The URL can be used to link to this page

07-15-1968 PacketI ~• VI.:GIi~3It~: At a regular meeting of the Hoard of Supervisors of Chestc:rficld County, held at the Courthouse on July 15, 1968 at 7:00 P.Ni. Pres`nt: ~~ 1~_r. Irvin G. Horner, Chairman °~r. L~~e R. Gordon, Comm. :attorney l~i.r. H. 0. Browning, Vice-Chr. iir. T~~orris T~~ason, Fsst. Comc,,.Atty. Pr. F. F, Dietsch Nir. Hoi~Jard A, •`.ayo,Jr. Co:Planner Tir. J. Ruffin hpperson t~tr. T;aynard L1rod,~.sst.Co.Eng. Pir. .i. Tt. Piartin r~~r. 1`i. ~~~. Durnett,i:;xec. Secy. I°ir. C. J. Purdy T•~lr. John i/.Longmire, ~sst.Excc. Secy. ~g<~in the rnattcr of desi,+n criteria of Rt. 147 yeas discussed. It was pointed out th~a the lack of riht of way could prevent th Hihaiay Department frorn constructing this road with a 24' raised median and extra side slopes as rer~uested. It era.-, generally agreed that further action would be taken after discussing the rnattcr ~rrith the Hi:hway Department and the Richrnond Regional Planning Commission. T_r. Irvin Horner, Chairman of the ~~oard, states th~•.t he will not vote on the Ordinance to bc- discussed becaus•~ he owns or is interested in two establishrnents which miht be affected. r;r. Conrad Dareford comas Y~efort: the ;oard e,cplaining the necessity for an ordinUnc:~ change to lengthen th~_ hours for the sal` of beer and. wine for the 108 license:>s in the County of Chesterfield. He states th~a these. store owners now lose aaout 20`ia of the tirne for the spa c of beer and wine, tha the County is losing revenue, that this is a matter of convenience to the general public of the County, thr.t the storms owners should ba treats-d the same as store -~ owners in adjacent localities, that beer is now sold and drill continue to be sold and that the passage of this ordinance will not affect the sale of beer to a great eaent, that the stores not only lose beer sales but other sales also which is unfair competition that it is alleged that people buy beer in Richmond and throw tl~,e c.::ns on the roads in Chestcrf field coming home, and pleads with 'the r3oard to pass the proposed ordin:~nce which has been advertised for - public hearing on this date. i~ir.Raymond Robero~~rski states that he has lived in three different States and as a private citizen the present beer laws make it expensive for the Cc.~unty citizen. ,~, ~' / ins. H. Nelms, Presid.•t of the U-Totem Stores, ~ates that there are 12 stores in the area, only two in Chesterfield because of the ' prohi}.;ition of selling beer on Sunday. Y~:r.Robert Porter, member of the Uoard of Directors of the I~~ieadowbrook Country Club, speaking for said Club,reauest•~d the p~.~ssagc of the ordin~.lnce. i~ir. Sim ~::acjs taff stztos th:_.t we should trcai. others as we would be treatad. If other locs.litios h~~v~ longer hours for th` sale of beer than Chesterfield, then our merchants ~:ac•uld necessarily suffer. I•.r. Fadool runs a restaurant in the County and states th:wt this is unfair competition. i~'ir< R.J. ~satten, I<,r. Sharko, Pr. Taytan and i~ r. Russell Davenport, speak in favor of the ordinance. The Rev. ti;.C.Russ, spe~:kin nor the opposition to this request, stated th:t he concedes there will be mori~ money to those people who sill beer in the County if the hours are l~:ncthened but the more beer sold ~•aill mean more accidents and more deaths on the hi~jhwa_ys, that more tares will. be necessary to pay the cast of additional police and the other services which are re.q_uired by the sale of alcohol. He states further that 72 Counties do not sell beer on Sunday or of ter 11:00 P.P:., that Hopewell and Colonial Heights do not sell beer on Sunday as was stated by tl~e proponents. The :ev. i:'rank LaPierre, st,~_tes th~:t since the hours for the- sale of beer will dictate, the hours of the sal< of whiskey-by-the-drink, that there is more involved in this case than appears. P'ir. Robert Bass, a business man, st~t~s that the increase of 20'% will. mean an increase in related problems, such as broken homes, alcoholics, etc. He states further that the County is not really taking a loss because good people come into the County because of no Sunday sale cf beer and concludes with the statement that there is too much promiscuity and not enough discipline. ~'~r. Treadway Layne, ...ttorney, states that the sale of beer is a dangerous busin:as which has been centrollod by legislation and should be further controlled. I:r. r';inley i~lbrich_t representin, 30 r,eople from ':,foods Church mites Biblical references against the use of alcoholic bcveracjes. P~.r. rv.L.Phillips speaks for the future of young people in the area. P.r. R.r. Cochrane, introduces Debbie Carlton who states that if one accident or death is saved then don't pass the ordinance. Mr. John l:eese states that additional hours for the sale of beer c-gill mean additional traffic, more police patrol and more over indulgence. Mrs. 1;;lilliam Snead states that we do not alway agree with Richmond, why follow its example at this time. I~~r. 4dilliam ititchie states that the officers in the Police Department s 2 I, say it would be harder to enforce the late hour sale of beer, Mr, J. L. Clr_.rke, Rcv.i,,lilliam Nottingham, C.E. Hall, George Bracley, Rev, Roland Powell, Lrs4 Carolyn Seville, James Dyson, Austin Minnis and others speak against the proposed ordinance. Mr. Eareford in rebuttal stat:~s that he had checked ~aiLh the Police Department and he had been assured that them would be no difference in the operation of the Polic~~Department if the hours for the sale of beer were extended, Therefore, for the safety of the people of the County, for the good of the merchants and customers and citizens of the aunty, he again requests that the ordinance be passed, Nor. Dietsch states th~it the License Tax in Chesterfield is less than in Henrico County and the City of Fichmond, that Henrico County did not ~~et into any trouble when the hours were changed. At the request of the Rev. Roland Po~rell there wer<: 106 people who raised their hands against the proposed ordinr:~nce and 98 people for the passage of the ordinance. P:r. Bros-aping presents 65/70 letters against the ordinance from which letters the writer' names were read. rlr. Apperson states that his generation grew up with automobiles and bootleggers, that high speed causes accidents, th~:t our Society is changing and morality is changing and we cannot legislate morals. Upon further consideration, [r. Apperson makes the following motion . Bc it resolved that the following ordinance be adopted: An Grdinance to amend and reordain Chapter 7, Section 7-2, paragraphs 1 and 2 to prohibit the sale cof beer and wine during certain hours, and to provide penalties for violation. BE IT OF:Di~INID BY TI-II~ BC.:I-2D CF SUPERVIJGZS CF i'H CGUN`.CY CF CHE::~T:RFILLD, VIRGINIA: ' 1. That Chapter 7, Section 7-2, paragraphs 1 and 2 of the County of Chesterfield be and they are hereby amended and reordained to read as follows: S'~CTION 7-2 S.~I,E tiND CC~NSUI~:PTIGN CF B~;;R i1PID IN=: PRUHIBIT~:D .DURIi~TG C:~RT.'~IN HOURS OF 1;ACH D;'~Y; PENitLTY FCt VIOLATION. It shall be unlawful for any person licensed under the provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act or his agents, servants, or employees, to sell beer or wine or permit the consumption thereof on the premises mentioned in such license between the hours of 12:00 o'clock midnight and 6:00 o'clock 1~.1vI. of each Calendar day, except Sunday,and between the hours of 12:00 o'clock midnight and 12:00 o'clock noon of each Sunday, Each such offense shall constitute a separate violation punishable by',a- fine not exce_.ding five hundred dollars (500.00) or by -3- ~' • • confinement in jail not exceeding twelve (12) months, or botiiz, in the discretion of the jury or of the trial justice or of the court trying the c~:se without a jury. Gdhereupon Is. Purdy stags that this ordinance has nothing to do with th:, sale of whiskey, tha-t he has received many telephone calls and letters and visits and seconds the motion of Mir. ;~pperson. I:r. Dietsch states that the passage of this ordinance has no religious implications «nd that we cannot legislate the morals and seconds T°ir. Itipperson's motion. P'ir. T°iartin states th<~t alcohol is the chief offender to our Society today. Tyr. Browning stags thet alcohol is the chief cause of highway accidents. After further comments 1~'ir. Bro~.;ming ofars a substitute motion: That the ordin:in~e be amended to eliminate the sale of beer and wine on Sunday. ;thereupon Mr. riartin seconds the: substitute motion. i~ir. Apperson cites a challenge to the S1F_en of the Cloth°° to- educate alcoholism, that he doesn't like to oppose people who feel as sincere as those present. Rev. Russ states that as a minister he sees the other side of the question and pleads with the Board not to e;ctend the hours for the sale of beer. is vote being taken on the substitute motion - i"r. Browning, P~ir. Martin, Ivir. Dietsch and I~r. Purdy vote Aye. i'-r. ~,pperson votes No. /~ vote being taken on the original motion as arnended those voting Aye - Mr. Apperson, I`ir. Dietsch r:•nd I:r. Purdy. Those voting IJay - [.r. Martin and i<`ir. Browning, and the following ordinance is adopted: An Crdinance to amend and reordain Chapter 7, Section 7-2, paragraphs 1 and 2 to prohibit the Salo of beer and wine during certain hours, and to provide penalties for violation. B.~ IT C;RD,:IP~iDD ;~Y TH; BG. ,~.Li Gt SUPi;I.VISGRa C:i' `i'I::: Ci.UNTY GF CY.ST:,:i~ILLD, VI~tGINIA: 1. That chapter 7, Section 7-2, paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Cede of they County of Chest~:rf field be and they are hereby amended and reordained to read as follows: SCT-_GN 7-2 SALE ~.i'dD CCNSUi.P~1'IGN C:i~ Bi~R ~iVi) ';,1Pv;~ PiZOHIBIT;JD DU~:ING C~;RT:.IN HC:URS~ PAN:=.LT`l FVit VIC:LA1'IGDI. -~- It shall be unla~Jful for any person licensed under the provisions of the .'-alcoholic Beverage Control %~•ct or his agents, servants, or employees, to sell beer or t-nine or permit the consumption thereof on the premises mentioned in such license between the hours of 12:00 o'clock midnight and 6:00 o'clock i:.M. of each calendar day, except Sunday and between the hours of 12:00 o'clock midnight of each Saturday and 6:00 o'clock A.1'I. of each Monday. liach such offense shall constitute a by a fine not exceeding five hundred in jail not excec--ding twelve months, of the jury or of the trial justice case a,ithout a jury. separate violation punishable dollars or by conf inement or both, in the discretion or of the court trying the P•.r.idalter it. Saunders, i~:.r. .rank McAllister, Pr. Jerry Jewett and others come be'ore the Board in behalf of a request for a building permit for the Golden Skillet on Belt Boulevard, the location for which involved building on a County drainage easement. It was cited by a letter sic;ned by I,r. Saunders that adequate provisions would be taken for maintaining the drainage and guaranteeing to the County certain easements for future use, - Upon consider~.tion whereof, and on motion of Per. Purdy, seconded by Mr. Dietsch, it is resolved th.:t 'the request of the Golden Skillet Restaurant be and it hereby is granted, subject to the conditions embodied in a letter dated July 11, 1968 and si;ned by Mr. ~lalter R. Saunders and filed with the Board's papers, This day there were presented to this Board the following bids for the sale of the $4,000,000 ':later Revenue Bonds of Chesterfield County, Vircjinia, dated ~1pri1 1, 1968 which were received on July 15, 1968 at the office of the Executive Secretary, Chesterfield County, Th.rginia. F. G1. Craigie 8: Co. Inc. u ;'associates, water bonds due $150,000 i~pril 1, 1970; '250,000 A,~ril 1, 1971; :200,000 each year ripril 1, 1972 to 1974, inclusive, at Six (6~) per centum per annum; due I-~pril 1, 1975 at Five and 20/100ths (5.20%) per centum per annum; due X200,000 each year :.pril 1, 1976 to 1984, inclusive at Four and 75/100ths (4.75/0) per Centum per annum; due b250,000 each year rapril 1, 1985 to 1988, inclusive, at Four and 80/100th (4.80`/0) per centum per annum, plus a premium of 6583.00 at an effective interest rate of 4.894°lo per centum. Horner and Barksdale & Company « :.ssociates, water bonds maturing y200,000 each year :~pril 1, 1970 to 1974, both inclusive, 6` per centum; X200,000 in water bonds maturing April 1, 1975 at 5`;o per centum and X200,000 in ..ater bonds due each year on April 1, 1976 to 1984, both inclusive, at 4.90`Yo per centum and. X250,000 each year in water bonds due April 1, 1985 to 1988, both inclusive, 4.90% per centum, at an effective interest rate of 4.9997% per centum. The following resolution was introduc d by r. Dietsch, seconded by and adopted by the follo~~~ing vote: ~i1~e®: Irvin G. Horner, H. G.Browning, J.Ruf~`in hpperson, F. F. Dietsch, C. J. i~urdy and :i. R. Martin. Nays: None -5- NO~n, THEitLE'Gr::;, r;.:! I`t' ~:::SCLV~D, by the Board of Supervisors of Chester- field County, Virginia, that the bids submitted by F. ~. Craigie « Company and :.ssociates for the of oresaid $4,000,000 ~~dater Revenue Bonds, due $150,000 r~pril 1, 1970; $250,000 .°~pril 1, 1971; y200,000 each year 'tpril 1, 1972 to 1974, inclusive, at Six (6w) per centum per annumy due :~>200,000 :~pril 1, 1975, at Five and 20/100ths (5.20 %) per centum per annumy due .:$200,000 each year r'~pril 1, 1976 to 1984, inclusive, at Ibur and 75/100ths (4.75;) per centum per annum; due $250,000 each year r~pril 1, 1985 to 198£1, inclusive, at Four and 80/100th (4.80'%) per centum per annum, plus a premium of y583.00 at an ef-L-ective interest rate of 4.894` per centum is hereby accepted and the $4,000,000 -:rater ilevenue Bends of Chesterfield County dated :.pril 1, 1968 are awarded to F.~I.Craigie & Cornpany and :ssoci~_tcs and said bonds shall boar interest in acco~dunce with terms of said bid, a certified copy of which bid is hereby attached which is an effective rate of 4,894°,6 per centum. On motion of tiir. Dietsch, seconded by Mr, r~.i>person, it is resolved that this Board inform the Ric:;i~ond 2egional Planning Commission that it has reviewed the proposal to exchange a portion of Interstate ~t.295 for a section of the Richmond Metropolitan expressway from Rt.64 to the vicinity of the Boulevard and approves of said exchange in the hope that the arterial system in the Ietropolitan area will be substantially improved. On motion oi` T:r, ripperson, seconded by P~~r. Purdy, it is resolved that this Board adjourn at 11:55 P.M. to 2:00 P.M. on July 25, 1968. -6- ~~ .. DOVGLA$ B. FUGAT E. COM MIS9IO NER G. L. BAUGMAN, Luaw Y. Vw. W. RAN$DELL GHILTO N. LANCASTER, Vw. W. FRED~DUCKWORT H, NOVFOLK, VA. EARL A. FITZPATRICK. ROwNOKE, Vw. GEORGE O. LANDRITM. A;ExANOalq, VA. LAWRENCE H.'MCWAN E. LTrvCNOUR G. VA W. M. BCLATE R. JR., MARION, Vw. ROBERT S. WEAVER, JR.. VIG TO RIw, VA, ,t, I O`'~ ONWEAL,T~-I- O~ ~jI~G G ~ ~I~- -~~ DEPAR"fMEf`1T Q5= hilG4-IWAYS RICHMOND, VA. 23219 _ JO/IN E. MARWOOD: ' DCPUIY COM MIS 910N Efl $ CHIEF ENOIN EEa A. B. EUR E. DIRECTOR OF AOMINI9TaATION A. K. MUMSBERGER. DIR LCTOR OF ENOIN EC RINO J. V. CLARKE. DIR ECTO0. 01 OPEaATIONB W. S. G. BRITTO N, DIR ECTON OF P0.00Rw MMINO ANO PLANNING July 12, 1968 IN REPLY PLEweE REFER TO , Interstate~System - Richmond Metropolitan Area Mr. F. F. Dietsch Chesterfield County Board of Supervisor s 7678 Yarmouth Drive • ' Richmond, Virginia 23225 Dear Mr. Dietsch: This is in reference to our telephone conversation concerning the exchange of a portion of Interstate Route 295 between Route 1 north of Richmond, 'and Interstate Route 64 west of Richmond for a section of the Richmond Metropolitan Expressway from Route 64 to the vicinity of the Boulevard in the City of Richmond, It is our plan that in the event this erchanoe becomes a reality, the portion of Route 295 from Route 1 north of Richmond to Route 64 west of Richmond will become a part of proposed Route 288, the.. circumferential route ,. . around the metropolitan area of Richmond. • I might point out that tae have for some time recognized a need for the completion of a beltway around the metropolitan'area of Richmond extending • I •' from Route '1 south of Richmond through Chesterfiield County to an intersection with route 64 west of FLichmond in order to complete the circumferential route and to provide a reasonable level of traffic service, In the event of this exchange, it will mean that we would extend Route 288 to accomplish this need in the process of roadway construction in the metropolitan area as we move •. forcaard with highway facilities to satisfy the traffic needs: •,\ . It is our flan to utilize a portion of Route 295 from east of Richmond and a section of Route 288 in Chesterfield County to .the intersection with. Route 360 as a part of our Arterial System to provide a by-pass of the east-west traffic movement in the metropolitan area of the City, 47e have been working cooperatively with Chesterfield County on this secL•ion and the balance .of the circumferential route in the County in order that we may preserve the right of way for this ultimate highway facility, • Wtlile we do not Have funds for the construction of this facility, tae will through this cooperative effort with the County reserve the right of way for the future highway and permit an orderly development of the adjacent property. . .. _____A_MIGNWAY IS.AS_SAFE AS THE USER MAKES IT • .~ Mr. K. M. Wilkinson Assistant Traffic and Planning Engineer Traffic and Planning Division Virginia Department of Highways 1221 East Broad Street Richmond, Virginia 23219 Dear Mr. Wilkinson: June 27, 1968 Re: Route 147-Chesterfield County Project 0147-020-101 , C501 Project 0147-020-101 , C502 In response to your letter of March 15, 1968 the Chesterfield County-Board of Supervisors had their staff evaluate the two referenced projects. This is in accordance with Instructional Memorandum 50-2-65 of the U. S. Bureau of Public Roads which places these projects in "Category B" and requires documentation as necessary to per- mit ajudgement concerning certain determinants, three of which have been evaluated by the staff and the Board of Supervisors, and are as followy r;~ 1 . The position of the governing body as regards acceptance or rejection of the projects. ~ ; ; 2. Compatibility of the project as regards both location and design, to ~ - i the anticipated land uses in the area affected. ~ f 3. Compatibility of any additional terminal facilities (needed to insure ~ that the improvement will be effective) with anticipated land uses in 1 - the area affected. The County, by resolution of its Board of Supervisors on June 27, 1968, only approves of these projects subject to the following modifications of design and general conditions, based on items (2) and (3) above: A. ,Project 0147-020-101, C501 (1) The proposed flush median for this four lane highway design is completely unacceptable. A 24' raised concrete median must be included in the design with appropriate crossovers and channelized left turn lanes. The location of crossovers and channelized left turn lanes should be jointly determined by the Department and the County. The interior of the median should be planted with shrubs to assist in the elimination of accidents by reducing headlight glare and to;assist with the aesthetic appearance of the facility from the viewpoint of the .motorist, the ~ ~ ,pedestrian, and the nearby residents. The lack of a raised median is an invi~ion to head on and angle. coll~bsions~as-are-the-present-over-abl-design-standards-of-the, ~~i -Department with regard-to_medi.any The varying standards for urban highways used by the Department for raised medians (pp. 602.1 &''602.2 of the VDH Road Designs and Standards and Figure 17 in Volume II, Richmond Regiona Area Transportation Stu y, Preliminary Draft ave as t e minimum design for afour-lane Mr. Wilkinson -2- divided major thoroughfare in an urban area, a 17' median (15' of that being a raised portion). None of these designs indicate a flush median. In addition, your attention is directed to pp. 157, 158, and 212 of the 1957 edition of the AASHO publication on A Policy on Arterial Highways in Urban Areas. These references bear out t e need for a raised median and t e Department's own design criteria! (2) The Chesterfield Board of Supervisors objects to the present design width of raised medians in most of the Department's standards. They should have a minimum width of 24-25 feet to protect vehicles entering such facilities and making left turns, in addition to vehicles crossing the entire facility. The present median design does not adequately protect such vehicles in periods of heavy traffic flow when it is difficult to cross three or four lanes of traffic in one movement and the vehicle stops in the median crossover area with inadequate protection. This presents an accident hazard and reduces the capacity of the facility. ~ (3) Due to the nature of the development and the aesthetic conditions now in existence it is recommended that a 1:1 instead of a 1 1/2 or a 2:1 slope be I used in cuts. B. Project 0147-020-101, C502 The County was represented at a meeting with members of the Virginia Department of Highways on May 17, 1968 with reference to this project. The Department indicated a major design and alignment change from the previous public hearing and indicated that the design shown on May 17, 1968 would be presented at a public hearing on July 2, 1968. While the original design was total unacceptable to the County, the new design is acceptable (if presented as described on May 17, 1968) with one exception. The median design for the four lane divided facilities should have minimum widths of 24-25 feet as discussed under Project 0147-020-101 , C501 ,whether raised or depressed. No flush medians should exist. A particular point of emphasis should be placed on the median width on Route 675 just west of the proposed interchange of relocated Route 675 just west of the proposed inter- change of relocated Route 147 and Route 675, where shopping center traffic will enter and exit on Route 675. Sincerely, Melvin W. Burnett Executive Secretary cc: Mr. J. E. Harwood Mr. J. B. Flannery ~, DOUGLAS B. FUGATE. COMMI9EIONER G. L. BAUGNAN, LugAY, VA. W. BANS DELL CHILTON, LANCASTER, VA. W. FRED OUCKWORTH, NORFOLK, VA. EARL A. FITZPATRICK, ROw NOKE, Va. GEORGE C. LANORITH, ALE%AN ORIw. VA, LAWRENCE H. MG WANE. GYNOM9UR0. VA. W. M. BCLATE R, JR., MwR10N, Vw. ROBERT S. WEAVER. JR., VICTORIA, Vw. G~.!~rc~NWEALTH- OF ViR~~ ~ 1 JOHN E. HAR WOOD, DEPUTY COM M15910NER @ CHIEF ENGINEER A. 8. SURE. DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATION A. K. HUNS BE RGE R. DIRECTOR OF ENGINES gING J. V. CLARKS. DIq EOTOR OF OPERATION9 DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS 'A'' S. G. BRITTON, DIRECTOR OF PROGRAMMING AND PLANNING RICHMOND, VA. 23219 March 15, 1968 IN REPLY PLEASE REFER TO Route 147 -Chesterfield County Project 0147-020-1O1,C501 and C502 From: So. End Huguenot Bridge To 3.65 Mi. So, of the So. End Huguenot Bridge Mr. M. W. Burnett Executive Secretary Chesterfield County Chesterfield, Virginia 23832 Dear Mr. Burnett: Because the Regional Transportation Study is not yet on a continuing basis the Bureau of Public Roads requires the Department to obtain a letter from an official of the County indicating approval of projects partially financed with Federal funds. In my letter to you dated January 16, 1968, such a letter was requested covering the project on Route 147 from the south end of the Huguenot Bridge to 2.148 miles south. As we have not received a reply to this request and as the Department would like to extend this project to a point 3.65 miles south of the bridge, a letter indicating the County's approval of the subject project would be greatly appreciated, Sincerely, /; / ~~~~/ K.' M. Wilkinson Assistant Traffic and Planning Engineer +, p KMW: srp ~~®p E~~1~~r9i~/j~~^ -`` J~ R~ "BAR 1968 `'-~~~, cc: Mr. Irving G. Horner, Chairman ~,.~_ -: Board of Supervisors ~ R~C~jV~~ `~ 3707 Hull Street ~ o ''?1"~~'~ w. ~-~' Richmond, Virginia \ ~-K- scrl4 ~ ~N'°"'~ v~ i ~~' Z 4.~~~j~ A HIGHWAY IS AS SAFE AS THE USER MAKES IT ;, ., i ~: . ~ : February 16, 1968 i . Project 0147-020-1O1,C501 Mr. Howard A. Mayo, Jr. ~ . , Director of Planning Chesterfield County Court House •. Chesterfield, Virginia 23832 , Dear Howard: This is written with regard to your telephone inquiry of February 15, 1968 on the subject project. This project was reviewed by the staff of the Richmond Regional Planning Commission under the Section 2G~'. review procedures. A copy of • this review is attached for your information: i, If you find it necessary to indicate approval of the subject project, I recommend that it only be done if a !il slope is used for cuts and the inclusion of a _•: ~. raised concrete median with sufficient width, appropriate crossovers and chan- i nelized left turn lanes. ~.. _ ~ However, under no circumstances could I recommend your approval _ of such a project until the Virginia Department of Highways has supplied you a i• ~ complete set of the final design information. This is normally a roll of plan and profile sheets at a scale of T" = 200'. !' Please call on me if I can be of assistance to you. Sincerely, ~. I ' ~ Richard B. Robertson Executive Director .' RBR:ms \ Attachment ~ ' ~ ,~ 'r"-, t _.a~..i..` ~~_.~ _ _ __ __~. _ _.__ _ .. . .._.....L. .~I.`..~.~....u.d.%~' ~. .rte - - ~~ i I ~ _~ _- _. . ~ ~~, ~ ...~...~.:.- .. ~ .~ {; i ~ ~i ~. „ I F 1 .+ir;i ~ ail :~i I ~.1.. . .. ~ ~° ~~ . ~ ik ,. ~. iA}?4 n~. \ Jcw lr ~l~1 ~:. :a :~_•,; !~)3'vjl r.L k_'~` ~~ ~~ii~i. ' v "` ~ ~l December 1, 1967 ~ . j I tfe: Section 204 Mr. IC, M. Wilkinson Project 0147-020-101, C-501 Assistant Traffic and Planning Engineer Traffic and Planning Division ' Virginia Department of Highways ' 1221 East Srood Street ' ~ Richmond, Virginia 23219 • Dear Mr. Wilkinson: The comments and recommendations of this office as the review agency ; e been entered on VDH Form 204-1, which is attached. t h av for this projec Sincerely, Richard B. Robertson Executive Director RBR:jj l . Attachment ;. ' ' ~., ' ,~ , ~~ r. • ;. • ... i 1 ~ i +' ._~.r... «.. _. _..~__.. _. ' _.~...'.'...._...~..:wiLar,i+n.a+.:lu...r~.vrr~~a~..n...~..-..~.w:~~_~wu-~.......::.r'.i..va'v.....uwr=::u.. v+4;f.as...+.... .,. _. .. ~. ~..e..r4..........._...:...._w....~._......~.~.....-~.a~i... ~• • I 1 .. ~~t~-1 RSVYEI~; Frc~a~ `n_...,a'LS • ~ I { ~ TO TFT VIRGINIA DEPAP.I~~T?QT OP ]?:-'G:P~LSYS ON PROJECT 0147-020-107., C-501 ROUTE 147 CITY OR COUDiTY Chestc~f-ield County PROM S. Rnd IIrid^e over ;Tames P.iver __ i TO 2.148 Mi. S. South :ind 13rid;;o aver James River PAGE 1 OP 1 PAGES November 29 ~ I9 67 VA. DS2T, H?GHTdAYS PILE RR-003 - REVZELI AGEiCCY PI].u i • ~ CONP:~NTS: ' There is no question as to the need for this facility and the appropriateness of the alignment i ' ~ selected due to the heavily developed nature of the high, income area which this highway serves. Due to the nature of the development and the aesthetic conditions now in existence it is recom- '~ mended that a 1:1 instead of a 1 1~2 :1 or 2:1 slope be used in the cuts. This will cause some - problems with the growth of the vegetation and its maintenance on the slope, but this is a lesser , ' problem than would be created for the residents of this area. This will likely permit the facility ': to be built within the existing ROW. I' The lack of a raised median with appropriate crossovers and channelized left turn lanes is _ a deficiency in the present proposal. A painted median strip, or none at all, is an invitation to serious head on collusions. This median should be designed so that shrubs moy be planted in its 'interior. This will assist in the elimination of accidents by reducing headlight glare. The median width should be sufficient to protect vehicles drossing Route 147 and forced to wait in the median area. ' The planting in combination with the utilization of a 1:1 slope will provide a transportation t the natural landscape. Such a location and design will " more Basil blend in o hich will facilit w Y y insure a pleasant appearance for the motorist, the nearby resident, and any pedestrians. i i Except for the aforementioned items this project is consistent with comprehensive planning in the Richmond Region. This project will serve the loco! residents and through traffic since Route 147 is a heavily traveled major thoroughfare. RECOMMENDATIONS ` It is recommended that this project be approved by all agencies concerned once two items in - ~- ~ the present project are modified: , j' 1 . Use of a 1:1 slope for cuts. (. i 2. Inclusion of a raised concrete median, with sufficient width, , appropriate crossovers and channelized left turn lanes. i ' ` ~ While not important enought to precondition the approval of this project,.it is recommended that the I j concrete median be designed so that the interior may be planted with shrubs. ~' f: Richmond Rexional Planning Co~nission 1015 T:ast Main Street i i _(Richmond Virginia 23219 • .~~- - i i . , _ . ., i ; `--,` r~1 ~^` .; ~. ___._..._;__._..,_ . _ . - -~~ --- ~- ---.. ......Y.._~_... i~ ! ~f =. v ~~ ~ ~. r ~ ~i[n,.a n~'~,. i~~,n17 e~U~~~~ 4~O ti~..i~;~l~~~n\~Lj t"r7~JtUL\~~~IIL~I~V,i ILA,Ii~~~~~~v~_4~1{,u).~~ll\U~~I ', r~` 1 [~' b~' ~ S~21YcJ ~IY~~~~ °~ 1'if6~le~4ll\ ~,'~~'?il~ ~'K.Y4-~- =.9r ~. ~ fin ,, :., n t ~t6 -~U -~ _ ._. December 14, 1967 Statement of Richard B. Robertson, Executive Director of the Richmond Regional Plan- ning Commission, at the Public Hearing on the proposed dual-laving of Route 147 in Chesterfield County from 2.15 miles south of the south end of the Huguenot Bridge to Rovte 60. Ladies and gentlemen, my name is Richard B. Robertson and I am the Executive Director of the Richmond Regional Planning Commission. This Commission is an agency representing the County of Chesterfield, the County of Henrico, and the City of Richmond. The statements which I am about to make have been presented to the Commission which is in agreement on this project. They. have also been presented to the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors and the Board has authorized me to speak for the County of Chesterfield on this matter. My state- ments are therefore made on behalf of the Richmond Regional Planning Commission and the County of Chesterfield. The Richmond Regional Planning Commission has been designated as the oreaw'rde review ~ agency under Section 204 of the Demonstration Cities and Metropolitan Development Act of 1966 with regard to capital improvements involving federal funds under various programs such j as highways. This project has been reviewed by the Richmond Regional Planning Commission and discussed with representatives of the County, the Virginia Department of Highways and the ': shopping center development. The preliminary engineering and final design studies of the Department have not recog- n nized the recommended improvement of Robius Road to a 4-lane divided highway facility in ~ the forthcoming Richmond Area Major Thoroughfare Plan. The final design proposed does not adequately recognize the future traffic which will be generated by the residential development anticipated in this area and the effect of a shopping center at this location. The location of this facility generally along the present alignment of existing Route 147, is not the best solution from either traffic engineering design considerations, service to the shopping center and local residential development, and planning considerations. The proposal by the VDH has aprelim- inary engineering estimate of $1,205,500 without an interchange at Robius Road and $1,981,300 with an interchange. li. ...~~+vr.~+~...i.Y«.....~u.~.r:.J.r. ~.~a.u .~_.....w....~.+ _ ~.r11~~~.wr~..~h ..ewav.. m .. .............ar.~.-._~_....~arvr.......«.rw-~... ~ ~ n ~" '. i > The Richmond Regional Planning Commission dnd the County of Chesteffield tecerrimend that thjs project be .denied by the Bureou of Public fabads as ptes~ently btoposed by the ViFgihia Department off' Highways; . It is recoth~iended 'that the a~~etnate line "A" with Interchange pro- ' , posal which was studied by the Virgin=a Department of Highways be utilized ~o d,evelop a final design, This line is shown In red on the map Which you see except that It has been slight- ly relocated by the Virginia Department of Hi,ghwhys to better protect the shopping center, and the recommended interchange at Robius Road is not shown. While I do not have the exact alignment, the approximate layout is indicated on this overlay. This facility would be used in conjunction with existing Route 147 to better serve the re- sidential development and the proposed shopping center. It would provide for the separation of residential and shopping center traffic from through traffic, reduce congestion, and help to reduce accident hazards. The cost for this proposal, as estimated by the VDH, is $2,079,600. This recommendation is more in keeping with the development of Robius Road os a four-lane divided facility as is being recommended in the Richmond Area Major Thoroughfare Plan, .. ~ ~ •v~ ~ I-:oy ~ b1b E.MRiN~.;.J ~ a~yr,pN~.. V /t . ` 1 ~ '1I t'f (lo __ ;._......_.,:..W R~~R..~iJ1=NU.e YJoNC~ ~f1E~-E- ~E2V i CE -- .. I ~ ----a-- l .._ - r _. II _..... _-.___._.__. .._.,._;. __.._.___..-,_.._._.._..::'~__._ ___ _'_ emu..}S~An~.~NC- .. .. '• ~91aq~-'~ II , ... , ` ' lcs::.._,__:.._ - 1 ~50 000 -~._. 2Jo~ 9i i _ .212'1 293 ... ~g l 1 9i ~ -- -- --- -- ~i i __.-~l -- ~--- --- 'f----- 5' Dolt --- 11°11 9co -_ .2.128 ~~;~ ._- lo'f~3~'1~~.. 2. l ~...; II II ~I ! II II I t,g, I^('~ --- Ioo oico __ . 1 l °Ilolo ._.. 2'~Io ~I1t 8 .. ~~9 3 I l 11 ~I • _ ~~It2.9~ .5' I :'7~ ._-.....:-- ---- :,_:.._...~._;_..~.-..5.205...... 2I io oo ._:. .: 1 iii S o .. _ : 2. . _ ~ T S l °1~~~ r, ~, ~ I i ~I _._ 'old .- _>~~1~5_.._ ?p I3t Slb~ _ Slowoll081 ~ i'~ _.- ~ _._..- ZOC IOI 12I*~ OOi __. .. Z.~I I tulo `a __.. .. Sl~a Io Io `d: . ' .-'~8 ___ _ _- __-- 2loio i o._._ _. 1 ti~Soi .-- _ 21~15I93 _ 5i~ o9 '3i i i I I _ / ~ j __-_Bo --- __ -_ .- _ 'o ooo_ _ .gl55oo.._ _ 2;55 ,'4;3._ 5912;3,.- ,, _ ~ - _ ~ ~~ ~ - lob ono _ ~8 L ooo _ 2.3°1 X108 - --g1 ~-- - - - - - - - 9bBi ,. 5;x.7 , . -8 ~ _._ _, _:. __ 'ooaoo_-._ ... i'1bSoo - 23b' 99 .. 5'1.~9~9~', !. I I ! ~ it II 3 ~I ''' -•-gel -------_.--.:-.--------- ___.._- 220 ooo--- - Ib'Z goo .-- -2.9108931. S03`t? I ,~ ll ~i ~ I 1 O Coo ~~ i I~ g I ,9 ~g i I '`' _-.-8 I -- •$OS.___ ~OOOa---' _ . +}`dooo-. 2~ ^i'~3 _.. 5~0 ~'1'J 1. - - ..-- 'ao l o --- - 3l Dolt .... Za-~a 1188 .__ 53.1 1 ~8I I ; ''I1-.---,-4?"'f .-_ _.._ _ _-_-- ~ooo'o.._ -- 2~}ooo -- -- 2~212a ._ ~ 11~12~i i. i l ! 1 I I I I, - ! - , ... _ .. ~~ I ..~__ ~~8~ -------- - _;..... _.:_.:.v._ _ a©.o,o --- - ~1l o°~ -- . 2~1~8'7aI__ oo 't~~ - - -- --- -- - -- o X19 ~,q _. ~, -------- _ _ _ ~ i~l_ __ I I i t II I 3" -- - -- - - -- -.. ___ _. _. ._ -- - -- - --. _1 -1 _~ ..I „ ~I ~¢~? o 4- 0 -~~ l ~`, . • HORNER, BARKSDALE & CO. JnoesfuterzC Securities P. O. BO% ~3B ]25 CHURCH STREET 645-7015 LYNCHBURG, VIRGINIA 24505 July ~, 1968 FOR $4,000,000 CHESTERFIELD COUNTY, VIRGINI BONDS. SERIES 1968_ Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia, wish to sell an additional $4,000,000 Water Revenue Bonds to be known as Series 1968, and WHEREAS, the above may be legally issued in compliance with the restrictive covenants of the authorizing resolution dated February 23, 1962. Horner, Barksdale & Co., 725 Church Street, Lynchburg, Virginia, hereby offers to purchase said bonds subject to the provisions of a resolution to be hereafter adopted which shall be satisfactory to said Horner, Barksdale & Co. and to Reed, Hoyt, Washburn & McCarthy, Attorneys, New York City. Horner, Barksdale & Co. will pay par (100) plus accrued interest from.April 1, 1968 to date of delivery for the bonds which shall mature and bear interest as follows: for $290,000 due April 1, 1970 ~ % for $200,000 due April 1, 1971 / ~ % for $200,000 due April 1, 1972 ( p yo for $200,000 due April 1, 1973 / ~ % for $200,000 due April 1, 1974 ~ % `~`~ • HORNER, BARKSDALE & CO. Inoestatent Securities P. O. BOX ]38 725 CHURCH STREET LYNCHBURG~ VIRGINIA 24505 - 2 - 845-7015 for $200,000 due April 1, 1975 .5 % for $200,000 due April 1, 1976 ~ ~~ % for $200,000 due April 1, 1977 h%lo I % for ~$200,000 due April 1', 1978 ~ ~~ % for $200,000 due April 1, 1979 ~ ~U ~ % for $200,000 due April 1, 1980 ~ % for $200,000 due April 1, 1981 ~ ~~ % for $200,000 due April 1, 1982 ~ d % for $200,000 due April 1, 1983 ~ Iv % for f $200,000 2 due April 1, 1984 ~ ~ ~ ~ % or $ 50,000 due April 1, 1985 O ~ for $250,000 due April 1, 1986 d ~ % for $250,000 due April 1, 1987 ~ ~~ % for $250,000 due April 1, 1988 7--l % The bonds sha ll be equal in all respects with all outstanding Water Reven ue Bonds of Chesterfiel d County, Virginia. The approving opinion accompanied by the usual non- litigation certificate of Reed, Hoyt, Washburn & McCarthy of New York City, will be provided by Chesterfiel d County, Virginia simultaneously with the del ivery of the bonds. Chesterfield County will provide at its expense the printed) bonds either in Richmond, Virginia or New York City, f', ~ ~ HORNER, BARKSDALE & CO. ~noesiment ,Se cu cities P. O. BOX )3B 725 CHURCH STREET LVNCHBURG, VIRGINIA 24505 I - 3 - Chesterfield County, Virginia will deliver and 845-7015 Horner, Barksdale & Co. will accept and pay for the bonds no later than August 28, 1968, unless extended by mutual consent, Interest coupons will be payable semi-annually on April 1 and October 1, in each year beginning October 1, 1968, -~ In addition to the restrictive covenants of the Authorizing Resolution dated February 23, 1962, iunder Article III, Sections 314, 315, and 316, pertaining to tlhe issuance of ' additional parity bonds, the Board of Supervisor's of Chesterfield ~. County, Virginia, shall add the following: "Addiltional bonds i shall not be issued unless the average net income available for debt service for the two fiscal years immediately preceding the issuance of the new bonds shall equal at least 120% of future maximum debt service on all bonds outstanding and the onds to be issued," The bonds will be issued in $5,000 will be registrable as to principal only, The above interest coupons equal an of ~ ~/~( % and interest cost of ~ The proceeds of the bonds shall be the retirement of outstanding temporary obliga issued to finance in part the purposes to be fir inations and ective rate ied first to of the County ed by said bonds. \`) ~ ~ HORNER, BARKSDALE & CO. ~noestm.ent .Se curifies P. O. BOX 736 ]25 CHURCH STREET 645-]015 LYNCHBURG, VIRGINIA 24505 - 4 - The acceptance of this agreement shall be recorded by a special Resolution of the Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia, Witness: Witness: Signed• Chairman, Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia Dated: Signed: Clerk, Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia Dated: Witness: Signed: ~~~--- ~~~~ President Hocrner,Barksdale & Co, Dated : O ~ Cj .: ` W ATE2. ~\L.JENILE ~JoNc~..~EIaT ~ER.V ~ ~_ T;;.;C^~Ai~~,a5 r.,.c . b1L E.Mgi N~~-~:.-' R+ 4hnroNd,.. V r4 . .~i«~~~ v ~ r. ~ it __ _ _ _ PRi}C}~ ~. __ ._.._ __:. mu.5 A L ~^ ' ' _-~~ ~ tW-L5 ~ 1-R-_n1 q+_l'_B_ ~N[£RES. -IoSLLL--- = To~A_f - \glaq-^i .-------.:_-~_;--:.___----,----;lc~;:......-. 15 0 21099oi 21 ;, ....f9~ .. >I ..- i'fl __-_ - -- - ''- __ 2!5' oolo.__ lql ~oo__ .212.84.'49._. lo'(?~~~9~ ' ~~?I ...__ _:_` ..-- °-- ---- ~ I .-_ 1'ZI Io ._ 229`~I!8~ .. loo9'a,1.8 i .'7~~ ~- --:.---•=--:.. of j i I 11. I 9 1i\~$~ , ,, __-.--,--._;.. ......- --_ - 9oi ._ 290 '1 43I ~ ~ II ~, I I ~ II ~ I 5 'I .. '^t~ 0 5.599 90 ~3_I~1'~.~~ '' ii ~ ~ i ~i I! ~JI ._-.._ .207.... 21c1 000 ... .. 13 Soo __ 23~15b~1 ~-- ... $.I,a~o,lo8~ ~ - I! -..._._....-;~_:.,_.._.'.:-':_------~ G1 I 131 r. I~ - I ~ ,~:.. , .. 1 ~ lol -,------------~----- ---- - 'o~ o._.,_.1:2 oo .._ 29It~'L43 _... .. 5'.~a bl~g: - '. ... I ~,~'I I i - .. '° ~ 5~ I~ 2I°O I ;. 1 1I~4 Soi 2'~ 5I9'I'3 ;~~y 9.9 ...- -. Qoooo I ~ ~ S' 3: ; • ~i _ - ~ , i l ~ ~ i ~ ~ I lo~ooo -- -- . q~5 5010.._ .2.95 ~4~3~ 5~1 2;~3; , - ~ -. 'oo~. ~SLooo.--- -2.9°1 b~~-- 5279e d: -- - ~i - : -`3l --- -- -- ~ ~ I ! ~ II - _a ~I - _ -- --- -- 2i o~o,._ i'IloSoo ._ 23`d ~99 Sl 9°19 ' i . So3~' - ~I - - -$~ - - - ----- - -• - 2~ ol.~~ _ _ h"T ~o0 2.'~l0 d 99; I 3'~, a it _ ,~ I 2,'00'00 ~5~ 918_ $g~ :. it 8S ;~,,.: '. ~.4ios.---- I~I° o~° - ~'~'19oo -.... 2'~, ''l,''f3 _ 5'~0 "T 91 . ~` __ _ ~ ,, ._. I ~ I ~ I ~ ~ i ----- • 'So ------ -- _:._-------__ . a ~ 8 S ~ 8 ,~ . , ~ oo - I I _ _ •',~--- ~0 2`00 __ .2'f,2m.t1p~/2~a`~..... !~~I~lo1zC ~' ~.- -'. .... ~.. .' II 71~IM /ll i, Ili 0110' ~i~ O~ UI Irl .- Id~~ o~_-~ t. r - #. ' 'REED, HOYT, WASHBURN 8e M~CARTHY - - ~ - ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LAW - ' ROBERT R. REED (Isis-194sJ 52-WALL STREET ~ ~ • .,MARTIN TAYLOR ' WM-HENRY HOYT (191]-195]J - .. _ ,COUNSEL LESTER H. WASH BURN (1919-1961J,. NEW YORK 10005 - - - ~ GABLE ADDRESS LEO A. M~CARTHY -TAYLAW"• GERARD GIOR DANO. JR. - - - ~ ~ ~ ~ •. " TELEPHONE ... ~ AREA CODE 212 .. - ~. ~ AL1gU St '22,, 1968 - HANOV ER 2-I93I Board of Supervisors of the . County of Chesterfield, •.' , ' ~ Virginia, . . (}ent lemen • We have examined a. certified copy bf the record of proceedings and other. papers submitted to ,us relating to the issuance of $4;x04;000 Water Revenue Bands of • the COUAiTY DF CHESTERFIEL•D thereinafter'referred to as. " "Ca~anty"), a political subdivision of the Commonwealth: ~' of :Virginia. The bonds are coupon bonds registrable as to `principal only and coris'ist of eight hundred bonds of •. the-denomination•of:$5,000`eachs numbered-from 1 to $4a, .inclusive,; in the .order of their maturity', dated April " , 1,..,1968,• and"'constituting. an issue. of btmds 'payable. in x annualinstal•lme'nts on April 1 in each year as follows, ' viz; ; ` Amount of Amount of •' Year`of Maturity Year of Maturity • -• Maturity" : installments •_ Maturity installments ••_ 1970 $150,ooa 1980 2oa,ooo 1971 250, oa0 198 z -. 200•, 000 ~ ~ . 197. 200,004' ~ 1982 •: 200,000 1973 200.,aoo .19$3.. 200,000.. ..1974 200,000 7.984 200,ooa - 1975 2ao,ooo :• 1985 250.,aao 1975.' 2oo,ooa :-. 1986 25a,ooo • 1972 200,,'000 1987 250;000 1978 2oa,ooo z~88~ 250,000 ,. 1979• - 200,000. ~ - - •The interest ori•the bonds iS-payable semi-annually on - • April 1 and xetober 1, The bonds bear interest as . • follows. the honds•maturing in each. of the years 1970 • to 197: inclusive, 5q per annum;. the bonds maturing' • - in the year .'1975, 5.20 per annum;-.the bonds. maturing. in eaoh of the years lg7s..ta 198, inclusive, ~..75~.per annum and the bonds 'maturing in each of the years 1985 • to,.19'88, ' inclusive, 4.80g~ per, annum, - • The bonds .are not redeemable prior to their respective. maturities. We have not examined any of the bonds except the'exeeuted bond numbered 1. _ " The Bonds are issued pursuant to the Public Finance Act of 1858 (Chapter.. 5 ' o.f Tit e 15.1 of the Code of Virginia,, 1950,)'ar~d a Resolution adopted by the Board of Superv~.sors of the Caurity on March 22, 1952 ana a Resolution adopted by said Hoard on July 2~j., 1968 to • finance L-he cost of impr'o'ving, uxtendirig and enlarging . the 'existing 4dater System awned arrd maintained •by the - County. The bonds constitute "Additional-Bonds" within . the terms of and as authorized by said Resolution, . •~1a. I ~i 't. - • .. oard..of Supervisors of .the - ? o_waity of Chesterfield, •. The bonds are payable solely from the net revenue - erived by the County from the sale of water supplied . y such water system and the credit of the County is of pledged to or obligated t4 the payment of the ~I a_id bondso `fhe County has agreed in and by the Resolution to fix' nd maintain such rents, rates, fees or other charges for water furnished as will be sufficient to produce. or yield revenues adequate to pay the expenses •_ ecessary for the administration and operation of, the water system andfor.its preservation in good; repair and working order and,to pay the aggregate~aaounta , required"by the terms .of the Resolution to'be set aside and paid into the several-funds establisY~~d to prov3~~~" for the payment of the principal of and interest or' ' _<<. the said' bonds m" " In our opinion (1) the bonds are valid and legally binding obligations of the County payabl+~ sole l" from. the net revenue.hereinbefore referred to`;and (2~ the: County is legally obligated to charge, fi~c and°' maintaim rents, rates, fees or other.charges fox water furnished by such water system and to use such revenue. for the payment of the bonds and the interest thereen-?: in accordance with the terms of the Resolution and (3)~ the payment of the. bonds and the interest thereon will.be a first charge on .such ne.t revenue and (4) the interest on the-bonds is exempt from all present-Federal iincome•taxes under existing statutes .and court decisions. ery truly yours, ~~ ~ - /,~~ C / --~. L~'~'~°~%:' l h:~:~5~ "~'~ & CO., INC. ; \~ INVESTMENTS I ..:, 616 EAST MAIN STREET • RICHMOND. VIRGINIA 23218 PHONE 64G•033I •,~A. T. T. TELETYPE 640-3637 .: ...:.. .. ..: .~,: 15, 1968 .. July .. ,`, .. .. , Board of Supervisors ~ ~ ~ , Chesterfield County Chesterfield Courthouse, Va. : Gentlemen: For $4,000,OGU'par value Chesterfield County, Virginia, Water •,:.~~,','.:`' Revenue Bonds, dated April 1,.1968, maturing April 1, 1970 to 1988, in- -";: clusipe, we will pay FOUR MILLION, FIVE HUNDRED EIGHTY-THREE and 00/100 ;;~;,;`, •' ($4,000,583.00) DOLLARS, plus accrued interest to date of delivery, for,';""`~ ~" bonds maturing and bearing interest as follows: "' ;$1,000,000 -due $I50,000 April 1, 1970; $250,000 April 1, 1971; " $200,000 each year April 1, 1972 to 1974, inclusive,' ,: at Six ((~) Per Cent per annum, ' ".:.$ '.200,000 -"due April 1, 1975, at Five and 20/100ths (5.200 Per , -0ent per annum, $1,800,000 -due $200,000 each year April 1, 1976 to 1984, inclu- ~~ sive, at Four and 75/100ths.(4.75~) Per Cent per annum, ". $1;000,000 -due $250,000 each year April 1, 1985 to 1988, inclu- " sive, at Four and 80/100ths (4.£30;0 Per Cent per annum. , We understand these bonds will be issued in the denomination of $5,000, registrable as to principal only, and non-callable prior to ma- _ ,' • ".turity. Both,.principal of and semi-annual interest (April 1 and October 1) . ., ~". on the bonds will be payable at a bank or trust company in Richmond, Virginia, or, at the option of the holder; et a bank or trust company ir, . " ATew York; N. Y. ' This bid is subject to our receiving without cost to us the un- •; qualified legal opinion of Messrs. Reed, Hoyt, Washburn & McCarthy, of. " ~. 'New York; N. Y., to the effect that these bonds are valid special obliga- ' lions of..Chesterfield Country, Virginia; payable solely from the ret revenues derived from the operation of the Waterworks System,. and issued :.. :. ~ in full compliance with the provisions of the Bond Resolution of 1962. ~:"~'.,":' It .is our understanding that Chesterfield County has been advised by lroody's Investors Service that these bonds. will be assigned their BAA-1 rating.:.It also is. our. understanding that,.the County will obtain . a rating,from.Standard & Poor°s•~ , ., , : ::: • ." • ~ ~ • . _ r .. Board of Supervisors . 'Chesterfield County July 15, 1968 .,Page ~`2 This bid is made subject to its being accepted no later than Q:00 P.i"1., July 16, 196€3, and the bonds to be delivered to us in New York;. N. Y., no later than August 2.6, 1968. The average net interest cost rate for this bid is ~..894U~. If our bin, subject to the terms and understanding as set forth in this letter, is acceptable to you, please sign and date tl:e enclosed copy and return it to us. " Very truly yours,. PHELPS, FEi~N & CO., IVew York, Id. Y. F. W. CRAIGIE & CO., 1iVC., Richmond, Va. and Associates by: r^^. W. CRA®Gp1E & CO., Iid The Board of Supervisors of Chesterfield County, Virginia, accept the above bid upon the terms a onditions as set forth therein. ,W: Jul /.~ /9 c 8 Title D to ;, •- C ~~ CJ _Hr- O ~^. ~ O ~~rHHH i7 V° to ~ t :--~rH o yr ~ lG D ~ r-'rrrr ~ lG ~ l0 lG ~rHHrr , ~ yr ~ l:7 L i--~rHHr I'<ic n l:J yr ~4 v % . ~' c7 rcn?'d H 9d G) C y C (c^ O C r V' U] `.~, 9 ;,. •n~~ W ~:~~v v~~o~c oo~com .p o~coaoo~~ ~tvv~l~ t~l~~l~l ~~ ~H ~4~ BUG ti ~ ~ -H 1 i I ~ i CA ~ W N r 0~ GJ V 6~ Ul ~ W N H O \^ O] V D1 Ln r W- N H O B ~ H G7 -{ -- •:~ In r ~ G~ O, -~ ~ v V] r CI1 /'~ to ~ yr ~:J ~i m G . y Cn .. V~ v' N C7 Z H ~ \ O Co r 9 r \ C t7 % m t-~ 1 (a ~ 1 9 np ~ 7 a t 7 0 I 1 7 0 1 I 1 E I 1 a 9 1 (p~ I. O Ly W O t-C H G: -.^ O tnr HAAH r- ~~+~.^~r ~-P~.f-~-P ~r .4~A.P .~-~.~r W W '=~ Y~tn7J H O N O O~~ O O ~ Co W O., V V V rn G~ U, Ui .(~ a~ W w Iv tJ H O to G~ ;~ O In In Ui Ui Q Q V,1 In In Ui O In O In O In O I.n O O O ~ C~7 X: ,- ( ~ rC 1 1 -~ e ~ In In ~. .0-- . I Y ~ ~ o ~ O c O O o o i.J i R G ~ [7 CA V- H N ~ to V c '~- \ ~ ~ / ~ ~ 00~ +`~ -fir .Pw wwwww ~ ~ . " c 7~ .. SS N OOrHH 0000 vo7 CA V G~ ~ ll f t7 Cn H In U, O O to In O O lr O U, O 'O O , , :-] " y H ~, \ :i ' I ~ , I 4 In In ~ In O, : ~ ~ ~';' ' ' H W / ~ [7 H r ~ ~ - H i 7 7~ ~ 2' ~C to " ' ~ O 1 0 0° o l ~ H In dJ In td H `• V V ~J / , r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ H C O V H ~ .I ! ! " .. ! 1' 1 f 1 ! ¢ ! 1 ! ! ! t 1 1 ~ 9 1 H H ~ Ut In In lr Cn In In U: In In l11 In In Ui In :^ -,^ ~ -F~ -~ Fi W O .-C ~ O ~ ~ . V V V ~ 000 v V v 6, "rn 000TH tr rn to -~ l.: N Op000 H O t7 CA OOO OC 6, In OO ~ ~ lil ~ O ~ -~ ~ __ CA~ r;- . +,~ y ~ ' - ., ~ ~ r3 H y ~ Y r ~: I .. .. O t -vr Cy-7 H ~ V Cn -cn Z to ;7 Z y w ~I ~\\ ! y W H ~ \ - T ! t! l ! I l • H ~ y~ n O c~ a, i~~ % ' r r ^: ~ 1 I t I t I I r r ..~ ;~:~r a t t ¢ V,.-fie (-. :. 1 ¢ I i r ~-~: -~t~ e!! s¢ wwwww o -? o c., o ~ ~ r~ n v, = ~ CO GG V\ • L, „'-~ In Ui VU r r W W W N N N N H r O O O Ur tO CO V GA ) S ~ (~jt O O in O U, V U~ O In O' U, O~ In O C lr. In O O lr. O V, O O In O O O O ) ! ~ ;^ '^ -.^ -F ^ -~ r -~ -~~ .;_l -~ In _ In f ~z F~ _. '~. ~ -. 1 I 7 ! 1~ (~(~ 1 1 ~) (~ 1 ~ (7 (~ 9 1! 1 In V' C] I YO O Y -~ .L~ W W W oou O O N H 0 t 0 0 0 0 ~ O O H W .~ ~ ~ ; gq ,,J o v, oooo I I :"° '~'' a~ . ~ ~ +~ -P to to ~ ~ w o e _ K- C7 '- w w ~ is C G \ .t` •~''' t 1 (~ (~ (,~ ! I ! I 1 7 1 1 ~ ~ w~ ~ \ - i " ~ ; ` H r - r-~ r -A -P .P T -~ .(-~ .~ -P ! t I 1 ! ^ -P .~ w w1 1 ! ! t I w w w w w p { { r N (7 $U \ " T,..•" O • - • t-' o rC e-~ O O O .~ '~ $` O O CC= O N N N N ~ln tnOC r H H I--~ O tn lnOOtn O O O to tnOOln to t0 GJ ao V G, OlnOOO I I ~ cn (,'~ O ~ ; _ ;~ I -N _ ~ ° ~ :~ o -,^ U~ o CA 1 n W 1 V W W G7 H O r l] \ ' o O° In ~ V Ut I ~ ~ . r.! O V O ! H~ ~ : ! I I 5 ~ ° t ! I I i t ! ! 1 ! 9 1 ! t 1~ 6 O V • T C ~+ G] v CO ~~ 1 ~ O 0 ' c.-, _ r r T , ^r t ~- :cr ~-~-r`r r -~•~~ .te r ° i , r r ~ ~ do o~ z o: c) C ~~~lll V ~ ~ G1 G G` Ui to In ^i :~ r W W W N N N H' O 1~ C7 ^~ ~ ~ In \ O to C O 1; .,+ to O U, O O U, O O Ut O U, '' I ~ L.., . ni;~ L :: ~ ~ i ~ II ! \ I N' I t "" n v: ~t / ~ ~` ~ I ~ O ~ N H ~ O ~ O !C H ~ '2,' N 1 N H °~ ~ ~ ~ rnnw Ho \~ 1 I 1 1 I I 1 1 I I 1 ! 1 ~ H G,\ C .' " o ~° G ~ O ''~ na ^J nn r -~ r -~ -~ -r` r r H.. . I 1 1 ~ r ~^ r -~ . ~ -~ -'^ ~ ~^ . i 1 1 i 1 I ~^ -~ W W W ~ I t"' 1 " ~ l J F' ~ ~ ~ o ° "~' O `- O r ~ i O O O ~ rn C, In U t` . ' / t ~ tl H UU ., C7 , . „ o o o ooov o ~ W W N N N H r r O O O l0 W V t~ ~ x . . , v,j ov,ov,tniov,oot,•: oov,v,t;.r r -~ o - I i i ,N~r rr O V ~ ~G ~ lG ~G O V ~ 'J ~G ~G G ~~rrr•~rrr~rr lG ~G ~D ~D ~~G ~G ~G ~:J ~ ~ ~ ' :~ ~~rr•~r 7 ~D Vr V` ~ + (:-~rrrr ^ lG ~O ~D ~G ~O rrt/rr ~G ~G V( lG ~D r" • ~ tdC~ycn ~ CH ~ H~t7 ~ ~ rC , ; '^ '- nhiy,; ~ V G, Cn ~ CJ GO Q7 Cb K J N t-' p ~G v0 V G, C J OJ CO 07 V N - O ~ V V V V V : ~ V ^I V V G1 ~ t7 j7 O ~ ;~ d 7 t . >~~° . n j r W ~ G~ lU l W ^ . W N r O ~ r' I C: H 7 d G r Ic r~ o ° c° 1 ~ lJ _V V d> G 1 W W ~~ ~' V y !'~ O O O O \ \ H -P w r G7 H ~-C {n u o °O o °° o -P -~ ~] r ~ 1 I ~' ~ >` l`rr ! 1 i t 1 ~~~r 4 I 7 ! 1 1 r r F~ ~~ 1 1 1 I ! ~~ W W ~ O ~y [-i W •n,! ~ t-1 w 7 r F p . p • • Q p - - • • • • • - - • • • • • - • • • • ~ tio ~ V] t7 In y O O rn a, O O Cn In .~ ..^ W W N N i-~ i-' O O O ~G ao w~ -(ry c.n In O O In O U O In O In O In O O O O H r_y r. ,_ V] C7 Va -_. O ~ ~ In Iln I~^ l r lr o° o° o c °O h ~"~ lp lG ~ , 'H '[~ ' O O .? ~ -Ur to ~ ~ V C] "U: • o a to z 4'1 HONv '.'- ~ ~ C ~ \ r I C Co . Cj Cn ~ \ C' ~ nA nn ! ~ 9 I ! ! 1 ! 1 ! 1 I I 1 1 1 G~ ~ ' -~ I{~ r 0 / H O L -~ [ OO O.O ' . O° ° • ~ ~ O ^Jo K b H r_j O O ~ O W W 41 l11 l11 .^ W W N N r O O ~ DD Cn ~ ~ C l.n In O O In O W W O In O O O In W f/] ' V \ i r H 1-• .~ -.P -~ .~ v, ~ `. \ ~.; i T W W r-' o r-' c Id H r O . ~i: j r ~ ~L` I 7 9 ! np (~ 1 i 1 ! 1 I I t O d~\ T 1 y\ W O ~ ~ •• O ~ . ~ r . rr ~~ r r~ r -fir I F~~r [ 1 1 1 -.^r ~~ O iCC h u`o',.C] 1 .~ HO b O O O O. o ° O. . '~ c ~C ` O O V V G1 to O^ .~ W W N N r-• H 0 0 0 jJ - N 0 0 to In In O V O O In O to O V! O O W • ~. ~. ~^ ^ -~ -~ -.^ ln- In ~ t'} •~] . ~ ~ \ \ \ \ \ H O r ~"' ~h ° c ~\ 0 0 o W ;--1 i-j O CJ O \ pp 1' a ! I 1 (~ ~ t 1~ 1 t nr 1 ! [ i I t 1 ~! o N ^ti ~ 'y+ r l l~ w r 7 0~ = ~ - . r ~-F~-~.~ r r ~.~.~ ., ^ i--+.~ r .~ .~-~~-P.~ t ~ r \ \ 1 N \ t" o 2' ~ GEC] N i m r O O ~ CO W W OJ CO O O V G, 6~ In O r^ .,^ W W N N 1-' H I ~ ~ ~ ° ° " C.n In lr O o O VI C lJa In O In O V, O In O ~H. b W o °° o °° ~ r-• ~ ~ ~ V H H \ N \ O 0 0 N o° o° o° O o o° o °° O O O ,J' ~ ~ .~ W~ rl , ~ G7 t7 n to nA rH -~r-•f^t~~ +'~r N~-~. _ ~~•W W W H O G, 1 r Cn t-+ H O ~G V o O • N N O 00 • O C ^ • 00 O O• l., _ `y O O O , O W W O ' N N O O H 0 0 0 \G W y ;-+ ~ Cn U 1 t/i In W l.r; In O O ~ N [n !2" \ ~ C :xA : J i.J V V ~ ~ ~ G~ ° o ° ~ b ~ N Cn d ~ ~" \ \ O ~ r ° O O O "Vr ~ 7 ~ ~ G] C] / Jh o ~. (~, rj ~ nC ~ ~ a 9 (a !~ .a i 3 ~t 1 t ! H 9 ! 1 ! 1' 1 ; ' no~na~ i ronr-+ v» y' h o -~ r ~.: ~_ u u u ~ k~ r- h-' r-` d-~ ~{-~ -{~ .I-~ ,I~ ~' .I-~ -R' ~ r A~ -~ ~ -L~ W W W • i-C C-~ f.^ "T1 O - ' • ~O C'OOO OC\~C O ln to lnN .~ ^.~ W W NNr~r OOv W V ." ~ 4?tr•_ ~ n~.~pQv, u,gpv,, F 9v,,9v,,o v,o~,v,,v, H n - ' ~ O r vi . r r °~ ° : . ~ T ~ ,- ~ i. := w wr rw W _~ ' -_ ' ~ ° o c e o c '' r z ~ i-' l ! (~ ~ (~ ! 3 ~ P ^. ~ 1 1 1 1 y('i . (~ + I i 1 (~ I ! 1 t [ e • • O ~ l p °~' F•"' O lfi V, r F-- r + • G O p ~ ~ T -'^ ~^ - - ~ ~^ ~ '" .^ r ~ r ~^~ -r^ ~^ ~ -.^ ~^ r ~ -^ W ~ ~ o Cn L O H 'r r 0 0 0 O O ~ U l0 ~ l;J W C A OJ CO O O' V dl l.fa O~ i^ W W N N u r 0 Vr I t ~ Z' C/] I n In O O In V , O O O O• U'1 In O In O In O In O O O • -~ -~ W W N 'N F-+ r y ~ G ti tb H ' H c~n 0 0 0000 0 0 0 0 ~ r d ~_~, n z~ w t n s o W v na ~r ' nn ! nn nu na 9~\ cno~ ~ ~! +~ ~ ,^ T ~ W w w O 'r ~ ~ C] ~ \• ~' O ~ H O O O W W O N N O H+ O O O O ~ OJ V O '~.1' Wf 0 of Q' --i y ?7 j ,• An Ordinance to amend and reordain Chapter 7, Section 7-2, paragraphs 1 and 2 to prohibit the sale of beer and wine during certain hours, and to provide penalties for violation. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA: ~ 1. That Chapter 7, Section 7-2, paragraphs 1 and 2 of County of Chesterfield be and they are hereby amended reordained to read as follows: the ea~. U and o SECTION 7-°2 SALE AND CONSUMPTION OF BEER AND WINE PROHIBITED, DURING CERTAIN HOUR ~ PENALTY FOR VIOLATION. It shall be unlawful for any person licensed under the provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act or his agents, servants, or employees, to sell beer or wine or permit the consumption thereof on the remises mentioned in such license between the hours of 12:00 o clock midnight and 6;00 o'clock A. M. of each calendar day, except Sunday_;_and-between---the°hours_ of'~12~:00-o'clock mid-- ~-~`I~ll~h} '~-ism-s~..~ ..rc~i~c~i~~~~~~~ n~ nh CttT'tC~ ~~ Each such offense shall constitute a separate violation punishable by a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars or by confinement in jail not exceeding twelve months, or both, in the discretion of the jury or of the trial justice or of the court trying the case without a jury. - -L NOTICE is hereby given by The Boartl of Supervisors of Ch¢sterfield County, Vlrglnta, shot an Ordinance amentlment concerning iC,e sale and consumption of'eeer and Wlne during certain hours of each da and. the cus~edyaf orpubl cahiegring iYln bulydl5, 1958, at 7:30 P. M. in }he County Courtroom at Chesterfield Court- house, Vlrglnta. A copy of the full text of the Ordl- npnce is on file In the Clerk's Offlte of the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County, Virginia, and In the office of the Executive Secretary. All persons favoring or opposing fhe atlop}Inn of fhls Ordinance are Invited to ~o}tend this meeting. Board of Supervisors of • Chesterfield County, Vlrglnln. By M. W, BU RN ETT, Clerk. XM • RICHMOND NEWBPAPE$B, i~ Publisher o~ THE RICHMOND TIMES-DISPATCH Richmond, Vs. J?x?Y_9~ 146$__________ This is to certify that the attached_____S,egaL.Natice____ ________ was published in The Richmond Times-Dispatch, a newspaper published in the City of Richmond, State of Virginia. ,. ---------------------- July_ 2 and_gs_1968 ---------------------- The first insertion being given_jlulg_2,-~2(z$------------------------ Busixeas ~Rzrl~ntattD ~xm~~e~c-~t~~tttrl~ r o II r ~ r o s u r o• r e s r. l e s o THE RICHMO1o1D 1o1EWS LEADER e v s r~ EI e^ s r••~ I s lE e o~ s o s PUBLISHED BY A ICNMOND NEWS PAPERS, INC. HENRY W. RICHARDSON gAS51HED ADVE0.T19NG nuNnGE0. July 1, 1968 County of Chesterfield Chesterfield, Va. Attention: M, W. Burnett Dear Mr. Burnett: o~~ ~ 456,E ~c`~' ,,111.1968 d -~ S -' C~~~E~ -y \~ a 1i"~~.E~ nit ~{ :w; fl~~~ We aclrnowledge receipt of your letter of June 28 enclosing a Beer and Wine Notice for publication. This notice will appear in the Times Dispatch on July 2 and 9, 1968. Your attention is directed to the terms of our acceptance which are printed on this stationery, Please notify us of any errors or omissions which you wish corrected. Invoice and Certificate of Publication will be forwarded. Very truly yours, ' H. W. Richardson, Manager Classified Advertising ss *The Richmond Times-Dispatch and The Richmond News Leader are not responsible for typographical errors or errors in publication except to the extent of the cost of the first insertion. No liability will arise through the omission for 8ny cause of any ad or legal notice. You are cautioned to check the papers to ascertain if your ad or legal notice is published on the proper dates and in the proper form. NICNMDND, YIRDINIA .' ~ .. ~_. t ... ., .. ~ .... ...a.. : 4 ~ ....... '~ ' • ~ i''~ , i An Ordinance to amend and reordain Chapter 7, Section 7-2, , paragraphs 1 and 2 to prohibit the sale of beer and wine during certain hours, and to provide penalties for violation. i • BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF . CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA: ' 1. ,That Chapter 7, Section 7-2, paragraphs 1 and 2 of the . County of Chesterfield be and they are hereby amended and reordained to read as folbws: SECTION 7-2 SALE AND CONSUMPTION OF BEER AND WINE PROHIBITED DURING CERTAIN %;..`:; HOURS OF EACH DAY; PENALTY FOR VIOLATION.. _ It shall be unlawful for any person licensed under the provisions • of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act or his agents, servants, or employees, to sell beer or wine or permit the consumption thereof. on the premises mentioned in such-license between~cth~e,,h~ours '„ 12:00 P. M. and 6:00 A. M. o,f each calendar days ~" /_" .rv.. a,~. Each such offense shall constitute a separate violation punishabrle ;.. by a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars or by confinement ;~ in jail not .exceeding twelve months, or both, in the discretion ' of the jury or of the trial justice or of the court trying the case without a jury. z ~ ,~ . ,,. C d} -~ - , :~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ;- (1) For state law authorizing counties to~fix the hours of sale of beer and wine and prescribe penalties, see Code of Va. Sec. 4-97. (2) For state law authorizing maximum punishment, see Code of _ Va. Sec. 4-92.. • Ghes,terP'ieTid Coun~g Va 7-T5-6~8 ChesterPi. ~oz~nty, I~oasc€~ of Supe~visio~rs. ~hesterPis]d' 4 re21t.'~JeII1P..31i As a .payer and a uoter I bed you.~o:glease oppose:. tt~e- sake: off'.' 1ieeA- on . 34anda~ in ; Chesterfi.e~ld- Count. ~ _G. ~'~ Mr. 8e: Mus C.F. Haut. RF'D~- ~ sautl~awn. Abe B3ox.223; µ Peters'tiurg~ Va:. G ~a' ~y~~ /6 pW • ~ ~w ~~a'-~~~ ati,~ ~ u°v ~ee-2. ~ze2~ ~-e~ ~u.~ `at'e ~_ ~ o-~~-e-s~-.~~~1 ~ ~~ ~ ~ -Q-~-~.-~.~.,U. ~. ~~ ~~ ..~x. ' (~~a-, ,s - ~y~g ~ i C~ ~~d~. C~~~ ~~ , ~~gg-~ d~ .tea-~`a-, ~~- ~ ~u,G, /sj/96$ e~ ~~~ ,.~~yt. a.c12~.eQ .~ a~c.~- ~,p~,K(Z,~ ~ Q1/~L[ l1SJ `~ Q.L Q/lu ta'i a Cx ~~Y'`Lli`` a~~~~aA GL'O„ QiYC.~,,G~~`'~-c~=cC•cY-~ GLi~c-CL ~ Qe /z4-ri22~ . I ,Q ~/ • s ~~ -- - -- - --- --t~J,_ ..~~.c~.~a1 - -- - - - -- - - _ - - -- e _ - ~~ ~, . ~~~e -- ~. Qw.Q,. /S ~ 19 Iv $ U d' ~~~ ~ ~ z~...a..~.x:>,.t~. ,a owe. . ~ ~ ~~ ~~~~ ~_. R.,o,. ,~ ~,t,~ o,.SZ ~# rn,.. ~ w. 7,~w,1.. .~r~ ~ d ~ From the study of V. ALLEN THOMPSON, Pastor ETTRICK BAYL'IST CHURCH Ettrick, Virginia 23803 ~i'r j gyp." ~,~ .~~~ ~~ - zJ.~ a ~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~Q .mac- ~~ ~-~- ~ ~.o»u~- ~~ o ~ G2~a-~ L ,~ ~~ ~~. • 1 ~i. ~ a ate. ~, . ~ ~ ~,e~ ~ ~. ,~u~ . `us~~/v~ - ~~ -~vzv~...,z ~ ° ,~:-... ~ . ~G~~ mow--- G1~ //, ~~`~'~ ~~~ ~~ • ~ ~~ ~'' ~~~ ~~ ~ o~-~'~ /`"" -" '~-<- /1-C~`" Gam' ~ G`~~.J n ~ ~- /~' VllcQ-~ ~~~. C ~ ~ ~~ -~, ~~~ ~~, ~,~ p,,' .~~C' /96 ~ . ~.~~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~~~~ ~ ~ o Tub ~¢~a~~ ~~~ ~ ~ w'~L ~'~; ~~ , ~ y~Q~~~~~ ~ ~.~~~~~ ~~~v~. ~~.j ~j %~/~ ~~~ir L~ ~~ ~~~~~ ~,~ , ~~~ -, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~y~~ ~ ~~ Q~, ~, iy, / 9G ~ O ~~~°'~ ~~~r~ C~ ~~~ .~.~. ~--d ~ ~~ (~d• ~.~z ~~ , ~~f/ . «~f ,,i 4 ~ z~ I(~~~r~z~i F!e e tv ~y~ ~s¢ me7F~ ~P~~ ~n~~, J`~.n..-rte ~~ ~~ ~, ~ -r~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~ G~~ i~ ~i~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~~~ / /~ ~a~ ~ `'~- ~ d' ,ae~-are- , o~ a.,~L o~.a,r~c~- .~ ~~~,.~,an. ~J`. V~r`^"""" ~C/~l ~~..Q r~. ~.~ • ,.~,,~6~ i~~ C~ / r ~ _~ ~` `-~ ~ ~;~ 2~-~~~~~~ l~ °~ ~~~~~ ~~ i • ~y ~. f' u~ ~~~~ ~ ~/' ,~` ~ -~ /J !j / ~ ~ ~ `~ ~~ ,, (J (~ 2 ~~~ ~ c.~C,dty ~~v v ~ ~~i ~ ~ C ~~~~~ ~,~~~~-- ~~?,v ,~~ ~7 a,.z a C~rv~ ~~,~~~ `fin- ~J~~.tis~~~' .~>~ ~ ~ ~L ~~ ~~~.~~ ~~ ~-~.~- ~~ ~y ~.~-~-- ~ ~~ ~. ~r~~^/~ ~~ ~-~ :~~^-~ "~°'~ _;., fix, ;lam-~-,~ ~~k ~ ~ ,f3s" ~ ~~~ ~s~ ~..- ~- -.- • • ~~~ ~~ ~ ~- ~~ ~ ~~~P~ ~' . ~ ~~~ ~~ a -,~. ~~~~ c ~ ~ ~~ ~'y`v ..t ' /~L..C.O,.~.~v C~,~""" ",, • /~~~~/~~ vim . ~"/ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~' ~ e~~ /~/-r-~ ,e~.~~~~ ~ ~z~ ~~ ~ ~7 ~/°/ ~~~~ Z~-. .%~~ . ~'~ ,~~~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~. ~~o~~~-' ~~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~.~,~~ ~~ ~~ •~ (/fLU~-C-~'-~ ~.fi.. ~-~ ~-~y/ ./ ~ /~/'~i .'Q.PLi2/ !/JCi ./J~/CQ/IG ~/ f 6--Q.~ GvYICL ~ ~~Gn~ .~d.Cer 2~7 ~ ~e~J ~ 7Fd2 Cn~u-c-e~Q . O~ o-rn, ~tcJia-mac - ~2a,~.~~ 4 .ou~~. ~G ~~ O I ~ ~ ~~e ~~i ~~9/~~C/ ~-fXiW~ ~~C~F./J`~C.-L~-i-i`-C/ ./U`.-i~~~.t-Pit--l~! ~ ~C~,_/ GC~r~I ~/iJ- ~// // • ~ ~~ ~l~ y~, ~n_. ~.~-~~ _-Y.~, ~---~; ~ @~~ ~L ~ ~~-- e..c ~~ ~~ ~~ Gam. r ~ ~~ //'~ m ~~~ ~~ ~ ~~~ ~~"- .~lin ~ ~ ~~. ~~ ,tee o~-c~ '~ ~'~ ~ ~. G~.. p ~~~~ ~/~-rw ~1%n. ~~rt~, ~~~z~M ,' ~ ~~. a~J o~c~ ~rr~~~~~-~~~'~~~~ ~~ ~~ ~'` • • ~0 Rt. 5, Hickory Road Petersburg, Va. 23803 July 15, 1968 Mr. Herbert Browning Supervisor, Matoaca District Rt. 5, Hickory Road Petersburg, Virginia 23803 Dear Mr. Browning: As chairman of the Commission on Christian Social Concerns of Wood's Methodist Church, Rt. 5, Petersburg, Virginia, and writing on behalf of members to this commission, we are aonosed to the extension of one hour to sell beer and wine, also most important the sale of beer and wine on Sundays. Mrs. C. C. Best, Chairman Commission on Christian Social Concerns Wood's Methodist Church ~mc pro r • 0 3339 Sherbrook Rd., Richmond, Virginia. July 15,1968. Chesterfield County Boa~id of Supervisors, Chesterfield Court`House, Virginia. Gentlemen: Your influence and vote against increasing the hours during which beer and liquor are sold in Chesterfield County would be greatly appreciabd. Very truly yours, ~~~ .~_~Y1a~,~G,~l l ~u ~uta~~~, QZ, - Mrs. B. Marshall N~annally, Jr. l1 copy/Supervisor Martin. The Board of Supervisors Chesterfield County Chesterfield, Virginia Dear Brethren: 526 River Road w~Q Matoaca, Uirginia 23803 ~~VV July 15, 1968 For the follaving reasons I wish to express my opposition to both the extension of the hours for the sale of beer and wine during the week and also the beginning of the sale of beer and wine on Sunday in Chesterfield County, Virginia with the hope that you may see your way clear to deny such requests: 1. According to the news recently, the sale of beer and wine in several cities was banned during the late hours to prevent violence during crisis days. Accordingly,~t~~b- eg permanent late sales of beer and wine most certainly~Be inviting an in- crease in lawlessness, civil disorder and crimes with the accompanying heartaches and material costs they would create: 2. Law enforcement officers with whom I have talked about this matter have stated that the extended hour on week nights as well as the Sunday sates would place an even 'greater burden on the already overworked policemen. 3. These law enforcement officers also stated that Sunday sales would most certainly rapidly increase the awful number of fatalities in highway accidents on week ends: 4. Another end result of Sunday's sales of beer and wine would be further desecration of the Lord's Day. 5• Upstanding citizens in neighboring cities tike Blackstone, Colonial Heights and Hopewell, where they have no. Sunday sales of beer and wine, would not want the trafficking of their people into Chesterfield County to buy beer and wine. 6. For the same reasons, we could expect only disappointment from friends in whole counties adjoining Chesterfield like Amelia, Dinwiddie, Prince George and Powhatan where they have no Sunday sales of beer and wine. IJe should respect the rights and feelings of such friends and neighbors. Brethren, I pray that you will see these six reasons as sound and worthy of your consideration as you decide how to cast your vote on the question before the Board tonight. Most appreciatively yours, ~ielz~~d'd:~._ Rol(~owell • • ~o is ~ I y'~ ~ ~d~ ~ ~. -y~~~,~ Q /~ ~~~¢ V / ~ ~ ~ ~~~v: ~~ ~~ ~~ co` 1~~~ ~~ ~~~~ ~~ ~.r~. ~+.~,. 7~lo-~e~e~~cc ~~- ~~ 0 ~/~~ ~ ~,~- ,ewe ~-~-~ ~- ~- ~°~`' ~ ~,~~ ~~~ ~ ~~~ ,~~ ~~ _ ~~~~~ ~~,kw Q%~GQ-Q-.e..-~/ UCc . ~~~ , ,~ ~' C'~, ~ . i ~,/9G~ _" ~/~ f~~„ ,, ~~'~'.J- ~:o ~ "`'`'~ ~~.t~~~~ CAP l G1~cs~ ~ ~~'' ` ~ ~ ~ ~LL~ '' G!. ~_ ~~ ~~ N° ~µ~ ~~' ~~ ~. ~ -~- ~~ ~ G~~~~~~~~ l ~~ . ~~~ a~-i ~ -~~, ~~ ~~~ ~° ~~=-~~ ~~~~~~~, ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ -c-C~e ~~ ~~`~ ~~, a a~~3 ~~ ~ . '~~ ~ ~ ~~. hj,~~,ti-`,1~~a ~ C.~f:~C.c~-c O..}~ ~~ ..IiGC.C~ LIirL./ ~ nn 1 ~/~ `-'1...~-c_J --~'X .off -~ ' .~ _ r r . l ~ ,~C.6c-tJ ~(~.C/t..~ ~=~ ~~~ ., y -~ _ c ~}'~ Eiji ~y C~///~Y~t- -~:~1~' ~G~-cv~ N Cr -- n V ~. ~., ~-.,~- y~,~- ~~ ~ ~- ~ ~~ i~~~ ~s6~ ~, ~ ~ ~- ~-- -~ ~ ~, f ~o~~ ~y/~"`/ irr~ ~~~ ?a~J ~-~~~, ~~ ha.~`-~~ ~~ -~~~-h.~ ~~ ~ ~ ^/ ~~~~«_ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ • ~~ ~y iy~~ =-' ~'~ ~~, ~~` ~'~~`~- 0 N ~~"""~ z ,~ ~- ~~.~ ~~~ Z ~ ~ ~ (Z ck.a1 ~ a lJ ~ r G,~wF,t ~ .Y' ~ r ...~ °~ .~„-ti,~. -<.~ ~~~ ~~.- .~,~"~ ~P.xPw+w~'2a o',.. a .~ ~-- ~~ . _~.,_,_ ~~ ~ ~'~ -~ G~~~ ~~ ~ ~~, ~ `~,~ ~ ~, ~ ~, ,~,w~~~ ,~- ~~~. ~ tit ~-~ ~.^'~ej- e~~~~, l~ `' ~; ~~~~ ~~ *~ ,,,d:< ,~ 2r°"~ ..~te~"~¢.~ .Pit/' J G~..~,~,/ ~-.~.di t l • ~y /~'r_ /96 S V !J_~e..~- .~~- C~ , ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~- ~~ ~~ V;°,z~- ~~ ~ ~~ ~~~ , ~ , ~~~ i ~i / cf ~i ~ n 0~-~,.c. dl ~ ~- t u~ta-x~~-a~~~ ~' ~J ~= ,~,, ~ ~dt-1~'y~ ,,~, l/o / ~-~.~.~ Qd'' y~j~c~. ~-~-~ , lfa, r1 LJ ~J' ate- ~G~ ~> ~ .~ z~- ,off ~ ~t',-~~,~-~-~ • • ~;~~„~, --~ ~s~- ~..P~D~v /dam/, i • • Wl~w ~/ -G-z .-~-~~. ~ -~--~-h, ~.~-~-~~~-~^^-~ Z ~' ~ 3 X03 ~~ ~ w • ~y ~~~~ ;- `~~~~ .~~ ~~ ...~`~-~--G~ ~~ --~~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~~ ,~ ~~ ~~~~ I • ~,, /~(/ /Y~~ 4 g r~.~ ~`f.,94._ ~ ~, ~ G' /~L~KiI~ 6e ~j~ ~te~cl c~e~ig~tteth i~t t~ ee ... Isa. 62: E cY~~~ Vii' `"' v ~~ zy~ ~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~ ~v ~~ ~~ ~~- ~~~ ~~ ~ ~, ~~~ ~~, ~~~~0~.~ s,u. ~~ ~~~ ~w ~~~~ ~~~ J; C'S'I n' ~`i~~~ x`3'%!/7` ~ C! ~ i I ~ ~~ • ~~~~ . ~~~~, y .. / /J /~ J 7 /~ ~ r ~~~~, ~~.~~ sue c1 ~~~~ ~~ .~~- =emu .~.~ ~ ~.~x` ~~ ~~ ~-.,.J ~ ~a-a,:-- ~-. ~ ~~ ~v Gil ~'~~ ~~-~ z~ Ei4-~~ ~ ~ Gay :~,x~ ~:~~1~ G~.~ ~-- ~~~~~ ~ i/~ d y/ -~L~~'-s-~S-~` ~e . ~iG~ ~t ~~GcC~ _ ~~ Dr. A. R. Martin Bon Air, Virginia 23235 Dear Dr. Martin: 517 Z'7illiamsdale Drive Richmond, Virginia 23235 July 14, 1968 l9e understand that Pdonday evening, July 15, 1968, the Chesterfield Board of Supervisors will consider a proposal to extend the length oP time that beer and wine can be sold in the County. The increased availability will necessarily lead to an increased consumption of thews alcohol beverages which is most unfortunate. V!e are opposed to the increased availability of beer and wine and sae hope that you also support this position and that you twill vote against the proposal to extend the hours that beer and wine can be sold in Chesterfield County.' S ce sly our , Q.t ~ /~0~^i7CY~ Richard L. Bidwell An Ordinance to amend and reordain Chapter 7, Section 7-2, paragraphs 1 and 2 to prohibit the sale of beer and wine during certain hours, and to; provide penalties for violation. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA: ~ 1. That Chapter 7, Section 7-2, paragraphs 1 and 2 of the County of Chesterfield be and they are hereby amended and reordained to read as follows: SECTION 7-2 SALE AND. CONSUMPTION OF BEER AND WINE PROHIBITED DURING CERTAIN HOURS OF EACH DAY; PENALTY FOR VIOLATION. It shall be unlawful for any person licensed under the provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Act or his agents, servants, or employees, to sell beer or wine or permit the consumption thereof on the premises mentioned in such license between the hours of 12:00 o clock midnight and 6:00 o'clock A. M. of each calendar day, except Sunday, and between the hours of 12:00 o'clock mid- night and 12:00 o'clock noon of each Sunday. Each such offense shall constitute a separate violation punishable by a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars or by confinement in jail not exceeding twelve months, or both, in the discretion of the jury or of the trial justice or of the court trying the case without a jury. :.. ~ ... .~ '.. ,. v /o ~~' / -- NIA L~ - --- -- - n U ~~ir~ ~2D y ~~1~~0/~ _ ~_ .~ OLIVER D. RIIDY JOHN F. DAFFRON. Ja THOMAS S. WINSTON. III J. J. JEWETT RIIDY, DAFFRON, ~1TINSTON & TEWETT ATTORNEYS AT LAW CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA 23832 July 11, 1968 Board of Supervisors Ches terfield County Chesterfield Court House, Virginia Attention: Mr. M. W. Burnett, Executive Secretary Gentlemen: CHHBiSHF[HLD. C. H. 74~~ CaHeaa ~~~ The undersigned company has applied to construct a building containing approximately 1200 square feet on the south line of Belt Boulevard for the operation of a "Golden Skillet Restaurant". The county has a 10 foot drainage easement extending through the parcel of land and through the site of the proposed building. There is now a 42 inch pipe installed through the proposed building site. If the county will grant a permit for the construction of the proposed building over the existing easement, we agree as follows: 1. To install a parallel 48 inch pipe adjacent to the existing 42 inch pipe under the proposed building, capping the same at both ends, to be opened and extended at our cost when the drainage in the area may require, such determination to be made by the county. 2. The undersigned, upon request by the county, will dedicate an alternative 10 foot drainage easement parallel to the existing easement extending through the parking lot of the site of the proposed restaurant; said alternative easement being east of an existing 20 foot driveway easement. r~ u Board of Supervisors Chesterfield County page 2 ~i 3. We will use our best efforts to obtain an alternative drainage easement east of the existing 10 foot drainage easement extending roughly along the east line of the property of Virginia Discount, Inc., in order to provide a more direct out-fall for the entire water shed. Very truly yours, Hero Land Corpora ion a ter R. Sa ers, President gkr June 27, 1968 .. :~~ ~^.,r . g. L. I~u~as~ building Inspector Gounty+ of Chesterfield Chctsterficld, Virginia Gear ~6r. Aaua~a: Re.: 1rainage for proposed "Golden skillet°° on Belt houlevar~"° TihQ shave pro~c~ct ms shown ~on the attached plena which were submitted to tP~is office for approval, indicate that a building is to be constxuct~d directly over are Qxistia~g County drainage easement whi¢~.h contains a 42 inch dimmeter corrugated metal pipe. Otte to the ir~e~dequacy of the e$istin~ drainaage ayateffi, sae recommend that this construction not be allowed ~til adequate provisions are made for drainage. ®ur recor~endmtions are still substantially the same as outlined in my letter to you on April 1, 1968 regarding the car wash which was recantlq con®tructed across ]felt boulevard from this location. The attached drawing is a preliminary study to determine a possible scheme to help alleviate the drainage psrolbl~t in this area. `Yhe structure sizes shown in refl will, if added to the existing system, accommodate the 10•year storm. Actually this area should probably be protected from flooding from at least the 25-year storm however, at this point I doubt if this is possibl®. Considerin8 all of the above, Y suggest the following steps as a ~ini~aum which the County should accept. 1. Rave the owner submit plans for and construct n 48 inch ~lia~tmr rainfarced concrete pipe (or equivalent) parallel to tflae ®xisting 42t1 pipe. The plans should contain details of the structural tzeatment of that portion of the pipe undet the proposed building and details of the tie-in to the existing 9'x3' box culvert under belt gouleverd. ~~ ~,, .~ . DOUGLAS e. FVG AT E. CoM Mls flonEa G. L. DAUGHAN. Lu rtw Y, Vw. W. RANSUELL CHILTO N, LwNCwsTE a, Vw. W. FREG DUCKWORT H, NORFOLK. Vw. EARL A. FTTZPATRIC K. ROwNOK E, Vw. GEORGE C. LANDRITH. ALE%wN DRl4. Vw. LAWRENCE H.'MCWAN E, LYNCHOUq G. Vw. W. M. SGLATE R, JR.. Mwglo n. Vw. ROBERT 5. WEAVER. JR., VIC TO RIw, Vw. f. ~. a 1.. O~ ~NWEALT~-d= O~.~J~~G ~'I I ~ '~~ I~ ~ I ~ f(I Pf)( ~~~ ~ II w~J{tt.1 9~~~h ~`Y I /' ~..1~ ( I 4~U`. n~,y fMl~ I l+Y~ ®EPA~TMERiT O~ H[GYWAYG •~ RICHMOND, VA.232i9 July 12 1968 JOHN E. HARWOOD: ' D[vU (Y COM MI•J 910 NER d CHIEF EN OIN EFP A. B. EUR E. DIq CCTOR OF AOMINIETgATION A. K. HUN58ERGE R, DIq CCTOR OF EN GIN EERiNO A J. V. CLARK E, DIq ECTON OI OP[R wTIONE W. S. G. DRITTO N, DIq ECTOR OF PgOOgAM MIND ANO PLwN NIND ' - ~ IN REPLY PLEwSE REFEq TO I S Mr, 'F, F. Dietsch Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors ' 7678 Yarmouth Drive • Richmond, Virginia 23225 Dear 1`lr, Dietsch: nterstate ystem - ..Richmond 1~"~etropolitan Area" " • a This i_s in reference to our telephone conversation concerning the :, exchange of a portion of Interstate Route 295 between Route 1 north of Richmond. and Interstate Route 64 west of Richmond for a section of the Richmond " 1`letropolitan Expressway from Route 64 to the vicinity of the Boulevard in the City of Richmond. It is our plan that in the event this exchange becomes a reality, the portiom of Route 295 from Route 1 north of Richmond to Route.64 west of Richmond will-become a part of proposed Route •288, the circumferential route around the metropolitan area of Richmond.' • I m9.ght point out that tae have for some time recognized a need for , the completion of a beltway around the metropolitan area of Richmond extending •' from Route 1 south of Richmond through Chesterfield County to an. intersection with Route 64 west of FLichmond in order to complete the circumferential route and to provide a reasonable level of traffic servi_ce_. In the event of this exchange, it will mean that we would extend Route 288 to accomplish this need in the process of roadway construction in the metropolitan area as tae move •. forcaard with highway facilities to satisfy the traffic needs. ` •~~ It is our plan'to utilize a portion of Route 295 from east of Richmond and a section of Route 288 .in Chesterfield County to the intersection with Route 360 as a part of our elrtexial System to provide a by-pass of the east-west traffic movement in the metropolitan area of the .City. 4Je have been working cooperatively with Chesterfield County on this section and the balance of the circumferential route in the County in order that we may preserve the right of way for this ultimate highway facility, y. • While we do not have funds for the construction of this facility, ;ae will through thzs cooperative effort ;pith the County reserve the right of way "• for the future highway and permit an orderly development of the adjacent property. '_~,__~~__A HIGHWAY IS AS SAFE AS'THE USER MAKES IT •, ~ Mr. F, F. Dietsch . . July 12, 1968 ' We do not anticipate that the exchange of the Interstate routing between Route 1 north of Richmond and Route 64 ~•~est of Richmond will affect in any way the construction. schedule of the portion of P,oute 288 in Chesterfield County. - Insofar as all roads in this area are 'concerned, I am sure we are i.n agreement that there is a great need over and beyond the ability of any of us ~,~ for accotaplishment. However, in view of the situation, it is incumbent upon '` us to attempt to provide at the earliest practical date those facilities that ..will render the maximum service to the traveling public and the community as a whole. ~. We trust this will provide you with the information you desire, and if • we can be of further service, please do not hesitate to call upon us. - Sincerely, ., /~ !. ~ . ' •A, K. Hunsberger. AKH.lfb Director of Engineering • ~:i .... '~ i1 ~~ • i 1 -,\ ~_ - - ~~ ~ ~ ~ .. .; ~~~~~ ~~/u~ /~Z ~I'orc _,~e 7 < at s, /!?.- <J~G • ~o_h-r_a_d /~ct_r_` ~Yd - 2~~ ~.~_~.ws-~r_~..•.-....~-~i-WK~~^- 1_6~n /-c~d.:_~o8 ,1~~~, N SCGt /_f/ .S_e_~/ bit6_//~"" G ~f ~1l_S_~ ~ .t.N_C ~ t•r Cp r.+~L_~j ~ O v~ - ~i ~ jt0 iJ ~~ ~~- Cv~.,. _c~s ~os_~w,_!'~ey~,..-c . ~er is_~ow ~t~~ ~{~~, ~//~~ ~ ~ ./ 1___/_I-/S WI-~.~ h 0 1 Q~~~f•.6~ ~,L / "'/ ~A ~.t ~.5~ i~. ~f ! 7"~ ~~ra. v Gn LPi-tc e_. R~ c ~_~m~! d_~_C_O~•-1`t-~-•-~~i'e-W e ~ ~i- •e1_s_p/_y~,_/°1~s:~acG_G~+_o._~Pwt_v_~_co_t!loa+ c~./loc.J_/_4_~e_l.~ow_s a.L._,~.!.ti~a~ . _..f~~sh.o_~ d._.l~ ros_e_6e.~~- .t'.c/e.r_~~ ~ B ~F_ir .s.. /es_ J ~` ~// ~LL . //~~~ 1 w ~'1.QT' }'R // e~M~B+T"l7~S1!1_~_VIG~~ ~~~1~ //f 7~ ~'e_~ /T'~~ • ~ /' GCv~%~ile~al ~3_w+~ 4~ ~ r wsk~• - l~ r e~ ih/ 3 s-~-It~s - C~_~~~.n3 1 • , o _._f -,Fa-~ a sL. /' /~ / / ~/ / / ~ - -sp-~ ~+-/~ s-T-+n! /I-P~Q. d_o G/_~7i~oa,~ C Our1 T+~y C~t/ b a{~- ~.1_l~ei_~ lwl_ov~~ ~C S?i_b.~G S••g___/ I~tw._~ _o ~w //I!1~_~s yon H,o~~d a_e_J~-~e_~ ,Y~,r - ~t vr~~r loc.clit~cs/ow_c/r ~o~rs_,_/je_L/_ou/a/ .,6~ ,for C~LJr~•- ,~/..~ .n v ~ / / / i _.~ ._ ~ f'e =I/~G_ r G n sue„, r'rsas~s~ .~. C/i /rc /I Q-s ~ m « .. - /Ortra ~-L~!_YSr~@~xS - ICJ d~r~..~ J4 G ~_T,~ 1 / J . G,. or7~ - . ._ i . ~~~, ~/.C._/P~,s;~- r_~b~~~s r~~-roar ~~ - _/ /'Nor_c_iyt_o!re~ ~. ~ore_!•!~o sit/ 6~er- ,~~_~'••~~ e-~e_r_~~is {v ,~e -~i~v_e . 3S_°_o s~ ~i~.~_c_~tcc_c./~/_.ci~ -~ _r_c•+_~a_r_.r_._ /~!al_2_S_o_~~(- jfior.+C//_`t_e.GJ-~`~+-~-~ort ei~~•e7~S- a _Aicm rt ~X_C s - a_ddi,k. ~.~ C.1{ e f ~(~~t c+ K I o_~a_r Str_~c~ e_,t~ is -3• /Uo U rs a-rs dts_L r~ ~~_..~~a~-7z Cs~r~i~ty' ~ ~~J'~l~ ~~~ Otis S~ ~ o,- ~~ ~ 1 ~ r.-=.~tri~ ~Gl ~ G~ ~~t, alo k.~- sedgy ,6~eer ~c- ,~/7 ~~ ~ ~ .. ,pvd irr~tl - v ~l~ol~J=J fC o~~~~~ _ I ' _ /___ ~ i_/_ _. ~ _ D is ., /Q G~rO / ~ -- - - / i /6H. ~Or~~yRr~T~OI'"' / I ss~=/_7_7 7~J ' _/_/~./_S_~S_A. O~~f~x.~/~ Ova ~ /!h'!`~jC ~s~d r/ X16-` ~~~ /_*-~.1 /.~~ ~~~3~, _ ~ ~ r _ _.t/_ _ - L'/fi3e/+,i " Y_4 a2S~-'3a ~1O"~~_wr ~ 1i1/ee.~.r ~ /p '/••• J~ O_r `w/_.,. -- De.b_b;e C'w:._l_y~sa,-/-t -Q,~, ctJ~ c. .-Q m~1.~~ ~o_r ^7~~ ~o.~.._e Jsco~ ~e-C~~ ~7~ c~v_. s._~., l~~o -~0-!!_re_s'~c~ a.r/_s_~r_/s~•,.s.r~ ~i.~~c.l s~// ~~es~ ~_~eeS~ -J / hc~ul ~f.,+oe - ~~ ~X ~~~~ ~~~ ~~4 ~_~-_ o ._C_ _4_r ~'-~ ~_?EH- - Coo N_T /e ~ • ~ /lr~~G, /_Q._/3r_~c~ -- J_7'SI.~Er' ... ~.s~ / n fKd ~Of.~CI~- ~~ ~~ ~ ~~s o ~, ~, i ~.~ ~-,;« ,- , , mar/ - /K 01-t ~O~ ~ ~ ~N~, ~ 63.C Q ~ r ~ . , ;T/ OT~crr ~ !0%/_5!f~_/_i~~{/~,~i!C~~ Q/_K/~/t_a~~~e._G°_7_~F- of _ _ (!!.? _/_IlsT. ~ L!`~J /~ Q~ir~L7 ~ l~raf .3, rite ~ (~.~,,,~- -[~ GK~I.c_o ~ d [_~ ko f y_2_T a ~y kldK. ~ ~(-fP ~CN4c_~~ ~ C~1.~1' / ./ , _~ Y. O_ i~/~~~5 Q//l ll~ria/st~/ - i'1 9 / • o =1~ /_in_.~~ ~u_. ~~ .~~t~ j f: ~er ~i.n aa~.J'..~- ~~JO f!Q_J //olow~_~W6~~~~-f'~~ oTL' _P~v_Y ~ l'~ ~ o ~rl 7ti ~.T-L.~C i (~ 7 n0_Y ~ rn/N • recess - _ -1_vrr -- iL~ ;o m ~/.~r_^ _~J ~~,.~ - '/'e ~ ~~~ /i+J7 .. 0 ~ j-a /ar - )~ A~e~~ - ~vY-a/. v -~.~~; -. to-7`r~. - ~co~e~ L+.i~ie7~ o ~~.~w ~o .roc.e ~'S, o ~~~,,~~ -~ / / ,~/ ~ef b~/~c •~~wl ~ Roca LJe~+~o/ i'~i.f' w ~c~~r S~~t. _d_~! ~- T_~!l A/dcwa~+~t-!_/l!~_.r ~y_SC~.~_~ oo_l.~!T~ ~ifiliF~I ~ / ^~~i /OA/~j ~6TfSaj Q t ~r e ~t-vI_t ~ C!rt_N_J~ KJ/J.(+?'ft /~II~~I_~l___ .~ ~ ~/_C~SG~ "` km I'C~~3 tav~ l••.~~ee~.Y_~+.+~.-L'.r..~_~ ~-yel.~ ~ ~s - _ MIJ~ - ~y o ~. ~_ J f 6 w~ G_~. ~ /e~~...,~ - alc.4• / t s a~o_c.~- cs ~ ~ _~ /!-G_I~±~c_a_~- c! v.n c~wy ~ c,~ 1'•~ /~tr~'y~_.rsi.._~1-~.-+.w..as -C_. ed(IG~~G GYris~ OI~J' ~ q!OCS_w ~ ~~C-T'°-a~~e~t -- / r ~•~o .f'~cr ~f~i O~or 1_'I±~1 07F _~I'. /_( /J.1~=~~ /_J O /~/N/l~~ J / T%C_l.1 _v_G_1~7 i-'a!1 ~ .f7/C~tdf ~10~ ~ `°~C~NoG-~od/J'-- / / . D : ~r ~ . Nd /..~~~--7-r /J_la_r~. . / 11 ..~Q/~~ .fj~. ~IrGT , _/Yl r f s ~w ~~ r_s'~_/~i~e•. ~ ~~~i!l~lf ~ ~ .T~ .~eW e 7T -r-nr P_w~-l-~o ~~s /fly ,D,~ ~~,( s~~.,,..lf: -/_Y1_~ D_~~~G~ - z_~8-/_.~ ~~~~