Archives for September 2013


Brandermill Woods Expansion and Renovation Update

Posted September 27, 2013 at 12:00 AM
Brandermill Woods presented its expansion and renovation plans to the BCA Board of Directors on September 9, 2013. If you missed it, a video (.mp4) of the presentation is available for your viewing: Brandermill Woods - Expansion and Renovation Update

Downloading of just the presentation slides is also available.


Highlights of September 9, 2013 BCA Board Meeting

Posted September 13, 2013 at 5:56 PM
Important Note: The below highlights are reported based on unofficial notes taken by NRC representatives who attended the above BCA meeting. Although we believe the below reporting is reliable and strive for accuracy, we cannot assure 100% accuracy. It is recommended to all readers that they read the approved BCA Board Meeting minutes when published.
President’s Report
President O'Hanley opened her remarks by noting that she had received a number of questions from residents regarding the BCA Board’s decisions at its August 5, 2013 meeting. She noted that there has been a lot of confusion about the decisions and that the Board is new and trying to do the right thing for residents. She noted that the BCA Board may have rushed to make decisions and continued to say that the Board would be working on the language in the decision relative to the Gilson/Collier garden. The revised language will be sent to the ARB for their input before making a final decision. She acknowledged that the BCA Board knows that the ARB consists of professional volunteers from our community and is an important BCA committee.

President O'Hanley next discussed the second issue of confusion, which was the vote taken regarding the BCA By-Laws at its August 5, 2013 meeting. This vote, as taken, would require residency in Brandermill for anyone serving on the BCA Board. The Directors have discovered that this would eliminate some of the commercial members from serving on the Board, and the Directors will address this issue during the meeting.

President O'Hanley reported that the BCA is launching the new website tonight. She thanked all of those who have worked so hard on the new website: Community Manager J.B. Bailey, Assistant Community Manager Al Raimo, Village Mill Managing Editor Wendy Parker, Sara Johnston of A Touch of Technology, and especially Dennis Peterson, Chair of the Marketing Committee, who spearheaded the creation of the new site. She also thanked Dianne Cardea for finding Dennis Peterson to lead the Marketing Committee and noted that Chair Peterson brings solid marketing experience to the committee from his work with the Walt Disney Corporation.
First Vice President’s Report
Director Davis stated that residents will notice an increased presence of VDOT vehicles within Brandermill as VDOT will be making repairs and fixing roads through the end of this year. He noted that we can expect to see a number of roads repaved with slurry seal as the Virginia General Assembly has approved to increase spending on roads and transportation. He noted that a definitive list of roads within Brandermill to receive repairs has not yet been developed, but he expects total repairs to be extensive. Director Bettin commented that this is very positive news.

Director Davis made a motion to approve Steve Russek (McTyre’s Cove) as a member of the Marketing Committee and Richard Ziegler as an NRC Representative for Regatta Point. The motion was seconded.

During discussion, Director Hillman asked if the “Application for Committee Membership” form used by Russek for his appointment had ever been approved by the BCA Board. She also commented that Russek had indicated on his application that his first choice for service was the Finance Committee and that the attachment indicated on the form was not sent. She asked if the BCA Board is now screening people before they are approved to serve on BCA committees.

Manager Bailey noted that the BCA Board has not approved the form, but previously there was no form. Director Davis agreed that the BCA Board should take action on the form.

Director Hillman asked who would interview the applicants. Director Malek responded that any BCA Director could interview the applicants and the First Vice President is the one who would generally receive the application.

Manager Bailey commented that this is one of the committee "things" that the BCA Board needs to consider. He suggested developing a process whereby an applicant initially completes a committee membership form, the First Vice President receives the form and makes the initial contact with the applicant, and the Directors have an opportunity to review/contact the applicant before voting on membership approval. Manager Bailey noted that this would enable the BCA Board to ask the applicant to serve in a “best fit” capacity.

Director Hillman made the point that the BCA Board needs to finalize the form, establish a process to accept membership applications and approve volunteers for committees. Director Bettin noted that the BCA Board needs some “background” on the applicants before approving them to serve on committees.

As the new membership application form and new process for approving committee members had not been officially adopted by the BCA Board, the Directors continued with the existing process and voted unanimously to approve the two committee applicants.
Treasurer’s Report
Treasurer Hillman noted that Manager Bailey is in the process of putting together the 2014 budget and that the Finance Committee will be looking at this draft budget some time in the next couple of weeks.
Manager’s Report
Manager Bailey reported that the 2014 budget development is on track to meet the November deadline to complete the budget process. He noted that several more walkabouts had been conducted in August, including Gleneagles, Poplar Grove, Winterberry Ridge, Old Fox, Northwich, Timber Ridge and Pebble Creek. These walkabouts result in about 20% of the neighborhoods having been visited, and additional walkabouts will resume later this month.

Manager Bailey advised that Valley Crest would assume the landscaping duties for the rest of this fiscal year. He also stated that a very severe storm in July had caused about $15,000 in electrical damages to the Village Mill building. This will be covered by BCA insurance with the exception of a $5,000 deductible.

He noted that a meeting has been scheduled with Fire and Rescue, VDOT and Police to discuss plans for the 2014 July 4th celebration. As many of our main roads are public, the BCA cannot just close them off for these events, and there are concerns about parking and accessibility for fire, rescue and police vehicles within the area. The meeting will review plans for these events and take a look at ways to deal with vehicle and pedestrian traffic, parking and other issues related to safety and efficiency.
Committee Reports
NRC Chair Mamie McNeal publicly corrected the August 15, 2013 minutes of NRC meeting, noting that Director Bob Malek, Board liaison to the NRC, had attended the meeting.

CCC Chair Dianne Cardea reminded the members that the CCC and the Activities Committee is sponsoring a Home and Yard Improvement Seminar at 7:00 p.m. on September 24 in the Brandermill Woods conference room. She encouraged everyone to attend.

Director Hillman commented on the Natural Resources Committee’s July 17, 2013 minutes (see page 19 of the September 9, 2013 Board packet) which stated that "... observation was made that there have not been any applications since the dismissal of Theresa Biagioli. This is attributed to the lack of observation and monitoring of the Swift Creek Reservoir shoreline. Work is being done without approvals." She asked if work was being done without approval and if this is being followed up by the BCA Staff. Manager Bailey responded that things are constantly being done along the shoreline and that the Staff is following up on these incidents as they become aware of them.

Director Davis noted that Director Hillman’s comments were inaccurate, since he lives on the lake and has not seen anything being done. He asserted that there are "things relative to the shoreline that should be done which are not being done, but nothing is being done that should not be." As an example, he cited trees behind Hickory Nut Pointe, which are located in dangerously eroded areas along the shoreline, representing a liability to the Association.

Director Davis asked about the reference in the Natural Resources Committee's January 2013 minutes to a BCA Board request to formulate standards for docks in conjunction with the ARB. Director Hillman said that it was a request made by the BCA Board last year when the County asked the BCA to establish dock standards.

President O'Hanley asked past President Dick Guthrie, who was in attendance, to address this. Guthrie stated that this issue came up during the last term of the BCA Board and that Chesterfield County had asked Brandermill to develop standards for docks. He stated that the issue was fully discussed at a Board meeting, and the request was made to committees to formulate and recommend a dock standard using the Woodlake dock standard as the model. Committee reports were to be received by the Board in the spring of 2013 during the transitional period of the Board. He added that someone has constructed a dock at The Landing on BCA open space. This might infer, he said, that someone could now build a dock at Sunday Park and keep his boat there. Guthrie said that he supports docks but also feels that if there is no design standard and no process for docks, Brandermill could have a "mess".

As Board liaison to the Natural Resources Committee last year, Director Hillman recalled it was unclear to the committee whether the BCA approved docks or not. The present policy states that Brandermill does not allow docks.

Director Blom commented that East West Realty had also asked the BCA to develop dock standards. He stated that East West has the authority to approve docks but will not do so until the BCA Board approves a standard.

Director Malek agreed that the dock located at the point of The Landing is clearly on BCA property and said it should be removed. Director Hillman said that she didn’t disagree with that, but since the person who used to handle such matters is no longer with the BCA, is there a process or method in place for someone to handle these types of situations.

Director Blom noted that in the August 15, 2013 NRC minutes, an NRC Rep had asked what the penalty might be if new mailbox units were not compliant by December 31, 2013. "Chair McNeal stated that it would be a covenant violation, but she was unaware of the exact penalty to implemented. Meeting attendees asked that she follow up with Manager Bailey on this." (See page 29 of the September 9, 2013 Board packet). Director Blom simply asked, "what is the answer to that?"

President O'Hanley said the CCC will be placing flyers in paper shoots to remind residents that the deadline for replacing mailboxes is quickly drawing close. She also noted that placing names on mailboxes made those units non-compliant. She reiterated that having all the mailboxes look the same beautifies the neighborhoods. NRC Chair McNeal asked if the BCA could act proactively by notifying residents who have non-compliant issues with their mailbox units of those issues so residents still had time to correct the problem. President O'Hanley replied that Standards Staff will begin to do that.

Director Malek asked how many mailboxes still needed to be replaced and does the BCA want to issue 500-600 violations.

Manager Bailey stated that as of January 1, 2014, having non-compliant mailbox units would be a violation. He asked the BCA Board how they would like to handle non-compliant mailboxes and what penalties they thought appropriate.

Director Hillman commented that by not requiring the various sub-associations to comform to the new mailbox policy, the community will not have a unified look.

Director Bettin asked if the BCA could replace non-compliant mailbox units in 2014 and bill the residents. President O'Hanley replied that the previous BCA Board had decided against that.

Returning to the subject of docks, Director Bettin offered to serve on any committee/task force that Manager Bailey might want to create to review the subject, as there are many moving parts, e.g., East West owns the land under the reservoir, BCA is unable to enforce dock standards, and the County has responsibility for water quality.
Member Voice
Joe Herbst (Harbourwood) addressed remarks to the Board concerning its decision on the Gilson/Collier garden. Herbst stated that he appreciates the dedication and hard work of the Directors in their service to the community. In particular, he stated that he was encouraged by the Board’s decision to hire John Bailey as community manager and by the work of the BCA Board to improve the condition of the pools as a community amenity. He was, however, very concerned by the BCA Board’s actions relative to the Gilson/Collier garden in August. Herbst stated that the approach taken by the BCA Board to create a separate Standard relative to gardens which applies to a single homeowner would undermine the legal foundation of the Association and the proactive enforcement of the Covenants and Standards. He noted that he is not opposed to a review and update of the language in the Standards but noted that any changes to the language should apply equally to all members. He also stated that he believes the ARB is the proper interpreter of the language in the Standards. He strongly encouraged the Directors to review last month’s decision and to make changes to the decision that are fair and equitable to all Brandermill residents.

Tom Spence (Promontory Pointe) said that he has been a resident of Brandermill for 30 years, adding that he was chair of the Finance Committee for several years. He stated that when he agreed to buy property in Brandermill, he was told that he had to accept and live by the Covenants. He stated that the Covenants are the tenants that go with the land and the legal basis for the Association. He feels that the BCA Board should not be making individual changes or compromises with residents and believes that he has a contract with the BCA to maintain the Covenants, with the BCA enforcing the Standards. Spence asked the BCA Directors to use its executive authority to enforce the Standards that exist or to use its legislative authority to create new standards, concluding that the BCA Board should resign if they don’t wish to take either of those approaches.

Dick Guthrie (Muirfield Green) thanked the Directors for their work. He noted that he worries about the BCA Board making exceptions to the Standards and said that he supported the statements made by Herbst and Pence. He encouraged the BCA Board to update the Standards, if necessary, but urged them not to carve out individual exceptions for residents.

Jim Schrecengost (Timber Ridge) made comments to support the importance of covenant enforcement. He noted the example of fabric gazebos as a violation of the existing Residential Design Standards. There are several of these in his neighborhood, and he noted that one of the problems with fabric gazebos is that they fade and become ragged over time. He stated that the current Standards require that gazebos be constructed of wood, preferably of Western Red Cedar. He understands that the ARB is now recommending a change to the Standards to allow fabric gazebos as "temporary structures" and that they be allowed to remain erected from April to October. He pointed out that this represents seven months of every year and noted that this is hardly "temporary." He noted that this recommendation is contrary to the Covenant language that disallows temporary structures of any kind. Schrecengost urged the BCA Board to uphold high community standards which influence the quality and character of our community, to not become complacent and to uphold strong proactive enforcement of the Covenants and Standards.

Steve Russek (McTyre’s Cove) commented that he agreed with the comments of the other residents regarding the Covenants and that he believes they represent the opinions of the "silent majority" of Brandermill residents. He noted that he selected a home in Brandermill because he wanted to have covenants protecting his property values.
Update on the Expansion and Renovation of Brandermill Woods
Mira Pallotta, President and CEO of Brandermill Woods, presented plans for expansion and updates to the facility. She noted that Brandermill Woods is now 25+ years old and needs to be updated to effectively compete and to meet the expectations of prospective clients. The project is large and will cost between $42-$47 million. The renovation and expansion plans are designed to accommodate residents in a "home-like" atmosphere. Today's residents want private rooms, private baths and choice. (A pdf version of the presentation slides is available for downloading. A video of the presentation is available from the NRC website.)
Launch of the New Brandermill Website
Manager Bailey updated the BCA Board and meeting attendees on the launch of the new Brandermill website. He noted that the target audience consists of residents, homebuyers and commercial clients. Development of the new site had many contributors, and Manager Bailey thanked the Staff, A Touch of Technology, and in particular, Marketing Committee Chair Dennis Peterson. Manager Bailey went through the major tabs on the website and encouraged everyone to visit the site to get a feel for its full functionality.

Chair Peterson thanked President O'Hanley for her acknowledgement of his contribution to the project. He said that he was pleased with the project reaching its objective of helping to increase/maintain property values and thanked Director Bettin for his support. He noted that he is also pleased that the website has the potential of being financially self-sustaining. He assured meeting attendees that all aspects of the site were fully discussed and vetted, and thanked everyone who contributed to the website with particular gratitude to Wendy Parker for the collection of Village Mill photographs.

Director Malek asked if the "Residents Only" section of the website would be password-protected. Manager Bailey stated that ultimately it would be; he also said that the website is a "living, breathing thing" so it will constantly be updated.
Consideration of Guidance Language for Changes to Residential Design Standard 8.5.2 Regarding Vegetable Gardens
Director Malek addressed the comments made during Member Voice and asserted that the BCA Board did not vote in August to give an exception for the Gilson/Collier garden. He read parts of the existing Residential Design Standards relative to the gardens (see page 40 of existing Residential Design Standards, Section 8.5.1) and asserted that the Gilson/Collier garden is allowable under the current Standards because he feels that the resident did not made "major changes" to his landscaping. Director Malek pointed out that there was a difference of opinion between the ARB and a majority of the Directors as to whether or not the front yard garden at the Gilson/Collier property represented a major or minor change to landscaping. He noted that the changes approved last month were never intended to be a stand-alone document. He stated that Gilson/Collier garden is only grandfathered through December 31, 2013. He said that, when language is finalized relative to standards for vegetable gardens, Gilson will be subject to that language. He noted that we have many younger residents who believe that having a small vegetable garden in the front yard is "not a big deal."

Director Malek noted that the suggested revised language relative to vegetable gardens will go to the ARB for input. After the ARB reviews the language and has offered feedback, the BCA Board will then finalize the changes to the Residential Design Standards, which will apply to everyone. The suggested language to the proposed change is as follows:

8.5.2
h.

In principle, vegetable and or fruit gardens shall be limited to the back yards of homes. If there are space or growing condition limitations, side yards are the next preferred option before front yards may be utilized.

Side yard gardens may not be located more than one-quarter the distance from the house to the adjoining property line or easement.
[Director Malek commented here that the "one-quarter" distance is a topic for which he would welcome feedback.]

The location of front yard vegetable/fruit garden shall be an area as close to the front of the house as possible and is restricted to 160 square feet or no more than one-half the size of the front yard, whichever is smaller. [Director Malek commented that the square footage is a topic for which he would welcome feedback.]

Vegetable and/or fruit plants shall be limited to normal home garden types such as tomato, strawberries, squash and other similar type plants. No large plants such as corn, sunflowers and other similar type plants. The height limit for mature plants shall be 3-4 feet. [Director Malek commented that plant heights is a topic for which he would welcome feedback.]

Low growing ground cover plants including herbs may also be used.

All gardens shall be appropriately mulched and weeded throughout the year and cleared at the end of the growing season.
[Director Malek commented that definitions of "growing season" are welcomed.]

Application for the establishment of side or front yard vegetable/fruit gardens including the type of plants to be used shall be made to appropriate BCA staff.

Director Blom noted that the audio recording of the August Board meeting regarding the Gilson/Collier compromise directly contradicts what Director Malek just said and that the recording indicated that the language voted upon at the August meeting would enable the Gilson/Collier garden to continue past 2013. Director Malek responded that it was never the intent of the compromise to enable the Gilson/Collier garden to be carried forward beyond 2013.

President O'Hanley noted that it was not her understanding that the language would carry beyond the 2013.

Director Blom noted that it was not a matter of misinterpretation. He noted that Director Hillman had asked directly if the so-called compromise language applied past 2013. The verbal response to that question affirmed that it would. Director Hillman confirmed that she had asked that question directly and had received that response. Director Malek responded that the intent was always to develop less ambiguous language as the basis for moving forward.

Director Blom agreed to the above proposed language (1) if that is the understanding and (2) if Bailey and O’Hanley believe the currently proposed language can be enforced.

Director Blom suggested that we might be better served to consider language that would allow the "integration" of vegetables with normal landscaping rather than to adopt language to allow separate "vegetable gardens." He also asked for clarification on the application process. Director Malek responded that "normal" landscaping does not require an application and that this would continue to be the accepted process. He also responded that this was the first he had heard about the concept of integrating vegetables into the landscaping. He wondered how we would monitor and enforce this. Director Hillman stated that she discussed integrated gardens during the August meeting. Director Blom noted that he had also discussed the idea of integrating vegetables in a previous e-mail. Director Hillman commented that integrated gardens would be less noticeable than 160-sq-ft vegetable gardens.

Director Davis asked if residents with integrated gardens needed to apply to the ARB. Director Hillman responded with "if you want a 'vegetable garden' in the front yard, you need to apply to the ARB with a plan that shows the integration of that." She noted that integration into the existing landscape would be key so the "garden" doesn't stand out as a garden. Director Davis pointed out that this proposed language would help to prevent subjective opinions in that regard. Director Hillman pointed out that there are major subjective "holes" in our Standards and that was the role of the ARB and Hearing Panel - to rule on those subjective issues.

Manager Bailey restated parts of the Gilson/Collier compromise: (1) that it was grandfathered through December 31, 2013 and (2) Gilson/Collier, as do all residents, must comply with any new Residential Design Standards going into the next growing season.

The BCA Board voted on the proposed language as a guiding document and agreed by a vote of 5 for and 1 against (Hillman) and 1 abstaining (Blom) to send the language to the ARB for their comments and feedback.
Consideration of Proposed Changes to the Residential Design Standards
APPEALS PROCESS
Director Leonard moved and Director Blom seconded a motion to adopt the proposed language for Appeals Section 3.8 of the Residential Design Standards (see pages 15-16 of the September 9, 2013 Board packet). Manager Bailey summarized the proposed changes to appeal an ARB decision as well as residents' prerogative to appeal to the BCA Board.

Mamie McNeal (Planter's Wood) asked for clarity in what is meant by "initial decision" in the proposed Section 3.8.1, as the ARB does try to work with residents and although an initial application may be denied, it is sometimes the case where the ARB would suggest to the applicant what changes needed to be made to enable approval of the application. Director Blom noted that in that case it would have to be the final decision.

McNeal asked why there was an option for the Board to "convene a special panel of at least three disinterested parties" to review an appeal and to make resolution recommendations to the BCA Board, if the special panel's decision had to come back before the BCA Board for a final decision. Director Blom pointed out that the BCA Board has always had this prerogative.

Joe Herbst (Harbourwood) pointed out that this process would not prevent residents from submitting new applications, but rather, the problem lies in residents not submitting applications when required.

Director Davis noted that the part of the problem is residents who do submit applications are "kicked" which, in turn, prompts people to not submit applications.

This motion was passed unanimously.

AUTHORITY FOR APPLICATION REVIEW
The BCA Board unanimously approved the language change for Administrative Review Section 3.5.2 of the Residential Design Standards (see page 47 of September 9, 2013 Board packet).
Consideration of Proposed Change to Bylaws - Article III Directors, Section 1 General Powers - Language Regarding Commercial Members
Director Leonard noted that last month in his attempt to protect the rights of Brandermill residents, he overlooked participation by our commercial members. He now moved to amend that BCA By-Law change to read as follows:
A director shall be a member of the Association and shall reside in Brandermill as defined in the Article 1.2(b) of the Third Reinstatement of the Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions of Brandermill Community Association or shall be a commercial property owner.

Director Hillman asked if this amendment allowed renters to serve on as BCA director. Director Leonard stated that a renter is not a member of the Association unless the property owner assigns that right to the renter. With that, President O'Hanley concluded that a resident of Brandermill Woods could not serve on the BCA Board. Director Hillman pointed out that commercial renters would also not qualify to run for a seat on the BCA Board.

Cassandra Lacey (Brandermill property owner) stated that if you are a member of the Association, you are also a property owner of some sort in Brandermill. "If you are a property owner in Brandermill, you have a vested interest in the community. Your dollars are in the land." She asked why a residential property owner who did not reside in Brandermill could not serve as a BCA director.

This motion passed 5:2.
Consideration of Next Step Regarding Pools Selection of Which Pool to Upgrade
Manager Bailey noted that the BCA Board needed to make two decisions:

1. What is meant by "upgrade" versus "major maintenance" of the pools. Examples he offered of what might be meant by “major maintenance” included maintaining the pumps, maintaining the pool facilities as they are and fixing the bathrooms. Examples of “upgrade” might include installing a spa or putting in a slide.
2. In order to generate an RFP to get actual costs, the BCA Board needs to decide which pool should be the focus of the RFP. Manager Bailey asked the Directors to decide if they wanted to focus on all three pools or if the focus is to be on one. If the focus is to be one, which pool would it be?

With decisions on these two items, Manager Bailey said that he and Douglas Aquatics could generate a RFP to get actual costs for Board review and approval.

Director Davis asked if Douglas Aquatics helped to prepare an RFP, does that preclude them from bidding on the project. Manager Bailey replied in the negative. Douglas Aquatics will help the BCA create an RFP for the proposed work without cost to the BCA, with the stipulation that if they are not the low bid, that they would be given an opportunity to resubmit.

Director Leonard noted that the BCA Board was about to make a pool decision without input from the residents, and he feels that doing so is wrong. Director Malek commented that making decisions is what the Directors were elected to do.

Director Bettin moved and Director Davis seconded a motion that pool development plans be focused on the North Beach pool.

Director Leonard commented that all three of the past pool consultants had recommended St. Ledgers as the pool to upgrade first. Director Malek said that Douglas Aquatics had identified North Beach as the pool that most needed an upgrade.

Director Hillman said that she did not receive any report from Douglas Aquatics stipulating that. At Director Davis' request, Manager Bailey stipulated that after visiting all three pools, Douglas Aquatics recommended focusing on North Beach for a variety of reasons: (1) Harbour Pointe is the smallest and least used pool; (2) St. Ledgers has more open space for possible future development; (3) North Beach is used by the swim team; and (4) membership usage at the St. Ledgers and North Beach are about the same. He concluded by saying that by focusing on North Beach first, the BCA could prove itself with a project of this size before moving to a possible larger project at St. Ledgers.

Director Davis commented that he thought a "we will build it and see if they come" approach would be the best one to take regarding the pools for right now. Upgrading North Beach would the lesser cost of the two pools. His feeling is that if the BCA has a really nice pool facility and residents still don’t utilize it, then the BCA Directors need to reconsider the issue of the pools, e.g., does the Association upgrade the other two pools.

Director Hillman felt that if the BCA Board was going to upgrade one pool to attract residents, it might be better to choose the larger pool and go all-out to upgrade the facility, thereby attracting more residents.

President O'Hanley said she felt the BCA Board should go with the lower cost upgrade of North Beach pool.

Director Leonard asked what the Directors might do if the BCA improved North Beach and residents "didn't come." If two pools needed to be closed, would we be happy with an improved North Beach pool? He reminded the Directors of North Beach's proximity to the lake and potential parking issues, especially if it is the only pool remaining in Brandermill.

President O'Hanley commented that if St. Ledgers is the pool chosen, the BCA would want to make improvements to include swim team requirements. She noted that the swim team has tremendous draw for residents with young children.

Director Bettin agreed with the choice of North Beach, as it has a fabulous setting. One of the things he hears from realtors is they like to bring potential homebuyers to a nice pool overlooking the lake.

Director Hillman asked if Douglas Aquatics could help to generate RFPs for both St. Ledgers and North Beach. Director Malek indicated that that would only postpone the decision-making process.

The BCA Board voted to focus on upgrading North Beach pool with a vote of 5:2.
Consideration of Creation of Association Management Software Task Force
The BCA Board voted (6:1) to create an Association Management Software Task Force (see page 69 of the September 9, 2013 Board packet).
Executive Session
The BCA Board entered into executive session to discuss BCA personnel and legal issues.


Time to Order Your New Mailbox!

Posted September 13, 2013 at 5:56 PM
No, you really don't have a lot of time left. With the number of mailboxes yet to be converted and only four BCA-approved vendors, there is some concern that there may not be enough time for remaining residents to have their new black-and-green mailbox units installed by the mandated deadline of December 31, 2013.

Acadiana Carpentry & Home Repairs Steve Clause: (804) 467-4290
GSL Builders Dave Maiorana: (804) 304-5646
Mailboxes by Atkins Vern Akins: (804) 536-6804
Major Creations by Minor Jim Minor: (804) 477-4888

Residents who choose to be "do-it-yourselfer" can stop by the BCA office to pick up the official design plans.

The NRC has also been able to develop a mechanism for implementing volume-discount programs for groups as small as five within the same neighborhood. If interested, contact Mamie McNeal (744-2678) for more information.

Neighborhood Watch Training

Posted September 13, 2013 at 5:56 PM
This message is courtesy of Brandermill Crime Prevention Committee

The Chesterfield County Police Department is holding a Neighborhood Watch Training Program as part of the new Heritage Woods effort. All Brandermill residents are invited. If your neighborhood already has a program, if you are interested in creating a Neighborhood Watch program, or you just want to learn about keeping our community safe, come join us. The training itself usually lasts one hour (depending on the number of questions asked). This session will be held on Thursday, October 3 at 7:00 p.m., Brandermill Church.

Wayne Paul is the new Heritage Woods Neighborhood Watch Coordinator, and he will be there to direct you to the appropriate room. Please try to attend. This is very important information to learn. Feel free to contact Dee Pisciella, Acting Chair, CPC at 744-6876 with any questions.


Information Packet for September 9, 2013 BCA Board Meeting

Posted September 6, 2013 at 5:15 PM
The information packet for the upcoming BCA Board meeting is now available for downloading. Please note that changes to BCA By-Laws and to the Residential Design Standards are once again on the Board's agenda (existing version of the Residential Design Standards may be downloaded from the BCA web site for comparison purposes) as well as proposed consideration in the "next step regarding pools" and creation of an Association Management Software Task Force.

We encourage residents to attend BCA Board meetings to learn of Brandermill "happenings". For a quick snapshot of what the BCA Board will be discussing, please read the agenda located on the first page of the Board Packet.