceed with eminent domain on an emergency basis and exercise immediate right of entry pursuant to Section ]5.1-238.1 of the Code of Virginia, and that the County Administrator be instructed to notify the owner by certified mail on June 27, 1991, of the County's intention to take possession of the easement. DISTRICT: Midlothian 000178 VICINITY SKETCH AUTHORIZATION TOEXERCISE EMINENT DOMAIN FORT HE ACQUISITION OF EASEMENTS FOR THE JAMES ( TRUNK SEWER PROJECT #88-0132) ~I¢#MONO YOUNG ~ICHNIONO ! 000174 15' TEMPI PROPOSED 20' SEWER CONSTRUCllON PROPOSED 15' TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTS PLA EXISTING 16' DRAINAGE PEREASEMENT RECORDATION OF HUGUENOT HUNDRED SECTION "A ") 20' SEWER E/ MICHAEL A. MA GALIS SUZANNE MA GALLS _~i~ I D.B. 1600 PG. 443 · 8'1 LOT 12 BLOCK "B" HUGUENOT HUNDRED I:~ I SECTION "A" PROPOSED 15' TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTS 'PROPOSED 20' SEWER EA SEt tEN T LOT 13 PLA T (~ Il. COX ~ 6Z 00' --S 89'11'25" W i R 90 CHEROKEE [ ROAO ~ · ..ROUTENO. 704 .K ~ '~ (EX~S~NC 66/R/W) ~_~ PRE~1OUS JOB NO. No. 1039 ,:~, 711 N. COUR TI'lOUSE RD. 8803 STAPLES MILL RD. 4411 CROSSINGS BL VD. DATE: OCTOBER 17,_1990 DRA~V BY: B. MORRISON CHECKED BY: /<'~'f~' JOB NO,: 14242-5 RICHMOND, VA HENRICO CO., VA PRINCE GEORGE SCALE: ~# ~ 50' CALC, CHK.: ,~'~ VA. ~, ,,r,, ~ ~ / L=Jg. 27 ~ ~_ ~.~ ~ ~o'oo'oo" _ I ~ ~ ~ TT=25.00 PLAT SHO~NG SE~R ANO ~MPORARY CONS~UCEON EASEMEN~ ACROSS ~E PROPER~ 0~' MI~AEL A, MAGAUS ~ EUZANNE S, MAGALIS TAX PARCEL NO,: ~-6 2 B 12 MIDLO~IAN DIS~ICT · CHES~RFIELD COUN~ ZRGINIA PLA T( ~I~ONE ~ ~NEOOI~EE, E~I~EE~ * ~I~ * ~0~ CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGE NDA MEETING DATE: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER; 13.F.3.j. ~UBJECT: Authorization to Exercise Eminent Domain for the Acquisition of a Permanent Sewer and Temporary Construction Easement for the James River Trunk Sewer Project COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION Staff requests the Board to authorize the County Attorney to exercise eminent domain for the acquisition of a permanent sewer and temporary construction easement across the property of Samuel C. Epes and Ruth B. Epes, 10700 Cherokee Road, Tax Map 3-6(2)B-11. The construction of this sewer is a County project and is necessary to .relieve the over-committed capacity in the Michaux Creek Sewage Pumping Station. This sewer will also serve the schools at the Riverton site. BACKGROUND: On March 6, 1991, an offer of $3,370.00 was made by the Right of Way Section to the above owner for the purchase of a permanent sewer and temporary construction easement for the installation of a 36" sewer line. This offer has not been accepted and the owner has made a verbal counteroffer in the amount of $10,000.00. Since staff feels this offer to be excessive, and since the contract for the installation of ATTACHMENTS: YES ~// NO [] crai~S.2 Bryant~ Assistant Director of Utilities BOS-9891 $1GNAT URE:, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 000172 Board Agenda June 26, 1991 Page 2 the sewer line has been awarded, it is necessary to proceed with eminent domain on an emergency basis for the health and safety of the public. Staff will continue to negotiate with the owner in an effort to reach a settlement. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board authorize the County Attorney to proceed with eminent domain on an emergency basis and exercise immediate right of entry pursuant to Section 15.1-238.1 of the Code of Virginia, and that the County Administrator be instructed to notify the owner by certified mail on June 27, 1991, of the County's intention to take possession of the easement. DISTRICT: Midlothian 000 t 7'2 VICINITY SKETCH AUTHO~ZATION~ EXERCISE EMINENT EASEMENTS FORT HE JAMES RIVERTRUNKSEWERPROJECT ( #88-0132) PROPOSED 20° SEWER SE~YER PROPOSED 20' SEIkE'R PROPOSED 15' TEMPORARY CONSTRUCT/ON EASEMENTS PLA T(~ 1 LOT 10 R/W-- 15' TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTS SAMUEL C. EPEE RUTH B. EPEE D.B. 904 PG. 6,34 LOT 11 BLOCK HUGUENOT HU,~.i?,,RED SECTION "A " 150. 00' ~S 89'71 '25" CHEROKEE ROAD ROUTE NO. 704 (ex~ST/N¢ 66' R/W) 15' TETMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASF__ME~TS PLA T (~ LOT 12 'I EXISTING 16' DRAINAGE EASEMENT (PER RECORDATION OF HUC, UENOT HUNDRED SECTION 'A ') 67. 00' -- ~, 89'71'25' VY PLAT SHOWING SEWER AND ~ ~. COZ N~. tO3g PRE~4OUS JOB NO. TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTS ACROSS THE PROPERTY OF': SAMUEL C. EPEE &: RUTH B. EPEE TAX PARCEL NO.: $-6 {2) B 11 MIDLOTHIAN D/STRICT . CHESTERFTELD COUNTY, VIRGINIA PLA T( I'I~J~ON'$ &: ASSOCIATES, BI~'~INBBRE * ~RC}IIT~T$ . 6'~RV~YOi~9 711 N. COURTHOUSE RD. 8803 ST~PI. ES MILL RD. 4411 CROSSINGS BLVD. DATE: OCTOBER 17. 1990 DRAin~ B~ B. k/ORR/SON CHECKED BY: /~,v~C JO8 NO.: 14242-5 RICHMOND, VA HENRICO CO., VA PRINCE GEORGE, VA. SCALE: 1" -, 50' CALC. CHK.: ~'x~,fd~ CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: 13.F.3.k. SUBJECT: Authorization to Exercise Eminent Domain for the Acquisition of a Permanent Sewer and Temporary Construction Easement for the James River Trunk Sewer Project COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION Staff requests the Board to authorize the County Attorney to exercise eminent domain for the acquisition of a permanent sewer and temporary construction easement across the property of George W. St. Clair and M. Carol Y. St. Clair, 10720 Cherokee Road, Tax Map 3-6(2)B-9. The construction of this sewer is a County project and is necessary to relieve the over-committed capacity in the Michaux Creek Sewage Pumping Station. This sewer will also serve the schools at the Riverton site. BACKGROUND: On February 2, 1991, an offer of $2,813.00 was made by the Right of Way Section to the above owner for the purchase of a permanent sewer and temporary construction easement for the installation of a 36" sewer line. Since this offer has not been accepted and no counteroffer has been made, and since the PREPARED BY;., ' J..~%~rd Beck, Jr. Assistant Director ATTACHMENTS: YES NO [] of Utilities BOS-9891 SIGNATURE: C OUNTY~~A MI N I ST R ATOR Board Agenda June 26, 1991 Page 2 contract for the installation of the sewer line has been awarded, it is necessary to proceed with eminent domain on an emergency basis for the health and safety of the public. Staff will continue to negotiate with the owner in an effort to reach a settlement. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board authorize the County Attorney to proceed with eminent domain on an emergency basis and exercise immediate right of entry pursuant to Section 15.1-238.1 of the Code of Virginia, and that the County Administrator be instructed to notify the owner by certified mail on June 27, 199], of the County's intention to take possession of the easement. DISTRICT: Midlothian 000!8i VICINITY SKETCH AbT~ORIZATIONTO~.KCISEE~N~T EASEMENTS FOR THE JAMES RIVER TRUNK SEWER PROJECT (PROJE~ #88-0132) YOUNG RICHMOND 000182 PROPO'SED 20' EA SEMEN T SEWER EASEMENT S 89'56'51" 24. 52 E PROPOSED 15' TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTS PROPOSED TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTS 15' TEMPORARY CONS1RUC TIOI~ EA SEMEN TS GEORGE 141.&r ST. CLAIR PROPOSED 20' SE~/ER EASEMENT LOT 10 PLAT~ PLA T~ M. CAROL Y. ST. CLAIR D.B. 2110 PG. 1,3 LOT 8 I LOT 9 BLOCK "B" [~ % HUGUENOT HUNDRED SEC TI ON "A " 6RoK66 o, EXISTING 16' DRAINAGE EASEMENT (PER RECORDA llON OF HUGUENOT HUNDRED SECTION 'A ') 584,84' TO THE EASE LINE OF DARBY oRIVE EXT'D. PLAT SHOHSNG SEWER AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCIION EASEMENTS ACROSS THE PROPERTY OF: GEORGE W. ST. CLAIR ~ M. CAROL Y, ST. CLAIR TAX PARCEL NO.: ,7-6 2 B 9 KENNETH K COX MIDLOTHIAN D/STRICT * CHESTERFIELD COUNTY;, VIRGINIA PLA T( K. TIMMON$ & ASSOCIATES, P. ENGINEERE * AI~CHITECTS * SURVEYORE No. 1039 PREVIOUS JOB NO. ~ 711 N. COURTHOUSE RD. RICHMOND, VA ~"~' $80,3 STAPLES MILL RD. HENRICO CO., VA 4411 CROSSINGS BLVD. PRINCE GEORGE, VA. DATE: OCTOBER 17, 1990 SCALE: 1' = 50' DRAWN BY: B. MORRISQN CHECKED BY: JOB NO.: 14242-5 CALC. CHK.: CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE' June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: 13.F.3.1. SUBJECT: Authorization to Exercise Eminent Domain for the Acquisition of a Permanent Sewer and Temporary Construction Easement for the James River Trunk Sewer Project COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION Staff requests the Board to authorize the County Attorney to exercise eminent domain for the acquisition of a permanent sewer and temporary construction easement across the property of Richard H. Youngblood, Jr. and Judy D. Youngblood, 10730 Cherokee Road, Tax Map 3-6(2)B-8. The construction of this sewer is a County project and is necessary to relieve the over-committed capacity in the Michaux Creek Sewage Pumping Station. This sewer will also serve the schools at the Riverton site. BACKGROUND: On January 31, 199], an offer of $3,264.00 was made by the Right of Way Section to the above owner for the purchase of a permanent sewer and temporary construction easement for the installation of a 36" sewer line. Since this offer has not ~ been accepted and no counteroffer has been made, and since the contract for the installation of the sewer PREPARED BY; , // '~ / J./_/ward Bec/k, Jr. As§istant Director ATTACHMENTS: YES NO D ofUtilities BOS-9891 SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMI NISTRATOR 000184 Bo'ard Agenda June 26, 1991 Page 2 awarded, it is necessary to proceed with eminent domain on an emergency basis for the health and safety of the public. Staff will continue to negotiate with the owner in an effort to reach a settlement. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board authorize the County Attorney to proceed with eminent domain on an emergency basis and exercise immediate right of entry pursuant to Section 15.1-238.1 of the Code of Virginia, and that the County Administrator be instructed to notify the owner by certified mail on June 27, 1991, of the County's intention to take possession of the easement. DISTRICT: Midlothian 000185 VICINITY SKETCH AUTHORIZATION EASEMENTS FOR THE JAMES RIVER TRUNK SEWER PROJECT (PROJET %88-0132) YOUNG ,,/ O00iSG PROF~OSEO 20' SE~ER -- EA SEMEN T 20° SE~CER EA~ PROPOSED 20' EA SEMEN T PROPOSED 15' CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTS PLA T (~ LOT ? 15' TEMPORARy CONSTRUCTION EA SEMEN TS RICHARD H. YOUNGBLOOD, JUDY D. YOUNOBLOOD D.B. 1174 PG. 626 LOT 8 BLOCK "B" HUGUENOT HUNDRED SEC TI ON "A " JR. '..PROPOSED 15' TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTS PLA T ~ LOT 9 ,( ). PLAT SHOWING SEWER AND TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENTS ACROSS THE PROPERTY OF: RICHARD H. YOUNGBLOOD, JR. ,~ JUDY D. YOUNGBLOOD .TAX PARCEL NO.: ,7-6 ~2) B 8 i~ C0X No. 1039 MIDLO THIAN D/STRICT PREVIOUS JOB NO. CHESTERFIELD COUNTT:, VIRGINIA PLA T~ TIlt~MON$ & .4550CI.,4~'E$, ENGINEERE * AI~CHITECT$ * SURVEYORE 711 N. COURTHOUSE RD. 8803 STAPLES MILL RD. 4411 CROSSINGS BLVD. DATE: OCTOBER 17, t990 DRAI'YN BY: B. MORRISON CHECKED BY: t~'/ ~ JOB NO.: 14242-5 RICHMOND, VA HENRICO CO., VA PRINCE GEORGE, VA. SCALE: 1" = 50' CALC. CHK.: CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGE NDA MEETING DATE: June 26, ]991 ITEM NUMBER: ll.F.4.a. ,~UBJECT: Approval of a Change Order for the Engineering Contract for the Proctors Creek WWTP Expansion (Project ~880163E) with R. Stuart Royer and Associates. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR,S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This project includes a pipeline from the plant site to the James River to discharge treated wastewater. After,design of the pipeline was underway the Corps of Engineers rejected the alignment due to minor disruption of wetlands. A new' alignment has been selected which is acceptable to the Corps of Engineers. The cost of additional design services associated with relocation of the pipeline is $]0,750.00. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board approve the change order for engineering services and authorize the County Administrator to execute the necessary documents. BOS-9891 ATTACHMENTS: YES r-I NO ~' SIGNATURE: Craig S. Bryant Assistant Director of Utilities COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 000 ]i 8 CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGE NDA MEETING DATE: June :2.6.. 1991 I'TEM NUMBER:, ll.F.4.b. SUBJECT: Request to Quitclaim a 16' Drainage Easement Across Property Owned by Whitlow Properties, Inc. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Whitlow Properties, Inc., has requested the quitclaim of a 16' drainage easement across its property adjacent to Moorefield Park Drive. This easement is no longer needed, due to the dedication of a new easement. This request has been reviewed by staff and approval is recommended. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board authorize the Chairman of the Board and County Administrator to execute a quitclaim deed to vacate a 16' drainage easement across property owned by Whitlow Properties, adjacent to Moorefield Park Drive. DISTRICT: Midlothian ATTACHMENTS: YES ~ NO [] Willis W. Pope, Manager Right of Way Division Department of Utilities SIGNATURE: C~NI I NI STRATOR 000188 BOS-9891 VICINITY SKETCH ~U~,AZ~ A ~6' DRAiNAgE ~AS~w,,q, A~ROSS ~RO~RTY 'NED BY WHITLOW PROPERTIES,.INC. N 000190 ' PLAT SHOWlNO 16' DRAINAGE EASEMENT TO BE VACATED ACROSS WHITLOW PROPERTIES, INC, CORPORATION I ~ /~' ' ~0 L E:XISTING 16' · D.B. 1638 F~ 268 E-25 ENGINEERS * ARCHI~CTS · SUR~Y~S DI~'ll~CT s CHEs'fERREI.D CO~INTY. VIRGINIA TAX MAP ~. 17-12 (1,) PT. 31 PREVIOUS JOB NO. 711 N. COURTHOUSE RD. 8803 STAPLES MILL RD. 4411 CROSSINGS BLVD. DATE: 12-27-89 SCALE: 1"=I00' DRAWN BY: D.J.F. CHECKED BY: CALC. CHK.: · JOB NO.: 62650 RICHMOND, VA HENRICO CO., VA~ PRINCE GEORGE, VA CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA June 26, 1991 MEETING DATE: ITEM NUMBER: ll.F.4.c. SUBJECT: Acceptance of a Parcel of Land along Coxendale Road from Virginia Electric and Power Company COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Staff requests the Board to accept the conveyance of a 0.27 acre parcel of land along Coxendale Road from Virginia Electric and Power Company, and to authorize the County Administrator to execute the necessary deed. BACKGROUND: It is the policy of the County to acquire right of way whenever possible through development to meet the ultimate road width as shown on the County Thoroughfare Plan. The dedication of this parcel conforms to that plan. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board accept the conveyance of this parcel and authorize the County Administrator to execute the necessary deed. DISTRICT: Bermuda. ATTACHMENTS: YES la NO [] Willis W. pope, Manager Right of Way Division Department of Utilities SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADM I N! STRATOR 000192 BOS-9891 ACCEPTANCE OF A PARCEL OF LAND ALONG COXENDALE ROAD FRON'4/IROINIA,,ELECTRIC AND POW~'~COMPANY N 0001C~ ROD 6~d.) VIt?GINIA EI EC Tt?IC AND POWER COMPANY D.B, 999 PG. 4~1 T.M. 99-6-7-1 STt~P TO ~E O~ICA I~-~ ~--~ TO ~ COONTY OF C~ ct~s T£RF~-~ O (O. SF AC.I $5' STRIP OF LAND TO BE DEDICA TED TO THE COUNTY OF CHESTEHF~'LD BERI~JDA DISTHICT~ CHESTERFIELD COUIVT~ Vt~G6~4 BENGTSON, DeBELL, ELKIN ~ TITUS, LTD. CONSULTING ENGINEERS, SURVEYOR$~ PLANNERS & LANOSCAPE ARCHITECTS I' = ~0' 001 4 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGE NDA June 26, 1991 ll.F.4.d. MEETINGDATE: ITEM NUMBER: SUBJECT: Approval of Water Contract for Belmont Road Water Line Extension - Faris Property - Project Number 91-0083 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION Staff requests that the Board approve the contract for 91-0083, Belmont Road Water Line Extension - Faris Property. BACKGROUND: This project includes 355 L.F.± of 16" water line extension where 300'± of the project is offsite. The developer is required to have an 8" water line to serve his development, therefore, staff has requested the water lines be oversized to provide service to the adjoining properties. ATTACHMENTS: YES [] NO [] PREPARED BY; ,.., ~'_//z ,;./~...~,. ~ , ~. E. Beck, Jr. LASsistant Director of Utilities SIGNATURE: COU~I NI ST RATER Agenda Item June 26, 1991 Page 2 Developer: Contractor: Thomas L. and Virgie C. Faris Bookman Construction Company Contract Amount: Total Estimated County Cost: Water (Oversizing) (Cash Refund) Water (Offsite) (Refund thru connections) Estimated Developer Cost: Code: (Oversizing) (Offsite) Estimated Total - $]0,242.50 $ 6,769.80 $ 1,927.00 $ 1,545.70 5H-57240-898200E 5H-58350-890731E RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board approve this contract and authorize the County Administrator to execute any necessary documents. DISTRICT: Dale 0003_96 PROJECT # 91-0083 BELMONT ROAD WATER LINE EXTENSION - FARIS PROPERTY 000197 CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: ll.F.5 SUB4ECT: 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: Contract Number: Project Name: Developer: Co~tractor: Contract Amount: District: 90-0500 Otterdale, Section E Otterdale Development Corporation James River Excavating, Inc. Water - $28,973.00 Sewer - $63,520.00 Midlothian Contract Number: Project Name: Developer: Contractor: Contract Amount: District: ATTACHMENTS: YES [] 89-0166 Gilritchie - Remainder Gilritchie, Inc. William M. Harmon Contractors Water - $32,973.00 Sewer - $57,212.84 Matoaca PREPARED BY~ ,'~.,/ ~... Be'd~i Jr. ASsistant Director of Utilities SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMINI STRATOR 000!gd CHESTERFI ELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA REPORTS MEETING DATE: June 26, 1991 ll.G.1 REPORT ON: Status of General Fund Contingency Account, General Fund Balance, Reserve for Future Capital Projects, District Road and Street Light Funds, Lease Purchases and School Board Agenda ATTACH MENTS: NO [] SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR CHESTERFIELD COUNTY STATUS OF GENERAL FUND CONTINGENCY ACCOUNT June 19, 1991 Date 07/01/90 07/01/90 07/25/90 08/22/90 10/10/90 01/23/91 Department/Description Original FY91 Budget Appropriation Increase in VACO membership dues Condemnation settlement for flood easement Consulting services for Committee on the Future to provide long-range strategic plan Fully fund Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act Partial funding for con- sulting services for consideration of alter- natives for school programming and scheduling Amount 11,460 3,523 32,500 8,950 43,567 Balance $100,000 88,540 85,017 52,517 43,567 0 conting Board Meeting Date 07/01/90 11/90 07/90 01/23/91 03/13/91 03/13/91 Ct{ESTERFIELD COUNTY GENERAL FUND BALANCE June 19, 1991 Description FY91 Budgeted Beginning Fund Balance Difference in audited and budgeted figure for FY91 beginning fund balance Sale of SCAN Center property Balance of funding for consulting services for consideration of alternatives for school programming and scheduling Loan to Bensley Volun- teer Fire Dept. to purchase capital Loan to Clover Hill Vol- unteer Fire Dept. to purchase capital Amount (4,256,613) 1,500,000 ( 31,433) (110,000) ( 50,O0O) Balance $16,800,000 12,543,387 14,043,387 14,011,954 13,901,954 13,851,954 gfbal Board Meeting Date 11/22/89 12/13/89 06/30/90 06/13/90 06/27/90 06/27/90 12/12/90 06/30/91 03/13/91 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY RESERVE FOR FUTURE CAPITAL PROJECTS TRADITIONALLY FUNDED BY DEBT June 19, 1991 Description FY89 Excess revenue FY90 Budgeted addition Designation from June 30, 1989 Fund Balance Purchase of land-Cogbill Road Purchase building at 6701 West Krause Road Budgeted addition of excess revenue Purchase medical building for future library site Funds to purchase land for park on Lake Chesdin Budgeted but not appropriated funds to purchase land for school and park sites Fill dirt for cover repair at Fort Darling Landfill Budgeted addition from FY91 revenues* Designated but not appropriated funds to cover construction contract for MH/MR/SA building if bonds are not sold in fall, 1991 Amount $2,119,900 1,881,500 Balance $2,119,900 4,001,400 1,500,000 5,501,400 ( 630,000) 4,871,400 ( 400,000) 4,471,400 2,100,000 6,571,400 ( 735,000) 5,836,400 ( 600,000) 5,236,400 (2,000,000) 3,236,400 ( 180,000) 3,056,400 4,000,000 (1,806,800) 7,056,400 5,249,600 * The FY91 Budget calls for the addition of $4,000,000 from FY91 revenues. Note: The FY91 Budget also called for the addition of $750,000 in revenue from State Recordation Tax. At this time, it appears that the revenue will not be received. rfcip O00kO~ 0 (""q I.~ 0 LO (30 0 0 (D 0 o o o o o o o o o o o o o 0 0 0 L.~ 0 ~ 0 U~ 0 ~ U~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 kO LC) LO LID 0 ~0 ~0 I O~ 0 Prepared by Accounting Department May 31, 1991 SCHEDULE OF CAPITALIZED LEASE PURCHASES Date Lease Purchase Began Description Original Date Lease Lease Purchase Purchase Amount Ends Outstanding Balance 5/31/91 12/83 10/84 APPROVED AND EXECUTED Copiers 800 MHz System Accounting System 30,500 2,888,682 ~50,000 3,138,682 8/92 10/91 8,642 136,533 %1,872 148,405 12/86 7/87 7/87 10/87 Mobile Radios Police Automatic Call Distributors Leaf Pickup Equipment Copiers Airport Fuel Truck Airport Mowing Equipment School Vehicles School Telecommunications Equipment Jail Addition Data Processing, Human Services, Courts Building 745,320 189,897 203,114 19,277 21,682 9,989 1,189,279 259,500 239,046 245,385 1,839,219 4,489,377 16,796,019 23,370,000 6/91 6/92 7/92 12/01 84,439 21,514 23,011 2,184 2,456 1,132 134,736 54,770 64,474 204,750 1,534,650 3,745,950 14,014,650 19,500,000 000 04 Date Lease Purchase Began DescripTions Original Lease Purchase Amount Date Lease Purchase Ends Outstanding Balance 5/31/91 6/88 10/88 11/88 12/88 3/89 8/89 12/89 10/90 800 MHz Equip. Rescue Squads 800 MMz Equip. Sheriff Fire Pumpers Fire StationApparatus and Furnishings A T & T Phone Equip. Filing System- Treasurer (Unallocated) School Copier School Equipment Airport State Police Hangar Additions and County Warehouse Geographic Information System ("GIS") - Automated Mapping System Data Processing Equipment Data Processing Equipment Mental Health, Mental Retardation and Substance Abuse Computer Equipment TOTAL APPROVED AND EXECUTED $ 85,000 140,000 264,000 1,428,000 946,400 40,000 83,600 2,987,000 21,600 1,080,000 128,800 331.200 460,000 3,095,000 183,430 2,015,570 96,500 $38,166,107 6/93 9/93 7/91 12/00 1/98 8/92 1/95 7/93 $ 37,266 61,094 115,459 326,168 400,739 11,825 0 952,551 11,684 196,214 110,397 28~,877 394,274 3,095,000 76,205 1,527,341 80,%96 $26,244,492 PENDING APPROVAL AND/OR EXECUTION None CHESTERFIELD COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOL CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA School Administration Building 9900 Krause Road Chesterfield, Virginia 23832 SCHOOL BOARD HEMBERS Mrs. Jean Copeland-Chairman, Matoaca William H. Goodwyn, Jr.-Vice Chairman, Bermuda Timothy Carter Brown, Midlothian John A. Cardea, M.D., Clover Hill Elizabeth B. Davis, Dale E.E. (Gene) Davis, Ed.D., Division Superintendent June 25, 1991 7:30 p.m. RECEPTION HONORING MR. WILLIAM H. GOODWYN, JR. ~:30 P.M. Fe AGENDA REGULAR MEETING OF THE SCHOOL BOARD 7:30 p.m. Call to Order, Roll Call, Flag Salute - Mrs. Copeland presiding Cub Scout Pack 874 ' Acceptance of Minutes June 11, 1991 (Regular Meeting) Agenda Approval Awards and Recognitions Superintendent's Report #231 Capital Projects Status Report #232 Monthly Financial Report for May, 1991 #233 May lgg] Enrollment Update Action Items 1. Consent Agenda Human Resource~ #234 Recommended Personnel Action for 1990-91 O0020G Operations ~nd Financ~ #225 Approval of Regulation 711.1 on Student Housing Alternatives #229 Authorization for Daily Use of the Channel One News Program Provided by Whittle Communications Educational Network Instruction Ge #235 Elementary Spelling Program Non-Agenda Items Discussion Agenda. agenda items (No public testimony will be accepted on discussion #230 Overcrowding Study Final Report and Recommendations Announcements, Communications, School Board Comments Executive Session (personnel, legal, land/property acquisition) Adjournment General Information The Chesterfield School Board meets on the second and fourth Tuesday of each month with the exception of July when it meets on the second Tuesday, August when it meets on the fourth Tuesday, November when it meets on the second Tuesday, and December when it meets on the second Tuesday. The first meeting of each month begins at 5:00 p.m. with routine business, operations, and personnel actions of the Board. Beginning at 7:30 p.m., policy and other issues requiring and/or permitting public testimony will be considered by the Board. The second meeting of the month begins at 7:30 p.m. All meetings are open to the public and are held in the Board Room of the School Administration Building, ggo0 Krause Road, Chesterfield, Virginia. If the place or time is changed, the public will be notified. Following is the procedure by which the public may speak before the School Board at any of the above meetings: 1. Persons wishing to be heard on action items must notify the Superintendent's Office by 2:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting. 2. Persons who have requested to offer public testimony will be heard when each item is considered. 3. Persons to be heard on non-agenda items will be heard during the specified section of the meeting. 4. It is requested that an individual conduct his/her presentation in 000207 three minutes; representatives of a group may speak for five minutes. Public delegations. Public delegations or their representatives are required to submit in writing their request for hearing and their proposals to the Division Superintendent at least five days prior to the meeting at which they wish to be heard. 3 00020 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA REPORTS MEETING DATE: ,Tl11'1 p_ ~; lqql ll.G.2. REPORT ON: Roads Accepted into the State Secondary System ATTACHMENTs: YES ~'/ NO D SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 000200 RAY D. PETHTEL COMMISSIONER COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1401 EAST BROAD STREET RICHMOND, 23219 June 10, 1991 Secondary System Addition Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors County of Chesterfield P. O. Box 40 Chesterfield, VA 23832 MEMBERS OF THE BOARD: As requested in your resolution dated January 9, 1991, the following addition to the Secondary System of Chesterfield County is hereby approved, effective June 6, 1991. ADDITION LENGTH GRAYFIELD PLACE, SECTION THREE Route 4930 (Stoney Creek Parkway) - From Route 144 to 0.39 mile Northwest Route 144 0.39 Mi Sincerely, issioner TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY 0002.i0 RAY D. PETHTEL COMMISSIONER COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1401 EAST BROAD STREET RICHMOND, 23219 June 4, 1991 Secondary System Additions Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors County of Chesterfield P. O. Box 40 Chesterfield, VA 23832 MEMBERS OF THE BOARD: As requested in your resolution dated January 9, 1991, the following additions to the Secondary System of Chesterfield County are hereby approved, effective June 4, 1991. ADDITIONS LENGTH RIDGE POINT Route 4310 (Ridge Point Drive) - From Route 3600 to 0.19 mile East Route 3600 0.19 Mi Route 4311 (Ridge Point Road) - From Route 4310 to 0.09 mile South Route 4310 0.09 Mi Route 4312 (Ridge Point Court) - From Route 4310 to 0.08 mile Northwest Route 4310 0.08 Mi Sincerely, Commissioner TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY RAY D. PETHTEL COMMISSIONER COMMONWEALTH of VIRQINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1401 EAST BROAD STREET RICHMOND, 23219 June 13, 1991 Secondary System Additions Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors County of Chesterfield P. O. Box 40 Chesterfield, VA 23832 MEMBERS OF THE BOARD: As requested in your resolution dated February 13, 1991, the following additions to the Secondary System of Chesterfield County are hereby approved, effective June 13, 1991. ADDITIONS LENGTH SALISBURY, LEAFIELD Route 1039 (Grangewood Road) - From 0.07 mile West Route 1038 to 0.19 mile West Route 1038 Route 3795 (Leafield Terrace) - From Route 714 to 0.29 mile Southeast Route 714 0.12 Mi 0.29 Mi Sincerely, D. Pethtel issioner TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY 0002 .2 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA MEETING DATE' SUBJECT: June 26, 1991 ITEM NUMBER: ll.H Presentation of Annual Report of Chesterfield Committee On The Future COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION' The Committee on the Future will provide the Board with a presentation of the Executive Summary of the 1990 Vision 2020 Report at 12:00. Committee members will be present to answer questions. Attached is a draft copy of the Committee's 1990 Vision 2020 Report. ATTACHMENTS: YES ~// NO E] PREPARED BY; _ ~F~/'/~,~r' /~Dirs d L. stegmaier, q~' D' ector, Budget & Management SIGNATURE: COUNTY ADM I N! STRATOR O002j P. O. Box40 · Chesterfield, Virginia 23832-0040 * 748-1548/Fax748-1006 June 26, 1991 The Honorable Members of the Board of Supervisors Chesterfield County Chesterfield, Virginia 23832 A. PAUL COX, JR. Chairman MARCIA T. CRANDALL Vice-Chairman Bermuda Distn'ct READE SHOOK HARLEY E. YOUNG Clover Hill District BALLARD R. PARKER, III Dale District JOSEPH L. BIGGS NANCY HUDSON Matoaca Distdct J. RUFFIN APPERSON FREDDIE W. NICHOLAS, SR. Dear Members of the Board: Midlothian District E. WILSON GARNETT This initial report from the Chesterfield County Committee on the Future is a result of the work of a large number of citizens of Chesterfield and the surrounding region. As such, it embodles more than the vlsions of any particular special Interests. It is a unanimous presentation of the Committee. The Committee on the Future is a creation of the County Charter. From the beginning, the Commtttee sought to define its role as a futuristic but pragmatic solution-finding group. It has reslsted the temptation to defile solutions to the "problem du jour." The success of these solutions contained il this report begins with initiating them. The Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County has a unique opportunity, as the Committee on the Future has had, to advance a vislon of the County's future that the community will anticipate with excitement and prlde. Others have gone before us il attempting to vlew the future and to define needed optlons and actions. In many cases, our findings and solutions parallel these studies. The Committee feels strongly that the Board must not fail to heed the direction set il this document. Agreement on thls direction ls not enough to guarantee success. Action ls required--action that must be clearly articulated to the publlc and soon begun. The public, il the United States, has become apathetic to an alarming degree toward their governmenm. As the Committee formed thls document, one could sense a dlminution of that feeling on the part of the participants, not because of lack of reallty, but because, woven though the fabric of solutions, was an appreciation for the value of participation and responsibility for one's actions. This generated a renewal, ffyou will, of support and hope for our government to perform the duties the public wants and not those of special interest groups. The Committee on the Future ls counting on the Board to help keep that support and hope alive. The Committee on the Future respectfully submits this report to the Chesterfleld County Board of Supervisors. Sincerely, ^. Paul Cox, ,Jr. Chairman Charting the Future O002.Z PREFACE The 1990 edition of VISION 2020 is a product of the Chesterfield County Committee on the Future, a citizen group appointed by the Board of Supervisors and charged with creating a long-range vlslon for Chesterfield County. Thc purpose ofthls report, and of subsequent reports, is to involve citizens directly in the future of their community, identifying opportunities and problems confronting the County now and in the future. While VISION 2020 is a recommendation of the Committee on the Future, it is a synthesis as well. The Committee sought - through focus groups, leadership retreats and individual interviews - the input of a wide range of citizens from both County and region. All of the information and data collection for thls edition of VISION 2020 centered around four topical areas: Education, Natural Environment, Transportation and Government Structure. These four areas served as a frame of reference for citizen input, and the Committee has synthesized the information into its recommen- dations for action. Dichotomies did surface In planning sessions, but the need for change remained constant. Issues such as cost, waste, and redundancy permeated the four topics. The need for increased public participation and simplification of issues was heard time and time again. The Executive Summary cites specific calls to action including: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. The expansion of regional efforts and service delivery, increased partnerships between business and education, with emphasis on technology and goal orientation, Creation of a network of Neighborhood Councils to increase public participation and awareness, A truly comprehensive land use plan that factors In such issues as cost/benefit analyses, early input from competing interests, land-banking, and stronger enforcement, Prlvatlzation of services and public/private sector partnerships where appropriate, Accountability of government with mechanisms to assure same, and, The need to begin NOW. While burgeoning growth has changed the visage of Chesterfield County irrevocably, there is time to turn growth into opportunity. There Is, however, a growing realization across the County that fraction is not taken soon, the County wlll be confronted with problems It can ill afford to handle. The recommendations of the Committee on the Future, delineated throughout this report, deserve serious and immediate attention. If implemented, they will help ensure that Chesterfield remains a viable, attractive and livable community, fully ready to meet the challenges of the future. The Executive Summary ls intended as an overview of the 1990 process. All of the information collected, analyzed and synthesized ls contained in a separate document referred to as the Source Document. To obtaln a copy of the Source Document, please contact the Chesterfield County Office of Budget & Management, Post Office Box 40, Chesterfield, Virginia 23832; (804) 748-1548. While many individuals participated in the 1990 vision planning effort, the Chesterfield County Committee on the Future assumes full responsibility for the contents of this report. 000210 INTRODUCTION In the face of unabated, rapid population growth during the past two decades, Chesterfleld's County Charter, adopted In 1987, reflected a need for long-range planning that would go beyond the mechanisms and scope tradition- ally used in community planning efforts. The drafters of the County Charter also ~aw the need to involve citizens in the long-range shaping of their community. The County Charter, under Section 7.5, rec- ommended the creation of the Chesterfield County Committee on the Future as a perma- nent body with equal representation from the County's five magisterial districts. The 10- member Committee (2 from each district), ap- pointed by the County Board of Supervisors in September 1988, has been meeting on a regu- lar basis since. An important purpose statement adopted early by the Committee, underpinning its mt-sslon "to expand thinklng beyond present-day lim- itations,' clearly plvots the Committee toward more visionary work in concert with Its char- tered mission, rather than toward addressing current-daylssues facingthe County. Follow- lng the intent of the Charter, the Board of Supervisors asked the Committee to view the future in terms of a time horizon of 20 to 30 years. As the following diagram shows, it ls impor- tant to know where the county, as a commu- nity, wants to be in the year 2020. It is the Committee's mission to define where the county can be in the future and recommend implem- entation of strategic action plans that will ensure that Chesterfield County reaches that vision. Where We Are Where We Want Impacting the Future Where We Are Going 000216 DEVELOPMENT PERSPECTIVE ON CHESTERFIELD COUNTY Growth of the County was a concern of the Committee's initial deliberations. The County's population nearly doubled during the 1970s to just over 141,300 In 1980, and then in- creased by nearly 68,000 persons or by 48 percent to over 209,200 In 1990. Assuming a moderate (two percent) rate of Increase annu- ally over the next 30 years, the County's popu- lation ts projected to Increase by 145,200 persons, reaching a level of 354,535 by the year 2020. o Population Projections Chesterfield County, Virginia lOO o 198o 1990 2000 ~010 To accommodate 145,000 new residents would require an addltion of 102,300 new dwelling units to the County's estimated current hous- ing stock of 80,535 units. By 2020, the County's housing stock would contain over 182,800 units. The County's employment base over the next 30 years is projected to nearly double, growing by 69,200 jobs from a base of 70,600 jobs In 1989, to 139,800Jobs by theyear 2020. If Chesterfield County contInues to develop at relatively low densities as it has in the past, over 82,550 additional acres will be needed to accommodate the population and employment base that is projected for the County over the next 30 years. In 1990, 200,572 acres, or 70 percent of the County's 285,702 total acres, were vacant. By the year 2020, 118,000 acres, or 41 percent of the County's total land area, will remaIn vacant. o The amount of developed land will grow from 85,100 acres in 1990 to nearly 167,700 acres, or 59 percent of total County land area, by 2020. Of the 82,550 acres needed, residen- tial land uses will consume the great- est amount of vacant land, occupying an additional 55,700 acres; industrial, conunerclal and miscellaneous land uses vall consume an additional 21,700 acres; while public and semi-public land uses would require an additional 5,100 acres, by the year 2020. 417,200 354,535 304,700 Low Growth Moderate Growth High Growth By 2020, a total of 103,200 acres will be under residential uses; 42,100 acres under Industrial, commercial and miscellaneous uses; and 19,900 acres under public and semi-public land uses. The Committee recognized that dramatic In- creases In population are placing increasingly serious pressures on many aspects of the County; from the general quality of life, to the provision of basic publlc services and infra- structure facilities, to the capacity of the gov- ernment structure to address and mitigate growth impacts. 2 000217 TI-IE VISION PLANNING PROCESS After a broad scan of the County's current development environment, and after an ex- amination of the County's current strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and potential threats, the Committee arrived at a list of four .issues as the priority items for formal strategic evaluation and citizen input in 1990: educa- tion, the naturalenvlronment, transportation, and government structure. "Growth" was made an underlying element for each of the four priority topics. Natural Environment Transportation Government Structure The 1990 Vision 2020 planning process was formally initiated in August of 1990. The research and public participatory process consisted of three distinct but interrelated steps: (1) creative group interaction; (2) per- sonal interaction; and (3) ongoing technical research and analysis. The participatory planning process included a number of opportunities for creative input, consensus- buildlng and decision-making by individuals working collaboratively in group settings. Specifically, two working sessions of the Committee, four sessions of resource indl- vlduals (wlth each sesslon focused on one of the four Identified priority topics), and a 2-day leadership retreat of prominent County and surrounding jurisdictional leaders were con- venech In addition, personal interviews of key busi- ness and industry leaders and government offlcials were conducted. Inall, approximately 200 individuals participated in and contrib- uted to the visions for the four topics identi- fled. Local and external re.search was con- ducted throughout the planning process which involved quantitative analysis as well as re- vlew of successful issue-oriented ease studies and strategies employed by other communi- ties. COMMON THEMES KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS It is important to note that while the main body of the report ls organized around each of the four topic areas taken separately, six theme~ emerged during the planning process that are common to all of the toplcs. The slx common themes are: (1) public awareness and educ- tion; (2) neighborhood councils; (3) reglonall- zation; (4) land use/comprehensive planning; (5) public/private partnerships; and (6) tech- nology. COMMON THEMES Public Awareness & Education Neighborhood Councils Reglonallzation Land Use/Comprehensive Planning Public/Private Parinerships Technology The first three common themes are primarily concerned with the process by which to galn cltizen inputs and to implement specific ac- tions. The remaining three common themes are primarily viewed as tools with which to accomplish certain objectives. It should be recognized that the findings of the several recent planning processes--- Future Horizons: Virginia in the Twenty-FirstCentury, organized and conducted under the auspices of the League of Women Voters in 1988, and The Future of the Capital Areo~' 2000/201 O- What It May Be, and What It Should Be, initi- ated in the autumn of 1987 by the Virginia Inter-Government institute in cooperation with 0002i Vlrgtnm Commonwealth University- are similar to the six common themes generated during Chesterfleld's Vision 2020 planning process. Public Awareness and Education If citizens are to participate knowledgeably and confidently in local decision-making, they must have access to the information they need and that information must be provided in a form they can understand. An informed citi- zen, It ls sald, is the best citizen in a demo- cratic/participatory soclety. There are many avenues currently used by both public and private interests to Inform and influence views of private citizens. They Include the print medla, audio/video communications chan- nels, specially publicly-televised Informative program venues, educational Institutions, and other communications channels. The participants, during the group sessions, frequently emphasized the need for timely and helpful Information on specific public policy decision issues so that they can make an educated and informed contribution. The present situation, according to many partici- pants, ls not satisfactory; the flow of appropri- ate information ls not reaching most constitu- ents except those clearly affected, and this encourages an emotional rather than an in- formed response from the general public. Recommendation In llght of the above, the Committee recom- mends that the Board of Supervisors institute an effective system for providing, in a timely and consistent form, general information re- lating to current and emerging Issues affecting the llves of County residents. The intent will be to clarify complex issues, explore costs/ benefits/solutions of issues, and to reach consensus on potential public action. One method of providing a mechanism for public awareness education ls through the creation of neighborhood councils. The Committee recommends this approach. ,Neighborhood Councils Demands for citizen involvement in public decision-making are only likely to increase over time, yet there are few, ffany, satisfactory mechanisms to stimulate and encourage non- partisan participation in public processes. The concept of neighborhood-based entities wlthln the County would provide the forums for Infor- mation distribution, lssues clarification, con- tact with elected representatives, and consen- sus at the most local level. In all of the four topical areas, participants most frequently discussed and recommended formation of neighborhood councils to influ- ence public policy decisions. In education, neighborhood councils Influencing education pollcles and programs at the system as well as the nelghborhood school level were consid- ered important. Similarly, in the case of natu- ral environmental issues, transportation con- cerns and the issues associated wlth govern- ment structure, the role of nelghborhood councils was seen as an essential grass roots approach to garner the representative voice of the people to influence policy decisions. Recommendation In recognition of the above, the Committee recommends that the Board of Supervisors implement a network of formal neighborhood councils. The Counclls should exist in each dlstrict with an overall coordinating entity for the purpose of exchanging ideas and posi- tions on specific issues between the supervi- sors and constituents, to foster a participatory process, to enhance understanding of specific issues, and to build consensus toward solu- tions. The organizations should hold regu- larly scheduled meetings with their member- ship and respective supervisors and build 0002i bridges with shullar groups throughout the metropolitan region. The forums should bring disparate and potentially competing/conflict- Lng Interest groups together to discuss and develop consensus and balance regardIng policies and solutions. The Intent of the Neigh- borhood Councils ls to create an informed citizenry which would motivate and encour- age specific public actions and encourage the trainLng of "citizen planners" who can be a resource for all aspects of the planning proc- ess. Regionalization The region and its citizens are interdependent In many areas of public concern and public service. Where appropriate, a regional re- sponse could be the best way to improve service, ellmLnate duplication, and reduce costs. As a major player in a reglonal theater, Ches- terfield County can play an assertive role in reglonallzation. Natural environmental concerns transcend loc~ political boundaries and the resolution of many environmental issues can only occur at the regional, state and multi- state levels. While transportation Issues are often translated Into local responses, the real solutions Lie In the cooperative and coordinated planning of re- gional systems that meet the needs of both the general publlc and buslness and Industry. The solution to the cost-effective provision of many governmental services, including dispo- sition of solid waste, provision of water and wastewater treatment facilities, and public health and safety needs, among others, lies with cooperative regional mechanisms rather than at the level of Individual political juris- dictions. Similar regional approaches to both higher education facilities and public school systems/student evaluations are needed to resolve the difficult Issues circumscribing education in general. Several regional organ- lzatlons exlst today, but their effectiveness has not been fully leveraged. Recommendation In recognition of the above factors, the Com- mittee recommends that thc Board of Supervi- sors explore and, where appropriate, imple- ment, regional approaches and solutions in areas such as transportation, the natural en- vironment, education, Infrastructure, and other governmental services. The Intent ls to recog- nize the Interdependency of the region and Its citizens, to eliminate duplication of services and waste, and to reduce costs. In thls regard, we also recommend that the County assume a pro-active role in the creation of a mechanism to develop and pool reglonal revenue resources to specifically fund regional servlces and proj- ects. Implementation of regional cooperation will help strengthen existing institutions. The Board must take the lead and hold scheduled meetings with appropriate regional represen- tatives to set attainable goals and timetables, with monetary incentives specified, In order to eliminate duplication of effort. Land Use / Comprehensive Planning In every aspect of community growth, develop- ment, and growth management, coordInated and comprehensive land use planning emerges as a critical need. A variety of community issues and concerns should be Integrated into the land use and planning process In order to provide a single source for the articulation of public action over time. Projected Land Consumption Patterns Acres (Thousands) 300- 50- 0 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 ~ Developed ~ Vacant 000220 The 1988 report of the Year 2020 Panel to the Chesapeake Executive Council entitled "Popu- lation Growth and Development in the Che- sapeake Bay Watershed to the year 2020' observed that: The use of land is a great environ- mental, social, and economic challenge. Society must create rational growth patterns, supported by adequate Infra- structure and public transportation. Scattered, unplanned development is wasteful and expensive, and generates greater net poliutlon than more ra- tional patterns of development. Growth requires effective land use plannlng and education of the publlc In proper land management and ste- wardship. The longer solutions are put off, the greater the problem be- comes. O New highways, sewers, and other in- frastructure have a powerful effect on the location and pace.of development. The best planning allows for such in- frastructure to guide and manage growth. Unfortunately, the opposite often hap- pens. Patterns of low-density residen- tial sprawl occur and then require improved linkages. Open spaces even- tually fill with new homes and conges- tion occurs along the new roads. Densi- ties are too low to support mass transit and no readily available rights-of-way can be found for additional roads. The participants In Chesterfleld's vision plan- ning process overwhelmingly agreed on the above sentiments, and suggested that the comprehensive land use plan Is the tool that the County can most effectively use to create public forums that bring competing interests together. The comprehensive plan should be used to better protect the natural environ- ment and to meet the Interests/needs of the County. Recommendation Recognizing the importance of land use plan- nIng and the comprehensive plan, the eom- mittee recommends that the current Compre- hensive Land Use Plan for the County should be extended to include natural environment considerations, transportation systems (medes and networks), and public facllltles and In- frastructure to become truly comprehensive. The County should have a comprehensive plan that enables both denslty and location to be more easily predictable farther Into the future, resulting In site acquisition plannlng for public facilities, with emphasls on educa- tional and multi-purpose facilities and roads. Means must be found now for land banking (re~rving) to assure compliance with the comprehensive plan later. The need Is for a method, quite posslbly a fungible Instrument of tax relief, by which the County can enforce land use restrictions whlle offsetting the bur- den of idle investment for the prlvate property owner. The restrlction could take the form of an optlon or a purchase, but the remuneration (tax-based) must be kept In proportion to both the value of the land and the degree of restric- tion. In our view, the land owner would get an Instrument providIng taxreliefinto the future. This instrument would be negotiable. Thls mechanism would eliminate the Countfs current need for cash, provide current value to the owner, and allow the County to match lts reduced lncome to the revenue planned facili- ties are expected to generate. The tax credlt could be for a maximum annual amount over a set period of time. 000221 Public / Private Partnerships There are some concerns as to whether gov- ernment will have the future capacity and ablllty to provide all of the services it is cur- rently providing, and whether it is even appro- priate for government to provide certain public services at all. With maximum efficiency and effectiveness as the goal, the involvement of private contractors at some level in the provi- sion/delivery of public services should be a consideration wherever appropriate. There are Innumerable examples of coopera- tive agreements and partnerships between the public and private sectors in the delivery of public services. In education, for example, there are: industry/university partnerships In research and In sharIng of both risks and rewards; partnerships with business where students spend part of the day gaining work experience and studying tradl- tional disciplines in a business envi- ronment with a "mentor" from the pri- vate sector; 0 exchange programs where teachers and business professionals trade places for as long as an academic year; and privately-funded scholarships and pooled funding through donations and dlrect contributions for the purchase of laboratory, communications and other needed equipment by school systems. Similarly, privatization of public services ls gaining increasIng acceptance among public agencies as a way to increase the quality and efficiency of the delivery ofpubllc services in a cost-effective manner. Examples of services that are often prlvatlzed include solid waste collection, delivery of certain health and social services, operation and maintenance of waste treatment plants, and concession operations In public parks. States such as Tennessee are currently ~lmenting with prlvatlzation of the operations and maintenance of state pris- ons. Recommendation In recognition of the need for and potential beneficial role of public / private partnerships, the Committee recommends that the County move to establish measurements and stan- dards for various services, in addition to regionalization, the County should move ag~ gressively to consider areas where services could be managed by the private sector in whole or in partnership for advantages of efficiency and effectiveness, In both the short and the long term. The County should move Immediately to evaluate the four'areas consid- ered in this report (education, natural envi- ronment, transportation, and government structure), as well as others where privatlza- tlon could be used to enhance co,st-effective- ness of services. A formal mechanism should be created to evaluate the specific areas of potential prlvatizatlon within the government structure determining benefits and coats, both short and long-term. For example, we recom- mend the establishment and funding of a study group of qualified citizens to 1) select areas where privatization could benefit the citizens, 2) perform cost/benefit analyses on each area and, 3) where the analyses prove positive to proceed, to outline In detail the process, costs, and schedule to obtain the desired results. It is understood that the existence of measure- ments and standards of performance are an Important part of the successful Implementa- tion of services to be performed. The County should move to develop these standards tn a parallel effort either through the existing func- tional areas or through commissions formed for thls specific and limited purpose. 7 Technology New technologies are constantly emerging to amslst In virtually every aspect of community life, and especially In the four areas that the 2020 vision process addressed in 1990. While it is difficult to project a 30-year vision for the impact of technological development, Ches- terfield County should be open to the potential benefits presented by new technologies. The ever-increasing use of newer and better technologies ls not only expected to affect everyday life, but it ls now mandated frAmer- Ica is to enhance lts leadership role in the global marketplace. The participants in Ches- terfleld's 2020 vision planning process recog- nized the need for Increased use of all forms of technologies In order to increase efficiency in the dally operations of government. The rate of change of technology and potential applications resulting are enormous. The county can take ad- vantage of these facts by maintaining awareness of technological changes and evaluating the affordabillty and use- fulness ofnewapplicatlons. Examples of potential beneficial uses of advanced technology Include: Video presentation or satellite trans- mission of the most effective teachers of certain subjects with facilitation. This would reduce the higher cost of many teachers for the same subject and provide a mechanism for uniform Ins~uctions. Use of data bases for decision-making available from private and public agen- cies. Recommendation In recognition of the importance of technolo- gies in each of the areas discussed, the Com- mittee recommends that existing technologl- cai tools be provided in all appropriate class- rooms, that new and emerging technologies be Investigated for potential use, and that the County take a proactive role in encouraging the development and use of technological tools. The Committee recommends the development of a mechanism to stay abreast of technologi- cal Innovations which have both promise and appHcabillty. When opportunities become evident which improve either the efficiency of existing services or the provision of new serv- ices, these should be aggressively pursued by the County. REALIZING THE VISIONS: RECOMMENDED ACTIONS Beyond the common themes as described, the process generated visions and strategies/ac- tions for specific issues and concerns under- lying each of thc four topics addressed in 1990. The key findings and recommendations for each topical area are sumnmrized below. Overall Vision for Education Transportation speed control signs, (for example, "move right," speed up," or "accident ahead, take alternateroute"), could be utilized in order to aide in regulating traffic flow. Toll collection/detection electronic devices (directly attached to individual automobiles) could be utilized to re- duce the need for toll collectors and regulate traffic flow. The economic efficacy of an effective educa- tional delivery system in the future must be studied, analyzed and implemented where practical In order that optimum utlli~,ation may be made of available resources. Prlvatiza- tlon in the provision of transportation, food services and administrative data processing, for example, may be more cost-effective and efficient than current day, costly stand-alone models. 0002 8 8 The implementation of an effective pragmatic public educational system In the future will require/demand cooperation and coordina- tion with a number of agencies both internal and external to the county government struc- ture. Positive partnerships and liaisons must be formed with surrounding unlversltles, businesses, industries, and state and federal governments - all ofwhlch consume the prod- ucts of the county school system. O Education-2020 in Chesterfield County will embody a hollstic approach. A broad-based cumculum w-ill accommo- date the growing Influx of human di- versity and its multi-ethnic, multi- cultural, and multi-lingual population. O Traditional methodology and the class- room environment will be used In conjunction with technological Inno- vation transmitted to the "electronic cottage" (home). O Education effectiveness and accounta- bility will be designed to ensure a reward system that will be beneficial to profes- sional educators and students alike. Education will be transmitted tn ac- cord w/th the psychological and socio- logical needs of each student. The topics covered in the Vision 2020 plan- ning process for education Included: curriculum and teachIng methods; the decision-making process; roles of schools and risk-taking; student and teacher evaluation; the teacher's role; school facilities; technology; and trainIng and re- traInIng. For each of the above areas, thc participants articulated statements of vtslon and an array ofstrateglcactlonstoachleve thosevlslons. In a rank ordering process, the participants went further to Identify those strategic actions that were of greatest concern to them. The follow- lng strategic actionsrecelved the hlghest rank- Lugs from the Vision 2020 participants: General .qualities of the Education System in the Year 2020 0 0 0 School facilities will still be present in the year 2020. Schools will be goal-oriented and spe- cialized. An open enrollment system will be in place. Subjects/Topics/Issues to be Included in the Curriculum O O O O O Classical education Logic skills Foreign languages Principles of our econon'~c and demo- cratic system Leadership. respect, and working-to- gether skills. Partnership BusIness and Industry should be more Involved in the education process: in plannIng and development, as providers ofteachIngresources, and administration. Community colleges should be more integrated Into the overall education process. 0002 , 9 While no consensus was established to set a final rank ordering of these strategic actions, the Importance of these priority concerns should, nevertheless, be noted. Recommended Actions The Connuittee on the Future feels that the substantive actions that could be taken in the Education area are embodied tn the Common Themes previously noted. Overall Vision for the Natural Environment In 2020: 0 The citizens of Chesterfield will have a high degree of awareness about their natural environment and Its needs. They will understand the issues and concerns of protecting and preserving natural resources and will demand that the County care for these resources. With respect to the natural environ- ment, the County will: stimulate, encourage, and promote a higher quality of life; ensure the availability and prudent use of clean and pure water and air, and other natural resources; protect natural resources (land, ah-, water, anImal habitats); and assure safe and manageable disposal of waste. The Chesterfield Comprehensive Plan will be an innovative tool for achieving a style of development that is resource- efficient, conserves the County's envi- ronment, and indeed, reflects the kind of natural environment that the citi- zens seek. Chesterfield County will have forums that bring disparate and potentially competing or conflicting interest groups together to discuss and develop con- sensus and balance regarding pollcles and solutions about the natural envi- ronment. 0 The Impetus for action plans will be generated from Informed citizen groups and interests and then carried out by local government. The County, supported by the people, will commlt the resources to achleve the desired quallty of life. Recommended Actions The Chesterfield County Conunlttee on the Future, acknowledging the various views and strategies discussed by the process partici- pants, recommends that specific environmental goals and standards be established that not only satisfy regional and national require- ments, but also meet the unique needs and desires of the citizens of Chesterfield County. Such goals and standards should serve the diverse population and environmental elements In different regions of the County, while main- mining an appropriate balance between devel- opment and preservation of the County's Iden- tity and sense of place and character. Implementation of an ongoing environmental program would best be accomplished through creation of a department specializing in envi- ronmental affairs. The Staff of such a depart- ment would have appropriate environmental expertise and would rely heavily on Input from and to public forums and citizen groups (neigh- borhood councils). 10 000225 The program should Include working models designed specifically for Chesterfield County. The models must Include proven solutions to slmllar environmental problems In other ar- eas, as well as Integrate public and private policy while continually monitoring and test- lng the program/models for meeting Chester- field County's goals. It must be accepted that regional cooperation will take place ff Chesterfield County's envi- ronmental program ls to succeed. Also, utiliz- Ing our extensive land use plans, agreements must be confirmed with public and prlvate parties as to an acceptable sharing of mone- tary gains and responsibility for how quality of life will be maintained and even enhanced. Overall Vision for Transportation The overall vision for transportation reflects the two aspects of the Issues---the user side and the planning side--that were identified by the participants, as follows: User-Side Vision: In the year 2020, the transportation system of Chesterfield County will have alleviated or mitigated the problems of the past. The prevailing transporta- tion system In 2020 will be a compre- hensive, multi-modal and well-planned countywide system, providing and accommodatIng movement for all seg- ments of the population In a way that is: safe, modern (state-of-the-art), accessible, affordable, rapid, ccnvenlent (where you want to go, when you want to go), ecologically acceptable, and congruent with other actual and planned uses. Planning-Side Vision: o In the year 2020, the transpOrtation system of Chesterfield County will accurately reflect the plans and com- mitments that were made by the citi- zens of the County In the early 1990s. Recommended Actions The actions recommended by the Committee and the underpinnIng rationale for realizIng visions for transportation are as follows. The need for reglonal cooperation in transpor- tation planning appears to be even more obvi- ous than In any of the other plannlng topics considered In this report, especially In plan- ning for a unified mass transit system. Such a system can encompass a mixture of modes, but junctions and fee structures need to be joIntly planned and joIntly funded. In general, land use restrictions placed on private property owners due to long-range transportation plans are at once difficult to enforce, and to the degree enforceable, often financially Injurious to the property owners. There is an lnunedlate need for long-range In- novative solutions to the land banking Issue (as stated above under the headlng "Land Use/Comprehensive Planning"). 11 00022G An open cycle of information should exist where the County would provide the mecha- nisms for communication of plans, requests, and alterations to the transportation planning process. These mechanisms may include newsletters, regular presentations to neigh- borhood councils, and telephone query sys- tems based on the model of the existing zoning requests llne. The Information provided should be phrased to invite public input, and should include rtsks, costs and land use implications in accord with the transportation plans. An overlapping of planning horizons, one dealing with the near term and one dealing with longer- term comprehensive, plans and issues, would allow the public to view current plans and provide input before controversial plans be- come imminent. Chesterfleld's utilization of user fees for road- ways may be justifiable. Technology will offer, tn the near future, systems which will provide simpler and safer mechanisms to levy such fees. When these mechanisms become eco- nomically viable, the expansion of such fees will become feasible with minimal additional investment. Mass transit systems can be expanded to utilize exlstmg rights-of-way. This could serve to alleviate some of the congestion In higher density areas. In the longer term, technology will become available whlch will allow the automated op- eration of personal vehicles with minimum Impact on the existing infrastructure. By maklng driver behavior consistent, such auto- matlon can make travel safer, and provide Independent transportation access for per- sons who because of handicap or other limita- tions now must seek other means of transpor- tation. By raising average speeds, this auto- mation could also dramatically reduce con- gestion on the existing road structure. Overall Vision for Government Structure In the year 2020: 0 The government of Chesterfield County will be responsive to the needs and desires of the citizenry and will provide effective and efficient services. Contained within the vision are two distinct aspects of government: government as a representative voice for the people, listener to and facilita- tor of citizen input; and government as provider of services. Projected Average Population Per Magisterlal Dlstrlct Based on Five Supervisors Thousands 80 6O 4O 2O 1980 1990 !000 2010 2020 Average Population per District 12 0 O 0 2 '> '? Recommended Actions The Chesterfield County Committee on the Future, acknowledging the considerable amount ofpubllc Input on the subject, recom- mends the following: 0 o o 0 The form and composition of thc gov- ernment body, the Board of Supervi- sors, should expand as the County's growth dictates. The body Itself should become much more of a policy-making board, while leaving day-to-day deci- sions to a strong administrative execu- tlve structure. The Board should set in motion a pro- cedure for an independent citizen group to make periodic assessments of gov- ernmental and financial efficiency of services, Including those provided through regional cooperation and prl- vatlzation. Consolidation of government services should receive prlme consideration in order to alleviate duplication of effort and reduce costs for providing those services. There was a considerable amount of citizen input that the Board should also consider the Issues of the rising cost ofcampalgn funding, the creation of spending ltmits, and possibly the use of public subsidies. The governmental body should create the proper mechanisms to seek legis- lative changes that permit the follow- ing to be addressed at the County level: possible elimination of consti- tutional officers now required by law, where duplication of effort exists; consider whether the Common- wealth retains power over the County on all issues concern- lng land use controls, environ- mental protection, and debt and taxing powers, for example; and possible limitation of terms for elected County officials. IMPLICATIONS OF NO ACTION Chesterfield County, has grown very rapidly from a predominantly rural county to a subur- ban community over the past two decades. The County's population nearly doubled dur- ing the 1970s to just over 141,300 In 1980, and then increased by nearly 68,000 persons or by 48 percent to over 209,200 In 1990. Today, Chesterfield County represents a life- style and living environment which most County residents appreciate; there ls a level of satis- faction in the way things are. There are those in the County who think that the County is not close enough to a crlsis stage to require any ameliorative actions. On the other hand, there is a growing reali?a- tlon among a segment of Chesterfield County residents (and this was very evident in the group sessions conducted as part of the vi- sions process) that ff appropriate actions are not taken soon, then the County is potentially headed for a major set of problems. The unrestricted, rapid growth over the past two decades has put substantial pressures on the County's land mass and its ability to properly service residents at reasonable cost. The County's fl~cal health today is not as strong as it was just flve years ago; the County's fiscal resources and its fiscal capacity are severely strained, and Indications are that continued rapld growth will call for substantially larger outlays of public funds than in the past. 00022 13 Chesterfleld's population ls expected to con- slstently increase in all age groups over the next three decades. However, the percentage of school-aged children will start to decline, reflecting lower birth rates and the general aging of the population. The proportion of total population over 65 years of age will more than triple during the 1990-2020 period. The number of school-age chil- dren (between five and 19 years of age) is projected to increase by more than 15,500 between 1990 and 2005. During the subsequent 15-year period to 2020, the school-age popula- tion is projected to stabfl/ze dra- matically, growing by only 700 persons to 68,763. The number of elderly people (65 years of age and older) is projected to grow rapidly, from 12,390 persons in 1990 to over 66,600 by the year 2020-- an increase of nearly 54,300 eld- erly persons during the period. Implications of Growth The indicated growth of Chesterfield County's economy and population poses significant challenges for appropriate public policy re- sponses and actions. Perhaps the greatest impact of past growth has been on the County's ability to adequately service its expanding population; the delivery of public infrastruc- ture facilities has not kept pace with the rate at which the County has grown. For the past few years, the County has been playing a ~catch- up" game with respect to the provision of infrastructure facilities with llrnited success. The indications are that continued growth of Chesterfield County will call for a substan- tially larger outlay of public funds than in the past. New residential development and busi- ness enterprises will generate new private investments and tax-paying capacities, but they will also require a substantial expansion in public services and public work~. Some public investments will be necessary to stimu- late the private investments themselve~ and to maintain a balance between commercial/in- dustrial and residential contributions. Other public investments will be necessary to ac- commodate the anticipated new growth. Streem, highways, sewers, solid waste disposal sites, libraries, parks, police and fn'e stations--the entire range of physical improvements pro- vided with public funds---are and will continue to be under pressure to expand. Implications for Education The public education system in the County ls already under severe growth pressure, and will be further impacted. Chesterfield County Public Schools have identified capital improvement needs between now and the start of the 1996- 97 school year of approximately $153.9 million (based on 1991 dollars). These needed facili- ties are in addition to those approved in the 1988 bond referendum, and include seven elementary schools, one middle school and one high school as well as improvements to existing schools. Present projections indicate that approxima~ $50 million, not including funds from the 1988 bond referendum, would be available for new school consU~action projects during fiscal years 1995 and 1996. Passage of a second referen- dum would be requlred. While a substantial shortfall in funding for educational facflltles is evident, a recent study on school overcrowding may assist in suggest- lng alternatives to new facility construction and positively impact this anticipated short- fall. 000223 14 In order to re~ltze visions for education, addi- tional funds will be needed for new teachers with different skills, new computers and other teaching/technology alcl~, libraries, books, new and better communications equipment, new and better-equipped laboratories, and a host of other facilities, equipment and programs. Unless appropriate actions are taken to as- sure public support and needed funds, visions for education, as established, would be diffi- cult to re~lt~.e. Implications for the Natural Environment Continued growth, ff allowed to occur in an unplanned manner will resuR in urban sprawl, having a very deleterious effect on the County's natural environment and its quality of life. First, the incremental public costs associated with servicing low density, sprawled develop- ment patterns would be significant, further exacerbating the County's limited fiscal ca- pacity. Second, low density development patterns are likely to reduce, rapidly, the In- ventory of open space. Third, rapid, unplanned growth is likely to generate new demands for solid waste disposal sites and negatively lm- pact the County's water resources and other natural environmental amenities. Unless good planning practices and indicated regional approaches to managing and maintaining the County's natural environment are put in place, the 2020 visions for Chesterfield's natural environment may not be fully realized. Agaln, Implementation of actions suggested for the preservation of the natural environment will place special demands on the County's fiscal resources in terms of added manpower, re- search and monitoring systems, and in other ways which must be met. Implications for Transportation Roads and highways have ~'adltionally been funded by the state and federal government, with local contributions amounting to a minor share of total project costs. Chesterfield County, unlike most other jurisdictions in the state, has been proactive in the development of roads and highways. As an example, the County funded construction of the Powhlte Parkway and Route 288 extensions, which involved a local commitment of $52 million. The visions for transportation require land banking of rights- of-way now, in order for the County to maintain its current status as a leader in transportation services. However, the County's ability to land-bank today ls con- strained by the current tight fiscal conditions. If appropriate actions are not taken now, the County runs the rlsk of losing its leadership position in this area. Implications for Government Structure The vast majority of public services are cur- rently provided to resldents by the County. New state regulations (such as those governing solid waste disposal sites) and the visions established in the process for the other three topic areas require enhanced services and, thus, increased spending to provide those servic- es. Wlthout assistance through cooperation with other nearby localities or the private sec- tor, County residents face, at best, lesser qual- ity services or hig~her tax rates in order to be able financially to meet state regulations. 15 00023U At the same time that critical decisions are being made, population growth in many mag- lsterial districts will make it almost impossible for elected representatives to weigh the con- cerns of all affected citizens. Population growth will leave each of the five representatives with large constituencies to whom they must be responsible. For example, the 1990 popula- tion averages over 40,000 people per district. As such, the current government structure may not be able to provide representation and responsiveness to lts constituent body equita- bly and effectively. The added population will also strain public administrative capacity in much the same fashion. In summary, It ls clear from the findings of the vision planning process that ff Chesterfield County cit~cns want the/r community to remain viable, attractive and livable, then the ques- tion of no action has little room for discussion at this stage of the County's development cycle. 16 00023.i ,_OM M QN T__I IF. ME8 · Public Awareness/ Education .'-~,,~i~ ,?~.'~, · Neighborhood Councils · Regionalization 4. Land Use/ Comprehensive Planning · Public/Private Partnerships Technology $8 g * Holistic Approach/Broad-Based Curriculum * Traditional Methodology in Conjunction With Technological Innovation * Effectiveness and Accountability Tied to Reward System * Education will be Transmitted in Accordance with Psychological and Sociological Needs of Each Student * Privatization in the Provision of Services (Transportation, Food Administrative Data Processing) Partnerships with Business, Industry, Universities, Community Colleges, Surrounding School Systems, and Governmental Entities * Citizen Awareness Availability and Prudent Use of Clean Air and Water * Protection of Natural Resources * Safe/Manageable Disposal of Wastes * Comprehensive Land Use Plan as a Tool for Resource-Efficient Develop- ment and Conservation of Environment * Forums to Develop Consensus on Environmental Policies and Solutions * Creation of Department of Affairs Environmental * Regional Cooperation * Establish Environmental Goals and Standards Specific to Chesterfield * Comprehensive, Multi-Modal, and Well- Planned County-Wide Transportation System * Provide Movement for all Sements of the Population in a way that is Safe, Modern, Accessible, Affordable, Rapid, Convenient, Ecologically Acceptable, and in Harmony with the Land Use Comprehensive Plan System in 2020 will reflect Plans. and Commitments of Early 1990's * Need for Land Banking for Rights- of-Way * Need for Increased Public Awareness * Funding for System Generated on Regional Level and need for new Financing Options · Creation of Neighborhood Councils * Responsiveness * Accountability * Consolidation of Services * Limitation of Terms * Elimination of Constitutional Officers Where Duplication of Effort Exists * Board as Policy Maker * Regional Mechanisms for the Provision of Services * Consideration of City Form of Government I~3~_LIC NO~IC~ The Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, on Wednesday-~ June 26~ lggl, beginning at 2:00 p.m., in the County Boax~ Roo~ at Chastex~ialA County Administration Building, Chesterfield, Virginia, will cO~si~a~ 91SR0201: In Bermuda Magisterial District, DIANE 5RANELEY requests renewal of Mobile Home Permit 85S18§ to park a mobile home in a Residential. (R-7) District. The density of the proposal, is approximately 1.33 units/acre. The Comprehensive Plan desi§nates the property for light industrial use with density to be controlled by zoning conditions or Ordinance standards. This property' is located approximately 200 feet off the south line of Melba Street at Ramona Avenue, and is better known as 10516 Ramona Avenue. Tax Map 98-1 (4) Be]m~ade, Block 5, Lots 9 through 13 and 39 (Sheet 32). 91SR0146: In Matoaca Magisterial District, C~IESTER~IRT.~ FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE, LODCE 47 requests renewal, of Conditional Use (Case 85S083) to permit a fraternal organization in an Agricultural (A) District. The density of such amendment will be controlled bY .zoning conditions or Ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan designates the property for residential, use of 1.50 units per acre or less. This request lies on a 14.00 acre parcel fronting approximately 400 feet on the south line of Beach Road, approximately 1,390 feet southeast of Brandy Oaks Drive. Tax Map 109-12 (1) Parcel 1 (Sheet 29). 91SN0161: In Dale Magisterial District, UK!ROPS SUPERMARKETS, INC. requests rezoning from Office Business (0) to Community Business (C-3). The density of such amendment will be controlled by zoning conditions or Ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan designates the property for residential use of 4.0 units per acre or less and office use with density to be determined by development regulations. This request lies on a 6.02 acre parcel fronting approx~mm_tely 840 feet on the south line of Courthouse Road, also fronting approximately 1~170 feet on the northeast line of Halls Run Road and approximately 600 feet on the west line of Iron Bridge Road, and located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Iron Bridge Road and Halls Run Road. Tax Map 79-15 (1) Parcel 32 (Sheets 22 and 31). 91SR0175: In Bermuda Magisterial District, THOMAS BECK requests amendment to Conditional Use Planned Development ( Case 86S094) relative to buffer requirements. The density of such amendment will be controlled by zoning conditions or Ordinance standar~. The Comprehensive Plan designates the property for general commercial use with density to be determined by development regulations. This request lies in a General Business (B-3) District on a 3.5 acre parcel fronting approximately 280 feet on the west line of Jefferson Davis Highway, also fronting approx~mmtely 365 feet on the south line of Drewrys Bluff Road, and located in the southwest quadrant of the intersection of these roads. Tax Map 67-3 (1) Parcel 51 (Sheet 23). lrSN0182: Bermuda Magisterial District, BURGE ASSOCIATES request rezoning In om General. Business (B-3) to General Business (C-5). The density of such endment will be controlled by zoning conditions or Ordinance standards-. The Comprehensive Plan designates the property for commercial use with density' to be determined by development regulations. This request lies on a 2.20 acre parcel fronting approximately 220 feet on the west line of Burke Avenue, approx~m=tely 1,080 feet north of Willis Road. Tax Map 82-1 (1) Parcel 44 (Sheet 23). 91SN0!~7: In Clover Hill Magisterial District, RICHMOND CELLULAR TELEPHONE COMP~Wy requests a Conditional Use Planned Development to permit a cogMunications tower plus an exception to height limitations in an Agricultural (~ District. The density of such amendment will be controlled by zoning /donditions or Ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan designates the property for public/semi-public use with density to be determined by development regulations. This request lies on 0.3 acres lying approximately 400 feet off the south line of Hull Street Road, measured from a point approximately 1,050 feet east of Pocoshock Boulevard. Tax Map 40-1 (1) Part of Parcel 3 (Sheet 15). 91SN0~19: In Clover Hill Magisterial District, SOUTHGATE ASSOCIATES request ame~ment to Conditional Use Planned Development (Case 89SN0199) relative to us~f. The density of such amendment will be controlled by zoning conditions or O/dinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan designates the property for office /rise with density to be dete~ned by development regulations. This request lies on a 4.21 acre parcel fronting approx~mstely 380 feet on the south line of Arboretum Parkway, also fronting approximately 550 feet on the east line of North Arch Road, and located in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of these roads. Tax Map 28-1 (1) Parcel 25 (Sheet 8). Copies of the above are on file in the Planning Department at the Chesterfield County Administration Building, Room 203, Chesterfield, Virginia, for public examination between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. of each regular business day. If you have a touch-tone telephone and want a general overview of a specific request, you may call the Planning Department's teleworks information system 24 hours a day at 751-4700. All persons favoring, opposing and interested in the above are invited to appear at the time and place herein stated. Thomas E. Jacobson, Director Pla~ming Department 2 PC/3UNE26A