The URL can be used to link to this page

06-08-77 Packet�' ssr a v M s�fIc� MEMORANDUM: - June 2, 1977 To: Mr. C. G. Manuel, Interim County Administrator From: Mr. R. B. Gal usha, Di rector of Perscarwrr�F"— �p Subject: June 8 Agenda Item I recommend that the attached letter be introduced during an executive session Por, the Board's consideration. RBG:mm Attachment OPTIONAL FORM NO. 10 , JULY 1073 EDITION GSA FPMR 141 CFR) 101.11.6 • UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT Memorandum TO Whom it may concern DATE: 5.26.77. FROM Mc Guire VA Hospital. Thoracic Surgery Service. SUBJECT: Mr Arthur L.Mc Bride Dear Sir: r This letter is to state that Mr Mc Bride underwent olien- heart surgery 5.13.77.As usual recovery from this type of surgery w� he will be unable to work for 3-4 months.IIis final return to work will be determined during this follow-up. If we can be of any further help,please do not hesitate to call on us Sincerel-y: zentpete M.D. Chief- Thoracic Surgery Mc Guire VA Hospital. ;n e Buy U.S. Savings Bonds Regularly on the Payroll Savings Plan 6010.110 �� °^ �yy"►�''i''»..:? �':, .� "�yi2'a k .we•r.r a.:Y�ieJbl"a9 _ � "K - "t "�pl` '� +�y,' , • mw � yJ'r w. � .� '+ r ;,% A� � ..!{� i®�4'wr+"n+.�-...^ _ _.�M�r�"�y, ''R.�.�r'.if"'='a. W s` Yr..+" i ,. June 8, 1977 - B. S. CASE NUMBER: 77SO67 APPLICANT: ELBERT N. AND CARRIE N. CLARK REQUEST AND PROPOSED USE: A Conditional Use to permit the construction of one two-family dwelling. GENERAL LOCATION AND TAX MAP IDENTIFICATION: In Matoaca Magisterial* District, this parcel lies along the north line of Aldridge Avenue and is located approximately 750 feet east of its intersection with Jefferson Davis Highway. Tax Map 163-11 (3) Boulevard Heights, Blk B Lot 12 (Sheet 49). ACREAGE, EXISTING ZONING, EXISTING LAND USE (SUBJECT PARCEL): This lot is 0.71 acres in area, is zoned Residential (R-7) and is presently vacant. ADJACENT AND AREA ZONING AND LAND USE: Adjacent property to the south is zoned Agricultural (A) while all other property is zoned Residential (R-7). Adjacent property is occupied by single family dwellings or remains vacant. UTILITIES, SOIL PROFILE, DRAINAGE AND EROSION, REQUIRED OFF-SITE EASEMENTS: This parcel is served by.public water. A 4 inch water line is located along Aldridge Avenue. There is an available water treatment capacity of 22 million gallons per day from the Appomattox plant which serves this area with approximately 2,000 million gallons per day now being used. This lot lies in the Timsberry Creek Sewage Drainage Area. Public sewer is available to serve this site. The Proctor's Creek Treatment Plan serves this area and has a rated capacity of 1 million gallons per day, which is adequate capacity to serve this project. The soils on this property are sandy loam, gently sloping and have only a slight chance for erosion. The soil on this property is well suited for the proposed use. The soils are good for foundations and road%•:ays. This lot lies in the Swift Creek Drainage Area. There are no existing off-site drainage or erosion problems, however; before clearing or construction, a site plan and erosion control plan must be submitted and approved. A drainage easement will be required. PUBLIC FACILITIES: This property will be served by the Chester Fire Station, Company #1, which is operated by County employees and is located 6 miles from this location. Fire service capability in this area is limited due to the lack of fire hydrants along Aldridge Avenue. Each dwelling unit rust be separated from the other by an assembly that has a fire resistance rating of at least 1 hour. This one two-family dwelling will not appreciably effect fire protection needs of this neighborhood. 1. over • r low a landscaping plan showing the retention of existing trees as well as additional planting shall be submitted to and for approval by the Division of Development Review. 7. Exterior colors of the building shall utilize muted earth tones. B. The above noted conditions, notwithstanding all other requirements as applicable in the R-7 District CASE HISTORY PAST COMMISSION AND BOARD ACTION FOR THIS CASE C.P.C. 4 19 77: It was resolved to recommend approval of a Conditional Use to permit the construction of one two-family dwelling on this property, subject to the following conditions: 1. Lots 11 and 12 shall. be resubdivided so that the existing building on Lot 11 and the proposed building on Lot 12 comply with the required setbacks in the R-7 zone. This shall be accomplished prior to the issuance of the building permit on Lot 12. 2. Public water and sewer shall be used. 3. A gravel parking lot, having sufficient area to accommodate 4 automobiles (each space being 200 square feet in area) shall be provided to the rear of the proposed building. This area shall either be paved or gravelled. A single access drive shall serve the parking area. This driveway shall have a minimum width of 12 feet and may be either paved or gravelled. 4. These conditions notwithstanding, the elevations, floor plans and site plan presented with the application shall be considered the plan of development for the duplex to be located on the subject property. 3. s •/111'••11/,/••. d = • �►%% I • . to ♦ ♦♦ ♦♦♦ • - '++ - - �~ � •1,I• �:.. �! 1.1..111:.' of j - Tr, r•,�,. .i fur, • � � +i sr/1z JunnnlnrlJ./ .cam +!: s11a„ -7%5iCp-7�lN.rtX"e�Q - ::u,,.►:�,��1111111 „".a, . J• Ifs/ = - �� TIulnlnu11u1� - 1111l11111111111lIIIIIIaar1111l1/11111 A al CdomftL a, r J No GSIEPAL , MOTES WATER: PUBLIC SDIER: PUBLIC USE: RES ID;tffIAL ZONING: R- T/UC P',APS: 1611 43 STORM RUA'JOFF COtITROLLED WITH ROADSIDE DITCHES BUILDING SETBACKS TO CONFORt4 TO COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE TABU_ATION NUMBER LOTS: 2 AREA OF LOTS: 0.71 ACRE AREA OF STREETS: NONE TOTA' AREA OF SUBDIVISION: 0.71 NOW - OR FORMERLY ANDERSON N80007b0"W— r50.0d BL B 14 13 0 12A I, 11A s 10 9 t a tib xes cQ asoo �. N 50.00 1 rfl; o DwYinp 8 ", $� owNlinp g 1 wao 34.od 10t shod N, of 8. c:.00` ee ori ' 150.0(1 �V90480` E 72s'a To us. nouTEs#i visa-+- ALDRID_GE AVENUE s°, PJW _ 77 54co? — - RESUBDIVISION rTiJ O, of LOTS 11 and 12, BLOCK B 'y tlt3 E TCt"��5 jOU L EVARD �'I�.I� r, L ^T�1 cT T `. tU CERTIFICATE No. �' M90ACA, DJ' R c 1 ��,� i� .0 CHESS ERFIELD CO., VIF INIA M CASE NUMBER: 77SO68 June 8, 1977 - B. S. Apr-il_19T_1977-4C-P-C_1. APPLICANT: MR. & MRS. JAMES O. SCHAEFFER REQUEST AND PROPOSED USE: A Conditional Use to permit the operation of a stock farm (to keep six (6) horses) in a residential district. GENERAL LOCATION AND TAX MAP IDENTIFICATION: In Midlothian Magisterial District, this parcel fronts along the east line of Old Gun Road and the south line of Young Manor Drive, and is located in the southeast cruadrant of the intersection of the aforementioned roads. Tax Map 2-15 (1) Parcel 6, (Sheet 2). ACREAGE, EXISTING ZONING, EXISTING LAPD USE (SUBJECT PARCEL): This parcel is 15.49 acres in area, is zoned Residential (R-40) and is occupied by a single family dwelling and a barn. ADJACENT AND AREA ZONING AND LAND USE: Adjacent property is zoned Residential (R-40) and is occupied by single family dwellings or remains vacant. UTILITIES, SOIL PROFILE, DRAINAG AND EROSION, REQUIRED OFF-SI^1E EASE^ --NTS: This request will have no effect on public utilities. The soil on this parcel is sandy loam, gently sloping to steep in (� some areas, and has only a slight chance for erosion. In general, the soils are well suited for the proposed use. (See attached soil study map) . This parcel lies in the Spring Creek Drainage Area. No off-site drainage or erosion problems exist, and none are anticipated, unless clearing to establish grass increases or creates a run-off or erosion problem. A site plan and an erosion control plan is necessary in order to insure no off-site drainage or erosion problem is created by the proposed use. PUBLIC FACILITIES: Development of the parcel in question for the proposed use should exercise no additional impact on either existing or future public facilities. T;,'_NSPORTATION_AND TRAFFIC: This request will have no effect on the traffic pattern in this area. GENERAL PLAN: This lot lies in an area designated for single family residential use. REQUEST ANALYSIS: The Applicants, who are the property owners, are requesting a Conditional Use to permit the operation of a stock farm, that is the keepirq of 6 horses in a Residential District. The Applicants note that the animals will be fenced in and stalled in a 6 stall barn. P_LT'IVE:S :_ND MITIGATING :•!EASURES: in reviewing this particular request, it should be taKen into corsin enation that the subject parcel, which is large, containinct�15.49 acres, has the majority of its area in 1. over pasture land. land. T. s situation is conducive keeping the number of horses desired. Most of the area surrounding this parcel has a rural-surburban character and it is believed that the proposed use does not distract from the pleasant surroundings. To the contrary, it adds to this dichotomy by offering a pastoral setting for adjacent residences which is pleasing and unobstrusive. The Commission may wish to recommend that the number of animals kept on the parcel be reduced either initially or over a period of time. However, staff does not feel that this is necessary. The enclosure surrounding the acreage is well maintained and adequate for the purpose of keeping these animals. The six -stall barn also located on the property is maintained in good fashion. For the purpose of guaranteeing a satisfactory situation over time, Staff is of the opinion that certain conditions should be imposed. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval of the request is recommended subject to the implementation of the following conditions: 1. This Special Exception shall be granted to and for Mr. & Mrs. James O. Schaeffer, exclusively, and shall not be transferrable nor run with the land. 2. This Conditional Use shall be restricted to the keeping of no more than 6 horses on the subject parcel. 3. The stall and pasture area shall be maintained in good order and the applicants shall take whatever steps necessary to eliminate odor and insects. 4. No commercial activity shall be permitted. CASE HISTORY PAST COMMISSION AND BOARD ACTION FOR THIS REQUEST C.P.C. 4 19 77: The Commission resolved to recommend approval of a Conditional Use to permit the operation of a stock farm (to keep six (6) horses) on this parcel subject to the following conditions: 1. This Special Exception shall be granted to and for Mr. and Mrs. James O. Schaeffer, exclusively, and shall not be transferable nor run with the land. 2. This Conditional Use shall be restricted to the keeping of not more than six (6) horses on the subject parcel. The stall and pasture area shall be maintained in good order and 3. the Applicant shall take whatever steps necessary to eliminate odor and insects. 4. No commercial activity shall be permitted. 5. The subject parcel cannot be reduced below 14 acres. 2. 'I SIJ •lslo Convil:! u _ ':+' � a Sul ,. !✓ �•- L:ar�s � �• � � A JAI Saar.► 1_r+ -'i �� • u . � ( - �-1 i (�j'•�� X171 , ,� L IooLl ��•= 105 C h in ria .. o r - a �-- �— "' M 'I SIJ •lslo Convil:! u _ 00 -fw � � .. I i,• iii �� • �: it El 36 0 EI moo !s V lklc 0 A ILLj co 4 00 -fw � � .. I i,• iii �� • �: it El 36 0 EI 00 -fw � � .. I i,• iii �� • �: !s V 00 -fw � � .. I i,• iii �� • �: a J 0 ..CASE 77 SOErB�� I ? .• : e 0�. 4k f 7�, • 203 ' :p -I 41 .1(12'';x• 400 goo I-6-1 — l}LLuvt4l,l.^vJD,Wc* 4!42-6-1: D -I - ,4PPGe,vf- s4,vOy Gok)" Jya-c--I ' AfFit NL GITA V61z%( S-LoAr� Ro BI%L4 5 SAouDy LOA)- 3os-L — po L 0514oc le. S• 1-0,4 JWA pr. r. G oe D "R P A -S Ti.#_R e c. 14,0r4A .moi Poo�� wit wq ? . I � I � � .r� .�.� ••••••moi ••i•i�i••�•••:%i : `• 4...... ...... i bass+tf.,et •.:.-.: ':;:::,'�,�. / ,r:• •.:� A 1 l -. r �:. • :» r 2 _NUR Y ! • ♦ ; :moi ., pyo Q•Y t:�:::�:�'�•s;: •• 4b LL; 4.v Jc Mn j Qui ��;;i ,• •••�j�1� t M 40 "tip �• • ILI 10 • , .77 �� - !• 'ice' ,, � _ _ _ -- CASE NUMBER: APPLICANT: 77SO69 WILLIAM G. SPEEKS June 81 1977 - B. S. Api 4-1-1A-7- -1.9-7a--(£z41%£-z-3 REQUEST AND PROPOSED USE: The rezoning from Residential (R-12) to Residen- tial (R-9). The Ar)vlicant Dlans to subdivide (William Gwyn Estates) this property for single family residential use. GENERAL LOCATION AND TAX MAP IDENTIFICATION: This parcel lies in the Clover Hill Magisterial District, and is located south of Falling Creek and adjacent to and east of Genito Forest. Tax Map 49-6 (1) Parcels 1 & 2 (Sheet 14). ACREAGE, EXISTING ZONING, EXISTING LAND USE (SUBJECT PARCEL): This parcel contains 96.74 acres, is zoned Residential (R-12) and i's presently vacant. ADJACENT AND AREA ZONING AND LAND USE: Adjacent property to the north and east is zoned Agricultural (A) and for the most part, remains vacant. Property to the south is zoned Light Industrial (M-1) and is undeveloped. Property to the southwest is zoned Residential (R-12) and is occupied by Genito Forest. Property to the west and northwest is zoned Residential (R-7) and is occupied by Lake Genito Estates. Falling Creek lies north of this property and cuts deeply into the northern section of the parcel. UTILITIES, SOIL PROFILE, DRAINAGE AND EROSION, REQUIRED OFF-SITE EASEMENTS: Public water and sewer is available to serve this site. The Applicant states that the subdivision will contain approximately 170 lots. The Utilities Department reports that an average single family residence uses 240 gallons of water per day; therefore, 40,800 gallons per day would be utilized by this development. These per unti flows are not line design flows because peak flow plus fire service flow must be considered for design purposes. There is an available water treatment capacity of 10 million gallons per day from Swift Creek, serving this area with 6 million gallons per day being used. There is a 12 inch water line located along Lake Genito at the property line which will serve this property. Staff finds that the County pump station on Clintwood Road must be enlarged in order to support this new development. The County Engineer calculates per capita sewage flow at 100 gallons per day for design purposes. Based on an average of 3.5 persons per single family dwelling unit, approximately 595 gallons per day of sewage effluent will be generated for treatment by the proposed sub- division. These sewage treatment figures are greater than the water used because of infiltration and inflow. This property lies in the Falling Creek Sewage Drainage area. The closest trunk sewer is located along Falling Creek with a sub trunk on site. This sewer trunk will connect to the Falling Creek Treatment Plant which has a design or rated capacity of 6 million gallons per day. The soils on this parcel are sandy loam and land wet, gently sloping to steep and have a moderate chance for erosion. In general, the 1. (over) soil conditions on this property are not well suited for small rec- tangular lots and lot lines should be designed to follow natural drainage ways. The subdivision plat for this project should show soil wetness for each lot. (See attached soil study map.) This parcel lies in the Falling Creek Drainage area. There are present- ly on- and off-site drainage and erosion problems on this property. Staff anticipates drainage and erosion problems when this property is developed. Prior to clearing or construction, a site plan and erosion control plan (very extensive) must be submitted to and approved by the County. Off-site sewer and drainage easements will be required. PUBLIC FACILITIES: Based on the 1977 average of 0.90 public school students per single family dwelling, approximately 153 students would be generated by this development. This subdivision is now within the Watkins Elementary and Clover Hill Junior High and High School attendance zones. This subdivision will be served by the Wagstaff Fire Station, Company #10,which is a volunteer company and is located 4.3 miles from the subject property. Adequate fire service capability can be provided only if this project is developed with public water and fire hydrants are provided. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC: Single family development under the requested Residential (R-9) rezoning would result in the generation of approximately 1,666 average daily traffic based on an estimate of 9.8 trips per single family residence. These vehicular movements would be distributed over Monday Way and Dumain Drive to the west and Woodsong Drive to the south which are now adjacent to or within the proposed development. Extension of other collector roads to the south, southeast would pro- vide additional access for this development. GENERAL PLAN: This parcel lies in an area designated for single family residential use. REQUEST ANALYSIS: In this case, the Applicant, who is,the property owner, plans to subdivide this property for single family residential use and create 170 building lots, see attached plat. He states that County water and sewer will be used and drainage will be provided by roadside ditches. He indicates that the minimum lot size will be 9,200 square feet, maximum lot size 20,615 square feet, with the average lot being approximately 10,400 square feet... On April 26, 1977, the Applicant will request the Planning Commission's approval for subdivision (William Gwyn Estates). On December 30, 1974, the Board of Supervisors approved the rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-12) and Light Industrial (M-1) and a Conditional Use for a Planned Development on that part of parcel 2 which fronts along U.S. 360. This zoning is indicated on the attached 600 scale zoning map. The Conditional Use was approved to permit the construction and operation of a Commercial -Industrial Park and a single family subdivision. The Applicant has submitted a tentative nlan to the Commission for schematic approval of road layout for 360 Commercial Park. The plan will be considered by the Commission at a later date. 2. Staff notes that on April 8, 1977, the Virginia Department o Hig ways and Transportation made application to the Board of Zoning Appeals for a Special Exception to permit the construction and operation of their residency office and a garage facility on part of the subject property. The Highway Department has taken an option on this 6.6 acre tract, see attached site plan. ALTERNATIVES AND MITIGATING MEASURES: Staff reviewed this application and finds that the parcels to the east of the project are zoned Agricult- ural (A), large vacant and have good potential for subdivision. The property to the south is zoned Light Industrial (M-1) and in the future will be developed for industrial purposes. Property to the west and northwest is zoned Residential (R-7) and has been developed for single family residential use. The rezoning of the subject parcel to the R-9 classification seems to be a reasonable step-up in this case. Staff notes that Falling Creek encompasses approximately 1/3 of the subject parcel, see attached tentative subdivision plan and soil study map. Staff finds that a gas pipe easement runs through the northern section of this property. In general, Staff finds that the request of compatible with all adjacent zoning, except the Light Industrial (M-1) zoning, to the south. However, Staff notes that the Zoning Ordinance requires that there be at least a 100 foot screen between residentially developed property and a Light Industrial use, and that the residential district be effectively screened by either an appropriate solid fence planting or natural conditions. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of Residential (R-9) zoning. C.P.C. 4 19 77: Recommended approval of the requested R-9 rezoning. 3. 0 0 0 Op• / YOUNG MANOR •y 0 1: S PRS .r t o • 7� .r t o • �YY77'�� • M � a ^ F F :fir y n D - •. � - b * S �•1 r N 2 a � C P n Z c � u :" :� i 4 EA F G � o T, 4 T � F iti 1 I S 1%1 • l ` • rt'y_ ter._...,...+ • � .tY y� �w•N fir" t �•\ � !, •.. i � , �a,� •,4 � ��•`2 : tr.��•:._ � " •fir+-...••--•--••- ' ./_ . j ,,�: '.... _ • �•.,. '-��:..; ' fVkrev j. • :. ; .., :.�,�_� \ f i � ��t ,�� .�.�� :;�'�.. •;---�:_:� � -�`' --�.r 1. •� 1 X ••.r' �`�'\z''�_t ,�� - �l�'"• �: 'rte. , '%/� _! �., 70 4015' Ir 4 WLLM T!Y csr�res , t- •— 101 77 - t WLLM T!Y csr�res , t- •— 101 77 - CASE NUMBER: 77SO70 APPLICANT: ZANE G. DAVIS, FOR COLONIAL April 19, 1977 (C.P.C. ) PINE ESTATES INCORPORATED REQUEST AND PROPOSED USE: The rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Residen- tial (R-7). The Applicant plans to subdivide (Colonial Pine Estates) the property for single family residential use. GENERAL LOCATION AND TAX MAP IDENTIFICATION: In Matoaca Magisterial District, this parcel fronts along the northeast line of Woodpecker Road and is located approximately 150 feet north of its intersection with Dupuy Avenue. Also fronting along the southwest line of Branders Bridge Road and located approximately 1,350 feet north of its intersection with Seaboard Coastline Railroad. Tax Map 175-13 (1) Parcels 1 & 2 (Sheet 49). ACREAGE, EXISTING ZONING, EXISTING LAND USE (SUBJECT PARCEL): This parcel contains 117 acres, is zoned Agricultural A and is wooded and vacant. ADJACENT AND AREA ZONING AND LAND USE: Property to the northwest is zoned Residential (R-7) and is being developed as Shadowbrook Heights Sub- division. Property to the north is zoned Agricultural (A) and is either vacant or occupied by single family dwellings. Property to the northeast, across Branders Bridge Road, is zoned Residential (R-7) and is being developed as Brookside Subdivision. Property to the east is zoned Agricultural (A) and is vacant except for the Southern Coastline Railroad which runs along the eastern boundry of this property. Property to the south is zoned Residential (R-7) and is occupied by Dupuy Court Subdivision. UTILITIES, SOIL PROFILE, DRAINAGE AND EROSION, REQUIRED OFF-SITE EASEMENTS: Water is available to serve this property and sewer should be available by the summer of 1977. The Applicant states that the proposed subdivison will contain 326 single family dwellings. The Utilities Department reports that an average single family residence uses 240 gallons of water per day; therefore, 78,240 gallons per day would be utilized by this development. These per unit flows are not line design flows, because peak flow plus fire service flow must be considered for design purposes. There is an available water treatment capacity of 22 million gallons per day from the Appomattox Water Authority serving this area with 1 to 2 million gallons per day being used. There is a 16 inch water line located along Branders Bridge Road at the northern property line of this parcel. The County Engineer calculates per capita sewage flow at 100 gallons per day for design purposes. Based on an average of 3.5 persons per single family dwelling unit, approximately 114,100 gallons per day of sewage effluent would be generated for treatment by the proposed sub- division. These sewage treatment figures are greater than the water used because of infiltration and inflow. This property lies in the Old Town Creek and Colonial Heights Sewage Drainage area. The closest trunk sewer is located along Old Town Creek, but as mentioned previously, will not be operational until the summer of 1977. The sewer trunk will serve this project and will connect to the Petersburg Treatment Plant. 1. The completion of the trunk sewer to this property is dependent upon Colonial Heights and their construction of sewer which will tie into the sewer trunk for this property. The soils on this parcel are sandy loam and land wet, gently sloping and have only a slight chance for erosion. Thirty to forty percent of the parcel has wet soils with a seasonal water table at 18 inches or less, and are poorly suited for building foundations and roadways. Minimum lot sizes (7,000 square feet) which would be permitted with the used of public utilities, will not allow a well drained building site for each lot. A field evaluation for each lot should be conducted in low areas to determine drainage needs for each structure (see attached soil study map). This parcel lies in the Old Town Creek Drainage area. There are present- ly on -and off-site drainage and erosion problems throughout the general area of this request. Because of topography and the types of soil present on this parcel, drainage and erosion Droblems are anticipated during development of this project. Prior to clearing or construction, a site plan and erosion control plan must be submitted to and approved by the County. Off-site drainage easements will be required. PUBLIC FACILITIES: Based on the 1977 average of 0.90 public school students per single family dwelling, approximately 293 students would be gen- erated by this development. This subdivision is now within.the Ettrick Elementary and Matoaca Junior Hiuh and Hiqh School attendance zones. This subdivision will be served by the Ettrick Fire Station, Company #12, which is operated by County employees and is located 2 miles from the subject property. Adequate fire service capability can be provided if public water is used and fire hydrants are provided. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC: Single family development under the proposed plan would result in the generation of approximately 3,195 average daily traffic based on an estimate of 9.8 trips per single family residence These vehicular movements would be distributed over Woodpecker Road, Dupuy Road and Branders Bridge Road which are the primary roads for carrying traffic north towards the Courthouse or east and southeast towards Jefferson Davis Highway or the Village of Ettrick. Presently, there are only two accesses to this property clearly defined; one off Branders Bridge Road and one off Woodpecker Road. Prior to the full development of this protect. additional access roads will be required. It should be noted that in the Highway Department's 1976 Primary and Secondary Road Traffic Counts. the following average daily traffic on area roads have been experienced: a. Branders Bridge Road, from Weldon Road to Lakeview Avenue - 1,391 ADT; b. Branders Bridge Road, from Weldon Street to Colonial Heights - 1,594 ADT; C. Woodpecker Road, from Dupuy Road to Rosewood Lane - 2,520 ADT; d. Woodpecker Road, from Dupuy Road to Thelma Avenue - 825 ADT; e. Woodpecker Road, from Dupuy Road to River Road - 2,186 ADT. Staff finds that the condition of Branders Bridge Road, Woodpecker Road 2. and Dupuy Road in the area of the request ranges from fair to poor, with no planned improvements in the near future. Staff notes that the proposed location for the Temple Avenue extension runs through the center of this parcel. GENERAL PLAN: This parcel lies in an area designated for single family residential use. REQUEST ANALYSIS: In this case, the Applicant, who is the owner of this property, plans to subdivide this parcel for single family residential use and create 326 building lots. The attached subdivision plan will be presented to the Planning Commission for their approval on April 26, 1977. The Applicant states that County water and sewer will be used and drainage will be provided by roadside ditches. He notes that the mimimum lot size will be 10,450 square feet, maximum lot size, 41,160 square feet, with an average lot size of 12,000 square feet. ALTERNATIVES AND MITIGATING MEASURES: Staff reviewed this request and notes that Old Town Creek lies along the western boundry of the subject parcel. Shadowbrook Heights lies north of this property, is zoned Residential (R-7) and is being developed with 64 single family dwellings. Brookside Subdivision lies northeast of this project, along the north- east line of Branders Bridge Road, is zoned Residential (R-7) and will be developed with 74 single family dwellings. To the south of the subject property, lie the subdivisions of Dupuy Court, L. A. Reynolds Property, Chesterfield Place and W. W. Mason Estates. These are old subdivisions which have an average lot size from 9,000 to 15,000 square feet. The vacant property to the north, east and southwest of the subject parcel is zoned Agricultural (A) and is undeveloped. These properties are large properties and have a good potential for future subdivision. In view of the large vacant parcels lying northeast and southwest of the project; the average lot size of existing subdivisions (9,000 to 15,000 square feet); the average lot size of those which are proposed (20,000 square feet); and the soil conditions on this property, Staff believes that the Commission may wish to consider recommending either the R-9 or R-12 classification. CASE HISTORY AND PAST COKMISSION AND BOARD ACTION FOR THIS REQUEST C.P.0 4 19 77: Recommended approval of the requested Residential (R-7) rezoning 3. W� 776,070 e,40 j' f% 7V le•7 , CTTDiry 'S .r,yF 0 4b 1 i Cert 77 SO?& i. 7 •1 B.I I •c'•rai • r�/,f� A• Igs's l So- 14-3 1 ic s: 8 0 foe s« So IL Su14AINI-Ciy Ji7.►t„ • iso �—� BuI'---%>//N G �okNDAT/flus ROADS o v /!lll/ rC-00 — t �� •1� po G /L �t I i �i1HLrli�+ 1 r 1 1 ��l I I o 77MANZ. COC.Wr MAP Mar ro 4. 77.6020 .' VICINITY MAP SCALE: I =eOO' M T A K E N 0 T I C E That the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, on Wednesday, June 8, 1977, beginning at 2:45 P. M., in the County Board Room at Chesterfield Courthouse, Virginia, will take under consideration the granting of Variances on the parcels of land described herein. 775135 In Dale Magisterial District, Thomas H. Tilley request a Variance to use a parcel of land, which has no public road frontage, for dwelling purposes. This parcel lies approximately 290 feet off the northline of Chalkley Road measured from a point 6400 feet southwest of its intersection with Centralia Road. Tax Map Sec. 96 (1) Part of Parcel 44 (Sheet 31). 775136 In Clover Hill Magisterial District, WILLIAM M. ELLIOTT requests aaVariance to use a parcel of land which has no public road frontage for dwelling purposes. This parcel lies 1100 feet off the north line of Pear Orchard Road measured from a point 36,000 feet southwest of its intersection with Skinquarter Road. Tax Map Sec. 86 (1) Parcel 10-1 (Sheet 26). 775137 In Matoaca Magisterial District, JAMES E. HOWERTON requests a Variance to use a parcel of land, which has no public road frontage, for dwelling purposes. This parcel lies 1321 feet off the north line of Hickory Road measured from a point 1650 feet west of its intersection with Rowlett Road. Tax Map Sec. 171-3 (1) Part of Parcel 8 (Sheet 47). 775138 In Bermuda Magisterial District, FLOYD EUGENE RAGSDALE requests a Variance to use a parcel of land, which has no public road frontage, for dwelling purposes. This parcel lies 430 feet off the west line of Lawing Drive measured from a point 650 feet northwest of its intersection with Woods Edge Road. Tax Map Sec. 134-1 (1) Part of Parcel 6 (Sheet 42). 775139 & 775140 In Matoaca Magisterial District, R. VAIDEN JONES requests two Variances to use two parcels of land, which have no public road frontage, for dwelling purposes. These parcels lie approximately 200 feet west of the terminus of Wild Turkey Run and Saddlebrook Road. Tax Map Sec. 158-12 (1) Parts of Parcel 37 (Sheet 47). Copies of these amendments are on file in the Department of Community Development, Airport Industrial Park, 7714 Whitepine Road, Chesterfield, Virginia, for public examination between the hours of 8:30 A. M. and 5:00 P. M. of each regular business day. APPLICANT AND/OR AGENT E RESENT AT A N . • James M. Sc vo Zoning Admi istrator Chesterfield County M CASE NUMBER: 77S135 APPLICANT: THOMAS H. TILLEY In B. S. - June 8, 1977 REQUEST AND PROPOSED USE: A Variance to use a parcel of land, which has no public road frontage for dwelling purposes. The applicant plans to build a single family dwelling on this parcel. LOCATION AND TAX MBP: In Dale Magisterial District, this parcel lies approximately 290 feet off the north line of Chalkley Road measured from a point 6,400 feet southwest of its intersection with Centralia Road. Tax Map Section 96 (1) Part of Parcel 432 (,Sheet 311. PROPERTY ACREAGE, ZONING AND LAND USE: Approximately 1.82 acres in area, zoned Agricultural (Al and is presently vacant. ADJACENT AND AREA, ZONING AND LAND USE: Property is zoned Agricultural (A) and is occupied by single family dwellings or remains vacant. UTILITIES: As of this writing, the Health Department has not reported that—this parcel is suitable for installation of a septic tank system and individual well. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC: This request requires the opening of a new street. GENERAL PLAN: Agricultural (A) use. REQUEST ANALYSIS: The applicant plans to purchase this property from Laverne Cole and Max Hunter and build a single family dwelling on the site. He states that access to Chalkley Road will be over and across a private road easement from Point A to Point B as shown on the attached map. ALTERNATIVES AND MITIGATING MEASURES: Staff reviewed this request and finds that Patrom ale, Lost Forrest and Centralia Gardens Subdivisions lie to the north and northwest of this request. Staff notes that this parcel and adjacent parcels are large with a good potential for future subdivision. Staff visited the location and finds that the present road will require extensive improvements if adequate ingress and egress is to be provided for emergency vehicles. Staff notes that the present property owner, Laverne Cole, owns Parcel 43-2 and 44 which are located adjacent to each other. In review of building permits issued on Parcel 44, staff has found that the applicant originally created two parcels which had public road frontage, see attached drawing 1. The property owner subsequently filed for an additional building permit and created a lot fronting on Chalkley Road; therefore, as a result creating an illegal lot by cutting off road frontage for one of the lots on which a building permit had already been granted, see attached drawing 2, Therefore, the applicant has created a total of -three lots bn Parcel 44. The property owner has created two lots on Parcel 44 which do not meet the exemption requirements from the Subdivision Ordinance because one does not front along an existing State highway and the other, although it does have public road frontage, it does not have the minimum required 125 feet in order to be exempted from the Subdivision process. The property owners are now in the process of developing Parcel 32-2 which is located to the west of Parcel 44. Staff finds that the applicant has recorded one lot in the rear of this parcel, see attached drawing 3. In addition, the applicant has obtained a building permit on the portion of the lot fronting along Chalkley Road. Now the property owners plan to subdivide a third time and create an additional lot which has no public road frontage, see drawing 4. Based on this, the property owners have created a total of three lots on Parcel 43-2, two of which do not meet the exemption requirements from the Subdivision Ordinance because they do not front along an existing State highway. Therefore, by definition, a subdivision has been created. Based on the foregoing, staff believes approval of this request would violate the provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance. Staff finds that the property owners have created a total of six lots, from two original parcels, four of which do not meet the exemption requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. Staff notes that one Variance request has been circumvented by acquiring a building permit on Part of Parcel 44 which had public road frontage and then subsequently subdividing and cutting off road frontage to that dwelling. Staff notes that there is a possibility for the request of at least one more Variance in the rear of Parcel 43-2. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THIS REQUEST AND SUGGEST THAT THE BOARD ADVISE THE APPLICANT TO OBTAIN PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL FOR SUBDIVISION. HOWEVER, IF THE BOARD SEES FIT TO APPROVE THIS REQUEST, STAFF RECOMMENDS IT BE SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. A fifty (50) foot wide public road shall be dedicated from Point A to Point B, as shown on the attached plat. This dedicatir1 will be with the understanding that the County will not build or maintain the road until it is brought to State standards by others. 2. No building permit shall be granted until thi's dedication is accomplished. 3. The dedicated right-of-way shall be constructed to at least all weather road standards (gravel surface with roadside ditches) and maintained to provide ease of ingress and egress for emergency vehicles during inclement weather. 4. Occupancy shall not be granted until the right-of-way is constructed to all weather road standards. A deed of dedication can be prepared and executed by a private source. The document must be filed with the County Right -of -Way Department, who will review and forward it to the County Clerk for recordation. or 2. loft The County Right -of -Way Department will prepare the deed of dedica- tion upon presentation of the following: LM N Three (3) copies of the latest recorded plat of the property. If no plat is available, a plat by a certified land surveyor is necessary. The data on the plat should be as follows: 1. Name(s) of legal living owner(s) of property. 2. Deed or Will Book and Page Reference to legal living owner. If there is no Will left by previous owner, then an instrument must be recorded to establish existing ownership. 3. Area to be dedicated to County described by bearings and distances and tied down to an existing road, creek or structure. If there are any questions regarding the preparation of a deed of dedication, please call the County Right -of -Way Office at: 748-1361. 3. 4L APR* »+ + �. ♦♦uln�nnuu�unn�� O ,kwy �' a r OS5 f� P ' `" 54� '`r 53 p 59 .� 5® 55.E 56 AM 38 _� . i 45 7 a 1 - 46 'OV - j - Evan 43-1 42 AIN OR,4WVAf4 -e- 44- IAJ Q o 37 `" 54� '`r 53 p 59 .� 5® 55.E 56 AM 38 _� AV 0 • 10 AO - P... r .S - '`._!.• Ao CD 2 � _ • • `' _.iii �-'� ',� • I J40 - is 45 - so' �9 •'" " 3 46 4 4 • ;�tf1 43-1 43-2111 r 42 �; = 43, 41 40 - �ca,�tDO�✓�.�i0�/ o� A9Ret.EL- 4¢ w 39 - Q � 37 54Q ? '� 53 p 52 55 4.) 56 A 197- W J � = 0 36 546) `r 55 p 59 521M i 1 1 36-1 :DiQAWIA14 , 3 39 37 38 97-1: - 7 ,7 1 •V •�1 • sir t` 46 .0 . J6- vb 1 —A. ,_ ,._ 9� . 1 - . ray r � � ^ 7�' • 45 46 qrr 43-1 43-4, 3- 42 -43 IV�• 1 � f �� lto toss 41 4-0 yowl W J � = 0 36 546) `r 55 p 59 521M i 1 1 36-1 :DiQAWIA14 , 3 39 37 38 97-1: y' _ Y KW uQ�lww� alp ¢ J39 3 _ Q o 36 7 549) Q o ss 53 p � S2 = � o -- <\ 38 _ "A JF j_ .. ,sem -� • ;iv 45� sAff 46 - 43-1 43-2q, -h 42 43 -'- 07 4*0 y' _ Y KW uQ�lww� alp ¢ J39 3 _ Q o 36 7 549) Q o ss 53 p � S2 = � o -- <\ 38 _ CASE NUMBER: 775136 APPLICANT: WILLIAM M. ELLIOTT M B. S. - June 8, 1977 REQUEST AND PROPOSED USE: A Variance to use a parcel of land, which has no public road frontage for dwelling purposes. LOCATION AND TAX MAP: In Clover Hill Magisterial District, this parcel lies 1,100 feet off the north line of Pear Orchard Road measured from a point 36,000 feet southwest of its intersection with Skinquarter Road. Tax Map Section 86 (1) Parcel 10-1 (Sheet 26). PROPERTY ACREAGE, ZONING AND LAND USE: Approximately four (4) acres, zoned Agricultural (A) and is vacant. ADJACENT AND AREA, ZONING AND LAND USE: Adjacent property is zoned Agricultural (A) and is occupied by single family dwellings or remains vacant. UTILITIES: As of this writing, the Health Department has not reported that this parcel is suitable for installation of a septic tank system and individual well. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC: This request requires the opening of a new street. GENERAL PLAN: Agricultural (A) use. REQUEST ANALYSIS: In this case William M. Elliott, the property owner, plans to build a single family dwelling on this site. He states that access to Pear Orchard Road will be over and across a private road easement from Point A to Point B as shown on the attached map. ALTERNATIVES AND MITIGATING MEASURES: Staff reviewed this request and finds that this parcel and adjacent parcels are large with a good potential for future subdivision. Staff visited the location and found that the existing road will re- quire extensive improvements if adequate ingress and egress is to be provided for emergency vehicles. Staff notes that the Board has already granted two (2) Variances along this private road easement. Staff reviewed records and finds that the original parcel has been divided a total of five (5) times. The creation of five (5) parcels is three (3) more than are permitted when the divisions do not meet the exemption requirements from the Subdivision Ordinance. In this case, four of the divisions (Parcels 11, 11-1, 10-1 and 10) do not meet the exemption requirements because they do not front along an existing State highway. Therefore, staff believes that approval of this request would violate the provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance. S RECOMMENDATION: RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THIS REQUEST AND SUGGEST rnnT/YT.T THAT THE BOARD ADVISE THE APPLICANT TO OBTAIN elRN141W-7 APPROVAL FOR SUBDIVISION. HOWEVER, IF THE BOARD SEES FIT TO GRANT THIS REQUEST, STAFF RECOMMENDS IT BE SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. A fifty (50) foot wide public road shall be dedicated from Point A to Point B, as shown on the attached map. This dedication shall be with the understanding that the County will not build or maintain this road until it is brought to State standards by others. 2. No building permit shall be granted until this dedication is accomplished. 3. The applicant shall construct the above described right-of-way to at least all weather road standards: gravel surface with road side ditches. This will provide ease of ingress and egress for emergency vehicles. 4. Occupancy shall not be granted until the right-of-way is constructed to all weather road standards. A deed of dedication can be prepared and executed by a private source.- The document must be filed with the County Right -of -Way Department, who will review and forward it to the County Clerk for recordation; or The County Right -of -Way Department will prepare the deed of dedication upon presentation of the following: Three (3) copies of the latest recorded plat of the property. If no plat is available, a plat by a certified land surveyor is necessary. The data on the plat should be as follows: 1. Name(s) of legal living owner(s) of property. 2. Deed or Will Book and Page Reference to legal living owner. If there is no Will left by previous owner, then an instrument must be recorded to establish existing ownership. 3. Area to be dedicated to County described by bearings and distances and tied down to an existing road, creek or structure. If there are any questions regarding the preparation df a deed of dedication, please call the County Right -of -Way Office at: 748-1361. 2. 17 N n ■ X7513 � "=c000VAQih"c.t. /CET ZZ, ' + N CASE NUMBER: 775137 APPLICANT: JAMES E. HOWERTON R] B. S. - June 8, 1977 REQUEST AND PROPOSED USE: A Variance to use a parcel of land which has no public road frontage for dwelling purposes. LOCATION AND TAX MAP: In Matoaca Magisterial District, this parcel lies 1,321 feet off the north line of Hickory Road measured from a point 1,650 west of its intersection with Rowlett Road. Tax Map Section 171-3 (1) Part of Parcel 8 (Sheet 47). ADJACENT PROPERTY, ZONING AND LAND USE: Approximately one (1) acre in area, is zoned Agricultural (A) and is vacant. ADJACENT AND AREA, ZONING AND LAND USE: Property is zoned Agricultural (A) and is occupied by single family dwellings or remains wooded and vacant. UTILITIES: The Health Department reports that this parcel is suitable for the installation of a septic tank system and individual well. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC: This request requires the opening of a new street. GENERAL PLAN: Agricultural (A) use. REQUEST ANALYSIS: In this case the applicant who is the property owner plans to build a single family dwelling on this site. He states that access to Hickory Road will be over and across a private road easement from Point A to Point B as shown on the attached map. ALTERNATIVES AND MITIGATING MEASURES: Staff reviewed this request and finds—that the subject parcel and adjacent parcels are large with'a good potential for future subdivision. Staff notes that Taylor Hall Estates lies to the southeast of this request. Staff notes that the applicant is in the process of purchasing the entire Parcel 8; however, he states he is presently unable to obtain a clear title, except for a one acre tract which is located in the center of the entire Parcel 8. Staff, however, believes that the Board should consider the possibility of the applicant not obtaining clear title to the remainder of the property and therefore, perhaps creating a situation where the proposed parcel will be land locked with no means of access to a public road. Staff believes that the division, as the applicant proposes, may hinder the future orderly subdivision of the parcel. Therefore, staff believes that if the Board sees fit to approve this request, there should be no requirement for dedication of a Right -of -Way but rather a requirement for reservation of a twenty-five foot (25) private road easement. Staff visited the 1_.:ation and finds that the rfoposed road will require extensive improvements if adequate ingress and egress is to be provided for emergency vehicles. Staff notes that the division of the parcel as the applicant pro- poses will create a subdivision, by definition. In this case, the subject parcel does not meet the exemption requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance because the parcel does not front along an existing State highway. Therefore, Staff believes that approval of this Variance would violate the provisions of the Subdivision Or Ordinance. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THIS REQUEST AND SUGGEST THAT THE BOARD ADVISE THE APPLICANT TO OBTAIN PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL FOR SUBDIVISION. HOWEVER, IF THE BOARD SEES FIT TO GRANT THIS REQUEST, STAFF RECOMMENDS IT BE SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. A twenty-five (25) foot wide private road easement shall be reserved from Point A to Point B, as shown on the attached map. 2. No building permit shall be issued until this easement is reserved and recorded in the County Clerk's office. 3. The applicant shall construct the above described easement to at least all weather road standards: gravel surface with roadside ditches. This will provide ease of ingress and egress for emergency vehicles. 4. Occupancy shall not be granted until the easement is constructed to all weather road standards. 2. ' r s w ,nx►�+NH4•'++-r�w�iAiVFYk"arr. ws�.�:. ...1+ .+..�CIJw�-r+4+T ih f • i .-Z- _ ___ _ • $ 77.5✓37 ZAewT47 1 R-151 F R-151 -CASE NUMBER: 775138 APPLICANT: FLOYD EUGENE RAGSDALE 4 B. S. - June 8, 1977 REQUEST AND PROPOSED USE: A Variance to use a parcel of land which as no public road frontage for dwelling purposes. The applicant plans to build a single family dwelling on this parcel. LOCATION AND TAX MAP: In Bermuda Magisterial District, this parcel lies 430 feet off the west line of Lawing Drive measured from a point 650 feet northwest of its intersection with Woods Edge Road. Tax Map Sec. 134-1 (1) Part of Parcel 6 (Sheet 42). PROPERTY ACREAGE, ZONING AND LAND USE: Approximately one (1) acre in area, zoned Agricultural (A) and is vacant. ADJACENT AND AREA, ZONING AND LAND USE: Property is zoned Agricultural (A) and is occupied J?y single family dwellings or remains vacant. UTILITIES: The Health Department reports that this parcel is suitable for installation of a septic tanksystem and an individual well. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC: This request requires the opening of a new street. GENERAL PLAN: Agricultural (A) REQUEST ANALYSIS: In this case, the applicant plans to purchase this parcel from Maggie Lawing and build a single family dwelling on the parcel. He states that access to Lawing Drive will be over and across a private road easement from Point A to Point B as shown on the attached map. ALTERNATIVES AND MITIGATING MEASURES: Staff reviewed this request and finds that adjacent parcels are large with a good potential for future subdivision. Staff visited the location and finds that the proposed road will require construction and extensive improvements if adequate ingress and egress is to be provided for emergency vehicles. Staff finds that six parcels have been created from the original parcel to include 3, 4, 5, 6, 6-1 and 6-2. Staff notes that by definition this is a subdivision. The creation of six lots is four more than are permitted by Ordinance when the divisions do not meet the exemption requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. In this case, four of the divisions (Parcels 3, 4, 6-1 and 6-2) do not meet the exemption requirements because they do not front along a State highway a minimum of 125 feet. Also, the proposed parcel does not meet the exemption requirements because it does not have any frontage as a State highway. Therefore, staff believes that approval of this request would violate the provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance. f STAFF RECOMMENDATION: RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THIS REQUEST AND SUGGEST THAT THE BOARD ADVISE THE APPLICANT TO OBTAIN PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL FOR SUBDIVISION. HOWEVER, ZF THE BOARD SEES FIT TO GRANT THIS REQUEST, STAFF RECOMMENDS IT BE SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. A fifty (50) foot public road shall be dedicated from Point A to Point B as shown on the attached map. 2. No building permit shall be granted until this dedication is accomplished. 3. The above described right-of-way shall be constructed to at least all weather road standards: gravel surface with roadside ditches. 4. Occupancy shall not be granted until the right-of-way is constructed to at least all weather road standards. A deed of dedication can be prepared and executed by a private source. The document must be filed with the County Right -of -Way Department, who will review and forward it to the County Clerk for recordation. or The County Right -of -Way Department will prepare the deed of dedication( upon presentation of the following: Three (3) copies of the latest recorded plat of the property. If no plat is available, a plat by a certified land surveyor is necessary., The data on the plat should be as follows: 1. Name(s) of legal living owner(s) of property. 2. Deed or Will Book and Page reference to legal living owner. If there is no Will left by previous owner, then an instrument must be recorded to establish existing ownership. 3. Area to be dedicated to County described by bearings and distances and tied down to an existing road, creek or structure. If there are any questions regarding the presentation of a deed of dedication, please call the County Right -of -Way Office at 748-1361. i W -M 9 0 � �ir- Y M B. S. - June 8, 1977 CASE NUMBER: 77S139 & 77S140 APPLICANT: R. VAIDEN JONES REQUEST AND PROPOSED USE: Two Variances to use two parcels of land which front along an unimproved public road, for dwelling purposes. The applicant plans to build two single family dwellings. LOCATION AND TAX MAP: In Matoaca Magisterial District, these parcels are located approximately 200 feet west of the terminus of Wild Turkey Run and Saddlebrook Road. Tax Map Section 158-12 (1) Part of Parcel 37 (Sheet 47) . PROPERTY ACREAGE, ZONING AND'LAND USE: Parcel C is 2.08 acres, is zoned Residential (R-15) and is vacant. Parcel E is 2.5 acres, is zoned Residential (R-15) and is vacant. ADJACENT AND AREA, ZONING AND LAND USE: Properties to the north, eand —Southare zone Residential (R-15). Property to the west is zoned Agricultural (A). Property is occupied by single family dwellings or remains vacant. UTILITIES: As of this writing, the Health Department has not reported `tFia`t these parcels are suitable for installation of a septic tank system and individual well. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC: These parcels front along a dedicated but. unimprove pu is road. This request requires the roads to be built to State standards. GENERAL PLAN: Agricultural (A) use. REQUEST ANALYSIS: The applicant is part owner in this property which is owned by —Bright Oaks Estate. The applicant plans to build a single family dwelling on Parcels C and E. He states that access to Saddle - brook Road will be over and across an unimproved public road from Point A to Point B as shown on the attached map. _ALTEMATIVE'S AND MITIGATING ?MEASURES: Staff reviewed this request and finds that Bright Oaks Estate lies to the east of this request. Staff notes that on October 26, 1976, the Planning Commission granted tentative approval for subdivision of Parcel 37; however, as of this writing, it has not been recorded (see attachment 77S139-1). Tentative approval for the subdivision was granted subject to the condition that no further sections be recorded until Wild Turkey Run is extended west to the Avery Property line. To date, Wild Turkey Run has been dedicated to the Avery Property line, but not built to State standards. Staff reviewed the p�dt (see attachment 77S139�j which the applicant submitted and finds that it is not in accordance with the plat which the Planning Commission gave tentative approval (see attachment 77S139-1). Staff notes that the plat which Mr. Jones submitted has not received approval from the Planning Commission. To date, the Board has granted a total four (4) Variances along unimproved Wild Turkey Run (see attachment 77S139-2). On November 10, 1976, the Board granted a Variance (#76S197) to use part of Parcel 37 for dwelling purposes. On May 11, 1977, the Board granted an additional three (3) Variances (#77S076, #77SO86, and #77SO87) (see attachment 77S139-2). These Variances were granted subject to the conditions that the applicant construct Wild Turkey Run to at least all-weather road standards and that occupancy not be granted for any of the subject parcels until the foregoing is accomplished. Staff notes that to date, the original Parcel 37 has been divided into a total of six (6) parcels. Staff finds that, by definition, this is a subdivision. The creation of six parcels is four more than are permitte when the divisions do not meet the exemption requirements from the Subdivision Ordinance. In this case, the divisions do not meet the exemption requirements because they do not front along an existing State highway. Therefore, staff believes that approval of these requeg"-s would violate the provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: RECOMMEND, DENIAL OF THIS REQUEST AND SUGGEST THAT THE BOARD ADVISE THE APPLICANT TO OBTAIN PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL FOR SUBDIVISION. HOWEVER, IF THE BOARD SEES FIT TO GRANT THIS REQUEST, STAFF•RECOMMENDS IT BE SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. The applicant and adjacent property owners shall construct Wild Turkey Run from Point A to its intersection with Saddlebrook Road to State standards. This will provide ease of ingress and egress for emergency vehicles. 2. Occupancy shall not be granted until the right-of-way has been constructed to State standards. 3. The County will not build or maintain the road until it is constructed to State standards by others. { 2. x a� RT sot "- •qui js§Y�Yrire+n� '% w .. n _ R--15 � V P,QEunrynlA+�Y IL . �s 140 -/ MOBILE HOME REPORT The Board of Supervisors of the County of Chesterfield, on Wednesday, June 8, 1977, beginning at 2:30 P. M. in the County Board Room at Chesterfield Courthouse, Virginia, will take under consideration the granting of Mobile Home Permits on the parcels of land described herein. 77SR129 CLINTON RAY SAUNDERS Tax Magisterial District Map Sec. 81-16(5)Central Park Blk 7 Lots 32-37 and better known as 10014 Beaumont Avenue. (Sheet 23) The applicant requests renewal of a Mobile Home Permit to park a mobile home on property which he owns. The Health Department reports no environmental health hazard in existence. One adjacent property owner has not signed this request which is for 2 years. Permit issued 5/14/75. 77SR130 SHERMAN MILLS Bermuda Magisterial District Tax Map 115-10 (5) Marquis Property Lot 7 and better known as 4816 �w Shop Street. (Sheet 32) The applicant requests renewal of a Mobile Home Permit to park a mobile home on property which he owns. As of this writing, the Health Department has not reported on environmental conditions on this parcel. Two adjacent property owners have not signed this request which is for 2 years. Permits issued 6/2/71, 6/6/73, and 6/11/75. ,/ 7 7SR131 BETTY LEWIS The applicant requests renewal home on property which belongs As of this writing, the Health rhealth conditions on this lot. to this request which is for 2 and 6/11/75. V/77SR132 KENNETH R. SNODGRASS Bermuda Magisterial District Tax Map Sec. 115-10 (3) Werths Addition Lots 69A, 70, 71 and better known as 4841 Shop Street. (Sheet 32) of a Mobile Home Permit to park a mobile to James Dudley, brother of the applicant. Department has not reported on environmental Adjacent property owners state no objection years. Permits issued 6/2/71, 6/6/73 Bermuda Magisterial District Tax Map Sec. 81-3 (1) Parcel 11 and better known as 2900 Kingsland Road. (Sheet 23), The applicant requests renewal of a Mobile Home Permit to park a mobile home on property which belongs to Orville C. Lucas, friend of the applicant. The Health Department reports no environmental health hazard in existence. One adjacent property owner has not signed this request which is for 2 years. Permits issued 6/13/73 and 6/11/75. l V/77SR133 PIEDMON<CONTRACTORS, INC. Bermuda Magisterial District Tax Map Sec. 116-12 (1) Parcel 6-2 and located in the vicinity of 12801 Old Stage Road. (Sheet 32) The applicant requests renewal of a Mobile Home Permit to park a mobile home on property which belongs to Joseph C. King. The applicant rents the property from the owner. The Health Department reports no environmental health hazard in existence. One adjacent property owner has not signed this request which is for 2 years. Permit issued 6/11/75. ✓ 775134 PHILLIP W. ELDER Matoaca Magisterial District Tax Map Sec. 186-4 (1) Parcel 16 and better known as 6207 Fitzhugh Street. (Sheet 52) The applicant requests a Mobile Home Permit to park a mobile home on property which belongs to George T. Elder, father of the applicant. As of this writing, the Health Department has not reported on the suitability of the installation of a septic tank system and individual �. well. Adjacent property owners state no objection to this request which is.,for 2 years. Copies of these applications are on file in the Department of Community Development, Airport Industrial Park, 7714 Whitepine Road, Chesterfield, Virginia, for public examination between the hours of 8:30 A. M. and 5:00 P. M. of each regular business day. APPLICANT AND/OR AGENT MUST BE PRESENT AT H' s M. S ng Administrator c T A K E N 0 T I C E That the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, on Wednesday, June 8, 1977, beginning at 2:30 P. M., in the County Board Room at Chesterfield Courthouse, Virginia, will take under consideration the rezoning and the granting of Conditional Uses on the parcels of land described herein at the times indicated. 77SO47 In Matoaca Magisterial District, GLEN T. HASTINGS COMPANY requests a Conditional Use to permit the construction of 16 two-family units in a Residential (R-7) District on a 14.3 acre parcel fronting approximately 100 feet on Brickhouse Drive and being located off the southern line of Block B of River Road Estates. Tax Map 181-16 (1) Parcel 7 (Sheet 53/54). 775058 In Clover Hill Magisterial District, GEORGE B. SOWERS, JR. requests rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-7) of a ,',',;j5.05 acre parcel fronting 535.12 feet on Providence Road and -located approximately 175 feet north of its intersection with Reams Road. Tax Map 39-2 (1) 8 (Sheet 14) . 775059 In Clover Hill Magisterial District, CALCOURT PROPERTIES, INC., request rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-7) of a 67.1 acre parcel fronting approximately 2,000 feet on Walmsley Blvd., also fronting approximately 600 feet on Newbys Bridge Road, and being located in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of these roads. Tax Map 40-9 (2) 41A, 42A, 47, 47A & 47B, Belmont Farms, Lots 41A, 42A, 47, 47A & 47B. (Sheet 15) . 775061 In Dale Magisterial District, MAX H. HUNTER AND GEORGE KCRAGET requests rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-9) of a 123.26 acre parcel located 1280 feet south of Beach Road measured from a point 300 feet west of the intersection of Qualla Road and Beach Road. Tax ap 110 (1) 45 (Sheets 29 & 38). 775063 In Bermuda Magisterial District, SIXTY SOUTH, a Virginia General P*yr ship, requests rezoning from General Business (B-3) to Mobile Home H-1) of a 9 acre parcel fronting 50.63 feet•,on Jefferson Davis and located approximately 250 feet north of its intersection with West Hundred Road. Tax Map 116-6 (1) 27 (Sheet 32). 775065 In Dale Magisterial District, R. 0. AND C. DOUGLAS SPENCER requests rezoning from Community Business (B-2) to General Business (S-3) to a depth of 400 feet of a 19.70 acre parcel fronting approximately 1300 feet on Iron Bridge Road also fronting approximately 500 feet on Beulah Road, and located in th southeast quadrant of the intersection of these roads. Tax Map 79-4 (1) 4 & 5 (Sheet 22) . 775066 In Clover Hill Magisterial District, DAIRY BARNS OF RICHMOND, INC. requests a Conditional Use to permit the operation of Retail Sales, Whole- sale Distribution and Drive -In establishment in a Light Industrial (M-1) District on a 0.67 acre parcel fronting 240.03 feet on Walmsley Blvd., also fronting 151.82 feet on Turner Road and located in the northeast quadrant of the intersection of these roads. Tax Map 40-6 (1) 22 (Sheet 15). 77SO67 In Matoaca Mag erial District, ELBERT N. CARRIE N. CLARK re- quest a Conditional Use to permit the construction of one (1) duplex in a Residential (R-7) District on a parcel fronting 62 feet on Aldridge Avenue and located approximately 750 feet east of its intersection with Jefferson Davis Highway. Tax Map 163-11 (3) 12, Boulevard Heights, Blk B, Lot 12 (Sheet 49). 77SO68 In Midlothian Magisterial District, MR. & MRS. JAMES 0. SCHAEFFER requests a Conditional Use to permit the operation of a Stock Farm (to keep six (6) horses) in a Residential (R-40) District on a 15.49 acre parcel, fronting approximately 875 feet on Old Gun Road West also fronting approxi- mately 1250 feet on Young Manor Drive, located in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of these roads and known as 3301 Old Gun Road West. Tax Map 2-15 (1) 6 (Sheet 2) . 77SO69 In Clover Hill Magisterial District, WILLIAM G. SPEEKS requests rezoning from Residential (R-12) to Residential (R-9) of a 96.74 acre parcel lying off the northern terminus of Woodsong Road (Genito Forest), and located off the eastern terminus of Dumaine Drive and Monday Way (Lake Genito Estates). Tax Map 49-6 (1) 1 & 2 (Sheet 14). 775070 In Matoaca Magisterial District, ZANE G. DAVIS, for Colonial Pine Estates, Inc., requests re.zoning from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-' of a 117 acre parcel fronting 515 feet on woodpecker Road, located approxi- mately 150 feet north of its intersection with Dupuy Avenue, also fronting 475 feet on Branders Bridge Road located 1350 feet north of its intersection with Seaboard Coast Line Railroad. Tax Map 175-13 (1) 1 & 2 (Sheet 49). Copies of these amendments are on file in the Department of Community Development, Chesterfield Industrial Park, 7714 Whitepine Road, Chesterfield, Virginia, for public examination between the hours of 8:30 A. M. and 5:00 P. M. of each regular business day. APPLICANT AND/OR AGENT MUST BE PRESENT AT HEARING. All persons favoring or opposing the granting of the above request is in- vited to appear at the time and place herein stated. ;J Stanely R. Balderson, Jr. Chief, Development Review Division June 8, 1977 - B. S. CASE NUMBER: 77SO47 APPLICANT: GLEN T. HASTINGS COMPANY REQUEST AND PROPOSED USE: Request a Conditional Use to permit the construc tion of 16 two-family units. GENERAL LOCATION AND TAX MAP 'IDENTIFICATION: This property is South of Brickhouse Drive, 150 feet south of its intersection with Brickhouse Court. Tax Map 181-16 (1) Part of Parcel 7 (Sheet 53/54), (see attached zoning map and subdivision plat) in Matoaca Magisterial District. ACREAGE, EXISTING ZONING, EXISTING LAND USE (SUBJECT PARCEL): This parcel is 3.6 acres in area, is zoned Residential (R-7) and is presently vacant. ADJACENT AND AREA ZONING AND LAND USE: Adjacent property to the north and east is zoned Residential (R-7) while all other property is zoned Agricultural (A). Adjacent property to the east is occupied by the Seaboard Coastline Railroad, while all other property is vacant or occupied by single family dwellings. UTILITIES, SOIL PROFILE, DRAI?:AGE AND EROSION, REQUIRED OFF-SITE EASEMENTS: Public water is on site to serve this pro je--t. The Utilities Department reports that an average single family residence uses 240 gallons of water per day, therefore, 7,680 gallons per day would be utilized by this development. These per unit f•lows"are not line design flows, becaus peak flow, plus fire service flow must be considered for design purposes. There is an available water treatment capacity of 26 million gallons per day from the Appomattox serving this area with 1 million gallons per day now being used. The County Engineer calculates per capita sewage flow at 100 gallons per day for design purposes. Based on an average of 3.5 persons per single family dwelling unit, approximately 1,120 gallons per day of sewage effluent would be generated for treatment by the proposed project: These sewage treatment figures are greater than the water used because of infiltration and inflow. The sewer trunk line in River Road Estates will serve this project and connects to the Petersburg Treatment Plant. This project lies in the Appomattox Sewer Drainage Area. In general, the soil is sandy loam, nearly level to gently sloping and has only a slight chance for erosion. This parcel has poorly drained soils that are poorly suited for roadways and foundations. In general, the soil is poorly suited for the proposed use; see attached soil map. If the Conditional Use is approved, public sewer must be used and drain- age plans developed for each structure. This parcel lies in the Appomattox Drainage Pattern. In general, this parcel lies in an area which has very poor drainage. Both drainage and erosion problems are anticipated during development of this project. No clearing or construction should begin until erosion control and road plans have been approved. An off-site drainage easement will be required for this project. 1• over PUBLIC FACILITIES: ed on the 1977 average oiwpproximately 0.90 public school students per single family dwellings, approximately 25 pupils would be generated by this development. This project is not within the Matoaca Elementary, Matoaca Junior High and Matoaca High School attendance zones. This project will be served by the Ettrick Fire Station, Company #1. The fire station's capability is adequate to serve this property. The developer will have to extend the existing County water system, on Brickhouse Drive, into this project and provide fire hydrants._. The Virginia State Basic Building Code requires a fire separation wall between each dwelling unit which has at least a one.hour fire resistant rating. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC: Two family development would result in the generation of approximately 134 average daily traffic based on an estimate of 9.8 trips per two family residence. These vehicular movements would be distributed over Sacks Land and Sasha Court, which are proposed public roads, and Brickhouse Drive, which is an existing public road. The proposed request would have only minor effects on the average daily traffic in this area. GENERAL PLAN: This request lies in an area designated for single family residential use. REQUEST ANALYSIS: The Applicant is requesting a Conditonal Use to permit the construction of 16 two-family dwelling units. AL`T'ERNATIVES AND MITIGATING MEASURES: The recuest area represents 16 lots, south of Shaker Drive, In Section 2 of River Road Estates. This sub- division is adjacent to property owned by Virginia State College, which in the past has been operated as part of Randolph Farm. Planning Staff is of the opinion that building duplexes in this area is not compatible with the concept of single family development which has been approved for the balance of River Road Estates north of the request site. In addition, the routing of approximately 314 duplex oriented vehicular trips per day trough a single family subdivision would prove disruptive. Also, by approving duplex use for the parcel in question, future -develop- ment of adjacent property to the south and west would be adversely influenced. More than likely, this would result in pressure to rezone or allow development of land uses other than single family residential. In considering the Commission's policy relative to no more than 50 dv:elli: units per single access, Staff would note that at the Sacks Lane access, to Bric:house Drive, there are 44 lots planned. If 16 of these lots are developed for duplex use,.a total of 60 dwelling units would be permitted in Section 2 of River Road Estates. Therefore, this developmen. would exceed the Commission's access policy by 10 dwelling units. The lots on which the duplexes are intended to mately 1/4 of an acre each. No site plan for site plan showing a structure and off-street with this application. Staff would note that per lot would be required. 2. be developed are approxi - the lots, nor any typical parking has been submitte%' 4 off-street parking spri_—s .7qzZ Bta:. ..c.. z CASE NUMBER: 77SO58 APPLICANT: GEORGE B. SOWERS, JR. REQUEST AND PROPOSED USE: The rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-7). The Applicant plans to subdivide this property for single family residential use. GENERAL LOCATION AND TAX MAP IDENTIFICATION: In Clover Hill Magisterial District, this parcel fronts along the east line of West Providence Road and is located approximately 175 feet north of its intersection with Reams Road. Tax Map 39-2 (1) Parcel 8 (Sheet 14). (See attached zoning map and parcel plat.) ACREAGE, EXISTING ZONING, EXISTING LAND USE (SUBJECT PARCEL): This parcel contains approximately 25.05 acres, is zoned Agricultural (A), and an unoccupied single family residence is located on the property. ADJACENT AND AREA ZONING AND LAND USE: All adjacent property is zoned Agricultural (A) and is occupied by a single family dwelling or remains vacant. UTILITIES, SOIL PROFILE 'DRAINAGE AND EROSION, REQUIRED OFF-SITE EASEMENTS: Public water and sewer is available for development of this parcel. It is estimated that development of this parcel, under the R-7 classification, with the use of public water and sewer, would permit a density of approximately 2.56 units per acre. Approximately 64 lots could be developed on the subject tract. The Utilities Department reports that an average single family residence uses 240 gallons per day; therefore, 15,360 gallons per day would be utilized by this development. These per unit flows are not line design flows, because peak flow plus fire service flow must be considered for design purposes. There is an available water treatment capacity of 10 million gallons per day from Swift Creek, serving this area with`6 million gallons per day now being used. There is a 16 inch water line along Poco Drive which is 2,800 feet from the subject parcel. The cost to the developer to bring water to this parcel will be approximately $56,000. The County Engineer calculates per capita sewage flow at 100 gallons per day for design purposes. Based on an average of 3.5 persons per single family dwelling unit, approximately 22,400 gallons per day of sewage effluent will be generated for treatment by the proposed subdivision. These sewage treatment figures are greater than the water used because of infiltration and inflow. This property lies in the Pocoshock Creek Sewage Drainage area. The Pocoshock Creek Trunk Sewer is the closest sewer line to the subject property. This sewer trunk will serve this project and will connect to the Falling Creek Treatment Plant, which has a rated capacity of 6 million gallons per day. Soils on this parcel are sandy loam, gently sloping to sloping and have only a slight chance for erosion. The soils on this property are well suited for single family dwellings. In developing the parcel, lot lines should follow natural drainage ways for building sites in low, wet areas. Natural cover on steep slopes should be maintained to avoid 1. (over) erosion hazards. (Se(I attached soil study map.)( This parcel lies in the Pocoshock Creek Drainage area. Presently, Pocoshock Creek is experiencing siltation and off-site drainage problems. If the parcel is not developed properly, both drainage and erosion problems will be experienced. Prior to any site clearing, a site plan, road and drainage plan and an erosion control plan must be approved for this project. Off-site easements will be required for utilities and drainage. PUBLIC FACILITIES: Based on the 1977 average of 0.90 public school students per single family dwelling, approximately 58 students will be generated by this development. This subdivision is now within the Davis Elementary, Providence Junior High, and Manchester High School attendance zones. This subdivision will be served by the Wagstaff Fire Station, Company #10, which is a volunteer unit, and is located 1.5 miles from the subject property. The fire service capability for this site will be limited, unless public water is extended to this property and fire hydrants provided. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC: Single family development under the proposed plan would result in the generation of approximately 627 average daily traffic based on an estimate of 9.8 trips per single family residence. These vehicular movements will be distributed over Providence Road. It should be noted that as indicated in the Highway Department's 1976 Secondary Traffic Road Count, the following average daily traffic on area roads have been experienced; (see attached traffic map) a. Providence Road, from Reams Road to Route 60 - 3,897 ADT; b. Providence Road, from Reams Road to Hicks Road - 3,960 ADT; C. Providence Road, from Reams Road , northwest - 2,170 ADT; d. Providence Road, from Hicks Road to Courthouse Road - 4,172 ADT; e. Providence Road, from Hicks Road, southeast, 1,683 ADT. Staff finds that Providence Road, in the area of the request, is in very poor condition. The upgrading of providence Road could take place in a few years. GENERAL PLAN: This parcel lies in an area designated for single family residential use. REQUEST ANALYSIS: In this case, the Applicant has a real estate contract with Wallace H. LaParade, the property owner, to purchase his property. The Applicant plans to subdivide this property for single family residential use. If public water and sewer are used in developing the property, approximately 64 building lots would be possible. ALTERNATIVES AND MITIGATING MEASURES: Staff reviewed the request and finds that the subdivision of Bexley lies south of this property and is zoned Residential (R-15); the subdivision of Spring Hill lies to the southwest and is also zoned Residential (R-15); and the subdivision of Surreywood lies to the northwest and this property is zoned both Residential (R-15) and Residential (R-7). Staff notes that the lots in Bexley and Spring Hill Subdivisions all exceed 15,000 square feet in lot area. 2. The elevations s tted with the applicatio ndicate that the units would have the ap arance of brick ranchers slab construction. In reviewing the floor plan for these units, Staff is of the opinion that if approved, the location of the kitchen and bedroom number 1, in the right hand side of the type A unit, should be reversed in order to facilitate improved service and parking design for placing the structure on the lot. This change should also reduce the cost of construction, since plumbing and electrical connections would be shorter. On October 11, 1971, River Road Estates, Inc. filed for a use permit (UP) to construct 277 multiple family units on Tax Map 181-16 (1) Parcel 7 (Case #71-57A). See attached 200 scale tax map. On November 3, 1971, the Board of Zoning Appeals approved this request. A plat dated 10/12/71 and a preliminary site plan dated 10/14/71 was filed. On February 22, 1972, the Planning Commission gave tentative approval for River Road Estates subdivision; 63 lots as shown on a plat dated January 72. (See attached plat.) On April 27, 1976, Planning Commission gave tentative approval of River Road Estates, Section 2; 44 lots as shown on plat dated September 17, 1976 (see attached plat). This part or section of Parcel 7 was originally planned for multi -family units (Case #71-57A approved by Board of Zoning Appeals November 3, 1971.) Some 5 1/2 years have gone by and Phase II has not been developed. However, Staff is of the opinion that River Road Estates still can develop Phase II or 152 multiple family units on this part of Parcel 7, since River Road Estates, Section 2, has not been recorded and the above noted multiple family plan is still valid. On February 7, 1977, Glen T. Hastings Company filed for a Conditional Use to construct 16 two-family dwellings on the south section of River Road Estates, Section 2, (Blk B, Lots 22-23, Blk G, Lots 1 & 2, and Blk A, Lots 12 & 13 (see attached plat). This application will have to be approved since duplex development cannot be substituted for the multiple family plan. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Given the character of the area, and intensity of the proposed development, Staff is of the opinion that this use is not appropriate and should not be permitted. As noted above, duplexes are not compatible with either the lotting or road arrangement for this subdivision and in addition, such a land use could adversely influence the development potential for adjacent property to the south and west. CASE HISTORY AND PAST COMMISSION AND BOARD ACTION FOR THIS REQUEST C.P.C. 3 15 77: Deferred at.the request of the opposition. C.P.C. 4 19 77: Recommend approval of a Conditional Use to construct 16 two-family dwellings on the subject property, subject to the condi- tion that the property be developed in accordance with the plat titled River Road Estates, Section 2, and dated September 17, 1976 and filed with the Applicant's application for this request; and that the Applicant file a letter with Chesterfield County Department of Community Development, stating that the remainder of the subject parcel will be developed for single family residential use rather than multiple family or two family dwellings. 3. I,I'IIIII � i ♦,♦,,,♦ • I^� I Q fHtftfftltlfttfflifHlM-•��• 8-2 w . 1 CA g E ND. 773047-/ ea/oitS V" -t ¢00 goo 0 9 � BI, � p-� 'q� 8. I I OR.ck� 04. Hl -6-1 G'RAUC-4 SAPJDY I -M" So.B-I [.Y p P -H QiiRCV 5Av0y "Ad" III -A-1 PA' Als- BL4O Enl S ANoy LO#4*" .60«- S01rABiwry For AWAOgnotVs f; fi ElAx�2 SEASoNA �- h/�9TL2 TA3LF t4.. OEPYri F� pW e 66e SOMAZ- h/ATEQrt9BL.E 1 ,� �_._-�`- � .ice/- .r ,��` '•'. •• _ , .: �•! . a •.� '•-.` •, �•:, fel � � � •l... Ic 12 .r ►; / ;� N � ti eC qc 10 r, < ` a or N _ �': `mac F `• e f ♦ "n.\��a • ! r.\ O I tea' �- ti • • Q a .� s7 \�i \ � r. `\ ' x f _ ` `' t'7\ _ • `\\ ! ` Yom. •: a •►J ��.y\ ••S~. off � / {ice - •t=M♦ • ` ,�,�� w •• ly v u'sss�xi ?:Tat �`• - p Staff believes that the rezoning Residential (R-7) classification, 7,000 square feet with the use o incompatible with the Bexley and of the subject property to the which permits a minimum lot of f public water and sewer, would be Spring Hill subdivisions. Staff is aware that when public water and sewer become available, to an area which has previously been subdivied, without the availability of these utilities, then consideration should be given to a reduction in lot sizes, thereby permitting more dense development. In conjunc- tion with this, staff is also aware that raw land costs have increased, thereby contributing to the pressure for more dense development. However, in areas where substantial development has occured in a sub- division pattern, using larger lot sizes, consideration of development compatibility should also be addressed in zoning. In this particular situation, several recommendation alternatives are open to the Commission. Rezoning to the R-15, R-12 or R-9 classifications would, of course, require lot sizes larger than the R-7 minimums, but would accordingly be more compatible with the lot sizes in developed sub- divisions in the area. As another alternative, the Commission may also wish to consider recommending that the front portion of the property (area adjacent to Providence Rodd) be rezoned to either the R-12 or R-15 classification with the remainder of the parcel being rezoned R-7. Staff would note, that if this is accomplished, the applicant would be required to present Staff and the Commission with a reasonable proposed line for the separation of the two zonings that would accommodate subdivision under the two classificationsl In this case, deferral of the case would be necessary. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff would recommend that no less a classification that Residential (R-9) be permitted for the entire development. CASE HISTORY PAST COMMISSION AND BOARD ACTION FOR THIS REQUEST C.P.C. 4 19 77: Resolved to recommend Residential (R-7) zoning, subject, to the condition that the applicant provide the Director of Community Development with a letter of intent which outlines the minimum lot width and lot area which will be used in developing the proposed subdivision. It should be noted that this letter has been received by the staff. ' CT t , <4 R 9 R -T E i �f 1 ,e5.05 Az,, -,B . 1 1 1 1 � v .� Vi1hl rM �I J.�it�l•Y� Vih '��'. •� �) ?.S �OI�4 �r/�!K J C.Ei.1IFI, iATE No. � s c(ciltr •.:�'T% c,,. :. � 1. v= ! ba! ?P � 1` .�•�6?SAO' 3.93'S667. . . L .o n�?/;rq sa � ' L •iy6. qo N1° 29'10 , � \ , All. 77 x.40✓/�ENG'E • �GLgO CA6G 77sos8 le—p0t + p y Ott ° ¢oo 800 a `x� I SiA I+A611-141 -veP- BtAILDIMG �ot�A1'4?T! oNs ROADwf)yr. . �< �Goo � • Poon Ssw s.,+A 1 u+t�r�l/e z pow 11t •�-e- k { 157-8-1- VAce✓iLl.e �•S• aWs-B-�-' p��,Nc- kE�psv�c.t-E s-�.�.r►s. - `x� I SiA I+A611-141 -veP- BtAILDIMG �ot�A1'4?T! oNs ROADwf)yr. . �< �Goo � • Poon Ssw s.,+A 1 u+t�r�l/e z M CASE NUMBER: APPLICANT: 21 775059 CALCOURT PROPERTIES INCORPORATED *40 June 8, 1977 - B. S. REQUEST AND PROPOSED USE: The rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Residen- tial. R-7 The Applicant plans to subdivide (Holly Ridge Estates) this property for single family residential use. GENERAL LOCATION AND TAX MAP IDENTIFICATION: In Clover Hill Magisterial District, the parcel fronts along the south line of Walmsley Blvd. and the east line of Newby's Bridge Road, and is located in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of the aforementioned roads. Tax D:ap 40-9 (2) Belmont Farms, Lots 41A, 42A, 47, 47A and 47B (Sheet 15). ACREAGE, EXISTING ZONING, EXISTING LAND USE (SUBJECT PARCEL): These lots contain 67.1 acres, are zoned Agricultural (A) and are vacant with the exception of one single family dwelling. ADJACENT AND AREA ZONING AND LAND USE: Adjacent property to the northeast, east and south is zoned Residential (R-7), while all other adjacent property is zoned Agricultural (A). Adjacent property to the north is occupied by Manchester High School, while all other property is occupied by single family dwellings or remains vacant. UTILITIES, SOIL PROFILE, DRAINAGE AND EROSION, REQUIRED OFF-SITE EASEMENTS: Public water and sewer is available to serve this property. The. Applicant plans to develop 187 single family dwellings. The Utilities Department currently reports that an average single family residence uses 240 gallons of water per day; therefore, 44,160 gallons per day would be utilized by this development. These per unit flows are not line design flows because peak flow plus fire service flow must be considered for design purposes. There is an available water treatment capacity of 10 million gallons per day from Swift Creek serving this,. area with 6 million gallons per day now being used. The County Engineer calculates per capita sewer flow at 100 gallons per day for design purposes. Based on an average of 3.5 persons per single family dwelling unit, approximately 64,400 gallons per day of sewage effluent would be generated for treatment by the proposed subdivision. These sewage treatment figures are greater than the water used because of infiltration and inflow. The Pocoshock Creek Trunk Sewer, which is located on property, will serve this project and will connect to the Falling Creek Treatment Plant. Soils on this property are sandy loam, gently sloping to steep in some areas, and have a moderate chance for erosion. Seventy-five percent of the soils on this property are good for building foundations and roads. The remainder of the property may experience severe erosion, has a very high water table and is subject to frequent flood. (See attached soil study map.) These lots lie in the Pocoshock Drainage area. There are existing siltation and drainage problems along Pocoshock Creek, in the area of the request. Because of the topography of this property, drainage and 1. (over) erosion problems are .Anticipated. Prior to an� clearing or co,Astruction, a site plan and erosion control plan must be submitted for approval`. Off-site easements will be required for drainage. PUBLIC FACILITIES: Based on the 1977 average of 0.90 public schosol students per single family dwelling, approximately 166 pupils 'would be generated by this development. This subdivision is now within.. the Chalkley Elementary, Providence Junior High and Manchester High School attendance zones. This subdivision will be served by the Manchester Fire Station,, Company #2, which is operated by County employees, and is located 1.6 rmiles from the subject property. Adequate fire service can be provided for the proposed subdivision, only if public water is extended to ;the property and fire hydrants installed. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC: Single family development under the regoes1 d Residential (R-7) zoning would result in the generation of app,roximat.ly 1,803 average daily traffic, based on an estimate of 9.8 trips per single family residence. These vehicular movements would be d1stribi'ed over Walmsley Blvd. and Newby's Bridge Road. The extension of Able Street and Melville Drive and other collectors would provide a.dditior_,,1 access for this development. It should be noted that as indicated in the Highway. Department's 1976 Primary and Secondary Road Traffic Counts, the following average daily traffic on area roads have been ex-perienc is (see attached traffic map) a. Walmsley Blvd., from Newby's Bridge Road to Turner Road 2,76E ADT b. Walmsley Blvd., from Newby's Bridge Road to Jacobs Road - 1,109 'kDT e. Walmsley Blvd., from Newby's Bridge Road to Hull Street Road - 2,340 ADT. Staff finds that Walmsley Blvd. and Newby's Bridge Road, in thie area f t request, are in very poor condition. These roads are very nar-row an(? qui winding. Presently, the bridge on Walmsley Blvd., which permiits acc�--s across Pocoshock Creek, is a one lane structure and a definite- traff;c hazard. There are planned improvements for the widening of thus bri,-7 e and the up -grading of Walmsley Blvd. for some time in the futuire. GENERAL PLAN: This property lies in an area designated for sing Ile family residential use. REQUEST ANALYSIS: In this case, the Applicant has a contract of sale -ith Edward C. People and Ann People Gills to purchase this propertty. T':e Applicant requests the rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-7) and plans to subdivide this property for single family presidential use. They anticipate the creation of 184 building lots. A temtative plan, Holly Ridge, will be reviewed by the Planning Commissiom oa April 26, 1977. The plan calls for the use of public water amd sewer, and curb and gutter. The minimum lot a will be 7,000 squaxre feet (where adjacent to curb and utility line easements) and the a-'verage lot area 12,986 square feet. (See attached subdivision plan.)) ALTERNATIVES AND MITIGATING MEASURES: Staff reviewed this request and finds that Pocoshock Creek runs through the southern and western secctions of this property and considerable land lies in the 100 Year Flood Plain. Staff also notes that a gas line easement runs through the eastern sectic of the property and a power line easement runs through.the western section of the property. The established subdivisions of North Lake Hills, Belmont Hills and Belmont Hills West, lie to the east and southwest of this property. Access to these subdivisions is over and across Turner Road. Staff finds that the Applicant plans to use Able Road and Melville Drive, in North Lake Hills, for additional access to the subject property. Staff notes that there are three subdivisions presently under construction which lie southwest of the proposed project and along Newby's Bridge Road. These subdivisions are Creekwood, with 523 lots; Cabin Creek, with 210 lots; Glen Wood, with 284 lots; and Calcourt Properties, Inc.; with 92 lots. The subdivision of Pennwood Acres, with 182 lots lies to the southeast of this parcel and fronts along Belmont Road. However, Pennwood Acres will have a secondary access on Newby's Bridge Road which will increase traffic along this road by approximatelv 20% or 36 families. When these subdivisions, including Hollv Ridae. are fullv developed. there will be 1.329 single familv dwellings which will result in the generation of approximately 13,024 average daily traffic, based on an estimate of 9.8 trips per single family residence. These vehicular movements would be distributed north over Newby's Bridge Road to Walmsley Blvd., then east to Turner Road. At this intersection, the traffic would either then go north along Turner Road to Route 360, or continue east along Walmsley Blvd, to Chippenham Parkway, see attached traffic study reap. This traffic is not discussed in the above Transportation and Traffic paragraph, because the traffic has not been experienced, and therefore, is not reflected in the Highway Department' Traffic Counts. The present condition of Newby's Bridge Road and Walmsley Blvd. between Glen Wood Subdivision and the intersection at Turner Rd. and Walmsley Blvd. is poor. Again, the roads are very narrow and winding with little or no shoulder. The intersection at Walmsley and Newby's Bridge Road and the intersection at Turner Road and Walmslev Blvd. are presently". very dangerous and have a high traffic density which will be "considerably increased when these subdivisions are fully developed. Staff believes that the rezoning of this property to the Residential - (R -7) classification is compatible with existing and proposed land -use in this area. However, development of this property for single family residential use, prior to Walmsley Blvd. and Newby's Bridge Road being widened and realigned and the intersections being improved will compound a serious traffic problem, be a detriment to the area in general and the citizens of the County who travel over and across these roads on a daily basis. It should also be noted that the Commission also has the option of reconu-nending a higher zoning classification (R-9, R-12 or R-15) which would reduce density and thereby traffic. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of Residential (R-7) zoning. Also, Staff recommends that the Applicant be advised that the Commission will not approve subdivision of this property unless an appropriate plan relative to addressing the aforementioned traffic is resolved. 3. C.P.C. 4 19 77: r CASE HISTORY PAST COMMISSION AND BOARD ACTION FOR THIS REQUEST Recommended approval of the requested R-7 rezoning. 4. & 4.M iK rL� c V O:•.r: .'i .l., moi.•' �::: ••�;::•:';,f^'�• ..g' 1 SSE' �• ;�.•:• :' � :'l•l•- :�;it: i O 101 P TF �Ty Ilo pay~ A 7'c')9— � ,,♦♦♦ ♦♦,j♦!I O ♦�♦I SL17 � = 1 rAq �Wfflila© IL �I ►�' W A/`.4y ,�s SZEY o . 1 ' C Ct I drillihwl� G Ase '775 0 5q .I'D 8 � t, VZ4''l; e '�o• 4'• e 4.t 7-8-f - C tT#*P. S.L.^., 1 C-0 , CHE�T6AktEt-p S -L. r 4A-8-ISG-I;D-f ��P�•NC.wG S -L• r ; 3 oS- p. f - Pe co ayoak S.L . 50 5ut TA 61,- X4,1 _Fad $li�c.Di,VG fol..NDh7/oNS � IpokOwf►YS FR�a, 5zv . e✓osraf• ha3Qrc2 0 00) AcGESSIAN oN ,vEwBy� aR,o4� . m mo - 6 74 sEzoKoAcY tiDr �EYELDPIy)Cl1lT� BieEA�l'Odw/�% ��BDwrsro�Y � �N�TS C2 z) 44C EA-IJVWD5 (3) 4Z.OAI MhWO Z?S¢ 4) �ENk�raop �fu2E5 iv -4 C 5) G AB 1A! ci2E'E� zr o �3 z9 x 9•$ Aor- oNrr = �3� ate¢ A -OT �N(F� Ooze To o6e-04 ,or"' ,V,:,rro J40cE • /fes z>t ♦psi, .. • WUZcc Wr lu 0, lr• AST y ,ra>•`Mt•I� f` ti ��•�\»� j Tf �'Ij�. R W =u U .d• l v ii -- °` ,aY � S -�'� J / F � �•�r !� �C � � Q J w►- �� I � � n „» '' � z '�• -+rl qtr yI �� l,t � �� . .� EE a• � o ••' ? r,.\• •! «• •,t ` •nt •.yam, `---�i .._ .r :�� .1p rt w W t •. tS::o t r- *14 14 Yj J\ g- Gel ..•.� - �,R � i1' pit it A .1 � • .1 ; ! `•,` .O i � .ilk _ � 1 0•} w rt � • y a' -Si. Ck f �<1. �1<fq •►. �' _ _ _ -�' -., any: - lei � ' •t. � .: 't.•'l. .•{iii: qtr � •--_ •. .. �..a / . •t,.tr.. '�:...•,. :..!��i\� .:Ci •. '.l •- n. • . .� • • �, r : 5 �....i..rirt-rw •n✓.« -.q. - .. Y - �• ♦j : � ...:. ."- j - ' �l- , _ •.��.r�i...rr...". �.i•••.• _ •A.PP�•rl. f -w-, i�••.`�..ti t.. } � � � / ;:`;' .. •...r 6 • 1(as i 'tj _r,' :i•{. ii o�9_r iy / G` .` 'r...... �• a�t •1:. P'" •t' I irf•+SAH=� - a"vP1'�"�A.�'-G-.;��D•r'V.•�' .. tis 31 c• • �3 � :•� ,dam. .r4w +•. '1t•�`t � � t =� [ u 14 1 I r•! 10; ff� 71� ti111 A ^i fti lt�y iti '• i S- I(♦ r �saayyyg>yyyg �� Gtq �• �'i i ° 3 --{<: o= +Vt'•� f'..•� �^ ' IC W i< t �i• • �3�. Q h r•3 7 r� I pO iy v: J=p. .,;y •'M:Y .r ..tom •� .i� j p11� ► $ ' o�t jF tYe :j��•� . :11:'..••).fr• '., .i� :1 r,•. :.•`•••.r.�•�i�!��1.:•:�..... ,•., r\.vt w •Ij..u•:.•F ' ••'rte "�• • �.. �• a>• •♦ >J•• •�•.•..t •• '.Z.•�i _,,. ,�► •.w T� d•••!t. I R`I. 1�': .,� t,'':Ti:�•I'�T. ne 8, 1977 - B.S. CASE NUMBER: 77SO61 APPLICANT: MAX H. HUNTER AND GEORGE KCRAGET REQUEST AND PROPOSED USE: The rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Ressidential (R- The Applicants plan to subdivide this property for single family residential use and construct approximately 134 single family dwellings on the parcel. The Planning Commission gave tentative approval to the proposed subdivision of Deerwood on January 22, 1977. There are 90 lots proposed for this development. GENERAL LOCATION AND TAX MAP IDENTIFICATION: In Dale Magisterial District, this parcel lies 1,280 feet off the south line of Beach Road, measured from a point 300 feet west of its intersection with Qualla Road. Tax Map 110 (1) Parcel 45 (Sheets 29 & 38) ACREAGE, EXISTING ZONING, EXISTING LAND USE (SUBJECT PARCEL): This parcel contains approximately 123,26 acres, is zoned Agricultural (A) and is vacant and wooded. ADJACENT AND AREA ZONING AND LAND USE: All adjacent property is zoned Agricultural (A) and is either occupied by a single family dwelling or remains vacant. UTILITIES, SOIL PROFILE, DRAINAGE AND EROSION, REQUIRED -OFF-SITE EASEMENTS: Public water and sewer is not available to serve this property. Soils on this property are sandy loam and land wet, gently sloping to moderately sloping and have only a slight chance for erosion. The soils on this parcel are not well suited for the proposed use; 60%-70% of the soils are either doubtful or unfavorable for septic tanks. Much of the soils on this property will require deep drainfields, and there is a danger of shallow well contamination. Because of soil conditions, lots will have to be oversize in order to find soils for septic tanks and wells. (See attached soil study map.) This parcel lies in the Second Branch Drainage area. Drainage and erosion problems are anticipated on this property due to the topography of the parcel. Before any clearing or construction begins, a site plan and erosion control plan must be submitted and approved by the County. Off-site drainage easements will be required. PUBLIC FACILITIES: Based on the 1977 average of 0.90 public school students per single family dwelling, approximately 81 students would be generated by this development. This subdivision is now within the Salem Church Elementary, and Clover Hill Junior High and High School attendance zones. This subdivision will be served by the Clover Hill Fire Station, Company #7, which is a volunteer unit and is located 7.3 miles from the subject property. Fire service capability for this subdivision will be extremely limited due to the lack of water and fire hydrants in the area. During development of this subdivision, special consideration should be given to installing underground watermains and fire hydrants so as to facilitate hook-ups when public water becomes available in this area. 1. (over) TR.n`:SPORTATION AND TRAFFIC: Single family develcpment, under the proposed plan, would result in the generation of approximately 882 average daily traffic, based on an estimate of 918 trips per single family residence. This vehicular movement would be distributed over Beach Road and Qualla Road. It should be noted that as indicated in the State Highway Department's 1976 Secondary Traffic Counts, .he following average daily traffic on area roads have been experienced: (see attached traffic map) a. Beach Road, from Second Branch Road to ,walla Road - 685 ADT; b. Beach Road, from Qualla Road, east - 782 ADT; c. Beach Road, from Qualla Road, north - 411 ADT; d. Beach Road, from Second Branch Road, west - 420 ADT; e. Beach Road,from Second Branch Road, south - 380 ADT. Staff finds that the condition of the roads in the general area of the request are in fair condition. GENERAL PLAN: This parcel lies in an area designated for Agricultural (A) use. REQUEST ANALYSIS: In this case, the Applicants, who are the property owners, request the rezoning from Agricultural (A) tc Residential (R-9) of the subject property. The Applicants plan to subdivide this property nor single family residential use and create approximately 90 building lots. The Applicants state that the average lot will be approximately 52,000 square feet in area. (See attached lot survey and tentative subdivision plat.) ALTERNATIVES AND MITIGATING MEASURES: Staff reviewed this request, and note: that the properties to the east, south and west are zoned Agricultural (A), are large and vacant and have a good potential for future subdivision Staff finds that when the Planning Commission gave tentative approval to the subdivision of Deerwood, the plat which was submitted stated that the proposed zoning would be Residential (R-40), and that minimum lot area would be 40,000 square feet, average lot area 52,994 square feet, and maximum lot area 99,800 square feet. Staff notes that develop- ment of this property under the Residential (-_�-9) classification, with no public utilities available, would permit a minimum lot size of 20,000 scuare feet. In view of the soil conditions on this property, which are doubtful and unfavorable for the installa=ion of septic tank systems, and the potential for shallow well contaminaf:on, Staff believes that for the protection of the developer and futu_e property owners in this subdivision, the minimum lot size allowed should be and because of soils will necessitate a minimun of 25,000 sc--,are feet in area. Staff believes that Residential (R-25) zoning is tie appropriate classification for this subdivision. If the Commission wis..es to consider a lower classification of zoning, then Staff would re:emmend that this request be deferred until the Applicant can obtain a private soils consultants report on this property. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Recommend Residential, CR -251_ zoning. CASE HISTORY AND PAST COMMISSION AND BOARD ACTION FOR THIS REQUEST C.P.C. 4 19 77: Recommended denial of the requested R-7 reclassification and approval of no less a classification than R-25. 3. I �O fn b071 0 "T Go/ ---a r KT 655 =1 7?.1 ®u m 4r" oN&y F0-1-RL-LUV(4j L.A(JD.WA-L CAfA x S -L. 38-e-I;c-Z'Ccc , L S• LOA►., 4-2-0-1•, c - I - 4rpi-(NG S-LeAI ?45-d.I A•ppL„vG- KE►.��s�,lle S L• 30S. C- I') p -I poc 091/ac.A. S•L. Soli- Su(tA15 -f I GowD(�ro►rAL —/ 6eo17 �y 3�4N04TcoNs ._...� �„-. ,• Sep1i�- 7 k ks � A CJN-VflVo(eA19LE 1 i N 776olal w�rale � W1L 6/K'K! i 01f�b �'6iwL,� I$t,/i/ /•pl • : a•t: .r •'+L • _ R(6 d al rz s3 �� , , � w . tart; ,G t r'+i• .. Y A, •tit ANCILM � r 3. f r' 1.�.7'+rfNTK - CAN •w X3 24 A.CeE3 N: -t! •G ti.'S•.Y-G L .vs• r'• -sr '► /3sx .rtx - Nl•G CL - ' i - •r�•r - ' �NL3fEliLLG L .ar � �:« tom. 4 • "Ew'fL "- t Lw ✓tt.:.� j ft3 i/O �c 0 VR. RfL. 655 BEACH ?04) SECayI SRzt�LM DEFG ►✓Cb0 • d dBO�ViS�/ � ; . ��sp�� June g, 1977 - B.S. CASE NUMBER: 77SO63 APPLICANT: SIXTY SOUTH, A VIRGINIA GENERAL PARTNERSHIP REQUEST & PROPOSED USE: The rezoning from General Business (B-3) to Mobile Home Park (MH -1). The Applicant intends to construct and operate a mobile home park on this property. GENERAL LOCATION AND TAX MAP IDENTIFICATION: In Bermuda Magisterial District, this parcel fronts along the east line of Jefferson Davis Highway, and is located approximately 250 feet north of its intersection with West Hundred Road. Tax Map 116-6 (1) Parcel 27 (Sheet 32). ACREAGE, EXISTING ZONING, EXISTING LAND USE (SUBJECT PARCEL): This parcel contains approximately 9 acres, is zoned General Business (B-3) ani is vacant. ADJACENT AND AREA ZONING AND LAND USE: Adjacent property to the north is zoned Mobile dome Park (MH -1) and is occupied by a mobile home park. Property to the east, south, west and northwest is zoned General Business (B-3) and is occupied by a motel, restaurant, a mobile home sales park and a Hardee's Restaurant. UTILITIES, SOIL PROFILE, DRAINAGE AND EROSION, REQUIRED OFF-SITE EASEMENTS: Public water is available to serve this development and is located on site. There is an available water treatment capacity of 22 million gallons per day from the Appomattox, serving this area with 1 to 2 million gallons per day now being used. This parcel lies in the Proctor's Creek Sewage Drainage Area. Sewer treatment capacity may not be available at this time to serve this project. The owner/developer should contact the County Utilities Department and furnish expected sewage treatment flows. The soil on this property is sandy loam, gently sloping and has only a slight chance for erosion. In general, the soils are well suited for the proposed project. The sandy soils are well suited for roadways and parking. See attached soil study map. This parcel lies in the James River Drainage area. At this time, no drainage or erosion problems are anticipated. However, a site plan and erosion control plan must be approved prior to the clearing of this property. Off-site easements may be required for sewer and drainage. PUBLIC FACILITIES: Based on the 1977 average of 0.90 public school students for single family d;•:elling, approximately 65 students would be generated by this development. This mobile home park is now within the Curtis Elementary, Chester intermediate and Thomas Dale High School attendance zones. This mobile homne park will be served by Chester Fire Station, Company rl, v-hich is operated by County employees and is located approximately 2.4 rales from the subject parcel. At this time, fire service capability for this area will be 14mited due to the lack of water and 1. over F and fire hydrants o: site. To provide adequate fire service for this property, the developer must provide water and fire hydrants, and provide and maintain at least an 18 foot wide all weather access road to all lots. TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC: Mobile Home Park development under the proposed plan would result in the generation of approximately 705 average daily traffic based on an estimate of 9.8 trips per single family residence. These vehicular movements would be distributed over Jefferson Davis Highway. It should be noted that as indicated in the Highway Department's 1975 Primary Road Traffic Counts, the following average daily traffic on area roads have been experienced: (see attached traffic ;nap) a. Jefferson Davis Highway from intersection Route 10, north - 17,155 ADT; b. Jefferson Davis Highway from intersection Route 10, east - 8,910 ADT; C. Jefferson Davis Highway from intersection Route 10, south - 11,105 ADT; d. Jefferson Davis Highway from intersection Route 10, west - 6,770 ADT. In general the condition of US 1/301 in the area of the request is good. However, the access to this property should be aligned with the existing crossover for Jefferson Davis Highway. Staff believes that the proximity of Jefferson Davis Highway and Route 10 could create a crossover problem if access is not property aligned for ingress/egress to this property. GENERAL PLAN: This parcel lies in a high intensity area which is designated for commercial use. REQUEST ANALYSIS: In this case, the Applicant has a real estate purchase agreement with Boddie-Noell Enterprizes to purchase this property. The Applicant is requesting the rezoning from General Business (B-3) to Mobile Home Park (MH -1) and intends to develop a mobile home park on this site with 58 lots. See attached site plan. ALTERNATIVES AND MITIGATING MEASURES: In considering the proposed rezoning and use under the classification, Planning Staff is of the opinion that a Mobile Home Park is cc,:patible with adjacent and area uses. An existing mobile home park is located to the north and mobile home storage and sales to the south. It is felt that as the area continues to develop, more than likely a higher use will be made of the subject parcel in relation to the overall development occurring in the north- east quadrant of the intersection of Routes 1 and 10. However, until a scheme for overall development solidifies, the zoning and use requested would be compatible. Nevertheless, Planning Staff is concerned over proper buffering and protection of the individual mobile home sites. Noting that this is a residential development, surrounded by various couLmercial uses, and therefore, should be protected from the adverse impact of such uses. As an alternative, the Commission may wish to consider recommending approval of the Mobile Home Subdivision (MH -2) classification as opposed to Mobile dome Park (1,11H-1). Staff is of the opinion, however, that this permanent residential use is not in keeping with what is anticipated as ultimate development for this area. 2, STAFF RECOIsi',ENDATION: Approval of this rea_uest is recommended only if the following conditions are imposed. 1. A forty-four (44) foot buffer shall be established in place of the western most lot on the north side of the entrance road. This buffer shall be planted with evergreen trees and shrubs, having a minimum height of 5 feet at planting. In addition, a solid board fence, not less than 6 feet in height shall be installed within this buffer, such that plants will be located on both sides of the fence. 2. A 25 foot wide buffer shall be established.along the south property line. Izo mobile home shall be permitted within this buffer area and a solid board fence, not less than 6 feet in height shall be installed within this buffer, along the property line. Where there is an open area, greater than 200 square feet, within the existing vegetation of the buffer strip, it shall be planted with evergreen plants and shrubs, having an initial height of not less than 5 feet. 3. A 50 foot buffer shall be provided along the east property line and shall be fenced and planted as noted in Condition #l. 4. W; -,ere yards and required setbac�s fall within the above noted buffers, the buffer -requirements shall ta'Ke precedent, however, all yard measure,iients shall be calculated regardless of the buffer. Note: If the access serving this property is desired as a public right-of-way, then the Planning Commission must approve this street under the provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance. In this case, the cul-de-sac must be limited to a maximum length of 1,200 feet (from the centerline of Route 1 to the radius of the cul-de-sac) in addition, it has been the Planning Commission's policy to permit no more than 50 dwelling units on a single access road without requiring second access. CASE HISTORY AND PAST CO24MISSION AND BOARD ACTION FOR THIS REQUEST C.P.C. 4 19 77: It was resolved to recommend approval of Mobile Home Park (I4H-1) zoning subject to the following conditions: 1. A fourty-four (44) foot buffer shall be established in place of the western most lot on the north side of the entrance road. This buffer shall be planted with evergreen trees and shrubs, having a minimum height of 5 feet at planting. In addition, a solid board fence not less than 6 feet in height shall be installed within this buffer, such that plants will be located on both sides of the fence. 3. d ri� B_2f 4 • ♦♦• ; '•• 010 • . ♦. •• . 10 v� i ANN ••. r' � �. ; c Is '• �� ; i11iL t i� l 1 i N ailiiNaiiiii 10 10 •t •• • if r r IB -. r . ../ 10 10 • 1� s iiitiii#faitai777iaHaia•i+iiaii;r•i•t*•r� B-2 o �ia+air+ist+ititirtrrrurrrfill « • M•fN�H+ w lo 10 10 10 /1 M 77777j7j � i 111ii77 f� \ \�� 77777 i• • ----- ----- �J , \ -77��'� • • 9� 1,10 10 t lop M it • N • MH_ ` i C;* 5C 77 So oCjyC4PlG plyLy s goLnVI L6 S,M.Dy te*or Qa- D-1 (�4M�'oit� LsAIKY Sgwp So�L SItCrA 811-Cfl �orL But �d�kq-�e11NDgTloN Roa0I�.QYs D Nor 77's oe.0 �Ar 1 June 8, 1977 - B. S. Apxa-1- -1-g+- -1-9-7-7 CASE NUMBER: 77SO65 APPLICANT: R. O. AND C. DOUGLAS SPENCER REQUEST AND AND PROPOSED USE: The rezoning from Community Business (B-2) to General Business (B-3). The Applicants have no proposed use for the property at this time. GENERAL LOCATION AND TAX MAP IDENTIFICATION: In Dale Magisterial District, this parcel fronts along the east line of Iron Bridge Road and the south line of Beulah Road and is located in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of these roads. Tax Map 79-4 (1) Parcels 4 & 5 (Sheet 22). ACREAGE, EXISTING ZONING, EXISTI14G LAND USE (SUBJECT PARCEL): This parcel is approximately 16 acres in area, is zoned Community Business (B-2) and is presently vacant. ADJACENT AND AREA ZONING AND LAND USE: Adjacent property to the east, south and west is zoned Agricultural (A) and is occupied by a single family dwelling or remains vacant. Property to the north and north- west is zoned Community Business (B-2) and remains vacant. UTILITIES, SOIL PROFILE, DRAINAGE AND EROSION, REQUIRED OFF-SITE EASEMENTS: Public water is not available to serve this development. A 16 inch water line is located at Wilmoth Drive, some 5,000 feet north of this property. This parcel lies in the Kingsland Creek Sewer Drainage area. Public sewer is not available to serve this property. Sewer is located 1 1/2 miles east of this property, in the subdivision of Indian Springs. It would cost approximately $2,060 to provide public sewer for this property. The soils on this property are sandy loam, gently sloping and have only a slight chance for erosion. This property should not be developed until public sewer is available because 90% of the soils are poor to doubtful for septic tanks and foundations. See attached soil study map. This parcel lies in the Reedy Branch Drainage Area. Due to the topo- graphy, this area has poor drainage to no drainage at all. Off-site drainage and erosion problems are anticipated on this property. Prior to any clearing or construction, a site plan, erosion control plan and a storm sewer plan must be approved for this project. Utility and drainage easements will be required for the development of this property. PUBLIC FACILITIES: This property will be served by the Dale Fire Station, Company rll, which is a volunteer unit and is located 2.3 miles from the site. Fire service capability in this area is inadequate due to the lack of water and fire hydrants. From a fire safety standpoint, this property should not be developed until public water is extended to this site and fire hydrants are provided. 1. t TRANSPORTATION AND TRA' IC: The condition of Ro 10 in the an ea ld " the request is good. This request lies in Traffic Zone 233. Staff notes that there is a future plan to widen Route 10 in the ar ea # this request. It should be noted that as indicated in the Hi ghway Department's 1975, 1974 Primary and Secondary Road Traffic Co unts, the following average daily traffic on daily roads has been e::xpenen( ,gid: (See attached traffic map.) a. Route 10, from Beulah Road, north to Kingsland Road - 6 ,440 ADT b. Route 10, from Kingsland Road, east to Beulah Road - 69 5 Ail; C. Route 10, from Beulah Road, northeast to Kingsland Road - } 47t* ADT; d. Kingsland Road, from Beulah Road, northeast - 1,428 ADT;; e. Beulah Road, from Kingsland Road, southeast - 759 ADT. Staff notes that the road alignment at the intersection of Beulah Ro• i and Route 10, and Kingsland Road and Route 10 is very dangeroius due to the curve in the road and the poor alignments of the iintersec� ons - Further, Route 10 is a major arterial and has a high traffic density 'n the area of the request. GENERAL PLAN: This parcel lies in an area designed for commerci al use. REQUEST ANALYSIS: The Applicants, who are the owners of the pro perty, request the rezoning from Community Business (B-2) to General Busine:.:s (B-3) of the subject parcel. At present, they have no plans for developing the parcel. ALTERNATIVES AND MITIGATING MEASURES: Prior to a major revision. of the Zoning Ordinance, which became effective January 1, 1973, the, suhjeci parcel was zoned General Business (C-2) (zoning granted 4-9-5)-7). This zoning classification permitted all commercial uses that_ were s; designated at the time. However, upon revision of the ordinaince, th' majority of properties in the County, zoned C-2 and not developed, were rezoned to the Community Business (B-2) District. This was accomplished in order to up -grade land use control relative too vacar': commercially zoned properties. It was also realized that thei newly established General Business (B-3) classification, although e,nconpa:;ing all previously permitted commercial uses, also permit some pr_evious'y restricted industrial use as well as permitting certain uses that wfr_e permitted by use permit under the C-2 classification. It was; also reasoned, that since the parcels in question were vacant and undeve"oped, the B-2 classificaiton permitted a large variety of uses which were better defined and more appropriate than what had been permitted under the General Business (C-2) zone. It was established that if the reclassification severely restricted a specific intended use, the property owner could apply -for consideration of that specific Lie. In addition, the redistricting maps were on display for a number of months prior to the reclassification approval date of Januarw 1, 1u73_ The display of these maps was advertised and it was widely known ti'at property owners, if they so desired, could appeal reclassific-ation prior to approval. In considering the specific parcel in question, relative to appropriate land use control along the Route 10 corridor, Staff and Planning Commission has always maintained that strip commercial zoning and high intensity connercial use should be carefully_ restricted and con- trolled in this area. The current application for rezoning indicates no proposed use and therefore, the Applicants are speculating, and 2. r attempting to secure zoning for the least restrictive land use the commercial classification having control. Planning staff is of the opinion that in this particular instance, the Commission should consider the impact General Business (B-3) rezoning would have on the area surrounding the subject parcel. Since property directly adjacent to the south, east and west is zoned Agricultural (A), it will set a precedent which the Commission has indicated as being undesirable or rezoning, since the pressure for similar such zoning on surrounding properties may be evident in the future. If this rezoning is approved, it will be difficult for the Commission to maintain a posture to protect the Route 10 corridor from commercial proliferation as experienced along Route 60 and Route 1. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Since no particular use is intended, Staff does not believe that rezoning to the General Business (B-3) classification is justified. The uses permitted under Community Business (B-2) are wide and varied and give the Applicants -property owners much latitude in either developing or marketing the property. Many uses permitted in the General Business (B-3) zone would prove a detriment to the area. Denial of the request is strongly recommended. If approved, the Board may wish to impose a card requiring a buffer strip along the north, south and west property lines. Such buffer should be not less than 50 feet in width and a solid board fence not less than 6 feet in height should be required along any portion of the property line while commercial use is being made of the subject parcels. CASE HISTORY FOR PAST COMMISSION AND BOARD ACTION FOR THIS REQUEST C.P.C. 4 19 77: It was resolved to recommend General Business (B-3) zoning. 3. j r r J,, FZ r -r t - r r • ■ ■ ■ r --t 1 m ■ r �i IIB -2 40, 1i • �/'/ � `°,` ?:'•'.;•,. .•+°°ate° I O e°�°:�•; fie' 1 0 U A L F F S LA. 4e�'°f,f .'•�' ' / • •e� iuuneuii 'quo i �75otc5_ I SffEE?� ZZ 1/ 2-41 77--)jb 0 C416 l7socs_Il 70 41 C-1 1- 0-1 - &4(-'-'Avt&l L.^#,A w&t , J;'-. 17 f Z 4 S4#vDyg.V,4j., /8's-.4 L4 tv 13,40. -r*4 (31L +I .F.jvo^AT8Le ;6#t sr--p-rjc--r&j-ks DotAB-r-P-LL r -o- '9dPT,c- T.4Ajk-% pm, �-� FFtG, cove r M� �lRZ� Ivor re) %7 3o&5 -Z June( 1977 - B. S. CASE NUMBER: 77SO66 APPLICANT: DAIRY BARNS OF RICHMOND, INC. REQUEST & PROPOSED USE: The applicant requests a Conditional Use to permit the operation of retail sales, wholesale distribution and a drive-in establishment. GENERAL LOCATION & TAX MAP IDENTIFICATION: In Clover Hill Magisterial District, this parcel lies along the north line of Walmsley Boulevard and the east line of Turner Road, and is located in the northeast quadrant of the intersection of the aforementioned roads. Tax Map 40-6 (1) Parcel 22 (Sheet 15). ACREAGE, EXISTING ZONING, EXISTING LAND USE (SUBJECT PARCEL): This parcel contains approximately 0.67 acres, is zoned Light Indus- trial (M-1) and is presently vacant. Adjacent property to the north is zoned Light Industrial (M-1) and is occupied by an engineering office; to the northeast is zoned General Business (B-3) and is occupied by a roofing company; to the east is zoned Agricultural (A) and is occupied by a church; to the south is zoned Convenience Business (B-1) and is occupied by a single family dwelling; to the west is zoned Agricultural (A) and is occupied by single family dwellings. UTILITIES, SOIL PROFILE, DRAINAGE & EROSION,•REQUIRED OFF-SITE EASEMENTS Public water is available to serve this property. A 16 inch water _ line is located on Turner Road and on-site. There is an available water treatment capacity of 10 million gallons per day from Swift Creek serving this area with approximately 6 million gallons per day now being used. This parcel lies in the Pocoshock Creek/Falling Creek Sewage Drainage Area. Public sewer is located at the intersection of Walmsley Boulevard and Turner Road and is available to serve this property. This property will be served by the Falling Creek Treatment Plant which has a treatment capacity of 6 million gallons per day and is capable of -handling this project. Public sewer should be used in the development of this property. It is noted that a sewer service lateral may have to be extended because of property acquired by the Virginia Department of Highways. This parcel lies in the Pocoshock Creek Drainage Area. The soil in this property is sandy loam. In general, the soils on this property are well suited for the proposed use. However, there are existing drainage and erosion problems in and around the area of this request. It is anticipated that drainage and erosion problems will occur in the development of this property. Prior to clearing or construction, a site plan and erosion control plan must be approved. Drainage easements may be required. 2. Is PUBLIC FACILITIES This property will be served by the Manchester Fire Station, Company Number 2, which is operated by County employees and is located approximately 1 mile from the site. There is adequate fire service capability to serve this project. TRANSPORTATION & TRAFFIC: Walmsley Boulevard and Turner Road in the area of the request are in a fair state of maintenance. This request is in Traffic Zone 227. Staff finds that the average daily traffic in the area of the request continues to grow in intensity due to both residential and commercial development in and around this site. It should be noted that as indicated in the Highway Department's 1976 Secondary Road Traffic Counts, the following average daily traffic on area roads have been experienced: (See attached traffic map) A. Walmsley Boulevard from Turner Road to Hull Street Road - 8,212 ADT; B. Walmsley Boulevard from Turner Road, south - 6,064 ADT; C. Walmsley Boulevard from Turner Road, west - 2,766 ADT; D. Walmsley Boulevard from Turner Road to Goodsbridge Road - 5,699 DT; E. Walmsley Boulevard from Goodsbridge Road to Hull Street Read - F. 1,784 Walmsley ADT; Boulevard from Goodsbridge Road, east - 6,160 ADB'. Because of the density of traffic on Turner Road and Walmsley Boulevard, only one access to this property should be permitted. An access on Turner Road as far north of the intersection with Walmsley Boulevard appears to be the most appropriate access for this parcel. GENERAL PLAN: This parcel lies in an area designated for multiple family use. REQUEST ANALYSIS: In this case, the applicant plans to lease this property from Thomas Daniel. He requests a Conditional Use to permit the operation of retail sales, wholesale distribution an(: a drive-in establishment on the property. He states that the use of the property will be for a dairy products wholesale and retail business. The wholesale distribution will be in the fro t portion of the bar type building. The retail portion of this facility will include a drive-in window. (See attached site plan, building elevation and floor plan.) ALTERNATIVES & MITIGATING YLEASURES: Again, the Planning Coirzmissit z is requestedto review -recommend approval of a proposed heavy commercial use at the intersection of Turner Road and Walmsley Boulevard. On several occasions in the recent and distant past, development pressures have sought rezoning in this area of a heavy co�-amercial nature. Both Staff and Planning Commission have taken the position that retail oriented com-nercial development in the vicinity of this intersection is not appropriate, .since such use would generate volumes of traffic which would congest the area and contribute to a hazardous traffic situation- In addition, residents in the area have also spoken out against uses which contribute to the traffic problems along Walmsley Boulevard and Turner Road. J. • The applicant's proposal to retail dairy products by use of a drive-in window is in direct opposition to proper planning and land use control in this area. There is no question that a drive-in facility at this location will compound traffic problems. Moreover, the parcel is of such a small size as to make both internal circulation and access difficult. Wholesaling dairy products might be acceptable since traffic associated with this use is not of a voluminous nature as is typified by retail trade. A redimentary site plan was presented with the application and from this plan it was determined that it is the applicant's intention to provide access from both Walmsley Boulevard and Turner Road to accommodate the retail drive-in trade. These driveways, the required parking area for a drive-in estab_lish- ment','and the building itself may constitute too large a facility for the size of the parcel. Stringent setbacks are required along both Walmsley Boulevard and Turner Road and the imposition of these setbacks on the proposed facility may necessitate the applicant applying for a Variance. Staff is of the opinion that the Commission and Board should not permit zoning endorsing a proposal which would not meet the minimum requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. STAFF REC011,U4ENDATION: DENIAL OF THIS REQUEST IS STRONGLY RECOMMENDED SINCE THE IMPACT OF A RETAIL DRIVE-IN FACILITY AT THIS LOCATION WILL BE TO THE DETRIMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND CONTRIBUTE TO THE TRAFFIC CONGESTION AT THE INTERSECTION OF WALMSLEY BOULEVARD AND TURNER ROAD. However, if the operation is limited to wholesale trade only, then such use might be acceptable provided the facility is properly planned and conditioned. If the Commission can find justification for recommending approval of the application, such use should not be permitted unless the following conditions are imposed. 1. This Conditional Use shall be granted to and for Daity Barns of Richmond, Inc. and shall not be transferable nor run with the land. 2. A. This Conditional Use shall be restricted and limited exclusively to wholesale and retail sales of dairy products. No other food items or other retail goods shall be sold from the premises, or B. This Conditional Use shall be limited and restricted ex- clusively to wholesaling dairy products. No retail sales shall be permitted. 3. Colors used in the exterior construction of the building to be located on the parcel shall be muted earth tones and no warm colors, such as reds, oranges and yellows, shall be utilized. 4. Only one sign shall be permitted. This sign shall not be free- standing, but may be attached to the building. The sign may be illuminated, but shall not be luminous. The size of this sign shall be restricted to those sign requirer,,ents applicable in the Community Business (B-2) zone. 5. Only one vehicular access shall be permitted. This access shall b( onto Turner Road and located as far north as the VDH&T will permit (It should be noted that this entrance may stradle the north property line and be used as a common entrance with adjoining property.) 4 . 6. All parking areas and driveways shall be paved. It should be noted that as required by the Zoning Ordinance, drive-in facilities must provide at least 13 parking spaces and pave at least 9 of these spaces. It should also be noted that there is a required 95 foot setback from the centerline of both Turner Road and Walsmley Boulevard for both buildings and parking areas. 7. y trash recepticals located on the parcel shall be completely screened from adjacent parcels and roadways. A plan for the screening thereof shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Development Review. 8. A plan for landscaping the parcel shall be submitted to and approved by the Department of Development Review prior to the issuance of any building permit. 9. The above noted conditions not withstanding, the all applicable bulk requirements of the B-2 zone shall govern this use. CASE HISTORY PAST COMMISSION AND BOARD ACTION FOR THIS CASE C.P.C. 4 19 77: It was resolved to recommend approval of a Conditional Use to permit the operation of a retail sales, wholesale distribution and a drive-in restaurant on this property subject to the following conditions: 1. The Conditional Use shall be granted to and for Dairy Barns of Richmond, Inc., and shall not be transferable nor run with the land. 2. This Conditional Use shall be restricted and limited exclusively to wholesale and retail sales of grocery items. 3. Only one sign shall be permitted. This sign shall not be free- standing, but may be attached to the building. The sign may be illuminated, but shall not be luminous. The size of this sign shall be restricted to those sign requirements applicable in a Community Business (B-2) zone. 4. Only one vehicle access shall be permitted along Turner Road and will be located as far north as the VDH&T will permit. A second access will be permitted along Walmsley Boulevard and will be located as far east as VDH&T will permit. 4. (CORPS OF £NC/N£ERS) 2° POCCSNAM CR. FL000 PL 40, 1010 10 r r r n i m p• r A f s 9 9 fl1�• •� ++� ir.,o W + r u PO • J � � V � J "oc �♦° ttt i l oe^ � C0A#k4 • v - i A!—/ �� a I�Q : PAR:ISyf. s T •, ..:.., f WALMSL EY ',.W♦♦° O O '♦♦ c +� D ♦♦♦ 2 � ♦ / lA : 1 yet 90 90 • -7760 CO ti PO G N\0� C' t d11 c �� 0 MC -VI -E �► Ij II 9 S I III -- ,x1 III .♦fliii��/1e1 (C- RF c 11 i • \ O Y 11 11 ♦_♦ ZY 0 ♦ a Sr4 •lP PP \ � ♦ 11 � T f OTy LP'�� p 9 tt+t♦ '11 sov 1%0 reAFFiL "owr r�DO sv �`sb 2-74 6 99 4/60 -74 NOT T2:5 S�'- c '� i �loG� •I LINES n a t, za n O Q [ in 7 z m e W a~ C ❑ m A W - rd j fn Z 1 ::r N a u C] C] by I m lull M (D "A ::r Z > N 7 In (D (D SU o o )> a (� C -a _ C+' c+ Q. d -+ Z a m -4 tD N m cp I `0 a • i1y Cl zz n 1 o P N K C O rn NU1 n n 7 n m O Z ( 1+ � Z m 1p ihPO ch o 0ED i < n co A m m N a RI $A iii cr 40 O i Gt Q M D m I Cl m u v m > zs i^ D W to 1 D DI �1, n Z -{ C W m ° -,I z 0 In «i . •'*I Z m m f a p =nz 1I N�w m ❑ ❑ In I � Z A '� k m f Z iF m 0 O n x (D J P Y` D D Z 0 m C 2'D m u O A ❑ v Ul (D m U rn A C ° a r A 'N J a u -J A D � ti 1 m CA W �m' A Z tty <tp m o a W NtA Z _ m Zr ` -a �O - u p � : "• ° W n co m r > 2 Q (D O , ❑ n r W L+ m [ * I1 .a.".i'r.[k....OM.':NJ.Gi»d;,,+.,r✓4,..r.,.,..,.�?'y.,.'�,5...1,i........,y,,.,...RY'::'....N.;:.�o,...r,.,;:;.di:�..rZ%team'"Wfw"Y.y.Jtlt.�'1:riwr.'Jw.d..737Ai'.,�.dR,...�✓r.ls..•"�,:,rH.".'+. Ji,i'w:...�'LX 1'JiA -,(�r�'"--i1+L..�.�.� � ,�,.. �y ,�...-# r r- Y ♦ .' 'i�.. __..�4,�y3s6. ,t^vd"'-'"y'vYi``'"„�,'.'".'�. ✓ Z. ✓ 3.1 v---- 4-- W---, 7. e //�isG - 6; 197-7 6,015 A Nce ,a .¢wd e.e /,, . �� 54R v 4 o A✓e w";vq gcIUVL-N:li� A�acd /�i�o G�41�io.�l /.�4•`d+e/J �� / la. 6.0Ic 19 se.�viCes - 7 •vine <A6 62 2e,*i e, ot Oe,� 3,_ 977 a o gip.- a�• -_ Q a — _ (�&Att. l The records disclosed that the Clerk was bonded in the amount of $50,000 with the Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland as surety. We acknowledge the cooperation extended to us during the course of the engagement. EJM:ob ob-9 r -2- Very truly yours, &"',& � ( , J6�� AUDITOR OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS STATEMENT OF REVENUE RECEIPTS AND DISBURSEMENTS Year Ended December 31 1975 Exhibit A-1 Balance Balance Items January 1, Receipts Disburse- December 31, 1975 ments 1 975 Commonwealth of Virginia: Tax on: Deeds $ - $ 545,732.55 $ 545,732.55 $ - Wills and administrations - 7,225.80 7,22 5•80 - Chancery causes - 4,060.00 4,060.00 _ Actions at law - 2,005.00 2,005.00 Marriage licenses - 2,231.00 2,231.00 Deeds of conveyance - 77,119.25 77,119.25 Fines and forfeited - 216,951.10 216,951.10 - recognizances - 6,352.74 6,352.74 ' Costs in criminal cases Proceeds from sale of forfeited property - 12,507.00 12,507.00 - Hunting and fishing license sales 1.00 2,971.00 2,971.00 1.00 Fees: Commonwealth's attorney - 4,174.50 4,174.50 - District Courts - 66,197.00 66,197.00 - Weighing - 4.00 4.00 - Receipts to defray costs of - 7,352.00 7,352.00 _ issuing summonses - 26.00 26.00 - Liquidated damages State forest stamp sales ( 1.00) 178.00 178.00 ( 1.00) Receipts for reportable - 44 850.00 44,850.00 - violations - D.M.V. - 999,936.94 999,936.94' Total County of Chesterfield: Fines and forfeited $ - $ 6,165.74 $ 6,165.74 $ - recognizances Recordation tax on deeds - 182,161.34 182,161.34 - Tax on deeds of conveyance - 73,256.86 73,256.86 - Land redemptions, delinquent - 21,330.46 21,330.46 - taxes, penalty and interest Fees: Commonwealth's attorney - - 907.21 4,590.18 907.21 4,590.18 - - Land transfer Sheriff and deputies - 909.13 909.13 _ Arrest - County police - 114.91 666.90 114.91 666.90 - County library - 290,102-73 - Total - 290,102-73 - 71. 3* Collections for Others 71*43— 1,930-00 Recording Equipment Account 1,930-.00 - - - 5.43 Unclassified Receipts $ 5.43 - Mack T. Daniels (Former Clerk): $ 65,047.54 $ - $ 65,047.54 $ - Fees, commissions, etc Petro D. Longest (Former Acting Clerk): Fees, commissions, etc. $ 22 404.61 $ - $ 22,404.61 _ $ Clerk of the Court: Fees, commissions, etc. $ 17,885 14 $ 239,395.23#$ 154,110-33 $103,170.04 Total receipts, disbursements $107,344.15 $1,529,434.90 $1,531,602.15 $105,176.90 and balances *June 28, 1967 Stuart P. Driskill #See Exhibit B for details Brackets denote debit. D E P 0 S I T 0 R Y B 0 N D S At December 311 1975 Schedule l Page l Date Style of Case Amount 4 11 56 Moody Shabam v. Donald K. Frazier $ 10.00 4 11 57 Reginald J. Gehret v. Charles F. Walker 25.00 10 27 58 James Davis Massenburk v. Julius Lee 25.00 3 16 59 Henry C. Sherman v. Ambrose L. Price 25.00 9 15 59 H. H. Lewis, Jr. v. Earl F. Davis 25.00 5 4 60 Bill Murphy Son's v. James H. Coogoon, Jr. 25.00 Ted Lansing Supply Company, Incorporated v: 4 5 61 Dennis P. Brooks, et al 25.00 (Dennis P. Brooks, et al 25.00 11 19 62 Elizabeth Kidd v. Stuart W. Kidd 50.00 185.00 11 14 63 Commonwealth of Virginia v. Ralph James Allen 7 16 64 Tidewater Oil Company v. Frederick D. Gordon 25.00 11 1 64 Seaboard Finance Company v. J. H. Shepperson, et al 25.00 7 15 65 Commonwealth of Virginia v. John M. Harris 50.00 10 19 65 Electro Beam Corporation v. Gordon W. Lang 25.00 5 10 67 Marie Phillips Realty Company v. Carl B. Whittington 25.00 3 2 68 Commonwealth of Virginia v. O'Neal Crockett 50.00 12 18 68 Shirley A. Crodle v. P. R. Wallace, Incorporated 25.00 2 28 69 Jarvis R. Jenkins v. Melvin C. Friend 25.00 4 18 69 International Properties v. John McDonald, et al 25.00 8 5 69 Redisco, Incorporated v. Jerry L. Swartz 25.00 5 14 70 M. W. Gill and Son, Incorporated v. Lewis A. Jenkins 25.00 5 14 70 Commonwealth of Virginia v. Willie E. Cornett 25.00 6 23 70 Richmond Ready Mix Corporation v. S. Clovis Smith 25.00 10 16 70 Drs. Kell, Eagles, Singer and Johnson v. James E. Cary 500.00 11 23 70 R. B. McCurry v. Clyde Shore 25.00 2 25 71 Virginia School Equipment Company v. Thurston Motors Lines, Incorporated 364.00 3 5 71 W. E. Lee and Company v. Jesse H. Brock 25.00 8 27 71 Aero Mayflower Transit Company, Incorporated v. Edward H. McAdams, et al 25.00 3 15 72 Commonwealth of Virginia v. Debra Sue Worrell 25.00 3 20 72 Patrick M. Gibrall v. J. F. Wadi]], III 25.00 4 19 72 Commonwealth of Virginia v. Harold L. Gillespie 1,500.00 7 1 72 Commonwealth of Virginia v. Delbert E. Slaser 25.00 2 1 73 James B. Carter v. Robert D. Twyman 25.00 4 26 73 Lee Builders Supply Corporation v. Alice Koogler 25.00 6 25 73 John F. Bellamy v. Ernest P. Gates, et al 300.00 9 12 73 Susan D. Grigsby v. Bobby Sizer 25.00 9 14 73 Cedar Roofs of Richmond, Incorporated v. Travel Sho., Incorporated 25,00 10 16 73 Commonwealth of Virginia v. Steven R. Acorn 500.00 3 13 74 Ashby B. Houchins, Jr. v. Dodds, Incorporated 25.00 5 31 74 Demetrois Papadakos v. Jerry Hopkins Lang 25.00 10 9 74 Continental Employment Corporation v. Harry 25.00 10 11 74 Ronny Bell v. Danny C. Porter 25.00 25.00 10 29 74 Gill Oil Corporation v. Joanne Isenberg 2 25 75 Judy C. Long v. Chesterfield County School Board 25.00 2 28 75 Anne S. Thompson v. William J. LaBelle 25.00 3 6 75 Bank of Chesterfield v. C. R. Chancy, et al 25.00 3 6 75 Ray Sullivan v. Kathleen T. A. Sullivan 25.00 3 25 75 Robert E. Chalkaler and Associates v. County of Chesterfield 50.00 8 1 75 Blue Cross of Virginia v. Thomas M. Conley 25.00 Total $242209.00 DEPOS I TORY BONDS At December 31, 1975 Schedule Page 2 Date Style of Case Amount 9 23 75 John C. Zehler, Sr. v. Mantel Jones $ 4,000.00 9 26 75 Hoilday Club of Dancing v. Nancy L. Gray 25.00 10 14 75 Owen L. Moorefield v. Thomas L. Stone, Sr. 25.00 10 28 75 T. Nevil Ingram, Incorporated v. James C. Lunsford 500.00 12 18 75 Daniel K. Lipscomb v. William W. Flipps, Jr. 25.00 12 19 75 Luther L. Covington v. Walter P. Styles, et al 50.00 12 23 75 Arthur C.:Taylor v. Ed. Halmark 25.00 12 23 75 George L. Kite, Jr. v. Ed's Marine and Travel, Incorporated 25.00 Commonwealth of Virginia v: 8 4 75 Cecil Hamon 500.00 8 11 75 Kevin Barnes 2,500.00 9 3 75 Robert Nunnally 2,500.00 9 4 75 H. C. Tadlock 300.00 9 4 75 C. E. Gill 300.00 10 15 75 Lottie M. Upchurch 1,000.00 10 21 75 Luvina A. Pegram 500.00 10 23 75 Kenneth C. Newton 25.00 11 14 75 Hubert Everett 300.00 11 17 75 James Alison 1,000.00 11 24 75 Carlyle F. Nunnally 1,000.00 12 18 75 David Carter Crouch 3,000.00 12 18 75 Robert Earl Siech 1,000.00 12 18 75 Freddie C. Sprouse, Jr. 500.00 12 18 75 William D. Chavis 300.00 12 18 75 County of Chesterfield v. James B. Friend, Sr. 300.00 Total $242209.00 STATEMENT OF COMPENSATION Year Ended December 31 1975 Exhibit B Income: Fees and other remuneration: Deeds Wills and administrations Chancery causes Actions at law Criminal cases Fees on land redemptions Commissions on land redemptions Commissions on State revenue Commissions on hunting and fishing licenses Issuing marriage licenses Commissions on transfer fees Commissions on local recordation tax on deeds Commissions on local share of tax on deeds of conveyance Filing financing statements Fees for indexing and filing land use assessment applications Miscellaneous Salary paid by County: County Clerk Total Expenses: Compensation of employees: Mrs. Petro D. Longest Mrs. Margaret C. Foster Mrs. Frances S. Wright Mrs. Bessie V. Richter Mrs. Elsie H. Cotten Mrs. Shirley Ann Royster Miss Brenda K. Heckel Mrs. Catherine M. Thompson Miss Donna J. Mann Mrs. Judith L. Keasler Mrs. Kira R. Brown Mrs. Charlotte T. Thacker Mrs. Pamela T. Craze Mrs. Linda K. Watts Miss Avis J. Harvey Mrs. Mary G. Blaquire Miss Sharon L. St.Claire Mrs. Ella Allen Crump Other: Postage Robbery and burglary insurance premium Professional liability insurance premium Recording and indexing deeds Local Governmental Officials Conference $107,775.50 4,199.50 23,093.50 8,215.00 19,160.25 192.00 1,122.66 32,081.94 97.60 5,301.00 510.07 9,587.46 3,855.64 3,814.00 408.00 18,481.11 1,500-00 239,395.23 $13,341.00 12,706.00 9,144.00 6,936.00 6,680.55 6,328.80 5,200.00 4,950.00 4,725.00 3,905.00 2,962.50 2,788.58 1,750.00 1,272.38 1,035.00 830.38 545.00 160.00 2,606.00 113.00 281.00 12,250.00 75.00 100,585.19 Income in Excess of Expenses Allowed $138,810.04 Excess Fees Refundable to the Commonwealth of Virginia (Exhibit C) 102,762.o4 Net Compensation of Clerk 3 ,0 .00 EXCESS FEES REFUNDABLE TO THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA At December 31 1975 Exhibit C Income: From all sources (Exhibit B) Allowances: Compensation allowed by statute Allowance for salary paid by County Commissions on local taxes collected: Land redemptions and delinquent taxes Local recordation tax on deeds Local share of tax on deeds of conveyance Fees for indexing and filing land use assessment applications Total provisional allowances Less - Amount in excess of 90% of average salary ($39,600.00) of resident judges 1 limited under provision of Section 14.1-143 of the Code of Virginia as amended Subtotal Add - Fees for indexing and filing land use assessment applications as provided in Section 58-769.8 of the Code of Virginia Net retainable compensation Expenses allowed by Compensation Board Excess Fees - Year Ended December 31, 1975 $239,395.23 $ 21,139.67 1,500.00 $1,122.66 9,587.46 3,855.64 408.00 14,973.76 $ 37,613.43 1,973.43 $ 35,640.00 408.00 $ 36,048.00 100,585.19 136,633.19 $102,762.04 FUNDS UNDER THE CONTROL OF THE CIRCUIT COURT ON DEPOSIT ACCORDING TO THE RECORDS OF THE DEPOSITORIES At December 31, 1975 Exhibit D (Unaudited) Page 1 Date Docket i Opened Number Style of Case Amount The Bank of Chesterfield, Richmond, Virginia: Checking accounts: 1 11 71 2-523-493 1 28 71 2-523-655 2 17 71 2-523-116 1 19 71 2-523-566 1 24 72 2-528-509 5 10 71 2-524-449 2 4 70 1-700-286 6 18 69 1-501-739 7 17 70 1-700-677 - 2-534-657 11 6 73 2-534-894 4 9 71 2-525-313 Clerk of Circuit Court of Chesterfield County v. Rufus Hairston $ Rufus Hairston R. J. Lotz Cornelius Bagley, heir of Richard Smith Robert and Alex Branch Suit of Henry B. and Gladys E. Belcher v. Bernard E. Perkinson Suit of Chesterfield Land and Timber Corp. v. Ella Jetter Potter Nettles In the case of Heinle Ayscue, et als v. Sarah Shell Golden, et als Chancery #6757 Joseph H. Watkins John.H. Thomas v. Lavinia Wise In suit of Carroll Foster, Inc. v. Gertrude T. Butler Bank of Powhatan, Powhatan, Virginia: Checking accounts: County of Chesterfield v: 4 3 63 2074-5426 Walter Clark, et als 4 3 63 2074-5439 Marion A. Gee, Sr. 10 20 62 2074-5442 R. L. Broach Bank of Virginia -Central, Richmond, Virginia: Checking accounts: 694.35 385.07 391.08 482.78 2,411.18 3,551.18 1,466.67 9.80 455.48 2,872.82 1,808.87 2,374.80 125.00 25.00 155.00 Richmond Petersburg Turnpike Authority v: 1,48.70 8 12 60 J.J. Hynst 111.25 8 12 60 Marie Miller Jackson 8 12 60 State Highway Commissioner J. Anderson v. P. M. Cooke 150.00 8 12 60 Richard L. Johnson, et al 1,285.00 8 12 60 Kenneth C. Perry v. Bear Bros. Inc., et al 1,500.00 8 12 60 Fletcher F. Jessup's heirs v. Fletcher Jr. Jessup, et al 500.00 8 12 60 Commonwealth of Virginia v. Glen S. Orren 1,500.00 12 28 60 Robert R. Saunders, Sr., acquire waste lands 88.00 8 12 60 George L. Richardson and W. E. Wiltshire, Trustees v. Southern Broadcasters, Inc., et als 261.13 1 5 62 Commonwealth of Virginia and County of Chester- field Circuit Court of Chesterfield v. Cecil N. Harwood infant, et als v. Luby Denning 3,408.67 6 5 63 Commonwealth of Virginia v. heirs of William S. Miller, et al 121'78 County of Chesterfield v: 40.00 8 4 25 24 64 64 Curtis F. Rogers Jefferson Davis Development Corporation 1,084.00 7 2 64 Leonard Thomas Wade 25.00 9 9 64 Mrs. Fern M. Holder 115.00 FUNDS UNDER THE CONTROL OF THE CIRCUIT COURT ON DEPOSIT ACCORDING TO THE RECORDS OF THE DEPOSITORIES At December 31, 1975 Exhibit D (Unaudited) Page 2 Date Docket Opened Number Style of Case Amount r - Bank of Virginia -Central, Richmond, Virginia: (Cont'd.) Checking accounts: (Cont'd.) 5 4 64 Howard R. Patterson, et als v. Maryilyn $ 60.85 Ireland, et als 5 7 62 Rebecca J. Speeks, an infant v. Juanita 1,217.62 F. Speeks, an infant County of Chesterfield v: 4 30 65 Edwin Rosinski 35.0 9 14 65 Dorothy May Phillips Furnam 2,442.660 9 14 65 Ellett Property 50.00 7 21 65 Stanley Smith, Jr. 2,184.00 9 14 65 Wirt H. Barksdale 25.00 161.00 8 17 65 Edith E. Armistead 6 4 69 H. Clem Johnson, et al 35.00 12 4 69 Christine T. Lumpkin 100.00 12 24 69 Rachel A. Mays 35.00 11 25 69 Daniel A. Patron, et al 25.00 10 3 69 Bettie M. Ross 75.00 12 24 69 Olin L. Taylor 25.00 6 4 69 Louis Allen Wilson, Jr. 6,050.00 8 12 60 Thomas Branch, etc., et al 8,000.00 8 12 60 Giles Bland Miller, et al 50.00 4 24 64 Emily Wisch 1,260.00 6 10 66 A. Devoe Blankenship, et als 25.00 6 10 66 Valentine F. Charles, et al 50.00 11 3 66 Alden Charles Wallace 25.00 3 14 66 Howard L. Atkinson 25.00 12 21 66 A. A. Wood 50.00 438.00 7 28 66 Stanley Crump v. Eula Lee, et al 11 7 66 Commonwealth of Virginia v. Samuel P. Howell 2.00 County of Chesterfield v: 12 21 66 Gladys L. Wood 25.00 12 21 66 Robert C. Creasy 25.00 12 21 66 Jerry G. Watkins 50.00 Commonwealth of Virginia v: 3 3 66 Frances S. Gornto 488.05 7 27 66 Virginia Electric and Power Company v. Sarah 2,219.25 Turner Green County of Chesterfield v: 5 24 67 John E. Hultiquest 25.00 5 24 67 Forest A. Traylor and W. I. Traylor 25.00 5 24 67 C. H. Venner 220.00 3 30 66 Gregory 50.00 6 2 67 Commonwealth of Virginia and County of Chester- field v. heirs of Lucy Howlett 242.49 6 23 67 Albert D. Talbott v. Ruby May Talbott Powell 868.68 4 14 67 American Telephone and Telegraph Company of Virginia v. Holland, Incorporated 3,000.00 8 12 60 Commonwealth Natural Gas Corp. v. Henry Clay 5.00 Turner, et al 1 11 68 Commonwealth of Virginia v. Frank A. 11.29 Rollins, et al FUNDS UNDER THE CONTROL OF THE CIRCUIT COURT ON DEPOSIT ACCORDING TO THE RECORDS OF THE DEPOSITORIES At December 31, 1975 Exhibit D (Unaudited) Page 3 Date Docket Opened Number Style of Case Amount Bank of Virginia -Central, Richmond, Virginia: (Cont'd.) Checking accounts: (Cont'd.) 8 7 68 Forest J. Watson v. William Watson, et al $ 3,076.46 County of Chesterfield v: 9 1 67 Edwin R. Bookman 25.00 9 1 67 Alma C. Bookman 100.00 10 2 67 John M. Lesner 25.00 10 2 67 Paul W. Stagg 25.00 10 2 67 John P. Schoenfeld 25.00 10 2 67 Irae O'Kennon 25.00 10 2 67 William E. Davis 25.00 10 2 67 James F. Hickson 50.00 12 11 67 Lula B. Badgett 100.00 12 11 67 Mitchell Well and Pump Company 50.00 3 22 67 Herman L. Coffey 25.00 4 10 67 R. L. Honbarrier Company 500.00 10 2 67 Thomas A. Sheeham 25.00 1 23 68 Eleanor H. Ewell 300.00 4 3 68 Albert S. Karvelis 50.00 6 13 68 J. H. Benson 25.00 6 13 68 Robert C. Newman 50.00 7 25 68 William L. Wray 35.00 7 25 68 Laura Croesldmpe 35.00 7 25 68 Maurice M. Mills X5.00 8 22 68 Mrs. Tonie Elko 25.00 8 22 68 Ronald E. Britton 48.00 8 22 68 Joe Vaden 500.00 10 29 68 J. Ivan and Laura M. Archer 84.00 2 24 69 Richard H. and Patricia B. Hamilton 25.00 9 11 69 Curtis N. Cosner and wife 150.00 6 4 69 John D. Dishman, et al 25.00 11 25 69 Samuel M. Douglas, et al 125.00 7 2 69 Marvin L. Harrison, et al 50.00 12 24 69 James C. Hobbs 50.00 7 2 70 James L. Johnson, et al 35.00 7 30 70 Franklin L. Partin, et al 130.00 7 2 70 William A. Scherer, Jr. 35.00 7 2 70 M. W. Trammell, et al 25.00 7 3 70 L. 0. Scott, et al 50.00 1 3 71 Daniel F. Farley, et al 150.00 8 29 74 Estate of Rosa B. Arvin 50.00 11 28 73 George F. and Helen M. Booker 75.00 11 7 74 Ruffin Bailey 50.00 7 15 74 Broad Rock Club, Incorporated 391.15 6 21 74 Allen D. Enge, et al 25.00 11 8 73 Lee Alan Bess, et al 50.00 4 11 74 Raymond E. Bruhk, et al 517.50 8 29 74 Thomas Brown, et al 50.00 8 29 74 C. H. Bruce, et al 50.00 8 29 74 William McChildress, et al 25.00 8 29 74 Carrie L. Childress 25.00 FUNDS UNDER THE CONTROL OF THE CIRCUIT COURT ON DEPOSIT ACCORDING TO THE RECORDS OF THE DEPOSITORIES At December 31, 1975 (Unaudited) Exhibit D Page 4 Date Docket Opened Number Style of Case Amount Bank of Virginia -Central, Richmond, Virginia: (Cont'd.) Checking accounts: (Cont'd.) 8 29 74 2 4 65 2 4 65 2 4 65 7 13 65 8 23 67 10 29 68 12 13 68 11 7 74 2 14 72 7 19 73 8 15 73 4 11 74 4 11 74 11 7 74 11 10 72 4 18 74 8 29 74 12 20 73 4 11 73 2 14 72 9 12 73 8 29 74 11 8 73 3 22 73 4 18 74 8 14 74 7 15 74 8 29 74 9 30 74 4 11 74 12 14 72 12 14 72 7 15 74 8 29 74 4 18 74 7 15 74 2 14 72 2 18 72 2 14 65 3 12 71 4 11 74 12 14 72 7 15 74 12 20 73 County of Chesterfield v: Randolph Campbell estate Harry Glenn Sells Helen M. Tolker R. L. Fulgham Thomas T. St.Clair J. D. Carneal C. H. Bollinger, et al Jose D. Coll and Ethel A. Coll Lee Conner Realty Corporation Jessie P. Coffey, et al H. R. Francis John G. and Maxine K. Jones Cay M. Colbert Vernon W. Carter M. Eldred Chappell Manie Djiovanides Estate, et William E. Duval, et al Ella Mae Fisher John A. Foster, et al G. Cabell Ferrell, et al V. Eldridge Granor, et al Emmett Gregory, Jr., et al Ruth Lee Green A. Paul Garrity, Jr., et al Charles R. Hawley and wife Frederick E. Holshouser, et State Highway Commissioner of Hillanne Assoc. County of Chesterfield v. Leroy Hopkins, et al Ann K. Henley Wallace M. Hall, et al Edward L. Hauchey, et al George H. Jones, et al 0. A. Kelley, et al Harry C. King Oscar B. Lindie, et al William E. Moore, et al Ivan Mallory, et al August Adams Maid Roland R. Newcomb, et al Emma Lee Leon Wayne Pearson, an infant Wade Pearson, etc. County of Chesterfield v: Joe B. Quesenberry, et al Ovid A. Raikes, et al Arcell Robins, et al Frank J. Reese, et al als al Virginia v. etc., v. Dwight $ 25.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 5,358.00 25.00 40.00 100.00 25.00 25.00 3,500.00 200.00 50.00 150.00 25.00 50.00 60.00 327.50 50.00 415.00 35.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 25.00 50.00 2,840.89 281.25 25.00 450.00 75.00 75.00 500.00 224.13 50.00 50.00 861.65 50.00 775.00 259.00 783.97 50.00 50.00 126.00 100.00 FUNDS UNDER THE CONTROL OF THE CIRCUIT COURT ON DEPOSIT ACCORDING TO THE RECORDS OF THE DEPOSITORIES Exhibit D At December 31, 1975 (Unaudited) Page 5 Date Docket Amount 0 ened Number Style of Case Bank of Virginia -Central, Richmond, Virginia: (Concluded) Checking accounts: (Concluded) Savings accounts: Clerk Court of Chesterfield County for: 1 10 72 11-24821-8 Benefit of Kevin, Keith and Kimberly Wright 11,623.15 1 10 72 11-24820-8 Benefit of Ernest R. Jr., Yolanda F. and 9,599.21 Debbie K. Wright The Central National Bank, Richmond, Virginia: Checking accounts: 7 2 48 County of Chesterfield v: $ 200.00 4 6 73 Clarence D. and Jane S. Smith 25.00 11 7 74 Lewis A. Skidmore, et al 25.00 3 22 73 Wavil C. Stewart and wife 25.00 3 22 73 Harry 0. Snead and wife 50.00 7 6 73 Earle Spencer, Jr., and wife 50.00 11 8 73 Alfred M. Strash, et al 25.00 12 24 69 Olin L. Taylor 25.00 12 14 72 Robert E. Terrell, et al 25.00 2 14 72 Robert M. Thompson, et al 50.00 2 18 72 Thomas M. Taylor, et al 250.00 4 5 72 George W. and Carolyn N. Thomas 25.00 4 4 74 Betty H. Utley 50.00 10 18 73 Elmer W. Yocham, et al 50.00 9 12 73 Bernice Vaughan 3 00.00 1 13 71 George W. Wilson and wife 25.00 2 14 72 Kenneth N. Worley, et al 25.00 2 14 72 William L. Woodford, et al 75.00 2 14 72 James L. Woodfin, et al 25.00 2 14 72 L. R. Luch, et al 100.00 4 18 74 Edward L. O'Connor 200.00 11 7 74 Raymond Q. Powers, Jr., Trustee 100.00 7 6 73 Robert F. Wench, Jr., et al 25.00 2 14 72 Edward McFlowers, et al 25.00 2 14 72 Wesley H. Hall, et al 25.00 2 14 72 Lester C. Emerson 75.00 2 6 73 011ie Q. Brandon 25.00 7 29 65 Frank H. Wisch, et al 100.00 1 13 71 Elmer L. Easterling and wife 4 16 74 Chesterfield Land and Timber Company v. Page M. Bass 26,739.35 Savings accounts: Clerk Court of Chesterfield County for: 1 10 72 11-24821-8 Benefit of Kevin, Keith and Kimberly Wright 11,623.15 1 10 72 11-24820-8 Benefit of Ernest R. Jr., Yolanda F. and 9,599.21 Debbie K. Wright The Central National Bank, Richmond, Virginia: Checking accounts: 7 2 48 12-082-207 Aaron Day v. John Paul Day, incompetent 101.00 203.83 12 27 53 12-082-215 Gussie C. Haynes v. Leonard Haynes, etc. 1,168.06 12 4 62 12-009-135 Re - Thomas Brown, et als v. Leslie Brown Jr. 329.93 11 28 62 12-009-127 Re - James W. Gilliam, et als v. Atha Brown, 90.69 9 7 65 12-088-736 M. E. Gordon v. Betty Jo Gordon Wingfield 6 19 69 12-079-117 Robert Cridlin Lloyd's Executors v. Thomas 2,720.04 Gregory, et als FUNDS UNDER THE CONTROL OF THE CIRCUIT COURT ON DEPOSIT ACCORDING TO THE RECORDS OF THE DEPOSITORIES At December 31, 1975 Exhibit D (Unaudited) Page 6 Date Docket Opened Number Style of Case Amount First & Merchants National Bank, Colonial Heights Branch, Colonial Heights, Virginia: Checking accounts: 4 8 60 02516712 A. W. & Irvin Horner v. June P. Traylor, et als $ 110.67 274.83 4' 5 61 02516738 Fred N. Sheppard, et al v. Bennie Thompson, et al 11 18 64 02516819 Joseph J. Pergerson, Jr., et al v. Victoria 380.51 5 1 59 02516725 Bridgefort, et al Robert L. Vincent v. Gus Vincent, et als 308.03 4 19 60 02516783 Robert L. Vincent v. Gus Vincent, et als 1,191.79 First & Merchants National Bank, Petersburg, Savings Branch, Colonial Heights, Virginia: Checking accounts: Circuit Court of Chesterfield County, Virginia in 12 4 48 02516770 the suit of Perkinson's creditors, et als v. Perkinson's executor, et als, Harland, et als v. Perkinson's executor, et als 101.06 12 4 48 02516767 In the suit of R. A. Wilson v. J. A. Wilson 84.96 First & Merchants National Bank, Richmond, Virginia: Checking accounts: 8 1 25 1 Prior to 1938 k a Cobb, executor v. Woolridge, et als Rooks & wife v. Brittons, et als Ada Irene Jones, guardian v. John Watkins Jones, et als W. A. Eastman v. Fred M. Eastman, et al Dormant checking account: 1 10 63 Raymond S. Cox v. George Clement Arhart, et als Savings accounts: 7 31 67 Bayler, Olivia, Epps, Barksdale, et al v. Wallace, et al 4 27 67 Medical College of Virginia v. Phyllis Reid Franklin Federal Savings and Loan Association of Richmond, Richmond, Virginia: Savings accounts: 1 20 38 270-7 R. Mallory v. Robertson, executor, etc. 1 20 38 253-6 R. Mallory v. Robertson, executor, etc. .23 27.67 104.98 2.95 639.63 1,302.38 383.91 2,900.00 1,310.77 M FUNDS UNDER THE CONTROL OF THE CIRCUIT COURT ON DEPOSIT ACCORDING TO THE RECORDS OF THE DEPOSITORIES At December 31, 1975 Exhibit D (Unaudited) Page 7 Date Docket Opened Number Style of Case Amount Peoples Bank of Chesterfield, Chesterfield, Virginia: Checking accounts: 12 26 75 900079 Circuit Court of Chesterfield County v. $ 460.00 Mary G. Camden 12 26 75 900044 Circuit Court of Chesterfield County v. Walter T. & Adele M. Burke 25.00 11 20 75 900087 Circuit Court of Chesterfield County in the matter of Marvin 0. Dunlevy v. E. S. Bonfanti, et al 56,613.22 Savings account: 8 20 75 016799 Circuit Court of Chesterfield County in the matter of Ivan M. Chapman 13,002.98 Pioneer Federal Savings and Loan Association of Hopewell, Hopewell, Virginia: Savings accounts: 7 - 64 S2-709 In the matter of E. Falonn Hodges, Adm. of the estate of Norann Eugenia Williams, deceased v. John Albert Walton, for the benefit of Baby Girl Williams, infant (now known as Patsy Ann Miles) 10,207.58 7 2 63 S2-239 Share of Richard Alexander Branch, held in suit of Henry H. Dodge, v. R. M. Phillips 187.89 5 - 69 S2-2162 Russell E. Mason 1,451.93 5 - 69 S2-2163 Joanne G. Mason 1,451.93 5 - 69 S2-2164 Shelia L. Mason 1,451.93 9 30 71 S2-2900 Cleste Rene Sharpe, Ruth Dabney, Charlotte 116.27 Dabney, Laverne J. Dance, minors 12 - 71 S2-2964 Pamela Renee Seamster 3,537.35 12 - 71 S2-2966 Richard Carroll Stephens 3,537.36 12 - 71 S2-2965 John Garland Seamster, Jr. 3,537.35 12 4 72 S2-3362 Jessee Alen Mcle, minor 1,469.65 12 15 72 52-3371 Stanley 0. Bowser, infant 2,739.17 147.45 11 10 72 S2-3335 John K. Glazebrook, Jr., minor 1,456.12 3 9 73 S2-3468 Mark Alan Davis, infant 3 9 73 S2-3469 Michael Elbert Davis, infant 1,456.11 4 24 73 S2-3520 Marc John Condren, infant 71.09 4 24 73 S2-3521 Eric John Condren, infant 71.09 4 24 73 S2-3522 Grey James Condren, infant 71.09 4 24 73 S2-3523 Stephanie Jean Condren, infant 71.07 7 31 73 S2-3649 For the benefit of George Mitchell Powers, infant in the matter of Shelby Jean Matthews, Adm. of R. L. Powers, Jr. estate 663.60 7 31 73 S2-3652 For the benefit of Michael Douglas Powers, an infant in the matter of Shelby Jean Mattews, 663.60 Adm. of R. L. Powers, Jr. estate 5 14 75 S2-4320 Circuit Court of Chesterfield County in the matter of Mary F. Schrum, Gdn. of Wilbur L. Schrum, III, infant 26,261.66 FUNDS UNDER THE CONTROL OF THE CIRCUIT COURT ON DEPOSIT ACCORDING TO THE RECORDS OF THE DEPOSITORIES Exhibit D At December 31, 1975 Page 8 (Unaudited) Date Docket Amount Opened Number Style of Case Pioneer Federal Savings and Loan Association of Hopewell, Hopewell, Virginia: (Concluded) Certificates of deposit: Circuit Court of Chesterfield County for: $ 4 19 73 C2-695 Marc John Condren, infant 4 19 73 C2-696 Eric John Condren, infant 4 19 73 C2-697 Grey James Condren, infant 4 19 73 C2-698 Stephanie Jean Condren, infant 4 9 73 C2-694 Barbara A. Williamson v. Glenn W. Ricks 7 31 73 C2-65-751 Circuit Court of Chesterfield County for George Mitchell Powers, infant 12 4 72 C2-70-635 Jessee Alen Mcle, minor 7 31 73 C2-65-752 Michael Douglas Powers, infant 9 30 71 C2-70-492 Cleste Rene Sharpe, Charlotte Dabney, Laverne J. Dance, all minors 4 5 74 C2-55-960 Teresa Ann Bruner, infant 1 7 75 C2-65-1123 Thomas E. Daniel, infant 1 16 70 C2-50-262 William E. Ferguson, Jr., infant 11 10 72 C2-70-627 John K. Glazebrook, Jr., infant 1 2 73 C2-70-642 Roosevelt A. Hamlin, infant in the matter of Havey Hamlin, father Richmond National Bank, Richmond, Virginia: Checking account: 10 15 56 201-70-955 Bernice Vaughan v. Vincent L. Gregory United Virginia Bank, Richmond, Virginia: Dormant checking accounts: 12 30 55 00-80-276 Heirs of Robert Michens 12 30 55 00-80-209 Barbara I. Powell v. Powell 12 30 55 00-80-233 Waverly P. Nunnally v. Robert L. Nunnally 8 21 58 00-80-403 Estate of Chastine Jasper 11 3 59 00-80-470 A. S. Gresham, Jr., v. Richard S. Mosely 7 26 60 00-80-3o6 Thomas Lewis v. Kate Mitchell, et al 9 4 62 00-80-179 Nora Rehberger v. Mary Alice Downes Checking accounts: 5 21 63 8 17 66 1 20 70 5 9 6o 8 11 70 2 24 67 8 13 73 00-80-039 Chase Construction Company, Incorporated v. unknown consent, heirs, devisees and/or successors in interest of Oble Johnson, deceased 00-80-004 Wilbert L. Michens, et al v. United Brothers and Sons Society 00-80-330 Joseph D. Jones, et al v. Albert Redd, and infant, et al 00-80-446 Clifford Grey, Francella Grey v. Lewis Supply Co. 00-80-101 Sarah Turner Sinclair v. Brook -Hill Heights Corp., Ltd. 00-80-063 Bessie Spencer Williams v. Ida May Troy, et al 8 44 H P tton Sr et als v. Stacey C. 5,888.71 5,888.71 5,888.71 5,888.71 7,500.00 1,198.47 12,053.44 1,198.47 18,344.06 5,090.74 9,682.32 15,223.40 12,101.41 5,998.73 71.73 61.46 42.58 1.85 499.72 599.47 1,710.49 107.08 321.06 87.76 1,319.28 15.00 105.80 25.25 00- 0-1 em y a , •, 210.00 Rhodes, Jr., infant Total $396,070.47 A Ike vo-ovo. DEPARTMENT OF TRPORTATION No% ..... rie%m AnM11IMTRATION r GL7G.rc�. �. .-•• ---- WASHINGTON AIRPORTS DISTRICT OFFICE g00 SOUTH WASHINGTON STREET FALLS CHURCH. VIRGINIA 22046 my 17 1971 Mr. Jack Manuel Acting County Administrator County of Chesterfield P.O. Box 3281 Chesterfield, VA 23832 Dear Mr. Manuel: We have received the Revised Audit County otort for rD roject No. 8-51-0007-02 at ChesterfieldunyAirpotChesterfield, Virginia. A copy of the report is enclosed for your review and information. O�Pr` 4 V,, �O t � Z 70 \ 2 ��NI5Tar1 cost Of This office has prepared written approval outfor Plan.he Reinstat ng that sum $1316.70 for updating the Airport Lay results in an overpayment of $1406. 85 as shown below: Amount of Overpayment(4/22/77 ALP Audit Cost $1316.70 X 755o Revised Audit) $2394.37 -987.52 $1406.85 If you concur with the revised audit, we request a letter of acceptance and we will recommend the projec d to the f check for the over- payment ollowing addre s s payment should be forwarde Mr. Lester Lord Federal Aviation Admiristration Eastern Region John F. Kennedy Intl Airport Jamaica, New York 11430 If you have any questions regarding this information, do not hesitate to call on us. We await your response. Sincerely, DWARD L. `BEALE, P. E. �. Chief, Engineering Section Enclosure cc: Div. of Aero. AFA- Airport, Chesterfields Virginia Chesterfield County -4_74, Revived Audit Repcart ADAP Prnj+�ct Ida. 8-5 1.-(X)07 An Chief, ;Audit Divisions AEA- .. i3atsed upon a visit to the offices of the Consultant' Dowberry, Neaaloxs we have revised our audit of the Chesterfield County p,a Airports a-51-OW7^02�-�74. ADAII Project No. I of 22,861.20, this t�'ea }agave reinstated inspection coStS ire. t'he am""o taq. There were of questionead inspectiondata to t�, leaves a balances of $110.Ix3 Weans d:ld not submit any no recordis at than consultant and the apo support the $310.43- There were records At tiles consultant to support ttie evert t cert of �1.,3i6.er for updaating the Airport Layout Plan- tiowe�ver, then -aa was no approval for this wc,rk to be included evidence that the l"Aarant� wTh refore�ritten �, thio unt is still puemtioned in the* srope of the g ponding written approval from tho FAA., There still ramaiin°� On ovex"pas}�rtar�stt due izOft thesponsor totaling S2,3g4.37. r audit 540.27Am,>,'Int () f overpayment pe 17, 11}5, e'© Reinstated Inspection $22,3091»20 x 7S� 3$ 2,3ra4.3c ,, Amount due from sponsor. The sponsor has not been informed nr-our revised audit. Ori.gi EDWARD W. Ra r,'.DWAIZD W- RI7S:il,LL Eta'Russe11:lp:AF-A-80:0520'APril 22, l' M May 27, 1977 Chesterfield County Board of Supervisor Chesterfield Court House, Va. 23832 Re: Firework Display Permit Dear Sir; If possible, I would like a Firework Display Permit issused for the effective date of July 1,.1977, to be held at the Southside Speedway. A self addressed envelope is enclosed for your convience and, I trust you will acknowledge the above as soon as possible. Cordinally Yours, oseph A. Fairlamb Sr. JAF/lfk 1%0 m n / i f f ' b , i / i f MOSEL.EY■ HENINO ASSOCIATES E , INC. MHA z ARCHITECTS ■ PLANNERS ■ INTERIOR DSIGNERS 601 SOUTHLAKE BLVD. ■ RICHMOND, VA. 23235 ■ 6041794-7555 3 June 1977 RE: Chesterfield Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court and Probation Building - Site Preparation Chesterfield, Virginia bc, Encls: As stated WILLIAM WARD MOSELEY. AIA, President •JAMES H. HENING, JR., AIA, Becretery-Treasurer The Surveyor will be responsible for determining quantities of earthwork and re- cording elevations of subgrades suitable for construction footings. QUALITY CONTROL 1J0-1 119 SOUTH MALL, WILLOW LAWN ROBIOUS INCORPORATED PHONE: 282.2172 June 3, 1977 The Board of Supervisors County of Chesterfield Chesterfield, Virginia 23832 Gentlemen: RICHMOND, VIGRINIA 23230 Re: Roads,Section I, Greenfield Attached, please find a xerox copy of a letter from the Virginia Department of Highways addressed to Mr. R. M. McElfish, County of Chesterfield, approving the road construction of Section I, Greenfield Subdivision. We would greatly appreciate your introducing and approving a resolution that these roads be taken into the State system for maintenance. Thanking you in advance for your kind attention to the above request at your earliest convenience, we remain V ry truly yo s, ulian B. Jacob obious, Inc. JBJ:Jm encl: copy GOMMONWLALTM OF VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS AND TRANSPORTATION Pe O. WX 2026 am Aixt v1.t+ Im" 22235 fqr. 2;. 1t. Ilo�i,tfah 62�1L CwrNgf Of drrt�ast3ald _ t�lb>le!ls3d, no Os*=new - sa"Am 2 DOW W* malit"ho As hnspaalm raa rig se tial Me& !s fte am" U"Aft" sib. s!low No& VMS ftut ft a"" am sift au tr t1M saalld me eig ex, d aoa !►se ! r0a� !O LN War In" tra star► me Wr fooe risl sor. ys It we r be OC mw toftbw amity" oav ple"o as"aft 0" Vow tuly 3�/ '. . E. fN covingtome a*. Cyt R* 97. UNCUMIllift .o, mr* adjas a. aw"ve jw. �• '� 1` F i M CARLTON, TAYLOR & CLARK C, C 206 EAST CARY STREET • RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23219 ARCHITECTS PHONE (804) 648-0171 E. TUCKER CARLTON, AIA 1900-1974 WAYNE E. TAYLOR, AIA ROBERT H. CLARK, AIA CSI Mr. Jack G. Manuel Acting Administrator County of Chesterfield Chesterfield, Virginia 23832 Dear Mr. Manuel: Alterations for Welfare Offices June 3, 1977 Based upon the revisions and alterations to the present data processing buildings for use by the Welfare Department, we estimate the work involved will cost ap- proximately $62, 500. We were unable to obtain too much data on the existing heating and air conditioning systems upon which to base the estimate and some electric heating may have to be added in the small wing building. The estimate does include new ceiling, new vinyl asbestos flooring, complete interior painting and painting of exterior windows and doors. I trust this meets with your approval. Sincerely, Robert H. Clark, AIA, for CARLTON, TAYLOR & CLARK RHC /dm c -Ms . Lucy Corr M 0.°' IV, � aor m Iiii ��o'o AUDITOR OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS P. O. Box I29S CHARLES K.TRIBLE AUDITOR RICHMOND 23210 To the Board of Supervisors County of Chesterfield Commonwealth of Virginia Chesterfield, Virginia Dear Sirs: We have examined the accounts and records of LEWIS H. VADEN COUNTY CLERK AND CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT of the COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD May 25, 1977 for the calendar year 1975, and present our report in the form of the statements immediately following this communication. -," The examination disclosed that full accounting had been made for all funds of record coming into the custody of the Clerk, and that the records had been prepared in an excellent manner. We have included in this report on Exhibit D a statement of the funds on deposit and under control of the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County at December 31, 1975. The information with respect to the accounts was furnished to us by the depositories. No audit of these funds has been made by us, and the inclusion of this statement, which is for the information of the Court, should not be construed as indicating that the funds have been audited. During the course of this engagement we observed that significant sums have been retained in various depositories for periods in excess of five years apparently without anyone known to the Court claiming the same, and we suggest that the provisions of Section 8-746 et sec., Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, be utilized to relieve the Court and Clerk of the responsibility for these monies by transferring them to the State Treasurer. The following statistical data concerning the activities of the Clerk's office for the calendar year 1975 are presented for informative purposes: Deeds recorded 12,521 Wills and administrations 10 recorded 194 Chancery causes - New 957 Actions at law - New 294 Criminal cases tried 639 Hunting and fishing licenses sold 526 Marriage licenses issued 839 -1- CEJ STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL CONDITION At December 31, 1975 Exhibit A A S S E T S Cash in office Cash on deposit with: The Bank of Virginia, Chester, Virginia Total L I A B I L I T I E S Collections for others Recording equipment account Unclassified receipts Clerk of the Court: Fees, commissions, etc., not withdrawn $ 408.00 Excess fees refundable to the Commonwealth of Virginia (Exhibit C) 102,762.04 Subtotal (Exhibit A-1) Depository bonds (Schedule 1) Advanced costs to record plats Deferred credit Total February 15, 1962 W. J. Horning $2.00 February 15, 1962 Custom Craft Homes 2.50 $4.50 $ 8,730.10 120,705.30 i2�TTn $ 71.43 1,930.00 5.43 103,170.04 $105,176.90 24,209.00 4.50# 45.00 $129T35 70 Memo page 3 fir►' June 7, 1977 M tire rental fee for the slicing machine. If the Board decides to go ahead with the project perhaps a reduced fee for use of the machine can be negotiated for the time period of this program by the De a ment of General Services with the City of �e,��n The success of the program depends a great deal on the publicity it receives and the cooperation of property owners and the public. If there is less than the anticipated demand for tire pick up and disposal then the personnel can be used to supplement special projects of the Department of General Services, the Recreation Department or the Environmental Engineering Division. If an appropriation is to be made it should be made to the De- partment of General Services budget. JPZ/jp M BOARD OF SUPERVISORS E. MERLIN O'NEILL. CHAIRMAN MATOACA DISTRICT JOAN GIRONE. VICE CHAIRMAN MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT C. L. BOOKMAN CLOVER HILL DISTRICT J. RUFFIN APPERSON DALE DISTRICT GARLAND DODD BERMUDA DISTRICT CO U NTY O F CHESTERFIELD, May 31, 1977 Mr. C.G. Manuel Interim County Administrator County of Chesterfield Dear Mr. Manuel: ADMINISTRATION C MANUEL INTERIM COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR MJ C H E S T E R F I E L D VIRGINIA 23832 I am very pleased to advise you and the Board of Super- visors that for the second straight year the Chesterfield Fire Department will be the recipient of a NACO Award. The award for this year will be for our new and innovative Technical Service Unit which is proving to be advantageous to us as it works its way through our all volunteer fire companies. As a result of our being selected for an award, the Technical Service Unit has been invited to attend this years NACO meeting at Wayne, Michigan, just outside of Detroit. We can display the entire unit, which I be- lieve will bring a very favorable reflection on Chester- field County, due to the fact that this is the only like unit in the fire service to the best of my knowledge. I would appreciate it if you would check with the Board of Supervisors and see if they are interested in two of our men attending. As far as the Fire Department is concerned, this is not intended to set a precedent but we really feel we have a most worthwhile project this year. The estimated cost of the trip to Michigan and to display the unit will be approximately $700.00. Thank you for your interest in this matter. Hoping to hear from you in the near future. Respectfully, Robert L. Eanes Chief of Department CHESTERFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT Mr. C.G. Manuel (2) May 31, 1977 cc: C.L. Bookman Chairman of Fire Committee Stephen A. Elswick Commander of Technical Service Unit Encl. . � atm �W'►"'Me�..;W!;,�.'"� 9 P4 r-4 +-) �I ± 's. � �'� TTY J4' �r� � �.. ,. i� - � t •'1 �•-f •� ``-a Y +) +) b4 o rt3 cd �•4 y1, 4 r-1 41, cm C -- m 9 P4 r-4 +-) ,-+ Cd •� a, 0 0 +) +) b4 o rt3 cd N r-1 41, Cd U A O b H A A A Cd E -a eA w w Cd > �..... - � quo.•--r�- y ;, - H Q O A Q H GL cd N O x w rx a Q q H W -�t o LH L Cd N M W cd N N W ) 'y � A d •• w �W z 00 w JWQC^4 U q H W :z A W � H H W U U W � h W w O F+1 H w Cn U W 77 U 9 P4 r-4 +-) ,-+ Cd •� E- 0 0 +) +) b4 o rt3 cd V r-1 41, O U A O b P-4 A A A Cd E -a eA P4 Cd > �..... - � quo.•--r�- y ;, - O U Cd O cd N O x O v� U Q C) a b -�t o LH L Cd N M W cd N N W ) 'y N O ^ll •• C �W • r -I 00 In JWQC^4 U r, W c cd :z rj H U W � h O Lti O F+1 H w 9 r-4 +-) ,-+ Cd •� +) +) fib` o rt3 _ O A O P-4 A A A +� E -a eA Cd > �..... - � quo.•--r�- y ;, - P4 Cd O cd N O O O Q C) a b -�t o O Ln O M O cd Q N A � 'y N O N • r -I 00 In +� 3 r, cd cd :z r-4 ,-+ 0� b +) +) fib` o rt3 _ P-4 A A A E -a �..... - � quo.•--r�- y ;, - :. A 'rte "r••ti•'s r - O O O O O O O Q C) C Q ` O O O O O O N N N N O N In _... I: Y^ 77 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS E. MERLIN O'NEILL. CHAIRMAN MATOACA DISTRICT JOAN GIRONE. VICE CHAIRMAN MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT C. L. BOOKMAN CLOVER HILL DISTRICT J. RUFFIN APPERSON DALE DISTRICT GARLAND DODD BERMUDA DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION C. G MANUEL INTERIM COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR C O U NTY OF C H E S T E R F I ELD CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA 23832 June 2, 1977 Mrs. Joan Girone Board of Supervisors County of Chesterfield Dear Mrs. Girone: In response to the request of the Midlothian Volunteer Fire Department for salaried firefighter coverage during the months of June, July and August, 1977, permit me to make the following proposals: 1. That we be permitted to hire three firefighters that are allocated in the 1977-78 budget approx- imately one month early. This will enable the Fire Department to place three firefighters on duty on a fifty hour workweek, 7 a.m. to S p.m., Monday through Friday as requested by Chief Vincent. I cannot recommend only two men on duty for safety reasons. Two men will provide an apparatus operator and only one other man to perform tasks that by necessity require a minimum of two men to be done effectively and safely. 2. That the salaried firefighters from the Bon Air Station respond automatically to back up the three men at Midlothian. Of course, the Bon Air unit will be quickly canceled by radio if it is not needed or if there seems to be a satisfactory response from the volunteer personnel at the Midlothian Station. Also, permit me to say that I do not feel like this is an orderly approach to fire protection in our county regard- less of which station the need should arise. However, due to District Chief Vincent's sincere belief that daytime assistance is needed, I do not believe any other solution is acceptable at this time. Mrs. Joan Girone (2) June 2, Our anticipated cost of personnel for this project will be approximately $2,500.00 which is not in the current operating budget or in next years projected budget. Thank you for your interest in this matter. Hoping to hear from you in the very near future. Respectfully, 4Robet L. E e Chief of Department CHESTERFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT cc: C.L. Bookman Board of Supervisors,Chairman Fire Committee C.G. Manuel i Interim County Administrator L/ David I. Vincent District Chief David E. Barfield Battalion Chief L9 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS E. MERLIN O'NEILL. CHAIRMAN MATOACA DISTRICT JOAN GIRONE. VICE CHAIRMAN MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT C. L. BOOKMAN CLOVER HILL DISTRICT J. RUFFIN APPERSON DALE DISTRICT GARLAND DODD BERMUDA DISTRICT n 4DMINISTRATION C. G MANUEL INTERIM COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR OSO COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA 23832 May 31, 1977 Mr. Garland Dodd Board of Supervisors County of Chesterfield Dear Mr. Dodd: Pursuant to our conversation of May 26, 1977, about the needed fire hydrants on Chester Road, permit me to recommend that we install the first three hydrants in the study if at all possible. 1. Southside of Route 1515 $ 1,250.00 2. Front of 11133 Chester Road $ 1,250.00 3. Chester Road South of Wood Dale Road $ 1,250.00 Total T 3,750.00 Then at a later date install the remaining two hydrants. With the installation of the first three which would permit the Fire Department to reach all structures on Chester Road between Route 10 and Centralia Road with a hydrant line which could very well be the determining factor on how successful the fire could be fought in some of these properties. Thank you for your interest in improving fire protection in this portion of our County. Sincerely, CX? Co'�� Robe t L. Eanes Chief of Department CHESTERFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT cc: District Chief Lynn Church Company Commander E.R. Anderson sr M n UTILITIES DEPARTMENT COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD AGENDA FOR THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS JUNE 8, 1977 J ITEM NO. Contract Number: W77-46CD District: Midlothian Location: Salisbury, Winterfield Section Developer: Salisbury Corporation Contractor: Stamie E Lyttle Co., Inc. Cost: Estimated Cost - $103,053.00 y- C,&aNQbus Estimated Refund to Developer':. 30,6_50.40 Estimated Developer Cost - $72,402.60 Code: 66-260-807.0 Cash Refund 66-260-807.1 Refund Through Connections VICINITY SKETCH so� Q. Mr. R. A. Painter County Engineer County of chesterfield Chesterfield, Virginia Dear Mr. Painter, • May 27, 1977 • 1� �'< n.1 EZEEVE7 NX MAY 2 71877► .VTIK M'F4, DEPT, Re: Contract W77-46CO Salisbury, Winterfield Section Enclosed please find an original and a copy of the above referenced water contract covering the water lines in Winterfield Section of Salisbury. Also enclosed is our check in the amount of $-1448.50 to cover the inspection fee. This contract has been executed by us in order to allow a speedy crossing of Route 714 which is scheduled for new asphalt by the Highway Department in early June. It is requested that the County amend the provisions of paragraph #12 for the reasons outlined below, so that the County will pay one half of their share on completion of the work, and the remainder through connections. The contract covers some 3235 L.F. of 16" water line which represents a County share of $ 30,650.40. This 16" line is for County benefit and is not needed by us. Due to the fact that the amount of oversized line is considerable, it would take the Salisbury Corporation from four to six years to be repaid solely by connection fees at our traditional rate of development. We see no change in our development rate at this time. The Salisbury Corporation has always tried to work with the County on mutual problems but feels that four to six years is much too long for us to carry the County under our present cash flow status. Therefore, we are requesting that the County reduce our payback time to a maximum of two years by paying one half their share in cash on completion of work, and the remainder through connections. It is hoped that we will hear from you at your earliest convenience. Should you have any questions concerning this matter please do not hesitate to contact us. Since ly arriss Executive Vice -President 14005 Steeplestone Drive, Midlothian,Virginia 23113 Tel. (804)794-6886 T A K E N O T I C E Z�4 Tha the Chesterfield County,dWWW will hold a Public Hearing at Chesterfield Cou house,. Chesterfield, Virginia,, — I-- o: 1977, beginning at P. M. _.in_the County Board Room, on Text Amendment No. 21 to amend Chapter 21 of the Code of the L _- County of Chesterfield, 1975, as amended, entitled the "County Zoning Ordinance" by amending Section 1-4 (47), definition`of kennel; Section 4-1, add (f) kennels; Section 4-3, delete (6); Section 4-4, add (r) kennels; amend Section 15-1 (f), kennels; Section 16-1 (1) add kennels; Section 16-4, add (7) kennels; Section 17-1 (1), add kennels; Section 17-4, add (2) kennels; Section 21-4, add (3) kennels; Section 8-5 (4), change ten (10) feet to read seven and one half (7�) feet. Copies of these amendments are on file in the Department of Community Development, Chesterfield, Virginia, for public examination between the hours of 8:30 A. M. and 5:00 P. M. of each regular business day. m MEMORANDUM .�.. DATE: March 31, 1977 TO: Chesterfield Board of Supervisors Jack Manuel, Interim County Administrator 0,,% - FROM: Stanley R. Balderson, Jr.,Chief Division of Development Review SUBJECT: Amendment to Section 28-3 (Fees) of the Chesterfield Zoning Ordinance In reveiwing the fee schedule approved July 14, 1976, Staff notes that the fee for a two (2) family Conditional Use is $500.00 plus $5.00 per acre. Literal interpretation of this charge requires that an individual, seeking a duplex use (one two-family dwelling) pay a $505.00 application fee. Staff is of the opinion that where only one duplex is proposed, the charge is excessive. Therefore, it is recommended that Section 28-3(2) of the Zoning Ordinance be amended as follows: (a) Multi -family or two-family - $150.00 plus $7.00 per unit for each unit after the first two units. It is felt that by charging the above recommended fee, a more equitable assessment of shared costs relative to multi -family and two-family applications would be offered. If the Board concurs, we request referral of this amendment to the Planning Commission for a recommendation. SRB/jp cc: S. C. Micas, County Attorney / CHEF--'tFIELD -COUNTY PLANNING DEP,'-`TMENT ZONING FEES `d zoning (a) Agricultural(A)---------------------------------------- $100.00 (b) Residential (R-40, R-25, R-15, R-12, R-9, R-7) ---------- $100.00 plus $1.00 per acre (R-TH, MH -1, MH -2) -------------- ----------------------- $300.00 plus $1.00 per acre (c) Commercial --------------------------------------------- $150.00 plus $20.00 per acre (d) Industrial --------------------------------------------- $150.00 plus $20.00 per acre %,Conditional Uses and Special Exceptions (a) Multiple family or two family -------------------------- $500.00 plus$5.00 per acre (b) Mobile Homes ------------------- ------------------------ $50.00 (c) Planned Developments ---------------- --------------------$200.00 (d) All Other ------------------------------ $75.00 Variances ---------------------- $50.00 ............................................................................... SUBDIVISION FEES Tentative Approval ----------------------------------------- $10.00 plus $1.00 per acre $15.00 plus Final Approval -------------- ---------------------------- $1.00 per lot SITE PLANS** SitePlan -------------------------------------------------- $5.00 and/or $.40 per dwelling unit and/or $1.00 per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area in new commercial structures and/or $.50 per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area in new industrial structures and/or $.50 per 1,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area in new institutional structures Master Site Plans ------------------------ ------------------ $30.00 ** Total fee shall not exceed $100.00 7/14/76 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS E. MERLIN O'NEILL. CHAIRMAN MATOACA DISTRICT JOAN GIRONE. VICE CHAIRMAN MIDLOTHIAN DISTRICT C. L. BOOKMAN CLOVER HILL DISTRICT J. RUFFIN APPERSON DALE DISTRICT GARLAND DODD BERMUDA DISTRICT n ADMINISTRATION C. G MANUEL INTERIM COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR C O U NTY OF CH E S T E R F I E LD CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA 23832 MEMORANDUM June 2, 1977 TO: Members of the Board of Supervisors FROM: Steven L. Micas, County Attorney iuA SUBJECT: Vacation of Streets, Alleys, Roads, Easements, Etc. Some months ago, the Board expressed concern that vaca- tions of dedicated roads and easements were being administra- tively handled in a haphazard, helter-skelter manner. Since then, Bruce and Willis Pope have formulated a proposed uniform program for the processing of vacations. The important fea- tures of the policy are: 1. All applications for vacations would begin with the Right of Way Department; 2. Uniform application forms would be used for all vacations; 3. The request would be routed to appropriate County departments for their comments prior to submission to the Board; 4. Applications would be considered on a set schedule by the Board; and 5. For the first time, a $50.00 administrative service fee would be charged. SLM/j lb Attachments n n POLICY FOR CONSIDERATION AND REVIEW OF PETITIONS TO VACATE A STREET, ALLEY, ROAD, EASEMENT, PUBLIC WAY, PLAT OR PORTION THEREOF 1. The Board of Supervisors will consider petitions for vacations only at the regularly scheduled Department of Utilities meeting before the Board of Supervisors on the third Monday of each month. 2. All requests for vacations shall be referred to and handled by the Right of Way Engineer in the Depart- ment of Utilities. 3. No petition will be considered unless an application, required documents, and fees are received by the Right of Way Engineer by the appropriate date set forth in the attached schedule. 4. A $50.00 fee plus the cost of advertising (estimated to be $50.00) shall be charged for each application. 5. Upon receipt of the application, fees, and required documents, the Right of Way Engineer shall route them to the staff for recommendations of approval or dis- approval. All recommendations shall be returned by the date specified by him. 6. After staff review, the documents shall be forwarded to the County Attorney for legal review. The docu- ments shall be returned to the Right of Way Engineer not later than two weeks before the Board meeting at which the request is scheduled to be considered. 7. The Right of Way Engineer shall advertise the notice of public hearing to consider the ordinance to vacate. 8. The Right of Way Engineer shall place the petition on the Board meeting agenda. 9. Upon approval by the Board of the written instrument or proposed ordinance, the County Attorney shall, where necessary, incorporate any conditions or restrictions placed therein by the Board. The County Attorney shall return a certified copy of the ordinance to the Appli- cant who shall record it and notify the Right of Way Engineer of the date of recordation. 10. The Right of Way Engineer shall notify the appropriate County Departments when the vacation is effective. n CHESTERFIELD COUNTY 1977-1978 M SCHEDULE FOR CONSIDERATION OF PETITIONS TO VACATE A STREET, ALLEY, ROAD, EASEMENT, PUBLIC WAY, PLAT OR PORTION THEREOF ************************************************************* Required Documents and Fees Will be considered by the Board received by 5:00 P.M. on: of Supervisors at 1:00 P.M. on: ,lune 20. 1977.................July 18, 1977 July 18, 1977.................August 15, 1977 August 15, 1977...............September 19, 1977 September 19, 1977............October 17, 1977 October 17, 1977..............November 21, 1977 November 21, 1977.............December 19, 1977 December 19, 1977.............January 16, 1978 January 16, 1978..............February 20, 1978 February 20, 1978.............March 20, 1978 March 20, 1978................April 17, 1978 April 17, 1978................May 15, 1978 May 15, 1978..................June 19, 1978 The required documents and fees are: 1. A fully completed application for each parcel to be vacated. 2. A petition, notice, and proposed ordinance for each application. 3. Four plats specifying the exact location and dimensions of the property to be vacated for each application. 4. A $50.00 application fee plus the cost of advertising (esti- mated to be $50.00) in check made payable to the Treasurer, County of Chesterfield, Virginia for each application. SUBMIT THE APPLICATION, FEES, AND THE REQUIRED DOCU14ENTS TO: Right of Way Engineer Chesterfield County Utilities Department Chesterfield, Virginia 23832 Telephone: 804-748-1361 * For Office Use Only * * Case No. * Fees_ * Date Received * Ad. Dates_ * Missing Documents * * * ****************************** APPLICATION TO VACATE A -STREET, ALLEY, ROAD, EASEMENT, PUBLIC WAY, PLAT OR PORTION THEREOF The following information must be typed or printed and completed in full. Attach additional pages where necessary. No application will be considered unless all necessary documents and fees are received by the Riaht of Way Engineer by the dates set forth in the attached ci.hoNn I C 1. 2. IDENTIFICATION OF REQUEST Vacation of a (_) road ( ) other APPLICANT AND AGENT ( ).easement A) NAME OF APPLICANT: (If a corporation or private person represented by an attorney, lines D through F below must be completed) B) MAILING ADDRESS: C) TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Home D) AGENT'S NAME: E) AGENT'S MAILING ADDRESS: F) AGENT'S TELEPHONE NUMBER: 3. LOCATION OF PROPERTY Work (This information must be completed and is available from the Office of the County Assessor, Room 213. Attach additional pages where necessary.) 4. A) B) D) F) G) H) Lm MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: m TAX MAP NO. C) SECTION NO. SUBDIVISION NAME E) BLOCK NO. LOT/PARCEL NO. _ STREET ADDRESS DATE PROPERTY CONVEYED OR DEDICATED FOR PUBLIC USE: DEED BOOK PLAT BOOK PAGE PAGE I) ACREAGE or SQUARE FOOTAGE J) TYPE OF EASEMENT (where applicable): _ K) EXISTING LAND USE (S) : L) EXISTING STRUCTURE(S):_ M) EXISTING ZONING: FULLY EXPLAIN THE REASONS FOR THIS REQUEST: 5. FULLY STATE THE PROPOSED USE OF THE LAND TO BE VACATED: 6. ATTACHED TO THIS APPLICATION ARE THE FOLLOWING REQUIRED DOCUMENTS: A petition. A Notice required by §15.1-431 of the Code of Virginia. A proposed ordinance. Four plats. 7. A CHECK IN THE AMOUNT OF $100.00 ($50.00 FOR APPLICATION FEE AND $50.00 FOR ESTIMATED COST OF ADVERTISING) PAYABLE TO THE TREASURER, COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA MUST BE SUBMITTED WITH THIS APPLI- CATION. 8. WHEN THE COMPLETED APPLICATION IS RECEIVED, THE APPLICANT WILL BE NOTIFIED OF THE DATE AND TIME AT WHICH THE BOARD WILL CONSIDER THE REQUEST. 9. �w *40 UPON APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, THE COUNTY ATTORNEY WILL REVISE THE AGREEMENT OR ORDINANCE BY INCOR- PORATING THEREIN ANY CONDITIONS OR RESTRICTIONS REQUESTED BY THE BOARD. THE REVISED DOCUMENT WILL BE RETURNED TO THE APPLICANT, WHO SHALL RECORD IT IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE OF THE CHESTERFIELD COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT AND NOTIFY THE RIGHT OF WAY ENGINEER OF THE DATE OF RECORDATION. 10. INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL DELAY THE SCHEDULING AND HEARING OF REQUESTS. 11. I/WE HEREBY CERTIFY THAT ALL OF THE ABOVE STATEMENTS AND THE STATE- MENTS CONTAINED IN ALL REQUIRED DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED HEREWITH ARE TRUE: DATE: Signature of Applicant: Signature of Agent: ******************************* SUBMIT THIS APPLICATION, FEES, AND THE REQUIRED DOCUMENTS TO: Right of Way Engineer Chesterfield County Department of Utilities Chesterfield, Virginia 23832 Telephone: 804-748-1361 ******************************* FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Documents Attached (check each applicable): Plats Petition Notice Ordinance Correspondence Other FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Date for Consideration by Board: ROUTING ORDER RECOMMENDATIONS APPROVE DISAPPROVE Right of Way Engineer, Department of Engineering and Utilities Sewer Design and Con- struction Engineer, Department of Engineering and Utilities Water Design Engineer, Department of Engineering and Utilities Chief, Development Review Division, Department of Community Development Environmental Engineer, Department of Community Development Fire Marshal County Attorney Reasons for disapproval: Conditions or Restrictions: RETURN TO RIGHT OF CONDITIONS WAY ENGINEER BY: 09 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, 1975, AS AMENDED, BY ADDING ARTICLE IV TO CHAPTER 17 CON- TAINING SECTIONS 17-28 AND 17-29 RELATING TO THE VACATION OF STREETS, ALLEYS, ROADS, EASEMENTS, PUBLIC WAYS, PLATS OR PORTIONS THEREOF. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County: (1) That Chapter 17 of the Code of the County of Chester- field is amended by adding Article IV containing Sections 17-28 and 17-29 as follows: Article IV. Vacation of Streets, Alleys, Roads, Easements, Public Ways, Plats or Portions Thereof. Sec. 17-28. Application. Each application to vacate a street, alley, road, easement public way, plat or portion thereof pursuant to section 15.1-48 or 15.1-482 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, shall be submitted to the Right of Way Engineer in the Chesterfield County Department of Utilities for administrative review prior to submission to the Board of Supervisors. Such application shall be made on forms provided for that purpose by the Right of Way Engineer. Such application shall be accompanied by all documents required by section 15.1-481 or 15.1-482 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. Sec. 17-29. Fees. In addition to the estimated cost of advertising the notic of the public hearing to consider the ordinance to vacate, the applicant shall pay to the County an application processing fee of fifty dollars for each application submitted pursuant to section 15.1-482 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. rn AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, 1975, AS AMENDED, BY ADDING ARTICLE IV TO CHAPTER 17 CON- TAINING SECTIONS 17-28 AND 17-29 RELATING TO THE VACATION OF STREETS, ALLEYS, ROADS, EASEMENTS* PUBLIC WAYS, PLATS OR PORTIONS THEREOF. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County: (1) That Chapter 17 field is amended by adding and 17-29 as follows-: Article IV. Vac Roa $"te Sec. 17-28. Application. of the Code of the County of Chester- , Article IV containing Sections 17-28 or f Streets reo r . Each application to vacate a street, alley, road► easement, public way, plat or portion thereof pursuant to section 15.1-481 or 15.1-482 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, shall be submit'Ced to the Right of Way Engineer in the Chesterfield County Department of Utilities for administrative review prior to submission to the Board of Supervisors. Such application shall be made on forms provided for that purpose by the Right of Way Engineer. Such application shall be accompanied by all documents required by section 15.1-481 or 15.1-482 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. Sec. 17-29.Fees. In addition to the estimated cont of advertising the notice of the public hearing to consider the ordinance to vacate, the applicant shall pay to the County an application processing fee of fifty dollars for each application submitted pursuant to section 15.1-482 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. x In cm AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, 1975, AS AMENDED, BY ADDING ARTICLE IV TO CHAPTER 17 CON- TAINTNG SECTIONS 17-28 AND 17-29 RELATING TO THE VACATION OF :STREETS, ALLEYS, ROADS, EASEMENTS, PUBLIC WAYS, FLATS OR PORTIONS THEREOF. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County (1) That Chapter 17 of the code of the County of Chester- field is amended by adding Article IV containing Sections 17-28 and 17-29 as follows: Article IV. Vacation of Streets-Alle s Sec. 17-28. A___pplication. Each application to vacate a street, alley, road, easement, public way, plat or portion thereof pursuant to section 15.1-481 or 15.1--482 of the code of Virginia, 1954, as amended, shall be submitted to the Right of Way Engineer in the Chesterfield County Department of Utilities for administrative review prior to submission to the Board of Supervisors. Such application shall be made on forms provided for that purpose by the Right of way Engineer. Such application shall be accompanied by all documents required by section 15.1.481 or 15.1-482 of the Code of Virginia, 1954, as amended. Sec. 17-29. Fees In addition to the estimated cost of advertising the notice of the public hearing to consider the ordinance to vacate, the applicant shall pay to the County an application processing fee of fifty dollars for each application submitted pursuant to section 15.1-482 of the Code of Virginia, 19500 as amended. n M l ENTA�SITES AND ESTIMATED COSTS For purposes of estimating operating costs, seven tentative sites have been evaluated for route mileage costs by GRTC and -for ridership demand by RRPDC. The sites are/shown on the map on page �U and the data are tabulated on page (� The data is not pro- vided for purposes of selecting a park 'n' ride site, but rather to show the general range of costs associated wi//thh the operation of �, 11 park 'n' ri e sere' e in he terfiel Cp?8nt��1�0'W Fy8Z (&_g_'*7/ Y The price of bus is another example of the increasing costs of transit. Two years ago, the general estimated price of a bus was $60,000. The current price is $70,000+, and the price for a new bus may well climb to $90,000 within the next few years. If the County should pay 2% of the purchase price of a new bus, then the cost to the County for each new bus would be $1400 currently, and may approach $2000 in the near future. The cost of constructing a park 'n' ride lot varies with land price, physical constraints, etc. However, the cost of park 'n' ride lots rte( 2 ra Ir y with lighting, landscaping, etc., is about $1500 per parking space. If the County should pay a 2% share of the overall costs, then the cost to the County per parking space would be $30. In the case of the ten- tative Route 1-301 and Chippenham site, 300 parking spaces would be required, and if the County should pay the 2% share, then the cost to the County would be $9,000. S i i 1 1- r l~ 1 -1 a) cn r- 10 r 4J b +� a F b ♦ a 'd 41Yr�q + ro .roC P4 a a ri al L lztr v i � 14 a - ' o 4J 4) w 4-) rd rA O r. >La W to W a> M c�OQW1J MSH - � � - rj 1 3 Laani En r, a) O a) o �br:q rn a (1) 0 ro a) cr u tr' _ i= (1) - .0 0 a 4 e 1 rz z u = Mm cP J W n O W I O r• j N M Q, to lD [� "= sc V ,I C4 z ba IWE -1 a) cn r- > 9 r 4J b +� a h x + ro P4 IWE tom, LU V W - J Q Q r! 1 4 Za) � O j N C7 rd rd b rd -4 r1 C r � T a) a) a) -A $4 rt) 44 >1 r-4 4J o aroi (q > I N r--1 O � N OILJ` N Q$ amo E -rri rrq r4 � 44 a) cd .O O 44 o 0 4 w 14 r.N N � 4J > C5 fa ::s a) A a) Q 5�j z wH� m �9 4J � O �d OrO4J A✓ V 00 r-1 m q 40 OD Ln 03 Q D-• .403 H I` IQI .9 a o of fn C-4{� -i \ r V) 4 } r03 N oma-- _ =' T 1 ' Z j;7- kr) N !j -T cv a >i tp I tb a C, a ro KI A a) 44 > tyl. 4Ja�iov 0 rd a r -I 04 -ri •ri W a p }°� 3 a� �9 M cv t� ►� Q H -ri -r-i Ln cA C: E CN En En>4 nw �4 r+ ra ro ui '--u Ln '_" (30Z O a - W H� o�� -19 Lij r N - N N LU V W - J Q Q r! 1 4 Za) � O a rn +- N C7 rd rd b rd -4 r1 C r W D a) a) a) -A $4 rt) 44 >1 r-4 4J o aroi (q r--1 Q N ri II N N Q$ LL`� E -rri rrq r4 � 44 a) cd .O O 44 o 0 4 r.N N � 4J > (Z a) fa ::s a) A a) w m �9 4J � �d OrO4J A✓ V 00 r-1 m 44 rd U H I` 4 ri .9 a o En 4J -i r-4 ra r -i —:J ro O U ni au N U C7 cv a >i tp a C, a ro O -� A a) 44 > tyl. 4Ja�iov 0 rd a r -I 04 -ri •ri �>a) r- 0-H tr ,:f) Ob ca x Qa 04 -1 'n H -ri -r-i Ln cA C: E CN En En>4 �4 r+ ra ro •rl •rl O Is N Za) N C7 rd rd b rd -4 r1 C r W D a) a) a) -A $4 L Q r--1 Q W LL`� E -rri rrq r4 � LL p f � .rl •RS OC � UI fA U) L: w �9 A✓ V _ 44 H 't—WA40, RICHMOND REGIONAL PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION July 14, 1977 Mr. Nicholas M. Meiszer County Administrator Chesterfield County Courthouse Chesterfield, Virginia 23832 Re: Agreement for Pass 'Through PL Planning Funds for FY 77. Dear Mr. Meiszer: Due to an administrative error, we need to make some corrections to finalize the above mentioned contracts which were mailed to you on June 17, 1977. Please send the original contracts to me and we will make the corrections. Thank you for your cooperation and if I can be of assistance please do not hesitate to call. EGC,III/rba 6 NORTH SIXTH STREET, SUITE 500. RICHMOND. VIRGINIA 28219 . PHONE (804) 644-8586 RICHMOND REGIONAL PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION August 8, 1977 Nicholas M. Meiszer County Administrator Chesterfield County Courthouse Chesterfield, Virginia 23832 Dear Mr. Meiszer: Enclosed are our originals of the corrected Agreements for Pass Through PL Planning Funds for FY 77. Please initial the corrections on page one of each agreement and sign the attached certification forms, and return our original to me. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, Edward G. Councill,III Executive Director EGC,III/rba enclosure 6 NORTH SIXTH STREET, SUITE 500. RICHMOND. VIRGINIA 28219 . PHONE (804) 644-8586 I t • "1 a o �:�, ��: . h A? ICY L OF 19 77 t�wecn '� . This agrcement rade •4��,,�, Richmond Regional T-PlanninC, District Co::t.-liZzion a:nd the County of Chesterfield ' The Richmond Regional Planning District Co ---mission, desires to y employ Count of Chesterfield to produce a report in con- nection with a ♦• Richmond Regional Planning District COM- lai;ssion project consisting of a. short ranre hig,hway planning analysis to inc1I, A an evaluation of the functional operation of the County highway system, its safety and capacity characteristics and its consistency- with the County's plans for development, and also, to include an evaluation of alternative transit service areas, the cost of increasing transit service to the County and the cost of fringe parking lots. The County of Chesterfield agrees; to have the project • finished and a report prevented to the Richmond Regional Plannb:C District CO -.mission by June 30 1977 for approval by the 1'0licy The County of Chesterfield further agrees to comply with COtr.•nittee and t!te Depart rent. Title V1 of the Civil. Rights Act of 1964 as set forth in the appended "Notice to Tho method of payment will -. be •�' Contractors." . A. A lwnp aura of IgA-- in accordance With Exhibit B. Partial payments MY be rade qu.-xterly in accordanco with an cstlrato of t1le percentn6c of work completed. . . on a 3 d W2- M B. 711C Cofission N-rees to pay up to the r. "-u.' 1'l n -^count of $6,000.00 -.: in pass-thro,.:,,h funds fro:., the Federal Ili(;hwny 1►d.:.inistrr►tion and as • matclled by the VirCinia Department of HiChway: and TranSFortation for the services to be perfo=...cd by the County of Chesterfield as herein described. Fayncnts vi11 be provided on a auartcrly.basis and will be based on documentation -provided by the County of expenditures for direct payroll costs (bare labor plus payroll burden). This agreement is subject to all provisions contained in the FY 1977 Agreement for Utilization of PL Fluids contract between the Richmond Regional_ planning District Co::rnission and.the Virsinia Department of HighWays and Trans- portation. XH W1Ti;ESS M1EREOr^) the parties hereunto have executed this agreement on the day and year first above written. ATTEST: BY: T tic ATTEST: BY: INTERIM COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Tit1C r BX: � Chairman, Board of Supervisors Title Exhibit A (attncliod) SCOP3': OF WORK to includo pork ProC.rM. ErJiibit D (nttnched) - FstirvLted Costo ,Ind v • W . z M x� .• •` S. 1 < ... Y L9!3 • O V ~•� Y M>> O Y t Y ✓ t7 ✓✓A L Y•� 1`• !. K �pM 6YQK /� t YF< Y F o u T C • V O -� • F• • • r• Y Y H Y!• A -• v ✓ Y Y N M y O Y P M • • Y V■> _6 • O•-1 r PM PY G �w r 7 V 7 a •e• r••iw Q L MNw r c C w G• •% M .•+ p rti FV V••� Y G _ � w • M • • • O.r H••i M 7 •P V y • . Y 7w G ytl O✓ !wN O • T. p• 4 •>• Y C Y w C O N 1••N Y Jf Y • O V • Y ML N • O C• O •t ✓ �� V��J �cE✓a o u 1.00 o: �o•vt O W C L->. 1 C -• • M~ 1• Y+ G C N C • C r Y Y W Y • C Y r i V ~ w r �. 4 • Y N O O O Y e• V JG ✓•+ V Y Y .• C It�F W ►- Y✓ JD ✓ d P Y Y tl tlry O O C G u y Y V � Z W t C u C C a 4 0 •• • y O T Y L y ••• b• i i y .G V C P W C V E 10 � • Y V� V ; O V •< r '0.'• C .>. • ON•O• m oC q O -• Y O O•+ tl q TOi� O >~ O a'O Y Q O J •• ow M• y t1 0 w C v Y C C • ^• CX O O iT V •• O •> W L w C y� ; R ✓• • • Y 6 •. 4 > B T F. V •y ! V F. ` ✓ C U C i � •' M O ✓ • O L • • • •.� w w Y � Y O M f w 4 Y t r d S i 7 C• Y O • Y• O'✓ Y e Y V M V i Y C 0. Z1 •+ u✓ C C J J O> V i K• G C O � 0 7 >>•• Y 7 ••••O•vo KN .0- .tl OY.K V! Go L Y C rl w C r Y • •0 6 • .0 Y• O S.• c w v —0 A o !L .Y. r■ Y p 110 6 • Y O V 4 Y .Gi R w Cc M•• M O O C < V C v LVVV �~ a 0 .• • M T L' r✓ a C G Y A• ■ ✓• i M• P r O Y) C O Y O T • f t• .. C ✓ M V • Y • ■ G r• e w A w y � 4 •✓ C C M .•i t C C• • M O Y • Lh • tl O • •N P C Y v•.•a OW T>C• 01C �trpiY •tla Y • r o v e ••• Y c • •.• • �• N ti V Y 4 C_ Oi w i e• . w p i 7 u tl w �N P� r s 0 c • e •G Y,Ci V Y Y r ✓ P 6C P Y O ✓ C V • ✓ Y O L • O h V y ✓ • •r•1 N • • M O. >` • y� {� Y C✓ Y Y C• C M G Y• V•> ✓ r✓ Y Y O• •✓ w c C M O• w M C .. K M W ✓ 0 7 O ..i0. G C i v �• tl M me•✓ • C i C Y w 0 � V • r Y✓ Y T! �. • � M •• ✓ L✓ b 4 w O W J YI a ✓ r .n O •• ✓■ G C L. Y • Y w ! O M O o. O Y a V ]L 1 Y r y M C 0 . M O O • r M � Y y M G v � � C C• r O C O✓ Y V J� Y V• v •'� �` ^� Nr1 � 3 • yN Mwvv p i tiM Y NP��V •• d Pr.. A�9>vvv M M • ^ N O N ie N M N N N N N N M N tO 8 - N M • M I 4 • - 06 L J O x Z z o� LO u40,(u C .n W Cpp •O N �� O T SivUNV S y y^ P V wN 1 0 bouo .- 006"O 0 > 11�Oh Vj N�•- O O p O. oG eN7 o H < co — O .. m oo N ►C. i. s o V. O X _ J N o J O O O < J H � O O Y. � �O ..•pp Z Y vA' O �y► N N C4 0 O J Z O i. Q W N • ; V = .0 6r off.. Z PI f'1 jLrjTjC!- TO ACT � •^ • L:I'liI il.i.i: ' C. 1;... L1'. • >F�ru:a��►�: n�a� Co.,'TRnCr-j • tllc co::tz•actor, for i:.cclf, itis the 1 cr:or.. arc of tl:ic cn::tract, t;hc • � I:;:f Lrr rcYcr_•ca to ...• D,lri:�, is in'.c•rest (hcr� i d:::,i�, ►►s. as dant:•^:t.or ::ill ca:-:,�� ( _^•1] l ' l�r,�ul atic :l^ tel: C a �,r: ^!1Cr \:i.•11 �... +• of "•I•'1:1^j�:',2'L1t?.c, 1 J V •� ♦lith ;.l►c is �2 to no2ldi:;Cri2:2in tion i.21 ;:c: 11ro- reInti C +••••.21L Of ',.1'.^.21 ,':11',. ,..ln:l' 'M )102 Coac &w.1- of the W:111r.. ' , hcrcin:►1'Ler re- errccl to Of Federal loci,:l La.;i o21 : , l r_•L' ._1, n, the ltr( IaLion .), ::bleb :u•c 12c:_•cin iaco:y:o:•atc3 by part of '.',hi:. co:ar ct. reference and :aadc a 1 • N?ith rc,^,ard to the (Q) I,o2ldir.crJ�, inn'.:io:l: 791c cont: ac 'o: , j prior to co' :alctio•1 ----- l u t :li Ler :2 c:1 t?;c C2 otu11 �:or1c j��rc•r::c, ; i of the contract work) :ill llo� cii.., '-it. ,. or 1latio2::21 ori,, i:l i:l ttic ::election ..^:ld of xticc, colo_pro:.�u•c:-ent.. of F pl ubcOTlt1': c�cqu cO:l:.r actO= will • �CCt•Cri..1O:1 � �r,r Tac �Y11t:Cr] al:'. :1'ltl lca,C= O1 Ctjl.i�.•••_:1,.. tot ll:u'ticilletc either clircctlY or in:iu cct1Y in tile �, on.,, ohibitcd by •;,Ccti.oll 21, 5 of '%,I' 1�c„ iiteh:clin ; c::'ill off^ ent' p'•'^cticec n the con Lr: ct co•: ers cat forth ill nppcildix of tl:c llc;,:il atio::a. iClt: t.l(l21': for �il�>rf�21�:1'RCt:^, 7.1(•Zt:�1121!' �` -- C1Li:C1. by 3 ,,:: ;•212:: 1�t a.1.1 ;;o1�ciLa�ic,:;,, 1lat:c•ri al:: : 2:�i ;'.,12� •_ — u'.c by the co:ltr: ctor co::2j1c•Li.Li:r hiu, i:2;. -1li • for t:or}; to be perVuY*-:2ci1 %lrictcr n 2., contrrcL i:lcl.2a�li.1(; ' proctu•r:-�111� of tnatcrial- or cq:lil�::cllt, each potcntin]. ttli,Cc,:11raCtrr or :111,),.l.ler Tall be riotifirt b;� the con- frnc -or of Lhc co21L1.1cLor 1;-u:lc!Cr tlu.: co21- trncL nl:d Lhr. R�•,:�illiLia21� rclaL.i•.:o to •Ic1:1 of races color s,r naLiena orC,in. oil i lle C1 � conL •actor will r:•ovidc nll Or �lltO:•2::12.1h:1 1111.1 )'+'�'.+S•L:. 1'l' �.. .• ,.2:! in :t r2:; t. j1•:1 :AWd 1'u:•: ua:IL L?2_i cto' . �•,. t `.oarcra pC1•r,iL n:r.l•::. to i,:• t,c 1lctrr,::ln��t�ly ' i L : 1'1Ic• 11. l ;,1::: n:• of irirol'2-.1t ion, aw.t :'c,lrrnl tile: ::; Lat%. Il1�h::1ky 11.•1,:�:•lt-r:or t1:� %L with i►atruLio» to 1'Cpel-Li'11t•i1L to 1%.-cvrLni3l cnr.:,lliaacc lkw •:L. ' 1:':lc•rc nUin- i01•�:a:.l:�a r►•.�:11 :'t•llOY(►1l• ertl : 111:::ctioll: M101 1'r1;111f►tiCM:*-" 11: J74! 1(:C.. i.. or .,• I •l. .t•11).: j211C�••'1::v1(�:1, •.il(• (•.\7:1Lrnc,c) ••1'71 r. \)1'C••C••��:•1. •• :1: T:•:.: ••:1v, C • (•j•l•VYL i.nL:•:►Lioa r.:. n!,;Tl•1�.:•ia:.c, it 11a.: � ..cic to cel iL::.II :,:u in:'or::., joa. c••: cn - cT:' ��r.:,:1C�_itT_"_ �..__-.nam � ----♦ .•:.:1:,:•1:7:1 :•.•� _... •• - � •• c- lic . •:1•ch cl't Coa:•l'.:C . C 1 C. b i.rtic:to .• ::::1:;;;c�:i: to Mo` `l.: •a.. c•� : , 7 „• but noL a.i:u:.cd e :l1•; :1. �at�}► dcLc . _. c . • to, o: Pti•' "-nta to 411c con'-r actor tuu3er the 'i contrcct u:1::il the cont-rac.,or co..:.)lics, ;Lll:l or • tU) ctlllccllation, tcrraat1On or sur.Pcnsion of the co:ltract, jell \:1101C or ill Past• •_V rc org the �ile con '',_1 •:._'•c_..�: cvcry I'll co::;:r_1ct, vn:-, lTl \:i'...l••�:'•l �� •i . '1� r ? C'+'•CJ ' CC:1:.� -..1\• nclllc'.ill;� t b til , cr or instrl:ctio^• ulllcs : cxc:^�t by file Rr,;til.a�io::s, o: c... , • i.ssllc(: ))kr :llxlt thcrc::o. 1'nc co-l�rac::or ;;ti:c ;uc1l . �•.•-. ;: or nroclu crr_\ or at as .►.,, tict.ion ):i tll rc: pcct t^ and , l•the•'-r ccicral i1ir.1I \^.;r ,.•-..:11- the �:,Lc Riehl ly 1)2n;--t :cn o. .� such pro':i�ions istr ation l a,Y odrect an :1 7:^-^=1.; Of C:. O1'Cln�, .:;,ti: ^cc: 1': o•.•iucd, ho:;c�•cr, for no:lcc•' , o,- is • flint, ill the event n con::rac 0 1Tcco:a_J involved. in ..• l iih a : u�con... \-cLor o= ;:u.ralicr {;hlcatc•ncct �:i::11, liti(;r1•.2on .. -,•• 1•c•c: of suc::c:t , tis tl rc: ill:. h dirccL; i°n, ,ac conLr: cLo. 11.x, • •:uch liti(:::t'; On to Zr_'o::ccL' the the St-ate to cll�c: ill. , - � 1 •,.; ;:l:c cont.l•actor interent n of the SL,'ltc, n:ldi ill • c'c1"-on, �a;U• rccl:c�t the United ;,Lates ;:o c:l:.c: i:l; o ;ill !1 liti�:ltion to l)rotcct the illtcres�s of file UnitedJL;L..cJ• • CERTIFICATIONOF Chesterfield — •COtAITY I hereby certify that I am, the of the City Cou::ty, :chose address is and that neither I nor the above City/County 1 here represent has been required, directly or indirectly as an express or irrplicd condition in connection with obtaining or carrying out this contract to: • (a) employ or retain, or agree to employ or retain, any fiszn• or person, or (b) pay, or agree to pay, to anyf`.im�, person, or organisation, any fee, contribution, dcnntion, or consideration of any • kind; except as here expressly stated (if any): I ackno;•rledge that this certif_cate is to be furnished the Virginia Department of U Highways and Transportation, and the Federal High;ray Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation., in connection -with t:'.is contr�ci. irvolvi::g participateion of'ccicr::l-aid highway funds, and is subject to a'_=_licable State and rederal lays, both cril incl ul-d civil. DATE S1G.+A! Ukc: • Richmond Regional CEMIFICATION OF Planning_ District CO.iSISSI0:1 I hereby certify that I t. the Executive Director of the Richmond Region t3 Planning Di G r; rr C� r=iss�o�'-� �d t'•' -at the above City%County or itis rcPresenta 'ive has not been it:.'.:_i red, directly. or indirectly as an ea-prass or ir:plie condition in co:nncction ;rith obtir._ng, or cariyinr, out this contract to (a) employ or retain, or agree to employ or retain,. any fina ' or person, or ' . (b) pay, or a-rae to pay, to ^ny fZnn, person, or org�ni nation, • any fee, contribution, dc -nation, or consideration cS any kind; except as here expressly stated (if any): •I acl:no;,•lcd c that this certi� cote is .to be furnished the VirUinia Dcpart-:cnt of ?)cr. art.: cat of lligh;.ays rnd Transportation, turd tl:n Federal lii�'.'n::;;y ,�? 1i�ti'stra,.ion, U.S. i `„+c_••i1_�id Trrgnspoz-taticn, in connection vith this contract i� ..yam ; p=rtic':• �i - high,�ay i1u:3s, and is subject to a_plicable St'•r. �, cth c r�si:tal and civil. • t 0 b....rDIL 40 This c�rcec:(cnt rradc------� 19 77 , between the Richmond Reginnal Planninr, Diztrict Co:%:ni�Jion and the County of Chesterfield The Richmond Regional Planning District CorniJsion desires to craploy County of Chesterfield to produce a report ill con- Richmond Planning District Com - Re ional nection �rlth a 1976 Count of Chesterfield 3-C/poQ'^��^^^��'*'Q mission project consisting of _ Y land use m units and land referred to in Exhibit A of An Agreement For A tion Planning Process for the Richmond Re ion dated June 97 The County of Chesterfield agrees to have the project • finiched and a report precented to the Richmond Regional Plane inC June 1, 1977 for approval by the Policy District Comaiso-ion by co;aaLtttcc and the lrpartment. The County of Chesterfield further agrees to comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as set forth in the appended "Notice to Contractors." The method of pa�mcnt will e- A. A 1»0,l) glum of�� "' in accordanco with Exhibit D. rartiml l)ayncntc r—ay be rxide quartcrlS• Jjl accordance with an cstil%tc or tllc percentni;e of work con:rlctcd. Olt d B. The Conmission ar.rees to Pny up to the maxi1-u•"1 11710',int of $2,200 in pass -thrown, funds fmra the Yederal Hichwny Administration and as matched by the VirCinia Department of lIirhways, wit Ti'ansi'ortation for the services to be perfozr:ed by the County of Chesterfield as herein described. payments will be provided on a quarterly basis and will be n Provided by the County of expenditures based on docur.cntatio for direct Payroll costs (bare labor plus payroll burden). This agreement is subject: to all provisions contained in the FY 1977 ftreenent for Utilization of pL Funds contract between the Richmond Regional plannina District Cor.Lmission and the Virginia Department of HiGhWays and Trans- portation. Xti WITNESS V"HEREOF, the parties hereunto have executed this oZrccment on the day and year first above written. ATTEST: tic ATTEST: BY: INTERIM COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Title Title Exhibit A (attnchod) - SCOPE OF WORK to includo Work Program. ' E)JIibit 11 (attnched) - Fstily%tcd Costo r 1 � y � � � H W • • .V• J u 0 ) V Y 7 •. � N r � y � � � H W • • .V• J u 0 ) V Y 7 •. � N Y V y M V uu1:�9 Lu ✓ 4 Y • .f Y O p� .. V r. L> y 4 .. p N u .. 'f. 7r • F V< O ✓ V � u G U •� K G :L O F u .. u u� F• N P V • V N C C •' �w 1-• •-• F Y� P .• O V •" [' •• V C •' f_ �� a l[ O V J u 11 w U♦ ■L r.nn ■�e.� FOCr a p w,S r w > C O V t e Y 7 Y [. rU.. y N O p w V w •O •c �• a s r L V V •• V w .• O c c 0• G C O >>•r •• cc n Y 1. Y u c ^ w u✓ u p .• Jt u >. ✓ N w C N ... c✓ w .. n .. �_>� _Vt y c n✓ o� c r • u N C � V e r V• C V r N V .F+ V_ • • tl c f- .. Jr r A 0 0 c ■ c� .. Y o v c c. [•+ % ti r .. Y D > K O• M V O C• V ♦ V C ✓ " C v < t0 M oS r t.. .. C O. >. V C [. t M ✓ D >• V< L V •• P< O O N •• •. a •. C O C[ -. P: � y � � � H O ..Vi C n V > .V• J u 0 ) V Y 7 •. � N Y i ✓ 4 Y • .f N p� .. V r. L> y 4 .. p N u .. 'f. O I. • F V< O ✓ V � u G w y Q N P V • V N C C •' �w 1-• •-• F Y� P .• O V •" [' •• V C •' f_ �� a l[ O V J u 11 w U♦ ■L r.nn ■�e.� FOCr .. VY u.. W t C O V t e Y 7 Y [. rU.. y ■ V: :< .. r tl .tai `J « C C Y ] cc n Y 1. Y J 1 N Y i p o • .f N ' O H Q K y U Oma O _ a Y K n O �v 3 s 7_ w � w Q P U Z. To vOVp Q V K O v N 0060' LL Z V^n N t f- 1- r—oln In N•- U � O � n h K LL a J �L y N N n � O Z N 1 O K N Cl) n K W O J N o Z O O Z LL V � o J � u- C n LL N O O 0 J 6 O H y Oma r S N �v w Z P U Z. To vOVp ~ 0060' V^n N i r—oln In N•- O � O N h K N a J - N co y N N co V - co t. LL N Cl) n V J N LL o J . C LL O LL O 0 J <Q .7 'Ll LL ' ~ O C N O• co LL V LL p N yy Dnp) J Z O e 14 .14Url W N O lr tZ.. Z t•) t7 1;r)T7C!: 'r) CM1i:�.(::�':.., I�•`11,:; ACT OF 19 1E C0:'a';.Tn1:C;: ► �`j;U;:1V►J.-Alai Co.;TRACi"•; . titc co:arncto:•, for itcclf, its lc:c of Llti� cont:rncL, 1 LO a:', t11c �.O•Sn;;hcr.o (11cr1:il.a: Lcr ;l�c•1:.. nn•.l ;.t:^cc :: c,r� in ilt rc: er:•c: �, o11L r:c Lc s•'+); :4'1'►.c'r. :tc. . rL,. ,nt:•nct:or 1:111 c.o...: t:it.11 re..tll - cc,c� of '"r:rtnl'=�rL.ltiio t)1L11 ;.11c 1..'l:jl a..J 1 ilro- 1 Co�c rclntiv c to nottcli. .,cril-li:1^tio:1 in 'cctcl•ntl.`'-:c:.=%l��c; Gi N:1, of tltc 1)::lla1 L:: �•)tt of,'11'Z11 •' 11c> cilli�l'Lc:r i•r� crrc(l to of rcdcrnl I:c'i;ula!:4011 ., 1 r 't 'l� . hY i n : the };c(;ul:►tionn), t:hi.ch ;u•c 1tc_•cin :tcorl:or:ltc.1 XcfercltCC altd );lade a p;u't of tlti:. co:lLr CL. t:ith rc; arc) to the (2� l;ondi: ct 3�,in, 191c cont: acto_•, .�lct.io•t �11;.N•cl ; nd 1>>'ior to co::. ,�ric•i::c,l i); it: cli Lcr _ c:2 tl:c �l Dolt) .01%, of tltc color, ev 1:or1;, tri 11 no',: Ill Lllc -.cicctio:l rind Of rncc, color; or llatiOl'.a1 oi•i,;i:t ret entiolt Of nUbcont_ ac,,or: , in�h: lia proclu c::cntn o ,,..,.,-tt. 7.1c co:t' t•;tct oz trill m;ttci•i.;lla aad Ica ,C: of C(IV .... , l . in the (US - )tot 1);u•ti.ci.lt^tc ci.t'.ltcr directly orni).r of '11c ,c �C`,�laL;Gl1a, ,rimi.natl.o:t .1,01libitcd Uy Sect 5-0ll 21.5 �ltclt:din ; c::,1t1oJ�rcnt lr :1cLi.cca ta:ca the ,cotil ;1tio:1CO•: cr:. 1ixo� 1•n;a tict forth in A1�Pcllclix -B of Ll.c l►c� • ^ , ,: t' � _7:1c1 r � ii jll� i'roctil_c"„lt__ t r �� for c:nn r;tc c :c r L (3 Lol.icit:•ct:ac,;t �j'_'>— - - 11]. 'ol.ic.�t.cl�l.c>tl::, it: 'J' con'• : ctor 1�11t.c•ri nl:,l:+i i': _ ol:i:li i.o:t r.:nrc by the �r M,I.c1-, ror %:orl; tobe llcl•1'Ul'.ned k1jlcicr n ::� Loco:ttrnc:L, Potential �li'octll r;-c:11L;, of matcri:�ls or CQ? l p'.Icnt, each chal? l+c )totificcl 1);� the Colt- rul,cc,aLractc�r or n ui,i,l.Icr Illi:: Con- trttct;or' of t1tc collLI-1 t.or t r rclat.i': c to trncL and tho lti•i ttl ltl l c n . noa+ti::cri: a.:tation ' on tllc i;ratcl of rncv) color yr n::t i.c•aa uri�;in. conLvacfor trill Provide rL �11� 7nf��:__ �. ^_1 r 1 :.._� �•<< .1i• :! 1-y t'.:►: :;+ ,;►:: n .i: :::, n1' �.•�• j.11+:l Illl�l )'+ ,•. 7'.:. t` . 1�•_1't l.o 1: t:':'1 11.1 1 , +1„r o�•d►•j r. wla in. c c��• +'::, to:c:01:n.: , n, , pel•1•11t ticc•t•::::to•: be dcLc'1' i Il; nrr.al : as , my.t 1 L ^ 1'nc• 11. T;. l ►:. tl: I:Ia;� ofll:r. :'<<t►•1'nl lll;;ll:::�: 11+il:ht- the :; loch );�:,j1 nt i (ail. OvIcr:: o :11::1 ill.. 1.1 t i• (... ;� .t., ;•c•ll c:l' t: : (t:t;.l•:tc':. SO7•�::t..i :1 1 .,:li ^, .,.t' ,•; :':til nM rc•:':::.c : Lo "•`. `. 3);t;.:c•::::i:•:t c•: :.:: ,.1.. '• t�'• .. ] ::c>t cc::.i.• :.O ::•� I{I17:' J111•Ct.•.'t:.V](�:1 ..l►l• CU:t.,l':tC.(t:' il.ti .....t.l'•�. �`.l:l- t t t �,t•:lt.l: 1, 1 ::t l•.: � • 13::1:1 ... :1 � x,:11• ":' L> �. ..:e v : (�:'' 11 ....:1„ (: i'I'():" L:• i:'t•:•:ltioa ;1: ;,1:,:,r(�;�: ia;.u, ...: 10:1. it 11:1:: 7:• �c1C LO Of the'in \ii ^:t.]C:_Ict_'_ C':w:C:l �'__ ----_. + ._ ' 1;,. •..•C.\i. :^:1:: O: •• - ' ^C�: :t! 1:.:._t` 1:1:.1 �• :::] ] j:'aU::C : t.0 1 CM ll ~1• p:' •t•lir' "''. ;::..:�:•:�• is t1 j.l'ttCt :.�1�'• i C�:1:: 31:, 1. t• b,jG 21UL .�-1'• :1C..L 7:1 tly •• V(':'.^...:C VC) be .t1'1' 'o.)• ..��(�, 1. �1::�,, lI C' • t0, �:i{:lll:ol(?il:; o: r;t.•I:1cnts to tllc co:l'.rcctor 1:�:?cr tl/c contrcct Until the co co::;?lic�, all:1 or (b) crl]cc?lat;io31, tcrm;nntion or -u i]cn:.ion of the co:lt.•act, j)1:hale or ill • A:111 incl::cic the ltic co..�.'rlctor t C\'C''\ 1JeU: lcn:,Cn of Cc' — ancl.uC:i11;; ;):ocllrc:.. nt� o1'(. , Colles. e>:c^;At by 1.i1C C , C:C7r 1:x11 tti:C ::ll:ll O. Tile con--Y..i as nct ion vi Lll )'C ::l)CCt: to i111;: : L:l)CC::t='•'`C 0- �.,. t•C )1 �1' :il\' nt or the tilC .�v.tv 1�• of C ;;!o i'C.l:]'• a 3^..n•1: u r ;t�tl': 11.0:1 3aC1,\' (tl2'CCi- Z a'2...:CC: for 177:1CC::1 the CYCi]L n Co:]tYnlicr CtO]' 'that ill ' 0= : a?;] fi•hrc�l; c�nc`(t t:i;•h, a.iti�;n;coat ; : t.c: 1: rc•c (1:, tl 'I'Cfad'v Of nuch�, . +-,Cta t0 1)_'O�CCC "LAIC tllc ✓talc toenteri11: C1 : IICh 1_..1�•'� t1:C Contr.—IC L -o-^ int.c7cr•t•:, of the :.L�tc, ana, il] ;:c.:-1�-oaj•:`o -,jell lit.iG'ttion •n the uniLCt1 Sltatc:, :.o c:::.C. . to pl-01,CO3 the illi crc of the L'::ed i t-• tt I hereby certify that I and represent has been reauired, condition in connection with ATION OF Chesterfield COUNTY. am the Iof the City Cotuity, whose address is that neither I nor the above City/CountyI here directly or indirectly as an of.press or implied obtaining or carrying out this contract to: (a) employ or retain, or agree to employ or retain, any firm' or person, or (b) pay, or agree to pay, to any firm, person, or organization, any fee, contribution, donation, or consideration of any kind; except as here expressly stated (if any): I ac}:nowledge that this certif= DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: M MEMORANDUM June 7, 1977 Board of Supervisors James P. Zook, Chief Comprehensive Planning Division Tire Removal and Disposal Objectives: Removal and disposal of tires that have accumu- lated on private property through no fault of the property owner. Removal and disposal at no cost to the property owner when amount of tires to be collected does not exceed 100 on any one parcel. This policy can be changed depending upon extenuating circumstances. Referral of tire dumps would be by property owner, civic associa- tions, private citizens and operating departments of the County. The project would be managed by the Department of General Services. The personnel could be used for other labor type projects if there is not a great deal of demand for the tire removal project. Other work could be performed on special projects for the Department of General Services, Parks and Recreation Department and Environ- mental Engineering Division of the Department of Community Develop- ment. Personnel would be employed for a period of 6-7 months. Costs of Program Personnel Laborer I $ 3540 CETA Laborer I 3540 CETA Laborer III 4102 CETA Laborer's fringe benefits 2645 CETA Existing County Staff Administration 2300 County Subtotal Personnel $16,127 Equipment Costs Machine rentall $ 2,000 Vehicle operation2 750 Vehicle renovation 300 Subtotal Equipment $ 3,050 Notes : 1. Assume 20,000 tires at $.10 per tire payment to 2. 5,000 miles at $.15 a mile Memo page 2+ June 7, 1977 Other Costs Landfill handling and spacel $2500 Foregone revenue 2500 Subtotal Other $5000 Grand Total $24,177 Effect on FY 1977-78 Operating Budget Machine rental $2000 Renovation and operation of truck 1050 $3050 Alternative effects of negotiated sharing of other than personnel costs with CETA: A. 5% of total project costs CETA share of $3050 $1208 County share of $3050 1842 $3050 B. 60 of total project costs CETA share $1450 County share 1600 $3050 C. 7% of total project costs CETA share $1692 County share 1357 $3050 Recommendation The Department of General Services indicates that they can handle the increased administrative responsibility. The Division of Development Review of the Department of Community Development will help set up the program. The number of tires collected has a significant impact on the cost of the program due to the 10¢ a 1. Assume that 12.5¢ per tire of 35¢ fee is actual cost to County for land fill, personnel and space. 2. Assume that 12.5¢ per tire is foregone revenue. LTi COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD INTRACOUNTY CORRESPONDENCE April 7, 1977 TO: Jack Manuel FROM: Lane B. Ramsey"I SUBJECT: 1976-77 Budget Changes In September we estimated that the Airport would need an additional appropriation from the General Fund. I have reviewed the budget as of February 28, 1977 with Mr. Parker and submit the following amendments to the Board of Supervisors for approval. I also submit the need to appropriate an additional $75,784 from the General Fund to supplement the operation of the Airport for the remainder of the year. Suggested Resolution: On motion of , seconded by , it is hereby resolved that $75,784 be appropriated from the Unappropriated Surplus of the General Fund (11) and transferred to the Airport Fund (16) to supplement the operation of the Airport for 1976-77 fiscal year. And be it further resolved that the following budget amendments be made: ACCOUNT AMOUNT EXPLANATION Increase Revenue: 16-000-505.0 Contract Operator ( 1,479) Aero Industries Fees higher than anticipated 16-000-817.0 Fuel Sales ( 70,000) Higher than anticipated Fuel Sales 16-000-819.0 Restaurant ( 2,000) Only $3,000 was budgeted from Two -Way Fund 16-000-907.0 Other Income (__3z000) Reimbursements TOTAL REVENUE INCREASE ( 76,479) Decrease Revenue: 16-000-504.0 Rent Tie Downs 8,200 wrong Airamounport tatogbe c iner included d original budget 16-000-816.0 Maintenance Labor 20,000 IncomeYear-to-date ecalled aforless than budget 16-000-818.0 Avionics 90,000 Income Year-to-date less than budget called for & Two -Way TOTAL REVENUE DECREASE 118,200 transferred out NET DECREASE IN REVENUE 41,721 . Jack Manuel April 7, 1977 Page 2 ACCOUNT AMOUNT EXPLANATION Increase Expenditures: ADMINISTRATION 16-162-206.0 Dues & Subscrip. 100 Subscriptions to Publications. 16-162-218.0 Postage 250 Rate Increase. . r. r T AT.' 16-163-217.0 Telephone 1,500 Maintenance Shop makes long distance calls to order parts. 16-163-312.0 Vehicle Operation 400 Higher costs than anticipated. 16-163-405.0 Equipment 600 Purchase of a jack. FUEL OPERATIONS Sewer Service 400 16-164-123.8 Fuel Supervisor 1,000 Overtime and Holidays paid. 16-164-123.9 Fuel Servicemen 5,000 Overtime, holidays for full-time Actual expenses are exceeding budget. 16-167-323.0 Materials & Supplies position. Carrying two part-time Actual expenses are exceeding budget. 16-167-324.0 Tools & Supplies positions where one full-time Nothing budgeted. Purchase of a dimmer assembly. 16-167-414.0 Light Equipment was budgeted. 16-164-323.0 Fuel for Resale 55,000 Sales are higher than anticipated. 16-168-210.0 Fire Insurance Insurance 125 2,100 Revenue is also increased. 16-164-323.1 Material for Resale 1,000 Sales are higher than anticipated. 16-168-295.1 County Retirement Revenue is also increased. 16-164-401.0 Fire Apparatus 100 Nothing budgeted for this. AVIONICS 16-165-217.0 Telephone 500 Nothing budgeted for this. 16-165-220.0 Travel 1,100 Nothing budgeted for this. BUILDINGS & GROUNDS 16-167-207.0 Electric Current 15,000 Higher than anticipated usage and rate increase. 16-167-223.0 Purchase of Water 400 Higher than anticipated usage and rate increase. 16-167-226.0 Sewer Service 400 Higher than anticipated usage and rate increase. 16-167-312.0 Vehicle Operation 700 Actual expenses are exceeding budget. 16-167-323.0 Materials & Supplies 750 Actual expenses are exceeding budget. 16-167-324.0 Tools & Supplies 450 150 Nothing budgeted. Purchase of a dimmer assembly. 16-167-414.0 Light Equipment UNASSIGNED EXPENSES 16-168-210.0 Fire Insurance Insurance 125 2,100 Nothing budgeted. Premium higher than anticipated. 16-168-211.2 Liability 100 Actual cost higher than anticipated. 16-168-295.1 County Retirement TOTAL EXPENDITURE INCREASE 86,725 ~ Jack Manuel April 7, 1977 Page 3 ACCOUNT AMOUNT EXPLANATION Decrease Expenditures: ADMINISTRATION 16-162-109.0 Clerical ( 762) Unspent salaries. 16-162-215.0 Repairs & Maint. ( 75) Not needed. MAINTENANCE 16-163-141.0 Aircraft Mechanic ( 5,000) Unspent salaries. 16-163-206.0 Dues & Subscriptions( 250) Not needed. 16-163-215.0 Repairs & Maint. ( 300) Not needed. 16-163-323.0 Materials & Supplies( 7,500) Purchases will be less than anticipated. 16-163-325.0 Uniforms ( 200) Not needed. AVIONICS 16-165-141.0 Radio Technician ( 30,000) 16-165-218.0 Postage ( 75) 16-165-312.0 Vehicle Operation ( 500) 16-165-323.0 Materials & Supplies( 7,500) BUILDINGS & GROUNDS 16-167-214.3 Machine Rental TOTAL EXPENDITURE DECREASE NET INCREASE IN EXPENDITURES Salaries transferred to Two -Way Radio Fund. Transferred to Two -Way Radio Fund. Transferred to Two -Way Radio Fund. Transferred to Two -Way Radio Fund. ( 500) Unused. ( 52,662) 34,063 TOTAL EXPENSE BUDGET AFTER ADJUSTMENTS TOTAL REVENUE BUDGET AFTER ADJUSTMENTS ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION FROM GENERAL FUND LBR/lga cc: Dennis Parker $471,484.00 (395,700.00) $75,784.00 COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD INTRACOUNTY CORRESPONDENCE June 2, 1977 TO: Jack Manuel i FROM: Lane Ramsey SUBJECT: Transfer of Funds to Airport Enclosed is the updated reports requested by the Board of Supervisors. This includes: 1. Balance Sheet 2. Income Statement 3. Detail of Expenditures, Revenues, Inventories, and Accounts Receivable These statements were prepared as of May 19, 1977. Based on these statements, please ask the Board to take the action requested at the May 11, 1977 Board meeting. LBR/lga Enclosures (3) cc: Dennis Parker Chesterfield County Airport Balance Sheet May 19, 1977 ASSETS: Cash Accounts Receivable: Rent Maintenance - Labor Maintenance - Parts Fuel Sales Avionics Key Deposit Restaurant Other Inventory: Maintenance Avionics Fuel Equipment Buildings Land LIABILITIES: $3,135,165 $3,122,873 Cash 5/19/77 7/1/76 $ 0 $ 0 $ 25 $ 5,114 Administration 8,807 11,749 5,336 14,090 Fuel Operations 56 5,460 Avionics 45 1,400 992 34 46,699 39,779 16,413 27,948 to Other Funds 1,788,029 10,422 Fund Balance 10,799 49,169 43,772 81,448 81,448 NOTE: 1. 1,235,245 1,235,245 Property Tax 1.722.604 1,722,604 $3,135,165 $3,122,873 Cash Overdraft $ $ 57,165 $ 0 Accounts Payable: Administration 113 Maintenance Operations 5,336 Fuel Operations 56 Avionics 6,236 Buildings & Grounds 992 Unassigned Expenses 1,967 14,700 16,413 Due to Other Funds 1,788,029 1,788,029 Fund Balance 1,275,271 1,318,431 $3,135,165 $3,122,873 NOTE: 1. The County will receive $18,281 from the Personal Property Tax assessed on the planes at the Airport. 2. The County will receive $12,720 from the Real Estate Tax assessed on the property at the Industrial Park. Chesterfield County Airport Statement of Income and Expenditures - Accrual Basis July 1, 1976 through May 19, 1977 Revenue - Cash Basis 275,599 Less: Accounts Receivable (7/1/76) 39,779 235,820 Add: Accounts Receivable (5/19/77) 46,699 Revenue - Accrued Basis 282,519 Expenditures - Cash Basis 355,890 Add: Inventory (7/1/76) 43,772 Accounts Payable (5/19/77) 14,700 414,362 Less: Inventory (5/19/77) 49,169 Accounts Payable (7/l/76) 16,413 Expenditures - Accrual Basis 348,780 NET PROFIT (LOSS) ACCRUAL BASIS (66,261) NOTE: No depreciation expense has been charged to date. A charge to depreciation would increase the net loss for the Airport. r N 00 H N �O 9 x (� H O O O N J-- 41 1 %O O` H N o V 4- r (D H O In N W H Od , M H U, W W ON rt 000 W 0, OHH1�W NH HHF='H'OOOO �:$ a' ON 00 0*, 00 W L HC7 O N Ow O% I In �0 N In O O 00 V l.n F" O O H N a N O . O In O I O H W 00 O V G rh � H O O O O N n O 0 (( D (CD D3 ((DD M b r) rt (D C (D G rt n 10 rn " p' tz. oo w (A H w C rt (D w :• o (n (D n w a w O G w M w FL Fi. N ry n n O H (D w b W H. "i H. (M n H rtt (D (D H H 00 Zr I -i G H R+ rt n (D n rGt (D 'TJ (D O w (D N G 0 to Fw+ G (DD -i o' G r* r 'ti Uri W b pbi (D rt rot 43 n Uo z N w o w w� w w r) n w rt tY rt (D (D rr w H (D b N n (D En rt O n (D rt Iw-A rc t ~O• (D ri)�3 .(D W w r) cn (D Lo In F•' F + 0 m tGd O V N V O 4- OD N N W Ui N 00 OOOIn 0000 00 000 O 00 0 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 rt O 0000 0000 00000 rt (D R O O O O O O O O O O O O O O t7 a H (D 00 O (D :j G z H UNi V Q` O In O NQ, H (D 0 G (D 0 O O O O z w Vt H F... F.+ Ui V In 1.0 N a% V O C3N 00 H N r.- In In 00 000Ui OIn ON OOOH� 0 (D H OOOO OO OIn 0000000 r- R O 0000 0000 00000 O O O rt (D D. O 000 0 O O O O O O N 00 H N �O 9 x (� H O O O N J-- 41 1 %O O` H N o V 4- r -- a H O In N W H O N 0 1 H U, W W ON rt 000 W 0, r- 0 V I ON 00 0*, 00 W N O N Ow O% I OH41H V ON O O In O I O H W 00 O V n V I O�1--000o L�oov I Ir 000%0 W N O v v � m �C H 9 x (� W 0l, 4- rt 'd w I V Ut rn In (D 11 N W N In ()N' a p o V 4- r -- a H O In N W H O j �NWO u rt 000 W 0, r- 00-10 00 -1 0 pi V N rt I ON r'.) W O (n (D I N V H w d I V Ut rn In H cn lJ1 1� V a p C31% d (D i A4-1 V C j �NWO u (D rt In H I H N H Ir H 4- H 0, W I N O H I N In O In (D 0"� a p C31% i H N O C)N H W H 00 i A4-1 V C rlt o (D (D 1"1 G rt I In000�D V NO I ON r'.) W O n a� H H H C. a` x x o. 4- � W W W W W N N N N N N F� H (D I J O O 7J 6 o N N N H H N H H 'H H 0 A O O 011 In O In O w V In H m H4-1 CL W 00 C 0. IDFl- O 000000 OOOOOOOH C 00 CYN D` (D (D H O •• cl W O �(D n O G O n O N N O 0 n (CD ((DD (D r- .0 n 'd rt H. r• rt n n b rt r• O rt rn p' w (AH rt (D H o m n n a rt w o w o w �t o w r• o r -n 10 (D H w C rt m w ro H G F. rD(D H N 0 (D H PI m D) M O Oy N (p (�D O H N M r W W X(D 10 ((D � (CD o H En � (A CA rt r t G ((D n n ny p rt �31 H LO 0 O (D Q, 0 G N rt rt p ((D fD (D (D W ro w rt Q., b ((DD �'� w (n (D � n n z H a� H tI w t ((D (nD HdC' w HW O 0 0 (D (nr•w r•n rt �b (D :j (D r• w (D FJ- n o' rt p o' G C I- rt w w Cn G rt a m H. n (D� H b r rt b H W n O v(A rt H H. w 0 rt H 0 W rD `C N (D \ Ul In 00 V \ N V H H O H W In In In C) V 0 0 Q� V N o CD O O C W. H o 0- W O O 00 I O C) C) C) 0000000 1nOOOO1- H O 0 00Q O O O N O o 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 N (D O 6 Ul \ O 0000060 6666600 rt (D O 0 0 H O \ V V N N - o Ln I" 0 0 O 0 V U7 O\ N In -I- In W N O O O o O O O In O (D a �j r- O O o O O O O O O O o O OIn O O O 0 O O p O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o O o 6 0 (D rt n 0 v 0 v u u u v rt R• F- W W 00 In W H H N N 00 In In is 0 �D 00 O N 0 to 1, V H In N N H00 W 0 O 00 In 0000000 1n 000In P H N O O O N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O 0 a O 6 6 66 0 66 66 0 0 0 0 0 rt (D I O 00 O 0000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, tTl C 00 V W W 00 00 n00 H a\ N H H N O W X (D r t b w lJ i %D Q` �! OD . (D n V W - H N 1� V N V In p �p V V O H V In N V H N N W W W o 0 H W 0 N H A V H W N In U-1 0 I \ t0.. H W ON In 0 N V ON V ON 0 W W V 00 H O In N W 00'0 W F- rt 01 H 00 W V a\ o o O �.o O 00 In a% 00 W N W O W O I�D k.0 O \ G C7 00 O 00 W In �l 0 p V O O v W I� V In In W O O In 0 v to P v (D rt U) W ~ W v 00 V H � t:d C~ V In N V n lJ7 I N N 4- H � �10 00 ON koN W H In 0 H U) �p V N N W I D` I Gr a, In N 00 H kD IO W -r-- 1 o W V ON V In In W M 0 0 In 0 (D rt F- is 01% Un 00 H 00 V H c v In N 1 N o H N H %�0 0o a` �o W In N H 00 H In (D ,D m N W I m m In N 00 H %D dam' V W 00 %D %lo 10 ol� N W I 0 O O I N -I.- W H W N 0110 Cl 010 O O (D tt :J H a\ w ON 1 O w V O` kn Ir V ON 0 0 to O rt H In a\ .-j-Il rpt a� b rni O 0 !;d -P, W W W W 1 W N N N I Fl (D H m M 7. rD O N N N N N H � 4.) H N No a-, A W d O O F -I In 4-- W W W N In N F-' W w CL 0000 p OOOInF-'OOOOO�DOo rt I O >C Fl Il G G (D f" ~ v v . m .. (D ON F•-� O U: O n G 0 x C W W G G G (ZD O rr) O G C (dD (rD ,70 (CD rt rt n rt (D (D rt n n b (D W O rt rt (D G' (1. n rt (D (D O F✓ F✓ 9 w O w H H w ri O w FJ " N W (D FJ H. F'• (D n rd FJ G N F1 m w G G ti rt o m e n n o 0 a Pi oc H. " H (n H U) (n n o rt C/) (n w w ra m rt El b !l a• G w o (D m e m G o � (D (n F--' N DC (D N (D b w W FJ K N(n 10 G M (D (D 10 0 w Cn (n O W G C (D G rt (n (n (D H. b rr ti G ::;" �d b d H H. rt 10 n � rt ((D I 0 0 w w (D O (D (D rt w 10 ti G (D H• Z H a w y O rt tt rt (n (D G w w G n (n FJ w (D W H rt p o' rt N FI. 9 :(� H rt w (D (D o C a' m N N O n G ai (0 o' n (~D m En G w G (D .�. F✓ rrr (D G rnr rt� m H CL v \ N V In F-' In a` O ON GW O p I OO OOOInIn N o4 --0o O OQ O O 0000000004-0 r_ In rnt O O \ O 0 0 0 0 0 66 0 0 0 0 rt (D O O N O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 G. V � V VON V N In Ui FJ F✓ In 9 �1 t7 O O g (D O O O O G G b O O O O 00 � � (p O F F F F?y O O O O 00 0 0 O 0 0 O O r D rt o(Drt O O O CL H O z A FJ FJ N O ~ � In Vt OO N 1- W In O O W H 4-' ',D Q`5 E3 A 0 0 0 0 0 0 In In N O 4- co O (D O O A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 � O. O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 rt w O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O a 0 O FJ FJ F+ N ^ IJ N � C19 �C ^ F' F-' V A V W W N F-' In N W 00 0 rt 'C1 w ti In +U, V ^N p In O Un W O O, A In 1.0 O 0o H W H H W N I -PI V w r.- In %D V w W 00 In I t- 0 V Ul I \ Cs. H W O F-' a, In N N O� In N Co W V F- In a\ N V I N (� 00 � n O O 4_1W d1 O a1 A N �D O O �D In O N N W O N W V I O N V O In DD W In W O I O In N \ G C7 v N wO W N N Ln O O N rt u v v W (D ^ ^ N N FJ 00 FJ W N td O ^ w FJ H F-' H^ ^ 00 W O" W W W O w FJ (n Oo N 00 In m N V O F- V FJ 10 A N V! (D O� �D O V V a\ O FJ I, V O o N N n d •P V In O In N V In 4-- W O O O In 00 (D rt W N N ^ 4:1 V W N N d\ W FJ 00 w N 10 10 10w FJ FJ 00 00 .. .. FJ W U, f., 0 P,3 ON ON w P.ONO (D a :300 G M(n CIN a% N N N 00 A W N V O N N H C M 10 Ul N V (D (D In O In N V In ON v 0 0 0 In 00 rt rGt v z m rt ro ri O r• rt r 0 V) N v HF-F, rn m ON rn ON�we tT7 A W Z 0 0 0 0 0 ONNNNNFJO�NH'N-H04-O G O\ OOOOO m In In A W W %0 N O N ON H' In O 00 V X-1 P• . In 00000 r• I� O (D OOOF' 000000000001-' Ffi , 0000000000 F-- F' H H H G G ri I I 00 00 W 00 00 m (D ON .1W NFO •• yay aaa yd a d mcicn ocIt F-3royad;a " 0 m G G w C W d n n N o m n m b ,n 0 v w w 1-n m w Gw O rt rt F-n ::Y' n a w L H rt m a w n() n r* n w ri n O w b FJ- rt r0 0 o r b O w 0 w w H. n n O F- m G ri .rb' o n n n N H' G H Fl H ri rt w o rt �t H r• r• m N H' OQ d H (r r• n pd rt m (Dw w r• I-h t-h n ry w rt m 0 w w m m 0 H n !n m (n o G m CO � rt rt (0 94 m m (D N 0 H' H W N N. m � a. b rt r rt � j b � H C� r) rrr (D H. ro �ro H. n w `C 0 �' N H rt (D r) N• N z G() 0 P a r' HI w H 0 m n (n H. w p n n n0 m w (D (D d r m o rt G m rt 10 w C m r• r• r-n G w •v w m C w w (D (D w r G pd w w b (D•G O n n rt H Q, rt 0 Nrt W F� m m In 0 H• w rt b H• w F'• H- H (D 'L7 m O 1-t m m (D N N n rt O V F" N (~ ~ O N W 00 v In W O p V t- n W a O 0 O A N O F-' In Un O 000-4 O 00 O O I 00Ln 0 000 O OO4N � (D O O rr O p O O O O O O O O 66 O O rr m R. O p N O O O O O O O O O O O O v W V F� O m a 0 0 In In N �-. In O m a 0 o v o 0 0� 0 0 ( z O 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 O 0 �(D n O W w D` 0 p 1- 00 O 4- N In H OOIn 00 O V 00000 V 0 m 0 0 p p F O O O O O O I n 0 0 0 A N Q 0 p O 000 00 0000000 rot m p O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q. p tTi •-C .. N H ^ N H W 00 �, Ul N N F-+ H, 00 w m m rt V 1- V 10 W N Vt In N N O I V 0 O o O a, N F-+ In N V I In .A 0 00 00 W I O P NF, I N O V o w In G I 00 00 Fl O N In V In I S ON H' 4, N H' M v.0 O I .L- %D N O WH_ O V Q\ N W W i i %.0 rt I H' �O O �O 00 V w In V O v 1 OoO�O�v r` 1 In W N C:) Ln I O W AOS OInV N 1 p V m rt •• .. (n m ^ N HLi 00 A N00 ^ V m y -' 00 A W Qo O ^ ^ N N O O 00 ^ . 00 N N N N In 1-Inln00F��O .. O F) � I^ In W OOv ( W V W C w G H (n �O NInV Un O \0 Ln 00 F-' O\ O H O 1� 0 N i In A ,O w W O N W W O COV00ln0 .F__ �O W V V �OO O O N O �O W mO In V NI In O O m rt O� O In V N O W � v u v► v v v v� ^ ^ N ^ ^H'NOOr1i 1' ^ � In Ul 00 F-' M I ^In �O N N I W 00 V G f h (n �O N In V In O In 00 F- M O I In In V I In X- �O P. rt b W N O` W W O ► m m O OOu Oln O �O w v v� o o I N O �O j-- W O% I t-n I V OO In V 00 1 v o 0 m ri o rr ON O In V N O W H H H H H !- H H CI] H �.d ~<l rnrnrnrnrnrnrnrn I I I I I I I I ON > lTl Cy] 00000000 A W W W W W N ISN N N N N H (D H 00000000 (D HHONIli NHON "4.1 ":H Ho H G a, 00000000 C -L,Ivinlnl.-W NO,O,W lnt-n "D Ia. V tnt) . I I I I I I I I (D H• I " H I'D ID m(,n to to Intn G OOOOOOOOOOW H W 00 O 0 >4 to U H o 0 0 0 0 G H H V %,o Ln 1, 1- A W (D rt .. (D a\ O O O O N H O O Z H aH H07dC) 7d pJPd H >U t- cnmc7F-3 C0Mtd7d td >m C-, (D G H w (D 0 r) 0 0 rt (D O O (D (D (D 0 0 (D W rt .n 0 0 (D H (D G G '0 rt rt 0 rt w a' w O G G O G rt r) b OQ H G H• O rt G' (D E tt F-4 n rt (D CJ D) O w G (D rt rt rt rt rt rt w O w p' (D H• M H (D W Cu (D r) w H �r 0 n H• a b H G H ri ri w H 5' I I I H G" rt (D b 0 (n "t n G H�V H• O+ W rt rt (� r( p w G w H t7 H tri G rt rt 5 H H w w rt w O H rt O 9 n 0 � rt :J H �t n `C w H. G M rt tr1 (D (r W* m 0 (n (n (D:J (D 0 H• n 0 M (D m 0 O w rt H• (D W X (n 0 (0 H OQ (D (D GQ (n () G H. C (D () G H H H 'd G G H. rt (n N O rt R+ (n ;d G G rt (D 9d 0 rt O H• `C t) O• (D b rt H. OQ G 10 C 0 (D H (n rt G (D �d El b (D O H. G w b G b a) (D W� m O w (D .. G 0 (D N (D H b 't rt 0 w rt p n Z t + (D (D 0 rt U H. OQ H• w 0 (D H (n w (D (D � H• 0 w () C w O H• 0 w 0 (D (n (n rt v' rt 0 H. G rt ti w G n H (D w Cn C Crt G H w rt (D '0 H• H• rt rt O. n (D n w (D O t7 n (D H (n b 0 w (D (D (n (D .. o' n rt (n 0 (D N G F rt 0 H H• (D (D w ED U) n w (D w zi rt ON H A .P H H H W W N H tD N O H A to w o w ,. ,. W W V V O N V W to H .L-_ N N a, o,� N H O O to o V G N Oo (31, a% 41 O C:) Ln 0 to 0 0th N0410 O N O o 0 0 0 W 0 0 0 0 O o 0 0 i n 0 0 0 0 00 0 M O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 rt 0 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U O rt(D O 0 H ^ H ^ H W N H OD V to ^ �r :;d (D d H V 0 0T__ N W H .� V V .L� .� In O (D .07_, N O o V O In In In to o 00 0 o G G 0 H o0O O O 000 00 O O D(D M O 000 O O O 000 O O O O (D rt :art C• O 0 C 0 O o 0 000 00 0 0 . o v O z a\ H W H ti 00 a\ to H l� H O, N O H H H -P. O W cn tD V 0- O V a, a,H.L-NAO W a, 0, In o0 O V tD 0o V O,a, t0 (notn0(nOo0tnN0.0, ON O (D 00 W 00o0000001n00 000 a OO�D O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O r-, ( D O 000 O O O 000000000000 O O D.. O, a\ H W to W to H -r- W H W H H N H O w X (D rt 10D) ip N H O o00H Nln O H V W Oo a, H a` a\ In O N W to 1 �D H N a` W to W 4- O In N O 00 oo H to a, to �D 00 Oto -10%.0110d, to G 1 a H W O, 00 V N w 00 V V H N O, W 00 to V Q` I N 1 0 to N V w w O L� N O, In H to to Fl 0 N I'D W V OD O ,O O N W N O � 1� vo V NHOo00NtoV W oW O 1 W Vt0InNN6toa,Q`000OH IG t7 W 00 0 00 H V W --1 O to 0 0 to O vi H N tD O O O O N N _j N rwt y H ^ ^ ^ O,Ui H BOO, ^ to NO, H a, N W 00 V a\ A H O, T N O ^ H N A V H N^4-1 J-- N U W w G d` O O, w V In A O tD a` 00 H (n Q\ V 00 O %D O N O, V N O �D .L� N W In a N N NHOoOONlnW W ON %D InN-l0I'D a\wC)0mw n G N HV wO j0tn00 to Ili OVH\.oHNH00 V HOON00 (D rt vv�v�,✓ v H W W H d\ H N ^ N d\ H H N W 00 V a, H O, 4- N W H 4- H W^ N H^ ^ N O W OD U aW to W �D V N to J-1 tD kD a` O (D ',D O O M En V N W 00 V H H W V N00 H o o N W In H iD N C). rt 'L7 A V DD O^ O N O, V ID M V NH0000 Ntn W O, C) ON C) -P- OH a,W 000000 (D rt O p ' 03 H V 00 V O to O O In 00 O V H H %.O Iv H 0 0 V H O O N 00 rt >4 rn F✓ 00 7% w V i N N N N N N V 1 (D FL N NN.�,D W CYN vl rnLnLn4-wwHo a.00 Ln F, W p al In �D p 4- N O I �D N F✓ (n N In V Lo (ON OD O I+ 0 0 0 O N O r i (D °�° N O%�0O OOVnN O (D F- 00 00 H v w I O O H ON w oorna.(DN oot q a (D �D Ln ul� In n ftl :r t4 (D > O (D O (D (D O H 0 rt (D r) b H O (D H0 O r• r O C rt 0 (n H W H Lo rt H rt I'd rt � wF, G n b H> �• H- n (D �r (D H ::: caw car I+ 00 00 N V W rpt E3 0 rt 03 Fl w 03 03 m rl rt N , rt G .< DC 10 to d(D F�-, M (D ::1 W N G N 00 W -- N I-� (D (D 04 ro (D M (D ro rt (D r17 • w rt ((DD m � N r• C a H P. n HW H H rt 0�3: z F� r, (D t=] H. H w w 0 �J(D W in (� W V W V 00 y rt v rt m 51 O b r -N (D H (D > N H > O . C F-+ D) 0 (D Hr�r 0 D) W N n O 0 n :d txi H (D (D F" 030 G N y 0p n rt ((D O 0 O 0 rt 0 O� O %D (D H.0 V I w rt 0 rt �D O O 0 y H (n v v (n (D 4 - Lo N In Z_ I'D W A N v NVt F� N In V P In O (1. �D O O V 0 In O O O DO N 00 O�CYN 00 p O FN_1 rt C) O r, (D a p O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O � N (D J w Ili ~ F F-' O N (D .n � Ir N W In O O Ln I1 (D F-1 5 U) 00 p O� O O O O O ( (DD v rt F✓ 00 7% w V i � V N N NN.�,D W CYN vl C) N F-1 00 011 w I Ln F, W p al In �D p 4- N O I �D N F✓ (n N In V Lo (ON OD O p i (D °�° N O%�0O OOVnN O (D F- 00 00 H v w I O O `D ON w oorna.(DN oot q a N �D Ln ul� In O I 1� (D > O p W O 00000000 rt (D (n Lo O �o w V W ON i p O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a. I OO (D H ::: O I+ 00 00 N V W I O O 0 rt Fl � rn N 00 N V w � .� �. w In Ul N ~ F� �D N N In N (D rt b w N ON In 00 In H y (D H N In 10In V W V 00 N 00 w 00 W V F� F-' In In F� In :jI rt F- N � OC 4 w O p In W N O W 00 N �D. w In O 0 %D rt li 0p N O N O 00 O O� O %D 1n�0�o A000 N OD %D W V O O O V I w In O �D O O �D V (D rt v v v (n (D F✓ 00 7% i N vl N N F-1 00 011 w I Ln F, W p al In �D p 4- N O I �D N F✓ (n N In V Lo (ON w Ln O p i (D + F- 00 00 H v w I O O (D rt ON N �D Ln ul� In N 00 C31 w I 1� (D > O 00 W 07 ,D 4- N0 I ',0M W OEl (n Lo O �o w V W ON i (p (D �D In U, I OO (D H ::: I+ 00 00 N V W I O O 0 rt Fl CHESTERiELD COUNTY PUBLICCHOOLS CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA 23832 A. M. DAVIS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL cou"May 30, 1977 415 S. Providence Road Richmond, Virginia 23235 o v ` o I. The Objectives of the Class are as follows: 1. Develop Skills 2. Encourage learning 3. Provide success 4. Develop growth 5. Counselling 6. Set objectives for themselves II. The Purpose of the Class is as follows: 1. To begin courses of study in the necessary fields leading to a GED III. CLASS: This class began in October 1976 and has continued to this writing. In the beginning there were 23 students ranging in age from 19 to 43 and in educational experience from third to twelfth grades. Many of the original men dropped out after the first few meetings because they expected to be able to get the GED simply by being in the class for a few weeks. Some dropped out because they felt defeated and had an "I don't care" attitude. The class continued around men who felt that (1) they should learn and (2) it got them out of their cells and into a different atmosphere. The selection of these students was left to the classi- fication officers, Mrs. Bishop and Miss Wingo, and anyone that they felt were sincere were allowed to go into the class. Only on one occasion were students not allowed to continue once they had started. IV. -2- M The class met twice a week for two (2) hours (Wednesday night and Saturday morning). Class size for the meeting ranged from one student on one occasion to twenty-three. The turnover, additions and deletions were about every three weeks. Often additions were made because other students talked about the class and advised who could come to it. There were few rules in the class. Generally, they were as follows: 1. No trouble with jail 2. No argueing between 3. Everyone was free to pertinent questions 4. Pay attention 5. If you want to stand could be done within behavior EVALUATION: personnel students discuss or ask any up and move around it the limits of proper The class has been a success. No student has taken his GED as yet because they are not in this class long enough. However, thanks to Sheriff Wingo, they had the proper tools to continue when they left. When one of the men went back into society his name, address and telephone number were turned over to the Adult Education Department of the Public Schools so they could be contacted and advised as to when they could continue. If a student was transferred to another custody he could take his books and continue in their programs. This class provided incentive to study and the opportunity to help themselves. Much of the counselling took place during a ten minute break or as others were working. At times a sort of class/group counselling session was held, particularly when a few new students first came to class. To sum up the evaluation, I feel it has been a success and should be continued. V. NEEDS: As previously mentioned, thanks to Sheriff Wingo and his personnel, the needs have been met as much as possible. R COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD INTRACOUNTY CORRESPONDENCE June 3, 1977 TO: Jack Manuel FROM: J- Holl nq. SUBJECT: 1'77 78 Budget Requests g q n Sheriff Wingo has requested that two additional appropriations be made to the 1977-78 Budget for the Jail. Two-thirds of this amount will be reimbursed by the State. Suggested Resolution: On motion of , seconded by , it is hereby resolved that $2,500 be appropriated from the Unappropriated Surplus of the General Fund to the Jail's 1977-78 Budget: 11-063-111.4 Comp. of Part-time Teacher $2,000 11-063-319.0 Office Supplies 500 $2,500 Also, increase Planned Budget Revenue account 11-000-620.4 Shared Expenses - Sheriff by $1,667. This represents the amount which will be reimbursed by the State of Virginia. JEH/lga cc: Sheriff Wingo M Mr. C. G. Manuel, County Administrator Chesterfield County, Virginia 23832 Dear Mr. Manuel: (Offue of the , 4eriff CHESTERFIELD COUNTY CHESTERFIELD C. H., VA. 23832 E. L. WINGO, SHERIFF June 1, 1977 E5 The Chesterfield County School Board has been furnishing the jail with a visiting teacher from the school system to carry out the GED program. Due to lack of funds they will no longer furnish this service. Therefore, we have requested from the Department Of Corrections and amendment to our budget of $2,000.00 for a teacher and $500.00 for supplies to continue this program. We need to have this amount of money appropriated from the county which will then be reimbursed two-thirds by the state if approved by them. Thank you for your cooperation and assistance din this matter. Sincerly, L. Ingo, Sheriff CC: Mrs. Joan Girone 0 We have been provided with a good classroom, workbooks, chalkboard and encouragement. The needs of the coming year are: 1. Expand the class to basic education as well as GED preparation and some time for juveniles in the jail 2. Workbooks 3. Dictionaries 4. Work tablets 5. Access to a library with up-to-date material 6. Test for achievement and intelligence E. A. BRITTON Adult Instructor Chesterfield County Jail M TABLE OF CONTENTS Existing Transit Service Background Metropolitan Area Service GRTC Bon Air Transit Company Waller Bus Lines Tri -City Coaches Through Service Greyhound James River Bus Lines Alternatives Previous Planning Efforts Voorhees Chesterfield -Henrico TDP Tri -City Area Transit Technical Study General Responsibility of County Expansion of Existing Services Park'n'Ride General Study and implementation Schedule Fiscal Responsibilities Tentative Sites and Estimated Costs Attachments COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD (Four Intracounty Correspondence) TO: Mike Ritz DATE: June 2, 1977 FROM: R. M. McElfish SUBJECT: Board Agenda Please have the following items placed on the next Board Agenda for Community Development: (1) Matoaca District - Street name change from Butler to Baretta Road. (2) Dale District - Street light request for Meadowdale Townhouses. RMM/mr M • MEMORANDUM DATE: June 2, 1977 TO: Board of Supervisors Jack Manuel, Interim County Administrator FROM: Dexter Williams, Planner/Engineer Comprehensive Planning Division SUBJECT: Park'n'Ride Lots I came before the Board on March 23, 1977, with information concerning some tentative sites for park'n'ride lots. The Board expressed the view that before they could consider any specific services, more specific information concerning County obligations for park'n'ride service would be required. Staff is preparing a report on existing transit services and alternatives. Attached is a table of contents of that report, which will be presented in full at the June 8, 1977 Board meeting. Attached are two sections of the report concerning park'n'ride implementation and fiscal responsibilities for GRTC service to the County. Attachments to the report are also presented to the Board with this memo, and provide some general information concerning existing transit service in the area. DW/jp 16W *40 Park'n'Ride Study and Implementation Schedule I. Select a service area for implementation of a park'n'ride facility.(County) II. Conduct a public hearing on lot location. (County) III. Conduct a public hearing on UMTA grant application. (GRTC) IV. Sign contract for service. (GRTC, VDH&T, City & County) V. Apply for UMTA grant. (GRTC) VI. Operate service. I Selection of Service Area The Board must select a service area for park'n'ride lot service, and initiate an evaluation of proposed park'n'ride lot locations for the service area. The Board may very well wish to examine the follow- ing criteria before selecting a service area: 1. Bus Utilization Survey (currently being conducted by RRPDC, should be complete June 15, 1977 ). 2. Recommendations by local civic associations, etc. 3. Recommendations by GRTC and VDH&T based upon professional experience. 4. Ridership estimates provided by RRPDC. Once the Board has chosen a service area, the tentative park'n' ride lot sites for the service area must be evaluated in the form of a Preliminary Study and Environmental Analysis which is required by UMTA. The Board may request that VDH&T prepare this document with assistance from County Staff. The Board may also request that GRTC work with County Staff to develop a tentative schedule for bus service to the preferred alternative cited in the Preliminary Study and Environmental Analysis. II Park'n'ride Public Hearin When the Environmental Analysis is complete, then the County may proceed with advertising and conducting a public hearing on the location of the park'n'ride lot. Representatives of the County, Board Members and Staff, should be present and may make statements defining the County's intention in requesting park'n'ride service. VDH&T representatives will be on hand to explain the Environmental Analysis. The testimony of the public hearing will, hopefully, provide evidence to UMTA that the public accepts the proposed park'n- 'ride lot location. III UMTA Grant Application Public Hearing GRTC will hold this public hearing on its intention to apply for UMTA funds. The public may also comment on the park'n'ride site selection process to date. IV Sign Contract for Service Once the contract is established, it may be signed before the UMTA grant application .is actually made, while the application is pending or after the application is approved, but before construction of the lot. V Application for UMTA Funding GRTC will apply for UMTA funds for the construction of the lot, additional busses (if needed), and operating subsidy. VI Operate Service It will be necessary for County Staff to stay abreast of the operation of the transit service, and periodically review the schedule, etc., for any changes which may serve to increase revenues while minimizing costs. The Staff will coordinate with GRTC in this review process, and will serve as liaison between the Board and GRTC operation staff. �4w *40 Park'n'Ride Fiscal Responsibilities There are three general areas of cost associated with the operation of a park'n'ride lot: 1. Construction of the lot 2. Purchase of rolling stock (buses) 3. Operation of the route The costs for construction of the lot under Urban Mass Trans- portation Administration (UMTA) programs calls for 80% Federal funding and 20% State and local funding. While new State legislation, effective July 1, 1977, enables the State to pay only 90% of the State/local share, or 18% of the total cost for this program, the previous agreement with VDH&T on the Bon Air lot was that VDH&T would pay the full State/local share, therefore, relieving the County of any fiscal responsibility to purchase land and construct the park'n'ride lot. It may be necessary to purchase busses to provide service to the park'n'ride lot, depending upon the availability of existing rolling stock. If all the existing busses are assigned to other routes at the time the County requests service, then it will be necessary to purchase busses to serve the park'n'ride lot. Under the existing system of shared costs for rolling stock, the County's share for each bus will be 2%. To date, it has not been necessary for Henrico to pay rolling stock costs for their routes. The Countv must assume responsibility to pay operating losses for each service which they request. GRTC charges a per mile fee based on actual operating costs. The current charge is $1.545 per mile, and bills for service are submitted to localities on a monthly basis. If the monthly route operating cost exceeds the monthly route revenue, then the County must pay the difference to GRTC. If the revenue exceeds the cost, then the profit is returned to the County. If the County should request and obtain two or more services, then the profits on one route may offset the deficits on another route and the County would receive monthly, a bil for the net deficit or a payment for the net profits on all of the requested services provided by GRTC. Federal funds are available to localities to pay half of the route operating loss for which they are responsible by contract. GRTC will apply for these funds. N. MEMORANDUM DATE: June 8, 1977 15 TO: Board of Supervisors, Jack Manuel, Interim County Administrator FROM: Dexter Williams, Planner/Engineer Comprehensive Planning Division SUBJECT: Park'n'Ride and Transit Report Attached is a draft copy of the Chesterfield County Transit Services Report No. 1. It is Staff's suggestion that the Board review this draft, and make recommendations to Staff for corrections, clarifif tion or additions before or at the next Board meeting on June 22. Staff will then prepare a final copy of the report for the Board meeting on July 13. The Bus Utilization Survey being conducted by RRPDC should be complete by June 15. Staff will present the results of this study at the June 22 or July 13 Board meeting. This study should provide some indication of transit demand in the County. Staff further recommends that the Board decide by August whether or not new park'n'ride service is justified for any service area. If not, then Staff recommends that the entire issue of new transit service be "shelved" for at least one year. If the Board decides to pursue park'n'ride service to a particular area, then Staff will begin the Preliminary Study in cooperation with VDH&T at that time. DW/jp DRAFT 6/6/77 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY TRANSIT SERVICES REPORT NO. 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXISTING TRANSIT SERVICES,BACKGROUN Metropolitan Area Service - GRTC, Bon Air Transit Company, Waller Bus Lines, Tri - City Coaches Through Service --Greyhound, James River Bus Lines ALTERNATIVES Previous Planning Efforts --- Voorhees (Richmond), Chesterfield -Henrico TDP, Tri -Cities Transit Study General Responsibility of County --- Ettrick, Northern Chesterfield Park �a Ride Service --- General Study and Implementation Schedule Fiscal Responsibilities s Tentative Sites and Estimated Costs Attachments M EXISTING TRANSIT SERVICE BACKGROUND Until 1973, all transit service in Chesterfield County and the adjacent metropolitan areas was operated by private companies for profit. In September of 1973, Virginia Transit Company (VTC), the principal carrier in the Richmond area, ceased operations because e4 -rising costs and declining ridership which made profit impossible. Their operations were assumed by the Greater Richmond Transit Company (GRTC), a non-profit public service corporation solely owned by the City of Richmond. On July 1, 1977, Tri -City Coaches will cease j � CC_ operations in Tri -Cities area. Their operations will be assumed by the newly -formed Transit Division of the Petersburg Department of Trans- portation and Traffic Engineering. During this same period, a number of smaller private companies have ceased public transit route operations because of declining ridership and increasing costs. Thus )in the last four years/the responsibility for mass transit in the metropolitan areas has largely been abandoned by private enterprise because of the disappearance of a profit incentive, and neighboring cities have assumed this responsibility for transit service. METROPOLITAN AREA SERVXE Greater Richmond Transit Company (GRTC) operates both express and local service in southside Richmond adjacent to Chesterfield County. The fare for any of these routes is $0.40, and transfers are $0.05. All GRTC routes are shown on Attachment #1 and those routes closest to Chesterfield are shown on the Attachment #2. All GRTC routes, except the Frugal Shuttle in downtown Richmond, are subsidized by localities, �w M including the Ampthill route which has its end -of -the -line stop at the DuPont Spruance Plant in Chesterfield County. (Subsidized by the City of Richmond). Bon Air Transit Company operates two express routes to downtown Richmond in the morning, and two express routes from downtown Richmond in the afternoon. (See Attachment #1 & Attachment #2) Waller Bus Lines operates one route between Petersburg and Richmond via Colonial Heights and Chester (#12). There are nine trips each way daily. (See Attachment #2) Tri -City Coaches, Inc., operates two local routes north of the Appomattox. One operates between Petersburg and Ettrick (#13), and the other operates along Route 1-301 in Colonial Heights and Petersburg. (See Attachment #2) THROUGH SERVICE Greyhound Bus Lines operates inter -city service through Richmond along Routes 60 and 360 in Chesterfield County. James River Bus Lines operates inter -city service between Hopewell and Richmond along Route 10 between Hopewell enc3 the _ R4chmandalcmg—R4D,Ute--•1,0. ,be.iween- 44opewell-- and the Richmond -Petersburg Turnpike. ALTERNATIVES Previous Planning Efforts 2. In February, 1974, Alalt M. Voorhees and Associates, Inc., completed the Transit Development Program (TDP) for Richmond, The following were 3. M E5 suggested new transit services in Chesterfield: 1) A park 'n' ride lot in Bon Air 2) Service to Cloverleaf Mall via Warwick and Hull Street 3) Local service to Chesterfield Courthouse via Broad Road, Hopkins, Beulah 4) A park 'n' ride lot in the Route 1-301 and Chippenham area 5) Local.gervice on Huguenot Road to the Old Gun Road area In May, 1975, the Recommended—Five Year TDP for the Counties of Chesterfield and Henrico was published by Richmond Regional Planning District Commission. The suggested transit services in this document were park 'n' ride lots at the following locations: 1) Bon Air 2) Route 60 and Turner Road 3) Route 1 - 301 and Chippenham 4) Matoaca (served by Tri -City Coaches) The suggested Matoaca park 'n' ride was recommended for further study by the Tri -Cities Transit Study. The Tri -Cities Transit Technical Study, completed in July, 1976, did not recommend implementation of a Matoaca park'n' ride or any other new transit service in Chesterfield County for the near future. GENERAL RESPONSIBILITY OF THE COUNTY' ., All transit service in and around Chesterfield County, as shown on Attachment #2, currently operates without funding or direct super- vision from the County. However, two factors which have caused the to County/review its position of non-involvement with transit are: 1) Transition of transit from private enterprise to public _.pja�-c service subsidized by localities. 2) Urbanization of the County accompanied by increasing citizen requests for urban -type services. 4. M M When local governments have taken over failing transit operations, their reasoning has been that transit operations should be continued so that captive riders who cannot afford other means of transportation are afforded a certain level of mobility to allow economic productivity and facilitate retail trade. The decision whether or not to continue the existing level of service in the Ettrick area of the County is an example of a local service that has been provided by private enterprise in the past in Chesterfield County. This service i-s-bel-rtT taken over by the City of Petersburg as a public service. Informal negotiation for a reason- able sharing of costs is occurring; staff will keep the Board informed on transit service possibilities in the Ettrick area. Chesterfield County has not been requested to provide subsidy for the portion of the GRTC Ampthill route which is in Chesterfield County. = However, the degree of urbanization in northern Chesterfield is such G) that some �transit services may provide viable alternatives to the auto- mobile. In particular, past transit studies have indicated that, nt-/i 1 44 4,O, park 'n' ride express service may be operated without subsidy, and would reduce peak hour automobile traffic congestion. Alternatives such as extensions of existing local service or new local service do not offer the potential of the park 'n' ride service in terms of fiscal viability or reduced automobile congestion (See Attachment #3) 5. M PARK 'N' RID%SERVICE In 1976, the County was involved to a limited extent in the evaluation of a proposed park 'n' ride lot in the Bon Air area. The service area was cited in the 1975 Five Year Recommended TDP for Chesterfield and Henrico, and the evaluation of tentative sites was performed by VDH&T (See Attachment #6). The proposed site was presented at a public hearing chaired by GRTC, at which time those citizens present thoroughly rejected the proposed site. Because of this negative public reaction, VW&T and GRTC will no longer initiate transit projects in Chesterfield County, and have left that responsibility to the County. Public support of any proposed park 'n' ride site is mandatory, and the County is —a�3e—bran—GR41C—er--�T�' to =determine- 3d -whe for park ' n' ride -service. I �6✓ Park'n'Ride Study and Implementation Schedule I. Select a service area for implementation of a park'n'ride facility.(County) II. Conduct a public hearing on lot location. (County) III. Conduct a public hearing on UMTA grant application. (GRTC) IV. Sign contract for service. (GRTC, VDH&T, City & County) V. Apply for UMTA Grant. (GRTC) VI. Operate service. I Selection of Service Area The Board must select a service area for park'n'ride lot service, and initiate an evaluation of proposed park'n'ride lot locations for the service area. The Board may very well wish to examine the follow- ing criteria before selecting a service area: 1. Bus Utilization Survey (currently being conducted by RRPDC, should be complete June 15, 1977 ). 2. Recommendations by local civic associations, etc. 3. Recommendations by GRTC and VDH&T based upon professional experience. 4. Ridership estimates provided by RRPDC. Once the Board has chosen a service area, the tentative park'n' ride lot sites for the service area must be evaluated in the form of a Preliminary Study and Environmental Analysis which is required by UMTA. The Board may request that VDH&T prepare this document with assistance from County Staff. The Board may also request that GRTC work with County Staff to develop a tentative schedule for bus service to the preferred alternative cited in the Preliminary Study and Environmental Analysis. II Park'n'Ride Public Hearin tir'hen the Environmental Analysis is complete, then the County may proceed with advertising and conducting a public hearing on the location of the park'n'ride lot. Representatives of the County, Board Members and Staff, should be present and may make statements defining the County's intention in requesting park'n'ride service. VDH&T representatives wile on hand to explain thenvironmental Analysis. The testimony of the public hearing will, hopefully, provide evidence to UMTA that the public accepts the proposed park'n- 'ride lot location. III UMTA Grant Application Public Hearing GRTC will hold this public hearing on its intention to apply for UMTA funds. The public may also comment on the park'n'ride site selection process to date. IV Sign Contract for Service Once the contract is established, it may be signed before the UMTA grant application is actually made, while the application is pending or after the application is approved, but before construction of the lot. V Application for UMTA Funding GRTC will apply for UMTA funds for the construction of the lot, additional busses (if needed), and operating subsidy. VI Operate Service It will be necessary for County Staff to stay abreast of the operation of the transit service, and periodically review the schedule, etc., for any changes which may serve to increase revenues while minimizing costs. The Staff will coordinate with GRTC in this review process, and will serve as liaison between the Board and GRTC operation staff. �kw Park'n'Ride Fiscal Responsibilities There are three general areas of cost associated with the operation of a park'n'ride lot: 1. Construction of the lot 2. Purchase of rolling stock (buses) 3. Operation of the route The costs for construction of the lot under Urban Mass Trans- portation Administration (UMTA) programs calls for 80% Federal funding and 20% State and local funding. While new State legislation, effective July 1, 1977, enables the State to pay only 90% of the State/local share, or 18% of the total cost for this program, the previous agreement with VDH&T on the Bon Air lot was that VDH&T would pay the full State/local share, therefore, relieving the County of any fiscal responsibility to purchase land and construct the park'n'ride lot. It may be necessary to purchase busses to provide service to the park'n'ride lot, depending upon the availability of existing rolling stock. If all the existing busses are assigned to other routes at the time the County requests service, then it will be necessary to purchase busses to serve the park'n'ride lot. Under the existing system of shared costs for rolling stock, the County's share for each bus will be 2%. To date, it has not been necessary for Henrico to pay rolling stock costs for their routes. The Countv must assume responsibility to pay operating losses for each service which they request. GRTC charges a per mile fee based on actual operating costs. The current charge is $1.545 per mile, and bills for service are submitted to localities on a monthly basis. If the monthly route operating cost exceeds the monthly route revenue, then the County must pay the difference to GRTC. If the revenue exceeds the cost, then the profit is returned to the County. If the County should request and obtain two or more services, then the profits on one route may offset the deficits on another route and the County would receive monthly, a bil for the net deficit or a payment for the net profits on all of the requested services provided by GRTC. Federal funds are available to localities to pay half of the route operating loss for which they are responsible by contract. GRTC will apply for these funds. I �a u x (NJ T { W ! y O O' u u ? IA c 1 P�' r-' z z ¢ u! O'I � u O w N a, rl O IA M M F_ r /1 O O N M, 1 J N IA N o� V1i M' A PI HPI, Z W r O Fy U In' m, 3 U),m' r .0 O 61 O r' O I LA I A', M 1- O' V1 I 0 r. F-� I N P- r u a 7' U P N O, m- .o I �I -o' N; N! r co .0 aD II 7 V11 NI!. R� O 1,1 M VI' AJ 7 at L m .o 81-1 O o MI �, I 1 N 71 'COD ru o, '4 .' y m P OI cD �� ! O ni O P I N 7 �, b M M, N .O N I �a u x (NJ T { W ! y O O' a Lj .o ? IA c m z z ¢ u! O'I � u O w N a, OI OI tAI r CI11 N CO a [ EX u o; M' A PI HPI, Z W r O Fy U In' m, 3 U),m' M .0 O 61 O r' O I LA I A', M 1- O' V1 -S O a C ! M 0 r. F-� I N P- r u a 7' U P N O, m- .o I 7I 7 a i N; N! O O O co .0 aD M D R� O O' oI a I o M I 1 ! u o, '4 .' o �,; Iv �� ! nC', o N �I r rA b M v I I I I O O Oi IAJ O'', O Oi o'' c i n J n a Q 4 O c ao O O O m L H+ M 7 0 N, O W 2 V1 CD D ' M F .-I I 4D! P .o I N. O; O IA OI .o !A In N i NI O O 4 � O N' O VI P a N m. I J In N N AI a a' P .O. r 0 O 1 : d a, F- � aP q C � I Cl Oj O! c iT I i I ^II !� a '• , N N'! W� LLIro N' ! N' cr c 'U.� N OD N O = W ON N N' Lni NI M' P ►- Z j f� I (�► N (t I O IL Z W' Y. F IY Z) O O. a, Z 2 tY I o o I v >'. r O V) n w w' r . w fx - O UA ai z o :3 r z Z Z M z " z N at 1-.4 Q Ib I W E E E h Z V o; c c o c as - r M < a til ` L rnl wl F Z Wr U u O 0:1 dr u, u; O' y O O' a Lj .o ? a u M' m O!. ¢ u! O'I � u O CO Od OI OI tAI ti CI11 N o! 7, O O Off' .o, o; M' A wj V• O�� O r O Fy U In' m, 3 U),m' M .0 O 61 O r' O I LA I A', M 1- O' V1 -S O a C ! M 0 r. F-� I N P- r u a 7' U P N O, m- .o I 7I 7 a i N; N! O O O co .0 aD M D .-. 3'. M M I oI a l _ oL 1 o M I 1 $ u o, '4 .' o �,; Iv �� ! �, o N I r rA b M v I I I I O O Oi O O'', O N I G C, P. .o I N O O I O N O o m V1 CD D r-- co N'I d .-I I 4D! P .o I N. O; O IA OI .o !A In N i NI O O M V1 O N' O VI P a N m. IA .0 P. Pi N N AI a a' P .O. VP' rU O : M O M aP M � I P � O� iT I i I ^II '• , N N'! N': Nj N' N' ! N' N N 'U.� N OD N O = N Ni N N' Lni M' P >; I a & LA M I I W' Y. W - f I r O'. salS .D � SII I � O'. 4D II O O O ISI > O! O' o! VIII OI OI tAI O' lA r C:. O VP pli O O O O oI D o Ni aI O NI O �I NI M a � N, N ! eu (u,. N'I ' Zi O N m N N, N1 N N- N Z Fr O Fy U In' m, 3 U),m' LAJ u < o, a z! o' rJ UD a z; wr o aI Fr 1 ~F_, Fr O N W O� W' H '. OC m U), W I wO. cc a; CL � O O! O'. .D G O — N O'. 4D II O O O r4 C> O O� NI Gj O N O O O r - O O I M O 7 O O O� G O co nt P I I I Ln I o u QI I a '4 U I N I I I I O O Oi O O'', O N I G C, � O O! O'. : G O' O O II O 4 O OI O� C Gj O' O O' O O O I O I O O O� G O; O I N I I I I O O Oi O O'', O N I G C, cD O 1 O ofy —'I PI a,'. N N'. Nll ;3 H. . O j O' I N N rU N N' rU M M! M tT P o, P P i � I P � O� iT J j O• ^II N N'! N': Nj N' N' ! N' N N 'U.� N N NI N N Ni N N' N >; I Cc W' Y. W - C J I v >'. r .+ yr n w w' r . w a UA ai z a D 1L u :r o; v, r o W a rnl wl F Z Wr U u a O a 3Wr to wj d O �: N C9; J tiJ n N u -1 W a w u OI D W O < 0.- w U. u CL ' i 1- u c :D�I , w > o u u < I Iti m I O O o, I O N, 7 P J • r Z O 7 aD IA z y P N I W LLA CL wI pp x o 0 0, < OI V1 4 o I • ►o- I na W or N m 'x- Ln W N LLS xP, 1Ln .0. P M Zfu O LLI M cr Z C o W U N S' W O .. ., J r Q O 93C (N CL u o a \ O:� o n CL M a I� 0 W Oco o: o O Z w zrQ W < Z Z J < A w I J n a 7 q r m o h Q M H \ a Illi W C I D � PPn W D NM N N m N N O� W I IM R W I F J !. z J ' F � o a 'r ►- M 0 W lti o w z W O M Z J f O ►r p I r Z.-. i-�. W y r OC Z w .m W < LL 2' fri H U� r[ d , K 2 7 Y. W I I I i J Ia ! Iii A,�' M.�� .•�I p p•� M m N a P a' P'. M! •' LA j �Z ml aIA A yl O'. M. ry'. r - a a :a ;Zz al In. 41 w e 0. N CL A Ii • J d LM N NI O Mt'' IaI M a N , COII M rl r' M o a CL a 'sn W U a, O O 2 V1 O C cc m r �. Z tN D N W W Q I X .O. M OI W D' T to w PLA r1 0 % W LI tt1 M K p W U t �x Iz rw .a U 0 .. .. o i 0 j 4 I aW or c� o Il 1nl �' ry a o I p a m o a Pi I I I I ' I 0 W I c� O c; o o o, W 0 a O, O O O, m Z 0 PI i I, a z c�.1 ..� 2 7 J a a J IL a -� N M •t1 .o-. ~ M NI \ a N ,U1 LLJ0 P .O: OI O O �II 1 w 0 ry N N N ruf� I A Z t1' N M N ri N I la � o w zl z vi to w va nI a i � Z In o4 � �••� o (D z tr I w a' z a x' ¢: " r u a a nul cs m u u uj a J t j M a a o In 1/i I o I» r W w z z' o z r of co J .6� Cl 6-- W U3 Z; a' u W MZ " 92, I I j I O O N: r% N' A w VJI 2 P. J c r+ W. �- a CL a! W' ac A'. F i i iI I �I O i G 17 I I I I O CD r CD --j n j O O M ''. .r' lA P ! ..n A j O M N !2 a1 i Y1 j z;: m; a) w 1, O C. r' I II LA l ;P ° N N''.i V11 N: 'P 1 oc M ! �. 13 0 Oi OI o O O cl Oi O of O O o O O of O, OI o r N I OI o M O O O w > NI M NI •O' w a r I!1 M O OD In I T OI of I o 7 a'. O .01 ri M II N MI N, M N MI N Or M Ni .P.. �j NI N NI N� NI N N Al I N N rx M eu N N N � tr MI N i I W A a N !n : OD i iI I O i G 17 I I I I O M al Nt a a l cf �,' OI z;: m; a) w ru N O al 'O I II it ° I 4 QNa a I fi j 0 Oi OI o O O cl Oi O of O O o O O of O, OI o r N I OI o M O O O w Cb --F � O M I!1 M O OD I T OI of I o of .P+I o Mtr N 0 o M O M II N MI N, M N MI N Or M Ni .P.. �j NI N NI N� NI N N Al N N, N N rx M eu N N N � tr I I W A a N !n : J C, r .»' In a' o: a a 7 J a l a a! a l F Ir :3: w c.) m D' In'I m, z i z w I z WI z a. 71 aj N to Ulo w: W> w 17 d s ', J.- fr I.0 H, O� , X:[ < I W x W O i 2' z O yt a W p J I= m 2 W W a C9 IA I la z a � ;K Ix A W I � J r ! O IO r on H K IL W u Iz a �I S .J u i z so iW W K R x i ►- I W IZ O K 2 K W u s' K D_ < OZ' x S W o_ J r W r < K'' H a;W x IL 0 0 Of Aa 'v a im r I 'a w u W 0 Z D z a W a Z Z J 4 J I Ia a o o O O O .D O M O A "I z Ki KI K'' I in a' I A' o I O O MN I O CID A� tI ti O.••.ryI j ri P P O•''A aD ,O ( 1 w QPr '^•I •D IA u Oj A . J OD .1..111 1 41 ml 71 H P i I VO tA dP,MI i M M I i O 7 W P P ' ?! P P •. o O I oI OI of o=. II O a 7I O a 7 •O! I 7 of •o- o a Ni � w N pl i I 7i ai i .o N 11N o . Mlj r 2 A M' O, Ni 1A N N N O N PI ru P - I j P P N o o O O O .D O M O A "I z K''I K U. U% u u 7 I U1 ! O O o f O A. O A ry, �' oo of of All0' o • • •l . •I • 1!1 j M1I •O m m vt O 7� O 1/1 O; t V1 . Air ti; M O a0 O �I o N v+I of o oI N r �' �: N OI O: co P A OI O o Pi O IA �O {A m A UDI 7 AI M .N.� o .p N �; NI ` AI 1+11 i i I I I I I OD ID N N •I P M N N It, m I in a' I A' o I O 4D fuI I O o f O.••.ryI j ri P P I1� \ m ( 1 w QPr II u Oj i 0 . J OD .1..111 1 41 ml 71 H P i I tA dP,MI M M I i Vl W P P PI P P P Q P o O I oI OI of o=. II O a 7I O a 7 O 7 o aI of •o- o a W OM evi A N 11N N N L r 2 } Il Ni 1A N N N O I ^' ru P - P P N P Q P P N P Q NI a. Q a .O f M a � ," Mm w Q MI w MI P ,IM! P ti Z M. Q -.I j N N ru NI N N N NI v I O :U N W o o 0 0 W K o c o Cf o 0 0 % o c H O WI x, W' Z 2' O o u O W: O O I GID o K; a. •-•; Q. d; � r. O h I w {A >, N 7 a K N r co:F-! Y� I i Oi 1 7 w O �+ O W O W,; VJI PI P O al p N lA 7 Iq V W, C w ru-. '"I N N N N o I e M J .� K M wi o M o w J a, U r ... ri .r a 1- N N N u, . a N H K M1 N N N N N N N N N M1 M CID W u U Oi > 0 I o a i1 I S Ki I I 0 W W Wi ► O �. K''I K U. U% u u 7 I U1 ! O O o f O A. O A ry, �' oo of of All0' o • • •l . •I • 1!1 j M1I •O m m vt O 7� O 1/1 O; t V1 . Air ti; M O a0 O �I o N v+I of o oI N r �' �: N OI O: co P A OI O o Pi O IA �O {A m A UDI 7 AI M .N.� o .p N �; NI ` AI 1+11 i i I I I I I OD ID N N •I P M N N of of I I I in a' I A' o I O 4D fuI I o f i j ri m ( 1 qq wI II u Oj i 0 OD .1..111 1 41 ml 71 P i I I i I I O OO o 0 O O o O I oI OI of o=. II O a 7I O a 7 O 7 o aI of •o- o a LAl AI O N M N L } Il 1A ,O A Cl O I ^' ru P - P P N P Q P P N P Q NI a. Q a .O f M 'ru NI M; M N M ," Mm w Q MI w MI P ,IM! P ti MI K-.; M. Q -.I j N N ru NI N N N NI v N' N Ni N :U N o o 0 0 0 0 o c o Cf o 0 0 % o c I z O O x, W' 2' O o N O W: O O c GID O z a. m' Q. d; :i O h N N {A D N 7 � N co:F-! Y� I i Oi 1 7 lA .O O �+ O W O M PI P O N N lA 7 O C w '"I N N N N N N /1 M M M MI M M M M M K Q . w ... .+ .r N N N N N N N N N M1 N N N N N N N N N M1 M I a.l o a i1 S Ki 2 0 W W Wi ► O �. Z: a', 7 a J a w Oj r'. a. a tr W Z W w ZI W K ZI > W;. ri m 2 O 21EX K r ►+ ri 3 >l all etl al x, aI al, a z KI a u a Si fi K 4� W 4 M � W KI KI O x S IA m 7 U W al <' m U Z Q u u d x 21 a a O a u o' m, a d,' J z u m o I oI of of of I I I in a' I A' o I O 4D fuI I o f i j ri m ( 1 qq p II u Oj i 0 I I 1 41 \ fin• i I I i I I O OO o 0 O 0 O o O I oI OI of o=. II O a 7I O a 7 O 7 o aI of •o- o a LAl AI O N M N L } Il 1A ,O A tD O I ^' ru P - P P N P Q P P N P Q NI a. Q a .O f M 'ru NI M; M N M ," Mm w Q MI w MI P ,IM! P ti MI K-.; M. Q -.I j N N ru NI N N N NI 1111 N N' N Ni N :U N I I I IA zi 0 1/Y Z O. L.l] IfYl � I uI ¢i 4 K O.JI K Wi x, W' 2' W Y K J a 1- W: 4: H W' .-... 3 z a. m' Q. d; h J U� W K' 7 D co:F-! Y� I i Oi H U Ui I I U W Oi i u► m o 0 I I M La CL m w J O O to ° GD I`v N N I CL co i I I ED Go SII m (n W I or l Ia I I.- X W yl I ' Z K M N ( f Wu I cr. d ! ., " z v i W OLb gr CL w ac CL 0 o a CL �I m I I � I o ! W O O Z O t W l 2 n M J a N J a a I r a: r- o uA 0 Is W I IW O N fN�I N z M W O Li W '' Y ! O M i j ►- I - O 1- R: m W m a O O W i I I I � K o J m Ia in I o Cl o f Mll... o', u a ar N. a OI o f IZ aD a C', .O 01 OI W Q N V In N Nifu rl x LLS Ln o r a N� ,p'',. I P Jem 'a Vol roi O N IA1D N P o 'b- N i M O I i w IL I j < Le I W L.), zit I o v q o 9 I r w iW I UJ IP r Ix W ,G IA C31' OI I N O �►+ �H P O! N - D z W Cb 0� r .. ? M1 Z OC M P 7 W u Y a d Z, x 7 u O q\�,, J CK Ix w 1- O •' CL %� o .` •1 CA m m a Im i Cl I� j IW z m N O� W N� 2 N � J Ia a r ti co o C oI .i o 0 0 r O M P OI M 1I\ \ P N M O \ d 7 a a ? O 0 'IW F- O Z N N N N N N N N N IQ O J t� ;z H 7 J Z iK N W QI W Z rl i a h ✓3:` zj' I ~ Q L) W W m a I O j u F r- O H T Y• y' n hl WI U> X:� z W'. Z ! w m W WCW W,.0 of Q a ►•r ►•I'I p H FM` M p p M p� 1 QI 1 {�►, I a� W I'A m I I pl�Op' IM IL• ►- W O LA OI < N 2 p CL W m, P J O IN wJ I < M i Ln OIA � a' o i M ,o I ►'� I M N' f„ I.O. I, I, i OX CL a Iw a x C> ;o I W W , I ~ x W I NiCD i w I2 ml 00 D W z Z a I W V I II a a I Wr of -9 ►+ If1 CL W x q � �I v I a O Q! I o_ 4O ol i \ ♦� ,3 i r I O U' WW� O O W p 73 O OI O O Q m tri rn CD, a�W L n p Ln a J o R "7 '11 c N O O O w r I}} 1n o W J Lr a Ln O' Ln P1 P O` cn a, N I i W Z J Q O i w a a f/> .-1cr W a: e i ' CD ' W > >; 2'.. d a.. W ►+ I J J Y11 D NJ N J i< Li I I N M Ou .-► Aa ry! L P M' Wn M N W V 41 7 j < IL Z ,M I � X I w fu CD N w � W IAI Irl � N, 7� ODS N. O M ODac 'y J I iI I Y9 d < h I W V I 2 I 'm S IZ 1 7 I Z W 1 � I D Z iW .p' N' Mi W U ir d 2 X H' Z W rrl U3 I CL, W 14 IP o la U I aD I r O W i CD I O O, O W 0 Q O O Zca7 01 O N 7 ru Z 4=1 �O .01 N _ < 2 Z I J < J A CD o 0 c. O O P ll1 I \ CCI Ic. I NOjll D_ LA IW O .+ jW emAl N H Z N N O W 2 Z Z I r z 2 ::)N , � a 0. L.1 0. M ti W O l► W p Ir W o: u71 • f0 I WQ j W r.r G NJ N U U' U U' U kA 4D 0 PZy,. O; a 43. m P P, a I o n Nck, ig rV .. MI 7 Ln GI P, o' �+. m M, P' MI t m CC 7 M PI in, m'. M N (/L n N IA O m d N JD A'. C M 'T M .+.. In' M P -Z'. O m � m` ?'. �I M: N ►. I I I i I a Al' O Jo' Cm. :a N N' m o A r a Cnl Ln Q m I i I i t i i 0 r- o pi N! ? In. Ofn G 1'' C d 1 r • m' l 01 o m P in, m 43, O, N'' . SOI 1- C► ru, M'I < w N, cul I I lr I 'USI 01 C,, •I C� � •` COI I ` Ili 'li i i I O'. a OI O; O C> OI C O, O, O� CM O OI O c J7i O O O 01 I O Q Ioci n o n a y o a r tr L a J < P rD I I r Z I N W P" W d ► T w; V h ' P C i Z I i N NIl I N'fuNI X f i � � W � I Q Z H iI O: i I J z tx a IL W F W u a ofm F u a o Z c91 AJ u U) W 2 W as I K IL .x F W n U Q 0 U l w W a jz X ,al J O W O l L W it ct Oc a, Z Or W IU y < z x =i F W O .r .� q H An CL W cr n OL 43 0 o or �- o a a m i I�I O W I � I W O73 li Z m Z O W j 2 I J Q J M a I N m w r O c> U O ty C I \ Cl Ln w .r N ~ Z N �a 7 1 O 1i I 2 � ►- � z Ix -4 I z a O M a u z M ►+ p O ►+ O H r CIO W W o a .r Q U U' U U' U kA 4D 0 PZy,. O; a 43. m P P, a I o n Nck, ig rV .. MI 7 Ln GI P, o' �+. m M, P' MI t m CC 7 M PI in, m'. M N (/L n N IA O m d N JD A'. C M 'T M .+.. In' M P -Z'. O m � m` ?'. �I M: N ►. I I I i I a Al' O Jo' Cm. :a N N' m o A r a Cnl Ln Q m I i I i t i i 0 r- o pi N! ? In. Ofn G 1'' C d 1 r • m' l 01 o m P in, m 43, O, N'' . SOI 1- C► ru, M'I < w N, cul I I lr I 'USI 01 C,, •I C� � •` COI I ` Ili 'li i i I O'. a OI O; O C> OI C O, O, O� CM O OI O c J7i O O O 01 I O Q Ioci n o n a y o a r tr L a N n Ir - �{ fy N 1 P" r-1� ► T w; P ti P C I r•� NI N NIl r N'fuNI N' f Z Z H iI O: W z a 1-. W F Q u a o c91 AJ u w i 2 cf. as N C z accma n U Q 0 U l w W a Q, X ,al J tL J O l L W it ct to, a, N n Ir - > ml cca) I J Q I F N fu I r m N i a /1 � I J W Q 7 W a CO W a z Z CL =0 j I 1 � W I ►- � OI � I i la x ! o r W i r �. - r r IO o j►- n M I tx IL a im W u a z a I Q Im a i,.. n z U) IW W i � K i M .a x j n I.- W b H F a z O W J x z W U K a I Z x N Z S W O w ti W f Q a., x i d I tI� I ,v a CL m O (D ! c jW 0 c =1Z co 1 H Z a W a L 2 i J a � r• m o cj c a� a M W W O� Q j W D N n 4 c 4 IZ C M ! U cr I 0 I I O _ li a O I --Ix c 7 z N m ui 0 W Y ►� I L„� t i I > ml cca) F N fu N Nco N /1 J j Z Q I T I O ! cif W Z ! 1 F� W i = I 1 � W I ►- � OI K U. Q I� m � of i t I O t1 M N� .D, .0 '►-' OI V1 O .OZ M OI P �Z & Pgo Ln Z. M Oi m IW O M O O' O O� .D W d Z of ° �I aI P' tv to o! N C',I a j0 a o g q o h 'i O °' ° 0 Ca L1 x O O N r -m .O N Ln ?' Ai IA Ln w I J O I A w N NU1 N ' Z A r to O °D A P II O ' O F w' P LD1 O i► IJ11 P CL W gr 2 I I I I W I I I II i i li P 1. x o o o r W I OD I P ti IZP' -1 f ' D W i � I Z W U N a a x,W Io w I.-. O O'i W < N ��n`{ a W a M �!1 ce� fi I i i Ir I ti 4a CL i 0 W L o 0 0� o 01 a o o o W O Co O o' O O of OI O :n r -I N-1 m c:, NI wl, Z co Z' O O M P I O N I 2 .D O -J J N D_ D_ , I I jo oI of o o .+ o =11 0 A o o o rnM a u+� cnl o o'I to \ o .+I P P P P, & 40,O 9rw rug ty nj c co m Psi P to W U P PI 0I P P� P P 0 P P I W O N N NI AN ru 1Y nN N fU N N r Z ty N (V N N Nl N N V7 1 uJ Z Z: LLL Q Z 4 W W b 8 O ! r O O D.., W p ►+ I 2 r a' o 0 a .+ a ! a O a N H r W �. U W O� K 2 W WI. J 2 M ►r Z V) to J W M, ►+, < r' I W O 'r H w W r W y w W. r r to =' .- a r d t" OC M O Z to W' Y.. d a .-° Z>j Z' W', < D Z ►+� O O W O Q! K 2. W ! J V < CD � O a i CD m I IIL m to OI If1 r m r • Ln 'Go j a N P W :" IM CID00 IWIL Lf% I &n ,m m to I� °:IJ 4 Lo co 142 Go r I a i I o '►- o I a ^ I Ico 11 I - < u N z o ix lm Z M 1 Pill I W N W j X to LA M BIZ IC O I� M i 1 O 0 0 N �.� O W rl n O OC zj N W U N Ir n a z x —z YW0 ►� .q O J r O W < • P w N W x G o. O Ir N p N R I N 1 � I I I F I I O W I 0 p i W O A I 1 Z rD ( N zta I O 4 z ru Z M J N -31 I C} O r m • n O O \ RG O P O o d P r \ O.. (1I MIN N Ln W W In 1n 1n o .(qyl al a a 41 N N N N . l'- z A N N N N 4 J O Lill, I I I� I 1< 1 Q Z' rp 1 I �ZO ml, YI I r W W 4 W (XI 4 P. - IM X. I: z 4 I►y Ww W 'r ul o r z W ca z ir ID W Y, r 0 IL 4. z O W W w W O i It I IZ '. W W IO_ I U' IN IZ ..� s I CL m' I Ia Ix I p I!; I W i I I It I m o r f i r I - PA II II I J � w I r I a I Lli Z O '., QMp - S Z U3 W N W K D D I Z ..� O W ! O z at cD U W j IN Oc a � W i0 I I J Ir � to aWla o II LD 0 I i N D CL i M D_ I Al =1 ` N m I I U' O W O O J � I 2 D o W 4 Z I N I J Q I N J Id d N 7 \ R cd 1 0 LIN W q O O n 6n i Ln W DLnIL Ln 1- z N N � IN IO 1L I m I z ry 7 N I Q D W I'O ID N W r Z I u ►{ z a u 711 LDul LL to W u 7 3 D_ Z r O K q W W 5 j O 77 SECTION III - PROJECT DESCRIPTION SITE OF PROJECT The proposed project is located in north-eastern Chesterfield County, Virginia. The proposed location fronts on Forest Hill Avenue and Buford Road. Both of these highway facilities are major commuter routes. See Figure I for vicinity map. The project site, Parcels 44-A, 45-26, 26-A, 26-B has approximately eleven (11) acres and is located south of the Bon Air Shopping Center and the Bon Air Baptist Church on the east side of Buford Road and the southwest side of Forest Hill Avenue. Figure II shows the general location of the project. The terrain of the site is lightly rolling and the majority of the acreage is wooded. This area is zoned R - 15. See Figure II -A. The project site was selected because it has adequate acreage and has access to two major commuter routes. (Forest Hill Avenue and Buford Road). This site has an excellent location in the midst of the project service area. The use of this site would benefit the surrounding area, making it more desirable for residential development because of the transportation service which will be available. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT The project development consists of both site acquisition and -3- VICINITY MAP = 4 FIG. I n Prop•d� 151 Ro MOOn/ 631 643 60 271 9i� a'n G�e?1g 1 ,U/�v Qa o Q° Allen �o 33 ° ��0 652 Rural Point v ,Atlee 640 43 Sho 25 @RO ' o° �ntain a P� PUMPN. Laurel 73 n \\\. Via. _a— Parham oJ. Sargeant J °o Reynolds Wilkinso n G2 S� 9 o Community Rd3 , o p Surn ke F ,A r , ollege Qf ra F� o^ 5O� \ m Q°` .0 w 0 a 151 reendale 356 Ellerson Gayton Rd., lo(:casinNei Ac�111CSVILLE 1`1 z pDumbarton Z Westhampton e �% ,° ulA L=i Woman's College ` y/ 197 r4 \n 33Rich y r 4 a Z Thee niversit) a 6 en/ s,�/ V mCent Richmond o q`F r o ~' Virgi ra Umt PF 8 O Y CP141 R 197 2 pElniversi�� Sot a O• � s s 141 PROP SITE °�� '° '�`i3 B oTF a irgr is ST�g icy � FJ 76 Com nwealth Q Q �0. /Ap tXIniversity W O� Fey ,p ICHMO ? ofiseb tiUGUEN sl 88 \ FP X1477 W 60 T LD GU' 678 R Y • �/i// ON AIR �M s a � 161 `'� 60 6 678 P' n 3 60 P NptKE m �< A 4" TVa BEC m M �pTHIAN 9 9 r 3b, � g I 150 U e�e 618 j QG y FRMINP� I- Aa OP a 161Or 0 PJ m 10 Z m ¢� s. ° \ a 651 Falling N 678 641 d 650 � �R l eeeoi us 36 �e 36 \�� \ 15 d \� \\ lyq JQ 6 / 0 \4 Harvie Rd. c Grey Moi O \\� v U� o MILE 33 HIG Hi yE ,e. a SPR \, R Y . 60 F sou a �— ro 1111 MsauR AND O /n Al v Y C. 8 O. Q RY. Zig Varina 0 5 Nat'l d d� Rb Park f pf. construction of a fringe parking lot for 400 automobile spaces for users of an express commuter bus service to downtown Richmond. The land acquisition will provide enough land to expand the facility to 700 spaces as needed in the future. The initial project will provide 400 parking spaces, sidewalks, a bus shelter, bike racks, low level lighting and approximately 15 percent non -parking landscaped area. The additional space for the future 300 spaces will remain in its natural state until needed. The terrain at the site is lightly rolling and therefore very little grading will be required. Access to the site will be provided from Forest Hill Avenue and Buford Road. Appropriate turning lanes will be provided at each of the access points and if justified, traffic signals will also be provided at these access points. See Figure III for a sketch showing possible project development. -4- 0 p O W N W M J ro Q J � Q 2 J Q O wz w MEOW 0 Z 2 J a2F-w airma W F- O Z -`t.! Me BUFORD ROAD SECTION IV - ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED As the study progressed from its early stages to present, a number of alternatives were considered. Significant among these were the no -build alternative and alternative site locations and plans. Following is a brief summary of these alternatives. See Figure IV for alternatives. THE NO BUILD ALTERNATIVE If fringe parking lots are not developed in the community to relieve the transportation system, there will be continued increases in daily vehicle miles. These increases will further drain the gasoline resources. Dependance upon the automobile will be greater. Operational cost of automobiles will become greater, creating heavier personal burdens to County citizens. The popularity of State financed fringe parking lots in other areas indicate the citizen interest and willingness to use transit service if it is available. For these reasons, the No Build alternative does not appear feasible. ALTER14ATIVE SITE #1 Alternative Site #1 is located on the northside of Forest Hill Avenue. This site will require considerable grading to properly terrace the lot. For this reason, considerable cost would be required for walls, etc., and maximum use of the area for parking space could not be obtained. There is also a gas pipeline through the site that would -5- be extremely costly to adjust if required. The connections to Forest Hill Avenue would have extremely steep and undesirable grades. If two connections or entrances are provided they would, by necessity, be very close to existing street intersections and this would be most undesirable. For these reasons, it is felt that this site would not be as desirable to develop as the proposed site (#2). ALTERNATIVE SITE #3 Alternative Site #3 is located on the south side of Route 147 (Huguenot Road) approximately 0.5 mile west of the intersection of Route 147 and Forest Hill Avenue. This site will require considerable grading to provide appropriate development of a parking lot. There is a rather large ravine passing through the center of the property that would require an expensive drainage structure. Access from Route 147 (Huguenot Road) would not be desirable due to other street connections in the vicinity. This site is the western most location considered and was not as desirable from this viewpoint. For these reasons, it is felt that this site would not be as desirable to develop as the proposed site (#2). Additional sites were considered for development, but for various reasons were not desirable and were dropped from further consideration in earlier stages of development. SECTION V - DESIGN CRITERIA AND COSTS DESIGN CRITERIA The proposed site has adequate acreage to develop approximately 400 parking spaces initially and approximately 300 additional spaces ultimately. Existing vegetation will be left undisturbed where practical and additional landscaping will be developed as required. Every effort will be made to appropriately blend the landscaping and the parking lot development into the existing surrounding landscape and community in such a way as to obtain maximum compatibility. The parking and entrance areas will be paved with adequate surface to support the traffic anticipated to use it. Low level security lighting will be provided in the developed area. Adequate access will be provided from Forest Hill Avenue and Buford Road with left and right turn lanes at both entrance points. This will reduce congestion on Forest Hill Avenue and Buford Road at these points. Traffic signals will be provided at the entrance points if found to be justified. The additional acreage will remain in an undisturbed state until the additional spaces are needed. Figure V may be seen for a sketch of the proposed development. Figures VI , VI -A and VI -B may be seen for views into and inside a typical parking lot. -7- COSTS The cost of the proposed project is as follows: *Property Acquisition Cost $148,500 **Construction Cost $650,200 Total Cost $798,700 *Approximately 11 acres of land will be acquired. **Approximately 400 parking spaces to be provided. An effort will be made to acquire the land needed for this project through negotiation and in compliance with the real property acquisition requirements of Title III of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970. The assurance concerning compliance was submitted with the original Section 3 application to UMTA by GRTC for this project in August - 1975. In the event condemnation proceedings are necessary, UMTA concurrence will be obtained before they are initiated. The construction to be done will be contracted for through competitive bidding, using the established procedures of the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation. It is understood that plans, specifications, and bid documents as well as the use of force account, requires the prior approval of UMTA, except as otherwise provided in the External Operating Manual. an - f I =3 r IL _', AV "�:.a= �� t � ice•_ ��:� ``y � ��•�r��'�'��.+ +.i .r"M►'i�.:4�'..tow ry"K+aM.1�i�a83,�fi1�-+1 10, will �` `ry-ra�►;z`: 'I!1>�1�.�+.-i .%ce.} i "[j��.•'�A3 �! i : . ��/ ♦ t �,-.♦•�!�``,�� ':4 ��t��.'l ,Grp _ � .• 'v� � /: ria �„�1+'��r��'73` l�3 _g� t�!.�.� ; .� } 1 r'�►-'R .;; - Dt '�,�''�j �'�'�!2 Iw�,yyt�'�`R'f`1�'Y`s��kal��'� �,r'�rr1�' , � s' ' syr 1 l+ ,`�•"�i/•"'4' :��L�'�Yi..i'��.�,-�`� �-t.`+�� .r,.. } rr �� i VIEWS INTO A TYPICAL PARKING LOT FIG.M FIG. =-A VIEWS INTO ATYPICAL PARKING LOT VIEWS IN ATYPICAL PARKING LOT FIGM-B SECTION VI - TRAFFIC The project site fronts both Buford Road and Forest Hill Avenue. Forest Hill Avenue and Buford Road both will have access to the parking lot. "A Recommended Five Year Transit Development Program for the Counties of Chesterfield and Henrico" prepared in 1975 projects an estimated daily ridership of 932 persons per day at the subject lot. Based on a modal split model developed by the Transportation Staff of the Richmond Regional Planning District Commission, a current ridership of 626 persons per day is projected to use the Bon Air Express Bus Service. The procedure used for this projection is more sophisticated and more reliable than the procedure used in the Transit Development Program for Chesterfield and Henrico Counties and thus a transit ridership of approximately 600 persons per day was used for the ridership estimate which would translate into approximately 300 vehicles during each peak period. As can be seen on the traffic diagrams, the small increases in traffic on Buford Road and Forest Hill Avenue resulting from the express lot are not such as to increase the congestion problems appreciably. The increases in traffic are small because many of the 300 vehicles using the express lot during the peak period would have routed their trip by Buford Road or Forest Hill Avenue anyway. However, even with the small increase in traffic volumes in this area, the overall regional affect will be positive with the reduction in traffic from this area to the center city. The turning movements shown on the traffic diagram at the entrances are based on the generation analysis done in the modal split model for the subject lot. This analysis indicated from which direction people would be coming to use the lot. Improvements are proposed to both Forest Hill Avenue and Buford Road in the 1985 Richmond Regional Area Transportation Plan. See Figure VII, VII -A and VII -B for traffic volumes and turning movements. -10- TRAFFIC MAP FIG.= P�. 147 o° ati 6350 11,300 BUFORD ROAD o0 �► os 0 c 000 - PRESENT DAY ADT TRAFFIC MAP FIG. Mr -A PJB. v� COQ` �O 147 �o ti 6,310 160 220 11,400 SUFORD ROAD 11,460 G O O 4 000 -PRESENT DAY ADT WITH FRINGE PARKING LOT TRAFFIC MAP FIG. :=-B PJB. vv 147 �O Cpl .�►(40p) 0 O 330 ooh [630 (1,425) 580 U,Opp�+ ' 9UFpRp S C30 q o .� R041) h Gn h�0 O O d BOO C5 �fhti 000 - PRESENT DAY PEAK HOUR VOLUMES (000) -PRESENT DAY HOURLY CAPACITY [000] -PEAK HOUR WITH LOT SECTION VII - ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS 1. Erosion and Sedimentation Site 1 - Because of the existing topographic constraints, extensive grading would be required. This could result in a serious erosion problem as practices such as stage seeding could not be adequately implemented. Site 2 - The topography at this site does not have the steep gradients found at Site 1. The grading could be accomplished with a minimum of disruption by leaving more vegetation in place. Site 3 - Some problems could be experienced along the western edge of the lot, where it parallels an active watercourse. 2. General Ecology All three sites will require the permanent disruption of wildlife habitat. Wildlife at these sites consists of small game and birds. Also, these sites appear to have varying amounts of marketable timber. There are no waterfowl or designated wildlife areas that would be disrupted by the proposed project. No historic or natural landmarks are located within or adjacent to the proposed sites. 3. Public Facilities and Services None of the proposed sites will disrupt or adversely effect -11- any educational facilities. Site #2 is located adjacent to a church; however, the utilization of both facilities would not conflict because of different time schedules. Construction at any of the sites would hinder the operation of emergency services. 4. Community Cohesion None of the proposed sites would result in any disruption to an established community or neighborhood. There would be no impact on any minority or specific group. a A possible adverse impact on property values could result at those properties adjacent to the completed facility. Some individuals may feel that being located next to a fringe parking lot may be undesirable. Some civic associations could object to the location in their neighborhood. 5. Displacement The only relocation required would be at Site 2, and this would consist of one house. There is a normal availability of housing in this price range available in the general area. Therefore, no problems are anticipated in relocating the displaced persons involved. 6. Air, Noise and Water Pollution AIR On a micro -scale analysis, some degradation of ambient air quality can be anticipated because of the concentration of vehicles in a limited area. -12- However, this factor will be greatly outweighed by the overall benefit of reduced pollutants because of fewer vehicle miles traveled. NOISE Residents adjacent to the completed facility and along streets leading to this facility will experience an increase in the ambient noise levels. Some areas will experience a decrease in noise levels because of increased bus ridership. WATE R The major water quality problem associated with all three sites will be increased runoff to adjacent properties during and after construction. However, standard drainage design practices will be employed to adequately handle the drainage resulting from the proposed project. The contractor will be required to meet strict standards and specifications regarding erosion and sedimentation control. Tne proposed construction would not disrupt the local watertable at any site. 7. Aesthetics The proposed construction will significantly change the appearance of the site. This change may be objectionable to some of the local citizens. The retention of existing trees and appropriate additional landscaping will minimize this impact. RECOMMENDATIONS The central location of Site 2 would appear to serve a greater -13- ridership, which is the purpose of the proposed construction. It would best serve the needs of the adjacent communities. BEIM F'n ' U P P .D W �.J .D r I�)OU o J a N 96 .D P G` r J D N p �J \/. ca L r .. 9 CD O "• C, cy, N L� O O W (D •o 0 N P P O O N N O -^ O C N y r--• P P -1 J V' r+ O T r J W P N co � y In P N W O H W tr .^O- .D P O y0 v. "Do O r � P 6 N O V V1 I'DO� J C, P "D O lJ O O y p 'J I J CD r 3 I�OC) F p p, V i N r-• O` N P P . � r O H -- CDCaP C J r r •l r O~ roCO- - rCD _ CD t` N O P c oo N \D CD it J n W ?• O 7 'IW W O P ••..77 _ xa v N n^ •rte--• v� u « J P^ n -s c'J � .�-• •D ..1 �' � _.� v W P ll J N .n `r N � l l/. () l t .J In U ,) l) ♦l P d v n n 40i. A V t• a n F'n ' U P P .D W �.J .D r I�)OU o J a N N W .D P G` r J D N p �J \/. ca L r .. 9 CD O "• C, cy, N L� O O W (D Co CD, N P P O O N N O -^ O C N y r--• P P -1 J V' r+ O T r J W P N co � y In P N W O H W tr .^O- .D P O y0 v. "Do O r � P 6 N O V V1 I'DO� J C, P "D O lJ O O y p 'J I J CD r 3 I�OC) F p p, V i N r-• O` N P P . � r O H -- CDCaP C J r r •l r O~ roCO- - rCD _ CD t` N O P c oo N \D CD it J n W ?• O 'IW W O P ••..77 _ v N P l J W W O W .n L• �) J �+ lJ O O y I1Ltlr J I J CD N O O J r r •l r O~ 11 .%. J P ••..77 _ v N P l � \]• " N O r •D ..1 �' � _.� v W P ll J N .n `r N � l l/. () l t .J In U ,) l) ♦l P n n 40i. A V t• Present: Mr. E. Merlin O'Neill, Chairman Mrs. Joan Girone, Vice -Chairman Mr. J. Ruffin Apperson Mr. C. L. Bookman Mr. Garland Dodd Mr. C. G. Manuel, Interim Co. Admin. VIRGINIA: At of the Board Chesterfield Courthouse on 9:00 a.m. Also Present: a regular meeting of Supervisors of County, held at the June 8, 1977, at Mr. Stanley Balderson, Chief -Development Review Mr, Raymond Birdsong, Engineer Mrs, Joan Dolezal, Secretary Mr, Richard McElf ish, Environmental Eng. Mr. Steve Micas, County Attorney Mr. Willis Pope, Right -of -Way Eng. Mr, Michael Ritz, Dir. -Community Development Mr. James Schiavo, Zoning Administrator Mr. Dexter Williams, Planner/Eng. Mr. Lynn Wingfield, Admin. Asst. to Co. Admin. Mr, James Zook, Principal Planner -Comp. Planning Mrs,. Girone calls the meeting to order. Mr. Apperson gives the invocation. Mr. Bookman states he would like it noted that the reason he did not attend the earlier portion of the meeting on May 26th was because he was under the impression, general County business would not be discussed at that time. It is on motion of Mr. Apperson, seconded by Mr, Bookman, resolved that the minutes of May 24th, 25th and 26th be and they hereby are approved as amended. Ayes: Mrs. Girone, Mr, Apperson, Mr. Bookman and Mr. Dodd. Mr. Manuel states this time and date have been set for a public hearing on the proposed vacation of a triangular portion of variable width easement in Winterberry Ridge. Mr. Pope states the staff does recommend approval of this vacation because the drainage problem which required this easement has been channeled in another direction. There being no one present in opposition to this request, it is on motion of Mr. Bookman, seconded by Mr. Apperson, resolved that this ordinance be and it hereby is adopt- ed: "An ordinance to vacate the triangular portion of variable width easement for Drainage and Utilities located near the southeastern corner of Lot 17, Block B, Winterberry Ridge Subdivision,' Brandermill, more fully shown and shaded in red on plat of survey entitled "Plat Showing Easement to be Vacated," made by J. K. Timmons & Associates, Inc., Engineers -Surveyors -Planners, dated April 25, 1977, a copy of which is attached hereto as a part hereof." (A cony of the full ordinance will he tvnpd in the nPrmanPnt MinntP Book.) Ayes: Mrs. Girone, Mr, Apperson, Mr, Bookman and Mr. Dodd. Mr. Pope states progress is being made on the water line extension to the Carriage Hill-Otterdale area regarding participation by others. It is on motion of Mr, Dodd, seconded by Mr. Apperson, resolved that the following resolution be and it hereby is adopted: Whereas, the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors, at its regular meeting on November 12, 1975, adopted the "1985 Highway Functional Classification" and "Realigned Federal -Aid Highway Systems" for Chesterfield County; and Whereas, the Federal Government does not recognize the Federal Aid Interstate designation assigned in 1975 to the 5,8 mile section of the Richmond -Petersburg Turnpike in the rural part of Chesterfield County; and Whereas, it is necessary to include this section of the Turnpike on the Federal Aid Primary System in order to control the use of outdoor advertising signs, displays and devices; Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved: the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors approves the addition of the 5,8 mile section of the Richmond -Petersburg Turnpike in rural Chesterfield County to the "Other Principal Arterials" Rural Functional Classification System and to the Federal Aid Primary System, Ayes: Mrs. Girone, Mr, Apperson, Mr, Bookman and Mr. Dodd. Mr. Dodd inquires if the removal of signage will affect the business owners currently existing. Mr. Covington states that they would come under a grandfather clause and would not have to remove their signs unless the Highway Department felt the need for such action and then the Highway Department would reimburse the owners for the cost of any such si we. Mr. Bookman, Mr. Dodd and Mr. Apperson do not have any road matters to discuss with Mr. Covington at this time. Mrs. Girone inquires about Route 60 and Robious Road and the unsafe situation that exists. Mr. Covington states they are m-Ar-ing improve mts to the road which should help whenicompleted, Mrs. Girone presents Mr. Covington with a petition with 196 signatures requesting that 4 traffic signal be'installed at Crowder and Route 60. Mr. O'Neill asks Mr. Covington to investigate a sunken spot on Harrowgate Road. He also inquires if Route 36 will be paved this year. Mr. Covington states it should be done in the near future. Mr. O'Neill cites the history of the roads in Greenbriar Subdivision, Section 3, stating that the Highway Department did at one time notify the County that the roads were ready for acceptance and because of the lack of a resolution being mailed, the Highway Department has informed the County of several things that need to be done prior to acceptance. Mr. Covington states the seal is not holding and had they accepted this section, they might call the bond of the developer, It is generally agreed that Mr. Covington, Mr. McElfish and Mr, O'Neill meet to inspect the roads. Mr. Manuel states the County has been formally notified that the roads in Salisbury, Hillcrest Section have been accepted into the State System effective June 1, 1977, and further that effective May 31, 1977, Butler Road and LeMaster Road have been accepted into the State System. It is on motion of Mr, Apperson, seconded by Mrs. Girone, resolved that the following changes be made in the Planned Budget for the Early Childhood Grant: Decrease Planned Budget Expenditures: 41-436-104,0 Child Dev.-Specialists $ 1,500.00 41-436-299,0 Other10 Increase Planned Budget Expenditures: 41-436-220.0 Travel $ 1,000.00 41-436-323.0 Supplies 500.00 41-436-405.0 Equipment 1,000.00 �'2,500.00 Ayes: Mr. O'Neill,' Mrs. Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr. Booknan and Mr. Dodd. It is on motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr, Dodd, resolved that a $50,00 Change Fund be established for the Community Development Department in the name of Michael C. Ritz. Ayes: Mr. O'Neill, Mrs, Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr. Bookman and Mr. Dodd, It is on motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Apperson, resolved that the Treasurer of Chesterfield County be authorized to transfer up to $126,641 only as needed at June 30, 1977, to be recorded on the books of the County as a "Due To the General Fund" in the Nursing Home Fund and a "Due From the Nursing Home Fund" in the General Fund. And be it further resolved that the following budget amendments be made: Am mdment Total For Increase Actual Projected Year Ended Budget (Decrease) Jul - it ' May -June 6/30/77 '1977 Re ested Revenue: Patient Services $1,613,186 $505,000 $2,118,186 $2,189,808 29,6001_. $(71,622) Other 25,872 5,000 30,872 Total Revenue $1,639,058 $510,000 $2,149,058 $2,219,408 $(70,350) Total Expenditures $1,838,367 $434,118 $2,272,485 $2,226,222 $ 46,263 Equipment Purchases: Administration $ 545 $ 280 $ 825 $ 500 .amendment Nursing Services 845 611 558 305 Total For 3,500 950 increase Ancillary Services Actual Projected Year Ended Budget (Decrease) Dietary Operation of Plant 2 A zil n�June 6L30177 1977 (430) Expenditures: 0 0 0 200 (200) Administrative $ 143,589 $ 56,625 $ 200,214 $ 176,916 $ 23,298 Nursing Service 8190431 148,915 968,346 985,647 (17,301) Ancillary Services 220,669 60,663 281,332 236,796 44,536 Dietary 244,885 521326 297,211 290,425 6,786 laundry 49,044 10,001 59,045 59,665 (620) Housekeeping 103,565 18,847 122,412 122,504 (92) Operation of Plant 135,284 39,938 175,222 136,975 38,247 Central Supply 12,228 2,253 14,481 141932 (451) Unassigned Expenses 109,672 44,550 154,222 0 142,362 60,000 11,860 (60,000) Interest 0 0 Total Expenditures $1,838,367 $434,118 $2,272,485 $2,226,222 $ 46,263 Equipment Purchases: Administration $ 545 $ 280 $ 825 $ 500 $ 325 Nursing Services 845 611 558 305 1,403 916 3,500 950 (2,097) (34) Ancillary Services 0 0 0 200 (200) Dietary Operation of Plant 70 0 70 500 (430) Central Supply 0 0 0 200 (200) Total Equipment $ 2,071 $1,1_43 $ 3,214 $ 5,850 $ (2,636) Total Expenses $1,840,438 $435,261 $20275,699 $2,232,072 $ (43,627) Total Revenue $2,149,058 Total Expenses 2,275,699 Expenses Over Revenues $ (126,641) Note: A detailed line item listing will be included in the Board papers, Ayes: Mr. O'Neill, Mrs. Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr, Boolman and Mr, Dodd. Mr, Micas states he has some question regarding the reimbursement of the money. Mr. Martin states that this was an expense incurred by the Nursing Home and he saw no problem with this way of handling the matter. After considerable discussion of the matter, it is on motion of Mr. Apperson, seconded by Mrs. Girone, resolved that $75,784 be appropriated from the Unappropriated Surplus of the General Fund (11) and transferred to the Airport Fund (16) to supplement the operation of the Airport for 1976-77 fiscal year. And be it further resolved that the following budget amendments be made: -4- ( 76,479) Decrease Revenue: 16-000-504,0 Rent Tie Downs 8,200 Airport Manager submitted wrong amount to be included in original budget 16-000-816.0 Maintenance Labor 20,000 Inane Year-to-date less than budget called for 16-000-818.0 Avionics 90,000 Income Year-to-date less than budget called for and Two -Way transferred out TOTAL REVENUE DECREASE 118,200 NET DECREASE IN REVENUE $ 41,721 Increase Expenditures: ADMIDTISTRATION 16-162-206.0 Dues & Subscrip. $ 100 Subscriptions to Publications 16-162-218.0 Postage 250 Rate Increase 16-163-217.0 Telephone $ 1,500 Maintenance Shop makes long distance calls to order parts 16-163-312.0 Vehicle Operation 400 Higher costs than anticipated 16-163-405.0 Equipment 600 Purchase of a jack FUEL OPERATIONS 16-164-123.8 Fuel Supervisor $ 1,000 5,000 Overtime and Holidays paid Overtime, holidays for full-time ACCOUNT Fuel Servicemen AMOUNT EXPLANATION Increase Revenue: 16-000-505.0 Contract Operator $( x.,479) Aero Industries Fees higher than time positions where one full- anticipated 16-000-817.0 Fuel Sales ( 70,000) Higher than anticipated Fuel Sales 16-000-819.0 Restaurant ( 2,000) Only $3,000 was budgeted 16-000-907.0 Other Inccme ( 3,000) Reimbursements from Two -Way Fund ( 76,479) Decrease Revenue: 16-000-504,0 Rent Tie Downs 8,200 Airport Manager submitted wrong amount to be included in original budget 16-000-816.0 Maintenance Labor 20,000 Inane Year-to-date less than budget called for 16-000-818.0 Avionics 90,000 Income Year-to-date less than budget called for and Two -Way transferred out TOTAL REVENUE DECREASE 118,200 NET DECREASE IN REVENUE $ 41,721 Increase Expenditures: ADMIDTISTRATION 16-162-206.0 Dues & Subscrip. $ 100 Subscriptions to Publications 16-162-218.0 Postage 250 Rate Increase 16-163-217.0 Telephone $ 1,500 Maintenance Shop makes long distance calls to order parts 16-163-312.0 Vehicle Operation 400 Higher costs than anticipated 16-163-405.0 Equipment 600 Purchase of a jack FUEL OPERATIONS 16-164-123.8 Fuel Supervisor $ 1,000 5,000 Overtime and Holidays paid Overtime, holidays for full-time 16-164-123.9 Fuel Servicemen position. Carrying two part- time positions where one full- time was budgeted 16-164-323.0 Fuel for Resale 55,000 Sales are higher than anticipated Revenue is also increased 16-164-323.1 Material for Resale 1,000 Sales are higher than anticipated Revenue is also increased 16-164-401.0 Fire Apparatus 100 Nothing budgeted for this AVIONICS 16-165-217.0 Telephone $ 500 Nothing budgeted for this 16-165-220,0 Travel 1,100 Nothing budgeted for this �: r r � it r'• n� 16-167-207,0 Electric Current $ 15,000 Higher than anticipated usage 16-163-206.0 Dues & Subscriptions " and rate increase 16-167-223,0 Purchase of Water 400 Higher than anticipated usage 16-163-323.0 Materials & Supplies ( and rate increase 16-167-226.0 Sewer Service 400 Higher than anticipated usage and rate increase 16-167-312.0 Vehicle Operation 700 Actual expenses are exceeding budget 16-167-323.0 Materials & Supplies 750 Actual expenses are exceeding budget 16-167-324.0 Tools and Supplies 450 50 Purchases budgeof a ted assembly 16-167-414.0 Light Equipment UNASSIGNED EXPENSES 16-168-210.0 Fire Insurance 16-168-211.2 Liability Insurance 16-168-295.1 County Retirement �►�� a+ it r M. Decrease Expenditures: AU�DNBTRATION 16-162-109.0 Clerical 16-162-215.0 Repairs & Maint. MAINTENANCE $ 125 Nothing budgeted 2,100 Premium, higher than anticipated 100 Actual cost higher than �—' anticipated $ 86,725 $( 762) Unspent salaries ( 75) Not needed 16-163-141.0 Aircraft Mechanic $( 5,000) 16-163-206.0 Dues & Subscriptions 16-163-215.0 Repairs & Maint. ( 300) 16-163-323.0 Materials & Supplies ( 7,500) 16-163-325.0 Uniforms AVIONICS 16-165-141.0 Radio Technician 16-165-218.0 Postage 16-165-312.0 Vehicle Operation 16-165-323.0 Materials & Supplies BUILDINGS AND GRO(MS 16-167-214.3 Machine Rental NET INCREASE IN EXPENDITURE ( 200) $( 30,000) ( 75) ( 500) ( 7,500) Unspent salaries Not needed Not needed Purchases will be less than anticipated Not needed Salaries transferred to Two - Way Radio Fund Transferred to Two -Way Radio Fund Transferred to Two -Way Radio Fund Transferred to Zhao-Way Radio Fund $( 500) Unused $( 52,662) $ 34,063 TOTAL REVENUE BUDGET AFTER ADJUSMTS ` (395,700.00) ADDITIONAL APPROPRIATION FRIM GENERAL FUND $ 75,784,00 Ayes: Mr. O'Neill, Mrs. girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr. Booknan and Mr. Dodd. The Board commends Mr, Ramsey and his staff for a fine report, It is on motion of Mrs, Girone, seconded by Mr. Apperson, resolved that $2,500 be appropriated from the Unappropriated Surplus of the General Fund to the Jails 1977-78 budget o2 �� osis of a R'AQ;=/,,�7 a.K,Q �,d,�c� A GFO PA&06 Y 1 �1cl,wad ryww.au,�Q,y Gy 4,1.��1 11-063-111,4 Comp. of Part-time Teacher $ 2,000 11-063-319.0 Office Supplies 500 0U Also, increase Planned Budget Revenue Account 11-000-620,4 Shared Expenses - Sheriff by $1,667. This represents the amount which will be reimbursed by the State of Virginia, Ayes: Mr. O'Neill, Mrs, Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr. Bookmn and Mr. Dodd. It is on motion of Mr. O'Neill, seconded by Mr. Bookman,resolved that Butler Road in Matoaca District be and it hereby is renamed Baretta Road, Ayes: Mr. O'Neill, Mrs. Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr. Bookman and Mr. Dodd. Mr. McElfish states he will bring street light requests before the Board after he has received a price on the cost of installation because the Board has approved some street lights in the past that have cost figures ranging from $448 and lower.depending on existing poles, underground wiring, etc. There is considerable discussion regarding how expensive a light should cost to be reasonable, who should pay for the installation, the Community Development Department should recognize where street lights should be installed when approving subdivision plans, if street lights should be installed on private property at the County's expense, etc. It is generally agreed that no action be taken today and further that the Street Light Policy be reviewed on June 22nd with the Community Development Department reviewing said policies and bringing recommendations addressing the concerns of the Board at that time, Mr, Dexter Williams presents the Board with a Park 'n' Ride and Transit Report. He asks the Board to review this draft and be ready to discuss any possible changes they might have at the meeting on June 22nd. He adds if changes are made and approved by the Board a final copy will be distributed at the meeting on July 13th. There is some discussion concerning this matter and Pyr. Williams states that no matter what type of service could be approved for the County, the County will have to subsidize a portion of the cost, He states the RRPDC should complete a Bus Utilization Survey by June 15th which 7 -ill help give a more accurate account of the need and in what areas,public transportation may be needed anal/or wanted. Mr. O'Neill states he is not sure the County needs or wants a bus service at this time. Mr. Williams states that costs for this type of service will continue to rise and the County would have to do a selling job on this program if it were to be successful, It is generally agreed the Board review the material for discussion on June 22nd. It is on motion of Mr. Apperson, seconded by Mrs, Girone, resolved that the Chairman be and he hereby is authorized to sign a transportation contract with the RRPDC for highway planning for fiscal year 1976-77 subject to the County Attorney's approval, a copy of which will be filed with the papers of this Board, Ayes: Mr. O'Neill, Mrs. Girone, Mr. Apperson and Mr. Dodd. y CaiN�Fr est,(tN.} exeJ� . �;sscfw� Zook states the CETA program could enable the County to begin cs, h* -J „o a project removing and disposing of tires that have accL=lated um around the County. He states he would like to incorporate in the contract that other manpotmr services neededby General Services, Environmental En- r,,,� f+Pk�c g.ineering or Recreation could also be included. After further discussion ►fwof this matter, it is on motion of Mr, Bookman, seconded by Mrs. dimGirone, resolved that $1,600 be and it hereby is appropriated from the Unappropriated Surplus of the General Fund to 11-103-2,99.0, b +Ai Grants, County Share, for the removal of tires from the County; Le 98�699&X JY 16S;4I1V1+ how* them to the County and the County will dispose of them at a cost of $.10 per tire; that after a certain date which will be established, �K the County ordinance will be effective and any one with tires will ^+1 .501t have to remove them which cost will be $.35-$1.00 at the County .o +�aas ac landfill and further be it resolved if the program cannot be a�_b°3i1�'s amended to include other manpower services thatcouldbe accomplished `s""""1in the Recreation, General Services or Environmental Engineering partments, the County will withdraw its application for funding. ices Rtes y� f- s: Mr. O'Neill, Mrs. Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr. Bookman and Mr, Dodd. {JM k ex W Clii1P,� Mr. Zook states bids were received for the printing of the General Plan map and document which low bid for the map was $2,915 and for the document was $4,758. He adds the Community Development Department would like to add an additional 1,000 copies of the map. He states the total price for the printing would be approximately $8,000 of which $6,500 would be paid by HUD. He adds the maps would be free but they would like to charge $.50 for the text which would off -set the $1,,500 that needs to be appropriated. After further discussion of the matter, it is on motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Dodd, resolved that $1,500 be and it hereby is appropriated from the Unappropriated Surplus of the General Fund to 11-104-299.0 Other Contractual Services and further be it resolved that the low bid of Wilkinson Printing Co. for the printing of the text in the amount of $4,758 and the low bid of The Baughman Co. for the printing of the map in the amount of $2,915 be and they hereby are accepted. 1 Ayes: Mr. O'Neill, Mrs, Girone, Mr.. Apperson, Mr, Bookman and Mr. Dodd. Chief Eanes states this will be the second straight year in which the Fire Department has received a NACO award for an outstanding project. He adds he would like to have the Technical Service Unit, which was selected for the award, displayed at the NACO meeting because it is, as well as he is aware, the only such Unit in the United States, After consideration of the matter, it is on motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. O'Neill, resolved that two members of the Fire Department affiliated with the Technical Service Unit be and they hereby are granted permission to attend the NACO meeting in Wayne, Michigan, Ayes: Mr. O'Neill, Mrs. Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr. Bookman and Mr. Dodd. It is generally agreed that discussion regarding the Mutual Aid Agreement with Richmond regarding Cardwell Machine Company be deferred until July 13th. Chief Eanes states he has received a request for salaried fire- fighters by District Chief Vincent who has been utilizing the high school senior volunteer firefighters during the school sessions. He states that Chief Vincent feels daytime assistance is needed to provide adequate fire protection in this section of the County, After further consideration of this matter, it is on motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Bookman, resolved that three firefighters be employed for the remainder of the month of June, July and August and further be it resolved that $2,000 be and it hereby is appropriated from the Unappropriated Surplus of the General Fund to 11-071-106.0, Compensation of Firemen. Ayes: Mr. O'Neill, Mrs. Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr, Bookman and Mr. Dodd, Chief Eanes states he would like the Board to approve the installa- tion of three fire hydrants on Chester Road to afford the area better fire fighting capabilities. He states five should be installed in the area but three would suffice at this time. After consideration of this matter, it is on motion of Mr, Dodd, seconded by Mr. Apperson, resolved that three fire hydrants be installed at 1. The southside of Route 1515, 2. In front of 11133 Chester Road, and 3, Chester Road south of Wood Dale Road, and be it further resolved that 53,750 be appropriated from the Unappropriated Surplus of the General Fund to 11-071-292.0, Installation of Fire Hydrants. Ayes: Mr. O'Neill, Mrs. Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr. Bookman and Mr. Dodd. Mr. Birdsong states Mr. Ted Harris, who is representing the Salisbury Corporation, has requested the County reimburse said Corporation $15,325.20 in cash and the same amount through refunds for their participation inthe oversizing of the water main for contract W77-46CD, Salisbury, Winterfield Section. Mrs. Girone asks if this would be setting a precedent. Mr, Micas states refunds of this nature depend on the availability of cash in the system and would not be setting a precedent, After further consideration of this matter, it is on motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Apperson, resolved that the following water contract be and it hereby is approved: W77-46CD Salisbury, Winterfield $ection $1039053,00 Developer: Salisbury Corporation Contractor: Stamie E, Lyttle Co,,.Inc. Estimated Refund to Developer: $30,,650,40 Estimated Cost to Developer: $721402.60 66-260-807,0 $15,325.20 - Cash Refund 66-260-807.1 - $15,325.20 - Refund Through Connections Ayes; Mr, O'Neill, Mrs. Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr, Bookman and Mr. Dodd, It is on motion of Mr, Apperson, seconded by Mr. Bookman, resolved that the proposed ordinance regarding kennels be and it hereby is to be advertised for a public hearing on August 15, 1977, at 7:00 p,m. Ayes: Mrs. Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr. Bookman and Mr. Dodd, It is on motion of Mr, Apperson, seconded by Mr. Bookman, resolved that the proposed ordinance amendment to Section 28-3 (fees) of the Chesterfield Zoning Ordinance be and it hereby is to be advertised for a public hearing on July 18, 1977, at 1:00 p.m. Ayes: Mrs, Girone, Mr, Apperson, Mr. Bookman and Mr, Dodd, Mr. Bruce Kimble, Asst. County Attorney, states there has been some concern regarding procedures for roads, alleys, easements, etc. to be vacated, He presents the Board with a proposed policy and a proposed ordinance amendment by which these matters could be handled more efficiently. After some consideration of this matter, it is on motion of Mr, Dodd, seconded by Mr. Bookman, resolved that the procedures, as presented, be and they hereby are adopted. Ayes: Mrs, Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr. Bookman and Mr. Dodd. It is on motion of Mr. Bookman, seconded by Mr. Apperson, resolved that the proposed ordinance amending Chapter 17 relating to the vacation of streets, alleys, etc. be advertised for a public hearing on July 18, 1977, at 1:15 p.m. Ayes: Mrs, Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr. Bookman and Mr. Dodd. It is on motion of Mr, Apperson, seconded by Mr. Dodd, resolved that $1,406,85 be and it hereby is appropriated from the Unappropriated Surplus of the General Fund to account I1-651-991.7, Refund Airport for reimbursement of overpayments to the Federal Aviation Administration. Ayes: Mrs, Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr. Bookman and Mr. Dodd. .It is on motion of Mr. Bookman, /sconded`by Mr. Dodd, resolved that the request,;, p�tthside peedwal July 1, 1977, be and it hereby is'approved subject to the conditions required by the Chesterfield County Fire Department. Ayes: Mrs, Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr`,' Bookman and Mr. Dodd, It is generally agreed that appointments to the Appomattox Basin Industrial Development Corporation and the Chesterfield County Industrial Authority be deferred.until June 22nd, It is on motion of Mrs, Girone, seconded by Mr. Bookman, resolved that the following resolution be and it hereby is adopted: Whereas, the Midlothian High School Boys Tennis Team has won the State Group AAA Tennis Championship for 1977; and Whereas, the 1977 Trojan Boys Tennis Team has won the first State Group AAA Crown in any sport at Midlothian High School; and Whereas, the Midlothian Boys Tennis Team has won the first State Team Tennis Title for the Central Region since 1970; and Whereas, the Midlothian High School Boys Tennis Team has brought honor and distinction to Midlothian High School, Chesterfield County and its school system; Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved: That the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors commends and praises the Midlothian High School 1977 Boys Tennis Team, their coaches and staff for their outstanding accomplishment, their sportsmanship, their dedication and their hard work that has brought credit to the team, the school, the community and Chesterfield County, Ayes; Mr. O'Neill, Mrs, Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr. Bookman and Mr. Dodd. Mr. Manuel states he has received a request from Moseley-Hening, architects for the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court and Probation Building, for the County to employ a soils engineer and land surveyor to do the necessary work Wiich he estimates to be $3,000, He states the architect recamends J. K. Tiamons as land surveyor and Sayre and Sutherland as the soils engineer because of their previous work on the project. After consideration of this matter, it is on motion of Mr. Apperson, seconded by Mr. Bookman, resolved that the Interim County Administrator be and he hereby is authorized to hire J, K, Timmons as the land surveyor and Sayre and Sutherland as the soils engineer for the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court and Probation Building provided the cost is reasonable and further that if the cost is too high, this matter will be brought back -before the Board for further discussion, Ayes: Mrs. Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr. Bookman and Mr. Dodd. Itis on motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Apperson, resolved that the State Highway Department be and it hereby is requested to accept the roads in Greenfield, Section I, into the State Secondary System, Ayes: Mrs, Girone, Mr, Apperson, Mr, Bookman and Mr. Dodd, Mr. Manuel states he has received an estimate of $62,500 from Carlton, Taylor & Clark for renovations in the old data processing building for use by the Welfare Department which estimate does not include any work to be accomplished on the heating or air conditioning systems, Mr. Manuel states the State will be reimburs- ing the County for approximately 80% of this cost over a period of years. After further consideration of this matter, it is on motion of Mr. Apperson, seconded by Mr. Bookman, resolved that Planned Bud et Expenditure account 12-500-601.0, New Buildings be reduced by 62,500.00 and Planned Budget Expenditure account 12-511-600,0, Improvement to Sites be increased by $62,500 for alterations to the old data processing building for use by the Welfare Department. Ayes: Mrs. Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr. Bookman and Mr. Dodd. Mrs. Girone asks that a talley of the revenue sharing funds be brought to the Board meetings. Mr. Manuel informs the Board that a copy of the audit for the County Clerk and the Clerk of the Circuit Court for 1975 has been received by the County and a copy of said audit is filed with the papers of this Board. It is generally agreed the Board will meet on June 27th at 900 a.m. for a field trip with the Director of Community Development, It is on motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr. Bookman, resolved that the Interim County Administrator and the Director of Personnel be and they hereby are granted permission to attend the County Adminis- trator's Conference in Virginia Beach during the week of June 13th, Ayes: Mrs, Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr. Bookman,,and Mr. Dodd. It is on motion of Mr. Bookman, seconded by Mr. Apperson, resolved that this Board go into Executive Session to discuss personnel matters, Ayes: Mrs, Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr. Bookman and Mr. Dodd, Reconvening: 77SR129 In Bermuda Magisterial District, Mr, Clinton R, Saunders requests repewal of a mobile home permit to park a mobile home on property which he owns and better known as 10014 Beaumont Avenue, Tax Map Sec. 81-16 (5) Central Park, Blk. 7, Lots 32-37. (Sheet 23). Mr. Saunders' sister is present representing her brother. There being no opposition to this request, it is on motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Apperson, resolved that this request be and it here- by is approved for a period of two years, Ayes: Mr. O'Neill, Mrs. Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr. Bookman and Mr. Dodd. 77SR130 In Bermuda Magisterial District, Mr. Sherman Mills requests renewal of a mobile home permit to park a mobile home on property which he owns and better known as 4816 Shop Street, Tax Map 115-10 (5) Marquis Property Lot 7 (Sheet 32). Mrs. Betty Lewis is present representing Mr. Mills. There being no opposition to this request, it is on motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Apperson, resolved that this request be and it here- by is approved for a period of two years. Ayes: Mr. O'Neill, Mrs. Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr. Bookman and Mr. Dodd. 77SR131 In Bermuda Magisterial District, Ms. Betty Lewis requests renewal of a mobile home permit to park a mobile home on property which belongs to James Dudley, brother of the applicant, and better known as 4841 Shop Street, Tax Map Sec. 115-10 (3) Werths Addition, Lots 69A, 70, 71 (Sheet 32). Ms. Lewis is present. Mr. Schiavo inquires if she has a septic tank and she states she does. There being no opposition, it is on motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mrs. Girone, resolved that this request be and it hereby is approved for a period of two years. Ayes: Mr. O'Neill, Mrs. Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr. Bookman and Mr. Dodd. 77SR132 In Bermuda Magisterial District, Mr. Kenneth R. Snodgrass requests renewal of a mobile home permit to park a mobile home on property which belongs to Orville C, Lucas, friend of the applicant, and better lauy.n as 2900 Kingsland Road. Tax Map Sec, 81-3 (1) parcel 11 (Sheet 23). Mrs. Snodgrass is present. There being no opposition, it is on motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr, Apperson, resolved that this request be and it hereby is approved for a period of two years. Ayes: Mr, O'Neill, Mrs, Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr, Bookman and W. Dodd. 77SR133 In Bermuda Magisterial District, Piedmont Contractors, Inc, requests renewal of a mobile home permit to pork a mobile home on property which belongs to Joseph C, King and better known as 12801 Old Stage Road. Tax Map Sec. 116-12 (1) parcel 6-2 (Sheet 32), The General Superintendent of Piedmont Contractors, Inc. is present. There being no opposition, it is on motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mrs. Girone, resolved that this request be and it hereby is approved for a period of two years, Ayes: Mr. O'Neill, Mrs. Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr, Bookman and Mr. Dodd, 775134 In Matoaca Magisterial District, Mr. Phillip W, Elder requests a mobile home permit to park a mobile home on property which belongs to George T. Elder, father of the applicant, and better known as 6207 Fitzhugh Street. Tax Map Sec, 186-4 (1) parcel 16 (Sheet 52). Mr. Elder states this trailer would be used to house his mother who will take care of his daughter because he works shift work, He adds all the neighbors in the area are agreeable to this mobile home being located here and he will connect to public sewer but will have an individual well. There being no opposition, it is on motion of Mr. O'Neill, seconded by Mr. Apperson, resolved that this request be and it hereby is approved for a period of two years, Ayes: Mr. O'Neill, Mrs. Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr. Bookman and Mr. Dodd. 77SO47 In Matoaca Magisterial District, Glen T, Hastings Company requests a Conditional Use to permit the construction of 16 two family units in a Residential (R-7) District on a 14.3 acre parcel fronting approximately 100 feet on Brickhouse Drive and being located off the southern line of Block B of River Road Estates. Tax Map 181-16 (1) Parcel 7 (Sheet 53/54). Mr. James Andrews, attorney representing Glen T, Hastings Company, states more two-family units can be constructed under the present zoning but Mr. Hastings intends, at this time, to construct single family dwellings on the remaining land, that this conditional use for the entire parcel of land to be two-family dwellings was a matter of public record and states further that by proceeding in the manner as requested, 95 less units would be built. Mr. Lyle M. Jones, a homeowner in the area, states he is opposed to the construction'of these units because all housing is single family and should remain single family. Mr. O'Neill states that under the current zoning Mr. Hastings could, as stated previously, construct more two-family units than what is now being requested. He adds this seems to be a lesser situation than what could exist. It is on motion of Mr. O'Neill, seconded by Mrs. Girone, resolved that this request be and it hereby is approved subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission, Ayes: Mr. O'Neill, Mrs. Girone, Mr. Apperson , Mr. Book=. and Mr. Dodd, 77SO58 In Clover Hill Magisterial District, George B, Sowers, Jr. requests rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-7) of a 25,05 acre parcel fronting 535.12 feet on Providence Road and located approximately 175 feet north of its intersection with Reams Road, Tax Map 39-2 (1) 8 (Sheet 14). There is some concern expressed regarding the graveyard. Mr. Eugene Glenn states the graveyard will be screened and access will be over another parcel of property. There being no objection, it is on motion of Mr. Bookman, seconded by Mr. Dodd, resolved that this request be and it hereby is approved, Ayes: Mr. O'Neill, Mrs. Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr. Bookman and Mr. Dodd, 77SO63 In Bermuda Magisterial District, Sixty South, a Virginia General Partnership, requests rezoning from General Business (B-3) to Mobile Home Park (MH -1) of a 9 acre parcel fronting 50.63 feet on Jefferson Davis Highway and located approximately 250 feet north of its intersection with West Hundred Road. Tax Map 116-6 (1) 27 (Sheet 32). It is on motion of Mr, Dodd, seconded by Mr. Bookman, resolved that this case be deferred for 60 days at the request of the applicant. Ayes: Mr. O'Neill, Mrs, Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr. Booknan and Mr. Dodd. 775059 In Clover Hill Magisterial District, Calcourt Properties, Inc. request rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-7) of a 67.1 acre parcel fronting approximately 2,000 feet on Walmsley Boulevard, also fronting approximately 600 feet on Newbys Bridge Road, and being located in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of these roads. Tax Map Sec. 40-9 (2), 41A, 42A, 47, 47A and 47B, Belmont Farms, Lots 41A, 42A, 47, 47A and 47B. (Sheet 15), Mr. Courtney Frazier, representing Calcourt Properties, Inc., is present to answer any questions the Board might have, There being no opposition, it is on motion.of.Mr, Bookman, seconded by Mr, Apperson, resolved that this request be and it hereby is approved, Ayes: Mr. O'Neill, Mrs, Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr. Bookman and Mr. Dodd. 77SO61 In Dale Magisterial District, Max H. Hunter and George Kcraget -15- request rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-9) of a 123.26 acre parcel located 1,280 feet south of Beach Road measured from a point 300 feet west of the intersection of Qualla Road and Beach Road. Tax Map 11.0 (1) 45 (ShQets 29 and 38), Mr. Balderson states the Planning Commission has recommended approval of Residential (R-25) for this property, Mr. Kcraget states he is agreeable to the R-25 zoning for this parcel of land, There being no opposition, it is on motion of Mr. Apperson, seconded by Mrs. Girone, resolved that this request for Residential (R-25) be and it hereby is approved, Ayes: Mr. O'Neill, Mrs. Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr. Bookman and Mr. Dodd, 77SO65 In Dale Magisterial District, R, 0, and C, Douglas Spencer requests rezoning from Community Business (B-2) to General Business (B-3) to a depth of 400 feet of a 19,70 acre parcel fronting approximatley 1,300 feet on Iron Bridge Road also fronting approximately 500 feet on Beulah Road and located in the southeast quadrant of the inter- section of these roads. Tax Map 79-4 (1) 4 & 5 (Sheet 22). Mr. Spencer states in 1957 this land was zoned general business, was changed by the County -to C-2 and was again changed by the County to B-2 and he would like B-3 for the storage of construction equipment. Mr. Charles Beddow, attorney representing Mr. and Mrs. Robert Taylor, the adjacent landowners, states their opposition to this rezoning, He states the Taylors live on the old home site, it has been recognized as having historic values, they would be able to see the site because of the rolling topography of the land, there will be lights and bothersome noise at all times of the day and night, that this will set a precedent for Route 10 and will invite these kinds of uses along the roadway, and further that it will destroy and disrupt the entire area. Mr. Spencer states they are requesting only the first 400 feet be rezoned and not the entire 1,000 which would be up close to the home and that they would be using the land closest to Kingsland Road. There is some question as to what Mr. Doug Spencer intends to do with his parcel of land. He states he might eventually bring his print shop from Richmond to this area. After further discussion of the matter regarding buffer areas, it is on motion of Mr. Apperson, seconded by Mr. Bookman, resolved that this request be and it hereby is approved subject to a 25' buffer (either a fence or planted buffer of reasonable height) at the time of the construction of a business on Mr, Doug Spencer's property and that Mr. R. 0. Spencer leave a natural treed buffer of 25' on the north, south and east side of the construction equipment site. Ayes: Mrs, Girgne, Mr. Apperson, Mr, Bookman and Mr, Dodd, Mr. Bookman states he feels this is better than what currently exists for this land because a buffer was not required previously for protection for the Taylors. -16- 77SO66 In Clover Hill Magisterial District, Dairy Barns of Richmond, Inc. requests a Conditional Use to permit the operation of a Retail Sales, Wholesale Distribution and Drive -In establishment in a Light Industrial (M-1) District on a 0.67 acre parcel fronting 240,03 feet on Walmsley Boulevard, also fronting 151.82 feet on Turner Road and located in the northeast quadrant of the intersection of these roads. Tax Map 40-6 (1) 22 (Sheet 15). Mr. Jim Nackley, representing Dairy Barns of Richmond, Inc.,states they have complied with all the requirements of the Highway Department and presents a new plat. A businessman in the area states something needs to be done about the traffic. Mr. Bookman. states this business would not generate a large amount of traffic, After further consideration of this matter, it is on motion of Mr. Bookman, seconded by Mr, Dodd, resolved that this request be and it hereby is approved subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission with condition number 6 of the Planning Staff's recannendation being; included as condition . SES, and being included as part of the requirements. Ayes: Mrs. Girone, Mr, Apperson, Mr, Bookman and Mr, Dodd, 77SO67 In Matoaca Magisterial District, Elbert N, and Carrie N. Clark request a Conditional Use to permit the construction of one (1) duplex in a Residential (R-7) District on a parcel fronting 62 feet on Aldridge Avenue and located approximately 750 feet east of its intersection with Jefferson Davis Highway. Tax Map 163-11 (3) 12, Boulevard Heights, Blk. B, Lot 12 (Sheet 49). There being no opposition present, it is on motion of Mr. Apperson, seconded by Mr. Bookman, resolved that this request be and it hereby is approved subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission. Ayes: Mrs. Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr. Bookman and Mr. Dodd. 77SO68 In Midlothian Magisterial District, Mr. and Mrs. James 0. Schaeffer request a Conditional Use to permit the operation of a Stock Farm (to keep six (6) horses) in a Residential (R-40) District on a 15.49 acre parcel, fronting approximately 875 feet on Old Gun Road West also fronting approximately 1,250 feet on Young Manor Drive, located in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of these roads and known as 3301 Old Gun Road West. Tax Map 2-15 (1) 6 (Sheet 2). Mr. Andy Turner asks questions regarding the specific use of the conditional use, if it were transferrable, etc. and adds he has no objections. 'There being no opposition, it is on motion of Mrs. Girone, seconded by Mr, Apperson, resolved that this request be and it hereby is approved subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission. Ayes: Mrs. Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr. Bookman and Mr. Dodd. _17_ 775069 In Clover Hill Magisterial District, William G, Speeks requests rezoning from Residential (R-12) to Residential (R-9) of a 96,74 acre parcel lying off the northern terminus of Woodsong Road (Genito Forest), and located off the eastern terminus of Dumainn Drive and Monday Way (Lake Genito Estates). Tax Map 49-6 (1) 1 & 2 (Sheet 14). There being no opposition present, it is on motion of Mr. Bookman, seconded by Mr. Apperson, resolved that this request be and it hereby is approved, Ayes: Mrs, Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr, Bookman and Mr. Dodd, 775070 In Matoaca Magisterial District, Zane G, Davis, for Colonial Pine Estates, Inc., requests rezoning from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-7) of a 117 acre parcel fronting 515 feet on Woodpecker - Road, located approximately 150 feet north of its intersection with Dupuy Avenue, also fronting 475 feet on Branders Bridge Road located 1,350 feet north of its intersection with Seaboard Coast Line Rail- road. Tax Map 175-13 (1) 1 & 2 (Sheet 49). There being no one present representing the applicant, it is on motion of Mr. O'Neill, seconded by Mr. Bookman, resolved that this request be and it hereby is deferred 30 days, Ayes: Mr. O'Neill, Mrs. Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr. Bookman and Mr, Dodd, 775135 In Dale Magisterial District, Thomas H. Tilley tequests a variance to use a parcel of land which has no public road frontage for dwelling purposes. This parcel lies approximately 290 feet off the north line of Chalkley Road measured from a point 6400 feet southwest of its intersection with Centralia Road. Tax Map Sec. 96 (1) part of parcel 44 (Sheet 31). Mr. Apperson inquires if Mr. Tilley has an easement for egress and ingress to his property„ Mr. Cole states. the 25 foot right-of-way is being conveyed in his deed. There being no opposition, it is•on motion of Mr. Apperson, seconded by Mr. Bookman, resolved that this request be and it hereby is approved with the understanding the County will not have any responsibility in the building or maintenance of this road. Ayes: Mr. O'Neill, Mrs, Girone, Mr. Apperson and Mr, Bookman, 775136 In Clover Hill Magisterial District, William M. Elliott requests a variance to use a parcel of land which has no public road frontage for dwelling purposes. This parcel lies 1,100 feet off the north line of Pear Orchard Road measured from a point 36,000 feet southwest of its intersection with Skinquarter Road, Tax Map Sec. 86 (1) parcel There being no opposition, it is on motion of Mr, O'Neill, seconded by Mr. Bookman, resolved that this request for two vari4nces be and it hereby is approved -su ject to' the s� Q,{ / [¢� a# oar au Get �a W Ayes: Mr, O'Neill, Mrs. Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr, and Mr. Dodd, It is on motion of Mr. Bookman, seconded by Mrs, Girone, resolved that an additional $70 be spent on road work to be done onreSecw�� is Bloomsherry Road and said funds to come from the 3C Road Funds of Clover Hill District. Ayes: Mr. O'Neill, Mrs. Girone, Mr, Apperson and Mr.. Bookman, It is on motion of Mr, Bookman, seconded by Mr. Dodd, resolved that this Board go into Executive Session to discuss personnel and legal matters, Ayes: Mr. O'Neill, Mrs, Girone, Mr. Bookman and Mr. Dodd, Reconvening: It is on motion of Mr, Apperson, seconded by Mr, Dodd, resolved that this Board adjourns at 6:15 p.m. until 10:00'a;m. on June 10, 1977. Ayes: Mr. O'Neill, Mrs.! Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr. Bookman and Mr. Dodd. -20- 1.0-1 (Sheet 26). Mrs. Elliott is present along with all the neighbors in the area who are in favor of this request. There being no opposition, it is on motion of Mr. Bookman, seconded by Mr. Apperson, resolved that this request be and it hereby is approved, Ayes: Mrs, Girone, Mr, Apperson, Mr, Bookman and Mr. Dodd, 775137 In Matoaca Magisterial District, James E, Howerton requests a variance to use a parcel of land which has no public road frontage for dwelling purposes, This parcel lies 1,321 feet off the north line of Hickory Road measured from a print 1,650 feet west of its inter- section with Rowlett Road, Tax Map Sec. 171-3 (1) part of parcel 8 (Sheet 47). Mr. Howerton is present. Mr. O'Neill inquires if he intends to build more than one home. Mr. HOwerton states his present intention is only to build one home and he wanted to have the deed to the land prior to building his home on this one acre and he will purchase the remaining land at a later date. Mr. O'Neill states his intention in granting this variance is that no others be built on this property. After further discussion of this matter, it is on motion of Mr. O'Neill, seconded by Mr, Apperson, resolved that this request be and it hereby is approved subject to conditions 1 and 2 as recommended by the Planning Commission. Ayes: Mr. O'Neill, Mrs. Girone, Mr. Apperson and Mr. Dodd. 775138 In Bermuda Magisterial District, Floyd Eugene Ragsdale requests a variance to use a parcel of land which has no public road frontage for dwelling purposes. This parcel lies 430 feet off the west line of Lawing Drive measured from a point 650 feet northwest of its intersection with Woods Edge Road. Tax Map Sec. 134-1 (1) part of parcel 6 (Sheet 42). Mr. Ragsdale is present to answer any questions, There being no opposition, it is on motion of Mr. Dodd, seconded by Mr. Apperson, resolved that this request be and it hereby is approved subject to conditions 1 and 2 as recommended by the Planning Commission, Ayes: Mr. O'Neill, Mrs. Girone, Mr. Apperson, Mr. Bookman and W. Dodd. 775139 & 77SI40 In Matoaca Magisterial District, R. Vaiden Jones requests two variances to use two parcels of land which have no public road front- age for dwelling purposes, These parcels lie approximately 200 feet west of the terminus of Wild Turkey Run and Saddlebrook Road, Tax Map Sec. 158-12 (1) parts of parcel 37 (Sheet 47). -19- M BOARD OF SUPERVISORS A G E N D A June 8, 1977 9:00 a.m. Invocation ✓I. Approval of Minutes (May 24th, 25th and 26th) ✓II. Proposed Easement. Vacation in Winterberry Ridge 9:15 a.m. ✓III. Highway Engineer ✓A, ' Roads Accepted into the State System f . Request of the Highway Department Miscellaneous Supervisors' Items 10:00 a.m. e"IV, Budget Changes �A. School Board Community Development ✓ C , Nursing Home D . Airport VE. Sheriff 10:30 a.m. e V. Community Development ✓ A, Transportation Planning Contract Zig ✓B. CETA Tire Slicing Program 3op0L�""g,�_' ' ✓ C. Park and Ride Lots 4 -7sb ✓ D. Bids for Printing of General Plan ,E. Street Name Change in Matoaca District ,,,-F. Street Light Request in Dale District 4- ., ` I. Fire Department ./ A, NACO Award B, Mutual Aid Agreement Regarding Cardwell .1., Le,41111- Machine Company .-C, Proposal Regardin�% Midlothian Volunteer Fire Dept. r -D - l Afet #Y40P�a)fs oN CS7/CC. Roov . ✓ VII. Water Contract W77-46CD, Winterfield Section of Salisbury /VIII HiQ Set Date for Public Hearing on Proposed Ordinance Regardi1ng Kennels /✓ �. I.N; a q D2c1. Fees d lX. Policy for Reviewing Petitions for Vacations of Easements, Streets, Alleys, etc . ,--' , it', ! 97� ✓X. Letter from FAA ,,-XI. Pyrotechnic Display for Southside Speedway ,***"XII. Miscellaneous Appointments ABIDCO B. Chesterfield Industrial Development Authority 2Z 12:30 p.m. 2:30 p.m. r XIII. ✓X IV . XV. XVI, L U N C H Mobile Homes Rezoning Variances Miscellaneous Matters Adjournment M BOARD OF SUPERVISORS A G E N D A June 8, 1977 9:00 a.m. Invocation EN I. Approval of Minutes (May 24th, 25th and 26th) II. Proposed Easement. Vacation in Winterberry Ridge 9:15 a.m. III, Highway Engineer A, Roads Accepted into the State System B. Request of the Highway Department C, Miscellaneous Supervisors' Items 10:00 a.m. IV. Budget Changes A. School Board B, Community Development C. Nursing Home D. Airport E. Sheriff 10:30 a.m. V. Community Development A, Transportation Planning Contract B. CETA Tire Slicing Program C. Park and Ride Lots D. Bids for Printing of General Plan E. Street Name Change in Matoaca District F. Street Light Request in Dale District VI. Fire Department A, NACO Award B. Mutual Aid Agreement Regarding Cardwell Machine Company C. Proposal Regarding Midlothian Volunteer Fire Dept. VII. Water Contract W77-46CD, Winterfield Section of Salisbury VIII. Set Date for Public Hearing on Proposed Ordinance Regarding Kennels IX. Policy for Reviewing Petitions for Vacations of Easements, Streets, Alleys, etc. X. Letter from FAA XI. Pyrotechnic Display for Southside Speedway XII. Miscellaneous Appointments A, ABIDCO B. Chesterfield Industrial Development Authority 12:30 p.m. L U N C H 2:30 p.m. XIII. Mobile Homes XIV. Rezoning XV. Variances XVI, Miscellaneous Matters Adjournment Speed Letter® To C %rl /'4AJ 0L -L From W /G 4. /'s CACI, 00, l� /> m � ti/ST,�'�, r�� 2i G X17 6.4= Subject -No. 98 10 FOLD MESSAGE IV 7-7-,47C /'Y(- co is .9 o o 0=r 19 1V0 77C e 7'A6 a /9 r /4/,1AZ 7 ' A /2 6 F T Q P ,a PET/ 7-/OAJ g lV b A PRO POS E6 b 2D I n)/4AiCG � u (Z- T 1-4 C� AQ, AT/ Too&l o tv Po R T/ Q IV O t= A QAIZ i g G. 9 w t< iqs i.: " m f t,) -r 1-.. o T 1 "7 F r�l tQ C K � uo i rV re 2 L 212J YZ� AC<,vs, 1njf2q�Da,�2 f� L PLE(AsG PLACEF -rN15 0,V A6tf✓ ,�p�} Q, 1� ,..5 u AJ CS 8 Date .5�// 7l 7 7 Signed -Z VVA 4rC REPLY -No.9 FOLD -No. 10 FOLD Date Signed WilsonJones 776 Q 1915 PRINTED IN JSP AS RETAIN WHITE COPY, RETURN PINK COPY IIUNTO19 & WILLIAMS 707 EAST MAIN STREET P. 0. 80X 1535 RICHMOND, VII20INIA 20212 TELEPHONE (804) 788-8200 CABLE HUNTWAND WA8H11g0TO1P, D. C. OFFICE 1730 PENNSYLVANIA AVE. N. W. 20006 SUITE 1060 TELEPHONE (202) 833-1680 May 16, 1977 FILE N0.315-915-2 DIRECT DIAL NO: (8040 788- 8376 Richmond Newspapers, Inc. Classified Advertising 333 E. Grace Street Richmond, Virginia 23219 Attention: Mrs. Alma Irby Gentlemen: Enclosed is a notice to be inserted under "Legal Notice" in the Richmond Times -Dispatch on May 25, 1977 and June 1, 1977. After the advertisement has been published as indicated above, please send me your statement along with a certified copy of such ad. Very truly yours, Jeffrey 11. Weitzman 1236/400 Enclosure .sYA� II 7 T TAKE NOTICE that on the 8th day of June, 1977, at 9:00 o'clock A.M., or as soon thereafter as may be heard, the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County at its regular meeting place in the Board Room of Chesterfield County, Virginia, will consider the following ordinance for adoption: AN ORDINANCE to vacate the triangular portion of variable width easement for Drainage and Utilities located near the southeastern corner of Lot 17, Block B, Winterberry Ridge Subdivision, Brandermill, more fully shown and shaded in red on plat of survey entitled "Plat Showing Easement to be Vacated," made by J. K. Timmons & Associates, Inc., Engineers - Surveyors -Planners, dated April 25, 1977. The complete text of the proposed ordinance is on file in the office of the County Administrator of Chesterfield County, Virginia, and may be examined by alli.i.nterested parties between the hours of 9:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. Q4�� LiA_� y e tzman , V Attorney for dward R. Applequist and Annette S. Applequist P E T I T I O N TO: The Board of Supervisors Chesterfield County, Virginia RE: Vacation of the triangular portion of variable width easement for Drainage & Utilities located near the southeastern corner of Lot 17, Block C, Winterberry Ridge Subdivision, Brandermill, more fully shown and shaded in red on plat of survey entitled "Plat Showing Easement to be Vacated," made by J. K. Timmons & Associates, Inc., Engineers -Surveyors -Planners, dated April 25, 1977, a copy of which is attached hereto as a part hereof. Your petitioners, Edward R. Applequist and Annette S. Applequist, Husband and Wife, respectfully represent: 1. That they are the owners of Lot 17, Block B, Winterberry Ridge Subdivision, Brandermill, Clover Hill Magisterial District, Chesterfield County, Virginia. 2. That the triangular portion of the variable width easement located near the southeastern corner of Lot 17, Block B, Winterberry Ridge Subdivision, Brandermill is not needed by the County. 3. That the present owners wish to make use of the land 1which is inconsistent with those rights granted to the County in the easement. WHEREFORE, your petitioners pray that the Board of Super- visors will consider the ordinance attached hereto for adoption in order that the aforesaid easement be abandoned and vacated in accordance with Section 15.1-482, Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. RespectfulLx submitted, ----Edward R./App _equist Annette S. ApplequisU I- 3901 Cheyenne Road Richmond, Virginia 23235 N � 2 m 49/ 2,5' /7 WID T.'7/ ESiL1'T 60 p o >. 0 �I WIN T5205212 0 00, </rccio,Q�' PoiNT 0 �m �m PL/JT .517D INC7 EZ ,EAI ENT TO 5E 110C/J 7 -ED t. CAE S TE2 F/EL,O C O. /JC�JOS S ' J. K. TIMMONS & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENGINEERS •SURVEYORS • PLANNERS 1314 W. MAIN ST. RICHMOND, VA. DATE -.4 -25- 7 7 SCALE: Ia - 4O ' DRAWN BY- a CHECKED BY- ,0. ,Q. ", JOB No. 34 2 % 7 r' r+' Virginia4At a regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, held at the Courthouse on June 8. 1977 at 9:00 a.m. . IIt s gn mot'gn of Bookman, seconded , following ordinance be and it hereby is a pted: AN ORDINANCE to vacate the Triangular portion of variable width easement for Drainage and Utilities located near the southeastern corner of Lot 17, Block B, Winterberry Ridge Subdivision, Brandermill,more fully shown and shaded in red on plat of survey entitled "Plat Showing Easement to be Vacated," made by J. K. Timmons & Associates, Inc., Engineers -Surveyors -Planners, dated April 25, 1977, a copy of which is attached hereto } as a part hereof. WHEREAS, Edward R. Applequist and Annette S. Applequist, I j I owners of the property in question, have petitioned the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia, to vacate the triangular portion of variable width easement for Drainage and i Utilities located near the southeastern corner of Lot 17, Block j B, Winterberry Ridge Subdivision. Brandermill, more fully shown i and shaded in red on plat of survey entitled "Plat Showing i Easement to be Vacated," made by J. K. Timmons & Associates, Inc., Engineers -Surveyors -Planners, dated April 25, 1977, and notice that the Board of Supervisors would consider the adoption of an ordinance vacating said easement having been given in accordance 'f with Section 15.1-431, Code of Virginia, 1950 as amended: NOW,THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Chesterfield, Virginia. That pursuant to Section 15.1-482 (6), Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, that the triangular portion of variable width easement for Drainage and Utilities located near the southeastern; corner of Lot 17, Block B, Winterberry Ridge Subdivision, Brander? 1 mill, more fully shown and shaded in red on plat of survey i entitled "Plat Showing Easement to be Vacated," made by J. K. Timmons & Associates, Inc., Engineers- Surveyors -Planners, dated April 25, 1977, a copy of which is attached hereto as a part 'j hereof, is hereby vacated. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect in accordance with Section 15.1-482, Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, and a certified copy hereof together with the plat attached shall be recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County, Virginia. i Pursuant to Section 15.1-485, Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, and shall be indexed in the name of the County of ;Chesterfield as Grantor and Edward R. Applequist and Annette S. !Applequist as Grantees. Ayes: Mrs. Giron, Mr, Apperson, Mr. Bookman and Mr. Dodd, {i '! A Copy: Teste - C, G; M nue terun County Administrator i j DOUGLAS P IUC:ATL. C( %Ahl I SSICINEk w IFONAN(` H HALL B/:IST OL. RAII II II 111 M/h'/('7 l G FNAL1� ROANOKE, .%411.1/ I11,SJRI(7 4x y l; THOMAS R GLASS LYNCHBURG I1 \(HNI R6 DIATRR7 MORRILL M CROWE HICHMONO R1(171II)ND DI.S7'RIC7 R-1 ,j1l WILLIAMT ROOS. YORKTOWN, .S111C11A DI.S7R1C7 DOUGLAS G JANNEN. FREDERICKSBURG, IRI .DLRIC'A.M(: N(: UI.S7RI(7 RALPH A BE ETON, FALI5 CHURCH, (11.1'7.11R DI.S7R1(7 COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA ROBERT S LANDES, STAUNTON, S7 It %I0A DIS7RK7 DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS & TRANSPORTATION T. RAY HASSE LL, III, CHESAPEAKE, 4T 1 INGI.URR.4A 1221 EAST BROAD STREET CHARLES S. HOOPER. JR., CREWE. A' 1.:IR61 RI K41 RICHMOND, 23219 L. E. BRETT, JR. DISTRICT ENGINEER Mr. Dexter R. Williams Planner/Engineer County of Chesterfield Chesterfield, Virginia 23832 Dea —hr. Williams: May 20, 1977 JOHN E. HARWOO DEPUTY 51 N R d CNI�GINEER W S. G. BRITTO DIRECTOR O AO I TI LEO E. BU OJ DIRECTOR OF PROGRAM MANAGEMENT J. M. WRAY, JR. DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS J. P. ROYER. JR. DIRECTOR OF PLANNING P. B. COLDIRON DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING IN REPLY PLEASE REFER TO OFFICE OF DISTRICT ENGINEER PETERSBURG, VIRGINIA 73803 P. O. Box 3036 Bon Air, Virginia 23235 Re: Federal Aid System Functional Classification System Richmond -Petersburg Turnpike From: Southern Intersection of I-64 To: Intersection Route 1 South of Petersburg Richmond -Tri -Cities Area This is in reference to the 1985 highway functional classification and federal aid highway systems for the rural area of Chesterfield County. In order to control the use of outdoor advertising signs, displays, and devices, it is necessary to include the subject section of the Richmond - Petersburg Turnpike on the federal aid primary system. Due to a misconcep- tion the section of the turnpike in the rural part of Chesterfield County is incorrectly designated on the realigned federal aid system map as a federal aid interstate facility. We are requesting you to secure a resolution from the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors approving the addition of the 5.8 -mile section of the turnpike in rural Chesterfield County to the "other principal arterials" rural functional classification system as designated.on the attached map. The resolution should also indicate the addition of this section to the federal aid primary system (copy of sample resolution attached). Thank you for your attention in this matter. ELCjr:pmg Attachments Sincerely, E. L. Coving - , Jr. Resident Engineer A HIGH'ANAY IS AS SAFE AS THE USER MAKES IT `1w It is on motion of , seconded by resolved that the following resolution be adopted. RESOLUTION Whereas, the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors, at its regular meeting on November 12, 1975, adopted the "1985 Highway Functional Classi- fication" and "Realigned Federal -Aid Highway Systems" for Chesterfield County; and Whereas, the Federal Government does not recognize the Federal Aid Interstate designation assigned in 1975 to the 5.8 mile section of the Richmond -Petersburg Turnpike in the rural part of Chesterfield County; and Whereas, it is necessary to include this section of the Turnpike on the Federal Aid Primary System in order to control the use of outdoor advertising signs, displays and devices; now; therefore, Be it resolved that, the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors approves the addition of the 5.8 mile section of the Richmond -Petersburg Turnpike in rural Chesterfield County to the "Other Principal Arterials" Rural Functional Classification System and to the Federal Aid Primary System. It is on motion of be adopted. seconded by resolved that the following resolution RESOLUTION 1_ US''t { 1'✓Y� j Whereas,the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors, at its regular meeting on (IC 12 1975 adopted the "1985 Highway Functional Classi- fication" and "Realigned Federal -Aid Highway Systems" for Chesterfield County; and Whereas, the Federal Government does not recognize the Federal Aid Interstate designation assigned in 1975 to the 5.8 mile section of the Richmond -Petersburg Turnpike in the rural part of Chesterfield County; and Whereas, it is necessary to include this section of the Turnpike on the Federal Aid Primary System in order to control the use of outdoor advertising signs, displays and devices; now; therefore, Be it resolved that, the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors approves the addition of the 5.8 mile section of the Richmond -Petersburg Turnpike in rural Chesterfield County to the "Other Principal Arterials" Rural Functional Classification System and to the Federal Aid Primary System. -w i 4 r K vR� ZZ)/ c s'€ c _ sAV t`C ,,�' �. � '", *�`+t ��"' �� ";#� ��' �t'. _ 1 � k � ,IJ '� ,� `�'y. -' .>. �' ':•''mac .:;.�, .,` s x .��x� ��-�-� �' dt' .% -1 •°"�1. „� � ^Y} �y�. ..d �,� '.a: ,�� y - +Y '- ;r, T-4 yjr - � .a + d +c -�{ > j k ° ie .,t' .i a4^.ufr-- '� t r ♦ .ii y„ X 'S. 42 ,�,.a •'-sM -.-,5 ';kt^ Yip'-^f.;*++1M%q�. +. > �" zy " }. y, - ,c, it It � to .t� ct - ,*� ,�"t'� , a� � t �� '�^ moo. � `6' �" • r �z „w�*� �r t`- t a - _ r 4 _ �' s " - � .7Y� '�3.-7'�.�4K � to :.. t X +• 'x. -'�� ,-�'-_�: �'�, i __ . ... ,3y". x :: ..:+,e "'�' uJ"' r , w '' � ,tea ,�,� � .. r Y ��ry�w. n�,� f.: .3" ak�l.' �s : z• •rir3 ..4 s ._ vol y 8.12 -- , Tod a " �., , rA _ - �.,_ JOHN E. HARWOOD, COMMISSIONER LEONARD R. HALL, BRISTOL, BRISTOL DISTRICT HORACE G, FRALIN, ROANOKE,.SALEMDISTRICT THOMAS R. GLASS, LYNCHBURG, LYNCHBURG DISTRICT MORRILL M. CROWE, RICHMOND, RICHMOND DISTRICT WILLIAM T. ROOS, YORKTOWN,SUFFOLK DISTRICT DOUGLAS G. JANNEY, FREDERICKSBURG, FREDERICKSBURG DISTRICT RALPH A. BEETON, FALLS CHURCH, CULPEPER DISTRICT jj �} p ROBERTS. LANDES, STAUNTON, STA UNTON DISTRICT COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA IR IN Ii A T. RAY HASSELL, III, CHESAPEAKE, AT LARGE -URBAN LLLL 111�� 111lll YYY iii�LLLLLL LLL CHARLES S. HOOPER, JR., CREWE, AT LARGE -RURAL DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS & TRANSPORTATION 1221 EAST BROAD STREET RICHMOND, 23219 May 31, 1977 Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County Chesterfield Court House, Virginia 23832 Gentlemen: W. S. G. BRITTON DEPUTY COMMISSIONER & CHIEF ENGINEER LEO E. BUSSER III DIRECTOR OF ADMIN ISTRATI0 J. M. WRAY, JR. DIRECTOR OF OPER.TI N J. P. ROYER, JR. DIRECTOR OF PLANNING P. B. COLDIRON DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING H. R. PERKINSON, JR. DIRECTOR OF PROGRAM MANAGEMENT IN REPLY PLEASE REFER TO Secondary System Additions Chesterfield County As requested in resolutions by your Board on March 23, 1977 and April 27, 1977, the following additions to the Secondary System of Chesterfield County are hereby approved, effective May 31, 1977 and June 1, 1977. ADDITIONS APPROVED MAY 31, 1977 V Butler Road - From: Route 633 to a cul-de-sac. LeMaster Road - From: Route 630 to a cul-de-sac. APPROVED JUNE 1, 1977 SALISBURY. HILLCREST SECTION Brigstock Road - Beginning at Brigstock Road, Route 1014, thence north and east 0.12 mile to the western intersection of Whitechapel Road, thence east 0.03 mile to the eastern intersection of Whitechapel Road; thence east 0.10 mile to a dead end. Whitechapel Road - Beginning at its western intersection with Brigstock Road, thence north 0.07 mile, thence north 0.21 mile to Vistapoint Road, beginning at its eastern intersection with Brigstock Road, thence north 0.06 mile. Vistapoint Road - Beginning at Whitechapel Road, thence westerly 0.16 mile to a cul-de-sac, beginning at White- chapel Road, thence easterly 0.23 mile to a cul-de-sac. Copies: Mr. W. P. Tucker Sincerely, Mr. J. P. Mills, Jr. Mr. A. E S. Brown W-0449faMr. L. E. Brett, Jr. �j/(�/� Mr. L. H. Dawson, Jr. W. S. G. Britton, Mr. E. L. Covington, Jr. Commissioner and TRANSPORTATION - AMERICA'S LIFELINES LENGTH 0.31 Mi. 0.51 Mi. 0.25 Mi. 0.34 Mi. 0.39 Mi. Deputy Chief Engineer R L COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD INTRACOUNTY CORRESPONDENCE June 2, 1977 TO: Jack Manuel FROM: Lane Ramsey SUBJECT: 1976-77 Board Request The School Board has requested that several changes be made in the Planned Budget for the Early Intervention Grant. No additional appropriation is being requested. Suggested Resolution: On motion of , seconded by , it is hereby resolved that the following changes be made in the Planned Budget for the Early Childhood Grant: Decrease Planned Budget Expenditures: 41-436-104.0 Child Dev. Specialists 41-436-299.0 Other Increase Planned Budget Expenditures: 41-436-220.0 Travel 41-436-323.0 Supplies 41-436-405.0 Equipment LBR/lga cc: Bob Lux $1,500.00 1,000.00 $2,500.00 $1,000.00 500.00 1,000.00 $2,500.00 M September 3, 1976 To: Lane Ramsey, Central Accounting From: Bob Lux, School Board Re: Early Intervention Grant According to our telephone conversation concerning the above program, please change this budget as follows: 41-436-000. 0 EARLY INTERVENTION GRANT ,� 1 l 41-436-102.0 Director $ 14,400 41-436-104.0 Child Dev. Specialists 20,000 41-436-109.2 Paraprofessional 3,300 41-436-111.3 Psychologist 9,700 41-436-220.0 Travel 5,-000 y�10 41-436-295.0 Fringe Benefits 5,688 41-436-299.0 Other 3,300 41-436-323.0 Supplies 3,050 41-436-399.0 indirect Charges 3,333 41-436-405.0 Equipment 2, 225. 5ta �$ 69.996 MI COUNTYOF CHESTERFIELD INTRACOUNTY CORRESPONDENCE June 2, 1977 TO: Jack Manuel FROM: Lane Ramsey C),* SUBJECT: Change Fund for Community Development Attached is a memo from Mike Ritz indicating the need for a $50.00 change fund. Please ask the Board of Supervisors on June 8, 1977 to establish this fund. Suggested Resolution: On motion of , seconded by it is hereby resolved that a $50.00 Change Fund be established for the Community Development Department in the name of Michael C. Ritz. LBR/lga cc: Mike Ritz DATE: May 19, 1977 TO: Lane Ramsey, Budget!D} rector j` , FROM: Michael C. Ritz;l bi�ector of Community Development SUBJECT: Change Fund Because we sell a number of maps, reports and ordinances, and accept application fees, I would like a $50.00 Change Fund. This Fund would permit us to make change at our new offices so citizens would not have to go elsewhere for correct change. Please request Board approval. I will be custodian of the Fund. It will not be used for petty cash. MCR:bk COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD INTMCOUNTY CORRESPONDENCE June 1, 1977 TO: Jack Manuel 4011 rT..0'T: Lane Ramsey SUBJECT: 1976-77 Nursing; Home Budget Based on several meetings with Mr. 'Martin, I submit the following budget changes and a request for an operating advance from the General Fund to thr. Nursing Home Fund for the 1976-77 Fiscal Year. Suggested Resolution: seconded by it isOn motion of r� hereby resolved that the Treasurer of Chesterfield county be authorized to transfer up to $126,641 only as needed at June 30, 1977 to be recorded on the books of. ti,e County as a "Due To The General Fund" in the Nursing dome Fund and a "Due From The Nursing Home Fund" in the General Fund. And be it further resolved that the folloiainr budget amendments he made: !'mendmeat Total For Increase Actual Projected Year Ended Budget (Decrease) July -April May -June 6/30/77 1977_ Re nested Revenue: Patient Services $1,613,186 $505,000 $2,113,135 $21139,80=; $(71,022) Other 25,872 5,000 30,272 _ 29,600 1,272 Total Revenue $1,639,058 $510,000 i$2,149,056 $2,219,408 $(70,350) f Jack Manuel June 1, 1977 Page 2 Actual July -April Expenditures: Adr1nistrar_ive $ 143,589 Nursing Service 819,431 Ancillary Services 21-0,669 Dietary 244,885 Laundry 49,044 Housekeeping 103,565 nneration of Plant 135,284 Central Supply 12,228 ITrassigned Expenses 109,672 Interest 0 Total Expenditures $1,338,367 Equipment Purchases. A, i,,�Unis tra t ion ';ursine Services Ancillary Services DietAry Operation of Plant Central Supply Total Equipment Total Expenses Total Revenue Total Expenses $ 545 $ 230 $ S 2 5 Amendment 3 Total ror 558 Increase Projected Year Ended Budget (Decrease) Nay -June . 6/30/77 1977 _ Requested 0 $ 56,625 $ 201,214 $ 176,916 23,293 148,915 968,346 985,647 (17,301) 60,663 281,332 236,796 44,536 52,326 297,211 290,425 6,7"6 10,001 59,045 59,655 (62M 18,847 122,412 122,504 39,938 175,222 136,97.5 38,247 2,253 14,431. 14,932 (451) 44,550 154,222 142,362 11,860 0 0 611, 11) 00 (60,`,'10)_ $434,118 $2,272,485 $2,226,222 46,26.3 $ 545 $ 230 $ S 2 5 $ 500 3 345 558 1,403 3,500 (2,097) 611 305 916 950 ( 34) 0 0 0 2100 (200) 70 0 70 500 (41) 0 0 0 _ ?'?? (200) 2,071 1,143 3,214 5,850 (2,63,,) $1,840,438 $435,261 $2,275,699 $2,232,072 (43,627) Expenses Over Revenues $2,149,053 2,275,699 $ (126,641) Note: A detail line item listing will be included in the Board papers. LBR/ l ga cc: Dean Martin A7'TACHMEWT U COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA COL'\'T1 OF Hicx ICO COMMUNICATION -DATE: April 23, 1976 NO: 33 TO: FROM: Board of Supervisors County Manager SUBJECT: Transit Services Report FY 1975-76 Submitted herewith is a report on transit services subsidized by the County of Henrico, which was requested by the Board of Supervisors in January, 1976. Summary In the space of three years the County's transit program has grown from none to six routes carrying 3, 575 passengers a weekday at a cost of $160, 000 in this fiscal year. This report presents detailed information on a proposed transit policy and operations. Recommendations include a continuing close watch on transit operations, increase in fares, reductions in services on the 1 Monument and Lakeside 24 routes, possible additional services on two routes, and consid- eration of subsidy of a private transit operator (Faglie Lines). Situation Since the County -was granted statutory authority to operate and contract for transit services in 1974, our financial commitment to this service for our citizens has increased substantially. Between 1974 and 1976 cost and service have gone from one experimental route 11 miles in length and at $6, 000 a year to $60, 000 a year in 1975 with two express routes and two local routes, then to a projected $160, 000 in 1976 with two express and four local routes. The 1976-77 Annual Plan calls for $300, 000 to maintain existing routes and provide for 4 additional services, 2 express routes with an additional fringe parking lot, Board of Supervisors Communication No: Page: 2 Date: April 23, 1976 and two local routes. Ridership in the County is now at a level of between 3, 500 and 3, 600 riders a day with buses averaging 22 riders a round trip. This relatively new service provides both problems and opportunities. First and foremost is the level of service and cost at which this service shall be maintained. The present program has been primarily to maintain and improve existing services, only one of the six routes (Regency Square) is a new service. The coming fiscal year will emphasize new services to catch up with existing and anticipated growth in demand; obviously, the rate of growth in this activity cannot continue at its present rate. The County Administration will continually work with GRTC to add or reduce service as ridership warrants. Nonetheless, costs of operation have far outstripped ridership increases. While federal operating subsidies will alleviate the deficit to a degree, the Board must be aware that this program will be a continuing financial burden. For this reason alone, every request for transit service cannot be honored. The GRTC intends to increase their base fares by $. 05 in June or July within the City. The Administration recommends that base fare for local and express services in the County be increased a like amount, effective about July 1, 1976. It is also appropriate that anachronistic $. 10 intra -county fares on the Monument and Lakeside local routes be made a uniform $. 35 at that time. GRTC estimates the increased fare will cause a net loss in riders of about 1016. It is also antici- pated the net increase in average fares will reduce the County's cost. Also recommended in this Report are a significant service reduction on the Monument route and a minor reduction on the Lakeside Route. At the same time small service increases are under consideration for the Patterson/Regency Square and Nine Mile - Seven Pines Routes. Under existing arrangements, the County contracts with GRTC for a specified level of service. Costs are assessed on a mileage rate, based on GRTC's actual per mile cost, less credits for pro -rated fares collected in the County. The Administration has a close working relationship.with GRTC. However, the County has no control over GRTC's operating costs. The County is not repre- sented officially on the GRTC Board, although Mr. Leonard Lambert, the most recent GRTC Board appointment is a County resident. Participation on the GRTC Board is possible when the Supervisors deem it to be appropriate. To this time, t - Board of Supervisors Communication No: Page: 3 Date: April 23, 1976 the County has maintained a satisfactory level of control through contract negotia- tions and the regional planning process. One additional area of note is the private transit operators within the County. One such carrier, Fairfield, was purchased by GRTC and the County in February, 1976. Another company has approached the County for operating assistance. The two remaining private transit companies also serve Hanover County, which further complicates the situation. These companies do provide service and can continue to do so at a more reasonable cost than can GRTC. The Board must weigh the services provided and the possibilities of coordinated and expanded transit ser- vices against the costs. As these private lines are operated by their proprietors, it must be anticipated that at some future time, these services will be absorbed by GRTC, if only because their present owners are forced to retire by reason" of age. Contents Immediately following this page is a table summarizing the transit services presently subsidized by the County and the regular quarterly report on transit operations. Contents of the Report include Section A. Summary History of Transit Service in Henrico County B. Characteristics of Transit Service C. Proposed County Policy regarding Transit D. Detailed Description of Present Services 1 Monument 2 Patterson/Regency Square Nine Mile - Seven Pine's 24 Lakeside Local Parham Express Lakeside Express E. Summary of Proposed Services FY 176-177 F. General Description of Regional Transportation Planning Process Appendix A: Sample GRTC contract for Service Appendix B: County of Henrico Transit Plan, November 4, 1974 Appendix C: "Urban Transit in Virginia" from Virginia Cities & Towns Appendix D: 1975 Regional Transportation Plan We will be pleased to answer any questions or to furnish any additional informa- tion desired. H 9 z H cn 0 LAI -0w 0cn��0 w 0w a� az or C%C%..,,� w f° w A d ��Lo LJ �Jro a w e n It a- to to .A N.-. y -j -j o� to to m CL as •1 t oc 7 o, Ir to a .A 'C b CJ 'rU n am o �• m ma •e r O It a Im p ,°� m 777E b .d --="= m �ro OD J 0D .D r r N O �p •� J N r to O N w < V T. mO W y isi iA iA fH 9 .D co .A W OD N .D J LIS ,P �P 01 00 O r .O Jco w r J >C Y z� �En En _ tn L%l N N N , OI1 to w , to to p•r to to W In J to I O J r O N to 1 Oo Q� O •D O` W rA N 0 co z N NQ. z y iA N -13 1 I 1 1 l 1 Ot w N J W 7., H H w 0 � rn cn D O a� z w cz r C, l 1 1 W O 1 1 1 to 1 1 1 10 1 1 1 N N OD z� 1 J � 40 1.4 io N OD .D J J J N w 1 N I O O10 1 N N O I O W N Cl N co , r to O, Oc tzl En MM V M l J 4.% JO j r D` OD .G r W N N r �" O to to O Oo O r to 10 A W& 0` .A O A W J r N W C, W O 4 c N Loh 10m0 10_oto.o to .o a r H 9 z H cn 0 or A-ITACHMEWT #- q VIRGINIA TOWN & CI1 INSTITUTE OF GOVERNMENT Commentary FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA URBAN PUBLIC TRANSIT IN VIRGINIA By JOHN A. MAHONE, Research Aide THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT in provid- ing adequate intra -urban public trans- it has increased sharply in recent years. In 1972, only two of Virginia's n%,elve major urban areas were served by publicly owned transit systems. In the fall of 1975, public bodies either owned or operated systems in ten of these urban areas. As such, public transit must now compete with other demands for governmental services and revenues. Beyond the rising capi- tal requirements, most Virginia locali- ties are being called upon to pay increasing sums out of general funds to meet the deficits arising from trans- it operations. For example, the rela- tively small Charlottesville Transit Service, the most recent to become publicly owned, projects a minimum operating deficit of S90,000 for the ten months included in fiscal year 1976. The five Virginia local govern- ments comprising the Northern Vir- ginia Transportation Commission esti- mate that their share of the larger ora Aeed ca Aew Ere ZTruek Vn d u Want it Aotw! Why wait 10 months or more when we can supply you anew FMC Bean "Class A" pumper from one of our in stock units. We finance with LOW INTEREST PATES or a LEASE PURCHASE PLAN We also have a good selection of RECONDITIONED, preowned Fire Trucks. C014TACT YOUR FULL SERVICE DEALER JACK L. F1 �' i1 mt U. S. H%Y. 58 E. - BOX 15 - SOUTH BOSTON, VA. 24592 Phone 904 675-7905 December, 1975 Washington METRO bus deficit will be $14,523,000 for fiscal year 1976, compared with $540,000 for FY 1973. Furthermore, it appears that the N`Il_:TI10 rail rate at a substnnti l dcficitwbenthe cllerail net- work begins providing service in the near future. As pubic expenditures for both capital and operating costs incident to mass transit brow, the role both of local governments and of the Com- monwealth in providing this service comes increasingly into focus. How much should governments be willing to pay? The provision of mass transit may be alternatively regarded as (1) a business, intended to make a profit in return for the services provided; (2) a public service, designed particular]}' to meet the needs of "captive riders" wbo, for various reasons, are unable to use the conventional mode of trans- portation, the auto; (3) a public utility, provided to reduce the num- ber of miles driven by car (and, by implication, to meet peak hour de- mands upon the transportation sys- tem as a -,.'hole while reducing pollu- tion and the use of petroleum); (4) an inducement to encourage citizens to live, work and shop in specific areas for specific reasons. These vari- ous goals are often more competing than complementary, for there are marry objectives which act in cross- purpose with each other. The politi- cal and administrative process is then called upon to translate the theory of objectives into the reality of dollars. As most major Virginia metro- politan areas have come to realize, it is increasing1v rare for a transit sys- tem to operate from the farebox alone. Indeed, the trend to..-ard public take- over of transit systems is an outgrowth of private companies succumbing to the relatively high elasticity of de- mand for mass transit. The general rise in affluence of the 1950's and 1969s prompted many citizens to abandon mass transit in favor of the automobile. Cutting back on service and maintenance levels while raising fares to avoid transit deficits generally resulted in further dramatic losses in patronage, v.hich, in turn, eventually led to increased deficits. Usually, those who have remained transit patrons in most Virginia areas are the ''captive riders" --the young, the old, the poor—who have little choice of transportation mode. Like a business, a governmentally -owned transit system can adjust service and fare levels in an attempt to operate from the farebox alone, even to the point of closing up shop completely if deficits persist. However, it is obvious that a governmental mandate to make the system pay its own way will have a significant impact upon these "cap- tive riders" and their cultural, re- creational and employment oppor- tunities. Those who deserted mass transit in favor of the car have proved to be very hesitant in recent years to return to transit, even if service and fares are reasonable. The rising price of gasoline has had a disappointingly small impact on transit patronage. It appears that if government wishes to decrease pollution and peak hour con- gestion in travel by inducing "margin- al riders" out of their cars, it must make transit highly competitive with the auto. This is an expensive propo- sition, to be sure, but often times not as expensive as building more high- ways to handle more autos. Beyond a certain minimum level of comfort in travel which might require newer buses, adequate shelter chile -,vait- ing and increased security, public transit systems oriented to increasing "marginal rider" patronage must pro- vide competitive : eryice. If any one variable should be singled out as im- portant in promoting increased transit ridership among those who already have access to a car, it is the time factor. \Vben mass transit can reduce total relative travel time, for instance by low headways, express lanes, rapid rail and sophisticate," trailic enbi- neerinp, there -..tel be a stron5Z in- ducemP^_ to s,,vitch modes of travel. VVIien service is such that the rela- tive travel time cannot be improved, appeals to civic responsibility will generally produce marginal results. The imposition of a parking tax within the urban core as an induce- ment to transit patronage is not only a politically sensitive matter, Leading Lines of Mim;cipal Fquipmerrt ? E0UIPh1i � 5t7 �; •* 3� COMPANY — P.ICI U\10\ -D — SALr AI — NORFOLK: 1ILUrrILLD — CODURN 10 but must also involve rates high enough to compensate for the fact that most travellers do not think of maintenance and depreciation of their cars as part of the cost of transporta- tion. The "visible" costs arc the ones which must increase dramatically. As the urban population continues to grow, and tvith it the demands upon the existing transpo..ation sys- tem as a whole, land use controls will be essential in promoting a coordi- nated transportation network. Con- tinously building highways in re- sponse to dispersed living and travel patterns or in response to increasing congestion eventual]• becomes self- defeating, both for municipalities and the outiving counties. Future authori- zation for land use must begin 'to promote utilization of transit systems, rather than inhibit them. The General Assembly has declared as policy that the development of transit facilities is necessary to the orderly growth of urban areas and is necessary for the economical utiliza- tion of public funds. For the 1974- 1976 biennium, the General Assem- bly appropriated S23,150,280 in state funds for utilization in the capital and administrative costs of providing pub- lic transit. It is likely that the Gover- nor's budget proposal 'to the upcom- ing General Assembly -will not in- clude any request for aid to urban public transit. Inasmuch as some legislators will move to maintain or increase state funding for transit, this issue promises to be one of the many controversies which the General As- sembly must resolve. Although public transportation might not yield a profit from the fare - box alone, there are benefits con- nected with transit that are not re- flected as revenue benefits in any ac- countant's c- countants profit and loss statement. When deciding expenditure levels for both rising capital and operating re- quirements, state and local officials alike must first consider their ultimate objectives in providing public transit, and how important these objectives BINGHAM & TAYLOR CORPORATION cr]t iNt rt rT At C\ -T tnnv-rR%)cz CAL\L. POVII'AV ANE) VCTrn r0\Li Manhole Framer and Covert Culpeper, Va. are in relation to other demands for funds within each particular urban area or locality. HUD Contract to Help Train City, County Managers The University of Georgia and the City and County Management Associations of Georgi*a and South Carolina have re- ceived a federal contract to develop better methods and techniques for training local government managers. The university and the professional organizations are one of 10 university/ localgovernment groups to receive research and demonstration contracts this year from the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD. Among projects planned under the con- tract are a seminar for graduate students in public administration, visits by local government managers to university public administration classes, visits by universiry public administration faculty members to watch local government managers at work and establishment of a university public administration alumni organization. In announcing the grant, Carla A. Hills, HUD secretary, said the program is de- signed to "re-establish and strengthen the historic ties between urban managers and academic institutions '.vhich prepare stu- dents for work in local governments." Selected local government managers -,gill teach a winter quarters seminar for pradr ate students in public administration. Di Frank Gibson, professor of political science and seminar coordinator, said the program will Five students an inside view of man- agers problems and will allow managers to learn of the concerns of students enter- ing the profession. Managers from Georgia and South Caro- lina will visit in university public adminis- tration classes and selected university faculty members +gill spend a +%eek along- side city and county managers to learn what problems arise and how they are handled. Graduates of the university public ad- ministration program will be surve+ed to learn which courses they have found most beneficial and xvhat other courses they feel would have helped in their Lvork. An alumni association twill be started to pro- vide continuing interchange bet veen man- agers and the university's public adminis- tration program. Political science and' public administra- tion faculty members at thb Univerity of South Carolina and Clemson University will be asked to help evaluate the project. Ray Brown, an institute governmental training associate, will serve as director of the program. George Cunningham, Field Rcpieeentafi.e ' "imepineetad" PLAYGROUND and PARK. EOUIPM.ENT Bl GMAE TIAAE, INC. CUNNINGHAM ASSOC. INC. I Bax 9554 Lakeside Br., Richmond, Vs. =3228 Phone 804!262.2401 � n k I I ACHMP NT {, r DRAFT This Agreement made this day of 1976, between the GREATER RICHMOND TRANSIT COMPANY, a Virginia Public Service Corporation with its principal ._...._.._....,;.office located at 900 East Broad Street, Richmond, Virginia, hereinafter referred to as GRTC; the COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia, hereinafter referred to as the CITY, and is the STATE OF VIRGINIA HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION �I COMMISSION, hereinafter referred to as the COMMISSION. I WITNESSETH: i WHEREAS, GRTC is the princi-pal transit carrier in I �I the Richmond Metropolitan area and is authorized to i receive. grants-in-aid from the U.S. Department of j Transportation; arid, II WHEREAS, the COUNTY, the CITY, GRTC and the �I COMMISSION desire to provide a suburban park and ride lot in the Bon Air area of Chesterfield County, including tilethe provision of transit service to such lot, and i WHEREAS, at the meeting of the Board of Supervisors on 1976 the Board voted to enter into this agreement and authorized the County Administrator I to negotiate this agreement; and I WHEREAS, the City Manager of the CITY has been authorized by the City Council to act on behalf of the CITY; and WHEREAS, GRTC's Board has authorized CRTC's President and General Counsel to enter into this agree - mens, NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of mutual promises and obligations as hereinafter set forth, it is mutually agreed as follows: (1) The GRTC has submitted an application to the U.S. Department of Transportation for a mass transit grant in aid under Section 3 of the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964, as amended, for the provision of two suburban park and ride lots. L) The C I'I'1' aml t;I( It: q-,- I It 14111,1, 1 wm:ni. the federal grant award with funds from the coMMISSION allocated for the CITY in the amount of eighty-five percent (857) of the local match to the federal grant. 3) The COMMISSION hereby agrees to plan, design, acquire the right-of-way and construct a suburban park and ride lot to be known as the Bon Air parking lot located at , as shown on the attached plat, and designated as Project Number _ The COMMISSION'S activities shall be performed in accordance with applicable federal, state and county guidelines, procedures and ordinances; provided, however that the COUNTY shall approve the proposed design of the lot prior to initiating construction. ,4) The GRTC shall. rei-mburse the COMMISSION for all costs of planning, design, acqui- sition of right-of-way and construction of the Bon Air Parking Lot within 60 days of final billing for the project. CRTC shall be responsible for paying monthly progress payments for costs properly billed by the COMMISSION incurred pursuant to the completion of the lion Air Lot. (5) The COUNTY agrees to pay GRTC three per- cent of the total. project cost, so long as the total project cost does not exceed _ which is attributable to the cost of providing the Bon Air Parking Lot on receipt of an invoice for such amount after completion of the lot by CHIC and the COMMISSION. GIITC will be liable I under the terms of this agreement only to the extent that Eurnds available from eligible federal, state and local sources are provided to it for this project. (c1 7't,r CLIIJN Y turt!,er a�nr t.u,: Luunty Pu?ice w111 u.aintafn surveillance of the Non Air Parking Lot during routine pattoi uT,eratiun5. (7) The CO:L"!ISS10N agrees to own, operate and maintain the bon Air Parking Lot or have it maintained in a satisfactory 1r.anner . (8) ^.he GR.T'C agrees to operate public trar5portat4on services between the hoc J'arking Lot and vorious e`P-oy- ❑,�.t, an c ,•,_ er ia! sites wiLhir, e Eich- n,1�c area ut: a defined sehe,!u1e for the rn�lre _crn! of Lhi-s agreement In accorL'anCe with an agreement to be entered inLt, between the GkT'C and the (9) A1'_ parking will be permitted free of �'�ar�e. In the event the CO)2?1SSION J11!1-5 it r:ecessary to charge parking fees in order to defray maintenance and opera*_ion costs, the CO!9-!ISSION must obtztr. the approval of the Guard of St,,rvisors of the COUNTY of any suR•aested rate schedule, and provided further, that any such fees shall not be in excess of that required for m.,ntenance and operation of the lot. (10) The CRTC agrees to obtain and provide ridership statistics on the transit services operated at the bon Air l.ot at„j furnish the statistics to the CC', "sslON and the COUNTY. (1l} T:.e C� SSIO!Z, COhNTy C1T1' and ree Lc cooperate fully in evelnine and enterit:g into any further agree^encs which may 'De recuired during the course of the pr�ject's constructiun and operation; p1ovi,le.', 1.w,-Vc1. LI -t the CU!I1!I:,:iIU14 will be resuon.sib'.c for the project's completion. (12) This agreement shall become null and void and without effect only if the COKMISSION, the COUNTY, the CITY and CRTC mutually agree that the proposed lot is no longer i' needed for mass transit related parking, I or in the event that the application to the U.S. Department of Transportation for the provision of the lot is not approved. (13) No waiver, alteration ur mudification of the provisions hereof shall be binding unless in writing and signed by a duly authorized respresenLative of the parties hereto. Neither the CITY, CRTC, the COUNTY, nor the COhS1JSSION may assign this agreement without written consent of the other parties. (14) This agreement shall be governed by the laws of the Couuicnwealth of Virginia. f The undersigned represent that they have authority to eXeCULe this i;greement on behalf of the respecciva parties. I: 'IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto affixed their sig- natures. The CITY on 1976, the CRTC on 1976, the COUNTY on 1971,, and the CO!•L'^ISSJON on 1976. ATTEST: GREATER RICHMOND TRANSIT CUP!i'A'. ene� rai—Eounse President COJ!:TY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGIP;'_;. County Admi.r.iscrator CLcirman, Boar�c or Su;:e:v_<,._ CI'iY OF RICA^"CND City Manager VIRGINIA DEPART','ENT OF AND TkANSPORT'ATION -ate }!ig.way Comuissicncr 0 Ll PRELIMINARY STUDY and ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS for FRINGE PARKING LOT at Forest Hill Avenue and Buford Road (Parcels Block 44 Lot A - Block 45 Lots 26, 26-A, 26-B) Bon Air Required by External Operations Manual Urban Mass Transportation Administration Virginia Department of Highways & Transportation Richmond, Virginia May - 1976 Prepared By VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS AND TRANSPORTATION LOCATION AND DESIGN DIVISION CONTENTS SECTION PAGE I- General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 II- Purpose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 III - Project Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 IV - Alternatives Considered . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 V - Design Criteria And Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 VI - Traffic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 VII - Environmental Considerations. . . . . . . . . . . . 11 ILLUSTRATIONS Vicinity Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I Location Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II Zoning Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I I -A Proposed Site Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . III Alternate Sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . IV Development Sketch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V Typical Views. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VI, VI -A, VI -B Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VII, VII -A, VII -B SECTION I - GENERAL This study has been developed as a result of an agreement between the Greater Richmond Transit Company, a Virginia public service corporation; the County of Chesterfield, a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia; the City of Richmond and the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation for a fringe parking lot in the Forest Hill Avenue Corridor. The Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation will plan, design, acquire right of way and construct this facility. The department will also own, operate and maintain the Bon Air Parking Lot and will provide for continuing maintenance each year. The Greater Richmond Transit Company will operate public transpor- tation services between the Bon Air Parking Lot and various employment and commercial sites within the Richmond area. If fees are charged for the use of the lot, the rate shall not exceed the required amount for maintenance and operation of the proposed lot. SECTION II - PURPOSE OF THE PROJECT This project is intended to meet some of the transportation needs of a residential area with some multiple family developments. The project is intended to encourage energy conservation through the reduction of vehicle miles, thus reducing fuel used. This project will create a reduction in automobile traffic from this area to downtown Richmond reducing congestion to a certain extent. The popularity of other fringe parking lots in the Richmond area and otner areas of the state has shown a strong market for express bus service. "A Recommended Five Year Transit Development Program for the Counties of Chesterfield and Henrico" prepared in 1975 proposes that this project be initiated as soon as possible. -2-