Mathews County approves $575,000 purchase of Boys & Girls Club site; consultant gives $5.6M renovation estimate

The Mathews County Board of Supervisors voted to amend the FY2024-25 budget and approve purchase of the Boys & Girls Club property at 498 Church Street for $575,000, actions the board said will preserve options for a new or renovated fire station.

The board approved a budget amendment adding $867,329 to the current fiscal plan: $18,856 in additional state revenue for the victim-witness program; $848,473 from interim financing earmarked for fire-station acquisition and related work; $211,146 for first-responder radio equipment and replacement gear; $77,175 as Mathews County’s match for VDOT design work on a sidewalk at Mathews High School; and $4,008 in adjusted victim-witness expenditures. The amended FY2024-25 total was read into the record as $40,843,165. The purchase price stated in the county’s signed commercial agreement is $575,000.

Why it matters: the purchase secures an existing, developed site with water and utilities while the county continues technical work — including engineering, soil, drainage and permitting analysis — needed to decide whether to renovate the existing buildings or build new. The board said it must balance cost, construction risk and durability while acting within a study deadline tied to the purchase option.

Consultant’s findings and cost options Donald Booth, president of DJG Incorporated, presented a six-week feasibility study of the property and three broad options for a fire station. Booth said the site includes two primary structures (a roughly 4,000-square-foot front building and an approximately 9,500-square-foot rear gym) and that both structures were built as ordinary, noncritical facilities rather than to public-safety standards.

Booth summarized structural and site issues the county would face in a renovation: the gym floor lacks sufficient reinforcing and would need removal and replacement to carry heavy apparatus; the roof and exterior “skin” would be removed and the structure shored up; electrical service would need consolidation; and circulation for fire apparatus is tight on the existing parcel without negotiating additional area or an easement from adjacent county-owned land.

Booth’s high-level cost estimates, as presented to the board, were: - Renovate both existing structures into a functioning station (construction dollars): about $4,800,000, rolled up into a recommended project budget “somewhere just over $5,600,000” when design, permitting and oversight are included. Booth described that as the study’s mid-range renovation figure. - Tear down the rear gym, renovate the front building and add a new apparatus bay attached to the front: roughly $6,100,000 in construction dollars. - Build a new 13,000–13,500-square-foot facility on a different parcel: construction-only estimates in the consultant’s range were about $6.5 million to $8.5 million; allowing for permitting and contingencies Booth said an all‑in planning budget could reach about $10,000,000 in a worst‑case scenario.

Booth also gave timing and technical context: design and permitting for a renovation typically take about six to eight months; construction of the Church Street renovation or a new building on that parcel was estimated at roughly 12 months; a new site with additional right-of-way, utilities or environmental constraints could extend construction to 14–18 months. Booth cautioned that site variables — wetlands, soil conditions that might require piles, stormwater and right‑of‑way work — are the largest cost drivers.

Board discussion, public comment and next steps Board members repeatedly emphasized that tonight’s vote authorized purchase of the property and budget changes, not a final decision on whether to renovate or build new. Supervisor Waltz moved to purchase the property and to approve budget amendment 25.12 (budget amendment number 3) as read into the record; Supervisor Bowen seconded the motion to include the contract purchase price of $575,000. The motion carried on a roll-call vote recorded in the meeting minutes as unanimous among the voting supervisors present (aye votes by Bowen, Walls, Phillips, Jones and Dawes).

Fire-department leadership and other speakers urged fiscal caution and thorough analysis. Ronnie Lewis, identified to the board as a fire department leader, urged careful stewardship: “We are here to serve the citizens of Mathews in the best possible way we can,” he said, and asked supervisors to weigh cost and community impact before committing to large construction sums.

Resident Catherine Davis Small, who identified her address as Buckley Hall Road, asked detailed questions about a separate VDOT sidewalk project that appears on the same budget amendment. She raised concerns about drainage and whether sidewalk work would require encroachment onto private property; county staff and project engineers said the $77,175 is a VDOT match for design only and that detailed drainage and right-of-way impacts will be determined during VDOT’s design phase and through required public hearings.

Several supervisors said they want formal, comparable bids for three clear options — renovate the front and rear buildings, demolish and build new on the Church Street parcel, or build on a different parcel — so the county can compare “apples to apples” cost estimates before committing to construction plans. The county attorney and staff reminded the board that a 75‑day study period in the purchase agreement ends later in March; staff said the county had requested a 30‑day extension from the seller but had not received a response before the vote.

What the board approved and what remains The formal actions recorded in the meeting were: (1) adoption of a FY2024-25 budget amendment to add $867,329 and appropriate those funds as described above, and (2) approval to purchase the property at 498 Church Street for $575,000 under the county’s executed purchase agreement. The board also authorized moving forward with due diligence steps already underway (geotechnical, drainage and design considerations) but did not adopt a construction option or award construction contracts.

The county staff and consultants will return with further cost estimates, site surveys and design details. The board said it intends to evaluate those results before deciding among renovation, partial demolition/rebuild, or new construction at another site. The county’s short-term procedural deadline is the expiry of the study/option period stated in the purchase agreement; staff said the county had requested a 30‑day extension but had not yet received a seller response at the time of the vote.

Ending By approving the purchase and the budget amendment, the Mathews County Board of Supervisors secured control of an existing developed parcel and the funding to continue design and permitting work. The board tasked staff and consultants to refine cost estimates and return with comparative, detailed pricing and technical analyses before selecting a construction approach.