Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
9/11/2018 - Regular
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors September 11, 2018 INVOCATION: Chaplain, Brian Clingenpeel Roanoke County Fire and Rescue PRESENTATION OF COLORS BY THE ROANOKE COUNTY PUBLIC SAFETY COMBINED HONOR GUARD AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE UNITED STATES FLAG IN REMEMBRANCE OF SEPTEMBER 11, 2001 Disclaimer: "Any invocation that may be offered before the official start of the Board meeting shall be the voluntary offering of a private citizen, to and for the benefit of the Board. The views or beliefs expressed by the invocation speaker have not been previously reviewed or approved by the Board and do not necessarily represent the religious beliefs or views of the Board in part or as a whole. No member of the community is required to attend or participate in the invocation and such decision will have no impact on their right to actively participate in the business of the Board." Page 1 of 4 Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Agenda September 11, 2018 Good afternoon and welcome to our meeting for September 11, 2018. Regular meetings are held on the second and fourth Tuesday at 3:00 p.m. Public hearings are held at 7:00 p.m. on the fourth Tuesday of each month. Deviations from this schedule will be announced. The meetings are broadcast live on RVTV, Channel 3, and will be rebroadcast on Thursday at 7:00 p.m. and on Saturday at 4:00 p.m. Board of Supervisors meetings can also be viewed online through Roanoke County's website at www.RoanokeCountvVA.gov. Our meetings are closed -captioned, so it is important for everyone to speak directly into the microphones at the podium. Individuals who require assistance or special arrangements to participate in or attend Board of Supervisors meetings should contact the Clerk to the Board at (540) 772-2005 at least 48 hours in advance. Please turn all cell phones off or place on silent. A. OPENING CEREMONIES 1. Roll Call B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS C. BRIEFINGS D. NEW BUSINESS E. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance authorizing the granting of new public drainage easements to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County on property owned by Ms. Kimberly D. Thompson, Tax Map No. 066.02-02-03.00-0000 and Boone Assets L.L.C., Tax Map No. 066.02-02-04.00-0000 for the purpose of Drainage Improvements (Tarek Moneir, Acting Director of Community Services) Page 2 of 4 F. APPOINTMENTS 1. Budget and Fiscal Affairs (BFAC) (appointed by District and At -Large) 2. Economic Development Authority (EDA) (appointed by District) 3. Library Board (appointed by District) G. CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO BE ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY 1. Approval of minutes — June 28, 2018 2. Confirmation of appointments to the Budget and Fiscal Affairs Committee (At - Large and District) and the Parks, Recreation and Tourism Advisory Commission 3. Request to accept and allocate funds in the amount of $9,698.90 from the Commonwealth of Virginia for the Library of Virginia's Records Preservation Program 4. Request to approve the Board of Supervisors budget development calendar for fiscal year 2019-2020 5. Resolution expressing the appreciation of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County to Ronald J. Wygal, Police Officer IV, upon his retirement after twenty- five (25) years of service H. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS I. REPORTS 1. Unappropriated, Board Contingency and Capital Reserves 2. Outstanding Debt Report 3. Statement of Treasurer's Accountability per Investment and Portfolio Policy as of July 31, 2018 J. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS 1. Joseph P. McNamara 2. P. Jason Peters 3. George G. Assaid 4. Phil C. North Page 3 of 4 5. Martha B. Hooker K. WORK SESSIONS 1. Work session to update the Board of Supervisors on the strategic direction of Economic Development in the County of Roanoke (Jill Loope, Director of Economic Development) 2. Work Session to update the Board of Supervisors on the 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan (Liz Belcher, Roanoke Valley Greenway Project Coordinator) L. CLOSED MEETING, pursuant to the Code of Virginia as follows: 1. Section 2.2-3711.A.3 Discussion or consideration of the acquisition of real property for a public purpose or of the disposition of publicly held real property, where discussion in an open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body, namely Westmoreland Drive M. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION N. ADJOURNMENT Page 4 of 4 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. E_1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: September 11, 2018 AGENDA ITEM: Ordinance authorizing the granting of new public drainage easements to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County on property owned by Ms. Kimberly D. Thompson, Tax Map No. 066.02-02-03.00-0000 and Boone Assets L.L.C., Tax Map No. 066.02-02-04.00-0000 for the purpose of Drainage Improvements SUBMITTED BY: Tarek Moneir Acting Director of Development Services APPROVED BY: Thomas C. Gates County Administrator ISSUE: Ordinance authorizing the granting of new public drainage easements by Kimberly D. Thompson, Tax Map no. 066.02-02-03.00-0000 and Boone Assets L.L.C., Tax Map No. 066.02-02-04.00-0000 to the Board of Supervisor of Roanoke County for the purpose of drainage improvements, Catawba Magisterial District. BACKGROUND: Ms. Kimberly D. Thompson is granting a variable width, 5,985 sq. ft. public drainage easement located on Tax Map No. 066.02-02-03.00-0000 shown upon the plat titled "EXHIBIT A" situate at 3055 Franklin Street, Lot 3, Section 4 dated July 17, 2018, as shown in the attachment. Boone Assets L.L.C. is also granting a variable width, 4,142 sq. ft. public drainage easement located on Tax Map No. 066.02-02-04.00-0000 shown upon the plat titled "EXHIBIT B" situate adjacent to Franklin Street, Lot 5, Section 4 dated July 17, 2018, as shown in the attachment. The easements are necessary to remedy an existing stormwater drainage problem that Page 1 of 2 emanates from the City of Salem and flows into Roanoke County affecting citizens residing in the area along Franklin Street. DISCUSSION: To address ongoing drainage issues, the City of Salem will fund drainage and stormwater conveyance improvements within its boundary. Roanoke County will then make necessary improvements to connect to the City of Salem project and convey stormwater to an adequate outfall in a natural watercourse. Once this drainage easement is accepted by Roanoke County and improvements completed, Roanoke County will assume responsibility for ongoing maintenance. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this agenda item. The County will maintain the structures within drainage easement utilizing existing funding designated for stormwater maintenance. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the first reading of this ordinance and scheduling the public hearing and second reading for September 25, 2018. Page 2 of 2 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 2018 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE GRANTING OF A NEW PUBLIC DRAINAGE EASEMENT BY KIMBERLY D. THOMPSON (TAX MAP NO. 066.02-02-03.000) AND BOONE ASSETS L.L.C. (TAX MAP NO. 066.02- 02-04.00) TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY ON PROPERTY FOR THE PURPOSE OF FACILITATING DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS WHEREAS, the Roanoke County has requested that Kimberly D. Thompson grant the County a new variable five thousand nine hundred eighty-five square foot public drainage easement across property in the County (Tax Map No. 066.02-02-03.00) said new drainage easement to contain a drainage system that will bring the drainage in the area to current design standards including the construction of an adequate outfall to a natural watercourse; and WHEREAS, the new public drainage easement will facilitate drainage improvements along Franklin Street, which is a residential area; and WHEREAS, the Roanoke County has requested that Boone Assets L.L.C. grant the County a new variable four thousand one hundred forty-two square foot public drainage easement across property in the County (Tax Map No. 066.02-02-04.00) said new drainage easement to contain a drainage system that will bring the drainage in the area to current design standards including the construction of an adequate outfall to a natural watercourse; and WHEREAS, the new public drainage easement will facilitate drainage improvements along Franklin Street, which is a residential area; and Page 1 of 3 WHEREAS, Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter directs that the acquisition and conveyance of real estate interests be accomplished by ordinance; the first reading of this ordinance was held on September 11, 2018, and the second reading and public hearing was held on September 25, 2018. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the County shall acquire a new variable width public drainage easement across property belonging to Kimberly D. Thompson, adjacent to Franklin Street, more specifically identified on Tax Map No. 066.02-02-03.00, containing 5,985 square feet and shown on the attached "EXHIBIT A" Roanoke County Department of Community Development, dated July 17, 2018, and such conveyance is hereby authorized and approved. 2. That the County shall acquire a new variable width public drainage easement across property belonging to Boone Assets L.L.C., adjacent to Franklin Street, more specifically identified on Tax Map No. 066.02-02-04.00, containing 4,142 square feet and shown on the attached "EXHIBIT B" Roanoke County Department of Community Development, dated July 17, 2018, and such conveyance is hereby authorized and approved. 3. That the County Administrator, or any Assistant County Administrators, either of whom may act, are authorized to execute, deliver and record the deeds, and any other documents on behalf of the County and to take all such further action as any of them may deem necessary or desirable in connection with this project. The form of the deed is hereby approved with such completions, omissions, insertions and Page 2 of 3 changes as the County Administrator may approve, whose approval shall be evidenced conclusively by the execution and delivery thereof, all of which shall be approved as to form by the County Attorney. 4. That this ordinance shall be effective from and after the date of its adoption. Page 3 of 3 M, 20, O1 S — S26°38'47"E— Street 4.43' FH Frankiln 9 S34°53'42"E 9.04' S26°38'47' E S30°2438 E 44.13' OF Is 63.1 10 E - !Tl CO-� -- NO 1a' P.t1_ R _ 5oZ641 E 30' ' r # 3055 PROPOSED VARIABLE 6 WIDTH �\ 0305 DRAINAGE �\ PROPERTY OF / EASEMENT MATTHEW C. & -PROPER TY OF LAUREN SWANK ; KIMBERLY D. Lora SEC. a LHOMPSON RIDGE AT FAIRWAY FOREST LOT 3 SEC. 4 n 0.5910 Ac. RIDGE AT FAIRWAY FOREST Tox # SMU. -02-021650 00 0.5830 Ac. �\ \ INSTRU. 201211650 Tox If 066.02-02-03.00-0000 INSTRU. / 201012576 (PLAT) INSM" 201608797 INSTRU # 200718656 (PLAT) INSTRU. 1201012576 (PLAT) \ \ INSTRU # 200718656 (PLAT) \ i%NS �YlzSanitary \sJ a \ — Seth Ease0t 1 — 201012576 r INSTRU• ti — �� �I 1 PROPOSED 8 \ \po I VARIABLE DRAINAGE \ EASEMENT \ I IPI SO9� �d��\ I 7 _ PROPERTY�I RIDGE AT FAIRWAY FOREST i HOMEOWNERS ASSOC. ' \ _ SW41 SEC: 4 RIDGE AT FAIRWAY FOREST \ _\ 1.614 Ac. I \ HOLWIp Tox 1 066.02-02-01.00-0000 M \ a lNSIRU. 1201202905_ INSTRU. 1201012576 (PLAT) INS7RU. 1200713324 (PLAT) °DD \ \ 6 5u E*Un9 PArate Stmnsatr U' Ymagemait Aron (Yrehumant j200718�) 900O0 SZSF \ \ IPF 36„ RCP' \ EASEMENT LINE TABLE (5,985.07 SQ. FT.) LINE BEARING LENGTH RADIUS 1-2 S67'42'29"W 76.20' 2-3 S72'59'16"W 110.41' 3-4 S67'42'29"W 23.56' 4-5 N30'05'00"W 4.84' 5-6 N20'28'45"W 31.03' 93.00' 6-7 N10'52'29"W 3.58' 7-8 S71 '33'45"E 52.85' 8-9 N67'42'53"E 167.48' 9-1 tie S26'39'00"E 15.02' NEW DRAINAGE EASEMENT AREA= 5,985.07 S.F. (0.1374 Ac Virginia Secondary Route 0693 GZ� GOJ (Right -of --Way Varies) ELEC M P75-152 „A„ GAS S22°33'42"E 2°33'42" — 25.07' 52.82' w COS 12778-2169 _ 10' Water Easomt. 10' P.U.E. —. _30'MAL 1._. O NIV Ln N D rl 0 1 ^ O M z # m N # 3075 � 2 v X x 1 1 Existing 20' Private Access / Waterline Easement for Tract DI -A Meda 0 Sttormwae s gem x 1 Easement 1 (Instrument (2010125776) Ln � J vO� X 20' Private — Sanitary Sewer o Easement — 0 N INSTRU. D 1201012576 LU / l oolj SE •NATERC� � \ 1 JAMIE AMBER PROPERTY OF L. KANE JORDEN J. & 1 LOT sEL; 4 RIDGE AT FAIRWAY FOREST JENNIFER M. RAMEY x6559 Ac. IPF ��Q� / _ LO_T 2 S_EC. 4_ T0X Jnvs f X0;51, / RIDGE AT FAIRWAY FOREST INs1Ru / 20,o1257s (PLAT) 0.6180 Ac. INSTRU. 1200718656 (PLAT) l Tox / 066.02-02-05.00-0000 \ _ INSTRU. 1201609663 INSTRU. 1201012576 (PLAT) IN STRU # 200718656 (PLAT) ao \ PROPERTY OF\ m BOONE ASSETS LLC _ 1 CW C) / BOONE HOMES OF RICHMOND LOT 5 SEC. 4 \ \\ 'k RIDGE AT FAIRWAY FORT\ IPF 1 50690 Aa ` N Tax {06502-02-04.00-0000 m 0p1 INSTRU. 1201376394 \ yC " INSTRU 1201012576 (PUT) \ \ O N I EXHIBIT TT JItl TT CURVE "A" SHOWING R=469.86' L=15.62' DRAINAGE EASEMENT (5,985.07 Sq. Ft.) BEING CONVEYED Tan=7.81' TO DCH1N 6°16'24"W BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, CHORD DIST.=15.62' ROANOKE COUNTY CURVE "B" R=1200.00' BY L=69.93' KIMBERLY D. THOMPSON Tan=34.97' D=3°20'23/4" ROANOKE COUNTY TAX MAP PARCEL #66.02-02-03.00 CH=N24°13'52"W CHORD DIST.=69.92' SITUATED ALONG FRANKLIN STREET o� goANOk� WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT <' >= ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA 0.Y SCALE: 1"= 40' DATE: JULY 17, 2018 ;) a~ PREPARED BY ROANOKE COUNTY 1838 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT RU � 20 012S'6 Zp 6 — � � Virginia Secondary Route J*93 t S2F,4 38'47"E G�,�y O L�J� (Right—of—Way Varies) . Scree __ -- — k 1 1 n ,Pao P75-152 Fran 1 1 Et_EC ,B,522°33'42"E 2°33'42" 534°53'42"E F" 'w GAS 9.04' S26°38'47' E 25.07' 52.82' S30°2438 E 44.13' w P778-2169 _ _ _ 10' Water Easem1. OF SP�EM 63.10' — 10 _ _ _ _ 10' P.U.E. - - - - tM EasM�t 1 10� � I Cl �r °2641 E o i 535 p0, 30. -B-_L _ . 1 N 00 r # 3055 M � PROPOSED I ^'Lff J� N VARIABLE o # 3075 WIDTH 0305 DRAINAGE " X X 1 PROPERTY OF T EASEMENT I 9 1 MATTHEW C. & �OPERTY of Existing Access LAUREN SWANK KIMBERLY D,.j X. e-11hee Easement / Waterline Easement LOT 4 SEC. 4 for Tract DI -A LHOMPSON RIDGE AT FAIRWAY FOREST I o and 20' StorA-ter LOT 3 SEC. 4 Mamagement Access X, — 0.59f0 Ac. RIDGE AT FAIRWAY FOREST E � Tox / 066.02-02-02.00-0000 a5830 Ac. 1�\` (Instrument (701012576) \ lNS1RU. 201211650 I Tox ly 066.02-02-03.00-0000 �3 � J INSTRU. / 201012576 (PLAT) — lNS7R�I! 201608797 I � — INSTRU # 200718656 (PLAT) INSTRU. 1201012576 (PLAT) o X_— PROPERTY OF X _ JORDEN J. & — 20' Private \ INSTRU. 200718656 (PLAT) ^ `� X JENNIFER M. RAMEY �� 1 ZD Sanitary Sewer \ v, Lor z s£c. a p o Easement \ �6� _RIDGE AT FAIRWAY IRWAYFOREST o m INSTRU. \ NS Sanitary o N — 20' ent I — — 1201012576 rax os6U. 12 160966 oo00 c \ �. Ses Ea20 Q12576 — / INSaru. t 2olsoss63 a INSTRU• N _ — — \ ' INS7RU. 1201012576 (PLAT) — U _ _ �INS7RU. 1200718656 (PLAT) WATERCOUI E PROPERTY PROPOSED \ ` — JAMIE AMBER \ p " 1 1 L. KANE � I I VARIABLE � � PR9PERTY OF 1 SWC 4 SDa° \ I WIDTH / $ Lor 1 / BOONE ASSETS LLC RIDGE AT FAIRWAY FOREST I13o2j \ DRAINAGE / 3 LOT 5 SEC. 4 Fox IOssoo -02-0600 EASEMENT / RIDGE AT FAIRWAY FOREST INSTRU. 1 201510836 \ / INS7RU. 1201012576 (PLAT) 40 \ I IPF PF/ / 5.0890 Aa INSTRU. ,( 200718656 (PLAT) 6.0 / 7 Tax # 066.02-02-04.00-0000 oo.: " l INS7R� 201316394_ PROP£R7Y13'.'7- _ _ \ ,'^„ \ INSTRU. # 201012576 (PLAT) RIDGE AT FAIRWAY FOREST I / 6 �\ \ HOMEOWNERS ASSOC. _ SW4 I SEC 4 N RIDGE AT FAIRWAY FOREST 1.614 Ac. I \ HOLLOIp Ch 40C) Tox (066.02-02-01.00-0000 M \ \ = �\ .G Lv O INSM.. 1201202905 - o \ N a INSTRU. 1201012576 (PLAT) lNS7RU. 1200713324 (PLAT) °oD \ o \ \\ W c Erl xktinq PAwk Stmnsakr in NOOo Llo nn IPF (rrehunNntM/21006F) 9 8 S�S'F \ IPF ._"5 EASEMENT LINE TABLE (4,142.60 SQ. FT.) LINE BEARING LENGTH RADIUS 1-2 S67'42'29"W 76.20' 2-3 572'59'16"W 110.41' 3-4 567'42'29"W 23.56' 4-5 S30'05'00"E 4.42' 5-6 553'06'45"E 16.43' 21.00' 6-7 S76'08'29"E 2.56' 7-8 N67'42'29"E 12.48' 8-9 N72'59'16"E 110.41' 9-10 N67'42'29"E 77.61' 10-11 N26'16'11 "W 15.62' 469.86' 11-1 tie S26'39'00"E 4.43' NEW DRAINAGE EASEMENT AREA= 4,142.60 S.F. (0.0951 AC.) EXHIBIT `'FB FT " c CURVE "A" R=469.86' SHOWING L=15.62' DRAINAGE EASEMENT (4,142.60 Sq. Ft.) BEING CONVEYED Tan=7.81' TO CCH1N 6°16'24"W BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, CHORD DIST.=15.62' ROANOKE COUNTY CURVE "B" BY R=1200.00 L=69.93' BOONE ASSETS L.L.C. Tan=34.97' D=302023/4" ROANOKE COUNTY TAX MAP PARCEL #66.02-02-04.00 CH=N24°13'52"W CHORD DIST.=69.92' SITUATED ALONG FRANKLIN STREET goANr) o� WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT <' >= ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA 0.Y z SCALE: 1"= 40' DATE: JULY 17, 2018 a~ PREPARED BY ROANOKE COUNTY 1838 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Return to: Roanoke County Attorney's Office Prepared and Recorded by Roanoke County Attorney Office Peter S. Lubeck, VSB: 71223 5204 Bernard Drive P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 Tax Map No 066.02-02-03.00-0000 Exemption Clahne& Grantee is exempt from recordation taxes and fees pursuant to Section 58.1- 811(A)(3) and (C)(5) of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended. This Deed of Easement, made this day of July 2018, by and between KIMBERLY D. THOMPSON, party of the first part, hereinafter referred to as "Grantor" and THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, its successors or assigns, party of the second part, hereinafter referred to as "Grantee." WITNESSETH That for and in consideration of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the Grantor hereby GRANTS and CONVEYS with General Warranty and Modern English Covenants of Title unto the Grantee, its successors and assigns, the following described easement in the County of Roanoke, Virginia, to -wit: A new DRAINAGE EASEMENT of variable width, containing approximately 5,985.07 square feet, to construct, install, improve, operate, inspect, use, maintain, remove, monitor, repair or replace present or future drainage courses, ditches, lines, pipes, facilities, and other necessary or related structures, appurtenances and improvements, for management, collection, transmission and distribution of any form of drainage, including but not limited to stormwater drainage, together with the right of ingress and egress thereto from a public road, upon, over, under, and across a tract or parcel of land belonging to the Grantor and designated on the Roanoke County Land records as Tax Map No. 066.02-02-03.00-0000. The location of said easements is shown and designated as "PROPOSED VARIABLE WIDTH DRAINAGE EASEMENT" upon the Exhibit showing "DRAINAGE EASEMENT (5,985.07 Sq. Ft.) BEING CONVEYED TO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, ROANOKE COUNTY BY KIMBERLY D. THOMPSON; Roanoke County Tax Map Parcel #66.02-02-03.00-0000; Situated Along Franklin Street; Windsor Hills Magisterial District, Roanoke County, Virginia; dated July 17, 2018; attached hereto as "Exhibit A" and by reference incorporated herein. The Grantee agrees to restore and repair any actual damage to Grantor's property which may be directly caused by the construction, reconstruction, or maintenance of or within the easement, except as hereinafter provided. The Grantor agrees that the Grantee will not be expected to restore the property to the identical original condition, but rather as near thereto as is practicable, and that the Grantor wiII cooperate with the Grantee in effectuating such restoration. The Grantee shall have full use of the easement for the purposes hereinabove set forth and shall have all rights and privileges reasonably necessary to the exercise of the easement. It is expressly agreed Page 1 of 3 between the parties hereto that the Grantee and its agents hall have the right to inspect the easement and to trim, cut, clear, and remove all undergrowth, obstructions, or improvements lying within, upon or immediately adjacent to the easement, that in any way endanger or interfere with the proper use of the same. The Grantor covenants that no buildings, structures or other improvements of any kind whatsoever shall be erected upon or within the easement herein granted or placed in such location as to render the easement inaccessible. In the event that this covenant is violated, the Grantee shall not be obligated to repair, replace,. or otherwise be responsible for such improvements if damage or removed. The fixtures, facilities, lines, utilities, and any other improvements placed upon, under or across the property by the Grantee shall remain the property of the Grantee. The easement herein granted is in addition to, and not lieu of, any easement or right-of-way now in existence or which may be acquired in the future. The Grantor covenants and agrees for itself, and its successors and assigns, that the consideration aforementioned and the covenants herein shaII be in lieu of any and all claims to compensation and damages by reason of the location, construction, operation, maintenance or reconstruction of or within the easement herein granted. To have and to hold unto the Grantee, its successors and assigns forever. This deed is exempt from the recordation tax imposed by Section 58.1-801, Code of Virginia, pursuant to Section 58.1-811 A.3., Code of Virginia. This instrument is executed by a duly authorized administrator of Roanoke County, Virginia, to signify acceptance by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County of the real estate conveyed herein pursuant to Action No. 2018. adopted by said Board of Supervisors on the day of WITNESS the following signatures and seals: BRIAN EPPERLEY KIMBERLY D. THOMPSON NOTARY PUBLIC REG. #295929. COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA PAY OOMMISSION EXPIRES OCT. 31.2("9 Commonwealth of Virginia, County of Roanoke, to -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 010 day of AVG u$1— 2018, by Kimberly D. Thompson. My Commission Expires: Notary Public Reg.# Page 2 of 3 Approved as to form: Senior Assistant County Attorney Commonwealth of Virginia, County of Roanoke, to -wit: THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY By: Thomas C. Gates, County Administrator The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2018, by Thomas C. Gates, County Administrator, on behalf of The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County. My Commission Expires: Notary Public Page 3 of 3 Reg.# � I 01p�dQM �zST6 1 V r R 11 k l l n i 5269817"[ t r e e 4.43' 4 00P jfirginro Secondory Route /69J (Right -of -Way Vanes) r APCO 1775-T52 ELI= 522°33'42"E 2°33'92" S34°53'42"E ♦ GAS B A, 25.07' 52.82' 9.04' 526°38'47' F C 530°29'3$'� 44.13' w COs /2778-7169 f 10' Water Easeml. Or 10' P.U.E. r - G Co f x�Ln 30' M.B.L. .v I is Co i r J # 3055 �I 7 - PROPOSED PROF}OSED Na VARIABLE c # 3075 rQ n WIDTH w nlLAUREN a DRAINAGE 2 x x F EASEMENT I C. & PROPERTY OF Existing 20' Private Access ANK KIMBERLY D. / Waterline Easement LOT 4 SEC. 4 �HOMPSON v tar Tract 01-A RIDGE AT FAIRWAY FOREST cj and 20' Stormwater 0.59fO Ac. LOT 3 SEC. 4 Yomongneal Access x. Tax 1066.02 RIOGE AT FAIRWAY FOREST I EOsemenf 0.5830 Ac. (Instrument 1201012576) j INSMU, 1 201211650 I � Tox 1066.02-02-0.300-0000 INSTRU. j 201012576 (PLAT) INSTRU 1207608797 in f INSTRU. 1 200718656 (PLAT) INSTRU. hq 2010125/6 (PLAT) � � � x � X � f 20' Privale ?0 INSWU. 1200718656 (PLAT) N -�Y �'� I � Saarlary Sewer dry f r CniJ s N Eosement \ �yl�4m F,yh r m INSTRU. , ,`si! ( 20 sanitary f ` "' / 201012576 \6f EaSement 411 Sewet 201012576 -zn \ \ 1 IhS�U- / WATERCouv'S� r r r n I •� \ _ f PRG°ERrY Or %q PROPOSED z PROPERTY OF JAMIE & AMBER KANE VARIABLE 1 WIDTHJORDEN J. & I ai I _ZC, 4 °� s \ t MOCEAT aersr O 1 DRAINAGE B '� JENNIFER. M. RAMEY 06559 Ac, / Tox / 066.02 -a2 -moo -ow EASEMENT--- IPF �� / LOT 2 SEC. 4 INSTRU/ 2015108]6 r RIDGE AT FAIRWAY FOREST 'N5 NU- .12010125;-6 (PLAT) ` l` IPF / INSTRU / Z00718656 (PLAT) 3Lpy, \ / 0.6180 Ac. g �IqN r _ l Tax 1 066,02-02-05.00-0000 7 CF,-, \ INSTRU. If 201609663 ROPERTY Oma!� RIDGE AT FAIRWAY FOREST T INSTRU d 201012576 (PLAT) HOMEOWNERS ASSOC, \ — Nlo �INSTRU. 1200718656 (PLAT) Via, SWt! I SEC. 4 \� �.` � \ I' RIOGE' AT FAIRWAY FOREST \ O �PROP£RTY OF' - 1.614 F L6T4 A:. \ HOLLOW m BOONE ASSETS I.LC— I c L2 Tor 1066.02-02-01.00-0000 in i 4 -- a, INSTRU. / 201202905 0 � / BOONE HOMES OF RICHMOND �� w lNSRrU. / 701077576 (PLAT) , r4 ` — a LOT 5 SEC 4 �, INSTRU. 1 200712176 (PLAT) O 6 C RIDGE Al FAIRWAY FOREST i4 5 4 IPF- I 5.0890 Ac E.rslnq fYiwle Slam/roln N \ `:1 Fax / 066.02-02-04.00-0000 v (msxn� mIM!?�1�8656f X00 as, IPF 001 IN51RU. / 201116194 ` .�, INSlriu. 1201012576 (PLAT) o c 9. F , I 9,` I EXHIBIT r"A f 36" SCP CURVE "A" R=469.86' L=15.62' Tan�7.81' D=1-54-17" CH=N26'16'24"W CHORD DIST.=15,62' EASEMENT LINE TABLE (5,985.07 Sq. FT.) LINE BEARING LENGTH RADIUS 1-2 567.42'29"W 76.20' 2-3 572'59'16"W 110.41' J-4 S67'42'29"W 23.56' 4-5 N30'05'00"W 4.84' 5-6 N20.28'45"W 31.03' 93.00' 6-7 N10"52'29"W 3.58' 7-8 S71 *33'45"E 52.85' 8-9 N67'42'53"E 167.48' -9-tie S26.39'00"E 15.02' NEW DRAINAGE EASEMENT AREA= 5,985.07 S.F. (0.1374 AC SHOWING DRAINAGE EASEMENT (5,985.07 Sq. Ft.) BEING CONVEYED TO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, ROANOKE COUNTY CURVE "B" BY R=1200.00' L=69.93' KIMBERLY D. THOMPSON Tan=34.97' D=3°2023/4" ROANOKE COUNTY TAX MAP PARCEL #1.66.02-02-03.00 CH=N24° 13'52"W CHORD DIST.-69.92' SITUATED ALONG FRANKLIN STREET aJ ROANO� WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT ` ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA F 7d SCALE: I"= 40' DATE: JULY 17, 2018 PREPARED 8Y ROANOKE COUNTY 1898 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Return to: Roanoke County Attorney's Office Prepared and Recorded by Roanoke County Attorney Office Peter S. Lubeck, VSB: 71223 5204 Bernard Drive P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 Tax Map No 066.02-02-04.00-0000 Exemption Claimed: Grantee is exempt from recordation taxes and fees pursuant to Section 58.1- 811(A)(3) and (C)(5) of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended. This Deed of Easement, made this day of July 2018, by and between BOONE ASSETS L,L.C., party of the first part, hereinafter referred to as "Grantor" and THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, its successors or assigns, party of the second part, hereinafter referred to as "Grantee." WITNESSETH That for and in consideration of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the Grantor hereby GRANTS and CONVEYS with General Warranty and Modern English Covenants of Title unto the Grantee, its successors and assigns, the following described easement in the County of Roanoke, Virginia, to -wit: A new DRAINAGE EASEMENT of variable width, containing approximately 4,142.60 square feet, to construct, install, improve, operate, inspect, use, maintain, remove, monitor, repair or replace present or future drainage courses, ditches, lines, pipes, facilities, and other necessary or related structures, appurtenances and improvements, for management, collection, transmission and distribution of any form of drainage, including but not limited to stormwater drainage, together with the right of ingress and egress thereto from a public road, upon, over, under, and across a tract or parcel of land belonging to the Grantor and designated on the Roanoke County Land records as Tax Map No. 066,02-02-04.00-0000. The location of said easements is shown and designated as "PROPOSED VARIABLE WIDTH DRAINAGE EASEMENT" upon the Exhibit showing "DRAINAGE EASEMENT (4,412.60 Sq. Ft.) BEING CONVEYED TO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, ROANOKE COUNTY BY BOONE ASSETS L.L.C.; Roanoke County Tax Map Parcel #66.02-02-04.00; Situated Along Franklin Street; Windsor Hills Magisterial District; Roanoke County, Virginia; dated July 17, 2018; attached hereto as "Exhibit A" and by reference incorporated herein. The Grantee agrees to restore and repair any actual damage to Grantor's property which may be directly caused by the construction, reconstruction, or maintenance of or within the easement, except as hereinafter provided. The Grantor agrees that the Grantee will not be expected to restore the property to the identical original condition, but rather as near thereto as is practicable, and that the Grantor will cooperate with the Grantee in effectuating such restoration. The Grantee shall have full use of the easement for the purposes hereinabove set forth and shall have all rights and privileges reasonably necessary to the exercise of the easement. It is expressly agreed Page 1 of 3 between the parties hereto that the Grantee and its agents shall have the right to inspect the easement and to trim, cut, clear, and remove all undergrowth, obstructions, or improvements lying within, upon or immediately adjacent to the easement, that in any way endanger or interfere with the proper use of the same. The Grantor covenants that no buildings, structures or other improvements of any kind whatsoever shall be erected upon or within the easement herein granted or placed in such location as to render the easement inaccessible. In the event that this covenant is violated, the Grantee shall not be obligated to repair, replace, or otherwise be responsible for such improvements if damage or removed. The fixtures, facilities, Iines, utilities, and any other improvements placed upon, under or across the property by the Grantee shall remain the property of the Grantee. The easement herein granted is in addition to, and not lieu of, any easement or right-of-way now in existence or which may be acquired in the future. The Grantor covenants and agrees for itself, and its successors and assigns, that the consideration aforementioned and the covenants herein shall be in lieu of any and all claims to compensation and damages by reason of the location, construction, operation, maintenance or reconstruction of or within the easement herein granted; provided, however, that Grantee's agreement to restore actual damages to Grantor's property as set forth herein shall remain in full force and effect. To have and to hold unto the Grantee, its successors and assigns forever. This deed is exempt from the recordation tax imposed by Section 58.1-801, Code of Virginia, pursuant to Section 58.1-811 A.3., Code of Virginia. This instrument is executed by a duly authorized administrator of Roanoke County, Virginia, to signify acceptance by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County of the real estate conveyed herein pursuant to Action No. 2018,. adopted by said Board of Supervisors on the day of WITNESS the following signatures and seals: BOONE ASSETS L.L.C. t aNrr 4A601 6A- By (printname) Commonwealth of Virginia, County of Roanoke, to -wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this r'day of Aa'� *y5_r 2018, by A LCXo%tQP!* to E on behalf of Boone Assets L.L.C, My Commission Expires: d BRIAN BPPERLEY NOTARY PUBLIC REG. #295929 AiIYCQMMMSWEP RO5 0 C7 3 2018 Notary Public Reg.# Page 2of3 Approved as to form: Senior Assistant County Attorney Commonwealth of Virginia, County of Roanoke, to -wit: THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY By: Thomas C. Gates, County Administrator The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 2018, by Thomas C. Gates, County Administrator, on behalf of The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County. My Commission Expires: Notary Public Page 3 of 3 Reg.# 210,701 E� QN 2526 r 526°38'47"E C e 2 4.43' Fr�nk��n 11' S34°53'42"E 9.04' S26°38'47' E 293 1 Cn 534°'8"'F 44.13' fl� 10roL�Eose�l. cam. E co. - - t0' p�f W� 7 "C 535-26 r 34VfA.6.� # 3055 PROPOSED VARIABLE o u7 WIDTH # 3045 $ DRAINAGE PROPERTY OF ` EASEMENT f MATTHEW C. & PROPERTY OF LAUREN SWANK KIMBERLY D. LOT 4 SEC, 4 LTHOMPSON RIDGE AT FAIRWAY FORE5T LOT 3 SEC. 4 05870 Ac. RIDGE AT FAIRWAY FOREST Tax / 066.02--02-02.00-0000 0.5830 Ac I jjI INSTRU. # 201211650 rot f 066.02-02-03.00-0000 I 5 INSTRU. j 201012576 (PLAT) INSTRU. 1201608797 INSTRU. 1' 200718656 (PLAT) INSTRU. if 201012576 (PLAT) ?o INSTRU: # 200718656 (PLAT? r 59ni1ary \�ss6J q` r 20 Easement J \ ��ti SewOr / 2tf1012576 INSITi � y� PROPOSED \ 1 t VARIABLE Say \ 4 WIDTH \ 44 ti DRAINAGE 3 17p2jlY �\ 4 1 EASEMENT 3 IPF � 6 l -1y PROP£R7Y OFA 1 ` rte,,. \ RIDGE AT FAIRWAY FOREST I� / HOMEOWNERS ASSOC, 5PM 1 SEC. , �4 �•_ RIDGE A F FAIRWAY roRESF /06s.a614 z 01.00-0000 M _ FIOLLOW rax 4 INSIRU. / 20rR0R905 4 INSTRU. / 201012576 (PLAT) INSIRU. / 20071JJ24 (PLAT) o E.al'nq PrivSe Stnmwla Ln n`001 Irnsr u A t�1109 Am) -'l' 25 E \ IPF t EASEMENT LINE TABLE (4,142.60 Sq. FT.) LINE BEARING LENGTH RADIUS 1--2 S67'42'29"W 76.20' 2-3 S72'59'16"W 110.41' 3-4 S67'42'29"W 23.56' 4-5 530'05'00"E 4.42' 5-6 553'06'45"E 16.43' 21.00' 6-7 S76'08'29"E 2.56' 7-8 N67'42'29"E 12.48' 8--9 N72'59'16"E 110.41' 9-10 N67'42'29"E 77.61' 10-11 N26'16'11"W 15.62' 469.86' 11-1 fie S26 -39'00"E 4.43' EdNEW DRAINAGE EASEMENT AREA= 4,142.60 S.F. (0.0951 Ac.) P� F O�� � Virg;nJa Secondary Route /593 (Right -of -Way Varies) 00ELEC APca /275-152 GAS S22°33'42"E 2°33'42" " Nl 25.07 52.82- W , 2.82'w, 12778-2169 10' Water Ease L. 10' f -YE f _ " - ao' M.A.L. 1 _ 1 Ln # 3075 X x 1 9 I Existing 20' Private Access / Wuferline Eosement rrx Tract 01-A I— ,sem.kcess and 20' StormWafer x!A<amagerntrlEef t � r ] — (Instrument 1201012576) y r 1 1 PROPERTY OF _ X _JORDEN J. & I 20' Priwfe JENNIFER M. RAMEY~ Sanifoq Sewer LOT 2 SEC. e o EBsemenl -R100£ Ar FAIRWAY FOREST ao INSTRU. 0.67$0 Ac. 200012576 Tox / 066.02-02-05.0-0000 r ` INSTRU. 1201609663 r 1NSrRU. / 20r012576 (PLAT) \ 1 1 1r 0+SM.. / 200718656 (PLA r) 1 WATERCOURSE PROPERrror 1 I JAMIE & AMBER L. 1 PROPERTY OF I ori wr # 8 / BOONE ASSETS LLC RIDGE AT FAIRWA Y FOREST 1 x65$9 Ac. LOT SEC. 4 Fax/L556.02-02-06.00-000 RIDGE AT FAIRWAY FOREST 1N5rRU. / 201510836 mli?v.. / 201012576 (PLAT, PFS 5.0890 Ac. elSW. 1200.718656 (PLAT, 7 Fox j 066.02-02-04.00-0000 INSTRU. Ae 201316J94 I INSTRU. 9 201012576 (PLAT) 6 moo wt,' Z; o w- c LF�= v p n 7. . I ,, EXHIBIT 7 A CURVE "A" SHOWING RT469.86' L=15.62' DRAINAGE EASEMENT (4,142.60 Sq. Ft.) BEING CONVEYED Tan=7.81' TO '17" C=N26�16'24'W HN2 H BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, CHORD DIST. -15,62' ROANOKE COUNTY CURVE "B" BY R=1200.00' 1.=69.93' BOONE ASSETS L.L.C. Tan=34.97' D=3.20'2314" ROANOKE COUNTY TAX MAP PARCEL #66.02-02-04.00 CH=N24°13'52"W CHORD DIST.=69.92' SITUATED ALONG FRANKLIN STREET 04 OAN.o WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA p Z SCALE: 1"= 40' DATE: JULY 17, 2018 v� PREPARED BY ROANOKE COUNTY 1898 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACTION NO. ITEM NO. F.1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: ISSUE: September 11, 2018 Appointments to Committees, Commissions and Boards Deborah C. Jacks Chief Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Thomas C. Gates County Administrator All open district appointments BACKGROUND: 1. Budget and Fiscal Affairs Committee (BFAC) (appointed by District) The following District appointments remain open: Cave Spring Magisterial District Vinton Magisterial District Budget and Fiscal Affairs Committee (BFAC) (At -Large) Two open appointments 2. Economic Development Authority (EDA) (appointed by District) The following four-year term expired on September 26, 2017: a) Steve Anderson, representing the Cave Spring Magisterial District is eligible for reappointment Page 1 of 2 3. Library Board (appointed by District) The following four-year term expired on December 31, 2016: a) Heather Lawrence, representing the Vinton Magisterial District FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this agenda item. Page 2 of 2 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 2018 RESOLUTION APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM G- CONSENT AGENDA BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for September 11, 2018, designated as Item G - Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 5 inclusive, as follows: 1. Approval of minutes — June 28, 2018 2. Confirmation of appointments to the Budget and Fiscal Affairs Committee (At - Large and District) and the Parks, Recreation and Tourism Advisory Commission 3. Request to accept and allocate funds in the amount of $9,698.90 from the Commonwealth of Virginia for the Library of Virginia's Records Preservation Program 4. Request to approve the Board of Supervisors budget development calendar for fiscal year 2019-2020 5. Resolution expressing the appreciation of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County to Ronald J. Wygal, Police Officer IV, upon his retirement after twenty- five (25) years of service Page 1 of 1 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. G.2 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: ISSUE: September 11, 2018 Confirmation of appointments to the Budget and Fiscal Affairs Committee (At -Large and District) and the Parks, Recreation and Tourism Advisory Commission Deborah C. Jacks Chief Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Thomas C. Gates County Administrator Confirmation of appointments BACKGROUND: Budget and Fiscal Affairs Committee (BFAC) (At -Large and District) The following appointments expired on August 31, 2018: Hollins District: Brian Bond - Supervisor North has recommended the reappointment of Mr. Bond to a two-year term to expire August 31, 2020. At -Large: The Board has recommend the reappointment of Jason DeVries and Michael Leigh to a two-year term to expire August 31, 2020. PARKS, RECREATION AND TOURISM ADVISORY COMMISSION The Virginia Recreational Facilities Association has advised that Debbie Pitts has Page 1 of 2 resigned her appointment. They have recommended the appointment of Taylor Spellman to fill Ms. Pitts unexpired term, which will expire on June 30, 2019 FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with these appointments. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends confirmation of these appointments. Page 2 of 2 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. G.3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: September 11, 2018 Request to accept and allocate funds in the amount of $9,698.90 from the Commonwealth of Virginia for the Library of Virginia's Records Preservation Program SUBMITTED BY: Lindsey Ayers Deputy Clerk II APPROVED BY: Thomas C. Gates County Administrator ISSUE: Acceptance and allocation of a grant in the amount of $9,698.90 from the Commonwealth of Virginia for the Library of Virginia's Records Preservation Program BACKGROUND: The Library of Virginia administers and oversees the Circuit Court Records Preservation Program (CCRP) to provide assistance to Circuit Courts. This program is designed to help localities in restoring old records and creating microfilm and/or digital copies of those records. Funding is handled in one cycle each year for this program and requires an application to be filed each time to be considered for an award. The awards are selected by the CCRP board with consideration given to the historical, informational and administrative value of the records and the soundness of the proposed project. DISCUSSION: The Clerk of Circuit Court's Office received a grant from the Library of Virginia's Records Preservation Program. This grant funding will be used to repair Land Record Map Books. Page 1 of 2 FISCAL IMPACT: Grant funds totaling $9,698.90 from the Commonwealth of Virginia provides one hundred percent (100%) funding. No County funds are required. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends accepting and allocating grant funds in the amount of $9,698.90 from the Commonwealth of Virginia to the Clerk of Circuit Court for the Virginia Circuit Court Records Preservation Program for fiscal year 2018-2019. Page 2 of 2 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. GA AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: ISSUE: September 11, 2018 Request to approve the Board of Supervisors budget development calendar for fiscal year 2019-2020 Christopher R. Bever Director of Management and Budget Thomas C. Gates County Administrator Planning for the fiscal year 2019-2020 operating and capital budgets is underway. Attachment A is the budget development calendar detailing required Board of Supervisors actions, public hearings, budget work sessions, and briefings associated with both the operating and capital budgets. BACKGROUND: As part of the annual budget development process, the Office of Management and Budget prepares a budget development calendar for approval by the Board of Supervisors. While the calendar is subject to change, it provides the Board of Supervisors and County staff a clear timeline to meet all legal obligations associated with both the operating and capital budgets. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with the approval of the budget development calendar. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the fiscal year 2019-2020 budget development calendar. Page 1 of 1 ATTACHMENT A Fiscal Year 2019-2020 Budget Development Calendar (dates subject to change) 1 of 2 Date Board Actions Public Hearings Briefings/Work Sessions 24 -Jul -18 28 -Aug -18 11 -Sep -18 Approval of FY 2019-2020 budget development calendar (consent agenda) 25 -Sep -18 Work Session: Fiscal Year 2017-2018 Preliminary and Unaudited Year -End Overview (Finance, Budget) 9 -Oct -18 23 -Oct -18 7 -Nov -18 Work Session: Fire and Rescue Department Staffing (Fire and Rescue) 5 Work Session: Communications / Information Technology Structural Organization (Communications / Information Technology Departments) 20 -Nov -18 Work Session: Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Update (County and Schools); Capital Projects Status Report 4 -Dec -18 Briefing: 2019 Reassessment (Assessor, Budget) Briefing: Fiscal Year 2017-2018 Audit Results (Finance) Work Session: CORTRAN (Budget, Parks Recreation, and Tourism, Social Services) 18 -Dec -18 8 -Jan -19 Work Session: County Financial Polices Review - if necessary (Finance, Budget) 22 -Jan -19 Approval of updated County Briefing: County Administrator's financial policies - if necessary Proposed FY 2020-2029 Capital (resolution) Improvement Program Presentation Work Session: FY 2018-2019 Mid -Year Revenue and Expenditure Update; Fiscal Year 2019-2020 Budget Issues 12 -Feb -19 Work Session: FY 2019-2020 Revenue Outlook; County Fees & Charges Compendium 26 -Feb -19 Work Session: FY 2020-2029 Capital Improvement Program 12 -Mar -19 Briefing: County Administrator's Proposed FY 2019-2020 Operating Budget Presentation 26 -Mar -19 Adoption of 2019 maximum tax Public Hearing: Effective Tax Work Session: Total Compenstation; rates (resolution) Rate (if necessary) Outside Agencies; Revenue Update (if Public Hearing: Maximum Tax necessary) Rate 1 of 2 ATTACHMENT A Fiscal Year 2019-2020 Budget Development Calendar (dates subject to change) 2 of 2 Date Board Actions Public Hearings Briefings/Work Sessions 9 -Apr -19 Adoption of 2019 tax rates (order) Public Hearing: Tax Rate Work Session: Departmental Budgets; Adoption Other General Fund Budgets Public Hearing: Operating and Captial Budgets (first of two) 23 -Apr -19 Work Session: Schools, CIP, Debt, Other/Follow-Up Items 14 -May -19 First reading of budget ordinances Public Hearing: Operating and (total of five ordinances) Captial Budgets (second of two) Approval of School Board budget (resolution) on 28 -May -19 Second reading of budget ordinances (total of five ordinances) Approval of operating and capital budgets, revenues and expenditures for County and Schools (resolution) 11 -Jun -19 25 -Jun -19 2 of 2 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. G.5 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: ISSUE: September 11, 2018 Resolution expressing the appreciation of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County to Ronald J. Wygal, Police Officer IV, upon his retirement after twenty-five (25) years of service Deborah C. Jacks Chief Deputy Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Thomas C. Gates County Administrator Recognition of the retirement of Ronald J. Wygal BACKGROUND: Ronald J. Wygal retired on September 1, 2018, after twenty-five years of service with Roanoke County's Police Department. Mr. Wygal is unable to attend today's meeting and his quilt and resolution will be mailed to his home. DISCUSSION: There is no discussion associated with this agenda item. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this agenda item. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of the attached resolution. Page 1 of 1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 2018 RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE APPRECIATION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY TO RONALD J. WYGAL, POLICE OFFICER IV, UPON HIS RETIREMENT AFTER TWENTY-FIVE (25) YEARS OF SERVICE WHEREAS, Mr. Wygal was employed by Roanoke County on August 16,1993-1 and WHEREAS, Mr. Wygal retired on September 1, 2018, after twenty-five years and one month of devoted, faithful and expert service to Roanoke County; and WHEREAS, during Mr. Wygal's tenure with Roanoke County's Police Department he served as a Police Officer, Police Officer- Criminal Investigator, Police Officer II, Police Officer III, and Police Officer IV and served with professionalism and dedication in providing services to the citizens of Roanoke County; WHEREAS, Mr. Wygal was trained extensively and assigned as a department Evidence Technician. On April 16, 2007, Mr. Wygal responded to one of the deadliest mass shootings in United States history. Mr. Wygal assisted with the evidential processing at Virginia Tech in which 32 people lost their lives. The scene was indeed somber, but Mr. Wygal remained professional and efficient in the evidence collection process. WHEREAS, Mr. Wygal was a leader and mentor to many young officers over the span of his career. Mr. Wygal's loyalty to the department and the County was never more evident than when he encouraged younger officers to find joy and a sense of pride within their career as a law enforcement officer. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County expresses its deepest appreciation and the appreciation of the citizens of Roanoke County to RONALD J. WYGAL for more than twenty-five of capable, loyal and Page 1 of 2 dedicated service to Roanoke County; and FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors does express its best wishes for a happy and productive retirement. Page 2 of 2 01 ri O N 06 ri O N i M G1 ca V H LL N Ol 00 M en N O ri 04, O n � Ol W m v N N l0 l0 O � 0 00 Ol 00 Ol m u O O C "a Gl O Vl O V1 to O •r 00 C O U qj,)- qj,)- ( o N 7 W V1 O C o � N ri 0) W 00 O G1r4'I� L U M Ol I� Q O LR M Ol M rm m N N Q m c In qj,)- r -I ri 00 r i N 00 r -I N 0 O N N �n U O 4% � C U m C 00 0 O UA b. O M � b.0 j 00 7 w O W 0 � C0 ri ul m N O N C vl V O w O E N f6 L. yj Q. Ln ? m N oj L CL 'C3 oj L41 Q 0 m m O Q O L Q Q U m : lz Q Q Q m m Q m COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA CHANGES IN OUTSTANDING DEBT Changes in outstanding debt for the fiscal year to date were as follows: Unaudited Outstanding Outstanding June 30, 2018 Additions Deletions September 11, 2018 General Obligation Bonds $ 2,765,175 $ - $ 2,765,175 VPSA School Bonds 78,883,082 8,121,855 70,761,227 Lease Revenue Bonds 81,845,705 81,845,705 $ 163,493,962 $ - $ 8,121,855 - $ 155,372,107 Submitted By Approved By Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance Thomas C. Gates County Administrator ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER. MEETING DATE: September 11, 2018 AGENDA ITEMS: Statement of the Treasurer's Accountability per Investment and Portfolio Policy, as of 31 -Jul -18 SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: CASHINVESTMENT: SUNTRUST CON 18,871,692.12 18,871,692.12 CrZOPA=1N �il�►�� SCOTT STRINGFELLOW CONTRA (230,074.00) SCOTT STRINGFELLOW 38,004,918.78 WELLS FARGO 12,000,000.00 WELLS FARGO CONTRA (111,320.00) 49,663,524.78 LOCAL GOVT INVESTMENT POOL: 31,211,375.03 GENERAL OPERATION 10,087,110.56 10,087,110.56 MONEY MARKET: AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK 2,029,641.61 BRANCH BANKING & TRUST 95,885.30 HOMETRUST BANK 11,493.73 SCOTT STRINGFELLOW - JAIL 1,125,039.84 SCOTT STRINGFELLOW 31,211,375.03 WELLS FARGO 45,563.21 BANK OF THE JAMES 502,045.23 35,021,043.95 TOTAL 113, 643, 371.41 09/11/2018 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. K.1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: ISSUE: September 11, 2018 Work session to update the Board of Supervisors on the strategic direction of Economic Development in the County of Roanoke Jill Loope Director of Economic Development Thomas C. Gates County Administrator This time has been set aside to discuss with the Board of Supervisors the strategic direction of Economic Development in Roanoke County. Page 1 of 1 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. K.2 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: ISSUE: September 11, 2018 Work Session to update the Board of Supervisors on the 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Megan Cronise Principal Planner Thomas C. Gates County Administrator This time has been set aside to discuss with the Board of Supervisors the 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan. Page 1 of 1 _AA ►$t lt4oanoke--.Va-li-._ea -'4* .. r 'v RWA 6 LV - ar ►T Ilk 4, cj .. S Yom' l� _�� Y �• ^ Cover Photo by Dave McCoy: Roanoke River Greenway 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Approved by: Roanoke Malley Greenway Commission June 27, 2018 Signed by: Arthur L. LaRoche, III Chairman, Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission Produced by Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission and Roanoke Valley — Alleghany Regional Commission In cooperation with City of Roanoke, City of Salem, Botetourt County, Roanoke County, and Town of Vinton EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In 2017 the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission celebrated its 20th anniversary and began looking ahead to plan for the future. The Greenway Commission has developed this 2018 Plan in conjunction with the Cities of Roanoke and Salem, the Counties of Roanoke and Botetourt, the Town of Vinton, and the Roanoke Valley -Alleghany Regional Commission, taking into account progress and changes since 2007 and looking at specific goals and direction for the next ten years. The 2018 Plan includes off-road and on -road routes, recognizing the need to tie neighborhoods to the bigger network to promote a bikeable and walkable community. While many miles of greenways and trails are now built, many routes are still conceptual and represent a vision for a comprehensive greenway network. This 2018 Plan provides an update on the status of greenway routes, documents progress meeting goals established in 2007, and incorporates Botetourt County, a new member of the Greenway Commission, into the planning process and vision. The Plan incorporates two rounds of public comments, as well as staff perspective. Several developments and issues emerged during the update process. • Greenways have become important to the economic vitality of the region, supporting tourism, recruitment, redevelopment, festivals, fitness and a healthy environment. Greenways are the core infrastructure for the region's brand, Roanoke Outside. • Greenways and trails are the face of the region for many visitors and potential businesses and thus should be well marked and well maintained, providing a pleasant and rewarding experience for all. • Citizens want a bikeable and walkable community and need expanded signage and on -road facilities to provide connectivity between greenways, neighborhoods, and other destinations. All user groups need to practice common courtesies, good greenway etiquette, and safe usage practices. The growing greenway network requires increasing maintenance budgets to maintain service. The vision for the Roanoke Valley Greenway network is to have Roanoke River Greenway as the backbone of the system, running west to east, and then having north -south routes tying to Botetourt County and to the existing public lands and trail opportunities surrounding the Valley. The greenway network is part of the bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure for the region and provides the arterial routes, with connectivity to neighborhoods via sidewalks, bike lanes, and on -road facilities. Implementation of this plan will require continued cooperation among the many partners and will offer opportunity for all of the community to be involved. The vision of finishing the Roanoke River Greenway has been a resounding theme echoed from the citizens and corporations, but the residents of the valley are looking beyond Roanoke River to the next projects and total connectivity. The dream of having a greenway network that provides facilities for transportation to work, recreation, health, and social gatherings is laid out herein and challenges all partners to focus efforts on implementation and incorporation of greenways in development. 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This Plan was developed by the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission, working in conjunction with its five member localities, with the assistance of the Roanoke Valley —Alleghany Regional Commission. Special thanks to the following people who assisted during the process: Robert Beatty Botetourt County GIS Analyst and Greenway Commissioner Liz Belcher Roanoke Valley Greenway Coordinator Warren Clark Botetourt County Greenway Commissioner Megan Cronise Roanoke County Principal Planner and Greenway Commissioner Bailey DuBois Roanoke County Planner II and Greenway Commissioner David Holladay Roanoke County Planning Administrator Dee King City of Salem Greenway Commissioner Bud LaRoche Town of Vinton Greenway Commissioner Ursula Lemanski National Park Service, Rivers Trails and Conservation Assistance, Virginia Projects Manager Anita McMillan Town of Vinton Planning and Zoning Director and Greenway Commissioner Amanda McGee Roanoke Valley -Alleghany Regional Commission Regional Planner Jerod Myers Botetourt County Planner and Greenway Commissioner Renee Powers City of Roanoke Trails and Greenways Supervisor Lee Osborne Transportation Planning Organization Representative and Greenway Commissioner Frank Simms Roanoke County Greenway Commissioner Ben Tripp City of Salem Planning Director and Greenway Commissioner Donnie Underwood City of Roanoke Parks and Greenways Planner and Greenway Commissioner Lindsay Webb Roanoke County Parks Planning and Development Manager and Greenway Commissioner Page ii 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS ExecutiveSummary ................................................................................................................................................... i Acknowledegments.................................................................................................................................................... ii Tableof Contents....................................................................................................................................................... iii Figuresand Tables..................................................................................................................................................... iv Glossary of Acronyms and Abbreviations................................................................................................................... vi Chapter1 Introduction............................................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Purpose of This Update.................................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 History of Greenway Planning in the Roanoke Valley....................................................................................... 1 1.3 Changes and Growth in the Region.................................................................................................................. 2 1.4 Vision for the Future of Greenways and Trails.................................................................................................. 2 Chapter 2 Status of the Roanoke Valley Greenway Program.............................................................................. 3 2.1 Greenway Partners........................................................................................................................................... 3 2.2 Progress on Greenway Planning, Construction, and Funding.......................................................................... 5 2.3 Addition of Botetourt County............................................................................................................................. 13 2.4 Review of Goals, Objectives, and Strategies.................................................................................................... 15 Chapter 3 Community Input and Issues................................................................................................................. 21 3.1 Greenway Plan Update Process....................................................................................................................... 21 3.2 Public Input and Discussion.............................................................................................................................. 22 3.3 Key Issues and Recommendations................................................................................................................... 24 3.4 Other Takeaways............................................................................................................................................... 27 Chapter4 Greenway Network.................................................................................................................................. 29 4.1 Prioritization of Greenways................................................................................................................................ 29 4.2 Greenway Routes.............................................................................................................................................. 33 Chapter 5 Regional Transportation Connections.................................................................................................. 71 5.1 Other Regional Plans......................................................................................................................................... 71 5.2 Recommended Connections.............................................................................................................................. 75 Chapter 6 Goals, Objectives, and Implementation Strategies.............................................................................. 85 Appendix A Intergovernmental Agreement Establishing the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission Appendix B 2017 On-line Survey Questions and Responses Appendix C Public Input from 2017 Community Meetings Appendix D Public Response to Draft 2018 Plan Appendix E Tinker Creek Greenway Conceptual Plan Appendix F Web Sites for Referenced Documents and Organizations Appendix G Bibliography of Design Standards Appendix H 2018 Greenway Plan Network Map 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page iii FIGURES Figure 2-1 Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission Service Area 3 Figure 2-2 2007 Plan Map of Proposed Greenway Network 9 Figure 3-1 Destinations and Priorities Identified by the Public 23 Figure 4-1 Blueway Routes 31 Figure 4-2 Birding and Wildlife Trails in the Mountain Region of Virginia 36 Figure 4-3 Carvins Cove Trail Network: Map of Existing Trails 41 Figure 4-4 Catawba Greenway: Map of Existing and Proposed Sections 42 Figure 4-5 Explore Park Map of Existing Trails 45 Figure 4-6 Green Hill Park: Map of Roanoke River Greenway and Other Trails 47 Figure 4-7 Greenfield: Map of Trails at Botetourt Center and Greenfield Park 48 Figure 4-8 Hanging Rock Battlefield Trail Map 49 Figure 4-9 Havens Wildlife Management Area Map 50 Figure 4-10 Mason Creek Greenway Phase III: Proposed linkages between existing sections 55 Figure 4-11 Mill Mountain Greenway Map 57 Figure 4-12 Mill Mountain Park Trail Map 59 Figure 4-13 Mudlick Creek Greenway at Garst Mill Park 60 Figure 4-14 Murray Run Greenway and Fishburn Park Trails 61 Figure 4-15 Poor Mountain Preserve Trails 62 Figure 4-16 Read Mountain Preserve Trails 63 Figure 4-17 Roanoke River Greenway Status Map 66 Figure 4-18 Tinker Creek Greenway Study Area 68 Figure 5-1 Recommendations from the Bikeway Plan for the Roanoke Valley Area MPO, 2012 72 Figure 5-2 Map of Multimodal Centers and Districts, Regional Pedestrian Vision Plan, 2015 74 Figure 5-3 2018 Greenway Plan Regional Connectivity Map 76 Figure 5-4 Botetourt County Connections 77 Figure 5-5 City of Salem Connections 78 Figure 5-6 City of Roanoke Connections, Northwest 79 Figure 5-7 City of Roanoke Connections, Central and Southwest 80 Figure 5-8 Northern Roanoke County Connections 81 Figure 5-9 Southern Roanoke County Connections 82 Figure 5-10 Town of Vinton Connections 83 TABLES Table 2-1 Plans with Greenway Components, Adopted since 2007 6 Table 2-2 Growth of the Greenway Network, Comparative Mileage 7 Table 2-3 Status of Greenway Routes in the 2007 Greenway Plan as of 12/31/2017 8-9 Table 2-4 On -Road Bicycle Accommodations Built by 12/31/2017 11 Table 2-5 Grants and Allocations for Roanoke Valley Greenways 13 Table 2-6 Existing Trails Incorporated into the Greenway Network with the Addition of Botetourt County 14 Table 2-7 Progress on 2007 Goals, Objectives and Strategies 15-17 Table 2-8 Progress on 1995 Goals, Objectives and Strategies 18-19 Table 4-1 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Network 32 Table 4-2 Birding and Wildlife Trail Routes in the Region 36 Table 4-3 U. S. Forest Service Trails within the Roanoke Valley Greenway Service Area 52 Page iv 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Table 4-4 Status of Roanoke River Greenway 64 Table 5-1 2006 Rural Bikeway Plan Recommendations 73 Table 5-2 Multimodal Districts and Centers without Direct Greenway Intersections 75 Table 5-3 Recommended Connections to the Greenway Network, Botetourt County 77 Table 5-4 Recommended Connections to the Greenway Network, City of Salem 78 Table 5-5 Recommended Connections to the Greenway Network, City of Roanoke 79 Table 5-6 Recommended Connections to the Greenway Network, Roanoke County 81 Table 5-7 Recommended Connections to the Greenway Network, Town of Vinton 83 Table 6-1 Implementation Strategies 2018 85-89 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page v GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 1995 Plan Conceptual Greenway Plan, Roanoke Valley, Virginia, December 1995 2007 Plan 2007 Update to the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan 2018 Plan 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ATC Appalachian Trail Conservancy BRP Blue Ridge Parkway CEDS Roanoke Valley Area Regional Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy CPTED Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design DCR Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation DGIF Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries Greenway Commission Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization NBATC Natural Bridge Appalachian Trail Club NPS -APPA National Park Service, Appalachian National Scenic Trail Pathfinders Pathfinders for Greenways, a non-profit support group RATC Roanoke Appalachian Trail Club Regional Commission Roanoke Valley —Alleghany Regional Commission RIMBA Roanoke Chapter of International Mountain Bicycling Association RSTP Regional Surface Transportation Program, a funding source for regional projects RTCA Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance Program of the National Park Service RVARC Roanoke Valley - Alleghany Regional Commission RVTPO Roanoke Valley Transportation Planning Organization TA Transportation Alternatives Funding, formerly called Transportation Enhancements TTC Transportation Technical Committee (of the Rvtpo) USFS U.S. Forest Service (of the U.S. Department of Agriculture) VDOT Virginia Department of Transportation WMA Havens Wildlife Management Area WVWA Western Virginia WaterAuthority Page vi 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1. PURPOSE OF THIS UPDATE In 2017 the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission celebrated its 20th anniversary and began looking ahead to plan for the future. This document provides a review of the 2007 Update to the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan (2007 Plan) and a look forward to the next decade. The purpose is to document progress towards goals identified in previous plans, to consider additional routes and issues, and to incorporate Botetourt County, a new member of the Greenway Commission, into the planning process and vision. 1.2. HISTORY OF GREENWAY PLANNING IN THE ROANOKE VALLEY John Nolen first proposed "greenways" for Roanoke by including parkways along the river and streams in the 1907 and 1928 City of Roanoke comprehensive plans. Today's greenway program began with completion of the Conceptual Greenway Plan, Roanoke Valley, Virginia in December 1995 (1995 Plan). The 1995 Plan was developed under the direction of a regional Greenways/Open Space Steering Committee of citizens and planning staff meeting at the Fifth Planning District Commission (now called the Roanoke Valley -Alleghany Regional Commission, hereafter referred to as the Regional Commission) and included 51 routes, 24 of them off-road and 27 on -road. The 1995 Plan led in 1996 to hiring a greenway coordinator, forming an independent land trust, and establishing a non-profit friends group called Pathfinders for Greenways. In 1997 the City of Roanoke, Roanoke County, the City of Salem, and the Town of Vinton signed an Intergovernmental Agreement setting up the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission (hereafter referred to as the Greenway Commission) to steer the program and adopted the 1995 Plan into their comprehensive plans. Construction was not far behind, and the first greenway segment opened at Garst Mill Park in August 1997. In the early years, the Greenway Commission and localities focused on projects that were possible on existing public land or in conjunction with other infrastructure improvements. In developing the 2007 Plan, which documents those early developments, the Greenway Commission used a consultant to help analyze the organizational structure and the way things were working, examining the roles and responsibilities of various partners. That led to revisions to the Intergovernmental Agreement to include locality staff on the Greenway Commission, as well as representatives from major partners like Pathfinders for Greenways and the Roanoke Valley Transportation Planning Organization (RVTPO). The 2007 Plan included a new prioritization of routes, with 35 off-road routes and trail destinations and with on -road routes included in the regional Bikeway Plan. This document, the 2018 Plan, is an update of the 2007 Plan. The Greenway Commission has developed this 2018 Plan in conjunction with the localities and the Regional Commission, taking into account progress and changes since 2007 and looking at specific goals and direction for the next ten years. The 2018 Plan once again includes on- and off-road routes, recognizing the need to tie neighborhoods to the bigger network to promote a bikeable and walkable community. While many miles of greenways and trails are now built, many routes are still conceptual and represent a vision for a comprehensive greenway network. TERMINOLOGY: WHAT IS A GREENWAYS Greenways are linear parks, corridors of natural or open space: • following land or water features such as streams, rivers, canals, utility corridors, ridgelines, or rail lines and • managed for conservation, recreation, and/or alternative transportation and • including trails for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other trail users. 2007 Update to the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan (p. 1-2) 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 1 1.3. CHANGES AND GROWTH IN THE REGION Since the 2007 Plan, the Roanoke region has truly embraced the greenway system. The Greenway Commission undertook the Bridge the Gap campaign, which culminated in over $13 million in private and regional transportation funds being allocated to Roanoke River Greenway. As Roanoke River Greenway has grown in length, more and more people have come to depend on it for daily needs, such as exercise, commuting, and special events. The vision of "Roanoke Outside" began to grow, with greenways and trails as the core infrastructure to access outdoor amenities throughout the valley. This push has led to an economy more focused on the importance of having a bikeable and walkable community with many outdoor recreation options nearby. The region has become a bicycling destination for both mountain bikers and road cyclists. The greenways are increasingly recognized as an important regional amenity, supporting redevelopment opportunities, attracting new businesses, aiding in employee and student recruitment, while encouraging housing construction, festivals, outfitters and tourism growth. In 2016, Botetourt County embraced this vision by joining the Greenway Commission, effectively doubling the geographic area of the greenway region. 1.4. VISION FOR THE FUTURE OF GREENWAYS AND TRAILS The proposed Roanoke Valley Greenway network is shown on the map included in this 2018 Plan, Appendix H, located inside the back cover. The vision is to have Roanoke River Greenway as the backbone of the system, running west to east, and then having north -south routes tying to Botetourt County and to the existing public lands and trail opportunities surrounding the Valley. The greenway network is part of the bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure for the region and provides the arterial routes, with connectivity to neighborhoods via sidewalks, bike lanes, and on -road facilities. Construction of Roanoke River Greenway has supported redevelopment of adjacent facilities, such as the River House, Wasena Taproom, the Bridges, and, in 2018, a building at the 91" Street industrial park for residential housing. Photo by Darrell Powledge Page 2 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan 2. STATUS OF THE ROANOKE VALLEY GREENWAY PROGRAM 2.1. GREENWAY PARTNERS 2.1.1. Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission The Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission was formed in 1997 by an Intergovernmental Agreement among four local governments. With the update to the Greenway Plan in 2007, the Intergovernmental Agreement was revised, and it was revised again in 2016 when Botetourt County joined (Appendix A). The Greenway Commission is now comprised of five localities with three citizen members appointed by each of the participating governments, two staff appointees from each, one member appointed by the Roanoke Valley Transportation Planning Organization (RVTPO), one member from Pathfinders for Greenways, and non-voting ex officio members representing interested organizations. The purpose of the Greenway Commission is to promote and facilitate coordinated direction and guidance in the planning, development, and maintenance of a system of greenways throughout the Roanoke Valley. In accordance with the Intergovernmental Agreement, the Greenway Commission's responsibilities are to encourage incorporation of greenways into each jurisdiction's planning efforts, explore greenway opportunities, make recommendations on legislation, investigate funding and grants, recommend standards, pursue partnerships, and coordinate the efforts of the federal, state, and local governments involved. 2.1.2. Local Governments The greenway program is multi -jurisdictional, including the City of Roanoke, Roanoke County, the City of Salem, the Town of Vinton, and Botetourt County. The five jurisdictions help fund an office for the Greenway Coordinator on a per capita basis. The localities own and operate the greenways, and each has staff responsible for management and maintenance. The localities match capital grants within their respective jurisdictions, oversee planning and construction projects, and provide extensive staff time and in-kind services for greenway planning, construction, and management. When the Intergovernmental Agreement was adopted in 1997, the greenway movement in the valley was a new frontier. Over time each locality has developed internal processes and staff expertise to deal with many greenway issues, and thus over time the Greenway Commission's role has evolved. That role varies by jurisdiction, depending on the locality's needs and staffing. The Greenway Commission strives to be responsive in complementing the localities' programs and in finding resources to help meet localities' needs. Figure 2-1: Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission Service Area includes the City of Roanoke, City of Salem, Roanoke County, Town of Vinton, and Botetourt County. 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 3 2.1. 3,. Pathfinders For Greenways Pathfinders for Greenways, Inc. (Pathfinders) is a 501(c)(3) grass roots citizen organization with a volunteer board united by the vision of establishing a first-class regional greenway system within the Roanoke Valley. The Pathfinders' purposes are to promote and encourage development of a greenway network, educate citizens and officials on greenway benefits and value, raise and receive gifts, donations and grants, organize volunteers to assist with greenway development and maintenance, and sponsor greenway promotional efforts. Pathfinders has been particularly effective in designing, building and maintaining natural surface trails, and it is due to their expertise and efforts that the 2007 Plan expanded the network to include "trail nodes," destination public lands with natural surface trails. Pathfinders'volunteers donate 5,000+ hours of service each year and have purchased over $100,000 worth of trail building equipment. 2.1.4. Supporting Organizations 2.1.4.1 Roanoke Valley -Alleghany Regional Commission The Roanoke Valley -Alleghany Regional Commission, or Regional Commission, is a state -established regional planning organization. It provides assistance to local governments for land use planning, transportation planning, mapping, project management services, and grant applications. The Regional Commission sponsored and facilitated development of the initial greenway plan in 1995, obtained a grant for the update in 2007, and has developed the regional bicycle plans. It has continued to provide greenway services, including mapping, web assistance, use counts, bicycle route assessment and planning, and open space planning. In addition, the Regional Commission office houses the Roanoke Valley Transportation Planning Organization (RVTPO), also known as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), a federally required body responsible for regional transportation planning in urbanized areas. The Greenway Coordinator serves on the Transportation Technical Committee (TTC) of the RVTPO, and the RVTPO has an appointed member to the Greenway Commission. 2.1.4.2 Virginia Department Of Transportation The importance of the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) to the greenway program has grown significantly since the 2007 Plan. From the beginning of the program, there have been "Enhancement" transportation grants that could provide funding for greenway construction. Other grant funds administered through VDOT have become available through the years, providing significant greenway funding. VDOT helps the localities understand grant requirements, comply with federal and state regulations, and meet environmental regulations. VDOT maintains the roads in the counties and has been the implementing agency for striping of bike lanes and installation of bicycle signage in those jurisdictions. 2.1.4.3 Other Partners The Intergovernmental Agreement allows ex -officio positions on the Greenway Commission. At this time, ex -officio members include the Western Virginia Water Authority (WVWA), Roanoke Regional Partnership, Blue Ridge Bicycle Club, Roanoke Chapter of International Mountain Bicycling Association (RIMBA), and Hollins University. The Greenway Commission has procedures for adding and removing members and reviews the membership annually. Other groups involved in greenways in the past include Roanoke Appalachian Trail Club (RATC), Appalachian Trail Conservancy (ATC), Western Virginia Land Trust, Valley Beautiful Foundation, Roanoke Valley Urban Forestry Council, Foundation for Roanoke Valley, and Greater Raleigh Court Civic League. Other neighborhood groups have been involved with specific projects, and citizens, corporations, and civic organizations are encouraged to be actively involved in greenway planning and construction. The Greenway program has received valuable assistance from Virginia Road and Transportation Builders Association, Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, Roanoke Kiwanis Club, Salem Rotary Club, corporations, equine enthusiasts, and volunteers from Rotary, Kiwanis, Valley Area Shared Trails, Roanoke College, Virginia Tech, North Cross School, the Governor's School for Science and Technology, and Faith Christian School. The Greenway Commission has established important formal and informal connections to federal and state agencies. These include the Blue Ridge Parkway, National Park Service, Jefferson and George Washington National Forests, and Virginia Departments of Conservation and Recreation (DCR), Forestry, Transportation (VDOT), and Game and Page 4 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Inland Fisheries (DGIF). The Greenway Commission and staff have assisted with statewide greenway conferences sponsored by DCR and with VDOT conferences and workshops, as well as providing advice to many jurisdictions interested in planning and constructing greenway systems. 2.2. PROGRESS ON GREENWAY PLANNING, CONSTRUCTION, AND FUNDING 2.2.1. Summary Of 2007 Plan The 2007 Update to the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan (2007 Plan) included several components: an organizational analysis, a refinement of routes and their feasibility, and an assessment of the process of getting greenways funded and built. Using a grant from VDOT, the Greenway Commission and Regional Commission hired a consultant to complete a management analysis, develop alternative funding strategies, provide comparisons with other communities, and recommend implementation strategies. Two public input meetings were held, and the consultant conducted qualitative telephone interviews with key stakeholders, including elected officials, staff, and decision makers. The 2007 Plan addressed the issues raised at the public meetings and established Roanoke River Greenway as the #1 Priority. Much of the work done in the first ten years, exploring routes and their feasibility, played into the establishment of priority levels and recommended surfaces for all other projects. The 2007 Plan was adopted by each of the four local governments. Significant steps taken after the 2007 Plan to implement its recommendations were: • Revision of the Intergovernmental Agreement to include staff as voting members. • Inclusion of Roanoke River Greenway in the flood reduction project within the City of Roanoke. • Establishment and completion of the Bridge the Gap campaign to provide funding for construction of Roanoke River Greenway. • Application for and receipt of significant grants for construction, including American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (Stimulus), Open Container, Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP), House Bill 2, Smart Scale, and Transportation Alternatives funding. 2.2.2. Regional Changes Since 2007 2.2.2.1 Regional Vision And Development The landscape and focus of the Roanoke region have changed in the last ten years. Some of these changes are structural, as buildings have gone up or come down, others are economic as companies have moved out or in, and others are technological as things like smart phones have impacted the way people interact, the things they look for when selecting a job location, and the very branding of communities. Roanoke is no longer "a railroad town" but presents itself as appealing to outdoor enthusiasts; the Convention and Visitors' Bureau now promotes Virginia's Blue Ridge; and downtown living is popular in Roanoke, Salem, and Vinton. Buildings embody this changing landscape with the roof of the Taubman Museum facing I-581, the Virginia Tech Carilion Medical School anchoring the Jefferson Street redevelopment area near Roanoke River, and the River House apartments and Wasena City Tap Room defining neighborhood redevelopment and re -use. In 2009 the Roanoke Regional Partnership, a regional economic development organization, recognized the untapped potential of the region's natural assets and initiated Roanoke Outside to leverage natural assets to attract investment and talent to the region. With the hiring of staff to promote this vision, the Partnership developed an extensive web site compiling information from multiple organizations to provide a comprehensive list of outdoor resources, trails, and outfitters. They began promoting the outdoors through weekly emails and events like Radical Reels and GO Fest. The Roanoke Regional Partnership recognizes the importance the greenway system plays in growing the regional economy and incorporates greenways into regional marketing. The greenways are viewed as a top selling point for the region, and the Partnership has fully supported the implementation of the greenway plans. During these changes, greenways have been increasingly recognized as important to attracting millennial employees, promoting health and wellness, contributing to an ecological mindset that helps address environmental issues, and providing a quality of life and facility that citizens can love. Greenways are now a target location for social interaction, 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 5 with huge weekly pub runs, countless races and festivals, and numerous adjacent breweries. Greenways have become a training ground for athletes, a free gym, the place to walk your dog, the place to meet and greet your neighbors, and the thing to show to travel writers and economic prospects. The greenway infrastructure is supported by a growing network of on -road bike lanes and by bike share stations. 2.2.2.2 Relevant Plans As greenways have been built and citizens have become familiar with their benefits, the demand for more has risen. Advocates mention greenways at public meetings on a variety of topics, such as art, and push for greenways to be included in neighborhood and regional plans. Since the 2007 Plan was adopted, plans have been developed in all jurisdictions that incorporate greenway elements (Table 2-1). Table 2-1: Plans with Greenway Components, Adopted since 2007 Botetourt County City of Salem • 2007: Town of Buchanan Comprehensive Plan • 2012: Comprehensive Plan of the City of Salem, VA • 2010: Botetourt County Comprehensive Plan Update • 2016: Downtown Plan • 2010: Town of Troutville,Virginia Strategic Plan • 2011: Botetourt County Strategic Plan 2011-2015 Town of Vinton/Roanoke County • 2016: Botetourt County Board of Supervisors Strategic Priorities • 2010: Vinton Area Corridors Plan • 2016: Gateway Crossing Area Plan • 2017: Parks, Recreation, Greenways and Blueways Section of Town of Vinton Botetourt County Comprehensive Plan • 2010: Downtown Vinton Revitalization Plan • 2016: Town of Vinton Urban Development Areas City of Roanoke • 2007: Greater Raleigh Court Neighborhood Plan Blue Ridge Parkway • 2007: Parks and Recreation Department Master Plan Update • 2015: Roanoke Valley/Blue Ridge Parkway Trail Plan, • 2008: City -Wide Brownfield Redevelopment Plan Environmental Assessment • 2008: Mountain View/Norwich Corridor Plan • 2008: South Roanoke Neighborhood Plan Roanoke Regional Partnership • 2009: Old Southwest Neighborhood Plan • 2014: Connections: Annual Report 2014 • 2010: Carvins Cove Natural Reserve Trail Management Plan • 2010: Loudoun-Melrose/Shenandoah West Neighborhood Plan Roanoke Valley Alleghany Regional Commission (RVARC) • 2010: Melrose -Rugby Neighborhood Plan Update -Annual: RVARC Annual Reports • 2010: South Jefferson Redevelopment Area, Amendment 1 -Annual: Roanoke Valley Area Regional Comprehensive Economic • 2011: Arts and Cultural Plan Development Strategy (CEDS) • 2011, 2012: Countryside Master Plan • 2007: Roanoke Valley -Alleghany Regional Strategic Plan, 2007 Update • 2013: Evans Spring Area Plan • 2007: The Five Pillars of Economic Development • 2013: Roanoke Parks and Recreation Update to the 2007 •2010: Annual Report on Regional Economic Progress Master Plan • 2010: Existing and Possible Urban Tree Canopy, Reports for City of • 2017: Downtown Roanoke 2017 Plan Roanoke, City of Salem, Roanoke County and Town of Vinton • 2014: Partnership for a Livable Roanoke Valley Plan Roanoke County • 2007: Roanoke County Comprehensive Master Plan for Parks Roanoke Valley Transportation Planning Organization (RVTPO) • Annual: RVTPO Performance Measures Reports and Facilities • 2008: Hollins Area Plan • 2010: Route 419 Corridor Plan • 2008: Mount Pleasant Community Plan • 2011: 2035 Rural Long Range Transportation Plan • 2009: Route 221 Area Plan • 2012: Bikeway Plan for the RVAMPO, 2012 Update • 2010: Vinton Area Corridors Plan • 2015: Roanoke Valley Pedestrian Vision Plan • 2012: Glenvar Community Plan • 2016: 2040 Financially Constrained Long Range Transportation Plan • 2016: Explore Park Adventure Plan • 2016: Roanoke Valley Transit Vision Plan • 2016: Roanoke County Community Strategic Plan • 2018: Draft 419 Town Center Plan (under review) 2.2.3. Growth Of The Greenway Network The greenway network has grown, not only through construction, but also through expansion in 2007 to include "trail nodes" and expansion in 2016 to include Botetourt County's resources. (See Section 2.3: Addition of Botetourt County.) Table 2-2 shows this growth of the network by showing how many miles were built at the time each plan was developed. Botetourt County's trails are included in the 2018 Plan, but not in the 1995 or 2007 Plans. Some trail systems have actually gotten shorter, because of lack of maintenance or inclusion of the mileage in other places. The trails included in the 2018 Plan are described further in Chapter 4. Page 6 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Table 2-2: Growth of the Greenway Network, Comparative Mileage Built Miles Included in Greenway Plans Off-road Routes 1995 Plan 2007 Plan 2018 Plan Appalachian Trail++ 37.2 37.2 79.0 Back Creek Greenway 0 0 0.4 Barnhardt Creek Greenway 0 0 0 BioMed Loop (included in other routes in 2018) Not included 1.5 Removed Birding and Wildlife Trail Sites (miles not included elsewhere) Not included 7.50 18.75 Blue Ridge Parkway Trails++ 19.5 16 30.5 Carvin Creek Greenway 0 0 0 Carvins Cove Trail Network Not included 38.6 56.0 Catawba Greenway Not included 0 0.7 Dry Creek Greenway 0 0 Removed Dry Hollow Greenway 0 Removed Not included Explore Park Trails 0 7.0 14.0 Garden City Greenway (formerly Garnand Branch) 0 0 0.7 Gish Branch Greenway 0 0 0 Glade Creek Greenway 0 0 0.3 Gladetown Trail 0 0.6 0.7 Glenwood Horse Trail With National Forest Trails Green Hill Park Trails Not included 0.9 2.8 Hanging Rock Battlefield Trail 0 1.7 1.8 Havens Wildlife Management Area Trails+ Not included 20.3 20.3 Homers Branch 0 Removed Not included Horse Pen Branch 1 Moved to Carvins Cove Trails Jefferson National Forest Trail++ Not included 8.2 139.8 Lick Run Greenway 0 3.0 4.6 Long Ridge Trail Not included 0 0 Masons Cove Greenway Not included 0 0 Mason Creek Greenway 0 0 1.0 Mill Mountain Greenway 1.9 3.5 3.3 Mill Mountain Park Trails 2.8 8.2 9.9 Mudlick Creek Greenway (& Garst Mill) 0 0.5 0.5 Murray Run Greenway & Fishburn Park Trails 0 2.8 2.8 Paint Bank Branch 0 Removed Not included Perimeter Trail Not included Mileage in other routes Poor Mountain Preserve Trails + 0 0 3.4 Read Mountain Trails 0 0 4.5 Roanoke River Greenway 0 3.0 13.7 Roanoke River Greenway Extensions 0 0 0 Roanoke River Tributary (Franklin St.) 0 Removed Not included Spring Hollow Trails Not included 0 0 Tinker Creek Greenway 0 1.2 3.3 Wolf Creek Greenway 0 2.2 2.2 Subtotal 62.4 163.9 414.9 On-road Bicycle Connections 1995 Plan 2007 Plan 2018 Plan Bike Lanes 0 1.1 47.9 US Bike Route 76 9.6 13.7 55.5 Signed Bike Routes 0 9.9 31.9 Subtotal 9.6 24.7 135.3 Total 72.0 188.6 550.2 +State Jurisdiction ++ Federal Jurisdiction 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 7 2.2.4. Status of 2007 Greenway Routes Table 2-3 summarizes the current status of individual greenway routes which were included in the 2007 Plan. Projects that were included in 1995 but dropped in 2007 are not included. More detail on individual greenways can be found in Chapter 4. Table 2-3: Status of Greenway Routes in the 2007 Greenway Plan as of 12/31/17 PROJECT NAME N = c O a w C R a = C rnc w � N M O y c U Q- E v Appalachian Trail ++ 1 ✓ 1985 Back Creek Greenway 2 Martins Creek Rd. to Cotton Hill Rd. 2 ✓ Cotton Hill Rd. to Crystal Creek Rd. 2 ✓ ✓ Starkey Park to Merriman Park 2 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 2002 Merriman Park to Blue Ride Parkway 2 ✓ ✓ Crystal Ck Rd to Penn Forest Elem.Sch. 2 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 2013 Jae Valley Rd. to Roanoke River 2 ✓ ✓ ✓ Barnhardt Creek Greenway 3 ✓ Biomed Loop 4 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Part Birding and Wildlife Trail Sites 5 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 2003 Blue Ride Parkway Trails ++ 6 ✓ ✓ Carvin Creek Greenway 7 ✓ ✓ Some Carvins Cove Trail Network 8 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Ongoing Catawba Greenway 9 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Part Dry Creek Greenway 10 ✓ Explore Park Trails 11 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Ongoing Garden City Greenway Garnand Branch 12 Blue Ridge Parkway to Yellow Mtn Rd 12 ✓ Yellow Mtn to Ivywood 12 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 2016 Ivywood to Roanoke R. Greenway 12 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 2016-18 Gish Branch Greenway 13 ✓ Glade Creek Greenway 14 Beyond Vinyard Park 14 ✓ Vinyard Park section 14 ✓ ✓ ✓ County line to Gus Nicks Blvd 14 ✓ ✓ Part Gus Nicks Blvd to WalnutAve. 14 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 2019 Walnut Ave. to VA 24 14 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 2017 Gladetown Trail 15 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 2012 Green Hill Park Trails 16 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 2009 Hanging Rock Battlefield Trail 17 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 1999 Mason Creek Bridge 17 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 2014 Branch Drive to E. Main St. 17 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 2018-19 Havens Wildlife Mgt Area Trails + 18 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Jefferson National Forest Trails ++ 19 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Lick Run Greenway 20 Peters Creek Rd to Countryside 20 ✓ Countryside to Wm. Fleming Schools 20 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 2014 Wm. Fleming to Interchange at I-581 20 ✓ ✓ Valley View bridge 20 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 1999, 2015 Interchange to Visitors Bureau 20 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 2002, 2006 Long Ridge Trail 21 ✓ Masons Cove Greenway 22 ✓ Mason Creek Greenway 23 ✓ ✓ Part Part 2013 Mill Mountain Greenway 24 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 2003 Mill Mountain Park Trails 25 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 2015 Page 8 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Table 2-3: Status of Greenway Routes in the 2007 Greenway Plan as of 12131117 (continued) PROJECT NAME ac N C at O O- Lu C M•tm a C Lu C LL 77R O VJ C U O- E U Mudlick Creek Greenway 26 — Priority 2 Greenways — Priority 3 and 4 Greenways crag cw°ry m - • Proposed Multi -Use Route — Appalachian Trail Hidden Valley High School-Cresthill Dr. 26 ✓ ✓ — Ex stng Greenways Cresthill to Garst Mill Park 26 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 1997 Garst Mill to Roanoke River 26 ✓ PublicLands One tract Murray Run Greenway 27 Ogden Rd. to Colonial Ave. 27 ✓ ✓ N 1 -Appalachian Trail 2 -Back Creek Greenway 3 6arnhartlt Creek Greenway °# ,'-,3 Colonial to Brambleton Ave. 27 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 2004 Brambleton to Grandin Rd. 27 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 2001, 2003 Perimeter Trail 28 ✓ 10.Dry Creek Greenway Poor Mountain Preserve Trails + 29 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 2013 Read Mountain Trails 30 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 2012 Roanoke River Greenway (See p. 64) 31 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ Ongoing 1999-2018 Roanoke River Greenway Extensions 32 ✓ 20.Lick Run Greenway Spring Hollow Trails 33 ✓ 7 21 -Long Ridge Trail Tinker Creek Greenway 34 22_MnsCove Greenway 23 -Mason Creek Greenway Carvins Cove to City/Co line 34 ✓ ✓ 24 -Mill Momn Greenway 25 -Mill Mountan Park Trals Part Part 2012 City/County line to Wise Ave. 34 ✓ ✓ ✓ 27-Mumay Run Greenway 28 -Perimeter Trail Wise Ave to Roanoke River 34 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 2003, 2012 Wolf Creek Greenway 35 -Read 31 -Roanoke River Greenway 32 -Roanoke River Greenway Extensions( 33 -Spring Hollow Trails Blue Ridge Parkway to Stonebridge Park 35 ✓ ✓ N ✓ ✓ ✓ 2007 Stonebridge Park to Hardy Rd. 35 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 1999, 2001 Hardy Rd to Roanoke River 35 ✓ Fr°°ai°C 9 +State Jurisdiction ++ Federal Jurisdiction LEGEND Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan _ .� �, � � Roanoke River (Priority 1) f � — Priority 2 Greenways — Priority 3 and 4 Greenways crag cw°ry m - • Proposed Multi -Use Route — Appalachian Trail — Ex stng Greenways Ex st ng Trails ® Equestmy Facility Q Greenway Number PublicLands r , N 1 -Appalachian Trail 2 -Back Creek Greenway 3 6arnhartlt Creek Greenway °# ,'-,3 l " 4-BioMetl Loop . `"-{'^^"'°�'9--" i� •, , eP 5-Birtling and Wildlife Trail Sites 6 -Blue Ridge Parkway Trails .,•'° -- 7 -Carvin Creek Greenway 8-Carvins Cove Trail Network r1% w - 9Catawba Greenway 10.Dry Creek Greenway 11 Explore Park Trails 12 Gartlen Cty Greenway (Garnantl Branch) ,Gish Branch Greenway Lff W W eeaf ac 14-Ga:tCwreek Greenway 5-GThai f 1FGreen Hill Park Trails 17 -Hanging Rock Battlefield Trail 18 -Havens Wildlife Management Area Trails 1g -Jefferson National Forest Trails 20.Lick Run Greenway 7 21 -Long Ridge Trail ` '✓r 22_MnsCove Greenway 23 -Mason Creek Greenway 24 -Mill Momn Greenway 25 -Mill Mountan Park Trals 26-Mutll ck Creek Greenway (& Garet Mill) 27-Mumay Run Greenway 28 -Perimeter Trail °k` c - 23Poor Mountain Preserve 30 Mountain Trails y -Read 31 -Roanoke River Greenway 32 -Roanoke River Greenway Extensions( 33 -Spring Hollow Trails N 34 -Tinker Creek Greenway 35 -Wolf Creek Gree—y u' E �S Fr°°ai°C 9 Figure 2-2: 2007 Plan Map of Proposed Greenway Network 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 9 2.2.5. On -Road Bicycle Connections For decades the region has had bicycle plans, developed by the Metropolitan Planning Organization (now the RVTPO), to encourage bicycling as an alternative mode of travel and to facilitate development of greater connectivity between activity centers. These plans have documented bicycling conditions, accommodations, popular routes, safety concerns, and corridors needing improvements. The most recent update to the Bikeway Plan for the Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (Regional Bicycle Plan) was completed in 2012. In addition, the Ride Solutions program has played a significant role in encouraging bicycle commuting and developing on-line mapping resources. 2.2.5.1 U.S. Bicycle Route 76 U. S. Bicycle Route 76, established in 1978 as part of the TransAmerica Trail, is a national, signed bike route running through Botetourt and Roanoke Counties. The portion on Blacksburg Road was included in the 1995 Plan, and, with the inclusion of Botetourt County, the entire 55.5 miles within the region is included in this 2018 Plan. In 2017 the Regional Commission completed a study of the route to assess conditions and develop recommendations for improving the cyclist's experience, showcasing the region's resources, and increasing the economic benefits of this national facility. That study has specific recommendations to improve safety and wayfinding and encourages development of amenities and facilities for long distance riders. There is also a proposed U. S. Bicycle Route 11, which would follow the Blue Ridge Parkway. 2.2.5.2 Blue Ridge Parkway The Blue Ridge Parkway, under the jurisdiction of the National Park Service, is located in Botetourt and Roanoke Counties from Milepost 75 to Milepost 136. It is a popular route for recreational and long distance riders but is not signed for bicyclists. The speed limit is 45 mph, and there is limited access and lower traffic volumes than on many other roads. However, there are often conflicts between bicyclists and cars, because of significant commuter traffic and because the alignment and hills make it difficult for cars to pass bicycles. The Parkway does not have paved shoulders, and thus there are many safety issues for bicyclists. 2.2.5.3 Other On -Road Facilities The 1995 Plan included many proposed on -road routes, which were referenced in the 2007 Plan and included in the Regional Bicycle Plan. The localities have developed these facilities as opportunity has allowed, when roads are rebuilt, restriped, or reconfigured. Table 2-4 (p. 11) lists the roads with striped bike lanes and those that are on signed bicycle routes. The City of Roanoke has led the way on adding bike lanes through striping space when paving. Page 10 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan 2.2.6. Development of Blueways as Water Trails 2.2.6.1 Roanoke River Blueway In response to public input, the 2007 Plan had considerable discussion of development of a Roanoke River Blueway. Such a water trail would complement the greenway and help protect the scenic quality and health of the river, which directly affects users' experience on the greenway. The Greenway Commission had been providing annual canoe trips for elected officials and staff for many years, and numerous boat launches were being constructed in conjunction with Roanoke River Greenway. Some advocates assumed that the Greenway Commission was the logical group to organize the blueway development, but the four localities declined to expand the mission and staffing of the Commission at that time. In 2013 the Regional Commission received several requests from localities to help organize development of the Roanoke River Blueway. Thus, in 2014 the Regional Commission organized a steering committee of users, locality staff, outfitters and other community partners to gather the information that would be needed to develop a blueway website. Many of the boat launches, water gauges, canoe racks, and other amenities had already been installed, but the committee identified additional needs to provide continuity for a water trail. Staff looked at efforts in neighboring jurisdictions and across the state and developed the Roanoke River Blueway website. Partners on the steering committee stepped up to raise funding for installation of two new access points. The Greenway Commission supported these efforts by serving on the steering committee, providing amenities, assisting with funding, and providing tours, pictures, and other information. The Roanoke River Blueway has been designated a Virginia Treasure, received the Governor's Award for Environmental Excellence, and received a Virginia Tourism Corporation Grant. Promoting the Roanoke River Blueway helps to market the Roanoke River Greenway as the flagship greenway for the broader network. The Roanoke River Blueway, 45 miles long with 17 access points, remains a key amenity for outdoor recreation in the Roanoke Valley and is important to the greenway network. 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 11 Table 2-4: On-Road Bicycle Accommodations Built by 1213112017 Miles of Locality and Route Name Bike Lane Miles of Signed Bike Route Locality and Route Name Miles of Bike Lane Miles of Signed Bike Route City of Roanoke City of Roanoke cont'd 10th St. NW 1.67 Belmont 3.34 13th St. 2.90 Carlton Rd. 0.44 5th St. NW 0.56 Ferdinand Ave. 1.33 Boulevard St. 0.44 Maiden Ln. 2.08 Brambleton Ave. 1.60 Market St. 1.24 Brandon Ave. 4.53 1.61 Old Southwest 1.33 Broadway 0.45 Tinker 2.06 Colonial Ave. 1.81 Wise Ave. 1.69 Ed ewood St. 0.20 0.52 City of Salem Franklin Rd. 3.66 Braeburn Dr. 1.90 Gus Nicks Blvd. 1.33 Colorado St. 0.80 Hershberger Rd. 1.60 Salem Bike Route 9.93 JP Fishburn Parkway 1.60 County of Botetourt McClanahan St. 0.46 U. S. Bicycle Route 76 41.80 Melrose Ave. 4.49 County of Roanoke Memorial Ave. 1.04 Brambleton Ave. 2.30 Patterson Ave. 0.23 Mountain View Rd. 2.50 Peters Creek Rd. 4.44 11 U. S. Bicycle Route 76 13.70 Peters Creek Extension 4.66 2.08 Town of Vinton Shenandoah Ave. 1.62 4.32 Hardy Rd. 1.10 Totals 47.89 87.47 2.2.6. Development of Blueways as Water Trails 2.2.6.1 Roanoke River Blueway In response to public input, the 2007 Plan had considerable discussion of development of a Roanoke River Blueway. Such a water trail would complement the greenway and help protect the scenic quality and health of the river, which directly affects users' experience on the greenway. The Greenway Commission had been providing annual canoe trips for elected officials and staff for many years, and numerous boat launches were being constructed in conjunction with Roanoke River Greenway. Some advocates assumed that the Greenway Commission was the logical group to organize the blueway development, but the four localities declined to expand the mission and staffing of the Commission at that time. In 2013 the Regional Commission received several requests from localities to help organize development of the Roanoke River Blueway. Thus, in 2014 the Regional Commission organized a steering committee of users, locality staff, outfitters and other community partners to gather the information that would be needed to develop a blueway website. Many of the boat launches, water gauges, canoe racks, and other amenities had already been installed, but the committee identified additional needs to provide continuity for a water trail. Staff looked at efforts in neighboring jurisdictions and across the state and developed the Roanoke River Blueway website. Partners on the steering committee stepped up to raise funding for installation of two new access points. The Greenway Commission supported these efforts by serving on the steering committee, providing amenities, assisting with funding, and providing tours, pictures, and other information. The Roanoke River Blueway has been designated a Virginia Treasure, received the Governor's Award for Environmental Excellence, and received a Virginia Tourism Corporation Grant. Promoting the Roanoke River Blueway helps to market the Roanoke River Greenway as the flagship greenway for the broader network. The Roanoke River Blueway, 45 miles long with 17 access points, remains a key amenity for outdoor recreation in the Roanoke Valley and is important to the greenway network. 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 11 2.2.6.2 Upper James River Water Trail In 2015 Botetourt County developed the Upper James River Water Trail from Iron Gate to Alpine, a distance of 46 miles. This blueway has eight sections, with Class I and II rapids and excellent fishing. Several outfitters provide rental tubes, kayaks, fishing tours, and shuttles. In 2017 two segments of the river, totaling 30 miles, were designated part of the Virginia Scenic Rivers system and added to the 16 -mile segment designated in 1985 to provide Scenic River status for the entire river in Botetourt County. The trail's website provides detailed information about each section and contacts for renting equipment. 2.2.7. Greenway Funding The Upper James River Water Trail offers tubing, canoeing, kayaking, and fishing. Outfitters provide rental equipment and guide services. 2.2.7.1 Construction Funding Greenway construction and development has been funded through a myriad of federal, state, local, and private sources. Table 2-5 (p. 13) documents the grants and donations received since the 2007 Plan. Most grants require some match. These charts do not document all the local government spending to match grants and employ staff for managing projects. The 2007 Plan recommended reducing reliance on federal and state grants, but, in fact, the region is very dependent on these sources. 2.2.7.2 Greenway Commission Funding As outlined in the Intergovernmental Agreement (Appendix A), the Greenway Commission budget is funded on a per capita basis by each of the participating localities. The budget has increased over twenty years as the cost of salary and benefits for the Greenway Coordinator has increased, but the Greenway Commission is still staffed by only one employee. The Commission has an agreement with Roanoke County to provide office space and equipment and to serve as fiscal agent. 2.2.7.3 Funding through Pathfinders for Greenways Pathfinders relies on private donations and grants to cover its expenses. With those funds Pathfinders has been able to purchase a truck, trailer, two mini -skid steers, hand tools, and trail construction materials. Pathfinders does not have staff, but is assisted by the Greenway Coordinator and has a part-time contract employee to do clerical work and bookkeeping. In 2007 a group of young professionals called Valley Forward started a fundraising race, Gallop for the Greenways, to provide monies to speed up greenway construction. The race is an annual event and the proceeds have paid for engineering, survey, construction, and land purchase on different greenway and trail sections. Pathfinders has also participated in other events for charitable organizations, such as First Fridays and the Deschutes Street Pub, won awards such as Cox Heroes, and received corporate donations, such as those from Bridge the Gap donors and from Novozymes, which provided $50,000 annually for six years. Pathfinders has received grants and donations that have allowed purchase of a mini -skid steer to assist with trail building. Page 12 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan 2.3. ADDITION OF BOTETOURT COUNTY In 2015 Botetourt County asked about the possibility of joining the Greenway Commission. After informal discussions between County and Greenway Commission staff, the Botetourt County Board of Supervisors took action to request to join the Greenway Commission. While the addition of new members was specifically allowed in the Intergovernmental Agreement, no process had previously been specified. Thus, the Greenway Commission reviewed the request at length, considering the pros and cons, the impact on staff and funding, and the expectations. In April 2016 it recommended to the localities that Botetourt County be admitted as a member and that the Intergovernmental Agreement be revised to reflect the change. Subsequently, each of the four localities took action approving a resolution to add Botetourt as a member and to revise the Intergovernmental Agreement. On June 29, 2016 these documents were signed by the administrators of each jurisdiction at the Annual Meeting of the Greenway Commission, held at Greenfield Education and Training Center. Botetourt County is 548 square miles in size and brings many resources and opportunities to the greenway program. In the eastern part of the County are the Blue Ridge Parkway and the Glenwood District of the Jefferson National Forest. In the northern part of the County are the James River and Craig Creek. In the western part are the Patterson"" Mountain and North Mountain Trails` of the Eastern Divide District of the I National Forest. In the southern part are Carvins Cove, Tinker Creek, ' and Read Mountain. U.S. Bicycle Route 76 runs through the County for 41.8 miles from Buchanan through Troutville to Catawba Road, and the Appalachian Trail crosses the County from Carvins Cove through Daleville to the Blue +, Ridge Parkway. Thus, the County r �, is well connected with recreational` resources, has ample space for development of support facilities like camping, and could be a hub for outdoor recreation. On June 29, 2016 Botetourt Countyjoined the Greenway Commission with the signing of documents at Greenfield Education and Training Center. Table 2-6 (p. 14) is a list of the existing trails in Botetourt County which are being incorporated into the 2018 Plan, thus enlarging the total mileage in the Roanoke Valley Greenway network. 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 13 Table 2-5: Grants and Allocations for Roanoke Valley Greenways YearAwarded Federal State Local Private Total 2007 $1,005,000 $173,300 $ 773,000 $ 69,631 $ 2,020,931 2008 $ 279,000 $ 0 $ 4,344 $ 281,221 $ 564,565 2009 $ 2,565,000 $10,000 $ 485,000 $ 379,300 $ 3,439,300 2010 $ 251,503 $1,300,000 $ 0 $ 75,162 $1,626,665 2011 $ 925,000 $ 33,825 $ 200,000 $159,550 $1,318,375 2012 $ 652,000 $1,374,000 $1,268 $ 639,904 $ 2,667,172 2013 $13,140,443 $ 81,000 $ 411,000 $ 80,200 $13,712,643 2014 $ 657,392 $ 60,000 $ 50,500 $ 49,000 $ 816,892 2015 $1,790,784 $ 0 $ 200,000 $ 30,250 $ 2,021,034 2016 $ 8,061,329 $1,643,041 $ 670,000 $103,760 $10,478,130 2017 $ 2,610,000 $ 3,195,175 $ 0 $17,805 $ 5,822,980 Total $ 31,937,451 $ 7,870,341 $ 2,795,112 $1,885,783 $ 44,488,687 2.3. ADDITION OF BOTETOURT COUNTY In 2015 Botetourt County asked about the possibility of joining the Greenway Commission. After informal discussions between County and Greenway Commission staff, the Botetourt County Board of Supervisors took action to request to join the Greenway Commission. While the addition of new members was specifically allowed in the Intergovernmental Agreement, no process had previously been specified. Thus, the Greenway Commission reviewed the request at length, considering the pros and cons, the impact on staff and funding, and the expectations. In April 2016 it recommended to the localities that Botetourt County be admitted as a member and that the Intergovernmental Agreement be revised to reflect the change. Subsequently, each of the four localities took action approving a resolution to add Botetourt as a member and to revise the Intergovernmental Agreement. On June 29, 2016 these documents were signed by the administrators of each jurisdiction at the Annual Meeting of the Greenway Commission, held at Greenfield Education and Training Center. Botetourt County is 548 square miles in size and brings many resources and opportunities to the greenway program. In the eastern part of the County are the Blue Ridge Parkway and the Glenwood District of the Jefferson National Forest. In the northern part of the County are the James River and Craig Creek. In the western part are the Patterson"" Mountain and North Mountain Trails` of the Eastern Divide District of the I National Forest. In the southern part are Carvins Cove, Tinker Creek, ' and Read Mountain. U.S. Bicycle Route 76 runs through the County for 41.8 miles from Buchanan through Troutville to Catawba Road, and the Appalachian Trail crosses the County from Carvins Cove through Daleville to the Blue +, Ridge Parkway. Thus, the County r �, is well connected with recreational` resources, has ample space for development of support facilities like camping, and could be a hub for outdoor recreation. On June 29, 2016 Botetourt Countyjoined the Greenway Commission with the signing of documents at Greenfield Education and Training Center. Table 2-6 (p. 14) is a list of the existing trails in Botetourt County which are being incorporated into the 2018 Plan, thus enlarging the total mileage in the Roanoke Valley Greenway network. 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 13 Table 2-6: Existing Trails Incorporated into the Greenway Network with the Addition of Botetourt County Name Trail or Section Management Partners (Acronyms Listed p. vi) Surface Existing Miles Added Andy Layne Trail Rt 779 to Appalachian Trail Roanoke Cement, RATC C 3.0 Appalachian Trail Campbell Shelter to VA 652 NPS -APPA, RATC, ATC C 17.5 Appalachian Trail VA 652 to Thunder Hill Shelter USFS, RATC & NBATC C 40.1 Birding and Wildlife Trail Sites Alleghany Highlands Loop: Callie Furnace USFS B 0.3 Birding and Wildlife Trail Sites Iron Ore Loop: Craig Creek Recreation Area - mileage counted under National Forest USFS B 0.0 Birding and Wildlife Trail Sites Peaks of Otter Loop: Harveys Knob Overlook Blue Ridge Parkway A 0.0 Birding and Wildlife Trail Sites Peaks of Otter Loop: Warbler Road USFS B 13.0 Birding and Wildlife Trail Sites Roanoke Valley Loop WVWA; Roanoke Parks & Rec A 0.1 Birding and Wildlife Trail Sites Roanoke Valley Loop: Woodpecker Ridge Nature Center Private B -C 0.8 Blue Ridge Park Blue Ridge Park Trail Botetourt Parks and Rec A -B -C 0.65 Boxley Park Blue Ridge Springs Trail Botetourt Parks and Rec C 0.6 Carvins Cove Trail Network Multiple Trails, Listed in Chapter 4; 45 miles, counted previously Roanoke Parks & Rec B -C 0 Greenfield Trail System Cherry Blossom Trail Botetourt Parks and Rec B 0.88 Greenfield Trail System Boyer Holiday Trail Botetourt Parks and Rec C - grass 0.86 Greenfield Trail System Colonel William Preston Trail Botetourt Parks and Rec C - grass 2.4 Greenfield Trail System Greenfield Recreation Trail Botetourt Parks and Rec C - grass 3.1 Blue Ridge Parkway Harkening Hill Trail BRP, USFS C 3.3 Blue Ridge Parkway Fallingwater Trail BRP, USFS A &C 1.6 Blue Ridge Parkway Flat Top Mountain Trail BRP C 4.4 Jefferson National Forest Multiple Trails, listed in Chapter 4 USFS-Eastern Divide C 57.4 Jefferson National Forest Multiple Trails, listed in Chapter 4 USFS-Glenwood/ Pedlar C 76.3 George Washington National Forest Multiple Trails, listed in Chapter 4 USFS-James River C 6.1 Perimeter Trail Curry Gap to Nace On roads - USFS, VDOT A -B 6.2 Tinker Creek Greenway Botetourt Co. Line to Carvins Cove Boat Landing Roanoke County Parks, Rec. and Tourism; Roanoke Parks and Rec. C 0 Upper James River Water Trail Iron Gate to Craig Creek DGIF Water 14.0 Upper James River Water Trail Craig Creek to Springwood DGIF Water 16.5 Upper James River Water Trail Springwood to Buchanan DGIF, VDOT Water 5.0 Upper James River Water Trail Buchanan to Arcadia DGIF Water 6.0 Upper James River Water Trail Arcadia to Alpine VDOT, DGIF, USFS Water 4.5 U.S. Bicycle Route 76 Rockbridge County to Roanoke County Line VDOT A 41.8 Existing Mileage Added to Roanoke Valley Greenway Network 326.4 Surfaces: A= Paved, asphalt or concrete; B = Crushed aggregate stone, wood chips; C = Natural surface, wood chips, stone, or grass Page 14 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan 2.4. REVIEW OF GOALS, OBJECTIVES9 AND STRATEGIES 2.4.1. Review of Goals, Objectives, and Strategies from 2007 Plan In the 2007 Plan issues raised by the public led to development of six new goals, in addition to those in the 1995 Plan. Those six goals were regional goals for all the partners involved in the greenway program to consider during development of the greenway network. After completion of the 2007 Plan, the four localities and the Greenway Commission addressed many of these issues by revising the Intergovernmental Agreement, expanding the Greenway Commission membership to include staff, revising the bylaws, and focusing on Roanoke River Greenway. In 2014, in line with the Commission's responsibility to review the Plan periodically, the Executive Committee updated the implementation strategies and this 2018 Plan includes further updates in Chapter 6. Table 2-7: Progress on 2007 Goals, Objectives, and Strategies Goal Objectives Strategies Progress by 2018 1. Greenway Construction Prioritize greenway construction and Focus on finishing the Roanoke River Greenway Complete a connected greenway focus resources on completion of the (Priority #1) in the next five years. High network of trails to provide the greenway network's arterial routes. Provide a connected greenway system Focus on finishing Priority #2 routes in five to ten multiple benefits of a greenway system, with focus on finishing Roanoke River Greenway. by focusing on long stretches of off-road trails and tying them together years. Moderate with on -road bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Improve the process for getting greenways built. Incorporate on -road greenways and connections into the regional Bikeway Plans. High Provide identification, regulatory, and Develop master plans for Priority 1 and 2 informational signs on each greenway greenways with time lines for land acquisition and Moderate to facilitate use and management. construction. Identify a project team for each project, with assigned roles and responsibilities. Moderate Within each locality coordinate project management, land acquisition, and greenway construction with all departments that might help Moderate or be impacted. Develop greenway sign guidelines to encourage signage consistency while retaining flexibility to Moderate meet locality requirements. Continue to use Pathfinders for Greenways to build Class C trails. High 2. Funding Develop an aggressive, regional, Continue to seek federal and state grants but Increase greenway funding to meet the goals for trail multi-year funding plan that identifies fiscal goals and sources of continuous reduce reliance on these sources. High; low. construction and completion of the funding for greenway construction. Develop new sources of revenue for Develop an implementation plan for completion greenway network. greenway construction. of the Roanoke River Greenway and utilize it in High soliciting corporate donations and investments. Target multiple funding sources and explore innovative funding possibilities such as bonds, High stormwater fees, private grants, and partnerships. Expand fund raising activities such as charitable donations, festivals, races, and other fundraising High events. Include capital money for greenways in each locality's Capital Improvement Program. High Develop a donation program to allow private donation of greenway amenities such as water High fountains, bike racks and benches. 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 15 Table 2-7: Progress on 2007 Goals, Objectives, and Strategies (continued) Goal Objectives Strategies Progress by 2018 2. Funding (cont'd) Develop a method for receiving and efficiently utilizing corporate donations. High Develop a list of specific trail sections or components that could be funded by corporate or Moderate other private monies. 3. Land Acquisition Develop an aggressive, land Form land acquisition teams, define roles and Develop a land acquisition acquisition program that identifies responsibilities of team members, and train team program that provides rights- properties needed for each project and members to assist with acquisition of greenway Low of -way needed for greenway time lines for acquisition that dovetail easements. construction. with construction schedules. Work cooperatively among local Identify existing public properties and easements jurisdictions to coordinate land being acquired for other purposes to determine if Moderate - acquisition across jurisdictional greenway easements can be incorporated. High boundaries. Develop a mechanism to be involved in the utility easement process so that greenway easements Moderate can be considered where appropriate. Work with planning staff to refine local zoning ordinances to encourage and protect greenway corridors. Moderate - High Work with developers to include greenway easements, and greenway construction, within Moderate - new developments that are located along identified High greenway corridors. Utilize corporations and chambers of commerce to support development of trails within industrial/ Moderate business complexes. 4. Community Outreach and Develop a dynamic outreach program Expand the Greenway Commission and localities' Education that communicates the economic, web sites to provide current information on Moderate - Develop a community outreach health, environmental, and quality of projects and events, trail locations and maps, and High and education program that life benefits of the greenway system. information for tourists. provides information on greenway Increase awareness of greenway Provide greenway marketing information to the opportunities and benefits. implementation efforts through a economic development departments of the local Moderate comprehensive marketing strategy. jurisdictions. Expand environmental educational Develop an outreach program that goes beyond programs and service opportunities the Roanoke Valley to be used to attract new Moderate - through cooperation with local schools businesses and enhance the valley's value as a High and an expanded volunteer program. tourism destination. Develop a speaker's bureau to market greenways to Valley residents through club and organization Low meetings, civic associations, and business groups. Standardize use of the greenway logo on trail signs, maps, and marketing materials. High Publicize greenway projects, trail locations, and benefits via the press, newsletters, signage, and High web site. Expand the volunteer and volunteer recognition program. Moderate Develop a "Youth of the Greenways" advocacy component to engage young audiences to volunteer and contribute to future greenway Low development. Page 16 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Table 2-7: Progress on 2007 Goals, Objectives, and Strategies (continued) Goal Objectives Strategies Progress by 2018 5. Organizational Structure Clarify the roles and responsibilities for Clarify the roles and responsibilities of each Refine the organizational structure to effectively and efficiently implementing the Greenway Plan. locality, the Greenway Commission and volunteers in implementation of the Greenway Plan and High implement the Update to the s ecific ro ects. Improve the Greenway Commission's Update and renew the Intergovernmental Conceptual Greenway Plan and manage the growing greenway function to assist the localities Agreement. High system. effectively. Identify staffing needs of the localities and Greenway Commission to meet the responsibilities of each in implementing the Greenway Plan and Moderate managing the greenway network. Develop a Memorandum of Understanding with Western Virginia Water Authority and other utility companies to facilitate right-of-way planning and Low management of greenways within utility corridors. 6. Greenway Management Utilize best management practices Work with legal departments to develop Manage the greenway network to meet user needs, provide a in design and maintenance of greenways. ordinances needed to effectively manage greenways and to encourage consistency across Moderate range of experiences in a secure jurisdictions when feasible. Improve regional coordination among Develop methods for users to report problems or environment, and protect the natural resources. greenway managers to address management issues and develop conditions on greenways. Moderate consistent responses. Provide departments maintaining Involve law enforcement and emergency greenways with sufficient budget and management personnel prior to the opening of Moderate - resources to manage the growing new greenways. High greenway network. Schedule regional meetings among staff managing greenways to share methods and experiences. Low Identify greenways in locality mapping and geographic information systems. High Use national and state guidelines like CPTED (Crime Prevention through Environmental Design) and AASHTO (American Association of State High Highway and Transportation Officials) to design secure and safe trails. Expand adopt-a-greenway programs and other methods for volunteer assistance to reduce High maintenance costs. 2.4.2. Review of Goals/Objectives from 1995 Plan The 2007 Plan incorporated the Goals and Objectives from the 1995 Plan. The 1995 Plan presents a holistic vision for a Valley -wide greenway system. That plan identifies many greenway corridors to establish an interconnected trail system. However, the greenway system is more than just an alternative transportation and recreation facility. The 1995 Plan addressed not just the physical infrastructure but the following as well: • Recreation opportunities • Wellness of the Valley's citizens (health and fitness needs/active lifestyle) • Preservation/conservation of natural resources • Educational opportunities • Economic development potential 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 17 These ideas are represented as seven goals with 45 related objectives and strategies. The Steering Committee for this update reviewed these strategies and subjectively re-evaluated the success in achieving each. The table below lists the goals and objectives/strategies and ranks the degree of progress on each as: None, Low, Moderate, or High. These goals, objectives and strategies represent an ambitious concept that could create a model greenway system. Table 2-8: Progress on 1995 Goals, Objectives, and Strategies Goals 1995 Plan Objectives/Strategies Progress by 2007 Progress by 2018 1. Transportation Provide corridors that bicyclists, Provide greenways that connect schools, libraries, shopping centers, work sites, parks and other places in the community. Moderate Moderate — High Provide connections between mass transit sites and make pedestrians, and others can use to get from one place to another as an alternative to motor vehicle use. arrangements for safe storage of greenway system users' bicycles (or other belongings) while they are using the transit Low Low system. Identify and make plans for existing roads that should be widened or otherwise modified to accommodate bicycles and pedestrians. Moderate Moderate Initiate Valley -wide design and installation standards to incorporate bicycle and pedestrian facilities on new roads and Low Moderate road improvement plans. Initiate design standards that are sensitive to the disabled in order to ensure opportunities for a variety of users. High High 2. Safety Establish integrated law enforcement and emergency response Design a greenway system that maximizes safety of greenway system programs that service the needs of greenway system users and landowners. Low Moderate — High Incorporate into the greenway management system appropriate safety and security strategies. Moderate Moderate users and nearby property owners and neighborhoods. Design the greenway system to accommodate different activities (such as horseback riding and bicycling) with a minimum of user- Moderate Moderate conflict. Improve bicycle safety by implementing safety education programs in local schools and the community. None Low 3. Recreation/ Fitness/Health Design the greenway system as Provide a greenway system that accommodates a variety of recreational activities. High High Encourage businesses to establish and integrate use of greenways into corporate health and wellness programs. Low Moderate — High both a recreational resource and as public access to other recreational Promote programs and facilities that provide opportunities for individual health related activities. Moderate High resources, offering a full spectrum of recreation and exercise opportunities. Make each greenway a stand-alone destination (as well as a link to other resources) by providing amenities such as benches, Moderate Moderate - High picnic areas, and workout stations. 4. Education Educate the public about the need Educate the community on the importance of environmental conservation and restoration ecology. Moderate Moderate Develop a program of continuing education for elected officials, for and benefits of greenways, and educate the greenway system user about the area's natural and cultural history. agency staff, developers and engineers to define the latest technologies, design methodologies and land use practices for managing the environment. Low Low Increase public awareness of the importance of the Roanoke River and its watershed lands to the future of the Roanoke Valley. Moderate Moderate - High Educate the public on the benefits and uses of greenways. Develop an out -reach education program to attract new users. Moderate Moderate — High Educate property owners of the economic advantages of having a greenway on or near their property. Low Moderate Educate greenway system users on proper greenway system etiquette that respects the rights of adjacent property owners and Moderate Moderate other greenway system users. Use the greenway system as an outdoor Environmental Learning Lab for school and community use. Moderate Moderate Provide historic information using trail markers along historically significant trail corridors. Low Moderate Provide maps and literature on trail length, difficulty, restrictions and amenities. Moderate Moderate Page 18 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Table 2-8: Progress on 1995 Goals, Objectives, and Strategies (continued) Goals 1995 Plan Objectives/Strategies Progress by 2007 Progress by 2018 5. Economic Development Address both the appropriate costs of Utilize the greenway system as an economic development marketing tool for the Roanoke Valley. Low High Use greenway linkages to complement and enhance tourist attractions. Moderate Moderate implementing the greenway system (including land acquisition and capital improvements) and the benefits that will result from its creation. Document economic benefits of greenways, such as increasing the value of land that lies contiguous to a greenway and the Low Moderate benefits to a new business locating in the Roanoke Valley. Establish a mechanism to ensure continuing maintenance of the greenways, such as using volunteers to keep maintenance costs Moderate Moderate low and starting Adopt -A -Greenway program. Utilize tax incentives, easements and other approaches to encourage individuals and businesses to donate land, funding or Moderate Moderate materials. Establish procedures for subdivision developers to provide donations of land or rights-of-way for greenway systems. Low Moderate Utilize existing rights-of-way, utility corridors, and other features to lower installation costs. Low Moderate Explore and obtain multiple sources of funding for greenways. Moderate High 6. Environmental Design a plan that preserves, Encourage localities to include greenways as a flood reduction strategy in the Roanoke Regional Stormwater Management Plan. Moderate Moderate Develop a valley -wide strategy for protecting natural stream promotes and enhances the Valley's environmental assets. corridors and other open space, plus a mitigation program for addressing resources that have been adversely altered by land None Moderate development. Promote greenways as an alternative transportation mode that can help reduce air pollution. Moderate High Utilize areas adjacent to greenways as natural areas that protect, maintain, or restore natural vegetation and aquatic and wildlife Moderate High habitats. Design greenways to reduce non -point source pollution in stormwater runoff. Moderate Moderate - High Utilize greenways as buffer zones between developed area and open spaces. Moderate Moderate 7. Organizational and Operational Implement the Roanoke Valley Obtain local government and citizen support for the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan. High High Respond to citizen concerns such as safety issues and user Conceptual Greenway Plan on a regional level and proceed with future conflicts in the establishment and operation of the greenway Moderate Moderate greenway system planning and system. implementation. Establish standards for the design, operation, and maintenance of the greenway system. Low Moderate High Ensure that an organizational structure exists for regional planning, implementation, and operation of greenways in the High High Roanoke Valley. Establish a non-profit organization to launch a public awareness campaign, volunteer programs and fundraising efforts. High High Select a pilot greenway project and implement it. High High Pursue implementation of other elements of the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan. Moderate High 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 19 Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 20 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan 3. COMMUNITY INPUT AND ISSUES 3.1. GREENWAY PLAN UPDATE PROCESS The Greenway Commission and Regional Commission selected a variety of methods for involving citizens, locality staff, and officials in the update to the Greenway Plan. These methods included convening a steering committee (listed on the inside cover of this Plan), holding seven public input meetings, conducting an on-line survey, and meeting frequently with locality staff, locality greenway teams and the Greenway Commission. 3.1.1. Public Input Meetings Six community meetings were held in 2017 to gather public input on the future of the greenway system. Total attendance was 208 people. These meetings took place on the following dates at locations noted: • March 21, 2017 in Botetourt County at the Greenfield Education and Training Center • March 27, 2017 in Roanoke County at Mountain View Elementary School • March 30, 2017 in the City of Roanoke at Fishburn Elementary School • April 3, 2017 in Roanoke County at South County Library • April 6, 2017 in Roanoke County at Glenvar Middle School • April 10, 2017 in the Town of Vinton at the Vinton War Memorial Each meeting began with a presentation on the history and status of the greenway program. Attendees divided into groups to rotate through stations focused on specific topics. Within each station, the facilitator led the group through questions, recording answers on flip charts and allowing personal responses on comment sheets. The topics were: • Station 1 - Regional Vision • Station 2 - Neighborhood Vision • Station 3 - Tinker Creek Greenway (only at Greenfield, Mountain View, and Vinton meetings) • Station 4 - Operations and Management Input from these stations is summarized in Section 3.2. Complete flip chart notes from these meetings and all comment sheets are recorded in Appendix C. 3.1.2. On-line Survey An on-line survey was available from February 27th to April 17th of 2017. This survey contained 27 questions on a variety of topics, from personal use patterns to regional connectivity goals. The survey received 542 responses. The questions and a summary of responses for each question are included in Appendix B. 3.1.3. Meetings with Staff and Officials Staff from multiple departments and agencies were consulted via transportation meetings, management meetings, Greenway Commission meetings, locality greenway team meetings, and individual conversations. This feedback provided data for the Plan, as well as perspective on management issues. 3.1.4. Public Review of Draft Plan A draft greenway plan was presented to the public on April 19, 2018 at the Berglund Center. At this open house meeting, organized again at four stations, staff discussed the plan and answered questions. Comments and reactions from the 108 attendees were recorded on flip charts, as well as individual comment sheets. These comments, as well as on-line responses and email input Citizens provide public input on the regional vision at the Greenfield meeting. 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 21 received by May 4, were incorporated into revisions to this 2018 Plan and are shown in Appendix D. The 2018 Plan was approved by the Greenway Commission on June 27, 2018 and was forwarded to the five localities for review and action. 3.2. PUBLIC INPUT AND DISCUSSION The structure of the community meetings with four stations framed the discussion at the meetings and organized the public input. This input and the Greenway Commission response to it is summarized below. 3.2.1. Regional Vision The 2007 Plan prioritized individual greenways into four categories and focused work on Roanoke River Greenway as Priority #1. Many miles of greenways and trails in all priority levels have been built since that plan. In order to capture public satisfaction with the vision of the 2007 Plan, people were asked to reassess the network, verbalize their vision, and propose changes if needed. At the Regional Vision stations, attendees were asked to use stars and dots to mark on a map what they thought were key destinations and priority greenway routes. The cumulative results of this activity are shown in Figure 3-1: Destinations and Priorities Identified by the Public (p.23). The destinations with the most votes were Carvins Cove, Explore Park, and Smith Mountain Lake (which is outside the Greenway Commission service area). Other destinations were widely spread across the region and seem to reflect the public's desire to use greenways for transportation. Connectivity was a recurring theme as part of the regional vision. People want greenways, particularly Roanoke River Greenway, to be completed in order to provide a continuous route. Where a greenway is not completed, they want an on -road accommodation to reach the next section safely. They also want to be able to access the greenways by foot or bicycle, rather than having to drive to trailheads. Additional themes from public responses include the importance of greenways for transportation, connections to work and businesses, tourism, and access to nature. Attendees at Greenfield and Mountain View meetings particularly recognized the challenge of strategically envisioning Botetourt's new system and connections, but also preferred using public land or on -road routes, as opposed to private lands, for development of routes. Completion of the greenway network adopted in 2007 was a key priority identified in all community meetings. In particular, respondents want to finish the backbone of the greenway network, Roanoke River Greenway, and the north - south connections to Carvins Cove and the Blue Ridge Parkway. Responses from both the public input meetings and the survey identified Tinker Creek Greenway as the next regional priority. Tinker Creek Greenway is the route which could most easily extend from the Roanoke Valley into Botetourt County and, as a north -south corridor, it extends through four of the five member localities, just as Roanoke River Greenway does from west to east. The vision of having a greenway network that provides a trunkline route from west to east and arterials north to south is adopted in this 2018 Plan, as articulated in Section 1.4. 3.2.2. Neighborhood Vision At each community meeting and during the survey process citizens responded with their own neighborhood in mind. Some citizens look to greenways to protect their neighborhood from development, a concept voiced by many at the Fishburn Elementary School meeting where residents were concerned about the impact of development of the Shenandoah Life property on Murray Run Greenway and on their own residences. Others are most concerned about reaching the greenways safely by foot or bicycle; 41% of respondents to the survey said they could not. Neighborhood destinations include schools, residential neighborhoods, parks, libraries and local stores. In neighborhoods that are densely developed, it is not possible to put off-road paths to every destination. Connectivity recommendations such as sidewalks and on -road bicycle accommodations were proposed as an alternative solution; these are further discussed in Chapter 5: Regional Transportation Connections. These recommendations could improve the utility of the greenway network as a web of transportation corridors connecting communities across the Roanoke Valley, as well as improve access to recreational opportunities such as mountain bike trails, hiking trails, and regional blueways. Page 22 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Figure 3-1: Destinations and Priorities Identified by the Public 3.2.3. Tinker Creek Greenway Studies of the Tinker Creek corridor began in FY 16, separately from the update to the Greenway Plan. The Tinker Creek Greenway Connectivity Study was supported by the Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance (RTCA) Program of the National Park Service. Ursula Lemanski, RTCA Virginia Projects Manager, was an integral part of coordinating a Tinker Creek Greenway Steering Committee and writing the Conceptual Plan. As these two planning efforts approached the point where public input was needed, staff realized that it would be more efficient to seek that input simultaneously with the Greenway Plan. Thus, at the community meetings near Tinker Creek— Greenfield, Mountain View and Vinton War Memorial — there was a Tinker Creek Greenway Station to obtain feedback on routing options. While there were many neighbors who did not want the greenway on their property, Tinker 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 23 Public Input Destinations and Prioritiest,. Legend G-1-1 Pfsn L.-*ons Craig rr County c� y�Lti,r t �t Public Input Priorities �`�` ° 1 4-E 9 �• o f Bedford County r6 o a Franklin County Figure 3-1: Destinations and Priorities Identified by the Public 3.2.3. Tinker Creek Greenway Studies of the Tinker Creek corridor began in FY 16, separately from the update to the Greenway Plan. The Tinker Creek Greenway Connectivity Study was supported by the Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance (RTCA) Program of the National Park Service. Ursula Lemanski, RTCA Virginia Projects Manager, was an integral part of coordinating a Tinker Creek Greenway Steering Committee and writing the Conceptual Plan. As these two planning efforts approached the point where public input was needed, staff realized that it would be more efficient to seek that input simultaneously with the Greenway Plan. Thus, at the community meetings near Tinker Creek— Greenfield, Mountain View and Vinton War Memorial — there was a Tinker Creek Greenway Station to obtain feedback on routing options. While there were many neighbors who did not want the greenway on their property, Tinker 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 23 Creek Greenway was a very important piece of the network for many people and was strongly supported as the most logical route to Botetourt County and as the next priority. The Tinker Creek Greenway Conceptual Plan is included in this document as Appendix E. It documents the planning process, alternatives, and evaluation of the location options. 3.2.4. Operations and Management The Operations and Management station was part of all six community meetings, and issues with maintenance and amenities were the focus of five survey questions. In addition, staff had a focus group meeting with maintenance personnel. Generally, comments ran along the broad topics of user conflicts, amenity improvements, damage to facilities, wayfinding, and funding. These issues are discussed further in Section 3.3. 3.3. KEY ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS The 2007 Plan addressed 14 issues and made recommendations for improvements. Many of those recommendations have been implemented, but the issues persist and require on-going attention. This 2018 Plan addresses issues most frequently mentioned, but the discussion in the 2007 Plan is still valid. 3.3.1. Priorities Regional priorities help leverage resources and funding to complete routes that connect all localities. Since 2007 Roanoke River Greenway has been the flagship greenway - the longest, most popular and most used greenway in the Roanoke Valley. Citizen response demonstrates a firm commitment to completing this greenway and to ensuring it is maintained as the heart of the regional greenway network. Current timelines show Roanoke River Greenway could be completed from Green Hill Park to Explore Park by 2023. There is strong community support for Tinker Creek Greenway to become the next regional priority greenway. This north to south route will connect Botetourt County, Roanoke County, Roanoke City, and the Town of Vinton. This 2018 Plan recognizes that there are many projects underway, based on the resources and opportunities for development. On any given greenway corridor, which can be many miles long, the priority can vary depending on the proximity to the urbanized area and locality resources. In Chapter 4 the greenway routes have been sorted into five categories, reflecting their status and progress. 3.3.2. Connectivity The theme of connectivity had several components: one was finishing specific greenways so that they provide continuous routes, another was connecting communities by providing facilities between greenways for safe bicycle and pedestrian travel and between neighborhoods and the greenways, and a third was connecting the region to other regions. The progress on specific greenways is detailed in Chapter 4, with additions to some greenways to provide connections to other routes. Chapter 5 was developed to address the issue of connectivity between greenways, neighborhoods, and communities via sidewalks, bike lanes, and other on -road accommodations. 3.3.3. Signage, Wayfinding, and Web Information The theme of signage and information was heard frequently in 2007. Since then, the localities, Greenway Commission, and partners such as Roanoke Kiwanis Club have made significant efforts to install kiosks with maps and rules, identification signs, entrance signs with addresses, rules signs, mile markers, etiquette reminders, on -road directional signs, and interpretive signs. Still, the public regularly mentioned signage on the greenway, the need for improvements to both wayfinding and educational signage, and the need to simplify rules and improve etiquette. The need for wayfinding signage varies depending on the complexity of intersections and was mentioned often for Lick Run Greenway and the on -road section of Roanoke River Greenway around Golden Park, connecting to Tinker Creek Greenway. Signage regarding etiquette and mile markers are lacking on some greenways, few bridges over the greenways are labeled, and seldom is there information on how to connect to roads, parking, bicycle infrastructure, or other greenway segments. Consistency across jurisdictions was a repeated concern. While signage on the greenways has improved, the general public has become more and more dependent on phones and the internet for wayfinding. Roanoke Outside has developed a significant website with maps and trail information. Page 24 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Mapping tools change constantly, and it is a challenge to keep web maps current and applications up-to-date. Pathfinders for Greenways initially developed the greenway website with volunteers, but neither they nor the Greenway Commission have had the resources to address social media trends and the demand for on-line information. Web maintenance and upkeep, calendars of events on greenways, notice about weather related closures and conditions, and interactive mapping are demands that have grown significantly since 2007. 3.3.4. User Conflicts As use of Roanoke River Greenway has increased, conflicts between users has become a significant concern. Pedestrians complain about the speed of bicyclists, and bicyclists complain that pedestrians are unpredictable and take up the whole trail. Several injuries and even a lawsuit have occurred. Pets are also a significant source of conflict, as leashes impact bicycle safety. Concerns about pet waste cleanup and water quality have led to installation of numerous Mutt -Mitt stations. User conflicts and fear of being hit by a bicycle are most common in the City of Roanoke, where the greenway is longer, but conflicts also occur in Salem, where sunbathers on the trail obstruct users and where fishermen may cast too close to the greenway. The Greenway Ambassador Program was started to encourage common courtesy and etiquette along the greenways, in hopes of improving behavior and reducing interactions. Ambassadors patrol in official vests, talk to other users, and report maintenance issues to staff. Other proposed solutions to user conflicts include: centerlines, wider greenways, separate pedestrian and bicycle lanes, speed limit signs, and speed limit enforcement. The public feels that connecting the greenway network more thoroughly to bike lanes and other greenways could take pressure off popular stretches by dispersing traffic. Marketing and education are important factors for letting people know about other trails and appropriate greenway etiquette. 3.3.5. Event Management The greenways have become a popular place for fund raising events such as races, weekly pub runs, church services, reunions, and informal outings such as bike rides for Scouts and other groups. The City of Roanoke now regulates events, charging for the use and limiting the number of closures of the greenways. The City of Salem does not allow races on the trails. Other jurisdictions are still developing policies. Management of group use is an on-going concern, as individuals and groups vie for space for their activities. The Greenway Planning, Standards and Safety Committee initially recommended the incorporation of street addresses into greenway identification signs, especially at trailheads and parking areas. These addresses serve an important function as a safety measure, allowing quick response for emergency calls, and as a wayfinding measure for those navigating with a phone or other mapping device. Additionally, wayfinding signage can direct users of all transportation modes on how to reach the greenway and can assist users in reaching other greenways in the network once on a particular route. Greenway Identification Sign, Town of Vinton 3.3.6. Amenities The array of amenities along the greenways has increased significantly since 2007. Benches, water fountains, wildflower gardens, art sculptures, and bike racks are prevalent. Bathrooms are the resource in most demand. Some bathrooms have been retrofitted for year round use, and port -a -johns are available when budgets allow. Donations and volunteer help for installation of smaller items like benches and kiosks are easier to obtain than funding for long term maintenance and replacement. 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 25 3.3.7. New Equipment New equipment is constantly being developed and often shows up on the greenways. The most recent are motorized skateboards and E -bikes, bicycles with an electric battery to assist the cyclist in climbing hills. Motorized vehicles are prohibited on the greenways, unless for ADA purposes. Those purchasing this equipment may not realize it is not allowed. Big wheels, tricycles, skateboards, and even electric wheelchairs can be problematic if not used responsibly. There is increasing demand for cell reception, chargers for electric wheelchairs, and webcams to provide reports on flooding. Each new item will require consideration, decisions by staff, and possibly ordinances. 3.3.8. Staff Challenges While the Greenway Commission itself is responsible for planning, securing grant funding, and working with the public, as well as identifying future projects and helping to see that those projects are built, the Commission is not currently involved in management. This is handled by the member localities. Each member locality has different procedures, organizational challenges, and statutes that can directly affect user experience on the greenway network. Greenways are popular facilities and staff in all the localities have been proud to keep them well maintained. Staff are challenged by: • Funding: Greenway construction across the region is being funded largely with state and federal grants, matched by local capital monies and in-kind labor. Budgets for managing departments do not always grow as the network grows. This means that management must be increasingly inventive in how they approach maintenance. • Landscaping: Landscaping methods have shifted due to a variety of factors, including funding and stormwater control. Maintaining flowerbeds and mowing regularly require staff resources that are often not available. There are benefits to allowing forested or native grass landscaping to occur: it is lower maintenance and reduces runoff into streams and rivers often running parallel to greenways. However, the public may not be aware of these water quality benefits and may demand a maintenance level that is not affordable or environmentally friendly. The greenway system has many environmental benefits to the Roanoke Valley. These can be increased by partnering between departments which manage the greenways and Stormwater agencies. Some examples of existing partnerships include Mutt Mitt stations for reducing pet waste that could run off into nearby rivers and streams, and planting riparian buffers to improve water quality. Educating the public about the broader environmental benefits of riparian buffers may reduce demand for mowing and more maintenance intensive landscaping. • Flooding: Two types of flooding were discussed as I Riparian Buffers Preserve Water Quality challenges for greenway maintenance. The first was flooding due to rising rivers and streams, which can block trails, leave mud and trash, and sometimes destroy bridges and fencing. Staff are challenged to get the greenways cleared after these events. The second kind of flooding is due to extreme storm events, particularly on unpaved trails, causing water to stream down the trail and wash out gravel or other trail structure. Repairs are often costly and may only hold until the next storm event. Both of these types of flooding came up during public input meetings, as well as staff session, specifically in regards to Roanoke River Greenway and Wolf Creek Greenway, respectively. • Maintaining Amenities: Staff expressed concerns with the cost of maintaining amenities such as trashcans and bathrooms, which are often requested by the public. Costs include staff time, repairs, and regular upkeep. While amenities such as benches are added incrementally after a greenway is installed, funding for maintenance and replacement seldom grows. Page 26 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan • Vandalism: Like all public spaces, greenways have vandalism. Potential solutions to prevent or avoid vandalism include solar lights, greater police presence, proactive landscaping decisions that improve sightlines, installation of cameras, and increased volunteer presence, such as the Greenway Ambassadors. • Securing Good Design: Lastly, management staff pointed out that many problems can be ameliorated via good design, but maintenance staff are not always involved in the design phase. Also, the funding source may dictate the standards used for construction. 3.4. OTHER TAKEAWAYS One of the most important takeaways from this section is the need for locality staff to work together across jurisdictions in order to support one another and to coordinate across departments within each locality. Greater coordination can provide several important outcomes, including increasing the uniformity of experience for greenway users throughout the system; maximizing the utility of infrastructure additions such as bathrooms and water fountains; and trading knowledge and best practices. Some of the best practices for area localities have been included in this chapter for reference, but the practice of greenway maintenance is constantly evolving. New challenges will require new solutions, and sharing those solutions will be helpful. It is important to recognize some of the funding issues which will continue to exist and begin thinking about the Greenway Commission's role in exploring new funding sources. Grants have been a primary source of funding for the greenway system, but grant funding is often only available for projects which design or build new parts of the network, and, more rarely, for large repair projects. Maintenance funding and funding for staff positions continues to be a challenge for localities. Funding for amenity improvements requested by the public, such as bathrooms, lighting, edible landscapes, and trash cans, should be prioritized along with funding for staff support to maintain these new amenities. Lastly, partnerships with the community are an important element of continuing to fund and improve the greenway network. There are numerous ways of fostering a sense of community along the greenway. Signage to educate people on protocol for interacting with other users, information on upcoming events and programs which use the greenway, and partnerships with public and private entities can all help to improve the utility of the greenway corridors and satisfaction of users. Some examples include erecting kiosks with information about stormwater management, using yield signs to encourage etiquette and sharing, or developing commemorative plates to thank citizens and organizations who have shaped the greenway system. Many, many groups use the greenways, and it is important to work with these groups to encourage ownership, love and care for the facilities. Commemorative trees and benches are a way that citizens feel connected to the greenways. 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 27 Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 28 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan 4. GREENWAY NETWORK 4.1. PRIORITIZATION OF GREENWAYS The 1995 Plan recommended 51 greenway routes with each route labeled as either on -road or off-road on a map. The 2007 Plan focused on the off-road routes (35) and endorsed the 2005 Bikeway Plan and 2012 Update for on -road routes. In response to public and staff input, this 2018 Plan includes off-road routes and important on -road connectors. The 2018 Plan groups routes based on their role in the greenway network and their progress to date. On any given greenway, localities will be at different stages depending on the proximity to urban areas, opportunity for coordination with other developments, funding, availability of rights-of-way, and total workload. Roanoke River will be in Category 1 and is the primary greenway corridor, the region's #1 priority since 2007. Category 2 routes are those hard surfaced greenways that are underway and that provide arterial north -south corridors, most connecting to Roanoke River Greenway. Category 3 routes are those greenways and trails that are most important to the region, provide destinations for users, or are funded/underway within a locality. Category 4 is routes with no resources at this time in terms of land or funding. Category 5 includes routes that are largely complete and clusters of trails and destinations on other public lands that help provide connectivity for the greenway network. This 2018 Plan, like the 1995 Plan, lists on -road routes to provide connectivity, described in Chapter 5; it also recognizes the blueway corridors that were introduced in 2007 and have developed since then, complementing the greenway system. All greenways and trails discussed in this section are listed alphabetically. The number for each route is the n umber used on the Greenway Plan Map inside the back cover of this document; all routes and their numbers are shown in Table 4-1. Category 1 Route: Map #40: Roanoke River Greenway The only greenway in this category is Roanoke River Greenway, the longest greenway in the regional network. Many sections of this paved greenway are built, and it is still the #1 priority, in order to focus efforts on finishing it. This east -west route has proven to be an invaluable community asset in terms of economic development, tourism, special events, recreation, health, and environmental education. Roanoke River Greenway is the backbone of the greenway network. Category 2 Routes: These are hard surfaced greenways which will run north and south from Roanoke River Greenway to the public lands surrounding the valley. Sections of each have been built, with some started and others extended over the last ten years. These routes provide the arterials, the major side corridors of the greenway network. The Category 2 routes are: • Map #18: Glade Creek Greenway • Map #22: Hanging Rock Battlefield Trail • Map #27: Lick Run Greenway • Map #29: Mason Creek Greenway • Map #43: Tinker Creek Greenway Category 3 Routes: These routes are either important to the region, destinations, funded or engineered within a locality, or progressing with significant planning and design. Some are partially, but not completely, built. They may also be trails on another agency's land, where a portion of the network is complete but additional connections are needed or planned. They can be hard surface or natural surface. Many are important for connection to the network, economic development and public health. 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 29 The Category 3 Routes are: • Map #5: Blue Ridge Parkway Trails • Map #7: Carvins Cove Trail Network • Map #9: Catawba Greenway • Map #12: Daleville Greenway • Map #13: Eagle Rock Greenway • Map #14: Elizabeth Greenway • Map #15: Explore Park Trail Network • Map #16: Garden City Greenway • Map #19: Gladetown Trail • Map #24: Hinchee Trail • Map #34: Murray Run Greenway • Map #37: Poor Mountain Trails • Map #38: Read Mountain Greenway • Map #39: Read Mountain Trails • Map #44: Wolf Creek Greenway Category 4 Routes: These are other greenway projects to be addressed as opportunity and resources arise. They may be routes that localities are working on when possible or routes which have strong citizen support but no resources in terms of land or funding. The Category 4 Routes are: • Map #2: Back Creek Greenway • Map #3: Barnhardt Creek Greenway • Map #6: Carvin Creek Greenway • Map #8: Carvins Cove Connections • Map #11: Craig Creek Trail • Map #17: Gish Branch Greenway • Map #25: James River Greenway • Map #28: Long Ridge Trail • Map #30: Masons Cove Greenway • Map #33: Mudlick Creek Greenway • Map #35: National Forest Connections • Map #36: Perimeter Trail • Map #41: Roanoke River Greenway Extensions • Map #42: Spring Hollow Trails Category 5 Routes: These are existing trails and greenway projects that are substantially complete, given existing planning. They may be clusters of trails or destinations on public lands that help provide connectivity for the greenway network. While substantially complete, they will continue to require maintenance and may need improvements. The Category 5 Routes are: • Map #1: Appalachian Trail • Map #4: Birding and Wildlife Trail Sites • Map #10: City, County, and Town Park Trails • Map #20: Green Hill Park Trails • Map #21: Greenfield Trails Page 30 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan • Map #23: Havens Wildlife Management Area Trails • Map #26: Jefferson National Forest Trails • Map #31: Mill Mountain Greenway • Map #32: Mill Mountain Park Trails On -road Category This 2018 Plan recognizes how important the on -road connections are for continuity in the system. Existing on -road routes, such as U.S. Bicycle Route 76 and bike lanes, are shown in Chapter 2, Table 2.4. Connectivity is discussed in more detail in Chapter 5 and suggested connections are shown on the Regional Connectivity Map, page 76. The On -Road developments suggested are: • Bike accommodations on arterials; • Infrastructure suggested in urban development area (UDA) plans and designated growth area (DGA) plans; • Neighborhood connections to Roanoke River Greenway and bike routes; and • Neighborhood sidewalks and greenway connections. Blueways: This 2018 Plan recognizes the blueway routes as important recreation opportunities that contribute significantly to the economic impact of the greenway and trail networks. The existing blueways — Upper James and Roanoke River — are discussed in Section 2.2.6. The potential blueway routes are: • Back Creek Blueway • Craig Creek Blueway • Jennings Creek Blueway • Mason Creek Blueway • Tinker Creek Blueway Figure 4-1: Blueway Routes On the Greenway Network Map, Appendix H, included inside the back cover of this 2018 Plan, the greenway routes are listed and numbered in alphabetical order. Table 4-1 (p.32) shows the numbering system, jurisdiction, and surface expected for each trail. 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 31 Blueways and Potential Blueways p�3 $otetourt J/ County Roanoke j County �# n ,.rte Ci lemt filly of .g • RcanvP.■ al l' Legend Vlnttln % De gna- 6lueways Patannial Future F-1 L my I REGIONgLCCen 1111 �5]1t�: 0 15 a 6 9 Q Figure 4-1: Blueway Routes On the Greenway Network Map, Appendix H, included inside the back cover of this 2018 Plan, the greenway routes are listed and numbered in alphabetical order. Table 4-1 (p.32) shows the numbering system, jurisdiction, and surface expected for each trail. 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 31 Page 32 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Table 4-1: 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Network PROJECT NAME Plan # Localities Category Surface Appalachian Trail++ 1 Roanoke and Botetourt Counties, City of Roanoke 5 C Back Creek Greenway 2 Roanoke Count 4 B -C Barnhardt Creek Greenway 3 Roanoke County, City of Roanoke 4 A -B -C Birding and Wildlife Trail Sites 4 All 5 A -B -C Blue Ride Parkway Trails++ 5 Roanoke County, City of Roanoke 3 C Carvin Creek Greenway 6 Roanoke County 4 A -B -C Carvins Cove Trail Network 7 City of Roanoke 3 C Carvins Cove Connections 8 Roanoke and Botetourt Counties 4 B -C Catawba Greenway 9 Roanoke County 3 B -C City, County, and Town Park Trails 10 All 5 B -C Craig Creek Trail 11 Botetourt County 4 B Daleville Greenway 12 Botetourt County 3 A -B Eagle Rock Greenway 13 Botetourt Count 3 B -C Elizabeth Greenway 14 City of Salem 3 A -B Explore Park Trail Network 15 Roanoke County 3 B -C Garden City Greenway 16 City of Roanoke 3 A -B Gish Branch Greenway 17 City of Salem 4 B -C Glade Creek Greenway 18 Town of Vinton, Roanoke County, City of Roanoke 2 A -B -C Gladetown Trail 19 Town of Vinton 3 C Green Hill Park Trails 20 Roanoke County 5 B -C Greenfield Trails 21 Botetourt County 5 B -C Hanging Rock Battlefield Trail 22 City of Salem, Roanoke Count 2 A -B Havens Wildlife Management Area Trails+ 23 Roanoke County 5 C Hinchee Trail 24 Roanoke County 3 C James River Greenway 25 Botetourt Count 4 B -C Jefferson National Forest Trails++ 26 Botetourt and Roanoke Counties 5 B -C Lick Run Greenway 27 City of Roanoke, Roanoke County 2 A Long Ridge Trail 28 Roanoke County 4 C Mason Creek Greenway 29 Roanoke County 2 B -C Masons Cove Greenway 30 City of Salem, Roanoke County 4 A -B Mill Mountain Greenway 31 City of Roanoke 5 A Mill Mountain Park Trails 32 City of Roanoke 5 C Mudlick Creek Greenway 33 Roanoke County, City of Roanoke 4 A -B MurrayRun Greenway 34 City of Roanoke, Roanoke Count 3 A -B -C National Forest Connections 35 Botetourt County 4 C Perimeter Trail 36 Roanoke & Botetourt Counties 4 C Poor Mountain Trails+ 37 Roanoke County 3 C Read Mountain Greenway 38 City of Roanoke, Roanoke County 3 A -B -C Read Mountain Trails 39 Roanoke and Botetourt Counties 3 C Roanoke River Greenway 40 Roanoke County, Cities of Roanoke and Salem 1 A Roanoke River Greenway Extensions 41 Franklin and Montgomery Counties 4 A -B -C Spring Hollow Trails 42 Roanoke County 4 C Tinker Creek Greenway 43 City of Roanoke, Roanoke and Botetourt Counties, Town of Vinton 2 A B C Wolf Creek Greenway 44 Town of Vinton, Roanoke Count 3 B +State Jurisdiction ++Federal Jurisdiction Design Guidelines in Appendix G. pp A = Paved, asphalt or concrete, B = Crushed aggregate stone, wood chips; C = Natural surface, wood chips, stone, or grass Page 32 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan 4.2. GREENWAy RoUTES 4.2.1. Appalachian Trail, Map #1, Category 5 Description The Appalachian National Scenic Trail (AT) is a 2,174 -mile footpath from Katandin in Maine to Springer Mountain in northern Georgia. The AT provides the ultimate greenway on the northern edge of the Roanoke Valley, with 79 miles in Roanoke and Botetourt Counties. This trail is managed for foot travel only by the National Park Service, U.S. Forest Service/Jefferson National Forest, Appalachian Trail Conservancy (ATC), Roanoke Appalachian Trail Club (RATC), and Natural Bridge Appalachian Trail Club. Bicycles and horses are not allowed on the AT. Well known lookouts along this section of AT include Audie Murphy Memorial, Dragon's Tooth, McAfee Knob, Tinker Cliffs, Fullhart Knob, and Apple Orchard Mountain. Key access points with parking are located at: • VA 311 at Dragon's Tooth Trailhead, with access via Dragon's Tooth Trail (Roanoke County); • VA 311 at the top of Catawba Mountain (Roanoke County); • VA 779, Catawba Creek Road, with access via the Andy Layne Trail (Botetourt County); • US 220 in Daleville at the park -n -ride (Botetourt County); • US 11 near Troutville (Botetourt County); and • Blue Ridge Parkway overlooks at Blackhorse Gap (Milepost 97.7), Taylor Mountain (MP 97), Montvale (MP 95.9), Harvey's Knob (MP 95.3), Bobblets Gap (MP 93), and Bearwallow Gap (MP 90.9) (Botetourt County). There is also access to the AT via Sawmill Branch Trail within Carvins Cove Natural Reserve. Information on the AT is available from many sources, including the National Park Service, the Appalachian Trail Conservancy, and the Roanoke Appalachian Trail Club. Status In the last five years hiking use of the AT in this region has increased dramatically. McAfee Knob has become the iconic destination overlook, with hiking there on the "bucket list" for college students and tourists. McAfee Knob appears as background on billboards and websites and is now the Roanoke County logo. This increase in use has led to significant management issues, including overflowing parking lots, parking on the edge of roads, trail erosion and widening, trash, and frequent search and rescue calls. RATC and ATC have responded by adding port -a -johns at the McAfee parking lot, hiring ridgerunners, encouraging use of the McAfee fire road, and organizing a volunteer McAfee Knob Task Force to provide visitor information and education. There are several plans which propose new access connections to the AT. The Carvins Cove Trail Plan proposes Rocky Branch Trail as #36 from the boat landing to the AT near the powerline crossing. This 2018 Plan proposes two routes which would cross the AT — Tinker Creek Greenway (#43) crossing near the Tinker Creek bridge and #8, which would cross near Angel's Gap to provide a connection from Carvins Cove to Botetourt County. Permission for such crossings would require concurrence from various partners and National Park Service approval and environmental compliance. Challenges The congestion at the McAfee parking lot has led VDOT to increase safety signage, including rumble strips and flashing lights. VDOT has also received funding for FY 21-23 to provide a bridge over Rt. 311 to reduce pedestrian crossings of the road. The crossings of US 220 near Daleville and of US 11 near Troutville are also a significant challenge and need safety improvements. Dragon's Tooth is one of the destination AT sites in this region. 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 33 Because the managing partner for this section of AT, the National Park Service, does not have a local office, much of the burden of this increase in use falls on the local partners, especially the volunteers of RATC. The Appalachian Trail Conservancy is assisting with funding for additional ridgerunner hours and has organized meetings for local, state, and federal staff with management roles. Roanoke County has increased its emergency services to the area and those volunteers have spent significant time exploring the most efficient rescue routes. VDOT has stepped forward with improvements and grants. More may be needed. An ever present challenge for the AT is growth and development within the viewshed or near the AT corridor. Botetourt County is encouraging economic development, and a 256 -unit apartment complex is being built next to the AT. This will undoubtedly increase use on that side of Tinker Mountain and increase maintenance needs, but could also bring new volunteers and supporters. Next Stens While the AT is a National Park, it is dependent on volunteers and the cooperative management system. ATC should continue to facilitate meetings among all the management partners and to explore management options. Resources from volunteers and governments will continue to be needed to protect this iconic resource. McAfee Knob is one of the most photographed points on the AT. Page 34 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan 4.2.2. Back Creek Greenway, Map #2, Category 4 The 1995 Plan included a greenway route (#45) along the entire length of Back Creek. Exploration of the corridor, setting of priorities, and recognition of the extensive acquisition that would be needed led to shortening the route in the 2007 Plan to the section from the headwaters to Merriman Park. Some improvements have been made in this corridor, but there is not yet a continuous greenway route. At the headwaters of Back Creek there are several public properties which might be linked by a greenway, including a well field site and Back Creek Elementary School. Downstream from Crystal Creek Road Roanoke County manages a large park complex including Darrell Shell and Starkey Parks, Merriman Soccer Complex, South County Library Wetland Trail, as well as Penn Forest Elementary and South County Library. At Darrell Shell there is a fitness loop around the ballfields, and the County has built sidewalks and pedestrian connections between the park facilities which could be linked together as part of Back Creek Greenway. There is a well -used bicycle access point from Merriman Soccer Complex to the Blue Ridge Parkway, which is proposed by the Parkway in its Trail Plan as an official connection of Parkway and greenway trails. South County Library Wetland Trail was built in 2015. Route 221 has been widened as far as Cotton Hill Road, and Cotton Hill has been widened to the Parkway. Bike lanes were not included, but a sidewalk for pedestrians and a wide shoulder for bicyclists were included on Cotton Hill. Route 221 is a critical road for bicyclists because it provides a section of so many loop rides, and Cotton Hill could provide access to the Blue Ridge Parkway. Citizens have encouraged Roanoke County to build a greenway on VDOT property in the area between Cotton Hill Road and the bridges downstream. The County has explored this option and reached out to VDOT about permits to do this. An agreement is possible, but at this time there are no financial resources for pursuing this trail. 4.2.3. Barnhardt Creek Greenway, Map #3, Category 4 Barnhardt Creek begins near state property on Long Ridge, parallels the end of Grandin Road Extension, winds through Hidden Valley Country Club and Middle School, and runs into Roanoke River at the Salem/City of Roanoke line. Within the City of Roanoke it is often called Craven Creek. While this route is difficult from a right-of-way standpoint and would require on- and off-road sections, it could provide linkages from suburban neighborhoods like Meadow Creek, Fairway Forest, Farmingdale, Medmont Lake, and Crestwood to Roanoke River and to Poor Mountain Preserve. The fifteenth anniversary of the greenway program in 2012 was a special year with nine greenway and trail bridges built by the localities and volunteers. 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 35 4.2.4. Birding and Wildlife Trail Sites, Map #4, Category 5 The Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries has developed a Birding and Wildlife Trail to celebrate the state's diverse habitat and bird watching opportunities. The Mountain Area guide includes two loops in the Roanoke Valley, the Star City Loop and the Roanoke Valley Loop, and three loops covering other sites in Botetourt County, the Alleghany Highlands Loop, Iron Ore Loop, and the Peaks of Otter Loop. The guide highlights parks, trails, greenways, and other sites where nature enthusiasts will have good opportunities for observing birds and wildlife and directs users on driving between these sites. While many of the individual sites are otherwise listed in this 2018 Plan with individual map numbers, the Birding and Wildlife Trail is included as a separate "greenway" to highlight its importance as a state network. Due to the number of sites, these are not marked on the Greenway Plan map. Sites currently listed in the five jurisdictions are: Table 4-2: Birding and Wildlife Trail Routes in the Region Star City Loop Roanoke Valley Loop Alleghany Highlands Loop • East Gate Park Woodpecker Ridge Nature Center Callie Furnace Peaks of Otter Loop • Masons Mill Park Carvins Cove Recreation Area - Boat Landing • Thrasher Park Whispering Pines Park Harveys Knob Overlook • Wolf Creek Greenway Carvins Cove Recreation Area - Bennett Springs Warbler Road • Explore Park Havens Wildlife Management Area Iron Ore Loop • Chestnut Ridge Trail Hanging Rock Battlefield Trail • Mill Mountain Park (including Star Trail) Green Hill Park Craig Creek Recreation Area • Roanoke Water Pollution Control Plant Moyer Sports Complex/ Roanoke River Greenway • Tinker Creek Greenway Poor Mountain Natural Area Preserve La NW, P— Loop • Wasena Park and Roanoke River Greenway Happy Hollow Garden • Rivers Edge Sports Complex Bent Mountain Elementary School r • Fishburn Park 5".rV ..t LM • Garst Mill Park Greenway •Qu Birding and Wildlife Trail o Wfte me•• -RM an m. TlMl (� Fg"M LOop WPstBm Ph— Loops -F-KR"LOOP - SwM M -4 -L -M LOW •., r fM.9h y Hlghl.n& L.P LM &Atl WaM LOW fNJ S.M HOMtan LOW a F.—Tom L -P L9MS110•I000 SWAWAYl PiN11 LOCO -leW.9�e Utlaa Jeirm Lam La NW, P— Loop /y J `/ M"'W" its Lftp �• • NBq 9bre [3ePImP /� ! V Pe•Ntoraw Lm 5".rV ..t LM •Qu 7'mdYAr R4—a Moe Loop Marl RN- WV( 7M N/00ek Lbo 1.., C'. ft-Md1 Hgti.,d LO M.0 R.9-LOW-MNdn} 1 J M—M.Wk L." a f\J Thnree.len nlmP Lon.eia R. Lott' �i R�WU VM,ry Lm D - 01—Moen Lmp SMf CNYL., _ AW1*01an WmdM LOW MPM W— to* .. 817 W." Mwntan LOW PJL7r �_ t]enlel Boone [mP .. SNn[ P.1 LOOP orgM.rarn•St- tmp � ' ��� `° O . .. Mb- CwdFeNs4fJnmMeLoop .a. o _ 7 Orb 0 •O OR o a Figure 4-2: Birding and Wildlife Trails in the Mountain Region of Virginia Virginia Birding and Wildlife Trail Guides are available from the Virginia Tourism Corporation at 1-866-VABIRDS, 1-866-822- 4737. Additional information and loops are available at Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries Page 36 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan 4.2.5. Blue Ridge Parkway Trails, Map # 5, Category 3 Description The Blue Ridge Parkway, a National Park, is a 469 -mile recreational motor road through Virginia and North Carolina connecting Shenandoah and Great Smoky Mountain National Parks. The Parkway is a popular on -road cycling route for recreational cyclists, in part due to its limited access and lower traffic levels when compared to most community streets and highways. The Parkway swings in and out of Botetourt County from Milepost (MP) 75 near Arnold Valley Overlook to MP 105 near US 460 and traverses southern Roanoke County from MP 105 to MP 136 nearAdney Gap. The Parkway has several trail systems in the area: 1) the six -mile Chestnut Ridge Loop Trail around Roanoke Mountain Picnic Area, 2) the 13 -mile horse trail paralleling the Parkway from US 220 to Stewarts Knob, 3) the one -mile Roanoke River and Fisherman's trails from the overlook to the river, 4) the half mile Buck Mountain Trail from the parking area to an overlook, and 5) ten miles of hiking trail near the Peaks of Otter, including Harkening Hill, Fallingwater, and Flat Top Mountain Trails. None of these trails are open to bicycling. Between 1995 and 2018 the mileage of these trails has varied, as sections have been closed due to damage or insufficient maintenance. Status In 2001 the Greenway Commission and the Blue Ridge Parkway signed a General Agreement allowing the Commission to assist with trail planning, mapping, and rehabilitation of Parkway trails. This five-year agreement allowed the Commission to facilitate volunteer assistance in reconstructing and maintaining Parkway trails under the direction of Parkway staff. Work completed during that time included inventory and assessment of the Parkway trail system from MP 121 (US 220) to MP 110 (Stewart's Knob), development of a trail plan (January 2004) which recognized greenway connections at Mill Mountain, Roanoke River, and Wolf Creek Greenways, construction of a portion of Wolf Creek Greenway, and extensive trail rehabilitation on the Chestnut Ridge Loop Trail and horse trail, utilizing volunteers and a grant obtained by the Commission. In January 2006 the Parkway launched a new trail planning process, with a draft plan released in fall of 2011. In 2013 the Parkway completed its first General Management Plan, but the trail plan was not included. The same trail plan, with no changes in response to significant public and locality input, was released in fall of 2015 as the final Roanoke Valley/ Blue Ridge Parkway Trail Plan. The Plan recommended no mountain biking on Parkway trails, except if developed as greenway routes on lands off Roanoke River Parkway. It proposed a new trail from Buck Mountain overlook to Back Creek Greenway, official connections at several access points, and a new trail on Stewart's Knob. Volunteers built over 200 steps to provide access from the Blue Ridge Parkway to the Roanoke River. Roanoke County has continued to work with Parkway staff to negotiate a crossing of the Parkway for Roanoke River Greenway. The crossing is proposed to be under the Parkway at Highland Road. In 2015 Pathfinders' Mid -Week Crew completed a rehabilitation of the Fisherman's Trail at Roanoke River Overlook, building 200 steps down to the river. Minimal funding was provided by Friends of the Rivers of Virginia, Friends of the Blue Ridge Parkway and Pathfinders. This improvement has led to significant increase in boating, as it is the only accessible launch below the dam and above the rapids. The Roanoke Chapter of Friends of the Blue Ridge Parkway 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 37 has increased its efforts to pick up trash and maintain trails. Benefits The Parkway trails provide many loop connections between Roanoke Valley greenways. Completion of the Parkway system would greatly enhance the regional network. It would also give the Parkway trail attractions in the Roanoke area and much needed assistance with trail construction and maintenance. Challenges The Parkway is significantly underfunded and understaffed in Virginia, with planning staff located in Asheville, North Carolina; coordination often takes many months or years. In terms of trails, maintenance is challenging because the narrow corridor does not allow sustainable design. Also, to complete the Parkway trail system, a bridge across the Roanoke River for trail users is needed. Next Steps The Parkway is looking to volunteers or other organizations for completion of the trail work. No NPS funding is available for it at this time. Volunteers from Pathfinders for Greenways and the Roanoke Chapter of Friends of the Blue Ridge Parkway continue to work on rehabilitation and maintenance of the horse trail and Chestnut Ridge Trail. Roanoke County will continue its coordination efforts to get the Roanoke River Greenway built and the horse trail rehabilitated between Mill Mountain and Explore Park. The City of Roanoke will continue to work with the Parkway on alternative uses of Roanoke Mountain Picnic Area. Roanoke County and City should assist the Parkway with all connections allowed in the Parkway Trail Plan. 4.2.6. Carvin Creek Greenway, Map # 6, Category 4 The 1995 Plan included a greenway route (#9) from Carvins Cove Reservoir to Tinker Creek. Exploration of the corridor, setting of priorities, and recognition of the extensive acquisition that would be needed led to shortening the corridor in 2007. There are two feasible sections. One is from Brookside Park to Tinker Creek. The second section is being incorporated as an option for Tinker Creek Greenway from LaMarre Drive through Hollins University campus to Carvins Cove. (See Appendix E.) The existing trail from Plantation Road to the boat dock at Carvins Cove could be renamed to be part of Carvin Creek Greenway, if Tinker Creek Greenway is developed on another route. Greenways and trails provide opportunity to enjoy the beauty of spring. Photo by David Lewis Page 38 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan 4.2.7. Carvins Cove Trail Network, Map #7, Category 3 Description The Carvins Cove Natural Reserve is a 12,700 -acre municipal park protecting the watershed of Carvins Cove Reservoir. The Carvins Cove Natural Reserve is a 12,700 -acre municipal park protecting the watershed of Carvins Cove Reservoir. The Cove, which is owned and managed by the City of Roanoke, is located in Roanoke and Botetourt Counties, 7 miles from downtown Roanoke and 4 miles from Interstate 81. The reservoir is fed by springs and creeks within the Reserve as well as by tunnels from Catawba and Tinker Creeks. When the Western Virginia Water Authority (WVWA) was formed in 2004, the City gave the reservoir and lands below the 1,200 -foot contour to WVWA to be managed as one of the valley's major water sources. The remaining Reserve lands above 1,200' were retained by the City and are managed by the Parks and Recreation Department. Carvins Cove is the largest municipally owned park east of the Mississippi River and the second largest municipal park in the country. Carvins Cove Natural Reserve can be accessed from three public roads: • Reservoir Road near Hollins, known as "the boat landing" • Carvins Cove Road, Route 740 off of Route 311, known as "Bennett Springs" • Timberview Road At the Reservoir Road entrance there is a large parking lot, picnic area, fishing pier, restrooms, boat launch, trails, and office. On Carvins Cove Road there is a parking lot, restroom and trailhead located a mile from the Bennett Springs gate. At Timberview Road there is a small parking lot and trailhead. Status In 2007 Roanoke Parks and Recreation Department developed a Carvins Cove Natural Reserve Park Management Volunteers admire the rock they split to make a trail feature. Plan. Subsequently, the City granted a conservation easement to Virginia Outdoors Foundation to protect the lands above 1200'. The Management Plan recognized the need for a trail plan, and in 2009 the Department initiated this planning. The effort was led by the Greenway Coordinator, with significant volunteer help for trail assessments. In 2010 the Carvins Cove Trail Management Plan was approved by Council, documenting 46 miles of trails, the trail termini, degree of difficulty, trail conditions, maintenance needs, and access needs. The plan outlined proposed trail closures, proposed new trails, procedures for approval, and priorities. This plan started a new era in management of Carvins Cove for recreational use and gave both staff and volunteers direction on trail standards, signage, events, and improvements. Volunteers continued to build new trails, now that there was a method for approval and plan for locations. In 2012 volunteers and Roanoke County completed the first linkage from the greenways to the Cove with the construction of Tinker Creek Greenway from Hollins University to the boat landing. In 2013 the City hired a trail specialist to take on many of the tasks previously done by volunteers, becoming the volunteer coordinator and trail manager. Gradually, this has led to improvement in maintenance of trails, roads, and ditches and in signage, information, and amenities like a bathroom at Bennett Springs. It has also allowed multiple volunteer groups to build trail, thus leading to diversity in trail types. There are now 56 miles of trail at the Cove, most of them open to hikers, mountain bikers, and equestrians. The trails and allowed uses are shown on the map in Figure 4.3 (p.41). This 2018 Plan incorporates the entire Carvins Cove trail network into the greenway system and recognizes this area as a destination site attracting users from all over the East Coast. 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 39 Benefits The Carvins Cove trail network provides a premier natural area that serves as a destination site for greenway users, as well as for tourists of all trail persuasions. Completion of additional greenway connections to the Cove, such as the Hinchee Trail described in Section 4.2.24, will allow local users to ride to the Cove and will enhance connectivity to other parks and public lands. The Cove has the potential to become a national destination for naturalists, mountain bikers, hikers, and equestrians. The region recently received designation as the first silver level IMBA Ride Center in the east, and this is only possible because of the extensive network at the Cove. Challenges Currently, Carvins Cove is in a pristine state with a large system of multi -use trails cared for by dedicated volunteers under the supervision of one staff person. Land use fees are collected by WVWA, but this funding is not available to the Parks Department. WVWA does use these fees to pay for patrols and to make improvements at the boat landing such as a handicapped accessible fishing pier and bathroom renovations. As visitation continues to increase and Carvins Cove becomes more and more a destination site, additional resources will be needed to ensure long-term sustainability of the trails and natural resources at the Cove. Carvin Cove offers equestrians many miles of trail riding. This large area has many miles of boundary, adjoining other public lands as well as private lands. There are instances of boundary encroachments, hunting, erection of tree stands, and riding of ATVs. Increased law enforcement presence, surveys when needed, and coordination with multiple agencies will be important to protection of this significant resource. Next Steps The City and the Water Authority should continue to coordinate on management of this asset and develop financial resources to maintain its watershed and recreational values. Roanoke County is coordinating with Pathfinders to provide an additional access to the Cove via the Hinchee Trail (Section 4.2.24). Additional information on Carvins Cove is available at the City of Roanoke and WVWA web sites. 4.2.8. Carvins Cove Connections, Map #8, Category 4 Increasingly, users want to be able to reach Carvins Cove without driving to a parking lot. This route recognizes the many requests to connect to the Cove. The routes developed will be dependent on available right-of-way and coordination with other management agencies. Page 40 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan LEGEND Easy: These routes are appropriate for novice through advanced users. They generally follow obvious, well marked trails and roads. MILES Carvins Cove Natural Reserve USAGE ROLLING EXIT 146 PARKING 130ANfDKE N -P INFORMATION Very Difficult: These routes are recommended for physically fit technical skill. Terrain is steep and difficult obstacles will 2 be encountered, 9.81 E)tremely Difficult: These routes are recommended only for L=A physically fit users with technical skill. Users need to control speed, �M 10 PARKING Terrain is steep, and technical obstacles will beencountered. �j° �--, Liyr 0 0.25 0.50 Miles © SHELTER e „s,., Very Difficult `tF qXN N 441 5 Jacob's Drop 0.52 Very Difficult Multi RESTROOM' 6 Kerncliff �....., I, More Difficult Multi 601 7 Y �nI NO HORSES Multi 713 8 Araminta NO BIKES More Difficult Multi 69 9 Songbird i More Difficult # 206 NO HIKERS i 1.53 �o Multi 192 of Enchanted Forest , More Difficult APPALACHIAN TRAIL �.. 12 Little Bell ® BOAT LAUNCH FFF 42 13 ©' PICNIC AREA M Extremely Difficult Multi 1092 14 The Trough S +Very Difficult Multi • EASY JSP 1.50 n Multi 513 O � Hotel14 ■ MORE DIFFICULT 196 17 Hi -Dee -Hoe 1.52 Very Difficult Multi 804 18Horse Pen VERY DIFFICULT � i 88 NEXTREMELY DIFFICULT 0.43 0 Easy Multi 177 20 i� 0.97 0 More Difficult _ R '�'✓'✓ Q-'-. AY -' PRIVATE LAND PARKING) 21 saa 1.62 _ (NO 133 22 I Riley Circle 0.34 0 Easy Multi 26 23 Sawmill Branch 1.17 More Difficult Hiker Only 690 24 Four Gorge 2.13 More Difficult Multi BENNETTSPRINGS - �`° - o ! _® BOATLANDINGI © More Difficult PARKING•1 75 eRJs�� PARKING \MFrT1 � m sPo pB CARVINS e a O RpgTFTO�RTO COVE vo �� YOKFCO OUN� �N7y EXIT 143 41 TIMBERVIEW e PARKING I e~ EXIT 141 Easy: These routes are appropriate for novice through advanced users. They generally follow obvious, well marked trails and roads. MILES Grades are gentle, and only minor obstacles will be encountered. More Difficult: These routes are appropriate for intermediate USAGE ROLLING EXIT 146 PARKING 130ANfDKE Easy EXIT 143 41 TIMBERVIEW e PARKING I e~ EXIT 141 Easy: These routes are appropriate for novice through advanced users. They generally follow obvious, well marked trails and roads. MILES Grades are gentle, and only minor obstacles will be encountered. More Difficult: These routes are appropriate for intermediate USAGE through advanced users. Terrain will be steeper, trails narrower, 1 and obstacles such as rocks and loose stone will be encountered. 130ANfDKE Easy PaRKf ANA RfLAFA'li]n tIusenswith Very Difficult: These routes are recommended for physically fit technical skill. Terrain is steep and difficult obstacles will 2 be encountered, 9.81 E)tremely Difficult: These routes are recommended only for L=A physically fit users with technical skill. Users need to control speed, 3 watch for surface hazartls, and be familiar with trail location. ,n'AT[n A..-110rITy Terrain is steep, and technical obstacles will beencountered. Figure 4 3: Carvins Cove Trail Network: Map of Existing Trails 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 41 TRAIL MILES DIFFICULTY USAGE ELEV. +/- 1 Happy Valley 6.71 Easy Multi I 559 2 Brushy Mountain 9.81 Easy Multi 1668 3 Lower Comet 0.72 More Difficult Multi 51 4 Upper Comet 1.44 Very Difficult Multi 441 5 Jacob's Drop 0.52 Very Difficult Multi 395 6 Kerncliff 2.47 More Difficult Multi 601 7 Hemlock Tunnel 1.87 » Extremely Difficult Multi 713 8 Araminta 0.71 More Difficult Multi 69 9 Songbird 1.88 More Difficult Multi 206 10 Arrowhead 1.53 More Difficult Multi 192 11 Enchanted Forest 0.66 More Difficult Multi 40 12 Little Bell 0.29 More Difficult Multi 42 13 I Gauntlet 2.05 M Extremely Difficult Multi 1092 14 The Trough 1.08 +Very Difficult Multi 636 15 Buck 1.50 1 + Very Difficult Multi 513 16 Hotel14 More Difficult Multi 196 17 Hi -Dee -Hoe 1.52 Very Difficult Multi 804 18Horse Pen 1.24 0 Easy Multi 88 19 Tunnel 0.43 0 Easy Multi 177 20 Tuck -A-way 0.97 0 More Difficult Multi 260 21 Schoolhouse 1.62 0 More Difficult Multi 133 22 I Riley Circle 0.34 0 Easy Multi 26 23 Sawmill Branch 1.17 More Difficult Hiker Only 690 24 Four Gorge 2.13 More Difficult Multi 275 25 Four Gorge Extension 0.69 More Difficult Multi 75 26 RattlinRun 2.28 M Extremely Difficult No Horses 364 27 Bennett Springs Loop 0.83 Easy Multi 117 28 Royalty 0.80 M Extremely Difficult No Horses 666 29 First Deck 0.92 More Difficult Multi 147 30 OG 0.55 Very Difficult Bikes Only 339 31 Lakeside I 3.70 More Difficult Multi 524 32 Tinker Creek 2.24 00 More Difficult Multi 388 33 Old Hi -Dee -Hoe 0.13 Very Difficult Multi 40 34 Trough Expert 0.12 M Extremely Difficult No Horses 63 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 41 4.2.9. Catawba Greenway, Map # 9, Category 3 This greenway was added to the Greenway Plan in 2007 at the request of citizens, envisioned as a link between the Appalachian Trail, the National Forest, the Catawba community, and the Roanoke Valley greenway network. The greenway will have two sections, one tying from the AT south of Rt. 311 to Roanoke County's Catawba Community Center and the Virginia Tech Catawba Sustainability Center (CSC); the other section, in Phase 2, will start at a parking lot at CSC and climb the former Rt. 311 to a vantage point for bird watching, then climb up to the fire road to McAfee Knob. As plans have developed, the trail's role as a connection from the AT to the Catawba community has become increasingly important. Roanoke County and CSC have worked for many years to develop plans and permits for the trail and now plan to build a parking lot and bathroom to relieve congestion at the 311 parking lot. The sections close to the AT are on National Park Service land and require environmental compliance by them. Phase 1, the section south of Rt. 311, was approved in 2012 and built by volunteers in 2013. Roanoke County then built a bridge across Catawba Creek substantial enough to resist frequent flooding. When NPS compliance is finished, volunteers will build the trail from CSC to the fire road. The County is designing a parking lot and bathroom to serve trail users starting at CSC. The upper sections of this route will be hiker only because of the connection to the AT. The planned alignments of the different sections are shown in Figure 4-4. RQ _ 16 SOW �s•',i 1 Virginia Tech — Catawba Sustainability Center 44 190 008vR J 006E INSET MAP 000" rte-_ o0 0 250 500 1,000 - �Feet - 0 7s 1s�o 3oFee� 1 inch = 333 feet h�, Catawba Greenway at the Catawba Sustainability Center 5omBlue Blaze Spurs to the Appalachian Trail Date: 2/20/2017 Figure 4 4: Catawba Greenway: Map of Existing and Proposed Sections Page 42 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan 4.2.10. City, County, and Town Park Trails, Map #10, Category 5 There are numerous trails within the jurisdictions that have been built as features within local and regional parks or business centers. The City of Roanoke and Roanoke County both have a Parks Master Plan that itemizes trails and trail needs. This item number encapsulates those trails that are not otherwise included in the greenway network. Some of these trails serve the local neighborhood, school or employees, some have become destinations, others are associated with a greenway, and others could be connected to the greenway network, becoming attractions along the way. The City of Roanoke has paved or natural surface trails in Countryside Park (part is Lick Run Greenway), Fallon Park (cyclocross course near Tinker Creek Greenway), Fern Park (connected to Mill Mountain Trails), Fishburn Park (connected to Murray Run Greenway), Highland Park, Jackson Park, Kennedy Park (near Lick Run Greenway), Lakewood Park (near Murray Run Greenway), Norwich Park (near Roanoke River Greenway), and Ridgewood Park. In Roanoke County there are trails in Darrell Shell Park, South County Library, Starkey Park and Merriman Soccer Complex (all associated with Back Creek Greenway and Blue Ridge Parkway trails); Happy Hollow Gardens (terminus of proposed Long Ridge Trail); Walrond Park; Oak Grove Park, Hollins Park, and Mount Pleasant (near Blue Ridge Parkway Trails). In the Town of Vinton there are trails in Vinton Business Center, and in the Town of Buchanan trails are used at the Town Park. In Botetourt County there are trails in Boxley Park and Blue Ridge Park. There is a high demand in the region for additional trails close to home, and future development could help strengthen communities by providing local recreation opportunities and neighborhood connections through parks to greenways. 4.2.11. Craig Creek Trail, Map #11, Category 4 This route is included because it was so frequently mentioned by the public. There is an abandoned C&O rail line from New Castle to Eagle Rock, largely owned by VDOT and the Jefferson National Forest. Fifteen miles of this 26-mile route are in Botetourt County; the remainder is in Craig County, which is not a member of the Greenway Commission. In 2000-01 the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) conducted a study of the potential of making this a rail-trail. There was vehement public objection, largely from residents of Craig County where many adjacent landowners were using the property as their own. Since then, Craig County has developed a trail on the rail bed from New Castle to Craig County Schools. In Botetourt County the rail bed is used in some locations for driveway access, but is largely open to the Forest Service Craig Creek Recreation Area. Botetourt County has acquired the rail property near Eagle Rock and is moving forward to develop a trail on it. 4.2.12. Daleville Greenway, Map #12, Category 3 Botetourt County is proposing a hard surfaced greenway trail in the greater Daleville area designed to accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists. The Botetourt Greenway Committee has studied the project's feasibility and conducted public outreach among area property owners to establish a viable route. Once built, the Daleville Greenway will connect various residential, recreational and commercial amenities. Among the proposed connections for the first phase are the Glebe Retirement Community, Daleville Town Center, and U.S. Bicycle Route 76. The Daleville Greenway could ultimately provide a connection from Greenfield to the proposed Tinker Creek Greenway extension coming out of the Roanoke Valley. 4.2.13. Eagle Rock Greenway, Map #13, Category 3 Botetourt County seeks to provide a hub for outdoor recreation and highlight the historic and natural resources of Eagle Rock by creating a future boat landing on the Upper James Water Trail, along with a small park and greenway connection to town. The proposed greenway connection follows the CSX Transportation main line, which runs between Railroad Avenue and the James River through Eagle Rock. The project area also includes a retired railroad bridge that crosses the James River. The bridge formerly served the C&O Railroad's Craig Valley Line. It had a county road cantilevered on the north side, and a pedestrian path cantilevered on the south side. Rehabilitation of this structure could provide future greenway access across the James to Craig Creek Road and the Craig Creek Trail, if developed. An engineering stL&was conducted in 2015 assessing challenges and opportunities of the area. 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 43 4.2.14. Elizabeth Greenway, Map #14, Category 3 Most of the area within the triangle bordered by Texas Street, Lynchburg Turnpike, and Idaho Street has long been known as the Elizabeth Campus. In 1998 Salem rezoned portions of the property for commercial development. The Salem YMCA was built and numerous enterprises have been built within the Salem Commerce Park. Roanoke College still maintains its portion of the Elizabeth Campus, including buildings, soccer fields and tennis courts. This greenway will provide recreational use through the properties and will help connect downtown Salem to the Salem Civic Center. 4.2.15. Explore Park Trail Network, Map #15, Category 3 Explore Park is 1,100 acres of state owned land managed by the Virginia Recreational Facilities Authority (VRFA) and leased for 99 years to Roanoke County. The park includes many recreation opportunities like canoeing, fishing, picnicking, hiking, and mountain biking. Within the park are a Blue Ridge Parkway Visitor Center, the Brugh Tavern, Arthur Taubman Center, and a restored church which can be rented for special events. Access to the park is from Blue Ridge Parkway Milepost 115 via Roanoke River Parkway. Roanoke County completed the Explore Park Adventure Plan in 2016 to guide development of the park and expansion of recreation opportunities. Explore Park's trail system has several components, including 14 miles of mountain bike trails, hiking trails, and interpretive trails. Volunteers have provided assistance with construction and maintenance of these trails, as well as with those at Mayflower Hills Disc Golf Course, which opened in spring 2018. The County has a contract for design of Roanoke River Greenway to Explore Park and is seeking funding for sections through the park. Roanoke River Greenway will be a major non -motorized transportation corridor to and within the park. Development of Explore Park is underway, with camping opportunities anticipated by summer of 2018. Rutrough Point at Explore Park is a popular fishing area. Page 44 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan PARKING LOTS E2 Lot A - Visitor Center Parking 0 Lot B - Brugh Tavern Parking 19 Lot C - Overflow Parking 0 Lot D -Journeys End Parking 12 Lot E - Rutrough Point Boat Access M HISTORIC AREA TRAILS Q Frontier Fort Trail .27 miles Q Settlers Cabin Trail .18 miles © Farmstead Loop 26 miles Q Houtz Barn Trail .14 miles © Grist Mill Way .10 miles 0 Journeys End Trail .17 miles Q River Walk Link.10 miles TRAILS — Walking Trail a Biking Trail Road Figure 4-5: Explore Park Map of Existing Trails HISTORIC AREA BUILDINGS Q Blue Ridge Parkway Visitor Center Q Arthur Taubman Center Q Brugh Tavern 0 Mountain Union Church © Frontier Fort 0 Settlers Cabin 0 Kemp's Ford School House © Loom House Hofauger Farmstead 0 Wray Barn © Houtz Barn Q Journeys End © Blacksmith Shop © Slone's Grist Mill 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 45 4.2.16. Garden City Greenway, Map 16, Category 3 The Garden City Greenway corridor follows Garnand Branch from the Roanoke River near the American Electric Power (AEP) substation to Garden City Recreation Center, with a potential connection to the Blue Ridge Parkway trails. Construction of this greenway was mentioned often by the public in development of the 2005 Garden City Neighborhood Plan. In 2014 Roanoke City received Safe Routes to School funding to begin the project, generally. as an on -road widened sidewalk. When the roundabout at the intersection of Bennington St. and Rt. 116 was s built, a path connecting from Garden City Boulevard' W3 to Roanoke River Greenway was included. In 2016 pedestrian crossings to the trail segment built with the roundabout and a bridge across Garnand Branch were installed at the Riverland Road/Garden City Boulevard �1 stoplight; wide sidewalks were included when the corner property was developed. In January 2018 construction began on the lower off-road portion of the greenway, ` utilizing properties purchased with flood mitigation funds. This greenway is a major improvement to the pedestrian " and bicycle facilities of this neighborhood and, when complete, can provide important connections from Garden City Greenway provides for safe travel through the neighborhood. Roanoke River Greenway through the neighborhood to the trail networks of Mill Mountain Park and the Blue Ridge Parkway. 4.2.17. Gish Branch Greenway, Map #17, Category 4 Gish Branch is a tributary of Mason Creek, and the corridor includes several historic structures related to the Valley Railroad. This greenway could link Salem neighborhoods to the Hanging Rock Battlefield Trail and the Exit 140 Park - n -Ride. 4.2.18. Glade Creek Greenway, Map #18, Category 2 Glade Creek is a tributary of Tinker Creek, with headwaters in eastern Roanoke and Botetourt Counties near US 460. The floodway for the creek is quite wide, and numerous homes in the Town of Vinton were lost during the flood of 1985. For many years corporate sponsor Orvis, Roanoke County, and other partners have worked on various ways to protect the creek from sedimentation and erosion and to improve fish habitat. In 2017 the Town completed construction of the first section of this greenway from Tinker Creek at Virginia Avenue to Walnut Avenue. The Town is designing the next section from Walnut to Gus Nicks Boulevard, through Gearhart Park, in 2018, with expected construction in 2018-19, and is including the greenway in plans for redevelopment of Gish's Mill. From there the projected alignment along the creek will include a difficult crossing under a Norfolk and Southern trestle, where the greenway will enter Roanoke County's Vinyard Park. Beyond Vinyard Park the greenway could connect to developments in the City of Roanoke or to the Blue Ridge Parkway near Stewarts Knob. The portion in Vinyard Park is a priority for Roanoke The first section of Glade Creek Greenway was completed in 2017. County in its Parks master plan. Page 46 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan 4.2.19. Gladetown Trail, Map #19, Category 3 Gladetown Trail in Vinton was built by Pathfinders' volunteers in 2012 as a loop trail from the Craig Avenue Recreation Center around the stormwater management pond. The connection on to Niagara Road has been explored and is included in Vinton's Comprehensive Plan, with connections to the Tinker Creek canoe launch, developed in 2015, and to Wolf Creek Greenway. 4.2.20. Green Hill Park Trails, Map #20, Category 5 Green Hill is a 224 -acre Roanoke County Park located along the Roanoke River west of Salem. The park offers a range of festival events, sports, and recreation opportunities. It includes an equestrian facility with show rings, stables, and a hunt course. The Greenway Coordinator and Pathfinders' volunteers worked with Roanoke County in 2008 to develop a trail plan and build 1.9 miles of multi -use trails for hiking and mountain biking. These tie into the section of Roanoke River Greenway through the park, which opened in 2008. Green Hill Park -Greenway and Trail Map WestStreet- Roanoke River Greenway1� r_ Hiking and Bicycling Trails*r - . • Pawpaw Trail i . � � Wadowview Loop Craig Climb o, Walton Way Gravel Access Roads Paved Park Road �}g} a t N 0 —••—••• Park Boundary �. Picnic Sheffer Q Parking . *Proposed Names � Main r D y. ,y Y' s ea ewa=m,s GreenlMill Park * quest an Center n� � 5y � ♦4\�, ♦ 9k. �t� moi. ,C �~ �' Miles 0 0.125 0.25 0.5 Figure 4-6: Green Hill Park: Map of Roanoke River Greenway and Other Trails 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 47 4.2.21. Greenfield Trails, Map #21, Category 5 Located north of the Daleville Town Center on US 220, Greenfield Park is a large recreational area that features the Sports Complex (a baseball/softball stadium), soccer fields, a disc golf course, a playground area, and county owned trails. The trail system weaves through the Botetourt Center at Greenfield, which is a business park that contains parking for trailheads. These trails were built and are maintained by the County and include the Cherry Blossom Trail, Holiday Boyer Trail, William Preston Trail, and Greenfield Recreation Trail. Some are handicapped accessible, cinder - surface trails; others are grass surface and open to cross country runners and equestrians. The large pond along the Cherry Blossom Trail and the diversity of vegetation and insects attract many species of birds and thus bird watchers. Bluebird boxes can also be found in the park. This Plan recommends that these trails be nominated for inclusion on the Virginia Birding and Wildlife Trail (4.2.4). In October 2017, a conceptual master plan for the Greenfield Historical Preservation Area was presented to the public. The area is located within the Botetourt Center at Greenfield, adjacent to existing trailhead parking and US 220. The concepts presented call for the expansion of the existing trail network with the addition of interpretive walking paths that would guide visitors through the history of the area and its inhabitants. In 2017 some of the recreational trails were temporarily closed during construction of new businesses. Greenfield Trails 20] 8 Greenfleld Recreational hall 0 0.1 6-2 0.4 Miles Cherry &vasam Trvil Figure 4-7: Greenfield: Map of Trails at Botetourt Center and Greenfield Park Page 48 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan 4.2.22. Hanging Rock Battlefield Trail, Map #22, Category 2 Description Hanging Rock Battlefield Trail is the only existing rail -trail project in the Roanoke Valley. It is a portion of Mason Creek Greenway, 1.7 miles long, along a railbed donated by Norfolk and Southern. The project was initiated by the Hanging Rock Battlefield and Railway Preservation Foundation, supported by the City of Salem and Roanoke County. The railroad right-of-way was donated to the Foundation and then from it to the localities. Features include the Hanging Rock, Mason Creek, Buzzards Roost, and Route 311 scenic byway. This joint project between the City of Salem and Roanoke County opened in 1999. Facilities included a northern parking lot with historic information and exhibits, shared parking facilities at the Orange Market and at the southern terminus of the trail, numerous interpretive signs about the Battle of Hanging Rock and the railroad corridor, bike racks, a renovated trestle bridge, and wildflower plantings along the trail. Since the 2007 Plan, Roanoke County has completed the bridge across Mason Creek, wetland plantings, and a separate parking area at the Orange Market. The greenway is listed on Virginia's Civil War Trails map of the Shenandoah Valley and on the western Virginia Birding and Wildlife Trail Guide. Status Use of this greenway has increased steadily. In 2013 Parkway Brewing Company opened a facility next to the trail. Parkway's popularity has encouraged use of the trail, and Parkway has been a sponsor for many years of the annual fundraising race, Gallop for the Greenways. Salem has designed the extension of Hanging Rock from its southern terminus to East Main Street, with construction expected in 2019. At East Main the trail will connect to other proposed and funded sections of Mason Creek Greenway (See Figure 4-101 On the northern end the trail will connect to the newly proposed Hinchee Trail, Section 4.2.24, to provide a direct link to Carvins Cove. Benefits This greenway has been an attraction for tourists, particularly those interested in the Civil War. The Civil War Roundtable at Virginia Tech often sponsors field trips to this site, which is the closest battlefield to Blacksburg. With easy access to Interstate 81, tourists may be introduced to the Valley's greenway network at this trail. Challenges The cinder surface of this trail is subject to erosion during heavy stormwater events. Because the facilities are almost 20 years old, the signs and bollards need maintenance or replacement. The surface itself needs more frequent rolling and compaction. There is an opportunity to expand interpretive facilities along the trail by renovation of the coal tipple, but it is not owned by the County and such a renovation is unfunded at this time. Next Steps Salem expects to begin construction of the extension to East Main Street in 2019. HANGING Figure ROCK BATTLEFIELD TRAIL Market C n t ye o f Roan ke 311 o4y Roanoke County Parks 8 Recreation $1 o�ex�d Office tt�Ms � 1 oa e= i t y o f S a l e m ` _ � ....E N� yH... so" "�zo,3 = ■ F -w-= n ■ �nr5 m v1 naeor®u tet. a"e�neYJ nal 8 Kiosk F ¢ t• o ® morns ••.•"'• Wo6 Z, Ft R -d a o Highways M ahk o of 02 04M 7Mlles Lenglk: 17— Figure 4-8: Hanging Rock Battlefield Trail Map 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 49 4.2.23. Havens Wildlife Management Area Trails, Map #23, Category 5 Havens Wildlife ManagementArea (WMA), covering 7,190 acres, is located in northwest Roanoke County and managed by Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. Havens encompasses most of Fort Lewis Mountain and is generally steep and inaccessible terrain except to the hardiest hunter or nature enthusiast. Elevations range from 1,500 to 3,200 feet. In addition to hunting, Havens offers visitors the opportunity to hike, view wildlife and wild flowers, and pursue other outdoor interests. The WMA is an important connection between Carvins Cove and the western part of Roanoke County and its trails could be a component of the proposed Perimeter Trail (4.2.36). Havens has two primary public access points: • Carroll's Access Road from Wildwood Road; parking here is not always open. • Bradshaw Road, VA 622, where there is a small parking lot. In addition, there is access to the various communication towers on the mountain via Forest Acre Road, which is gated. Public access on this road would significantly increase the opportunities for use of these trails. Additional information is available from the Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. ar. - ..... ,SAM R HAVENS y . A II E MANAGMW AREA Figure 4-9: Havens Wildlife ManagementArea Map Trail users have made unofficial maps to show trails at Havens WMA. Page 50 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan 4.2.24. Hinchee Trail, Map #24, Category 3 Planning for this trail began with the 2007 Plan and became more specific in the Trail Management Plan for Carvins Cove, approved by Roanoke City Council in 2010. This connection is described as "a major connector to the valley greenway network" and recognizes the opportunity to tie the Carvins Cove Trail Network to the Hanging Rock Battlefield Trail and thus the greenway network. Brushy Mountain Fire Road, an existing single lane, unsurfaced road with ditches, is this connection, running from Timberview Road at Hanging Rock to Happy Valley Trail at the Carvins Cove gate, a distance of over 12 miles. While ten miles of the road are on the City's Carvins Cove property, two miles have been in the Hinchee family t for many decades. When the land passed to a younger generation through trusts, the owners approached --r the Greenway Coordinator with willingness to protect the land and allow the greenway linkage. In 2017 - Pathfinders for Greenways purchased 35 acres and '/z interest in the 200 -acre property, with an agreement to donate it to Roanoke County in 2019. Survey and additional rights-of-way may be needed on the road. The property will be managed by Roanoke County Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism. The Hinchee store was a busy general store prior to construction of Rt. 311. 4.2.25. James River Greenway, Map #25, Category 4 The James River has historically been a major transportation corridor and there have been many efforts to make the river completely navigable through addition of locks and other navigation aids. In 2009 the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation designated statewide trunk line trails, including a conceptual James River Heritage Trail that could basically parallel the Upper James River Water Trail. The Town of Buchanan is looking at options for initiating this greenway with a trail on park properties within the Town. 4.2.26. Jefferson National Forest Trails, Map #26, Category 5 The Jefferson National Forest includes 690,000 acres of woodlands between the James River and southwest Virginia. It is managed by the U. S. Forest Service for multiple uses, including recreation, timber, wildlife, water, and minerals. The Jefferson is now administered jointly with the George Washington National Forest, which covers the Forest Service lands in the north western part of the state from the James River to the Potomac River. The U. S. Forest Service is one of the experts nationally in construction and management of natural surface trails for hiking, horseback riding, mountain biking, and other trail uses. The addition of Botetourt County to the Greenway Commission significantly increases the number of Forest Service Trails in the service area. Table 4-3 provides information on the 139.8 miles of Forest Service trails in the jurisdictions which are members of the Greenway Commission. The National Forest provides existing trail destinations as well as important greenway connections for the Perimeter Trail, Appalachian Trail, and other trail loops. National Forest trails close to the Roanoke Valley include the North Mountain, Patterson Mountain, Arcadia/North Creek, and Glenwood Horse trails. Trails on the National Forest are under federal jurisdiction and management. The National Forest has many miles of multi -use trails. 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 51 Table 4-3: U. S. Forest Service Trails within the Roanoke Valley Greenway Service Area Forest Service Trail Name Segment County Use Surface Mileage District Boy Scout Trail Dragons Tooth Trail to AT Roanoke Eastern Divide Hike C 0.5 Catawba Valley Trail Rt. 779 to North Mtn Trail Botetourt Eastern Divide Hike and Bike C 2.5 Craig Creek Campground Trail around peninsula Botetourt Eastern Divide Hike and Bike C 2.0 Trail Dragons Tooth Trail Rt. 311 parking to AT at saddle Roanoke Eastern Divide Hike C 1.2 Hoop Hole Trail Upper and Lower Loop Botetourt Eastern Divide Hike and Bike C 9.0 Iron Ore Trail Roaring Run to Hoop Hole Botetourt Eastern Divide Hike and Bike C 2.4 Kelly Trail Price Mtn Tr to FS 184 Botetourt Eastern Divide Hike, Bike, Horse C 1.3 Lee's Creek Horse Trail FS 5061 to Stone Coal Creek Rd. Botetourt Eastern Divide Hike, Bike, Horse C 2.8 North Mountain Trail Rt. 311 to Turkey Trail Roanoke Eastern Divide Hike and Bike C 6.5 North Mountain Trail Turkey Trail to Stone Coal Gap Botetourt Eastern Divide Hike and Bike C 6.7 Patterson Mountain Patterson Mountain Trail Botetourt Eastern Divide Hike, Bike, C 6.0 Horse Patterson Mountain Tucker, Helms Loop, Elmore Botetourt Eastern Divide Hike, Bike, C 5.1 Horse Price Mountain Rt. 606 to Patterson Creek Rd. Botetourt Eastern Divide Hike, Bike, C 6.6 Horse Roaring Run Trail Trailhead to falls Botetourt Eastern Divide Hike C 1.5 Sulphur Ridge Trail Rt. 606 to Price Mtn Trail Botetourt Eastern Divide Hike, Bike, C 3.3 Horse Apple Orchard Falls North Creek Rd. Trailhead to BR Botetourt Glenwood/ Pedlar Hike C 3.3 Parkway Buchanan Trail VA 43 to Cove Mtn. Trail Botetourt Glenwood/ Pedlar Hike and Bike C 2.5 Cornelius Creek Trail Appalachian Trail to North Creek Rd. Botetourt Glenwood/ Pedlar Hike C 2.9 Cornelius Creek Spur Trail FS 812 to Cornelius Creek Trail Botetourt Glenwood/ Pedlar Hike C 2.8 Cove Mountain Trail Rt. 622 to Glenwood Horse Trail Botetourt Glenwood/ Pedlar Hike and Bike C 1.5 Curry Creek Trail AT to Rt. 640 Botetourt Glenwood/ Pedlar Hike C 0.7 Glenwood Horse Trail Multiple Botetourt Glenwood/ Pedlar Hike, Bike, B/C 29.2 Horse Glenwood Horse Trail Multiple Botetourt Glenwood/ Pedlar Hike, Bike, B/C 7.7 Alternate Horse Hammond Hollow Trail AT to FS 634 Botetourt Glenwood/ Pedlar Hike C 1.8 Hike from FS Little Cove Trail AT to Rt. 614 Botetourt Glenwood/ Pedlar 3004 to AT, Hike C 2.8 and Bike from FS 3004 to 614 Salt Pond Road Curry Gap on BRP to Rt. 711 Botetourt Glenwood/ Pedlar Hike, Bike, Horse B 4.7 Spec Mines Trail BR Parkway to Glenwood Horse Trail Botetourt Glenwood/ Pedlar Hike and Bike C 2.8 Alt. Sprouts Run Solitude Road to FS 812 Botetourt Glenwood/ Pedlar Hike C 3.4 Whitetail Trail Long and short loops Botetourt Glenwood/ Pedlar Hike and Bike C 2.6 Wildcat Mountain Trail Loop in Cave Mtn. Lake Rec. Area Botetourt Glenwood/ Pedlar Hike and Bike C 4.0 Wilson Mountain Trail Rt. 622 to Skillern Mtn. Road Botetourt Glenwood/ Pedlar Hike and Bike C 3.6 Anthony Knob Trail Lollipop from Longdale Picnic Area to Botetourt James River Hike, Bike, C 4.7 Blue Suck Trail Horse Blue Suck Trail Longdale Furnace Picnic Area to Botetourt James River Hike, Bike, C 1.4 Anthony Knob Trail Horse B = Crushed aggregate stone or wood chips; Total Miles 139.8 C = Natural surface, wood chips, stone, or grass Page 52 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan 4.2.27. Lick Run Greenway, Map #27, Category 2 Description Lick Run is a tributary of Tinker Creek, starting in north Roanoke County and running to downtown Roanoke. The creek has water year round and is one of the major drainages in the valley, contributing to flooding downtown during heavy rains. The 1928 Comprehensive Plan for Roanoke depicted a green corridor along this creek, thus recognizing its importance to the green infrastructure of the valley. Lick Run Greenway provides a direct connection between downtown Roanoke and the Valley View business district. Status Construction of Lick Run Greenway from Valley View Extension to downtown was completed in phases between 1999 and 2006. Within the downtown area, the original route was designed to go to the Visitor Center at 0. Winston Link, but was later moved to take advantage of the Martin Luther King bridge. Now, with the completion of the Amtrak Platform, the downtown alignment is being returned to the original alignment, providing a connection to the Visitor Center, Hotel Roanoke, and the Market Street glass bridge with its popular view of the trains below. Planning for Lick Run Greenway sections beyond Valley View was completed in 2009, with the Lick Run Greenway Phase III Feasibility Study of routing options. In 2013 the Evans Spring Area Plan was completed, and residents insisted that the greenway be included in any new development near Fairland Lake. In 2014 a half mile section was built in conjunction with development of Countryside Park, as well as a one mile fitness trail. In 2016 a new bridge for the greenway was built over 1-581 as part of the Valley View exit reconfiguration. In 2018 the greenway was provided a separated grade crossing at 10th Street as part of the reconstruction of the road. Amenities along the greenway include fitness stations, bike fix -it equipment, interpretive signs, and the bridge connecting to Norris Drive as a neighborhood connection. Benefits Lick Run Greenway is a crucial greenway in terms of transportation from downtown Roanoke to northern parts of the valley. It provides a free exercise and recreation facility in a section of the City which has historically been underserved. It also is important in terms of green infrastructure. Protection of riparian buffers along this perennial stream and its many tributaries such as Cedar Creek helps reduce runoff and thus flooding in downtown. The wooded linear trail linking multiple parks provides a beautiful setting with unusual habitat for an urban area. Lick Run Greenway provides a woodland trail with exceptional connections with nature. When Valley View interchange over 1-581 was rebuilt, a separate bridge was provided for Lick Run Greenway. Challenges The Feasibility Study for Phase III does define routing options as far as to Peters Creek Road. Northside High School, Green Ridge Recreation Center, Valley Pointe, the proposed Wood Haven Business Center, and Roanoke -Blacksburg Regional Airport are potential destinations for this greenway if it were extended, but no plans for these phases have been developed. There are unique opportunities for inclusion of the greenway during development of properties currently in open space and for modification of existing 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 53 road spaces to include on -road connectors. There is also an opportunity to develop greenways on branches of Lick Run as part of stormwater management projects in downtown. Next Steps The City of Roanoke is exploring options for extending Lick Run from Countryside Park to Peters Creek Road near Northside High School. Roanoke County should develop a plan for the greenway from Peters Creek Road to Wood Haven Road and within the new business park. The City of Roanoke and Roanoke County should continue to take advantage of opportunities to provide on -road connections and to develop off-road sections in conjunction with other developments. 4.2.28. Long Ridge Trail, Map #28, Category 4 Long Ridge connects Poor Mountain Preserve, managed by the Virginia Division of Natural Heritage, to Happy Hollow Gardens, managed by Roanoke County as a park. The ridge is undeveloped at this time and provides a unique opportunity for a woodland trail connecting western Roanoke County to southwest County. 4.2.29. Mason Creek Greenway, Map #29, Category 2 Description Mason Creek begins in the Masons Cove area of Roanoke County and runs into the Roanoke River across from the Cook Drive Industrial Park in Salem. This watershed has significant drainage, providing brief paddling opportunities after substantial rains. Hanging Rock Battlefield Trail is a portion of Mason Creek Greenway. Upstream from Hanging Rock the greenway is in Roanoke County and could be extended to provide connections to Carvins Cove Road, Masons Cove, and thus over the mountain to Catawba Valley and Catawba Hospital. Downstream from Hanging Rock Trail, the creek is in Salem. It parallels Kessler Mill Road to Main Street, flows behind Lakeside Shopping center, under Rt. 419, past the General Electric plant and Burton Center for Arts and Technology, to Roanoke River near Apperson Drive. Status In 2004 this greenway was awarded funding through the Scenic Byway portion of the federal Omnibus bill. This funding was used in 2013 to build the first mile of the greenway near General Electric, from Roanoke Boulevard to Salem Turnpike. Additional funding has been obtained to provide the connection from Salem Turnpike to East Main Street, where it would tie to the extension of Hanging Rock Battlefield Trail. On the northern end of Hanging Rock Battlefield Trail, a half mile of Mason Creek has recently been purchased by Pathfinders for Greenways as part of the Hinchee Trail project (Section 4.4.24). The bridge across the creek on Dutch Oven Road has been closed by VDOT, making Dutch Oven a potential location for the greenway. Roanoke County completed an engineering study of the bridge to explore options for rehabilitation as a trail bridge. Beyond that bridge, there is some off-road VDOT right of way that was once Rt. 311. Benefits Completion of this greenway from Hanging Rock Battlefield Trail to Roanoke River Greenway will provide an important north -south connection from the river to Carvins Cove, Havens Wildlife Management Area, the Jefferson National Forest, the Appalachian Trail, and North County neighborhoods. There are numerous businesses and commercial areas along the route, and thus the greenway could be important for access to these employment areas, as a health and fitness facility for these businesses, and as a quality of life attraction that facilitates retention of a talented work force. Because of the linkage to Hanging Rock Battlefield Trail, this greenway has Mason Creek Greenway is used daily by GE employees. Page 54 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan great potential as a destination site for tourists, who might then bike or run on to Roanoke River Greenway. Challenges Downstream from Roanoke Boulevard there are railroad crossings that could complicate an off-road alignment parallel to the creek. Other options might include an off-road route behind the Veterans Administration Hospital or an on -road route along the road to Peters Creek Extension, where sidewalks and a bike lane tie to Roanoke River Greenway. On the upstream section there is some right-of-way available, but not yet a continuous route. Next Stens The City of Salem should continue with construction of the section from East Main Street to Salem Turnpike and with construction of the Hanging Rock extension to East Main. Downstream from Roanoke Boulevard, Salem should continue exploring all routing options to provide a connection to Roanoke River Greenway. Hanging Rock is popular for running and walking because its cinder surface is softer than asphalt. ( ^� Trailhead r 1 e Bus Stop ty f Improvetnel City of Sale�rl Proposed 5' Sidewalk: - Proposed �- � 169D' S Sdewalt �ao #�. r Pedestrian Crosswalk - and PED Signals X19 Imer�•:ements_ 'Masan Creek fPaa Pen eF This Ide*ia and PED Signals Improvements w City of Roanoke L :S, i Figure 4-10: Mason Creek Greenway Phase 111: Proposed linkages between existing sections of Hanging Rock Battlefield Trail and Mason Creek Greenway 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 55 MASON CREEK PHASE III - 419 MULTIMODAL IMPROVEMENTS • .. t. .. T r 4C i=il�d�"t �li:J l ... ■ :. :.. Sidewalk { 7. Fes. runt Pare of This PraJr!rt iS. Not Para sf Hanging Rroj.ea _ s. - " ^ Rock Battlefield Trarl PJSposed Extensionr UPC 106208 q 9©' icfewg& T 2 a. - 223Q •. 46q - Proposed - ( ^� Trailhead r 1 e Bus Stop ty f Improvetnel City of Sale�rl Proposed 5' Sidewalk: - Proposed �- � 169D' S Sdewalt �ao #�. r Pedestrian Crosswalk - and PED Signals X19 Imer�•:ements_ 'Masan Creek fPaa Pen eF This Ide*ia and PED Signals Improvements w City of Roanoke L :S, i Figure 4-10: Mason Creek Greenway Phase 111: Proposed linkages between existing sections of Hanging Rock Battlefield Trail and Mason Creek Greenway 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 55 4.2.30. Masons Cove Greenway, Map #30, Category 4 The Masons Cove Greenway would connect Mason Creek Greenway to Catawba Greenway utilizing an old railroad bed. Bicyclists could use this route to get up the mountain and connect to Rt. 311 to reach U. S. Bicycle Route 76. 4.2.31. Mill Mountain Greenway, Map #31, Category 5 Description The Mill Mountain Greenway was selected in 1996 to be the Roanoke Valley's pilot project. The original plans envisioned the greenway connecting from the market downtown to Mill Mountain Park and out to Explore Park via the Blue Ridge Parkway. Later the project was limited to the route from the market to the Star and thus this greenway is considered complete. Status The City of Roanoke has built on and off-road sections of this greenway, as right of way has allowed. The greenway officially connects to Lick Run Greenway at "ground zero" by the Wells Fargo Tower; it then is on existing streets and sidewalks to Elmwood Park, where it is off-road; it parallels Williamson Road through the railroad district and crosses Walnut Avenue bridge on sidewalks. Originally the route followed the Roanoke River to Piedmont Park and came up Laurel Street, but, when that section of Roanoke River Greenway was built in 2007, Mill Mountain Greenway moved to a more direct route straight up Walnut Avenue. Bicyclists share the road, and pedestrians follow sidewalks and streets to reach the rugged terrain of Mill Mountain, following historic Prospect Road, the old road up the mountain. The greenway passes under the Mill Mountain Tollbooth and utilizes the unique switchback bridge. The greenway reaches the top of the mountain at the Discovery Center, where park pathways link to both the Mill Mountain Star and the trail system of the mountain. The greenway opened in 2003 in a joint dedication Pathfinders for Greenways helped raise private funds for restoration of the toll with the western phase of the Virginia Birding booth in 2010. and Wildlife Trail. Benefits This greenway provides an important connection from downtown to the northern section of the Riverside Centre for Research and Technology, Roanoke River Greenway, Mill Mountain Park and Star, and the Blue Ridge Parkway. Challenges Because of its urban location, wayfinding for this greenway, off-road and on -road, has been challenging. Clear signage for users, as well as for adjacent motorists, is important. Further wayfinding identification should be considered to create fluid connectivity between Mill Mountain and Lick Run Greenways, through downtown Roanoke, and up Mill Mountain. Additional and separated space for bicyclists in some on -road sections is desired. Next Stens The City Parks and Recreation Department will continue to coordinate with other departments and with Downtown Roanoke, Inc. for wayfinding improvements for both greenway users and vehicles wishing to reach Mill Mountain. When the renovation of the Virginian Station was funded, a bathroom for greenway users was included in the project; the City will encourage any operator to keep those restrooms open to the public during normal business hours. Also, improvements along Walnut Avenue to identify more space for greenway users would improve the connectivity of this route. Page 56 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan C'-#' Ibf JiveNW W kt W"Z Ave NW Z +3 } r� $a 'o,Roanoke r, ,? m y 3"(10P msto�yf cad eke SE arket. GU S'� Ro _ . Cri f''y35� iaze'�,� SiCt€artNIJ'SE KJrk,Ave 5Vr Kirk a S.E �7 .Nrch Plasw t2� pain p7es? 1_tiL1R f1Y 0 SW � � r 0 � sf s Sw � M prgY(p g 24 'g�Yllff AYLa $F M s^ rn Pack q pv�SF. E Mountain Ave SW tori AveS 4 Rva5f ad yo R y�oe a 'cul'op yJ, 4ye SrGtti�` r%•�® Si e SW y pv 7a�dF �A IrOgp 4T. 7arlg Ave 3101 c y a41 4 rr Walnu€Ave SW � 7l� Ae '9YF testa -0yrs� aP ac Piffi or C 9y Morehead Ave ti sk �or4hnA6,@SF. B1vr1S{r-UIWp�i1�,P�Ulc a `4 eat 41 fr,dusfeyAve Se frs R€vers Edga Sports Complex North Vr' G d9ey �� '� 4 R,.�,'' �� SeJ AV, SE O -umpt- South F ` . Ged I µ„i�n:si GrFe�w.� f r c, 00�C' � � LL ?ahai�r Ave SE .q” !I►yr.W tib. W 'trhtower Trdtt 4i��wHr r 16 7� r3 m c imovffry Center £ar ra?Y y5� -_ WWII Muutan i `q zee ��os h4 BJP 3 4 i�rr v+ .9-A J. Crag Rob -?sr m hstsi� �. a W p �~ Ln G+k' ` q =t'14v .. t 0 Figure 4-11: Mill Mountain Greenway Map, a connection from downtown to Mill Mountain Star 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 57 4.2.32. Mill Mountain Park Trails, Map #32, Category 5 Description Mill Mountain Park is a 600 -acre park managed by Roanoke Parks and Recreation Department. It has historically attracted recreational use and many of the trails are shown on 50 -year old maps. Status In 2006 Roanoke City Council adopted the Mill Mountain Park Management Plan, developed by the Roanoke Parks and Recreation Department. This plan included the Mill Mountain Trails Plan, developed by Parks staff, Pathfinders for Greenways volunteers, and the Greenway Coordinator. The Trail Plan included inventory and assessment of all trails on the mountain, proposed trails for completion of a network, and management of -v - trails in the park. A few trails on the mountain are open to hikers only, but most are available also for mountain 7 R - biking and equestrian use. The trail network connects the park to Chestnut Ridge Loop Trail, managed by the Blue Ridge Parkway, to Fern Park and Piedmont Park,, �. and to Riverland, South Roanoke, and Garden City -.ham neighborhoods. Pathfinders for Greenways helped build many of the trails in the Trail Plan and the trail specialist, hired in 2013, has recruited many additional volunteers. The trails proposed in the Trail Plan were all completed The Mid -Week Crew of Pathfinders for Greenways has built many by 2015. New maps and kiosks were installed in 2017. miles of trail on Mill Mountain. Users have requested additional trails. Benefits The Mill Mountain Park trails provide a wonderful, wooded network of natural surface trails within walking distance of numerous City neighborhoods. These trails also provide an attraction for tourists coming from the Blue Ridge Parkway. Challenges Park staff face the typical challenges of managing a wooded park and trail network in an urban area. These challenges include restricting illegal uses, such as all - terrain vehicles, camping, and fires, managing user conflicts, educating inexperienced users, managing resources such as control of invasive species, protecting resources like trees and wildlife, and maintaining facilities. Next Stens Neighborhood connections are needed from the Riverland Road Trailhead to Garden City Greenway and Roanoke River Greenway. Park staff should continue to work with volunteers on trail maintenance, construction and wayfinding. At this time no new natural surface trails are planned on Mill Mountain, but an update to the trail plan is scheduled for 2019. There are opportunities for development of trails nearby on the Roanoke River flood bench. Kiosks at trailheads provide maps and information about the Mill Mountain trails. Page 58 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan MILL MOUNTAIN PARK TRAIL MAP _ oqG v e 0 � FrW NpF 4r PZ o �g FlshVzrr��aihyay �y4 MILL MOUNTAIN PARK y 0 3 SE / 13 iRNA \Rv\NIA PILAF F as 1NnoPrlNn�woRVI nc SERVICE) Marn�ro B1g Sunny 0.73 More Difficult MuItI-Use 241 It 0 0.61 F, No Horses 104ft Monument — Mdgellne* 1.55 1.26 M N LMFN'�a/ �F� �9Y 553 It 416 It Riser MILL MOUNTAIN STAR dt. IONNICT ON o �g FlshVzrr��aihyay �y4 MILL MOUNTAIN PARK y 0 3 SE / 13 iRNA \Rv\NIA PILAF F as 1NnoPrlNn�woRVI nc SERVICE) Marn�ro B1g Sunny 0.73 More Difficult MuItI-Use 241 It CrystalSpring 0.61 Easy No Horses 104ft Monument — Mdgellne* 1.55 1.26 More More Difficult ■ MuItI-Use Difficult ■ MuItI-Use 553 It 416 It Riser 0.31 More Difficult ■ Multi -Use 137ft — Sidewinder 0.53 More Difficult ■ Multi -Use 224 It Star 1.38 More Difficult ■ Hikers Only 639 It Star- Woodthrush Connector — Understoy 0.24 0.38 More Most Difficult ■ Multi -Use DlfflcultMulti-Use 143 It 109ft — Vlrginla Pme 0.75 More Difficult■ Multi -Use 175 It — Watchtower 0.22 Easy • Hikers Only 111ft Woodthrush* '1.90 More Dlfflcult ■ Multi -Use 373 It -TM, Is Ile partially on National Park Se—, property and may have different ru les and usage Figure 4-12: Mill Mountain Park Trail Map qi t�toatvhn NaoN Please share the trans and have respect for others Please stay on the toi Is to mire mize damage owl*, Keep you r pet on a leash and pd, up aftsryourpet Campingand mown,,dvehldes a re prohibited Kindly pack out al tMs1 R OA N O K E PARKS AND RECREATION To report trail condi ons or for more Info rmatl on about the Ory of Roanouss trai Is and trai p rogrsm ming, p lease cal 1540.&535867. For eInformator, about MITI Mountain and nature programs, please N sitthe Discovery Center Sent &531236) orfind upcoming events and —,Pes at www.Rlayroanok-- In the event of an emergency, please oil 911. 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 59 4.2.33. Wdflck Creekr u w , uM p , Category Mudlick Creek flows through many neighborhoods in Roanoke County and the City of Roanoke, generally connecting Hidden Valley High School (HVHS), Garst Mill Park, and the Deyerle Road area. The creek is subject to flash flooding after hard rains, and in 2002 Roanoke County installed a stormwater detention pond as part of the High School construction. The first section of this greenway opened in Garst Mill Park in 1997, built in conjunction with a sewer line upgrade. The '/z mile paved trail is heavily used by neighbors and by other park visitors. In addition to those exercising, frequent users include families with children learning to ride bikes, groups with wheelchairs and mobility impairments, neighbors walking dogs, and folks with mobility impairments. Since the trail was built, many amenities have been installed, including trees, benches made from recycled materials, pooper scooper bag dispensers, and memorials to Lee Eddy and Charlie Blankenship, early greenway supporters. Extension of the trail is challenging because of the proximity of residences to the creek itself, but several easements have been secured. In 1999 an easement for the greenway near Route 419 was secured as a proffer with the McVitty Forest development. An easement downstream from the park, parallel to Garst Mill Road, was secured in 1999. The greenway has been included in development plans for HVHS, McVitty Forest, and McVitty Road. Connections to Cave Spring Middle School and Penn Forest Elementary have also been proposed in conjunction with Merriman Road improvements. In 2015 a bench was installed in Garst Mill Park in honor of Charlie Blankenship, one of the founders of the greenway program. Figure 4-13: Mudlick Creek Greenway at Garst Mill Park Page 60 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan MUD LICK CREEK GREENWAY GARST MILL PARK y� Garst Mill Park I� 0 � Q. a C o u n t y o f R o a n o k e Esq <e .o41a11m rz 0250 500 1,000 Ft Huh rkiln9 ogways 0 005 01 Perk pane ah .2. length: a 5 Mils Figure 4-13: Mudlick Creek Greenway at Garst Mill Park Page 60 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan 4.2.34. Murray Run Greenway, Map #34, Category 3 Murray Run is a stream which starts near Green Valley School in Roanoke County, runs through a site known as the Old Jefferson Hills Golf Course, passes behind residential houses, and then enters Fishburn Park. From the park the stream goes under Brambleton Road, through a neighborhood, through Lakewood Park, behind more residences and then under Brandon Road to Roanoke River. In 1998 the Greater Raleigh Court Civic League adopted this project and developed a plan which combined three routes suggested in the 1995 Conceptual Greenway Plan. The greenway has been built in stages, with much of the work by Pathfinders for Greenways and corporate volunteers. The trail has a natural surface in wooded areas and a cinder surface across school and park fields, with a dramatic 80' curved bridge built by volunteers at Fishburn Park. The sections of the greenway which have been built connect six schools and three parks: Patrick Henry High School, Roanoke Valley Governor's School, Raleigh Court School, James Madison Middle School, Fishburn Park Elementary, Virginia Western Community College, Shrine Hill Park, Woodland Park, and Fishburn Park. Fishburn Park includes an additional mile of natural surface trails which are used in conjunction with Murray Run to form loops. Other facilities along the route include the Virginia Western Arboretum, Blue Ridge Public Broadcasting Station, and the GatorAquatic Center. Murray Run Greenway is the City's most natural greenway corridor, connecting forest fragments and parks. Status Roanoke Parks and Recreation Department completed Murray Run Greenway Extension Feasibility Study in 2010 to explore alternatives to connect upstream to Roanoke County and downstream to Roanoke River Greenway. Support for the upstream portion was heard frequently at Roanoke County public input meetings for the 419 Town Center Plan. Concerns about development on the Shenandoah Life property were heard at greenway meetings in 2017. Next Stens An extension of the greenway is possible from Colonial Avenue to Ogden Road, Tanglewood Mall, and Green Valley Elementary School. On the other end a connection to the Mudlick Creek corridor is proposed along Grandin Road. In addition, there could be connections along Brandon Road or Brambleton Avenue. The City should develop safer bicycle/pedestrian connections on these roads, provide bike/ped signalization at stoplights, work with developers to incorporate trails, and obtain easements on the Old Jefferson Hills Golf Course. Figure 4-14: Murray Run Greenway and Fishburn Park Trails 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 61 4.2.35. National Forest Connections, Map # 35, Category 4 With the inclusion of Botetourt County, there are many miles of National Forest trails providing destination nodes for trail users. In most cases these trails are not accessible without a car, even if relatively close to communities. This route recognizes the need for such connections from communities such as Buchanan, Arcadia, Daleville, Cloverdale, and Eagle Rock. Any connections would require Forest Service approval contingent on assessment of location, environmental impacts, and sustainability. 4.2.36. Perimeter Trail, Map # 36, Category 4 The Perimeter Trail will be a multi -use trail, on and off-road, circling the Roanoke Valley and connecting existing public lands. Existing trail networks to be connected include Carvins Cove, Havens Wildlife Management Area, Green Hill Park, Spring Hollow, the Blue Ridge Parkway, Explore Park, and the Jefferson National Forest. This greenway would provide a long distance trail for hikers, equestrians, and mountain bikers. 4.2.37. Poor Mountain Trails, Map #37, Category 3 Poor Mountain Preserve is a 933 -acre site managed by the Virginia Division of Natural Heritage (Department of Conservation and Recreation) to protect the world's largest population of the globally rare piratebush. This shrub is dependent on the opportunity to entwine its roots with those of Table Mountain pine or hemlock. A small parking lot provides access from Twelve O'clock Knob Road. Pathfinders' Mid -Week Crew has assisted the Division by building the Piratebush Loop, Overlook and Canyon Trails, with the Cascade Trail built under contract. Division plans call only for these four miles of trail, but additional trails within and beyond the Preserve could provide connections to Poor Mountain Road and Harborwood Roads. Figure 4-15: Poor Mountain Preserve Trails N W E S Legend Preserve Boundary ^� Piratebush Loop Trail - G.8 mi. Overlook Trail - f1.7 rni. Cascade Trail - 1.4 mi. Canyon Trail - 0.9rni- ® Overlook 0 0.125 0.25 Miles I i i I Page 62 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan 4.2.38. Read Mountain Greenway, Map #38, Category 3 Read Mountain Greenway will be a connection from Tinker Creek Greenway at Mason Mill Park to Read Mountain Preserve in Roanoke County. With additional development and employment at the City of Roanoke's Centre for Industry and Technology (RCIT), demand has increased for connections to nearby trail opportunities. This greenway is projected to go from Tinker Creek Greenway to businesses at RCIT, then up to the CCC Trail at Roanoke County's Preserve. In 2018, City and County staff are working on a preliminary alignment, feasibility plan, and easements for this stretch of greenway. 4.2.39. Read Mountain Trails, Map #39, Category 3 Read Mountain lies between US 460 and Old Mountain Road and is undeveloped on its upper slopes. In 2000 a grassroots group called Read Mountain Alliance was formed to protect the mountain from ridge line development. The Alliance has worked with property owners to secure easements and to explore and build trails on the mountain, with assistance from Pathfinders' Mid -Week Crew. In November 2006 a developer donated 125 acres to Roanoke County to be part of a new park and in 2008 the Read Mountain Preserve was opened to the public as a County park. In addition to trails on the mountain within the Preserve, there is opportunity for a connection to Tinker Creek Greenway and RCIT, via the Read Mountain Greenway, and to Botetourt County and ultimately the Jefferson National Forest through new trails to the north. Legend O Parking a PicnicTable Buzzards Rock Trail (1.9a m i.) o Rocky Way Trail (1.45 mu°s) Crossover Trail (21 nb° o CCC Trail (82ml°s) Private Leased Property County Park Property o State Road 2,180 You Are Here q 1o\ema' N o 1,000 B01111111terPoWt Park Entrance m-111110, �Jc Elevati , OFr • a� GG GAJ Summit R ge Elevation 2,0 Read Mountain Preserve °`, "p°■ Caunty R dM—W.Al ® Trail Map z dTou' Figure 4-16: Read Mountain Preserve Trails, all built by volunteers 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 63 4.2.40. Roanoke River Greenway, Map #40, Category 1 Description The Roanoke River Greenway has always been considered the backbone of the regional greenway and trail network. This bicycle/pedestrian path, projected to be 31 miles, will be the major west -east greenway, making it possible to travel from western Roanoke County near Spring Hollow Reservoir through the City of Salem to the City of Roanoke, Town of Vinton, Blue Ridge Parkway and Explore Park. The greenway will provide linkages to neighborhoods, industrial facilities and business complexes, ten parks, three schools, two sport complexes, Cardinal Criminal Justice Academy, the Blue Ridge Parkway and Montgomery and Franklin Counties. It will be a continuous route for non -motorized transportation where none existed in 1997. Connections to streets with bike lanes and to Masons Creek, Murray Run, Mill Mountain, Lick Run, Tinker Creek, and Wolf Creek greenways will permit travel north and south. Status Since 2007, over ten miles of Roanoke River Greenway have been completed and opened, for a total mileage in 2017 of 13.7 miles. The status of the various sections is itemized below. Table 4-4: Status of Roanoke River Greenway Section Jurisdiction Mileage Status Projected Construction Montgomery County Line to Green Hill Park Roanoke County 8-10 Conceptual alignment only. Beyond 2020 Within Green Hill Park Roanoke County 0.80 Completed. Opened 2008. Green Hill Park to West Riverside Park Roanoke County & Salem 1.90 Engineering complete; environmental permitting underway; right-of-way needed 2019 Woodbridge Section Salem 0.25 Completed. Opened 2011. West Riverside Park to Eddy Avenue Salem 1.30 Opened 2013 Eddy Avenue bridge Salem 0.04 Under construction 2018 Eddy Ave. to Rotary Park Salem 2.10 Built in sections, all opened by 2012. Rotary Park to Apperson Drive Salem 0.60 Negotiating rights-of-way. 2019 Apperson to Barnhardt Creek Salem 0.90 Scheduled for construction by Salem crews, starting spring 2018. 2018 Barnhardt Creek bridge at Salem/Roanoke City line Salem & City of Roanoke 0.02 RSTP funded for FY 19-20. 2018-19 Barnhardt Creek to Aerial Way City of Roanoke 1.00 Completed. Opened 2015 Aerial Way to eastern Materials Yard City of Roanoke 0.70 Construction began 2017. 2018 Materials Yard to Bridge Street City of Roanoke 1.00 Right-of-way needed from Walker Foundry. Ready to go to construction. 2019-20 Bridge St. Bennington Trailhead City of Roanoke 6.80 Built in sections, all opened by 2012. Bennington to eastern City line at Tinker Creek City of Roanoke 1.25 Three quarters of a mile is on -road with a steep hill; relocation is needed. Roanoke City line to Blue Ridge Parkway western boundary Roanoke County 2.70 Engineering completed. Right-of-way needed. Environmental permitting underway. 2019 Section under Blue Ridge Parkway Roanoke County 0.30 TA Funded FY19-20. 2020 Blue Ridge Parkway across landfill to Explore Park border Roanoke County 1.70 Funded. Engineering underway. 2019 Through Explore Park to Rutrough Road Roanoke County 1.80 Recently awarded RSTP funds FY20-22. 2022 Page 64 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Funding Roanoke River Greenway has benefited from large infusions of transportation funding since 2007, including monies from American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (Stimulus), Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP), House Bill 2, SmartScale, Federal Lands Access Program, Transportation Alternatives (TA), and Revenue Sharing. In addition, the Greenway Commission raised over a million dollars of private funds through the Bridge the Gap campaign. The localities continue to apply for grant funding to match local capital funds to finish the final sections. Benefits The Roanoke River Greenway has long been recognized in local, regional, and state plans as an important facility for the area. It is included in each locality's comprehensive plan, the regional greenway and open space plans, and the Virginia Outdoors Plan. The Roanoke River Greenway is a multi -faceted project. All sections include canoe launches, providing access to the river. The greenway also includes historic and environmental interpretive signage, landscaping, sculptures and art, mitigation of runoff into the river, and establishment of riparian buffers. This project provides transportation, safety, health, environmental, and economic benefits to the valley, thus improving total quality of life in the region. The trail is often used for races and fundraising walks and runs. Roanoke River Greenway is the foundation for the region's "Roanoke Outside" branding and has become a tourism destination supporting two outfitters adjacent to the trail. In addition, it has contributed to adjacent economic development such as the River House apartments, Green Goat restaurant, Wasena City Taproom, Underdog and Roanoke Mountain Adventures outfitters, River Rock Climbing Gym, and the Bridges apartments and entertainment center. Challenges The challenges for construction have been acquisition of rights-of-way, proximity of the railroad to the river, flooding, topography, protection of endangered species, and funding. The localities have resolved most of these issues for the sections from Green Hill Park to Explore Park. The section from Bennington Trailhead to the Water Pollution Control Plant is on -road, with a very steep section on Underhill Street; Roanoke City would like to move this section off-road. In the future, maintenance, capital funds for flooding repair, and user management will be the predominant issues. The localities will each address maintenance issues through their budgeting processes, utilize volunteers such as the Greenway Ambassadors and Pathfinders, and implement management techniques like striping and wayfinding as needed. Roanoke River Greenway bridges offer views of the river on family outings. Photo by Rachel Kuehl Roanoke River Greenway at dawn. Photo by Darrell Powledge Next Stens Completion of the core urban sections of Roanoke River Greenway, from Green Hill Park to Back Creek at Explore Park, is strongly supported and is expected by 2023, as shown in Table 4-4 and Figure 4-17. The City, in coordination with Roanoke County, should pursue an off-road alignment from the 13th Street trailhead to the Water Pollution Control Plant, to eliminate the steep section on Underhill Avenue. 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 65 �2 «� . .y.� .��� �\ ~ ...�� �� ,� �� ^ �: a, / z � f « �� �.2f \ .� 2 �/ � �<�\ \K' �� , �� � ` » �ƒ: � /.y . - «>���>� � �`!y\��� w« ^§®. 4.2.41. Roanoke River Greenway Extensions, Map #41, Category 4 This route is the extensions of Roanoke River Greenway from Explore Park to Smith Mountain Lake and from Spring Hollow Reservoir to the New River Valley. The Roanoke Valley's portion of this route may be only a bridge to Franklin County or a short connection to Montgomery County, but the route is included in both the Virginia Outdoors Plan and the Franklin County Trails Plan. The Montgomery County Bikeway/Walkway Plan includes a North Fork route, and the New River Planning District Commission is currently updating the regional greenway plan, which is expected to include a Roanoke River Greenway connection to New River. 4.2.42. Spring Hollow Trails, Map #42, Category 4 Spring Hollow is a major reservoir for the Roanoke Valley, now managed by the Western Virginia Water Authority. Adjacent lands are owned by Roanoke County, as is the adjacent Camp Roanoke. A master plan for the site completed in 1996 proposed numerous horse trails and other facilities, but these have not yet been developed. Spring Hollow is an important connection for the Perimeter Trail and a destination along Roanoke River Greenway. 4.2.43. Tinker Creek Greenway, Map #43, Category 2 Description The Tinker Creek corridor is one of the most historic in the valley, dotted with mills, taverns, and historic buildings. The creek has its headwaters in Botetourt County and is fed by Carvin Creek, Lick Run, and Glade Creek. This is one of the few urban trout streams in the state and connects a diversity of urban, suburban, industrial and rural landscapes. Status For many years the Greenway Commission has explored ways to develop Tinker Creek Greenway. In 2000 a conceptual master plan was developed in cooperation with students at Virginia Tech, and in 2003 the City of Roanoke completed the first mile of this greenway. In 2012 the City completed a bridge across the river to connect this greenway to Roanoke River Greenway. Also in 2012, Roanoke County began work on the northern end, using Pathfinders' volunteers to build the greenway as a natural surface trail from Hollins University to Carvins Cove. In 2016 Tinker Creek Greenway became a priority for the City when Deschutes Brewery decided to locate in Roanoke, a projected $95 million investment, and requested that the greenway be extended to its site at RCIT. In 2015 the Greenway Commission had been awarded assistance from the National Park Service Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance (RTCA) program to study the Tinker Creek corridor, and thus an assessment of the feasibility of various alignments all the way to Botetourt County was underway, as shown in Figure 4-18. The Tinker Creek Steering Committee included staff representatives from Roanoke and Botetourt Counties, Roanoke City, and the Town of Vinton. The committee expanded previous resource inventories, explored multiple location alternatives, and began conversations with landowners about rights-of-way. In 2017, as part of the public input meetings for the update to the greenway plan, the committee received public input on the various alternatives. This process is documented in the Tinker Creek Greenway Conceptual Plan in Appendix E. Benefits Tinker Creek Greenway is envisioned as the arterial north -south route from Roanoke River Greenway to Carvins Cove and to Botetourt County. It will connect seven schools, employment centers, natural areas, and historic sites, with linkages to Carvins Cove, the Appalachian Trail, Read Mountain, and U.S. Bicycle Route 76. It has the potential to provide the same benefits as Roanoke River Greenway to a different quadrant of the valley, providing multi -modal connections, quality of life, opportunity for health and wellness, and a facility that encourages economic development. Challenges During development of the Conceptual Plan, the Steering Committee identified three challenges: site constraints and physical feasibility, cost, and community and political support. These three impact the ability to obtain rights-of-way and build the trail. Each alternative was evaluated on these criteria, as well as on its ability to provide benefits. 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 67 Next Steps The City is currently in the engineering phase for the section from Wise Avenue to Masons Mill Park. The next step is the construction of that section, which is funded and promised as part of an economic development package. For the rest of the greenway, the first step is completion of the Tinker Creek Greenway Conceptual Plan as part of this 2018 Plan. After that, each locality will look for opportunities to develop sections by obtaining rights-of-way, securing funding, and building partnerships to construct the greenway, at times in conjunction with other projects. Greenfecd I nd School rn U),, r Lard B tour. Nigh Schad v t n e t r❑ r _ L} Ir!Va �.. b - S.r;arcm h i A) ! Roanoke County, Monterey Elen entQry School n - .,,L •RCIT 11 �f tPc n o k i y Faliv P trk lemon r �cnovl r W i1 O f V i nton_. ` rt Figure 4-18: Tinker Creek Greenway StudyArea Tinker Creek Subareas Legend Tinker Creek Alignments 2007 Conceptual Line 2018 Alternatives - • - Design Underway Built Tinker Creek Greenway ® Roanoke RiveT Greenway • • • • ° Conceptual Roanoke River Greenway Other Built Trails ----- Conceptual Connecting Greenways Existing Sidewalk — Appalachian Trail —•••—• Conceptual Daleville Greenway Roanoke River o Streams Interstate 81 In duWial Park Daleville Town Center Roanoke Gas Property School Parcels LVVVVA Property Puhlie Lands — Railroad Railway Properties Page 68 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan 4.2.44. Wolf Creek Greenway, Map #44, Category 3 Description This greenway corridor parallels Wolf Creek from the Blue Ridge Parkway to Roanoke River. The creek is the boundary between the Town of Vinton and Roanoke County. Development of this greenway as a joint project was initiated early in the greenway program because of the availability of land within parks, along sewer corridors, and next to Vinton's well fields. Status The section of the greenway in Vinton from Hardy Road to Washington Avenue was completed in 1999. The 80 -foot bridge crossing the creek was built by volunteers, and the ribbon cutting for the trail was incorporated into the first Governor's Conference for Greenways and Trails. Vinton has continued to utilize volunteers for greenway maintenance and enhancement, with the addition of flower beds, kiosks, benches, additional parking, and a Police fitness course. In 2001 Hardy Road was widened from two lanes to five, and bicycle lanes and sidewalks were included with connection to the greenway. Roanoke County's portion of the greenway was built in sections, with the last one completed in 2006 to reach Mountain View Road at the Blue Ridge Parkway. The greenway connects Goode Park, William Byrd schools, and Stonebridge Park, as well as numerous neighborhoods. The County's section also includes volunteer -built bridges, and the greenway goes under the reconstructed Mountain View Road, which now has bike lanes. Benefits Wolf Creek Greenway provides a well -used connection in Vinton and Roanoke County neighborhoods. Many senior citizens, William Byrd students, and residents from local subdivisions as well as the neighboring county use the trail. With completion to the Parkway, Wolf Creek Greenway offers many extended loops. Challenges A major challenge at Wolf Creek Greenway has been stormwater runoff, sedimentation in the creek, and erosion. The cinder surface of the trail has been difficult to maintain due to an increasing number of intense rains and twenty years of repairs. The culvert under Washington Avenue, long maintained by volunteers, has become increasingly difficult to keep clear. Both the Town and the County have paved short sections to prevent washout. Next Stens The Town and County should continue to cooperate on frequent maintenance and compaction of the trail surface, with consideration of soil stabilizers. Plans for extension of the greenway to Vinton Business Center, the Blue Ridge Parkway, and Roanoke River should be developed before right-of-way acquisition can be initiated. A couple enjoys a morning jog on the Wolf Creek Greenway, approaching Goode Park. 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 69 Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 70 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan 5. REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION CONNECTIONS This chapter focuses on regional connectivity. Connectivity was a major topic of the public input received during development of this 2018 Plan. Some connectivity can be achieved by ensuring that planned stretches of the greenway network outlined in Chapter 4 are built. Connectivity can also be addressed through alternate infrastructure networks such as on -road bicycle lanes, sidewalks, and transit. This chapter outlines proposed connections, identified by staff and the public, to integrate with other options for transportation. 5.1. OTHER REGIONAL PLANS The Roanoke Valley- Alleghany Regional Commission (Regional Commission) has worked with member localities to create several regional plans which describe a vision for future improvements of alternative transportation networks. These networks can be used to further connectivity of the greenway system by providing bicycle, pedestrian, and transit accommodations for citizens to reach greenways, or reach destinations from greenways, without having to use a car. Improving connectivity in this manner meets three goals. In conjunction with expanding and improving the existing greenway network, construction of other facilities such as bicycle lanes and sidewalks helps to plug gaps in connectivity identified by the public. Improving connectivity increases the viability of the greenways as a transportation system by connecting users to key destinations. Lastly, users who are able to walk or bike to the greenway will receive greater health benefits from their activities and may access the greenway more frequently than those who must drive to get there. Several regional plans which have been adopted by the Regional Commission and the Roanoke Valley Transportation Planning Organization (RVTPO) include recommendations which should be discussed within the context of the greenway network. These plans, as well as a brief description of each, are listed below. 5.1.1. Regional Bikeway Plan The Bikeway Plan for the Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO, now the RVTPO) was completed in 2005 and updated in 2012. This plan recommends on -road accommodations for bicycles within the MPO boundary, generally the urbanized area, by identifying corridors in need of accommodations, listed as either priority or vision routes. The types of accommodations to be provided are not specified in this plan. All of the Greenway Commission member localities are part of the MPO area, in whole or in part, so there is a high level of overlap between recommendations in the Bikeway Plan and the greenway network. Recommended corridors for improvements from that plan are shown in Figure 5-1. Some of the corridors identified are discussed further as high priority connections for the Greenway Commission. For a complete list of all recommendations, please view the Bikeway Plan on-line. 5.1.2. Rural Bikeway Plan The Rural Bikeway Plan (2006) of the Regional Commission identifies needed bicycle improvements in areas of the Roanoke Valley - Alleghany Region that are outside the boundary of the urbanized area. While the study area for the Rural Bikeway Plan excludes localities such as the City of Roanoke, Town of Vinton, and the City of Salem, large sections of Roanoke County and Botetourt County are within this study area. The purpose of the Rural Bikeway Plan is to provide information and guidance on the planning and provision of bicycle accommodations and facilities that enhance and encourage bicycling in the rural portions of the Regional Commission's service area. There are several recommendations in the plan that could have an impact on proposed connections in more rural areas where a connected greenway network becomes more challenging. Bicycle accommodations described in the plan include paved shoulders, widened travel lanes, and bicycle lanes, as well as improved signage, such as Share the Road signs, and amenities, such as bicycle racks. Table 5-1, on page 73, shows the recommendations made for Botetourt and Roanoke Counties. This table highlights corridors where bicycle improvements should be made, but does not specify what kinds of improvements to target. 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 71 Bikeway Plan for RVAMPC Update Priority and Vision List Corridors Priority List Corcidar - Vision List GQRidor tocal Park _ National ParkfForest MPO MS SWdy Area 0 1 2 4 Miles Figure 5-1: Recommendations from the Bikeway Plan for the RoanokeyalleyArea MPO, 2012 Update Page 72 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Notably, U.S. Bicycle Route 76 (USBR 76) runs through Botetourt and Roanoke Counties. Many of the roads shown in this table are part of this stretch of USBR 76. In 2017 the Regional Commission completed US Bicycle Route 76. A study of the Roanoke Valley -Alleghany Region, making further recommendations for improvements and goals for the USBR 76 corridor. 5.1.3. Transit Vision Plan The Roanoke Valley Transit Vision Plan (2016) outlines improvements that could be made to the transit network in the next several years. Transit service is provided in the region by Valley Metro, and buses include bicycle racks. An improved grenway network could help provide connectivity for the transit network. Improvements noted in the Transit Vision Plan include increasing frequency of service, broadening service to new routes, including Botetourt County routes, improving bus stops, and incorporating new transfer stations. While specific transit improvements are not discussed further in this chapter, transit is an important element of the overall alternative transportation network. 5.1.4. Regional Pedestrian Vision Plan The Regional Pedestrian Vision Plan, A Coordinated Approach to a Walkable Roanoke Valley, adopted by the RVTPO in 2015, provides a vision for a more walkable Roanoke Valley. This plan does two key things which are of interest in understanding how regional transportation networks interact. First, it makes numerous recommendations for pedestrian improvements in specific corridors and intersections. Second, through analysis of concentrations of employment and housing, it identifies multimodal districts and centers throughout the Roanoke Valley. 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 73 Table 5-1: 2006 Rural Bikeway Plan Recommendations Botetourt County Roadway From To US Route 11 Buchanan Troutville Frontage Road 55 Old US 11)* Rockbridge County Line US Route 11* Route 43 Buchanan Blue Ridge Parkway Route 43 Eagle Rock Buchanan Route 43 Eagle Rock Corporate Limit US Route 220 US Route 220 Route 43 Route 615 (Craigs Creek Rd.) Route 615 (Craigs Creek Rd.) US Route 220 Craig County Line Route 640 Lithia Rd.)* US Route 11 Nace Rd also Route 640)* Nace Road (Route 640)* Route 640 (Lithia Rd.) US Route 11 Route 651 (Stoney Battery Rd.)* US Route 11 US Route 220 Route 740 Roanoke County Line Carvins Cove Rd. Route 779 (Valley Rd.)* US Route 220 Catawba Rd. (also Route 779) Route 779 (Catawba Rd.)* US Route 220 Roanoke County Line Blue Ride Parkway ** Roanoke County Line Rockbrid e County Line Roanoke Count Roadway From To Route 11/460 MPO Boundary Montgomery County Line Route 311 (Catawba Valley Rd.) MPO Boundary Craig County Line Route 622 (Bradshaw Rd.)*** Route 864 (Bradshaw Rd.) Montgomery County Line Route 624 (Newport Rd.) Route 311 (Catawba Valley Rd.) I Montgomery County Line Route 740 (Carvins Cove Rd.)*** Route 311 (Catawba Valley Rd.) Botetourt County Line Route 779 (Catawba Creek Rd.)* Route 311 (Catawba Valley Rd.) Botetourt County Line Route 785 (Blacksburg Rd.)*** Route 311 (Catawba Valley Rd.) Montgomery County Line Route 864 (Bradshaw Rd.) Route 311 (Catawba Valley Rd.) Route 622 (Bradshaw Rd.) Route 1404 Timberview Rd. *** Route 863 Road terminus Blue Ridge Parkway ** I Franklin County Line I Botetourt County Line * Part of the U.S. Bicycle Route 76 (Note: all portions of U.S. Bicycle Route 76 are included in the Rural Bikeway Plan). ** Managed by the National Park Service. *** On -road greenway corridor from the 1995 Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan. 5.1.3. Transit Vision Plan The Roanoke Valley Transit Vision Plan (2016) outlines improvements that could be made to the transit network in the next several years. Transit service is provided in the region by Valley Metro, and buses include bicycle racks. An improved grenway network could help provide connectivity for the transit network. Improvements noted in the Transit Vision Plan include increasing frequency of service, broadening service to new routes, including Botetourt County routes, improving bus stops, and incorporating new transfer stations. While specific transit improvements are not discussed further in this chapter, transit is an important element of the overall alternative transportation network. 5.1.4. Regional Pedestrian Vision Plan The Regional Pedestrian Vision Plan, A Coordinated Approach to a Walkable Roanoke Valley, adopted by the RVTPO in 2015, provides a vision for a more walkable Roanoke Valley. This plan does two key things which are of interest in understanding how regional transportation networks interact. First, it makes numerous recommendations for pedestrian improvements in specific corridors and intersections. Second, through analysis of concentrations of employment and housing, it identifies multimodal districts and centers throughout the Roanoke Valley. 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 73 Legend Fincastl Gui i'zs'&'® Pedstrian Vision Plan btu kirrradal Gerdes` Maps M.ftir—dA osnkt-. O 2D4D MPO Study Aree L- __ Jv �d irto�i eounda les f Map 1: Apperson Map 24: WE Roanoke Map 2: Bonsack Map 25: Oak Grove Map 3: Brookside Clap 26: Penn Forest Map 4: Cave Spring Horth Map 27:. Rlchfield Map 5: Cave Spring South Map 28: SE Roanoke-Rivertand Daleville Troutv` e Map 5: Clearbrook Map 29: Tanglewood •_, Map 7: Countryside Map 30: TroutviRe Map 0: Crossroads Map 31: VA M ed ical Lor Botetou Map 9: Crystal Spring-Carillon Map 32: Valley View- Breckenridge it 150 Map 10: ❑aleville Map 33: Valleypointe Map 11: Downtown Roanoke - Old SW Map 34: West Salem- Map 12: Downtown Salem Map 35r. Wilfamson-Civic Center f Map 13, Downtown Vinton 1 Map 14, East Vinton Map 15: Elliston-Lafayette„ ? Map IS: Fincastle Hollins ^� f Map 1T: Garden City Map 18: Grandin - Hurt Park Valleypoatte „ngrookside Map 19: Hollins •� Map 20. Lakeside Plaza Map 21'. Lewis Gale ,�•�� __; . r Crossroads �' • Map 22'.: Lord Botetourt- Exit 150 .�' •! Count side �• Bonsack n .Y Countryside Valley View- NE Roanoke '•i Map 23: Melrose j -� / Lakn1de Breckenridge •.� (�,,. -� Downtown PIa4ta O west Salem A �. Sal � Melrose Williamson- Civ illiamson- ._- owns -f � s �•� Richfield � "` Civic Center:; —'15 w i Apperson VA r4�ical Vinton ; East a• Grandin- Downtown rVintopf ,__ Hurt Park Roanoke- SE Rogrrokq- ❑Id SW Rweilapd •�� � CT Spring Crystal Spring- rev e llArth Carillon Elliston- J Care Spring Tan glevreod Garden ��Lafayette South Penn Forest I Clearbrook i Figure 5-2: Map of Multimodal Centers and Districts, Regional Pedestrian Vision Plan, 2015 This is the first plan which identified multimodal districts and centers. This concept originates from the Ulrainia Department of Rail and Public Transportation's Multimodal System Design Guidelines (2013) which encourage the planning and implementation of an integrated transportation system including automobiles, public transit, bicycles, and walking. The Multimodal Districts and Centers represent areas of population density and future targeted growth, where destinations are close enough that walking and biking are viable modes of transportation. Transit service is often already provided or the need for it already acknowledged. The definitions of these terms are: Multimodal District: Any portion of a city or region with land use characteristics that support multimodal travel, such as higher densities and mixed uses, and where it is relatively easy to make trips without needing a car as gauged by the number of bus routes available and safe walking or biking paths — either currently or proposed in the future. Multimodal Center: A smaller area of even higher multimodal connectivity and more intense activity, roughly equivalent to a 10 -minute walk or a one -mile area. The Pedestrian Vision Plan places priority on making accommodations in the centers and districts, shown in Figure 5-2. More detailed maps of all the plan's recommended accommodations can be accessed in that document. Page 74 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan In general, greenway corridors follow rivers, streams, and conservation corridors where there is less development, so there is little overlap with multimodal districts. Multimodal centers and districts without a direct connection to a greenway or a planned greenway are included in Table 5-2. By integrating and developing bicycle lanes and sidewalks, many of these important areas become accessible from the greenway network. 5.2. RECOMMENDED CONNECTIONS The Regional Commission works with locality staff within the RVTPO and the broader Roanoke Valley - Alleghany Region to monitor bicycle accommodations, bus routes, and pedestrian infrastructure. This 2018 Plan recognizes the importance of connectivity with this infrastructure. The 2018 Greenway Plan Regional Connectivity Map (Figure 5-3, page 76) was developed to address the public's request for accommodations to reach key destinations (Figure 3-1, page 23) and to incorporate staff recommendations for connecting facilities. Existing bike lanes and sidewalks, along with the multimodal districts and centers, are shown on this map. Often, proposed connections would run along roadways, and constraining right-of-way and engineering factors may make a separated multi -use path not feasible. Connections, therefore, could range from sidewalks or improvements for bicycles to a multi -use path or greenway. Flexibility is inherent in these recommendations, and locality and VDOT staff will determine the nature of the improvements. The specific recommendations identified under each locality that were developed for this 2018 Plan are shown in Figures 5-4 through 5-10, on pages 77 — 83.. There may be additional connections to greenways that will allow for easier use by pedestrians and bicyclists, and development of such is encouraged and supported by the Greenway Commission. For this 2018 Plan, discussion of the connections is shown by locality, as each locality independently designated its desired connections. Table 5-2: Multimodal Districts and Centers without Direct Greenway Intersections District Name Accessible by Existing Bike Lane or Sidewalk Clearbrook No Exit 150 No Elliston -Lafayette Outside the Greenway Commission area Troutville No Penn Forest No Center Name Hurt Park Yes Fincastle No Melrose Avenue Yes* Crystal Spring Yes Oak Grove No Old Southwest Yes* SE Roanoke Yes Williamson - Breckenridge No Williamson - Civic Yes Crossroads Yes* Lewis Gale No Downtown Vinton Yes* Richfield No VA Medical No * = technically connected but improvements needed 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 75 Figure 5-3: 2018 Greenway Plan Regional Connectivity Map Page 76 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan rrr otetourt County Craig County 1 % ,l } S � .1J o- i a s a 0 a- rJ f• ��+ �Y / nOke '.tea. ! T �P Roanoke County Franklin ° Ccunty 2018 Greenway Plan Regional Connectivity Map Proposed Connections Multimodal G>~ er Proposed Greenways Multimdaai District Built Greenways and Trails (2018} ----- U.S. Bicycle Route 76 Public Lands Its '—EI 54 National Forest Trails MPO Boundary 2040 s RfcG`-16tJAL Appalachian Trail focality Boundaries- - - Bike Lane 0 0,75 1.5 3 4.5 6 Sidewalks Miles Figure 5-3: 2018 Greenway Plan Regional Connectivity Map Page 76 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan 5.2.1. Botetourt County Botetourt County is much more rural than the other member localities and has smaller multimodal districts. Given the rural opportunities, there are many routes popular for social rides and thus demand for connections from greenways to those routes. Most of Botetourt's recommended connection corridors are much longer than those shown in other localities. These recommendations are listed in Table 5-3 and shown on the map in Figure 5-4. The major connection in Botetourt County is U.S. Bicycle Route 76, a nationally designated bicycle route. This route is a priority for improvement and could function as a thru-corridor for bicyclists seeking access to parts of the greenway network, particularly Daleville, Buchanan, and Catawba. Improved accommodations along this corridor will be a key piece of Botetourt County's local greenway network. Two other roadways of note which could be improved as network connections are Blacksburg Road (45) and the Blue Ridge Turnpike (46). Both are shown in Figure 5-4 and provide connectivity between Daleville and Fincastle and Fincastle and USBR 76, respectively. Additional corridors identified for Botetourt show improved connections from USBR 76 to major residential neighborhoods. Additional reference to planned bicycle and pedestrian improvements within the county can be found in Botetourt's Gateway Crossing Area Plan. Table 5-3: Recommended Connections to the Greenway Network, Botetourt County ID Name 45 Blacksburg Rd. to Fincastle 46 Blue Ridge Turnpike 47 Sunset Blvd Botetourt County Connections Legend Proposed Connections Proposed Greenways 444III -Fincastle Built Greenways and Trails (2016) - - r U.S Bike Route 76 ' National Forest Trails Appalachian Trail '6 B,Ke Lane .. Sidewalks. ^ ,� - p G Y U 1 C(�' IvlullsrrodalCenter \ 45 B. Q t le t Q r t 0 Li In Mu It nloda I plstdci 41` Public Lands w 1 f MPO Boundary 2444 4° 47ry 1 r ►� Daseville Figure 5-4: Botetourt County Connections 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 77 5.2.2. City of Salem City of Salem staff worked with citizen appointees to the Greenway Commission to identify the connections in Table 5-4, shown on the map in Figure 5-5. Designations in Salem focused on connecting the greenways to residential areas and to downtown. The Roanoke River Greenway and the Hanging Rock/ Mason Creek Greenway are the main greenway corridors in Salem, and enhancing the connectivity of Table 5-4: Recommended Connections these was a key priority for Salem's representatives. There are numerous connections noted in the map and table, but most important to Salem's goals of connectivity are connections 10, 11, and 21. Number 10 connects the Elizabeth Campus trail network to the planned Mason Creek Greenway. Number 11 connects the greenway system to downtown Salem, a multimodal center which has existing sidewalks but needs improved connections. Connection 21 would provide access to the Veterans Hospital, a multimodal center which is currently not connected to the greenway system. Legend Proposed Connections Proposed Greenways -= Built Greenways and Trails (2018) U.S. Bike Route 76 National Forest Trails to the Greenway Network, City of Salem ID Name 1 Twelve O'clock Knob to Roanoke River Greenway 2 Mill Ln. to downtown 3 Mill Ln. to neighborhood 4 Union to downtown 5 Eddy to neighborhood 6 Colorado Ave. improvements 7 1 Homestead to Riverside 8 Colorado Ave. to Kimball neighborhood 9 Shanks St. (former Dry Creek Greenway) 10 Salem Civic Center 11 Main St. corridor 12 Keesling to Roanoke River 13 1 Wildwood Rd. to Havens WMA (with Roanoke Co) 20 Franklin to Kimball 21 Roanoke Blvd. to City Line City of Salem Connections Appalachian Trail Bike Lane - Sidewalks Multimodal Center Multimodal District Public Lands •h ,. MPO Boundary 2040 43 Richfield 30 .16 52 15 13 \ g 11 X11I Downtown Salem; �a City 942 e� 4 12 3 i T 5' �6 . 1 el 18 ' Apperson Dfive kx 20 Lewis G -e ` l Roanoke County Figure 5-5: City of Salem Connections Page 78 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan 5.2.3. City of Roanoke City of Roanoke staff are currently working with the public to assess neighborhood connectivity throughout the City. The City has an annual sidewalk construction program, utilizes its paving program to add striped bike lanes, and works continually to update neighborhood plans, which could include improved connectivity to the greenway system. Suggested routes are in Table 5-5. Numbers 19, 48, 49, and 50 shown in Figure 5-6 increase connections to Lick Run Greenway. Number 31 in Figure 5-7 connects Murray Run Greenway with the planned Mudlick or Garst Mill Greenway route. Additional connections, 42 and 44 in Figure 5-7, are proposed to improve connectivity to the Old Southwest neighborhood from the Roanoke River Greenway. Cltj of Roancke Connections Legend Proposed Connections Proposed Greenways x� Built Greenways and Trails J2018) U.S. Bike Route 76 Crossroads National Forest Trails 1 Appslaohlan Trail ' �= Bike Lane Countryside - Sidewalks Multimodal Center ! /+' 1 ` Multimodal Cfisftidf Public Lands 4$; M / PQ Boundary 2040 f Wililarrson - Breckenriige Valley view � 50 49 19 1 Melrose Avenue 1.^ Figure 5-6: City of Roanoke Connections, Northwest 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 79 Table 5-5: Recommended Connections to the Greenway Network, City of Roanoke ID Name 19 Kennedy Park to Lick Run Greenway via Norris Dr. 31 Murray Run Greenway to Mudlick connector 42 Mill Mountain to Garden City Greenway 44 Roanoke River to Old SW 48 Lick Run Gway from Hershber er to Countryside via Ferncliff 49 Lick Run to Round Hill Elementary School 50 Lick Run to Huff Lane Park 53 Colonial Ave. to MurrayRun Cltj of Roancke Connections Legend Proposed Connections Proposed Greenways x� Built Greenways and Trails J2018) U.S. Bike Route 76 Crossroads National Forest Trails 1 Appslaohlan Trail ' �= Bike Lane Countryside - Sidewalks Multimodal Center ! /+' 1 ` Multimodal Cfisftidf Public Lands 4$; M / PQ Boundary 2040 f Wililarrson - Breckenriige Valley view � 50 49 19 1 Melrose Avenue 1.^ Figure 5-6: City of Roanoke Connections, Northwest 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 79 City of Roanoke Connections �— Legend Proposed Connections �4 Hurt, Park Proposed Greenways Built Greenways and Trails (2018) U.S. Bike Route 76 Downtown Roanoke National Forest Trails ��. SEiRoanokej Appalachian Trail Bike Lane s - Sidewalks ' Multimodal Center Old Southwest Multimodal District Public Lands MPO Boundary 2040 S 31 � � Carillon � f f'" 42 Crystal �Spriinngg 53 Figure 5-7: City of Roanoke Connections, Central and Southwest With the growth of the greenway network, races and pub runs have become popular. Photo by Wade Thompson Page 80 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan 5.2.4. Roanoke County Given the geographic shape of Roanoke County, the connections in Table 5-6 are shown on several maps. On Figure 5-8 below Number 15 connects Hanging Rock Battlefield Trail to the proposed Gish Branch Greenway and existing Exit 140 Park -n -Ride, thus potentially providing a vital connection for bicyclists attempting to commute to the SmartWay bus stop operated by Valley Metro. Number 30 is a route broadly supported by public input, providing connection to Carvins Cove. Number 52 is a popular bicycling route that might be extended to Plantation Road and connected to Hanging Rock via Number 16. The Glenvar connection, Number 43 (Figure 5-5, page 78), connects Glenvar schools and the surrounding neighborhood to the Roanoke River Greenway. On the southern Roanoke County connections map (Figure 5-9, page 82), the two connections shown are 17 and 18. Number 17 provides a needed connection between the planned Murray Run Greenway and Tanglewood Mall. Number 18 is an on -road version of Back Creek Greenway and would connect South County Library and the Penn Forest District to the planned greenway network. I i 15 Figure 5-8: Northern Roanoke County Connections Ro4noke County Connections j 3oJ R 52 14 16 / Legend Proposed Connections Proposed Greenways Built Greenways and Trails (2018) U.S. Bike Route 76 National Forest Trails Appalachian Trail Bike Lane - Sidewalks Multimodal Center Multimodal District Public Lands MPO Boundary 2040 V Hollins �p ! oanoke County A _)'1 Brookside 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 81 Table 5-6: Recommended Connections to the Greenway Network, Roanoke County ID Name 13 Wildwood Rd. from Salem to Havens WMA (map on p. 78) 14 Valleypointe Parkway to Lick Run Greenway 15 Hanging Rock to Park -n -Ride and Gish Branch 16 419 from Loch Haven to Hanging Rock and Hinchee Trail 17 Tanglewood to Murray Run connector 18 Former Back Creek Greenway 24 1 Virginia Ave./Hardy Rd. improvements (map on p.83) 30 Timberview to Carvins Cove 43 Roanoke River to Glenvar Connection (map on .78 51 Rt. 311 from Mason Creek Greenway to US Bicycle Route 76 52 Loch Haven Road from Rt. 419 to Plantation Rd. Ro4noke County Connections j 3oJ R 52 14 16 / Legend Proposed Connections Proposed Greenways Built Greenways and Trails (2018) U.S. Bike Route 76 National Forest Trails Appalachian Trail Bike Lane - Sidewalks Multimodal Center Multimodal District Public Lands MPO Boundary 2040 V Hollins �p ! oanoke County A _)'1 Brookside 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 81 Legend Proposed Connections Proposed Greenways Built Greenways and Trails (2098) U.S. Bike Roue 78 Nabonal Forest Traals Appala0lan Trail Bike Lane Sidewalks Multimodal Center Multirnadal Oiatrict Public Lands MPO Bdundary 20M Roanake Coup#y.Connectiorls"� 31 �f Figure 5-9: Southern Roanoke County Connections 0, 17. r Roanoke C6 -aunt r J Bicycle accommodations can be provided in conjunction with routine paving by striping a lane, as was done on Brambleton Avenue in Roanoke County and City and Shenandoah Avenue in the City of Roanoke. Page 82 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan 5.2.5. Town of Vinton The Town of Vinton designated many connections which they would like to see incorporated in the future, as shown in Figure 5-10. A complete list of all of the connections is in Table 5-7. Key connections to the greenway network include 33, 37, and 38, which connect Gladetown Trail, Glade Creek Greenway, and Wolf Creek Greenway respectively. There are also connections between planned trails, such as Number 24, which would connect Wolf Creek Greenway and the Perimeter Trail, and Number 25, which would connect Gladetown Trail to Wolf Creek Greenway. A major priority for Vinton is to improve bicycle and pedestrian accommodations along major thoroughfares such as Walnut Avenue and Washington Avenue. These corridors are a popular route for bicyclists seeking to reach the Blue Ridge Parkway from the City of Roanoke. Legend Town of Vinton Connections Proposed Connections Table 5-7: Recommended Connections to the Greenway Network, Town of Vinton ID Name 22 Mountain View Rd. 23 Gladetown Greenway to Hardy Rd. 24 Virginia Ave./Hardy Rd. improvements (with Roanoke Co) 25 Gladetown Greenway to Wolf Creek Greenway 26 Meadow Rd. to Wolf Creek spur 27 WalnutAve. to downtown 28 Jackson Ave. to E Cleveland 29 3r' St. to Gladetown Trail Loop 32 Hardy Rd. to Niagara Rd. via Clearview 33 Gladetown Trail to Niagara Rd. via 3rd St. 34 Virginia Ave. to Gladetown Trail via S Pollard 35 Virginia Ave. to Washington Ave via S Pollard 36 Jackson to S Pollard via W Lee Ave. 37 1 Glade Creek Greenway to Mt View Rd. via Washington 38 Mt View Rd. to Wolf Creek via Washington 39 Cleveland to Hardy via Bedford Rd. 40 Hardy to Washington via Bypass Rd. 41 Cardinal Park Dr. to Vinton Business Center Trails Town of Vinton Connections Proposed Connections 1 Proposed Greenways - Buirt Greenway% and Trails (2018) f3 U.S. Bike Route 78 Nasional Forest Trails - Appalachian Trail Bike Lane Sidewslks Multimodal Center Multimodali]isirid o w n Public Lands MPO Boundary 2440 ` h of V 1 n t_nl37��/ 36 7nwr 27n 28- 24 3 - 22 211 1 38 40 29 23 1 33 32 All. 24 41 25 t' - i Figure 5-10: Town of Vinton Connections 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 83 Page Intentionally Left Blank Page 84 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan 6. GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES This chapter identifies goals, objectives, and strategies to aid in development of the greenway network (described in Chapter 4) and connections to that network (described in Chapter 5). This chapter in the 2018 Plan is an update by the Greenway Commission of the previous implementation strategies. The Greenway Commission will address the goals, objectives and strategies outlined in this section in a cooperative partnership with the five local governments, recognizing that each locality operates in an individual manner, is responsible for a broad spectrum of needs, and develops facilities as its resources and governance allows. This 2018 Plan reaffirms the goals and objectives of the 1995 Plan, listed in Section 2.4. Progress on goals and objectives from the 2007 Plan and 1995 Plan is discussed in Section 2.4. Table 6-1: Implementation Strategies 2018 Goal Objectives Strategies 1. Greenway Construction Prioritize greenway construction and Focus on finishing the Roanoke River Complete a connected focus resources on completion of the Greenway (Category #1) by 2023. greenway network of trails to provide the multiple benefits of a greenway system, with focus on finishing Roanoke River Greenway. greenway network's arterial routes. Secondarily, focus on finishing Category #2 routes. Provide a connected greenway system by focusing on long stretches of off-road trails and tying them Incorporate greenways and on -road connections in regional transportation plans. together with on -road bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Provide identification, regulatory, and Encourage signage consistency across the informational signs on each greenway network while retaining flexibility to meet to facilitate use and management. locality requirements. Coordinate with stormwater Within each locality, coordinate project management and flood projects to management, land acquisition, and greenway capitalize on opportunities for new construction with all departments that might greenways and joint projects. help or be impacted. Coordinate with federal, state, and Use best management design practices and regional efforts to plan and develop national and state guidelines like American long distance trail opportunities, with Disabilities Act (ADA), CPTED (Crime encouraging inclusion of the Roanoke Prevention through Environmental Design), region as a destination site. and AASHTO (American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials) to design secure and safe trails. Support the localities in celebrating completion of each new greenway segment and significant feature. Support locality efforts to provide connections to the greenway network through improvements such as sidewalks and bike lanes and through wayfinding signage. Consider renewable energy options and recycling during design. Continue to use Pathfinders for Greenways to build Class C trails. 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 85 Table 6-1: Implementation Strategies 2018 (continued) Goal Objectives Strategies 2. Funding Maintain a regional, multi-year Assist localities with securing multiple funding sources Assure adequate funding plan that identifies and exploring innovative funding possibilities such funding to meet the fiscal goals and sources as bonds, stormwater fees, private grants, and goals for construction of continuous funding for partnerships. and maintenance of the greenway construction and greenway network. maintenance. Pursue new sources of Continue to seek federal and state grants. revenue. Provide and encourage Pursue fund raising activities such as charitable appropriate recognition of donations, festivals, races, and other fundraising donors. events. Encourage adequate funding for each locality's Capital Improvement Program, capital maintenance fund, and operations and maintenance budgets. Maintain a donation program to allow private donation of greenway amenities such as water fountains, bike racks, trees, and benches. Solicit and efficiently utilize corporate donations, and develop ways to recognize those donors. Maintain a list of specific trail sections or components that could be funded by private monies. Utilize Scouts, schools, civic groups, and other volunteer partnerships for installation of amenities such as kiosks, benches, landscaping, and mile markers. Gallop for the Greenways is an annual fundraiser to support greenway construction. Page 86 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Table 6-1: Implementation Strategies 2018 (continued) Goal Objectives Strategies 3. Land Acquisition Encourage and assist localities Identify properties, easements, and rights-of-way Support a land acquisition with land acquisition for each being acquired for other purposes to determine if program that provides project within time lines that greenway easements can be incorporated. rights-of-way needed for dovetail with construction greenway construction. schedules. Work cooperatively among local Continue to be involved in the utility easement jurisdictions to coordinate land process so that greenway easements can be acquisition across jurisdictional considered where appropriate. boundaries. Work with planning staff to refine local zoning ordinances to encourage and protect greenway corridors. Encourage developers to include greenway easements and greenway construction within new developments. Utilize corporations and chambers of commerce to support development of trails within industrial/ business complexes. Utilize platted easements to protect greenway corridors, and incorporate those into jurisdictional mapping systems and comprehensive plans. Monitor rail and road abandonments for potential greenway development. Conservation -minded landowners make greenways possible. 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 87 Table 6-1: Implementation Strategies 2018 (continued) Goal Objectives Strategies 4. Community Outreach Support an outreach Partner with locality staff to expand communications and Education program that communicates to provide users with current information on Develop a community the economic, health, projects, events, trail locations, maps, trailheads, outreach and education environmental, and quality of closures, safety campaigns, meetings, upcoming program that provides life benefits of the greenway development, and trail amenities. information on greenway system. opportunities, benefits, and user safety. Increase awareness of greenway implementation Provide greenway marketing information to the economic development departments of the local efforts through a comprehensive jurisdictions. marketing strategy. Expand environmental Continue cooperation with the Regional Partnership, education programs, historic Roanoke Outside, and Virginia's Blue Ridge in information, and service promoting greenways and trails beyond the Roanoke opportunities through Valley to attract new businesses and enhance the cooperation with multiple valley's value as a tourism destination. partners. Promote responsible use of the Expand signage and other methods of encouraging greenways, common etiquette, greenway etiquette. and practices and activities compatible with multi -modal, shared use. Encourage schools to embrace Expand outreach and market greenways and their greenways as an avenue for benefits to residents through club and neighborhood safe routes to schools, fitness, meetings, civic associations, and business groups. and reduced transportation costs. Standardize use of the greenway logo on trail signs, maps, and marketing materials. Expand the volunteer and volunteer recognition programs. Improve social media outreach and website design for more intuitive navigation and broader reach. Work with locality staff to educate greenway users about methods of managing greenway corridors beneficial to water quality, such as reduced mowing. Continue to support the Greenway Ambassadors program and consider expansion into other localities. Develop an assessment of the economic impact of greenways locally. Page 88 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Table 6-1: Implementation Strategies 2018 (continued) Goal Objectives Strategies 5. Organizational Clarify the roles and Clarify the roles and responsibilities of each locality, Structure responsibilities for implementing the Greenway Commission and volunteers in Utilize the organizational the Greenway Plan. implementation of the Greenway Plan and specific structure to effectively projects. and efficiently implement the Greenway Plan, as Identify staffing needs of the localities and Greenway updated, and manage the Commission to meet responsibilities of each in growing greenway system. implementing the Greenway Plan and managing and maintaining the greenway network. Utilize annual action plans for localities and committees to keep projects and activities focused and on schedule. Maintain partnerships with agencies, nonprofits, and volunteering organizations. Establish a permanent storage system for preserving greenway records. Review local and state ordinances pertaining to greenways and trails to identify commonalities and deficiencies and to encourage consistent rules enforceable by code. 6. Greenway Encourage best management Work with legal departments to develop any Management practices in maintenance and ordinances needed to effectively manage Assist the localities with management of greenways. greenways. management of the greenway network to Facilitate coordination among Encourage the involvement of law enforcement and meet user needs, provide greenway managers to address emergency management personnel in design and a range of experiences management issues and develop management of greenways and in incident reporting. in a safe and secure consistent responses. environment, and protect Provide alternative resources Improve methods for users to report problems or the natural resources. and volunteers to manage the conditions on greenways. growing greenway network. Cooperate with the Regional Schedule regional meetings among staff managing Commission on tracking greenways to share methods and experiences. performance measures and growth of the greenway network. Identify greenways in locality mapping and geographic information systems. Promote adopt-a-greenway programs and other methods for volunteer assistance to reduce maintenance costs. Support management departments in securing additional maintenance funding. Continue to track greenway use and trends. 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan Page 89 Page Intentionally Left Blank Appendix A Intergovernmental Agreement Establishing the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission Appendix A - 1 AMENDED AND RESTATED INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING THE ROANOKE VALLEY GREENWAY COMMISSION Appendix A - 2 AMENDED AND RESTATED INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING THE ROANOKE VALLEY GREENWAY COMMISSION July 1, 2016 This Amended and Restated Intergovernmental Agreement Establishing the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission is made as of this 1St day of July, 2016, by and among the City of Roanoke, Virginia, the City of Salem, Virginia, the Town of Vinton, Virginia, the County of Roanoke, Virginia, and the County of Botetourt, Virginia. PREAMBLE A. The City of Roanoke, the City of Salem, the Town of Vinton, and the County of Roanoke ("Original Participating Localities") entered into an Intergovernmental Agreement Establishing the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission in 1997 ("Intergovernmental Agreement") and revised the Intergovernmental Agreement in 2008. B. The Original Participating Localities desire to amend and restate the revised Intergovernmental Agreement to allow the County of Botetourt to join the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission as a participating locality. C. The Original Participating Localities and the County of Botetourt have submitted this Amended and Restated Intergovernmental Agreement Establishing the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission ("Agreement") to their governing boards for approval, and each locality has approved the Agreement in accordance with Section 15.2- 1300, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended. D. The Original Participating Localities and the County of Botetourt (collectively, the "Participating Localities") agree that this Agreement shall amend, restate and replace the revised Intergovernmental Agreement. 1. PURPOSE The purpose of the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission ("Commission") is to promote and facilitate coordinated direction and guidance in the planning, development, and maintenance of a system of greenways throughout the Roanoke Valley. 2. BENEFITS OF A GREENWAY SYSTEM This greenway system, in which each greenway is owned and operated by the Participating Locality in which it is located, is intended to enhance the quality of life for Valley citizens and visitors and to: Appendix A - 3 (a) Provide safe and efficient alternative transportation linkages among recreational sites, open spaces, residential areas, employment centers, educational and cultural facilities, and other activity centers; (b) Encourage citizen wellness and maintain environments which promote opportunities for recreation activities; (c) Protect environmental assets and retain beneficial ecological habitats; (d) Maintain a contiguous urban forest ecosystem to reduce community wide environmental problems such as excessive storm water runoff, air quality degradation, water pollution, and urban climate change; (e) Promote an appreciation for the Valley's natural, historical and cultural resources and its neighborhoods; (f) Protect and link significant remnants of the community's undeveloped open spaces, woodlands, and wetlands; and (g) Enhance the Valley's appearance to encourage tourism, promote economic development, and improve the living environment for residents. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE, ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMISSION, AND PARTIES TO THE AGREEMENT This Agreement, and any amendments thereto, shall be effective, and the Commission shall be established, pursuant to §15.2-1300, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, upon its execution pursuant to the authority of ordinances adopted by the governing bodies of each of the City of Roanoke, the City of Salem, the County of Roanoke, the Town of Vinton, and the County of Botetourt, each herein being referred to as a "Participating Locality". Additional participating localities may be added as parties to this Agreement upon unanimous approval of an amendment to this Agreement by the existing Participating Localities and upon adoption of an ordinance by the governing body of the locality requesting to be added. 4. RESPONSIBILITIES AND DUTIES The Commission shall have the following responsibilities and duties: Appendix A - 4 (a) To study the needs of the Roanoke Valley and the desires of the Valley residents as expressed in the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan, dated December 1995, the 2007 Update to the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan, and other Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan updates, as amended; to review these plans every five years and revise as necessary; and to encourage inclusion of a coordinated system of greenways into each Participating Locality's planning efforts; (b) To advise and inform the governing bodies and the citizens of the Valley of existing, planned, and potential opportunities for establishing greenways within the Valley; (c) To make recommendations to the governing bodies relative to desirable federal, state, and local legislation concerning greenway programs and related activities; (d) To investigate, recommend, and help solicit funding, grants, and/or donations of land, property or services from the Commonwealth of Virginia, the United States of America, their agencies, private citizens, corporations, institutions and others to promote, construct or maintain greenways within the Roanoke Valley; (e) To study and recommend uniform standards for the design and construction of greenways, including sign standards, to be employed Valley -wide; (f) To actively pursue and promote public/private partnerships, work closely with nonprofit organizations, and facilitate cooperation among Valley governments in developing, constructing, and maintaining a system of greenways throughout the Valley; (g) To coordinate the efforts of the federal, state and local jurisdictions in the Valley to create a Valley -wide system of greenways and trails that satisfy the needs of all the residents of the Valley, including those with special needs)- (h) eeds; (h) To assist the Participating Localities with developing project plans and timetables for greenways and with defining roles and responsibilities for each project; and (i) To coordinate with Pathfinders for Greenways, Inc. in its use of volunteers to assist Participating Localities with construction Appendix A - 5 and maintenance of greenways and in its solicitation of private sector funding for greenway development. 5. MEMBERSHIP (a) The Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission shall be composed of members, appointed as follows: (1) Up to three (3) members from each of the Participating Localities to be appointed by the governing bodies, each for a term of three (3) years, with appointments to be staggered. Each member shall be a resident of the locality which he or she represents; (2) One (1) member appointed by the Roanoke Valley Transportation Planning Organization for a term of three (3) years; (3) Up to two (2) staff members from each of the Participating Localities, appointed by the chief administrative officer; and (4) One member appointed by Pathfinders for Greenways, Inc., the nonprofit group established to support greenways in the Roanoke Valley. (b) In addition to the above members, one representative from each of the following organizations shall serve as a non-voting member of the Greenway Commission: (1) The Western Virginia Water Authority; (2) The Roanoke Valley Alleghany Regional Commission; and. (3) Such interested organizations as the Commission may approve. (c) A vacancy for the remainder of any term of any member shall be filled by the governing body or person making the original appointment. Appendix A - 6 (d) The members of the Commission shall serve without compensation. 6. MEETINGS (a) The Commission shall hold regular meetings at least once per quarter each calendar year. All meetings and hearings of the Commission shall be open to the public, except closed meetings may be held pursuant to the provisions of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act. Reasonable notice of the time and place of all regular and special meetings shall be given to the public. Meetings shall be called by the chair or upon request of a majority of the members. (b) The Commission shall adopt bylaws necessary to conduct the affairs of the Commission. 7. OPERATING REVENUE (a) The Commission shall not operate as a fiscal agent. (b) Funding for the Commission shall be administered through an agreed-upon fiscal agent. (c) The Commission shall adopt an annual budget. (d) Operating revenue for the Commission shall be funded by the Participating Localities on an equal per capita basis as determined by the most recent population estimates of the Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service of the University of Virginia. (e) Annual funding requests from the Commission shall be made by February 1 of each year to the governing bodies of the Participating Localities. (f) The Commission shall be authorized to apply for and receive, through its fiscal agent, grants and donations for use in support of the greenway program. Appendix A - 7 :9u I I \ 11.011 HTA a Lei\ (a) An annual report shall be prepared and submitted to the governing body of each Participating Locality each calendar year. (b) The Commission may establish any committees necessary to fulfill the responsibilities and duties of the Commission. 9. DURATION (a) This Agreement shall remain in force until terminated or modified by action of the governing bodies of all Participating Localities. (b) A Participating Locality may withdraw from this Agreement by adoption of an appropriate ordinance. 10. AMENDMENTS This Agreement may be amended only by approval by the governing bodies of each Participating Locality. 11. LIABILITY To the extent permitted by law, the Participating Localities agree to indemnify, keep and hold the members of the Commission and its staff free and harmless from any liability on account of any injury or damage of any type to any person or property growing out of performance of the duties and responsibilities imposed by this Agreement. In the event of any suit or proceeding brought against members of the Commission or its staff, the Participating Localities shall pay reasonable costs of defense. Any costs of the Participating Localities under this section shall be shared on a per capita basis as determined by the most recent population estimates of the Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service of the University of Virginia. SIGNATURES APPEAR ON FOLLOWING PAGES Appendix A - 8 WITNESS our hands and seals as of the date set forth at the beginning of this Agreement. ATTEST: Ci Clerk .� Approved as to form: LJ - City Atto y Approved as to form: ; d County Attorney ATTEST: Approved as of m: n, Cit Attorney tl CITY QFROANOKE ByO / Christopher P. Morrill, City Manager Ordinance Number 40508-051616 COUNTY OF ROANOKE B Thomas C. Gates, County Administrator Ordinance Number 052416-1 CITY OF SALEM By lam/ Byron 50dolph Foley, Maor Ordinance of May 9, 2016 Appendix A - 9 ATTEST TOWN OF VINTON Town Clerk Barry W. T mpson, ToA Manager Ap r ved as to form: Town Attorne ATTEST: County Clerk Approved as to form: County Attorney Ordinance Number 971 COUNTY OF BOTETOURT By Gary Larro e, County Administrator Ordinance Number 16-06-10 Appendix A - 10 Appendix B 2017 On-line Survey Questions and Responses Appendix 8 - 1 542 Total Responses Date Created: Wednesday, February 22, 2017 Complete Responses: 474 Powered by ^ Survey Monkey Appendix B - 2 Q1: How often do you use the Vallev's areenways? Answered: 534 Skipped:8 Daily OEM Once a week Once a morph D% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Powered by ^Survey Monkey Q1: How often do you use the Valley's greenways? Answered: 534 Skipped:8 Answer Choices Responses Daily 26.84% 138 Once a week 45.88% 245 Once a month 23.78% 127 Never 4,49% 24 Total 674 Powered by h Survey Monkey Appendix 8 - 3 Q2: How do you access the greenways? Answered: 529 Skipped: 13 I walk to the greenway 1 bike to the greenway I take puhlic transit to t... I drive to the greenway 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 60% 90% 100% SurveyMonkey Q2: How do you access the greenways? Answered: 529 Skipped: 13 Answer Choices I walk to the greenway I bike to the greenway I take public transit to the greenway I drive to the greenway Total Respondents: 529 >wered by ^ SurveyMonkey, Responses 33,84% 18.53% 0.57% 71.83°/ Appendix 8 - 4 174 3 380 Q3: How far is vour home from the nearest areenwav? Answered: 533 Skipped:9 I can walk or bike to the... I can walk or bike to the... 1 can walk or bike to the... I cannot safely walk ... 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 60% 90% 100% Powered by ^ Survey Monkey Q3: How far is your home from the nearest greenway? Answered: 533 Skipped:9 Answer Choices I can walk or bike to the greenway in five minutes or less I can well. or bike to the greenway in between 5 to 10 minutes I can wall: or bike to the greenway in between 10 to 20 minutes I cannot safely walk or bike to a greenway from my house Total Powered by ^ Survey Monkey Appendix 8 - 5 Responses 2aX8% 123 18.39% 96 16.70% 89 41.94% 223 537 Q4: Which greenways do you use? Select all that apply. Answered: 527 Skipped: 15 Roanoke River Greenway - C... Mill Mountain Trails Carvins Cove Trails Roanoke River Greenway - C... Mill M...' in Greenway Tinker Creek Greenway Roanoke River Greenway ar... Murray Run Powered by 4`1 5 Greenway 94: Which greenways do you use? Select all that apply. Answered: 527 Skipped: 15 Answer Choices Responses Roanoke River Greenway - City of Roanoke 81..21% 428 NRI Mountain Trails 40.23% 212 Carvins Cove Trails 39.28% 207 Roanoke River Greenway - City of 5a[em 37.76% 199 Mill Mountain Greenway 37.57% 198 Tinker Creek Greenway 33.97% 179 Roanoke River Greenway at Green HN Park 32.64% 172 Murray Run Greenway 31.31% 165 E.plo.e Park Trails 26.19% 136 Lick Run Greenway 25.24% 133 Hanging Rock Battlefield Trail 22.20% 117 Powered by 5 Tinker Creek Greenway -Hollins Trailhead 17.08% 90 Appendix 8 - 6 Q5: Which greenway is your favorite? Select only one. Answered: 516 Skipped: 26 Roa I' River 43.99% Greenway . C.- Carvin Cove Tralls Carvins Cove 63 Trails 10.65% Murray Run Roanoke River Greenway - City of Salem Greenway 37 River 4.65% enwe Grreenway - C... e ■ Roanoke River 24 Greenway at... 3.29% Wolf Creek Explore Park Trails Greenway 12 Mill Mountain' 2.13% Trails hick Run Greenway Explore Park 11 Powered by 44), 5 Trails 2.13% Q5: Which greenway is your favorite? Select only one. Answered: 516 Skipped: 26 Answer Choices Responses Roanoke River Greenway - Cly of Roanoke 43.99% 227 Carvin Cove Tralls 12.21% 63 Murray Run Greenway 10.65% 56 Roanoke River Greenway - City of Salem 7.17% 37 Roanoke River Greenway at Green Hill Park 4.65% 24 Wolf Creek Greenway 4.65% 24 AGI Mountain Trails 3.29% 17 Explore Park Trails 2.33% 12 Hanging Rock @aftlefreld Trail 2.13% 11 hick Run Greenway 2.13% 11 Tinker Creek Greenway 2.13% 11 Powered by 5 Mill Mountain Greenway 1.74% 9 Appendix 8 - 7 07: How do you use areenways? Select all that aaaly. Answered: 531 Skipped: 11 Recreation A Exercise Races or other organized... Transportation to get from .... To walk pets 70 enjoythe outdoors To show visitors mor... Bird -watching Powered by Q7: How do you use greenways? Select all that apply. Answered: 531 Skipped: 11 Answer Choices Recreation Exercise Races or other organised athletic everts Transportation to get from one place to another To wa8 pets To enjoy the outdoors To Show visitors more of the Roanoke Valley Bird -watching Fish4y Other (please specify) Total Respondents: 531 Powered by Survey Monkey' Appendix 8 - 8 Responses 73.67",6 92.09"i, 26.93% 12.627 31.26% 84.374 32.58% 10.5x% 6.27% 3.85% 392 459 143 67 166 173 56 Q8: What additional improvements or amenities would you like to see on existing greenways, and where? Select all that apply. Answered: 453 Skipped: 89 Bathr aoms existing greenways, Water fountains murttnt statioo ns star Answer Choices Benches Picnic areas 60.93% or pavilions Water fournains Information kiosks Maps 5 Playgrounds Q8: What additional improvements or amenities would you like to see on existing greenways, and where? Select all that apply. Answered: 453 Skipped: 89 Answer Choices Responses Bathrooms 60.93% 276 Water fournains 49.01% 222 Mutt Mitt stations 23.62% 107 Benches 27.37% 124 Picnic areas or pavilions 21.41% 97 Information kiosks 14.13% 64 Maps 31.79% 144 Playgrounds 43.69% Exercise equpmerd 14.35% Artwork 22.52% 10: Total Respondents. 453 Powered by (r'f SurveyMonkey Appendix 8 - 9 Q9: Would you use a Greenways app on your smart phone or tablet to view maps, locations of amenities, closure notifications, event notices, and to report issues? Answered: 530 Skipped: 12 Yes l:s 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Powered by ^ SUrveyMonkey Q9: Would you use a Greenways app on your smart phone or tablet to view maps, locations of amenities, closure notifications, event notices, and to report issues? Answered: 530 Skipped: 12 Answer Choices Responses Yes 60.75% 428 No Total Powered by ^ Surveyl-ionkey` 19.25% 102 Appendix 8 - 10 Q10: How would you rate the maintenance (mowing, trash pickup, trail condition, etc.) of the greenways you use? Answered: 528 Skipped: 14 (no Itmel) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 - - ICS Powered by a i, Survey Monkey Q10: How would you rate the maintenance (mowing, trash pickup, trail condition, etc.) of the greenways you use? Answered: 528 Skipped: 14 Poor Fair Good Very Good Outstanding Total Weighted Average (no label) 1.33% 4.73% 30.01% 41.35% 15.12 153 i 250 83 5_f+ - Powered by ^ Survey Monkey' Appendix 8 - 11 Q13: The Roanoke River Greenway is currently the top priority for completion, between Green Hill Park and Explore Park. Which greenway should be constructed or completed next? Select one. Answered: 440 Skipped: 102 Tinker Creek Greenway Murrey Run Greenway Roanoke River Greenway... Other (please - specify) Lick Run . Greenway... Mason Creek Greenway Bark Creek , Greenway Daleville 5 Green—ly Q13: The Roanoke River Greenway is currently the top priority for completion, between Green Hill Park and Explore Park. Which greenway should be constructed or completed next? Select one. Answered: 440 Skipped: 102 Answer Choices Responses Tinker Creek Greenway 20.91% Murray Run Greenway 12.05% 53 Roanoke River Greenway extensions (from Green Hill Park to Montgomery County Line) 12.05% 53 Other (please specify) 11.76% 50 Lick Run Greenway extensions 5.68% 25 Masan Creek Greenway 5.46% 24 Back Creek Greenway 5.00% 22 Oaleville Greenway 5.00% 22 Muddck Greenway 4.77% 21 Read Mountain Preserve (trail connections) US% 20 Garden CtyMaarnand Branch Greenway 432% 1y Powered by 5 Glade Creek Greenway 2.55% 13 Appendix 8 - 12 Q16: Do greenways positively benefit the community? In what ways? (Check all that apply) Answered: 470 Skipped: 72 Encourage economic,,, Improve public health Improve water quality Encourage non -motorize.... Preserve natural... Provide recreational... Promote community air 0% 10°% _V. ?L7°% 40% 60% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Q16: Do greenways positively benefit the community? In what ways? (Check all that apply) Answered: 470 Skipped: 72 Answer Choices Responses Encourage economic development 67.66% 318 Improve public heath 92.13% 433 Improve water quality 25.53'% 120 Encourage non-moton--ecitransportaftri 74.04% 348 Preserve natural environment 70.641% 332 Provide recreational opportunities 93.62% 440 Promote tommurfty and social interaction 50.43% 378 Total Respondents: 476 Powered by SurveyMonkey Appendix 8 - 13 Q17: How important are greenways to the quality of life in the Roanoke Vallev? Please rate importance below. Answered: 477 Skipped: 65 (no Wei) g 1 - .3 .l - - I., Powered by ^ Survey Monkey Q17: How important are greenways to the quality of life in the Roanoke Valley? Please rate importance below. Answered: 477 Skipped: 65 (RO label) Powered by ^ Survey Monkey not Somewhat Important Extremely Total Weighted important Important Important Average 0.42% 7.14°a 21.59% 74.84%. Appendix 8 - 14 Q18: Which localitv do you live in? Answered: 481 Skipped: 61 Boteto Couovestyn y Roanoke County We Town of Vinton City of Roanoke City of Salem . Ott— (please specify) Powered by e?- 5 11% 10% 20% 30% 40% =naa . )% 7n €30% 50% 100% Q18: Which locality do you live in? Answered: 481 Skipped: 61 Answer Choices Responses Botetoul County 7.69% 37 Roanoke County 30.15% 145 Town of Vinton 0.67% 22 City of Roanoke 46.15% 222 Cky of Salem 6.441/. 31 Other (please specify) 4.99% 24 Total 491 Powered by 4~A SurVeyMonkey Appendix 8 - 15 Q19: What is your sex? Answered: 480 Skipped: 62 Female M Male Prefer net to � answer 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Powered by ^ Survey Monkey Q19: What is your sex? Answered: 480 Skipped: 62 Answer Chotces Responses Female 49.36% 237 Pilate 47.06% 226 Prefer not to answer 3.54% 17 Total 40 Powered by ^ Survey Monkey Appendix 8 - 16 Q20: What is your race/ethnicity? Choose all that apply. Answered: 479 Skipped: 63 Mite Black or African... American Indian ar... Asian Ilative Hawaiian or... Prefer riot to answer Powered by S 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% -= 0 71 80% 90% 100% Q20: What is your race/ethnicity? Choose all that apply. Answered: 479 Skipped: 63 Answer Choices PAsponses While 90.40% 433 Black or African American 0.63% 3 American Indian or Alaskan Native 0.63% 3 Asian 9.67% B Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific islander 0.00% Prefer not to answer 6.35% 47 Total Respondents: 479 Powered by GSA Survey Monkey Appendix 8 - 17 Q21: What is vour aae ranae? Answered: 481 Skipped: 61 Under 16 16 34 35-59 60-74 Answered: 481 Skipped: 61 76 and over Prefer not to answer Powered by ^ S 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 80% 50% 100% Q21: What is your age range? Answered: 481 Skipped: 61 Answer Choices Responses Under 18 0.21% 1 18-34 21.41% 103 35.59 611.77% 249 80-74 22.45% 108 75 and over 0.62% 3 Prefer not to answer 3.63% 17 Total 41H Powered by Q*A Survey Monkey - Appendix 8 - 18 Q22: What is your household income range? Answered: 475 Skipped: 67 Answered: 475 Skipped: 67 Less1han $15.000 per.., Responses $15,000 t Less than $15,00D per year $Y4.999 per..... 4 $Yi.000 to 3.16% $46,999 per... $25,000 to $49,999 per year $50,000 to 61 $74.999 per... 16.42% $75,OOD to $75.000 to $99.999 per year $99,999 per... 78 $100.000 to 21,05% $149,999 per... Over $150,000 per year Over $150,000 59 r year pyr per 16,84% Prefer not to Tota Powered by 5 answer 175 Q22: What is your household income range? Answered: 475 Skipped: 67 Answer Chotces Responses Less than $15,00D per year 0.84% 4 $15.000 to $24,999 per year 3.16% 15 $25,000 to $49,999 per year 12.84% 61 $50,000 to $74,999 per year 16.42% 76 $75.000 to $99.999 per year 16.42% 78 $100,000 to $149,999 per year 21,05% 1 DO Over $150,000 per year 12.42% 59 Prefer not to answer 16,84% 80 Tota 175 Powered by Survey Monkey Appendix 8 - 19 Q23: Would you be interested in volunteering to help support greenways in any of the following ways? Answered: 221 Skipped: 321 Pathfinders for Greenway... Greenway Ambassadors... Special Events (e.g. Gallop... Fundraising ■ Other (please specify) G% 10% Powered by ^ Survey Monkey 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 60% 90% 100% Q23: Would you be interested in volunteering to help support greenways in any of the following ways? Answered: 221 Skipped: 321 Answer Choices Pathfinders for Greenways (trail building and maintenance) Greenway Ambassadors (greenway monitoring and education) Special Events (e.g. Gallop 4 the Greenways) Fundraising Other (please specify) Total Respondents: 22'11 Powered by ^ Survey Monkey Appendix 8 - 20 Responses 4M9% 97 29.51% 65 48.87% 108 8.60% 19 15.84% 3S Q24: Would you like to stay informed about greenway news, events and/or volunteer opportunities? Answered: 358 Skipped: 184 llo Yes, please M co�dad meat: 096 i0°b .0°6 32".a 50% '046 60% 70°,6 80% 90% 100% SurveyMonkey Q24: Would you like to stay informed about greenway news, events and/or volunteer opportunities? Answered: 358 Skipped: 184 Answer Choices Responses No JJ.9V% Yes, please cordact we at 55.07% Total l5a Powered by ^ SurveyMonkey` Appendix 8 - 21 Page Intentionally Left Blank Appendix C Public Input from 2017 Community Meetings Appendix C - 1 Flip Chart Notes from 2017 Community Meetings Station 1 Question #1 What is your vision for the regional greenway network? Station 1 Question #2 What are the major connections needed within the Roanoke Valley? Station 1 Question #3 What do you consider to be the top priorities for completion? Station 2 Question #1 What are the destinations you would like to access via greenway from your neighborhood? Station 3 Question #1 For Tinker Creek Greenway, what alignment would you support, what benefits do you see? Station 4 Question #1 What solutions do you propose for management issues? GFC = Greenfield Flip Chart; MFC = Mountain View Flip Chart; FFC = Fishburn Flip Chart; SFC = South County Flip chart; GLFC = Glenvar Flip Chart; VFC = Vinton Flip Chart Comment Source Station # - Question # Recorded Response Date GFC 1-1 Long continuous path for road biking 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 Integrate Bike Route 76 with greenways 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 Continued growth - increase activity to public lands 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 Invest in nature routes, not through subdivisions 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 More interest with continued progress being shown 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 Build greenways within building restricted areas and buffers 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 Lighting that is compatible to use 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 Capability to 'overnight" and continue the next day on the greenway 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 Separation of activities and add capacity in high usage areas 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 Wider bicycle lanes 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 Completion of Roanoke River Greenways to Explore Park 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 More Greenways 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 Use what is already existing 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 Happy Valley and Carvins Cove trails also including carriage roads 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 Connectivity to Appalachian Trail and small towns 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 Connectivity wherever possible 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 Stay on natural trails and out of subdivisions 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 More opportunities for families, i.e. strollers 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 Connectivity for business, commuting, and recreation - Pub Runs 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 Commuting and connectivity to business 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 Connectivity of all greenways without being on highway or limited highway area 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 Finish Roanoke River Greenway 3/21/17 GFC Consider greenways for more than recreation - tourism, transportation, play grounds 1-1 along the way, restaurants 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 Tie urban and rural greenway areas together 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 Building connections, community through greenways, emotional connectivity 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 Businesses as destinations on the greenway 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 Connectivity from Salem to Botetourt County 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 Would like Town of Buchanan tied into system 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 Promote and use Bike Route 76 - even for hiking 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 Complete Roanoke River Greenway first 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 Connect Carvins Cove to Daleville around Tinker Mountain 3/21/17 GFC Connectivity is essential for continued improvement of quality of life and viability of 1-1 communities 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 Greenways building economic development 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 Williamson Road to Planation Road to Carvins Cove to Daleville to Greenfield 3/21/17 GFC 1-1 Connection to Flying Mouse 3/21/17 Appendix C - 2 Flip Chart Notes from 2017 Community Meetings Comment Source Station # - Question # Recorded Response Date GFC 1-1 Need main route in Botetourt and then build out from there 3/21/17 GFC 1-2 Lexington 3/21/17 GFC 1-2 Buchanan 3/21/17 GFC 1-2 Natural Bridge 3/21/17 GFC 1-2 Fincastle 3/21/17 GFC 1-2 Blacksburg 3/21/17 GFC 1-2 Franklin County - Rocky Mount/Harvester; Wade Park 3/21/17 GFC 1-2 Smith Mountain Lake 3/21/17 GFC 1-2 Bedford - Montvale Park, Falling Springs, Peaks of Otter 3/21/17 GFC 1-2 Access to Blue Ridge Parkway 3/21/17 GFC 1-2 Town of Buchanan 3/21/17 GFC 1-2 Roaring Run - north of Eagle Rock 3/21/17 GFC 1-2 Daleville Town Center and Greenfield Sports Complex 3/21/17 GFC 1-2 Clifton Forge and Bath County 3/21/17 GFC 1-2 Cowpasture River 3/21/17 GFC 1-2 Northwest corner of Botetourt County - Near Forest Service property 3/21/17 GFC 1-2 Craigs Creek to New Castle - Old Rail Bed 3/21/17 GFC 2-1 Buchanan Town Park 3/21/17 GFC 2-1 Limestone Park 3/21/17 GFC 2-1 Elementary School 3/21/17 GFC 2-1 Arcadia Jennings Creek 3/21/17 GFC 2-1 RR Fincastle to Buchanan? - Mary Z 3/21/17 GFC 2-1 Purgatory Mountain Rail Bed? 3/21/17 GFC 2-1 Gorge Road - trail? 3/21/17 GFC 2-1 Roaring Run spur from Craigs Creek Trail 3/21/17 GFC 2-1 DTC, Flying Mouse, Greenfield 3/21/17 GFC 2-1 Connect "little" towns 3/21/17 GFC 2-1 AT in Buchanan 3/21/17 GFC 2-1 Arcadia - Wilson Mountain 3/21/17 GFC 2-1 Camp Bethel - National Forest 3/21/17 GFC 2-1 Disc Golf Course 3/21/17 GFC 2-1 New Communities/Apartment Complexes 3/21/17 GFC 2-1 Not on my street 3/21/17 GFC 2-1 Tinker Creek to Etzler Road 3/21/17 GFC 2-1 ER - Patterson Creek 3/21/17 GFC 2-1 Carvins Cove 3/21/17 GFC 2-1 Troutville Town Park -AT 3/21/17 GFC 2-1 Old river beds/Flood plain 3/21/17 GFC 2-1 Parallel to BR Parkway 3/21/17 GFC 2-1 Reopening trails in Greenfield 3/21/17 GFC 2-1 How would we cross Glebe Road? 3/21/17 GFC 2-1 Read Mountain Trails 3/21/17 GFC 2-1 Kroger area shopping center 3/21/17 GFC 3-1 Consider using sewer line easement and railroad land 3/21/17 GFC 3-1 Natural connection between Roanoke County and Botetourt County 3/21/17 GFC 3-1 Commuting 3/21/17 GFC 3-1 Exit 150/UDA: greenway beneficial to improvements 3/21/17 GFC 3-1 Connect greenway and blueways 1 3/21/17 Appendix C - 3 Flip Chart Notes from 2017 Community Meetings Comment Source Station # - Question # Recorded Response Date GFC 3-1 Economic development: connect Carvins Cove and Hollins and Daleville 3/21/17 GFC 3-1 Concerns with parking lots not being patrolled (checking for parking fees at Carvins Cove) 3/21/17 GFC 3-1 Greenway parking lots are "free" 3/21/17 GFC 3-1 User confusion 3/21/17 GFC 3-1 Policy? Revenue source 3/21/17 GFC 3-1 Phased approach - connect to Carvins Cove first (south Botetourt County) 3/21/17 GFC 3-1 North Botetourt County - circular trails (looped) desired 3/21/17 GFC 3-1 Recreation (primary desire) 3/21/17 GFC 3-1 Avoid extreme grades on greenways 3/21/17 GFC 3-1 Why aren't trails in Greenfield paved? Surface not conducive for strollers. Improve those trails first to create a destination. 3/21/17 GFC 3-1 Avoid greenways in subdivisions (Fairview) 3/21/17 GFC 3-1 Privacy concerns 3/21/17 GFC 3-1 Safety concerns on Glebe Road, Country Club Road, and Orchard Lake 3/21/17 GFC 3-1 Assess cost -benefit 3/21/17 GFC 3-1 Socialize and being outside 3/21/17 GFC 3-1 Commuter routes/connectivity 3/21/17 GFC 3-1 Hiking options in region are plenty, no need for greenways in subdivisions 3/21/17 GFC 3-1 Market existing resources 3/21/17 GFC 3-1 Study of residents' desire to commute between Roanoke and Botetourt or use the greenway for recreational use 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 User Conflicts -Speed of bikes versus walking 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 User Conflicts -Walkers have headphones and can't hear callouts 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 User Conflicts -Dogs in way - leash 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 User Conflicts -Volume and congestion 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 User Conflicts -Awareness of others 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Issues -People blocking greenway 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Issues -People on wrong side 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Issues- Bikes, speed 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Issues -Packs of runners 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Issues- Strollers 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Solutions -Center line 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Solutions -Bike vs Ped Lane 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Solutions- Separation 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Issues- Bikes 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Issues -Dog walkers 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Issues -Mother Nature --Get cleaned up before opening 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Issues- Width 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Issues- Pack runners 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Issues-Homeless/aggressive panhandling 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Solutions -Enforcement 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Solutions -Education 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Solutions -Broken window -visibility 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Volunteers 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Issues -Speed 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Issues -Where users are on trail 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Issues Dog Leashes 3/21/17 Appendix C - 4 Flip Chart Notes from 2017 Community Meetings Comment Source Station # - Question # Recorded Response Date GFC 4-1 Issues -Children -motorized toy vehicles 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Issues -Congestion 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Issues -not a ton of problems 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Solutions -Go to different places to do different activities 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Solutions -Aware of congestion 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Solutions -More width 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Solutions -More trails 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Solutions -spread out users 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Solutions -Speed limit 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Pets -poop 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Pets -leashes 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Pets -getting off trail 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Pets -what about wildlife? 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Pets -running into bears? 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Pets -be aware of wildlife 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Pets -off leash pets 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Pets -Droppings 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Pets -Cleanup 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Pets -education 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Pets -trash cans 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Vandalism -Stealing signs 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Vandalism Issues -Broken fences 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Vandalism Issues -Homeless? 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Vandalism Issues -Signage 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Vandalism Solutions -Make stuff vandal proof 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Vandalism Solutions -Police and volunteers 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Vandalism -Theft of plants/items 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Vandalism- Get more users on trail 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Issues -Leashes -length 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Issues -Picking up after pet 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Solutions -Awareness 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Solutions-Enforcement/Law & Volunteer 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Signage -Situational 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Signage -Mileage 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Signage -Phone app to tell you where you are on the trail 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Signage -Reminders in congested areas 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Signage -need more signs/interpreter signs 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Signage -not for safety or protection 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Signage -have good maps already 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Signage -limit in neighborhoods 3/21/17 GFC 4-1 Signage -bathrooms 3/21/17 MFC 1-1 Be aware of personal privacy and safety 3/27/17 MFC 1-1 Protect the floodway and nature 3/27/17 MFC 1-1 Expand commercial development alone Plantation Road - coffee shops etc 3/27/17 MFC 1-1 Be aware of hills and problems of getting in and out of greenway (access) 3/27/17 MFC 1-1 Enhance Carvins Cove 3/27/17 MFC 1-1 Clearly marked trails - especially the natural trails 3/27/17 MFC 1-1 Get to and through Explore Park 1 3/27/17 Appendix C - 5 Flip Chart Notes from 2017 Community Meetings Comment Source Station # - Question # Recorded Response Date MFC 1-1 Connect downtown Roanoke to Vinton 3/27/17 MFC 1-1 Anticipating access to cover the number of users 3/27/17 MFC 1-1 Branches off main greenway to serve specific areas 3/27/17 MFC 1-1 Roanoke River Greenway needs to be completed 3/27/17 MFC 1-1 Connect neighborhoods, regions, and the Commonwealth 3/27/17 MFC 1-1 Connect to Craig Valley Scenic Trail 3/27/17 MFC Connect Roanoke River Greenway to Huckleberry Trail to New River Trail then 1-1 Beaches to Bluegrass 3/27/17 MFC 1-1 Connect schools, parks, village centers 3/27/17 MFC 1-1 Keep neighborhoods free of greenways 3/27/17 MFC 1-1 Want Roanoke River and Tinker Creek to be completed and connected 3/27/17 MFC 1-1 Connect, connect, connect. Build whole plan 3/27/17 MFC 1-1 Greenways through neighborhoods 3/27/17 MFC 1-1 Be aware of personal privacy and property 3/27/17 MFC 1-1 Connect Breweries 3/27/17 MFC 1-1 West along Roanoke River to Montgomery County 3/27/17 MFC 1-1 Complete Plantation Road region to downtown 3/27/17 MFC 1-2 Could be gaps -don't have to connect 3/27/17 MFC 1-2 Connections for Hollins University and Roanoke College 3/27/17 MFC 1-2 Hollins University to Blue Ridge Parkway 3/27/17 MFC 1-2 Hollins Road to Shadwell -Deschutes 3/27/17 MFC 1-2 Daleville 3/27/17 MFC 1-2 Hollins University 3/27/17 MFC 1-2 Carvins Cove 3/27/17 MFC 1-2 Poor Mountain and Read Mountain Reserve 3/27/17 MFC 1-2 Connect to Daleville 3/27/17 MFC 1-2 North County to Salem 3/27/17 MFC 1-2 More connection to Carvins Cove 3/27/17 MFC 1-2 More connections to Read Mountain Preserve 3/27/17 MFC 2-1 Connection to Carvins Cove 3/27/17 MFC 2-1 Connections to DTC/Greenfield 3/27/17 MFC 2-1 Eagle Rock 3/27/17 MFC 2-1 Troutville to BRP 3/27/17 MFC 2-1 Buchanan to BRP 3/27/17 MFC 3-1 Connectivity to the AT, Carvins Cove, to Roanoke River Greenway (Hollins Community) 3/27/17 MFC 3-1 BotetourtCounty— CraigRiverScenicTrailconnectivity 3/27/17 MFC 3-1 Concerns with privacy and seclusion (safety), trash, trespassing, enforcement 3/27/17 MFC 3-1 Consideration for off -creek routes 3/27/17 MFC 3-1 Topography issues 3/27/17 MFC 3-1 Hollins University connection to Downtown Roanoke 3/27/17 MFC 3-1 Design needs to be open, visible, secure and monitored 3/27/17 MFC 3-1 VDOT coordination on Plantation Road 3/27/17 MFC 3-1 Connection to Deschutes 3/27/17 MFC 3-1 Concerns with residential properties and topography 3/27/17 MFC 3-1 Connection through Hollins University 3/27/17 MFC 3-1 No public park in backyard 3/27/17 MFC 3-1 Elizabeth Arden (railroad line opportunity) 1 3/27/17 Appendix C - 6 Flip Chart Notes from 2017 Community Meetings Comment Source Station # - Question # Recorded Response Date MFC 3-1 Don't feel comfortable walking in people's backyards 3/27/17 MFC 3-1 Take advantage of mountain views 3/27/17 MFC 3-1 Gaps in system are okay 3/27/17 MFC 3-1 Concerns with school safety and public greenway 3/27/17 MFC 3-1 Concerns with horses 3/27/17 MFC 3-1 Preservation of historic structures along Tinker Creek 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 User Conflicts -Legal liability 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 User Conflicts -Promote courtesy -How to use/Pamphlets 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 User Conflicts- Safety tips 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 User Conflicts- Skateboards, rollerblades 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 User Conflicts- Does experience lead to less incidents? 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 User Conflicts- Concern with bike speed 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 User Conflicts -Distracted users 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 User Conflicts- Speed limit signs 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 User Conflicts -Improve width 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 User Conflicts -Time limits for bikes 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 User Conflicts- Enforcement/Policing 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 User Conflicts -Encourage bikers to use other trails/greenways 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 User Conflicts- Weekend challenges 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 User Conflicts -Dividing line 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 User Conflicts -Have bikers announce w bells or calling out 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 UserConflicts-Signs — simple signs 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 User Conflicts -Pavement arrows 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 User Conflicts -Bike lanes on greenway 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 User Conflicts- Conflict between walkers and cyclists 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 User Conflicts -Distracted walkers 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 User Conflicts- Yellow line dividing traffic -effective 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 User Conflicts -Discourage fast riders 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 User Conflicts- Greenways for all users 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 User Conflicts- Protect vulnerable users 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 User Conflicts- Fast cyclists use roads 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 User Conflicts -Longer Greenways will create fast riders 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 User Conflicts- Advanced notice for events/races 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Vandalism -Police Presence? 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Vandalism- Prevalent at night 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Vandalism- More trashcans 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Vandalism- Campsites in warmer weather 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Vandalism- Lighting 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Vandalism- Greenway Ambassadors 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Vandalism -Protect private property 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Vandalism- Who polices? 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Vandalism- Wooded sections 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Vandalism- Irresponsible people 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Vandalism- "Leave no trace" 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Vandalism -Landscaping deters 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Vandalism- Inevitable 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Vandalism- Correlation with neighborhoods 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Vandalism- Mile Markers vandalized 1 3/27/17 Appendix C - 7 Flip Chart Notes from 2017 Community Meetings Comment Source Station # - Question # Recorded Response Date MFC 4-1 Vandalism- More people less vandalism 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Vandalism- Littering — also an issue 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Vandalism- Historical artifacts 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Vandalism- Keep users away from 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Vandalism -More trash cans 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Vandalism -Solar lights 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Vandalism- Litter 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Vandalism- "Adopt a Greenway" 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Pets -Leash 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Pets- Clean up waste 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Pets -control vicious animals 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Pets -Generally under control 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Pets -Subject to same rules for parks 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Pets- Dog Park near Greenway 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Pets- Issues with long leashes 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Pets -Leashes should be required 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Pets- Pet waste not picked up 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Pets- More pet stations 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Pets- Monitoring 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Pets- Wastebag dispensers 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Pets-Horses/dogs use grass 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Pets- Homeowners' pets affected by users' pets 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Wayfinding/Signage-Parking signs needed 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Wayfinding/Signage-Adequate parking 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Wayfinding/Signage- Mile markers helpful 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Wayfinding/Signage- Pavement markers 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Wayfinding/Signage- Greenway ends at 13th St 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Wayfinding/Signage-Need sign to Tinker Creek 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Wayfinding/Signage-Signs identifying private land 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Wayfinding/Signage-Posting notices for events 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Wayfinding/Signage- Too many signs create confusion 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Wayfinding/Signage-Sign for Carvins Cove trail off of Plantation Rd. and trail markers 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Wayfinding/Signage-Pavement arrows at same place indicating direction 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Wayfinding/Signage-Online map helpful 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Wayfinding/Signage- Vinton trail hard to find 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Wayfinding/Signage-Trouble finding blueway access particularly Roanoke River 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Wayfinding/Signage-Guides/Tours 3/27/17 MFC 4-1 Wayfinding/Signage- Hard to find Read Mountain Preserve -Access at different locations 3/27/17 FFC 1-1 Cave Spring to Roanoke River Greenway 3/30/17 FFC 1-1 Tinker Creek — connect at 81 3/30/17 FFC 1-1 Fishburn to Roanoke River Greenway 3/30/17 FFC 1-1 Roanoke River Greenway to Montgomery County, VT 3/30/17 FFC 1-1 Explore Park to Westlake 3/30/17 FFC 1-1 1 More signage 1 3/30/17 Appendix C - 8 Flip Chart Notes from 2017 Community Meetings Comment Source Station # - Question # Recorded Response Date FFC 1-1 Roanoke River Greenway to Smith Mountain Lake — Ferrum, Hollins, Craig Valley, James River Trail, Parkway, Huckleberry, New River Trail, Bluegrass in SW Tobacco Trail 3/30/17 FFC 1-1 Widen Parkway 3/30/17 FFC 1-1 Connect to neighborhoods/signage 3/30/17 FFC 1-1 More sidewalk connectivity/city and counties. Better coordination. 3/30/17 FFC 1-1 Colonial Ave safety/pedestrian connectivity 3/30/17 FFC 1-1 Connecting business areas 3/30/17 FFC 1-1 Attract businesses & services, signage directing to businesses 3/30/17 FFC 1-1 Tie in Tanglewood changes 3/30/17 FFC 1-1 Co -locating with Rail 3/30/17 FFC 1-1 Bike Share/Carilion to population, business 3/30/17 FFC 1-1 Divided/Share use 3/30/17 FFC 1-1 Connect with buses 3/30/17 FFC 1-1 Roanoke River Greenway to Huckleberry 3/30/17 FFC 1-1 Mill Mountain Campground 3/30/17 FFC 1-1 Camping? 3/30/17 FFC 1-1 Bike camping at Explore 3/30/17 FFC 1-1 More Blueway access 3/30/17 FFC 1-1 Tanglewood connect/big parking lot 3/30/17 FFC 1-1 Countryside — connect with Peters Creek 3/30/17 FFC 1-1 Any connections 3/30/17 FFC 1-1 419 3/30/17 FFC 1-1 Yellow Mountain trails to Mill Mountain & Star 3/30/17 FFC 1-1 Better at connections 3/30/17 FFC 1-1 McAfee to Hanging Rock 3/30/17 FFC 1-1 Parallel 460E connect to Botetourt 3/30/17 FFC 2-1 Greenway on Shenandoah Life Property (scribe's note: one red star and six blue dots were placed next to this comment) 3/30/17 FFC 2-1 Good South Roanoke greenway connection 3/30/17 FFC 2-1 Bridge at Dr. Pepper Park to Roanoke River Greenway 3/30/17 FFC 2-1 Handicap accessible 3/30/17 FFC 2-1 Connect north/south to NW/NE 3/30/17 FFC 2-1 Tinker Creek connection to Roanoke River—Avoid steep hill 3/30/17 FFC 2-1 Bike lane Route 24 @ Vinton to Wolf Creek & Parkway 3/30/17 FFC 2-1 Connect with 419 Plan/Apperson/Melrose/(scribe's note: one blue dot was placed on Melrose, and the following additional connections were listed in pen along the side of the paper) Peters Creek, 220, Parkway, Williamson, Jefferson, Garden City, Route 24, Virginia Ave, Gus Nicks, Route 460, Hollins, Plantation 3/30/17 FFC 2-1 Murray Run cross walk at Brambleton 3/30/17 FFC 2-1 Tie to Valley View Hotels 3/30/17 FFC 3-1 Separation or safety measures between on -road greenway and Plantation Road 3/30/17 FFC 3-1 Utilize right -of -corridors with railroad to get to Botetourt 3/30/17 FFC 3-1 13th St to East Gate Park — Mountain bike 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Need a center line paved trails (two check marks beside this note) 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Like the rhymes — nice reminders (one check mark) 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Improved connections b/w bike lanes & greenways — color 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Garbage cans @ P.L. & in between 3/30/17 Appendix C - 9 Flip Chart Notes from 2017 Community Meetings Comment Source Station # - Question # Recorded Response Date FFC 4-1 Trash can near parking lot pulloff near Monument on Mill 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Better signage on dog poop dispensers 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Kudzu & invasives — pygmy goats? 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Better ADA accessibility — alternate b/w Golden, Tinker, WTP in Roanoke —grading (one check mark) 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Fire & EMS collaboration on greenway locations 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Text # for issues/email/social media (two check marks) 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Simple more frequent signage for most important things 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Earbuds? Yes or no 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Shenandoah Life land priority 2 w/ Murray Run Greenway 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 More obvious littering violation signs 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Proposed single use days — bike night vs run night 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Mapped locations of bathrooms 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Bathrooms open year round or earlier in search (Possibly meant to be season?) 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Additional bathrooms needed in Salem b/w Rotary and WTP in Salem 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Rotary Park — curb to Hampton Inn near hospital —sidewalk extension 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Trash can on greenway in Smith Park near river 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 App 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Twitter 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 QR codes that link to website appropriate 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Bike fix stations/First aid stations (check mark) 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Public art/functional art 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Creative night time light/Blue lights 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Widen greenway in high traffic areas (check mark) 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 No center line 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 More light under Roanoke River trestles 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Better enforcement of 6' leashes 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Recharging stations for motorized wheel chairs 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Ebikes —concern about motorized use 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Market more for commuters & families 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Separate bike lanes thru Wasena, Smith, Rivers Edge 2' wide each direction (check mark) 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Security — Memorial to Bridge St. — Lick Run — Washington Park to Valley View 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Rename star trail parking lot to Riverland Road trailhead 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Hartsook Trailhead 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 "Roanoke Valley Horse Trail" — multiuse for all 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Naming trails for EMS response accuracy 3/30/17 FFC 4-1 Pave Wolf Creek Greenway 3/30/17 SFC 1-1 Regional Vision Priorities -Continue Roanoke River Greenway 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Regional Vision Priorities -Connect to more trails (Carvins Cove, Garst Mill, etc) and advertise trails 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Regional Vision Priorities -Solutions for McAfee's Knob 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Regional Vision Priorities -Balancing the rights of property owners with greenway needs 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Regional Vision Priorities -Access to greenways in places lacking public transportation and connecting to existing systems 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Regional Vision Priorities -Greenway along LaMarre Drive 4/3/17 Appendix C - 10 Flip Chart Notes from 2017 Community Meetings Comment Source Station # - Question # Recorded Response Date SFC Regional Vision Priorities- Central transportation hub in Roanoke Valley for SW Virginia 1-1 based on greenway system 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Regional Vision Priorities- Connections to businesses/neighborhoods/restaurants 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Regional Vision Priorities -Don't have to drive to greenways 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Regional Vision Priorities -Connect to Commonwealth, including VA Beach 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Regional Vision Priorities -Complete existing vision/greenway plan 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Regional Vision Priorities- Complete Roanoke River Greenway 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Regional Vision Priorities- Connect park greenways to the larger network 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Destinations -Smith Mountain Lake 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Destinations-Garst Mill to Murray Run 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Destinations -Blue Ridge Parkway 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Destinations- Explore Park 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Destinations -Craig Valley Scenic Trail 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Destinations- Hollins and Roanoke College 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Destinations-Carvins Cove 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Destinations -South Roanoke connector to the Roanoke River Greenway 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Regional Vision Priorities- Greenways everywhere 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Regional Vision Priorities- Connect to other towns, 50 miles 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Regional Vision Priorities- Link to Franklin, Craig, & Montgomery Counties 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Regional Vision Priorities- Link to Virginia Tech 4/3/17 SFC Regional Vision Priorities- Connect greenways to transportation network, no car 1-1 needed 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Regional Vision Priorities- Add protected bike lanes 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Regional Vision Priorities- On street parking as bike protection 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Regional Vision Priorities- Raised bike lanes (prevent debris) 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Regional Vision Priorities- Smith Mountain Lake parks, beaches connection 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Regional Vision Priorities- Rails to Trails opportunities 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Regional Vision Priorities- Brewery connections 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Regional Vision Priorities- Wayfinding signage, especially downtown 4/3/17 SFC 1-1 Regional Vision Priorities- Advertise to tourists, brochures at hotels 4/3/17 SFC 2-1 Connection from Starkey to Roanoke River Greenway 4/3/17 SFC 2-1 Connect S. County to greenway network 4/3/17 SFC 2-1 Mudlick Creek Greenway -Priority 4/3/17 SFC 2-1 Restrooms at Rotary Park 4/3/17 SFC 2-1 Charging stations for motorized wheelchairs 4/3/17 SFC 2-1 Sidewalk LaMarre (North Co.) or greenway 4/3/17 SFC 2-1 Connection to Reservoir from Plantation Rd 4/3/17 SFC 2-1 Expand Carvins Cove Trails on Williamson Rd. side 4/3/17 SFC 2-1 Transit access to Hollins area 4/3/17 SFC 2-1 Greenway connection to Tanglewood Mall (x2) 4/3/17 SFC Connections to Morningside in Southeast -Morningside Park and connect to Jackson 2-1 Park 4/3/17 SFC 2-1 Connect Schools -Reduce Obesity and bike to school 4/3/17 SFC 2-1 Mixed purposes- Recreation & commuting 4/3/17 SFC 2-1 Show bikeway on maps 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Pets -Retractable leashes 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Pets- Pet waste (health issues & environmental) 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Pets- People are the problem (not pets) 1 4/3/17 Appendix C - 11 Flip Chart Notes from 2017 Community Meetings Comment Source Station # - Question # Recorded Response Date SFC 4-1 Pets -Positive reinforcement 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Wayfinding Signs - Addresses (add zip code) 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Wayfinding Signs -Parking directions 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Wayfinding Signs -More milemarkers for emergencies 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Wayfinding Signs -Smartphone app needed for trails and greenways (relate to parking app) 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Wayfinding Signs - River dredging — keeping track of when greenway is closed (notice when greenway is closed) for flooding 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Wayfinding Signs - Underhill Avenue connection (onroad connection) -Sharp turn warning sign 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Wayfinding Signs - Different colors in each jurisdiction 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Wayfinding Signs - Consistent signage 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Wayfinding Signs -Simple messages on signs (less words on rules signs) 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Vandalism -Milepost signs 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Vandalism- Encourage Ambassador Program (volunteers are eyes and ears for greenway) 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Vandalism -More police presence (target areas) 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Speed/Misc-Fast bikes, no warning (bad etiquette) 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Speed/Misc-Road bikers "Tour de France" 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Speed/Misc-Too slow "Clydesdales" 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Speed/Misc- Marketing (peer pressure) to help educate users 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Speed/Misc- Promote shared use -Share, make noise, pass on the left 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Speed/Misc-Add centerline (dashed white) 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Speed/Misc-Yield 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Speed/Misc- More signage 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Speed/Misc- Generational differences (ages) 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Speed/Misc-Winter bathrooms (needed) 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Speed/Misc-Drones — new issue 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Speed/Misc- E -bikes (motor) — new issue 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Speed/Misc- Charging stations needed for wheelchairs 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Speed/Misc-EMS — ATV ambulance (Richmond,DC—examples) 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Speed/Misc-Widen greenway (two lanes) in congested areas; separate bike and pedestrian lanes (passing lanes) 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Speed/Misc- Weekend volunteer patrol 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Speed/Misc-Pedestrians facing oncoming traffic on roads, but not greenways 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Speed/Misc- Preventative maintenance (root pruning) 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Speed/Misc- Ambassadors hand out use/etiquette handouts to users (informational) violating rules 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Speed/Misc- Rules signs (multiple languages) -consistency across jurisdictions 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Speed/Misc-Encourage more pedestrian use in parks, as opposed to greenways (more marketing less known/visited trails) 4/3/17 SFC 4-1 Speed/Misc-Right-of-way negotiation packet (help with positive attribute of greenways) 4/3/17 GLFC 1-1 Overall Vision -Continuous, connected to popular destinations 4/6/17 GLFC 1-1 Overall Vision -Like AT — can stop & stay, destinations, things to do 4/6/17 GLFC 1-1 Overall Vision -Parks & schools & other trails 4/6/17 GLFC 1-1 Overall Vision -Emergency boxes — phone service, rural areas 4/6/17 GLFC 1-1 Overall Vision- Connect to AT, Carvins Cove 1 4/6/17 Appendix C - 12 Flip Chart Notes from 2017 Community Meetings Comment Source Station # - Question # Recorded Response Date GLFC 1-1 Overall Vision -Park & Ride connections for commuting 4/6/17 GLFC 1-1 Overall Vision -Falling Creek Reservoir 4/6/17 GLFC 1-1 Major Connections -Falling Creek 4/6/17 GLFC 1-1 Major Connections- Blacksburg 4/6/17 GLFC 1-1 Major Connections- Greenfield 4/6/17 GLFC 1-1 Major Connections- National Forest 4/6/17 GLFC 1-1 Major Connections- New Castle 4/6/17 GLFC 1-1 Major Connections- SML 4/6/17 GLFC 1-1 Major Connections- Lynchburg 4/6/17 GLFC 1-1 Overall Vision -Going well, hope it continue to grow 4/6/17 GLFC 1-1 Overall Vision-Blueway is great 4/6/17 GLFC 1-1 Overall Vision- Lots of room to grow — Botetourt 4/6/17 GLFC 1-1 Overall Vision- More put -in points on blueway 4/6/17 GLFC 1-1 Overall Vision -Greenway so much more than downtown, more than people realize 4/6/17 GLFC 1-1 Overall Vision -Corridor along Parkway 4/6/17 GLFC 1-1 Overall Vision- Incredible over last 5 years 4/6/17 GLFC 2-1 Glenvar— Neighborhood Vision -Connect Hanging Rock Greenway into Hanging Rock Golf Course area 4/6/17 GLFC 2-1 Glenvar— Neighborhood Vision -Connect Hanging Rock Greenway & Carvins Cove, then to Tinker, Roanoke River Greenway 4/6/17 GLFC 2-1 Glenvar— Neighborhood Vision -Coordination with Real Estate Department on delinquent tax parcels 4/6/17 GLFC 2-1 Glenvar— Neighborhood Vision -Connect greenways to blueways when possible 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Speed Conflicts -Individual responsibility to be aware of other users 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Speed Conflicts -Mindfully sharing the road/trail 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Speed Conflicts- Communicate how to share the greenway with the public, correct etiquette 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Speed Conflicts -Bike and pedestrians — not aware of one another, bikes overtaking peds. 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Speed Conflicts -Not sharing the road/trail 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Speed Conflicts -Not being mindful of others on greenway 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Speed Conflicts -Leashes extended across greenway, conflict with bikes 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Speed Conflicts -Safety of dogs & bikes, dogs excited by passing bikes 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Speed Conflicts -Bikes saying "passing" but startling walkers, or bicyclists not calling out 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Speed Conflicts -Not determining which side is for each user, which side for each direction 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Speed Conflicts- Need centerlines, as in other places 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Speed Conflicts- Earbuds 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Speed Conflicts- Higher bike speeds allowed at times/for special events 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Speed Conflicts -Speed limits for congested areas 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Speed Conflicts- Designate "bike only"/"ped only" times (not during peak hours) 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Pet conflicts -Extendable leashes 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Pet conflicts -Multiple leashed dogs 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Pet conflicts- Off -leash dogs 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Pet conflicts- Pet waste on greenways 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Pet conflicts- Recycled Kroger/grocery bag stations for waste 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Pet conflicts- Improper leashing, none, extended 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Vandalism-Carvins Cove: portable toilets tipped, money boxes stolen from 4/6/17 Appendix C - 13 Flip Chart Notes from 2017 Community Meetings Comment Source Station # - Question # Recorded Response Date GLFC 4-1 Vandalism -Site-specific issues 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Vandalism -Provide a contact number to report issues/trash/vandalism 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Vandalism- Overflowing trashcans (Colorado St. area) 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Vandalism- Security concerns at night/evening, esp in isolated areas 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Signage -Etiquette on greenways provided on signs 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Signage -Better signage needed at sewage treatment plant greenways 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Signage -Provide information at hotels, tourism sites, visitor spaces, etc. Physical information for visitors 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Signage- Improve education of greenway users to reduce multi -use conflicts 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Signage- Yield signs/instructions 4/6/17 GLFC 4-1 Other -Parking congested (Mill Lane), parking improperly 4/6/17 VFC 1-1 Biking & walking & running 4/6/17 VFC 1-1 Friends 4/6/17 VFC 1-1 Safe place to be 4/6/17 VFC 1-1 Community 4/6/17 VFC 1-1 Connectivity to get from one place to another 4/6/17 VFC 1-1 Separation from traffic 4/6/17 VFC 1-1 Recognition from other communities 4/6/17 VFC 1-2 Priorities -More mileage including Daleville & Green Hill Park 4/6/17 VFC 1-2 Priorities-Walkability 4/6/17 VFC 1-2 Priorities -Increase mileage so there is not so much congestion in certain areas 4/6/17 VFC 1-2 Priorities -419 Corridor — more connectivity with Reimagine 419 4/6/17 VFC 1-2 Priorities -Multi -use connection from Roanoke Mountain to Explore park — Class C - & access to Blue Ridge Parkway 4/6/17 VFC 1-2 Priorities- Spread out human traffic in Wasena area 4/6/17 VFC 1-2 Priorities- Expansion to Back Creek 4/6/17 VFC 1-2 Priorities -Cooperation with regard to mountain bike use — Carvins Cove, Blue Ridge Parkway 4/6/17 VFC 1-1 Unwinding 4/6/17 VFC 1-1 Natural environment in an urban setting 4/6/17 VFC 1-1 Gathering place 4/6/17 VFC 1-1 Retirement occupation 4/6/17 VFC 1-1 Physical well-being 4/6/17 VFC 1-1 Connections to different areas 4/6/17 VFC 1-1 Walking, hiking, biking, tubing 4/6/17 VFC 1-1 Super! — Great community asset — encourages healthy living 4/6/17 VFC 1-2 Priorities- Connecting communities 4/6/17 VFC 1-2 Priorities- Connect to Lynchburg & Christiansburg —Amtrak — New River Trail —AT— National Forest 4/6/17 VFC 1-2 Priorities- Downtown Salem to Roanoke River 4/6/17 VFC 1-2 Priorities- Hinchee—Carvins Cove 4/6/17 VFC 1-2 Priorities- Connect the gaps 4/6/17 VFC 1-2 Priorities- Connect neighborhoods to greenways 4/6/17 VFC 1-2 Priorities- Hanging Rock all the way south to Roanoke River by Mason's Creek 4/6/17 VFC 1-2 Priorities- Connect Roanoke River to Carvins Cove in multiple locations 4/6/17 VFC 1-2 Priorities- Back Creek 4/6/17 VFC 1-1 Community amenity — resource for residents for recreation and marketing the valley 4/6/17 Appendix C - 14 Flip Chart Notes from 2017 Community Meetings Comment Source Station # - Question # Recorded Response Date VFC 1-1 Outside activities so you're not inside 4/6/17 VFC 1-1 Close proximity for getting on greenways 4/6/17 VFC 1-1 Social activities—see neighbors 4/6/17 VFC 1-2 Priorities- Smith Mountain Lake 4/6/17 VFC 1-2 Priorities- Finish connectivity to Explore Park 4/6/17 VFC 1-2 Priorities- Connect to Elliston 4/6/17 VFC 1-2 Priorities- North tail of the Roanoke River to Christiansburg and Blacksburg 4/6/17 VFC 1-2 Priorities- Fill in the gaps in the existing system 4/6/17 VFC 1-2 Priorities- North to Catawba 4/6/17 VFC 2-1 Neighborhood Vision -Hanging Rock Trail extends to cemetery 4/6/17 VFC 2-1 Neighborhood Vision- Wolf Creek Greenway maintenance issues use da lot by school/students (science, cross-country, etc) 4/6/17 VFC 2-1 Neighborhood Vision -Should be paved all the way - safety issue due to a lot of ruts 4/6/17 VFC 2-1 Neighborhood Vision- Leave it as cinder surface 4/6/17 VFC 2-1 Neighborhood Vision- Extend Wolf Creek Greenway to the south from Hardy Rd to Roanoke River 4/6/17 VFC 2-1 Neighborhood Vision -Sewage plant to Explore Park 4/6/17 VFC 2-1 Neighborhood Vision -Mill Mountain to Explore Park for bicyclists 4/6/17 VFC 2-1 Neighborhood Vision- Will Wolf Creek Greenway ever be connected to City of Roanoke 4/6/17 VFC 2-1 Neighborhood Vision -Maintenance issue of the Wolf Creek Greenway 4/6/17 VFC 2-1 Neighborhood Vision -WC Greenway needs to be paved 4/6/17 VFC 2-1 Neighborhood Vision -Different size of gravel on greenway (behind the school W.E. Cundiff) 4/6/17 VFC 2-1 Neighborhood Vision -Glade Creek Greenway to be extended to Vinyard Park, to Parkway 4/6/17 VFC 2-1 Neighborhood Vision-Gladetown Trail to be connected to Niagara Rd 4/6/17 VFC 2-1 Neighborhood Vision- Loop Trail (paved) at Vinyard Park 4/6/17 VFC 2-1 Neighborhood Vision -A lot of ruts on WC Greenway 4/6/17 VFC 2-1 Neighborhood Vision -Gravel needs to be rolled properly at WC Greenway 4/6/17 VFC 2-1 Neighborhood Vision- Focus on connecting existing greenway and trail section where there are gaps 4/6/17 VFC 3-1 Paved Trails 4/6/17 VFC 3-1 Route along Tinker Creek 4/6/17 VFC 3-1 Better birding along creek 4/6/17 VFC 3-1 Aesthetics more pleasing along creek route 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Speed -Space for bikes 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Speed -Mt. View—dangerous for pedestrians 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Speed -Pave Wolf Creek -Drainage Issues, Mud, Roots behind WBHS 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Speed -Education 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Speed- Fleet Feet training 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Speed -Wolf Creek signage on erosion roots -Drainage Problems 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Speed- Rhyming signs 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Speed- Wolf Creek erosion near trail -Nets blocking currently 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Speed -Speed limits/Courtesy signs 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Speed -Bikes 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Speed- Greenway Ambassadors/education 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Speed-Dogs/leashes 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Speed -Work through bike clubs 4/6/17 Appendix C - 15 Flip Chart Notes from 2017 Community Meetings Comment Source Station # - Question # Recorded Response Date VFC 4-1 Speed- Not a raceway 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Speed -Bikes vs. walkers 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Speed -Inattention 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Speed- Safe speeds 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Speed -Center lines in heavily traveled areas 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Speed -Directional arrows 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Speed- Signs to regulate speed 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Speed- Group walking 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Pets -Dog conflicts 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Pets -Maximum leash length in high traffic areas 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Pets- Increase fee for dog license -Reduced for trained dogs 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Pets -Trash containers 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Pets -Ambassadors helping w pet issues 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Pets- Waste (mentioned 3 times) 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Pets- Leashes (mentioned 2 times) 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Pets- Control of children (also) 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Vandalism -Damage to signs 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Vandalism -Burned Port a John at Goode Park 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Vandalism -Overturn Port a Johns 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Vandalism -Vandalism to signs 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Vandalism -Community Group enforcement 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Vandalism -Cameras 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Signs -Vinton locations confusing 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Signs -Lick Run in downtown not well marked 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Signs -Mile Markers 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Signs -Transition signs where Greenway meets road 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Signs- Bridges near Ramada Inn in City of Roanoke need maintenance 4/6/17 VFC Signs- Wolf Creek -no rule signs, no signs on access at Parkway end, dangerous to cross 4-1 street 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Signs -Centerlines 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Signs -Lick Run signage 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Signs -Signs at Peters Creek/Aerial Way 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Signs- Cyclists should use bell 4/6/17 VFC 4-1 Signs- Etiquette signs 4/6/17 Appendix C - 16 Public Input from Individuals via Comment Sheets Station 1 - Regional Vision Station #1 Question 1 What is your vision for the regional greenway network? Station #1 Question 2 What are the major connections needed within the Roanoke Valley Station #1 Question 3 What do you consider to be the top priorities for completion? Comment # Question Response Date G1 1-1 End to end and top to bottom 3/21/2017 G2 1-1 Connectivity wherever possible. 3/21/2017 G3 1-1 Connectivity 3/21/2017 G4 1-1 Integrate Bike Rt. 76 w/ greenways. Continued growth. 3/21/2017 G6 1-1 Continued growth - always room for improvement and additions 3/21/2017 G7 1-1 One interconnected loop to host benefits marathons etc 3/21/2017 G10 1-1 Connection -flow -seamless 3/21/2017 G11 1-1 Consideration for our neighborhood and our privacy and safety. There is so much "green" space that could be used without costing our neighborhoods desires/needs. 3/21/2017 G12 1-1 To connect the region completely to allow for hours and hours of uninterrupted activity with opportunities for overnight lodging. 3/21/2017 G13 1-1 Still learning and forming. Northern Botetourt connection is my major concern. 3/21/2017 G14 1-1 Connecting counties for commuting, recreation 3/21/2017 G15 1-1 Continued improvement of quality of life and viability of communities through ease of access to cultural, recreation & exercise, economic, interaction opportunities and initiatives. 3/21/2017 G16 1-1 Loop entire city/work commuters 3/21/2017 G17 1-1 Inter connected several miles in length; paved pathways 3/21/2017 G18 1-1 No vision 3/21/2017 G19 1-1 Include "carriage road" type trails as at Acadia Nat'l Park; Perhaps upgrade Happy Valley & Brushy Mtn to carriage roads 3/21/2017 G20 1-1 Complete expasion throughout region; complete greenway to Explore Park; More blueway routes 3/21/2017 G21 1-1 Commuter access, not just recreation; more connection 3/21/2017 G22 1-1 Connect urban & rural while encouraging outdoor activity; good greenways with interpretive signs add to sense of community 3/21/2017 M2 1-1 Connectivity 3/27/2017 M3 1-1 Good idea until it interrupts your home, wildlife, historic areas in neighborhood 3/27/2017 M5 1-1 Not to invade the front or backyards of the residences 3/27/2017 M7 1-1 None 3/27/2017 M10 1-1 Expanding connections between restaurants/commercial centers & attractions with residential areas 3/27/2017 F1 1-1 Connect the Roanoke Valley from South to North, East to West 3/30/2017 F3 1-1 Shenandoah woodlands addition 3/30/2017 F5 1-1 Connect as much of the valley with bike/walk trail as possible 3/30/2017 F6 1-1 We love the Greenway system and look forward to its completion. We strongly oppose the development of the woodlands surrounding Shenandoah Life. 3/30/2017 F7 1-1 ADA accessible ramps, curb -cuts, parking, etc. 3/30/2017 Appendix C - 17 Public Input from Individuals via Comment Sheets Station 1 - Regional Vision F8 1-1 Dennis Fisher. Whatever you do - devote "20%" of the total effort to marketing/communication, taking advantage of all the tools at our disposal - my interest is in photography. 3/30/2017 F10 1-1 To include a greenway on the Shenandoah Life property 3/30/2017 F11 1-1 Eventually connect to surrounding counties to get to Craig, Blacksburg, Smith Mt. and become a destination in itself for the East Coast 3/30/2017 F12 1-1 To eventually (way down the road) connect to SML. 3/30/2017 F13 1-1 Connected to areas useful for education. 3/30/2017 F14 1-1 Connect the whole valley with greenways 3/30/2017 SC4 1-1 Connectivity for entire valley, not just isolated bits; and linearity 4/3/2017 GV1 1-1 All tied together w/ connections to community parks/schools 4/6/2017 GV2 1-1 Easy access anywhere in the valley 4/6/2017 GV3 1-1 Connect to more natural trails; head towards Blacksburg & Covington & Lynchburg 4/6/2017 GV4 1-1 Continuous; connecting popular destinationsn & schools 4/6/2017 GV5 1-1 Connect to all possible areas and neighboring greenways. 4/6/2017 V2 1-1 Quantity or Quality? Quality! 4/10/2017 V3 1-1 Continued expansion to encompass a circumference of Floyd to Christiansburg and Buchanan to Roanoke and areas within 4/10/2017 G1 1-2 Connect amenities, like food and drink locations, to trails. 3/21/2017 G3 1-2 Roanoke River Greenway, Hanging Rock from RRG to Cove, Tinker Creek to 3/21/2017 G4 1-2 Botetourt and Buchanan 3/21/2017 G6 1-2 Roanoke + Salem. Explore Park + Water Treatment Plant. National Forest. Carvins Cove. 3/21/2017 G11 1-2 Connectons that do not cut through our Fairview neighborhood. 3/21/2017 G12 1-2 RV to Botetourt Co. Roa River completion. Connection to SWVA through Salem 3/21/2017 G13 1-2 Promote Bik 76 to tie northern Botetourt/Buchanan area. 3/21/2017 G14 1-2 Carvins Cove, downtown Rke, AT, BRP, Explore Park 3/21/2017 G15 1-2 Botetourt access along 11, 220 3/21/2017 G16 1-2 Connect Botetourt to Carvin's Cove 3/21/2017 G17 1-2 Complete Salem to Green Hill 3/21/2017 G18 1-2 River greenways 3/21/2017 G19 1-2 Connect to Explore Park; Salem to C'burg/B'burg; maybe New Castle 3/21/2017 G20 1-2 Botetourt to Hollins to downtown 3/21/2017 G21 1-2 Businesses as destinations 3/21/2017 G22 1-2 Bedford: Peaks to D -Day Memorial; Buchanan 3/21/2017 M2 1-2 Roanoke River to Tinker Creek to Hollins to Carvins Cove 3/27/2017 M3 1-2 Connecting with other trails is a plus until it, as staed above, disrupts quality of life in neighborhoods. 3/27/2017 M10 1-2 Tinker Creek greenway as proposed Hollins to RRG 3/27/2017 F1 1-2 Roanoke River Greenway to Murray Run Greenway 3/30/2017 1-2 Murray Run [arrow] Shenandoah Woodlands [arrow] Fishburne Park 3/30/2017 F4 1-2 Parallel the BRP [Blue Ridge Parkway] 3/30/2017 Appendix C - 18 Public Input from Individuals via Comment Sheets Station 1 - Regional Vision Appendix C - 19 1-2 Grandin Rd w/ Downtown Roanoke -Salem; South Roanoke/Grandin Road; South Roanoke w/ Downtown 3/30/2017 F7 1-2 Have the greenway be attractive to all of the valley,not just some of the valley; i.e. more attractive events and spaces to SW population than SE & NW. 3/30/2017 F10 1-2 The Shenandoah Life property as an extension of the Murray Run. An extension from Roa. River Greenway to Grandin. 3/30/2017 1-2 Connector to Carvins Cove & Hollins; connector Blue Ridge (460); connector to Montgomery & Craig & Botetourt 3/30/2017 F13 1-2 Malls, schools 3/30/2017 F14 1-2 Roanoke [arrow] Salem, Blacksburg, Floyd; Roanoke needs to be the hub 3/30/2017 SC1 1-2 Garst Mill to Murray Run 4/3/2017 SC4 1-2 Must get through the " missing link" at Walker - #1 priority! Many other destinations as described during discussion 4/3/2017 GV1 1-2 Smith Mountain Lake 4/6/2017 GV2 1-2 Extend Hanging Rock Trail; Rivers Edge area to downtown Roanoke 4/6/2017 GV3 1-2 Carvins Cove; Explore 4/6/2017 GV5 1-2 Falling Creek Reservoir; National Forest 4/6/2017 V2 1-2 Hollins to Carvins Cove; SW county 4/10/2017 V3 1-2 Connection of Explore Park to Roanoke Mountain; Bent Mtn/Back Creek expansion. 4/10/2017 G1 1-3 The "Gap" - Roanoke River Trail. Bike trails. Explore Park connection. Connection. 3/21/2017 G3 1-3 Roanoke River Greenway 3/21/2017 G6 1-3 Continued growth. Roanoke River Greenway to Explore Park. Tinker Creek Greenway to Carvins Cove. Greenway to National Forest. 3/21/2017 G7 1-3 tax dollars spent 3/21/2017 G10 1-3 Wmson - Carvins Cove - Botetourt 3/21/2017 G11 1-3 My top priority is for the Greenway not to cut through my neighborhood. We chose our neighborhood because of privacy and calmness. The Greenway is not what we had in mind. 3/21/2017 G12 1-3 Roanoke River Greenway. Connector to Carvins Cove. Explore Park. 3/21/2017 G13 1-3 A Botetourt connection through Carvin Cove HookUp 3/21/2017 G15 1-3 Definitive route plan 3/21/2017 G17 1-3 Connect trails - Vinton-Roanoke-Botetourt 3/21/2017 G18 1-3 1)set the route; 2) is route reasonable? 3) develop the costs 3/21/2017 G20 1-3 Explore Park 3/21/2017 G21 1-3 Any 3/21/2017 G22 1-3 Connections from town/city centers to other centers and easy access for outlying areas of the valley 3/21/2017 M2 1-3 Tinker Creek in Vinton to Carvins Cove 3/27/2017 M7 1-3 1 strongly am against it & feel it is not needed 3/27/2017 M10 1-3 East Rke River to Explore Park 3/27/2017 F1 1-3 Roanoke River Greenway connected; Tinker Creek to Deschutes 3/30/2017 Appendix C - 19 Public Input from Individuals via Comment Sheets Station 1 - Regional Vision F2 1-3 Saving the Murray Greenway woodland/watershed area by upgrading priority for looping trail back to Patrick Henry through Shen. Life woods. Carilion needs an alternative - work with us! 3/30/2017 F4 1-3 Roanoke to Explore; Tinker to Carvins; #1 New Castle to Eagle Rock 3/30/2017 1-3 Bridge Street to Salem 3/30/2017 F10 1-3 Trails on the Shenandoah Life property 3/30/2017 1-3 Carvins Cove 3/30/2017 F12 1-3 1 live in Grandin Court on Guilford Ave., so right now, I feel top priority needs to be saving Murray Run & the surrounding community from being ruined by the development of this 225 apartment complex. We need your support! 3/30/2017 F13 1-3 To complete routes around schools first. 3/30/2017 SC1 1-3 2, 24, 33, 30. #1 Mudlick; Barnhardt Creek; Long Ridge Trail; Poor Mountain 4/3/2017 SC2 1-3 Stating we are here to propose a vision for trails instead of listening to opposition. 4/3/2017 SC4 1-3 Must get through the " missing link" at Walker - #1 priority 4/3/2017 GV2 1-3 Woodbridge to Green Hill Park; Rotary Park going east 4/6/2017 GV3 1-3 Roanoke River; Tinker Creek; Masons Cove full 4/6/2017 GV5 1-3 #1 Roanoke River Greenway; #2 Roanoke River Blueway 4/6/2017 V1 1-3 Hollins -Tinker Creek -Read Mountain connection 4/10/2017 V2 1-3 Focus on Roanoke connectors 4/10/2017 Appendix C - 20 Public Input from Individuals via Comment Sheets Station 2: Locality Priorities and Neighborhood Connections Station #2 Question 1 What are the destinations that people would like to access? Station #2 Question 2 Which of those destinations need to be linked together with the greenway network? Station #2 Question 3 Do you have a preferred route(s) to link these destinations? Comment # Question Response Date G1 2-1 Greenfield Ed Center, Botetourt Town Center, Read Mt., Carvins Cove (boating) 3/21/2017 G2 2-1 Buchanan! Connect AT to Buchanan safely - Rt. 43 is a connector now. 3/21/2017 G4 2-1 Buchanan River (James) 3/21/2017 G6 2-1 Link City of Roanoke + Roanoke County to Botetourt 3/21/2017 G8 2-1 Develop the Craig Rail Trail. Develop a Craig Creek Blueway 3/21/2017 G9 2-1 Develop the Craig Rail Trail 3/21/2017 G11 2-1 Appalachian Trail 3/21/2017 G12 2-1 Daleville to Cavins Cove - RKE. Eagle Rock to Craig Co. -Rail to Trail 3/21/2017 G13 2-1 James River Heritage Trail/Roaring Run 3/21/2017 G14 2-1 Fincastle, Troutville, Daleville, HMA, Patterson Mtn 3/21/2017 G15 2-1 Daleville Town Center. Fincastle, Buchanan, Lewis/Clarke, AT, Sports Complex 3/21/2017 G16 2-1 Carvin's Cove 3/21/2017 G17 2-1 #1 Reconfigure, build trails in Greenfield first - great place 3/21/2017 G20 2-1 Daleville TC; Exit 150 development; Kroger; Fincastle, Buchanan, 3/21/2017 G21 2-1 Botetout Commoms; LBHS, Greenfield, Troutville Park 3/21/2017 G22 2-1 Buchanan, Camp Bethel, Read Mt. (trails); Greenfield, Fincastle, Carvins Cove 3/21/2017 M1 2-1 Greenfield Park, Blue Ridge Pkwy, Roaring Run 3/27/2017 M2 2-1 Don't care 3/27/2017 M5 2-1 Carvins Cove 3/27/2017 M7 2-1 Town Center 3/27/2017 M10 2-1 Daleville Town Center & more Carvins Cove connections 3/27/2017 M11 2-1 Carvins Cove; Appalachian Trail access @ Buchanan and @ Fincastle 3/27/2017 F1 2-1 Connection from Roanoke River Greenway to Murray Run; possible Roanoke River Greenway to Towers Mall via old rail bed by Ice House. 3/30/2017 F2 2-1 People want beautiful rivers, creeks and woodlands. Those are destinations! Don't break up parks and greenways with tacky development! 3/30/2017 F3 2-1 Garst Mill Park; Happy Hollow Gardens 3/30/2017 F4 2-1 Tinker to Carvins; Carvins; Explore; Salem. North East; North West 3/30/2017 F5 2-1 Salem, Towers; Grandin Court/Raleigh Court 3/30/2017 F7 2-1 Libraries, parks, event centers & hubs 3/30/2017 F10 2-1 The Shenandoah Life property. More trails 3/30/2017 F11 2-1 Carvins Cove; Downtown; Blue Ridge Pkwy 3/30/2017 F13 2-1 Nature, schools 3/30/2017 SC1 2-1 Hidden Valley HS 4/3/2017 Appendix C - 21 Public Input from Individuals via Comment Sheets Station 2: Locality Priorities and Neighborhood Connections SC2 2-1 How are you getting the land for this trail & all of them? 4/3/2017 SC3 2-1 Tanglewood Mall from Pebble Creek and Honeywood Apts. 4/3/2017 SC4 2-1 Hidden Valley area; Tanglewood Mall area 4/3/2017 GV2 2-1 Green Hill Park from Woodbridge 4/6/2017 GV3 2-1 311 Park n Ride to Mason Creek & Roanoke River Greenway & to Carvins Cove from Hanging Rock 4/6/2017 GV4 2-1 Green Hill Park 4/6/2017 GV5 2-1 AT from Carvins Cove boat launch 4/6/2017 V2 2-1 Back Creek to all points 4/10/2017 G1 2-2 Explore Park to Vinton Town; Green Hill Ed Center to Daleville Town Center 3/21/2017 G2 2-2 Buchanan! Connect AT to Buchanan safely - Rt. 43 is a connector now. 3/21/2017 G4 2-2 Buch. Town Park, Acadia Jenning Creek. Connect "little" towns 3/21/2017 G6 2-2 be able to access as many areas as possible without driving a car 3/21/2017 G11 2-2 Carvins Cove - Appalachian Trail 3/21/2017 G12 2-2 Daleville to Cavins Cove - RKE. Eagle Rock to Craig Co. -Rail to Trail 3/21/2017 G13 2-2 Over time both, plus - 3/21/2017 G17 2-2 Lots of land; Greenfield 3/21/2017 G20 2-2 Hollins to Daleville 3/21/2017 G21 2-2 All the above 3/21/2017 M2 2-2 Don't care 3/27/2017 M3 2-2 Please don't put a bike trail on Williamson - we need 4 lanes. When 581 is closed most travelers going north go up Williamson. It doesn't need to be 2 lanes & a bike lane - keep it 4 lanes. 3/27/2017 M7 2-2 To complete this without affecting homeowners use Plantation Rd. 3/27/2017 M10 2-2 AT/Carvins Cove/Ballast Point 3/27/2017 M11 2-2 Eagle Rock/Buchanan/James River/ Rt 220 3/27/2017 F1 2-2 see above 3/30/2017 F3 2-2 Don't know 3/30/2017 F4 2-2 All the above 3/30/2017 F5 2-2 Towers - South Roanoke - Grandin Court 3/30/2017 F11 2-2 All! 3/30/2017 F13 2-2 High schools 3/30/2017 SC1 2-2 HVHS to Mudlick Creek Greenway 4/3/2017 SC2 2-2 See comment tab 4/3/2017 GV3 2-2 Cove -Havens -Explore -AT -Downtown -Park n Rides 4/6/2017 GV4 2-2 Green Hill Park 4/6/2017 GV5 2-2 Develop existing trail/old road bed to AT; connect Carvins Cove Greenway to AT 4/6/2017 V2 2-2 Back Creek 4/10/2017 G1 2-3 Do you? 3/21/2017 G2 2-3 Along rivers where possible 3/21/2017 G11 2-3 Routes that do not cut through or directly border the Orchard Lake/Fairview neighborhood. 3/21/2017 G12 2-3 Avoid subdivisions if possible, consider expanding roads. FIOS routes 3/21/2017 Appendix C - 22 Public Input from Individuals via Comment Sheets Station 2: Locality Priorities and Neighborhood Connections G13 2-3 Promote US Bike Route 76 to initially tie northern Botetourt to Grnway 3/21/2017 G15 2-3 GSC to Fincastle to GEL to Daleville to Valley tie. Buchananc to Toutville to AT to Daleville to Carvin Cove. 3/21/2017 G21 2-3 No 3/21/2017 M2 2-3 Don't care 3/27/2017 M4 2-3 Not Tinker Creek route 3/27/2017 M7 2-3 No 3/27/2017 M11 2-3 Along James River 3/27/2017 F1 2-3 Roanoke River to Murray Run is difficult but Wonju to Colonial with addition of bike lane on Wonju? 3/30/2017 F3 2-3 No 3/30/2017 F5 2-3 Round about on Wiley Drive Greenway 3/30/2017 F11 2-3 Along waterways where possible 3/30/2017 F13 2-3 n/a 3/30/2017 SC1 2-3 Mudlick Creek? 4/3/2017 SC3 2-3 Need Ogden Rd. GW and Murray Run GW to county line 4/3/2017 GV3 2-3 Off road 4/6/2017 GV5 2-3 Develop existing trail/old road bed to AT 4/6/2017 V2 2-3 Back Creek 4/10/2017 Appendix C - 23 Public Input from Individuals via Comment Sheets Station 3: Tinker Creek Greenway Station #3 Question 1 Do you think Tinker Creek Greenway is an important connection between Botetourt and Roanoke? Why or why not? Station #3 Question 2 What do you think the most important use would be if the greenway is developed ... Transportation? Recreation? Both? How would you use Station #3 Question 3 Do you have comments about specific segments or alternatives? Comment # Question Response Date G1 3-1 Yes, of course. (see next answer) 3/21/2017 G5 3-1 Railroad and sewer right-aways used? Definitely important for a multitude of reasons. 3/21/2017 G6 3-1 Yes - access Botetourt and Carvins Cove without driving 3/21/2017 G11 3-1 Yes, connecting nature from Roanoke County to the beauty of Botetourt. Following Tinker Creek. 3/21/2017 G12 3-1 Yes, connection is key for residents and visitors 3/21/2017 G13 3-1 Yes - look to be shortest most doable . Beginning - 3/21/2017 G14 3-1 It's the natural connection but much more access to Carvins Cove (permits issues, not parking in fee'd lots) 3/21/2017 G15 3-1 Essential link 3/21/2017 G18 3-1 Not needed; would only be beneficial to runners or cyclists 3/21/2017 G20 3-1 Yes -just a great future connection 3/21/2017 G21 3-1 Commuting; Yes, connects us to the city 3/21/2017 G22 3-1 Yes, to increase easy access to outdoor recreation and increase alternative transportation options 3/21/2017 M1 3-1 Yes, but I think it's more important to connect it back to the Vinton section and the Roanoke River Greenway before 3/27/2017 M2 3-1 Yes. Needed to connect NW ROA to SE ROA 3/27/2017 M4 3-1 Sure, connecting greenways are a good idea generally. I don't think Tinker Creek Greenway is necessarily the best solution. Why call it "Tinker Creek" How about "Plantation Road". "Plantation Road Greenway" has a nice ring to it. 3/27/2017 M5 3-1 Strongly against the development by houses & neighborhoods - specifically yards 3/27/2017 M6 3-1 Use Plantation Rd. Do not use peoples' yards 3/27/2017 M7 3-1 As long as it does not go through private yards and yards 3/27/2017 M8 3-1 No. Let them do there own thing. 3/27/2017 M9 3-1 Yes. Very important to bring Hollins College into the fold 3/27/2017 M10 3-1 Yes - connections to Hollins U and Daleville Town Center 3/27/2017 F1 3-1 Yes, Further enables the overall Greenway system to connect with Botetourt. 3/30/2017 F4 3-1 Yes. 3/30/2017 F5 3-1 Yes - More length makes for better riding/running 3/30/2017 F11 3-1 Yes it is. Both can meet at Carvins Cove, which is a wonderful outdoor destination. Eventually it can also connect to Craig & then Blacksburg. 3/30/2017 F13 3-1 Yes, as it further connects the valley. 3/30/2017 SC1 3-1 NO Tinker Station at South County Library 4/3/2017 SC5 3-1 Lives near Lamarre on Brookview. 4/3/2017 V2 3-1 Sure, once finish existing sections. See * [3-3] 4/10/2017 Appendix C - 24 Public Input from Individuals via Comment Sheets Station 3: Tinker Creek Greenway G1 3-2 Both. I walk and ride a bike often. I'd like to see it used to get from place to place. 3/21/2017 G5 3-2 I've lived in Botetourt for 22 years, fearful/unable to ride my bike much at all due to speeding traffic on curvy roads. I would love to have a safe place to ride!! 3/21/2017 G6 3-2 Transportation and Recreation 3/21/2017 G11 3-2 Recreation. I appreciate the purpose, but do not use them. 3/21/2017 G12 3-2 Recreation, potential transportation if housing options improve 3/21/2017 G13 3-2 My concept of transportation does not blend with recreation. Recreation. 3/21/2017 G14 3-2 Recreation. The state of the environment and location (trail areas) would only make sense to be for recreation. It's also a long mileage commute to get downtown 3/21/2017 G15 3-2 Recreation 3/21/2017 G16 3-2 Too expensive 3/21/2017 G21 3-2 All: run, bike, shop, etc 3/21/2017 G22 3-2 Mostly recreation to start. Over time I can imagine that we will increase for transportation - to work, to shop, to eat (or other "recreation"). 3/21/2017 M1 3-2 1 would probably mostly use it for recreation, but I think it's important to have safe, non -motorized transportation access. 3/27/2017 M2 3-2 Rec. 3/27/2017 M4 3-2 Recreation; exercise 3/27/2017 M5 3-2 Recreation. I would not like to walk in yards; could use gaps to avoid private residences. *Please consider Plantation Rd. [arrow] better for economic development. 3/27/2017 M8 3-2 Recreation. Not interested in greenways. 3/27/2017 M9 3-2 Recreation 3/27/2017 M10 3-2 Bike riding - connections to brewery 3/27/2017 F1 3-2 Biking; running 3/30/2017 F2 3-2 Recreation. 3/30/2017 F5 3-2 Recreation 3/30/2017 F11 3-2 60% recreation; 40% trans. 3/30/2017 F13 3-2 Transport 3/30/2017 SC5 3-2 She wants greenway in her backyard so she can walk to Williamson Road and businesses. She wants bus service on Williamson, for more than Hollins students. Her neighborhood is getting older and people need the option of walking instead of driving. One of her neighbors went to Mountain View meeting and told her there was hope for getting a greenway on Lamarre. 4/3/2017 V2 3-2 Mostly recreation; casual transportation only 4/10/2017 G1 3-3 Tinke Creek is a natural route between Roanoke City and Daleville. I'd like to see it developed as a blueway. Stay away from busy road - go scenic. 3/21/2017 G5 3-3 I've marked them w/ green dots.:) 3/21/2017 G11 3-3 Not through Orchard Lake/Fairview. Great alternative is along Tinker Creek. Expand into Troutville area. 3/21/2017 G12 3-3 Consider Tinker Creek as route. Partner with Roanoke Cement. 3/21/2017 Appendix C - 25 Public Input from Individuals via Comment Sheets Station 3: Tinker Creek Greenway G15 3-3 Too early. 3/21/2017 G21 3-3 No 3/21/2017 Not about specific segments, but regarding composition -- to the extent possible stick with the softest feasible surface. For instance, some city segments get such high use that a hard road -like surface is needed but I find it undesirable. Whever use allows, try to use less G22 3-3 firm surface. 3/21/2017 Botetourt [arrow] I prefer the route that follows 220 only because I M1 3-3 don't want to see a multiuse trail crossing the AT at Tinker Creek. 3/27/2017 M2 3-3 Finish Bridge St. Connection to Salem 3/27/2017 1 do not want a greenway along Tinker Creek. I own property on M4 3-3 Tinker Creek and do not want a public path in my back yard. 3/27/2017 Not in favor of using the front or back yards of the neighborhood. Not comfortable walking in other people's yards. Privacy and safety would M5 3-3 be compromised 3/27/2017 M7 3-3 1 think the route should stay on Plantation for certain lengths 3/27/2017 1 DO NOT want this to come by or on my property. I bought the M8 3-3 property because of the privacy! 3/27/2017 M9 3-3 No 3/27/2017 The whole greenway needs a center line and directions to all traffic to F5 3-3 please keep to the right. 3/30/2017 V2 3-3 *Would really like a connection in SW County - Back Creek area 4/10/2017 Appendix C - 26 Public Input from Individuals via Comment Sheets Station 4 - Operations and Management Challenges Station #4 Question 1 Greenway users report the following management issues: bicycles going too fast; pet problems (leashes, pet waste); vandalism; and lack of signage and available information. What solutions would you propose to these operations and management issues? Station #4 Question 2 Are there other issues that need to be addressed? Station #4 Question 3 Other Comments? Comment A Question Response Date G1 4-1 Volunters dedicated to maintain/oberve sections of trail. Speed limits for bikes. Perhaps add a center line. 3/21/2017 G5 4-1 Curvy greenway could slow down bikes. 3/21/2017 G6 4-1 Painted center line in heaviest use areas. Signage with rule reminders like the "burma shave" signs. Outlaw retractable leashes 3/21/2017 G11 4-1 Congestion, signage. Moe Geenways that connect to existing Greenway. Trailheads. 3/21/2017 G12 4-1 signage 3/21/2017 G13 4-1 Education on sharing. Add "Carry out any thing you bring in.' 3/21/2017 G14 4-1 The City had funny quips/rhymes on signs to teach greenway manners/behaviors. PSAs on TV and radio 3/21/2017 G15 4-1 Knowledge. Education. Develop "weism" vs "meism" 3/21/2017 G21 4-1 Paint a line to divide; more signage 3/21/2017 G22 4-1 Center line for heavier use areas; dividers sprinkled along paths are helpful in heavy use areas 3/21/2017 F1 4-1 Limit length of dog leashes to 5 ft or less - no retractable; center line in busy areas - Roanoke River Greenway 3/30/2017 F2 4-1 Center lines on paved paths. Connector roads should have green paint for recognition/navigation. Garbage cans @ all parking lots & in between. Signage teaching about feces in water supply. 3/30/2017 F3 4-1 Bicycle speed! Dangerous 3/30/2017 F5 4-1 See above [the whole greenway needs a center line and directions to all traffic to please keep to the right] and some extra warnings to go slowly through curves. 3/30/2017 F7 4-1 Signage or mapping on App or Cpu of most accessible locations. Map greenway routes by accessiblity. 3/30/2017 F10 4-1 - increase maps & signage for mileage 3/30/2017 F13 4-1 Better education of rules 3/30/2017 SC1 4-1 Bikers need to signal when they are about to pass someone 4/3/2017 SC2 4-1 see Other Comments tab 4/3/2017 SC4 4-1 Center line probably most important 4/3/2017 GV1 4-1 More organizations like Rotary/Kiwanis manage sections 4/6/2017 GV2 4-1 General rules of the road; Etiquette for everyone 4/6/2017 GV3 4-1 More outreach to get people to share and get along 4/6/2017 GV4 4-1 Open and easily visible; proper lighting; stations w/ trash bags & cans for trash & pet waste 4/6/2017 V2 4-1 Greater community education & partnerships to to leaders of key users, i.e. bike stores, civic organizations, etc 4/10/2017 Appendix C - 27 Public Input from Individuals via Comment Sheets Station 4 - Operations and Management Challenges G1 4-2 Repairs after rains. Repairs to fences along side of trail. More historic signage, like along Hanging Rock Trail. 3/21/2017 G2 4-2 Safety 3/21/2017 G3 4-2 Concerns of local Botetourt residents of level of support and more information of greenway users and what to expect 3/21/2017 G5 4-2 "possible wildlife" signs? (Der, bear, turkeys, foxs,& vultures!) 3/21/2017 G6 4-2 Signage + location awareness when you need to call 911 3/21/2017 G11 4-2 Not inviting strangers into a private neighborhood. The shortest - cheapest route is not always the best. Crowds, pollution, crime, etc do not belong in a secluded neighborhood. 3/21/2017 G15 4-2 Maintenance, all aspects. Accessability. Event management/trail management. Use limits as to what an area or segment can support. 3/21/2017 G16 4-2 Seasonal signs 3/21/2017 G18 4-2 Greenways in entire valley that are connected seems more of a "feel good" project rather than providing immediate benefits/returns 3/21/2017 G22 4-2 Signage about area features, businesses, history; sign reminders for pet waste, dogs on leash ,and be alert for wildlife 3/21/2017 M2 4-2 Notice of Greenway events. Several times I've had to leave the Greenway & th Cove due to unannounced foot races. 3/27/2017 F2 4-2 Kudzu & invasives ruining views of river. Have a number of people can text problems & pix of issues. Simpler, more frequent signage w/ reminder rules. 3/30/2017 F5 4-2 Remind folks to keep dogs on tight leash 3/30/2017 F12 4-2 Saving the Woodlands of Murray Run from being ruined from this horrible development of 225 apartments. Please help us! 3/30/2017 F13 4-2 Lack of exposure to younger audiences. 3/30/2017 SC4 4-2 Flooding [arrow] damage 4/3/2017 GV2 4-2 Long leashes; lack of signage at Water Treatment Plant to get to Tinker Creek Greenway 4/6/2017 GV3 4-2 More places to park; distributed parking 4/6/2017 GV4 4-2 Properly maintaining grass and trees 4/6/2017 V2 4-2 Greater community education and partnerships to to leaders of key users, i.e. bike stores, civic organizations, etc 4/10/2017 G1 4-3 More cooperation between localities. Dedicated funding, such as sponsorships. Consider solar lighting along the trail. 3/21/2017 G11 4-3 All of the management issues contribut to why our neighborhood does not desire the greenway through or bordering. 3/21/2017 G13 4-3 You have people using the facility. The more using will increase troubling situations. Keep rules simple and available! 3/21/2017 G15 4-3 egistration of users. 3/21/2017 G16 4-3 Phone app 3/21/2017 G21 4-3 More signage 3/21/2017 G22 4-3 Install dog waste receptacles at trail heads, parking areas and picnic and group gathering areas. 3/21/2017 F1 4-3 Interactive maps for the community with mileage, parking, addresses etc. 3/30/2017 F2 4-3 Help us save the Shen Life Woodlands! 3/30/2017 Appendix C - 28 Public Input from Individuals via Comment Sheets Station 4 - Operations and Management Challenges F3 4-3 Gorgeous amenity! Great for quality of life! 3/30/2017 F5 4-3 Thanks for all volunteers and paid folks work! 3/30/2017 F11 4-3 Thank you! 3/30/2017 F12 4-3 Thank you for your well done presentation tonight! 3/30/2017 I'm glad there is a project underway to replace the mile markers along the Roanoke River Greenway (an Eagle Scout project, I believe?). Is there any way possible to add the mile markers to the interactive map on the site? It's a nice map as it is, but the mile markers (or at least a few of them to let you see disance start to finish of a section, for E1 4-3 example) would make it even better. 4/3/2017 If the map can be enhanced, it also might be nice to add symbols for restrooms (either permanent or porta-potties, doesn't really matter) and water fountains. Those new blue fountains the city just installed are NICE! A place to fill your water bottle, that made my day when I E2 4-3 discovered that. 1 4/3/2017 Appendix C - 29 Public Input from Individuals via Comment Sheets and Email Other Comments Appendix C - 30 Station #4 Question 3 Other Comments? Comment A Question Response Date More cooperation between localities. Dedicated funding, such as G1 4-3 sponsorships. Consider solar lighting along the trail. 3/21/2017 We in Faiview and Orchard Lake appreciate you hearing our concerns. Our hopes now is that futue planning dos not impact our peaceful family neighborhood. Again, thank you. Feel free to call me G11 4-3 at 312-2376 or email at jmhdeeds@gmail.com 3/21/2017 Other Overall: Connectivity is essential to sustainability and viable G15 3-3 survival (economic development as impacted through accessibility) 3/21/2017 Not about specific segments, but regarding composition -- to the extent possible stick with the softest feasible surface. For instance, some city segments get such high use that a hard road -like surface is needed but I find it undesirable. Whever use allows, try to use less G22 3-3 firm surface. 3/21/2017 Why did you put in exercise equipment by Addison Middle School that F9 isn't appropriate for that age group? 3/30/2017 This is a cost expense to the county, not needed. You gave up hub to Charlotte - business have left and more leaving. We need smaller government- cut jobs. I hereby oppose the Greenway. There is the concerns for liability, security, landowners' land rights violated. The type of crimes that could happen on the greenway. Taxes paid on land you are taking lost. Roanoke is a dying town since NS left. Why a greenway? Pets, crime, crime, etc. Ask do people in Roanoke County want more gov't control. Ask Roanoke County by election to vote to allow further trails. We need smaller gov't not projects to increase gov't. Do those using trails own land and have they donated any land for trails? I see at the meeting they shut up those speaking against the trails. I am a concerned landowner opposed to greenways. I am opposed for the following reasons. My concern is liability, security, eminent domain, land rights, loss of taxes on land taken, who is allowed on trails including felons, rapists, murderers, sex offenders; the cost to Roanoke Co. to maintain these trails. Stores SC2 and jobs are leaving the valley. 4/3/2017 Brooke Stephens: Tinker Creek Greenway. She lives near LaMarre Dr. Wants a greenway in her backyard to she can walk to Wiliamson Rd. and businesses. She wants bus service on Willaimson Rd. Her neighborhod is getting older and people need option of walking instead of driving. One of her neighbors went to Mountain View SC5 meeting and told her their was hope of getting a GW on LaMarre. 4/3/2017 Spring Hollow needs to be considered recreational resource like GV1 Carvins Cove 4/6/2017 GV3 Keep the trails coming 4/6/2017 Appendix C - 30 Public Input from Individuals via Comment Sheets and Email Other Comments GV6 Safety issues? Drone surveillance? 4/6/2017 Greenways are for all generations. Senior Citizens make up a large percentage of the population in the Roanoke Valley. "Old People" and other persons using mechanized wheeled chairs and would like to get outside. Motorized wheelchairs are permitted on Greenways. Many of them are battery operated. Some batteries only last for 15 miles. Please plan to install battery recharging outlets at strategic locations along the Greenways. Inclusiveness of ALL people is important on public projects. I look forward to hearing about where E3 4-2 the locations might be installed. Appendix C - 31 Page Intentionally Left Blank Appendix D Public Response to Draft 2018 Plan Appendix D - 1 Public Responses to Draft 2018 Greenway Plan April 19 - May 4, 2018 B = Comment Sheet Response; O = On-line Response or Email; FC = Flip Chart Notes at April 19, 2018 Meeting ID # Topic Comments B11 Greenway network I have not read the whole plan, but I am very supportive of continuing construction of greenways & connections. The greenways are one of the valley's best assets! B14 Greenway network Safe bike lane on 460 out. More work on Reed Mt. Greenway B17 Greenway network Go ahead and build some of the easier segments in outlying areas to get people interested in a county wide network. B19 Greenway network Please connect to Green Hill Park from Roanoke River Greenway. Also, continue the section directly behind GE to Hanging Rock Trail and the other direction to the Salem Greenway. B2 Greenway network Encourage the building of as many greenways/blueways as possible to get people outdoors. Great job so far! B22 Greenway network Complete the Roanoke River Greenway soon! Get Salem moving on its sections of the RR Greenway. Make the connection along the Sewage Plant easier to navigate. Educate bikers to slow down on the greenway where there are lots of walkers. B23 Greenway network And the sooner the better! Better connectivity from the greenways to the trails -such as from Roanoke River greenway to the Mill Mtn. trails. B24 Greenway network Let's just complete the thing! B27 Greenway network The plan looks great! Focus on completing Roanoke River Greenway! Also connectivity to neighborhoods & side streets. B3 Greenway network Center lines in busy sections, ebikes on paved paths only, support tinker greenway connectivity, support greenway to greenhill park & explore park, increased tax revenue to Parks & Rec to support Greenways & trails. B30 Greenway network Complete Roanoke River section to Carvins Cove ASAP. Thanks! B31 Greenway network Not much planned for South Roanoke County. Only one trail (Back Creek/Mudlick) that is only conceptual at this point. Let's see the design and funding for SW county greenways soon! Every other portion of the valley is seeing action. B32 Greenway network Very high on greenways, bikeways & blueways. I don't know enough facts to comment. Thanks for your work. B36 Greenway network Just anxious to see it completed west to meet with the Salem portion. Landscape plantings, trees, shrubs and art work add to the overall trail experience. B38 Greenway network The overall goal is fantastic. The Greenway system is a fabulous opportunity to benefit citizens & businesses and should be marketed as such. Without the benefit of construction/maintenance costs, we cannot accurately compare the various proposals. In general, I prefer that the greenway be off-road and separate from alternate transportation modes. B38 Greenway network Reach out to neighborhood associations to include their input; once involved, they might provoke more visibility and input. Work with transportation departments to link greenways with street bike paths and sidewalks, expanding the reach of both. Include the city bus system, including expanding its service area, as bikes are welcome on the buses. Solicit businesses that might be bike friendly (offering incentives to employees for biking) as well as encouraging customers utilizing the system. In tandem (?) with Transportation, develop paths that connect citizens with their everyday tasks as well as entertainment possibilities, again utilizing city buses to augment and expand the reach of the system & would eliminate some for the "drive to the ark" crowd. B39 Greenway network I like the idea of providing more connectivity with neighborhoods very specifically, I would like to see a connector from 2nd Street over to 10th Street along Cedar Run, which is currently culverted under Coca-Cola, which is considering daylighting (?) along the north and east sides of its property- a good connector with their NW neighborhood and downtown. B40 Greenway network Use the greenway almost daily -I feel it is one of the best things the Roanoke Valley has going for it. I hope it will continue to grow and the various governments will continue to work together and support this worthwhile project. This is one of the top crown jewels in our area. Thanks to everyone for their hard work. B44 Greenway network I am a bicyclist for transportation. I will not be able to make it to the public information meeting. I Please include this comments as part of the official record. Thank you. Appendix D - 2 Public Responses to Draft 2018 Greenway Plan April 19 - May 4, 2018 ID # Topic Comments B44 Greenway network The Roanoke River Greenway parking lot along Bennington Road, SE needs to be physically connected with the Tinker Creek greenway by a dedicated "off-street" multi -use trail. The property behind Rossi Industries is perfect right-of-way near Underhill Road to make this possible. The County needs to act now and get it done before the land transfers to another person/corporation. B45 Greenway network I am anxiously awaiting the Daleville greenway!! You gals and guys are doing a great job!!! B46 Greenway network Hope there is a plan to link Fishburn to Wasena... much needed for all of us across Brandon and Brambleton! B47 Greenway network I just wanted to take a moment and commend all of you on the great work you've done on the new plan! I was reading through it today and it's amazing how much work everyone has done since last spring! I'm proud to have been a part of the process and I hope great things continue to come down the way for greenways in the Roanoke Valley. Like always, if there is anything I can do from afar don't hesitate to ask! B5 Greenway network Connect greenway to Parkway at Mountain View Rd, Garden City and Starkey. Finish Roanoke River Greenway to Botetourt County. FC -2 Greenway network Rails to Trails to connect to Franklin County and on to Martinsville FC -2 Greenway network Connect to Greenhill Park (Priority) FC -2 Greenway network Bike lane Loch Haven Drive 4 Plantation Exit 146 FC -2 Greenway network Need to replace segment Bennington to Golden Park with lower grade greenway FC -2 Greenway network Need parking at Peters Creek & Brandon FC -2 Greenway network 2"d to 10th Cedar Run. Coordinate with Coca Cola FC -2 Greenway network Roanoke River Greenway to Explore Park FC -2 Greenway network Need connection with Parkway at Starkey and Garden City 01 Greenway Network I think you should ensure a safe path between the Roanoke River Greenway and the Salem VA Medical Center. I think it would encourage employees an alternative way to commute as well as allowing veterans a safe way to find their way to the VAMC. Also, the section of railway that was donated to the Transportation Museum should be re -gifted to the city for a rails to trail section (from Bridge St to Franklin Rd) that could allow a high speed lane for bikers and commuters. To have a diesel locomotive cut across our green spaces is unthinkable and downright wrong. 011 Greenway Network I would like to see the mudlick creek greenway expanded ASAP. Specifically the area from Hidden Valley to Cresthill. I believe this area would be used by the many households specifically with children in the area. The off-road greenway would also provide an avenue for recreation in the area and safer passage for cyclists and runners who would prefer to not run/ bike on 221. Thank you. We love the GREENWAYS! Appendix D - 3 Public Responses to Draft 2018 Greenway Plan April 19 - May 4, 2018 ID # Topic Comments 012 Greenway Network I'd recommend reserving the term "Greenway" for paved, separated, wide paths that connect (or will connect) to the entire system. Murray Run "Greenway" and Mill Mountain "Greenway" is misleading Murray Run is single track trail and Mill Mountain is on -road, not even a bike lane. I get that it is all part of the bigger greenway plan and greenway picture. It's just super confusing to someone new to Roanoke to think you can get from Brambleton to Grandin on this "greenway" and then - surprise! it's actually a mountain bike trail and you weren't riding a mountain bike so you're walking it. A significant problem with the Mill Mountain "Greenway" is getting through Elmwood Park. It has never been clear to me how this is supposed to be done. I end up just going on Williamson Rd up to the stop light. That's fine, although it would be better if the parking lane was a bike lane especially when traffic is high volume which it often is, but the map still looks like you wind your way through the park and when I'm in the park I'm just not seeing what path I'm supposed to take. Do I go up and around the amphitheater? That's steep and awkward. Lick Run Greenway sort of serves the under- served, but it doesn't connect to those neighborhoods as much as you'd think because it's on the other side of the creek so you can only get on it at 10th & 19th (Norris). The 10th St project improves matters a lot. Something should be on 19th St to make it more clear that here is a good connection to the Lick Run Greenway and a straight shot to Valley View. I don't think 19th gets a huge amount of traffic so I'd think it would be relatively inexpensive with paint & signs. I'm glad to see the recommendation to move the on -street Underhill section of the Roanoke River Greenway to off- street. That is a huge barrier! Figure 4-17: 1 love this map that shows the progress. But I believe the latest RSTP funds are for the "red" (unfunded) sections so it is now 100% funded, in construction, or completed from Explore to Green Hill, right? Seems like we should celebrate that! Roanoke River Greenway on -street connection to 24th St & Melrose Ave: Goodwill is just 1 mile from the Roanoke River Greenway but it might be 10 miles because the only connection is through Shaffer's Crossing. Establishing a safe and pleasant path, even if it is on -street, could be accomplished with murals and narrower lanes through Shaffer's Crossing (lanes are VERY narrow through the north, oldest tunnel but then widen out and traffic speeds up as soon as the lanes widen). 012 Greenway Network Section 5.2.3, City of Roanoke's sidewalk construction program is first -come -first-served and has no prioritization for transit routes, Greenway connections, multimodal centers/districts, filling gaps or contributing to the overall network. I wish the Greenway Plan would actively recommend that the City prioritize sidewalk construction some other way than in order of requests. Maybe not for this current plan but consider debating & coming up with a consistent message regarding ebikes. It will take a lengthy debate because I know some of your members are dead set against ebikes and seem to refuse to consider any other position. Simply banning them is just not going to work. Too many people using them and it's not fair to ban them all because some people could go too fast. Not all ebikes are the same. Speed limits seems much more reasonable. So long as they are electric motors - not gas - and some people need that assist. Maybe I could get up Underhill Rd if I had an assist. 013 Greenway Network I would like to see a definition of a greenway included. The plan seems a little fluid in what a greenway is. I would like to see the plan focus on the wider paths in linear urban open spaces or corridors. I would exclude on -road bike facilities and allow them to be addressed in the regional bike plan. Natural surface (single-track) trails can be addressed through park master planning. The greenway can reference these plans. Some of the proposed greenways do not seem feasible. I would let the plan focus on what could be achieved in the next 20 years. Otherwise, the plan looks good and is thorough. 05 Greenway Network Build Murray Run Greenway from existing location up Ogden Rd. to Tanglewood Mall. 08 Greenway Network Finish Roanoke River and Tinker And Hinchee connection to Carvins Cove. B9 On Road Connections Include the Community Arboretum at VA Western in the plan/map as an extension off of the Murray Run Greenway. This should be easier option as sidewalks are included in the Colonial Ave improvement project. Appendix D - 4 Public Responses to Draft 2018 Greenway Plan April 19 - May 4, 2018 ID # Topic Comments B1 Operations Use/Maint More nature & Historical interpretation signage B10 Operations Use/Maint I believe the greenway brings an excellent opportunity to support or conduct ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION programs. Some signage could be a low cost and high impact tool, just to use the beautiful landscape as a reminder to the community about protecting natural resources. Volunteering opportunities such as cleanups are great ways to participate and complementing those intentionally with education tools towards environmental protection/stewardship. The greenway needs recycling bins! B15 Operations Use/Maint People move here b/c of our outdoor amenities. B15 Operations Use/Maint Hold public events on the greenway. B16 Operations Use/Maint Wonderfully thorough plan! I had no idea so much work had been done & is planned. Kudos to all of you for making this happen. Huge quality of life improvement for me. And good luck with Walker Foundry- LOL! B16 Operations Use/Maint 1.) Massive behavioral based education plan for newbies on the greenway. Some way that people not familiar with safe etiquette can know #1, #2, #3 only top biggest rules. 1. stay on right. 2. No leashes across path. 3. Let people ahead of you know when you are passing. 2.) Make it wide --only in certain sections like Wasena playground bend, right before entering River House low water bridge, etc. B20 Operations Use/Maint Please continue ahead full steam! Make sure Parks & Rec receive extra funding to manage new facilities! B25 Operations Use/Maint Use it daily from downtown to Crystal Spring area and to Black Dog! B25 Operations Use/Maint Consider closing the car section from the ice house to south Roanoke tennis courts. This is the heaviest traffic on greenway-Bikers, walkers, baby carriages, fisherman. The car usage is too light to justify B28 Operations Use/Maint I just met another couple who recently chose to retire here based on outdoors trail access, weather (?) and more. I would really hope that Roanoke City Council as well as all other municipalities would continue to fully support this plan. B28 Operations Use/Maint Widening greenway paths in high traffic areas i.e. Wasena, Smith. Solar lighting. Fix busted kiosks in Salem. B29 Operations Use/Maint I am excited to see the plans and their momentum! B29 Operations Use/Maint Incorporating renewable energy options into suggestions of items requiring power (solar, wind). Where possible incorporating bmps to minimize runoff and educate users of the benefits of reduced storm water (but this is likely in the plan). Municipalities dedicating funding to the greenways. Removing Niagara Dam. Protecting Riparian areas (stream bank vegetation). B33 Operations Use/Maint In general, I prefer greenways and trails that require less maintenance because of the environmental impact of mowing & cutting. I therefore support dirt trails with low maintenance landscaping wherever possible. I'm surprised by the old average age of the old average age of the crowd at this event. Younger people certainly use the greenways, but I guess they don't come to events like this. I hope that you see their input in other ways so that their voices don't get left out. B34 Operations Use/Maint Please finish #40 (RR greenway) soonest! Thanks for doing this! There seems to be many opinions of what not to do. Priority should be that ALL sections be clear, well maintained, and safe. Some patrons (oldest) are now in maintenance mode and are mature. Perhaps the experience of other municipalities would offer some guidance as to what works best for those and possible errors to avoid. Keep up the good work! B35 Operations Use/Maint The plan(s) always seem to make good sense once I understand them. I suppose what my two issues would be (1) we need to move faster, spend more money if need be, but move faster towards completion. (2) To me it always seems to be confusing as to where are the trail heads, what is completed and what is not. It seems too difficult to tell others where to go to get them on any given section and where it ends. Appendix D - 5 Public Responses to Draft 2018 Greenway Plan April 19 - May 4, 2018 ID # Topic Comments B37 Operations Use/Maint Love the idea of a birding and wildlife trail but not sure how you would do this. Having some sort of open bird sanctuary that can really showcase some of the region's native birds would be great. Also a butterfly garden would be lovely. B4 Operations Use/Maint Thank you for all the hard work, thought & vision that went into this plan. B4 Operations Use/Maint My biggest concern about the greenways are they are too crowded and sometimes dangerous b/c people are not sharing the space. Wider paths would help -maybe more communication regarding where all the trails are & parking so people do not concentrate all in over -crowded popular spots B41 Operations Use/Maint 1. Come up with a way to make part of the Roanoke River a "River Walk" with a commercial aspect, similar to River Walk in San Antonio, TX. I think it would be a great tourist draw in addition to being enjoyed by our own citizens. 2. Come up with a way to get more than just small trash picked up out of the Roanoke River. Flood waters have left unsightly logs and broken trees that could be cleared. B43 Operations Use/Maint There are a lack of recycling bins around greenways. This is a missed opportunity o improve the region's sustainability. I imagine folks who frequent greenways will be more inclined to recycle than the average person. B43 Operations Use/Maint I think it would be nice if the tennis courts in Wasena Park would be repaired. It is a great location that could attract a community of tennis players, like at Rivers Edge. Currently, the courts are in disrepair and an eyesore. If not renovated, they could be repurposed into a skate park, for example.. A renovation would attract more people to this section of the park, which currently lacks vibrancy. B48 Operations Use/Maint Recommendations for ensuring that greenways are handicapped accessible. B50 Operations Use/Maint Location of Greenway update at Berglund Center was PERFECT! The Greenway connects all neighborhoods(not those just south of the River), the region and the Commonwealth. I always think the HUB is in downtown Roanoke. BUT The civic center location allowed ownership and buyin from the localities who make up the Greenway commission. Parking: encourage localities to provide on road or trail connectors to the industrial parks and neighborhoods so parking not so much a need to build. The APBP website has examples of shared use path designs. From: People not able to attend: How can I find the plan and make comments? From past County appointed Greenway Commission member. "Why so slow a process, frustrating?" Need industries to help build Greenways. (I know you have asked Lewis Galeabout the stretch in Salem. Novazyme has been a corporate citizen. Companies support the Gallop for Greenways) Kenny Wingfield: Kenny has MS add has trouble accessing the bathrooms. Check out his comments. If no comments, I hear about this ALL the time. Other: User conflict is a topic. Separate the users. Bob Herbert included the multiuse path in the flood project to meet cost benefit ratio needed by Federal Gov. The flood was in 1985. Might need to update the design for the trunk of the Greenway. STAY RIGHT; PASS LEFT; SOUND or GREET or ANNOUNCE B51 Operations Use/Maint Most comprehensive plan that I am sure took lots of work. My concerns are still the same. Enforcing biking and speed limits and if possible separating bicyclists from pedestrians. One constantly sees terrible situations for instance a father riding bicycles with his children all in a row across the greenway riding like that in the curvy section of Roanoke Memorial. Also, that book nook stand near the hospital needs to be moved. People standing there looking at books are in grave danger of causing an accident. B53 Operations Use/Maint Roanoke is a bicyclling destination. Last week Roanoke received the Silver Designation for mountain biking. Please see the proposed route for United States Bike Route 11. The proposed route includes the Skyline Drive and portions of the Blue Ridge Parkway. B7 Operations Use/Maint The Greenways give me a better quality of life and they also make the Roanoke Valley a more attractive place to relocate. I like the way all the possible opportunities are recognized and added to future plans. You have the right priorities! Appendix D - 6 Public Responses to Draft 2018 Greenway Plan April 19 - May 4, 2018 ID # Topic Comments B7 Operations Use/Maint Keep all motorized vehicles including electric off. Under current conditions in some sections kids' bikes are ok but cyclists should use the road. Maybe the greenway should be widened and delineated. I say this as a cyclist and a walker. Cyclists fail to call out and one false move could be devastating. More bike lanes would be good. A bike lane on 311 from Hanging Rock to Bradshaw and the road to the Cove is badly needed. FC -4 Operations Use/Maint Recycling bins for users FC -4 Operations Use/Maint Stop spraying pesticides on the greenway FC -4 Operations Use/Maint Plant (and keep unsprayed) edible landscape! FC -4 Operations Use/Maint E -bike on paved trails only. FC -4 Operations Use/Maint Signage for blueways & greenways on VDOT bridges that cross greenways/blueways FC -4 Operations Use/Maint Homeless on the greenway FC -4 Operations Use/Maint Bathrooms open year-round FC -4 Operations Use/Maint Connectivity to livability -so do not need to drive FC -4 Operations Use/Maint More trash cans FC -4 Operations Use/Maint No trash cans - pack it in/pack it out FC -4 Operations Use/Maint Great Job on keeping the greenways clear after storms! FC -4 Operations Use/Maint Keep user "rules' simple FC -4 Operations Use/Maint More river access points for boating FC -4 Operations Use/Maint Connection from Towers/Lakewood Park to Smith Park greenway FC -4 Operations Use/Maint Emergency Pole/station in case of emergencies FC -4 Operations Use/Maint Big and informative and easy to navigate packets for visitors and locals; ex. Bikeshare, access points for GPS, FAQs, etc FC -4 Operations Use/Maint More lighting for winter months FC -4 Operations Use/Maint Neighborhood based art projects FC -4 Operations Use/Maint Respite stops... contemplative spaces FC -4 Operations Use/Maint Additional places to touch the water 010 Operations Use/Maint stop paving, stop cutting down trees, stop scarring our land! 03 Operations Use/Maint As a daily user of Wolf Creek Greenway, my personal concern is maintaining this greenway as a natural/unpaved surface. There are too few unpaved options. The human body is not meant to walk long distances on hard surfaces. It is important that some parts of the system be accommodating to people who desire a more natural experience without having to resort to more rugged hiking trails. 04 Operations Use/Maint This plan seems to mainly talk about the expansion and nothing about the upgrades to the existing Greenways. I walk the Wolf Creek Greenway ... the bottom of the list Greenway. It could use some major improvements such as the surface which is some areas is like walking in loose sand due to the gravel too thick and huge gravel in other areas. It makes it hard to ride a bicycle, especially for a child. A lot of folks walk in the grass to avoid walking in this mess. It would be nice to have more bathrooms since in the winter the toilets are removed due to vandalism in Goode Park so that leave two and one is at Stonebridge and the other on the Vinton side. There needs to be more trash cans since once you past Goode Park there are none on the trail going towards Mountain View Road, unless you go all the way into Stonebridge Park just to throw a water bottle away. I have not seen any improvements at all to this Greenway. More needs to be done to what is already being used instead of worrying about connecting them which seems to be the top priority. B12 Tinker Creek I'm excited about #43 Tinker Creek Greenway & #36 Perimeter Trail. B13 Tinker Creek Looking forward to the Tinker Creek Greenway and hope a route can be found everyone can get behind. I love linking to Carvins Cove on the east side of Roanoke. Thanks for linking Garden City to the Roanoke River trail! B18 Tinker Creek 11 only support subarea 3. 1 object to the route from Old Hollins Rd behind Mt. View School. 618 ITinker Creek I I really like Subarea 3. Appendix D - 7 Public Responses to Draft 2018 Greenway Plan April 19 - May 4, 2018 ID # Topic Comments B21 Tinker Creek Please do not have the route on Tinker Creek (sub -area 3) at all when other routes on Plantation Rd will work. B26 Tinker Creek As a resident of the Tinker Cree Area, we support the greenway running along Plantation Rd. We love the greenways. B42 Tinker Creek I support the Greenway Plan but as a homeowner whose property borders Tinker Creek, I only support option B or option C for the Tinker Creek segment. Please consider putting street names on the maps so people can follow the proposed routes better. B49 Tinker Creek Thank you for the invite to the meeting. I unfortunately was unable to attend. I have been present at the meetings regarding the Daleville greenway. B49 Tinker Creek I live in Fairview off of Glebe and Orchard Lake. My neighbors and I have been very vocal about the desire to keep the greenway out of our neighborhood and the direct perimeter of our neighborhood. I didn't want my absence or input to be misconstrued as lack of interest in the planning stages of the greenway. I am indeed in favor of physical activity. We moved to the Fairview area for privacy and the desire to get away from our neighbors. We would appreciate the respect of our privacy in design of the greenway. Other connection points are available from the town center, to the Glebe, to the other desired connections. I have been in contact regularly with Mr. Farmer and will continue to advocate for my neighborhood. We are concerned about the negative affects of the greenway and our privacy. It should not be a consequence to us. Connectivity can occur through other routes that still give the option of the use of the greenway. B52 Tinker Creek Unfortunately, due to my work schedule, I was not able to attend the Greenway Plan meeting in April 2018. Please keep me on any emails about any future Greenway planning meetings. B52 Tinker Creek I am especially very interested in any future planning about Tinker Creek Greenway concept as I am very much in favor of a future Tinker Creek Greenway. I live near LaMarre Drive and Tinker Creek runs behind my home, and I think a Greenway in this area would be great, especially any type of Greenway that might have a link along LaMarre Drive to Williamson Rd and Hollins University. Thanks for your emails and for all your work to help the greenways, which is so much appreciated. B6 Tinker Creek As a landowner in the Villages of Tinker Creek area, I support the Greenway thru Tinker Creek. I understand some areas may need to be routed differently due to the terrain/etc. but a Greenway trail would further enhance the Hollins revitalization plan. B6 Tinker Creek We look forward to be able to ride from our location up to Carvins Cove, which I believe is a great, untapped resource (and tourist attraction) that can be utilized wisely. B8 Tinker Creek I remember when we came here to the Civic Center to see/comment on a brand new idea for Roanoke: The Greenways! We've come a long way since then. I was amazed at the extent of possibilities that are underway or under study. B8 Tinker Creek I am disappointed that landowners are still preventing the Greenway from following Tinker Creek. Putting it along Plantation RD would be much less desirable b/c of traffic noise and exhaust, and b/c it's a considerable hill climb -not so good for inexperienced cyclist. I love the idea of eventually being able to travel on a greenway to Daleville. A connection btw Loch Haven Drive and Plantation Rd is a great idea! Especially now with the Plantation Rd. improvements and the walking trail up to Carvings Cove. FC -3 Tinker Creek Zagster bike station at Plantation Road parking lot for Tinker Creek Greenway FC -3 Tinker Creek How do you connect 38 to the creek safely? FC -3 Tinker Creek End of Old Manor to creek is not going to happen (Jeff Obenchain) FC -3 Tinker Creek We do not support the section along Tinker Creek from Old Hollins Rd - behind Mt. View School (Stephen Rossi) FC -3 Tinker Creek Ditto above — Beth Rossi FC -3 Tinker Creek We sure do support it! FC -3 Tinker Creek I support the greenway along Tinker Creek. (Mark Eanes) FC -3 Tinker Creek I prefer the eastern route on sub -area 5 in Daleville (James Hancock) Appendix D - 8 Public Responses to Draft 2018 Greenway Plan April 19 - May 4, 2018 ID # Topic Comments 02 Tinker Creek Let the greenway follow Plantation from Old Hollins Rd to ITT 06 Tinker Creek I live at 6918 Trevilian Rd. and am completely against the proposed subarea 3 Option A direction. My property includes part of Tinker Creek and the proposed option and my home has openings for doors and windows and am NOT happy with having people coming thru the edge of my property and the availability of them coming onto the property if the choose to cross the creek. Not looking forward to the area not being policed and many pets that are not cleaned up after. 07 Tinker Creek I live at 6918 Trevilian Road. Part of my property is next to Tinker Creek and is located in the "Subarea 3" section. I am totally against and do not support Option A due to this would put the access next to my property. I have windows located on my home facing the proposed Option A route. This is a safety and privacy risk to me and other neighbors. Brian K. Hood 09 Tinker Creek Landowners along proposed routes should have been notified about plans, in some cases years ago. Particularly those whose properties are mentioned specifically as highlights of the proposed routes. Wherever possible existing right of way corridors should be utilized, such as along low use railroad tracks, roads, and existing amenities. Properties should not be bisected by the greenways, rather the greenway should follow a path along existing property lines. The upper end of Tinker Creek in Botetourt specifically is currently a relatively pristine creek compared to the polluted mess in Roanoke County, and as such provides a home to some of Virginia's less common fauna that require clean water. Further, care should be taken to prevent the spread of invasive species currently found along the Tinker Creek corridor during construction of the greenways, if possible even commit resources for their removal so that Virginia's native flora and fauna can be on display for the greenway's users. Demonstrate good faith in pursuing the above and I could get on board and support some version of a greenway. First step: inform all potentially impacted landowners of proposed plans and include an apology that it hadn't already been done. Appendix D - 9 Page Intentionally Left Blank Appendix E Tinker Creek Greenway Conceptual Plan Appendix E - 1 Tinker Creek Greenway Conceptual Plan Table of Contents I. Introduction.....................................................................................................3 II. Background...............................................................................................................4 A. Goals....................................................................................................4 B. Previous Studies...................................................................................4 C. Trail Development Status.....................................................................5 D. Project Leadership: Tinker Creek Greenway Steering Committee and Planning Process..........................................................................5 III. Resource Assessment and Route Analysis........................................................8 A. Inventory and Mapping........................................................................8 B. Challenges and Opportunities............................................................ 11 C. Tinker Creek Community Meetings Summary.....................................12 D. Greenway Segment Evaluation Process..............................................14 E. Segment Analysis Results and Greenway Design Considerations ..... 16 — Subarea 1..................................................................................... 19 — Subarea 2..................................................................................... 21 — Subarea 3..................................................................................... 23 — Subarea 4..................................................................................... 28 — Subarea 5..................................................................................... 33 IV. Implementation............................................................................................. 39 A. Public Comment from Community Meetings ....................................... 39 B. Project Phasing................................................................................... 39 C. Cost and Funding Strategy................................................................. 40 List of Figures: Figure 1. Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan, 2007............................................................... 3 Figure 2. Tinker Creek Greenway Study Area........................................................................10 Figure 3. Community Meeting Mapping Exercise Results, Roanoke County Segments.... 12 Figure 4. Community Meeting Mapping Exercise Results, Botetourt County Segments.13 Figure 5. Tinker Creek Greenway Segment Analysis Matrix ................................................ 16 Figure 6. Tinker Creek Greenway Subareas.....................................................................18 Figure 7. Gateway Crossing Area Plan, Botetourt County...............................................35 Appendix E - 2 I. Introduction From downtown Roanoke, to its headwaters in Botetourt County, Tinker Creek connects a diversity of urban, suburban, industrial, and rural landscapes. Throughout the stream valley remnants of old mills, taverns, and historic buildings can be found. The Carolina and Great Wagon Roads both traversed the creek, which spurred early commercial and industrial development along its banks. Development of the Tinker Creek Greenway could expand awareness and interpretation of these heritage resources as well as connect natural areas, parks, and other trail systems such as Carvins Cove, Read Mountain, and the Appalachian Trail. In addition, the greenway has the potential to connect seven schools, a myriad of commercial areas, and employment centers, providing residents with a way to walk or bike to work and school, and visitors with a safe, physically active way to explore the area's attractions. For several years there has been interest in developing a greenway that follows the Tinker Creek corridor, beginning with the first study completed in 1992. With the Roanoke River Greenway nearing completion, business support such as the Deschutes Brewery in Roanoke and Ballast Point Brewing Company in Botetourt, and the addition of Botetourt County to the Greenway Commission, the timing is ripe for exploring next steps. The Tinker Creek Greenway Conceptual Plan builds upon past planning efforts, assesses trail development options, and provides recommendations regarding future greenway development. Figure I. Roanoke Valley Greenways Plan, 2007 Existing Priority #I ._. Priority #2 Appendix E - 3 1 ' s �IEf kln lhtyfy D D'. 1 8 A'ilee � r V. t; f� Appendix E - 3 1 ' s �IEf kln lhtyfy D D'. 1 8 A'ilee II. Background A. Goals The goals of the Tinker Creek Greenway mirror the broader regional greenway goals, specifically: — Recreation and Health: to provide access to the stream valley corridor for a multitude of trail -related activities (walking, biking, running, etc.), as well as fishing and wildlife viewing, to increase physical activity and enhance community wellness — Transportation: to increase transportation choice and reduce traffic congestion on nearby roads, through an expanded system of non -vehicular connections that link residential neighborhoods, commercial areas, employment centers, and community facilities. — Education and Interpretation: to illuminate the area's history and educate visitors about the unique ecological and heritage resources of the stream corridor — Environmental Conservation: to protect sensitive ecological areas, plant and animal species, and reduce impacts of flooding B. Previous Studies Numerous studies have been completed over the past several years to explore the idea of a greenway and trail along Tinker Creek. The following plans document the natural, historic, and cultural resources found along the stream corridor. They also highlight some of the issues and challenges to greenway development. The plans are listed below (links provided to the full documents where available): — Tinker Creek Conservation/Development Plan, 1992 — Tinker Creek Greenway Conceptual Master Plan, 2000 (Virginia Tech Landscape Architecture Class) — Tinker Creek Greenway Extension, Conceptual Layout, prepared by City of Roanoke Parks and Recreation Planning, April 18, 2016 In addition, Tinker Creek Greenway is mentioned in various state, regional and local planning documents, including: — 2013 Virginia Outdoors Plan, Chapter 10, Region 5, p. 10-58 — Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan, December 1995, p. 36-37, 41, 43 — 2007 Update to the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan, p. 5-20, 5-21 — Roanoke Valley Alleghany Regional Commission Rural Bikeway Plan, 2006 — Bikeway Plan for the Roanoke Valley Area MPO, 2012 Update — Vision 2040 Roanoke Valley Transportation Plan, September 28, 2017, p.150, 154 — City of Roanoke. Comprehensive Plan Vision 2001-2020, p. 64 — Hollins Area Plan, adopted November 2008, p. 52-53 — Hollins Area Plan, Annual Update January 2010 — 2016 Gateway Crossing Area Plan, Botetourt County, November, 2016 — 2017 Parks, Recreation, Greenways, and Blueways Section of Botetourt County Comprehensive Plan Appendix E - 4 C. Trail Development Status In 2001, the City of Roanoke constructed the first 1.5 mile segment of the Tinker Creek Greenway from the Roanoke River to Wise Avenue, providing a connection between the proposed Roanoke River Greenway and Fallon Park. In 2012, a two-mile section was completed from Hollins University to Carvins Cove, built by Roanoke County, Hollins University and volunteers. The trail utilized Hollins University's land under an agreement and a donated easement across private property. A big boost to the planning effort came in 2016 when businesses at Roanoke Centre for Industry and Technology (RCIT) expressed interest in a greenway connection from RCIT to downtown. The City committed to completing the greenway segment between the Wise Avenue trailhead and Mason Mill Park. In addition, the FY17 Regional Surface Transportation Program awarded $1,220,000 for the Tinker Creek Greenway (Wise to Orange Ave), for FY 17- 19, spurring the City to start the engineering for this phase. Progress has also been made in Botetourt County. In 2012, County staff worked with engineers to develop a Daleville Greenway concept, linking the Daleville Town Center, Lord Botetourt High School, the trail system at Greenfield Center and the Tinker Creek corridor. In March 2015, Botetourt was awarded a $476,000 Transportation Alternatives Program grant for the first phase of development, and in 2016 the County joined the Greenway Commission. In December 2017, the County approved the "Parks and Recreation, Greenways and Blueways" Comprehensive Plan Chapter which included commitments to upgrade, maintain and expand trails and greenways throughout the County and continue to participate in the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission, ensuring local planning efforts are aligned with the regional vision. D. Project Leadership: Tinker Creek Greenway Steering Committee and Planning Process In July 2015, the Executive Committee of the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission (GC) formed the Tinker Creek Greenway Steering Committee in partnership with the Roanoke Valley - Alleghany Regional Commission (RVARC), City of Roanoke, Roanoke County, and Botetourt County. Support was provided by the National Park Service, Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance Program (RTCA). The purpose of the committee was to assess greenway alignment options and gain consensus on a timeline and priorities for future greenway development. In December 2015, the first meeting was organized and the project team drafted a three - phased planning approach that included: 1) data collection, mapping, and analysis; 2) stakeholder engagement including meetings and workshops with neighborhood residents, businesses, schools, and other stakeholders in the project area; and 3) development of recommendations and completion of a conceptual greenway plan to document findings. The following tasks and roles were established: 1. Inventory and document corridor resources. (Localities, GC, andRVARC) 2. Compile GIS maps of corridor features and land ownership. (RVARC) 3. Engage stakeholders, including neighborhood residents, businesses and corporations, civic groups, universities and institutions, VDOT, locality and agency staff, schools, and others as identified. (Steering Committee) Appendix E - 5 4. Identify potential alternative alignments; evaluate constraints and opportunities for each alignment. (Steering Committee/RICA) 5. Design and host public forums to receive input on corridor options, evaluate input, and incorporate into the analysis. (Steering Committee/RICA) 6. Complete trail alternatives analysis; document and map findings and recommendations. (Steering Committee/RICA) 7. Develop a multi-year implementation plan with relative cost and funding options for greenway segments, critical milestones and phasing, and a maintenance and operations strategy. (Steering Committee/RICA) 8. Incorporate the greenway concept into the Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan (2018 revision) and present to councils and boards for adoption. (RVARC with GC and local jurisdictions) 9. Calculate preliminary engineering and cost estimates for preferred alternatives. (Future task -TBD) In the first year, a resource assessment, including inventory and GIS mapping of natural, cultural, historic, and community resources, land ownership and corridor amenities was completed with support from the RVARC. Aerial footage of the greenway corridor was also collected, utilizing a professionally licensed drone operator, and an edited video for the existing one -mile segment from Wise Avenue to the Roanoke River Greenway was developed pro bono by the contractor. Community outreach was initiated in 2016 and expanded in year two to assess interest and support of corporate/business landowners, Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), Hollins University, and adjacent neighborhoods. In March and April 2017, a series of six community meetings were held in conjunction with the regional Greenway Plan to receive input from citizens on route alternatives for Tinker Creek Greenway. The meeting schedule included: March 21: Greenfield Education and Training Center, Botetourt County, Daleville, VA March 27: Mountain View Elementary School, Hollins/Roanoke, VA March 30: Fishburn Elementary School, Roanoke, VA April 3: South County Library, Cave Spring/Roanoke, VA April 6: Glenvar Middle School, Roanoke County/Salem, VA April 10: Vinton War Memorial, Vinton, VA Tinker Creek options were evaluated in small group break- out discussions at the Botetourt, Mountain View, and Vinton forums. Additional information on community meeting results can be found in the 2018 Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan, Chapter 3 and Appendix C. In addition, Botetourt County held a community meeting Tinker small Group Discussion held at the Greenfield Training Center. Appendix E - 6 on June 6, 2017 to discuss alignments for Daleville Greenway. Several attendees asked questions about Tinker Creek Greenway at that time. Following the community meetings the Steering Committee worked to refine route maps and analyze the feasibility of various options. A detailed analysis of the corridor was conducted by breaking the entire corridor into 48 segments with logical endpoints, and ranking the segments based on agreed upon trail evaluation criteria that included constraints, opportunities, technical feasibility, and neighborhood support. The corridor analysis was completed in 2017, showing pros/cons and the relative priority of the trail segments based on the ranking. The committee created a final set of maps, based on the findings. Refinement of the concepts and development of an implementation strategy were completed in May 2018. Appendix E - 7 III. Resource Assessment and Route Analysis A. Inventory and Mapping In 2000, Virginia Tech students completed a comprehensive resources inventory for the ten - mile section of Tinker Creek in Roanoke City and County. The inventory served as a foundation for the development of a conceptual plan that was presented to the community at two public meetings. Although the plan was not officially incorporated into locality comprehensive plans, it was utilized as a resource guide and reference by local Planning and Parks and Recreation staff. The Committee expanded and updated the Virginia Tech assessment by adding Botetourt County, and created up-to-date GIS map files for the corridor. Field work was conducted to verify map data, and drone video was compiled to provide an overview for corridor analysis, outreach, and community meetings. Overview The Virginia Tech student research documented that the Tinker Creek corridor is rich in both natural and cultural resources, although some sections have been impacted by development. Tinker Creek originates from natural springs along the hillside of Tinker Mountain, providing year-round cold temperatures favorable for trout. The presence of limestone and dolomite buffer the stream's pH level, and make Tinker classify as a limestone stream. Several animal species are listed as state and/or federal threatened or endangered. There are no endangered plant species listed. The students also identified twelve historic properties located along the corridor including: Monterey, Bell Mont, Billy's Cabin, Fellers School, Lee Fellers House, Huntington, Harshbarger House, Windmere, Grey Flora House, Nininger House, the William Fleming Gravesite, and the Totera Indian Council Ground, some of which are listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Several sites are also listed in Botetourt County, including: Nininger's Mill (also known as Tinker Mill) near Daleville; the Bowyer -Holladay House; and Greenfield, a historic plantation that includes the site of the William Preston House (destroyed by fire) and slave dwellings and cemetery. (For more information see: Virginia Landmarks Register and National Register of Historic Places) Tinker Creek Greenway Study Area Figure 2 shows the entire Tinker Creek Greenway study area from the Roanoke River to Greenfield Center in Botetourt County. The alignment shown in the 2007 Roanoke Valley Greenways Plan was used as the starting point for analysis, which showed the greenway as a line extending up the creek. The planning team looked at land use patterns, property ownership, and physical constraints on both sides of the creek to assess opportunities for future trail development. The Committee found that there is significant diversity in the landscapes that the corridor passes through, from urban core to suburban to rural areas. Although some locations offer streamside locations and terrain suitable for trail development, other sites are constrained by Appendix E - 8 limited space between the creek and roadways, railways, or residential structures. Trail constrictions are most prominent in three locations: 1. There are several areas between Hollins Road (near the City boundary) and U.S. 11/Williamson Road, especially north of Mountain View Elementary School, where alternative options along roadways have been analyzed. 2. The area along U.S. 11/1-ee Highway, between Hollins and Cloverdale, where the creek travels back and forth under U.S. 11/1-ee Highway, and is constricted by highway and industrial/commercial development. An option to utilize connections on Tinker Mountain was analyzed for this area. 3. The underpass in Botetourt County where Tinker Creek travels under 1-81 is constricted by an active rail line and private property, presenting the challenge of where and how to cross under the highway. Two other options include the Hollins University pedestrian underpass and Reservoir Road. Connecting and Spur Trails: From its headwaters in Botetourt County, Tinker Creek is fed by Carvin Creek, Lick Run, and Glade Creek, offering future connections to these regional greenways, as well as several opportunities for spur trails that connect to parkland or other trail systems including: • Lick Run Greenway • Glade Creek Greenway • Carvin Creek Greenway (proposed) • Read Mountain Preserve • Carvins Cove Natural Reserve • Daleville Greenway (proposed) • Appalachian Trail • Read Mountain Greenway (proposed) These features were included in the overall analysis to evaluate opportunities for connections to areas adjacent to, but outside of, the Tinker Creek study area. Primary destinations and connection opportunities in each jurisdiction were also identified and are listed below. City of Roanoke Connection Opportunities: Roanoke River Greenway, Roanoke River, Glade Creek Greenway, Fallon Park, East Gate Park, Mason Mill Park, Monterey Golf Course, Blue Hills Golf Course, Read Mountain Preserve, Indian Village housing project, Regional Center for Animal Care and Protection, Deschutes Brewery, Roanoke Centre for Industry and Technology Roanoke County Connection Opportunities: Friendship Retirement Community, Mountain View Elementary School, Village at Tinker Creek, Hollins University, Carvin Creek Greenway, Carvins Cove Natural Reserve, Brookside Park, Hollins Park, Walrond Park, Sadler Park, Community School, Tombstone Cemetery Botetourt County Connection Opportunities: Daleville Town Center, the Glebe Retirement Community, Botetourt Center at Greenfield, Gateway Crossing Urban Development Area (UDA), Carvins Cove Natural Reserve, Appalachian Trail, Greenfield Recreation Park, Lord Botetourt High School, Greenfield Elementary School Appendix E - 9 Figure 2. Tinker Creek Greenway Study Area Appendix E- 10 Tinker Creek Corridor Map Roanoke Valley -Alleghany MREGIONAL Greenfield md,,tdal Park. � commission Graenfieltl Ela�entary,Sctiod� � Legend oal—oe Tawn Center ....... 2007 Conceptual Line T """" 2018 Alternatives i -••••-• Design Underway ``✓ / Lob Botetourt Hqh school • Built Tinker Creek Greenway •': Roanoke River Greenway ••••••. Conceptual Roanoke River Greenway Other Built Trails ------• Conceptual Connecting Greenways _ Existing Sidewalk Appalachian Trail -•••-•••- Conceptual Daleville Greenway Uma Roanoke River Streams Interstate 81 '«- Industrial Park ? Daleville Town Center Roanoke Gas Property Homme Hnmersay' �•'''����• �.' School Parcels ot0tourt WVWA Property C o u my Public Lands Railroad °j.,.. Roanoke County Railway Properties �- Mountain Vew Ele ntary School Monterey Elementary Schaal t, • .f f l�' RCIT i City of Roanoke I ■ F 1 Fellan Park El ementary Schaal V 0 0.3 0.6 1.2 1.8 2.4 Miles Appendix E- 10 B. Challenges and Opportunities The Committee identified several challenges to trail development that are discussed below, including: site constraints, cost, and community support. Site Constraints/Feasibility: Past development along Tinker Creek has often left a very narrow (30-50') buffer between the creek and adjacent roads, residential properties, and developed commercial and industrial facilities. There are also constraints of steep slopes/cliffs, utilities, dams, and structures. Environmental review, permitting, and compliance with new storm water regulations involving construction near streams will need to be adhered to, and in some areas there are limited options for securing rights-of-way and/or complying with regulations to build a sustainable trail. Cost: A second challenge is identifying and securing funds to build the project. Although the region has had success in securing funds for greenway development, there is a continued need to work collaboratively across the three jurisdictions to leverage resources so that projects complement each other, rather than compete for funding. There is also a need to address long- term maintenance and operational costs. Community and Political Support: While a large majority of citizens have documented support for greenways in general, and along Tinker Creek specifically, there are areas where adjacent neighborhoods have expressed concerns about potential impacts. These concerns include privacy, safety, and security in places with limited buffer areas between homes and the potential trail location and concerns about interruption of farm operations. Addressing these issues through trail design and an alignment that is sensitive to adjacent properties will be needed in order to gain support from the community at large and subsequent support from elected leaders. There are several opportunities and benefits from development of the Tinker Creek Greenway. Multi -Modal Connections/Quality of Life: Tinker Creek Greenway has the opportunity to connect thousands of people from diverse socio-economic backgrounds in the City of Roanoke, Roanoke County and Botetourt County. For much of the corridor, citizens do not currently have a greenway in their neighborhood. Once developed, the Tinker Creek Greenway will be within a half mile, or 10 minute walk, for 24,500 residents and employees, expanding opportunities for walking and biking to work or school. Community Health and Wellness: A growing body of research published by Active Living Research and other organizations show that residents are significantly more likely to meet Center for Disease Control guidelines for physical activity if there is a trail or greenway near their home.' Carilion Clinic helped fund the Roanoke River Greenway in front of Roanoke Memorial Hospital and sponsors "doctor walks" on the greenway. This model could be expanded to Tinker Creek Greenway where businesses along the corridor could support community wellness. 1 The Power of Trails for Promoting Physical Activity in Communities, Active Living Research, January 2011 Appendix E - 11 Economic Development: The Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission, Roanoke Outside, and local jurisdictions have documented the economic value of greenways and trails. For example, the City of Roanoke and Roanoke Outside co -host the annual GO Fest. In November 2016 the festival, which took place at River's Edge Sports Complex, attracted 30,000 people and generated $180,000 in retail sales in a single weekend. Greenways have been a selling point for businesses considering relocation decisions, with business leaders recognizing their value in attracting and retaining a skilled workforce. For example, in the past few years, two breweries have located to sites along the future Tinker Creek and Daleville Greenways. Finally, greenways have become the focal point for outdoor events, walks, and runs. There are now over ninety 5k races per year in the City of Roanoke alone, as well as weekly pub runs, bike rides, and other family -friendly programs. C. Tinker Creek Community Meetings Summary In spring 2017, a series of community meetings were convened, to allow local citizens the opportunity to review and provide input on greenway options. Workshop participants evaluated several trail route alternatives and were provided the opportunity to propose new alignments, while thematic challenges and opportunities were documented by staff. The diversity of perspectives can be graphically viewed in Figure 3 and Figure 4, with "green dots" representing the preferred greenway routes noted by workshop participants. Figure 3. Community Meeting Mapping Exercise Results: Roanoke County Segments Mountain View Meeting Botetourt-Greenfield Meeting Frig Hollins Park 0 WF ! •Ome. v X sa. V " ark Itntain . .y -it, -r. --' --. .,. - intain View Elementary School Appendix E - 12 rookside Park Citizens who attended the Mountain View session expressed concerns about aligning the trail near the creek in the Hollins area of Roanoke County, due to limited space between the creek and residences. This was a particular concern of residents in the neighborhoods near LaMarre Drive. The vast majority of workshop participants preferred that the trail be located along existing roads such as Plantation Road away from private property. Citizens at the Botetourt session, however, favored trail connections that took advantage of stream valley areas to provide a more natural setting, away from vehicular traffic. Participants were split in terms of preference but favored a route along the creek rather than along Plantation Road. Citizens at both meetings expressed an interest in a trail connection to Carvins Cove. Both meetings showed an interest in avoiding the densely developed area along Lee Highway between Hollins University and Cloverdale, and instead preferred routing the trail on the west side of 1-81. Citizens at the Botetourt meeting identified a new trail connection along the creek at the base of Tinker Mountain west of the Daleville Town Center to connect to Greenfield trails. This option was drawn in by workshop participants. Figure 4. Community Meetings Mapping Exercise Results: Botetourt County Segments Appendix E - 13 D. Greenway Segment Evaluation Process The next step for the Committee was to divide the greenway corridor into 48 trail segments for further analysis, develop evaluation criteria, and apply the criteria to each of the trail segments. Evaluation Criteria: The evaluation criteria consisted of eight elements: 1. Connectivity 2. Visitor Experience/Scenic Quality 3. Destinations 4. Landownership/Right-of-way 5. Feasibility/Site Constraints and Cost 6. Community Support 7. Economic Development Potential/Financial Support 8. Mitigates or Addresses a Safety Issue Definitions: The following definitions provide a description of the element as well as point values that show how the segments were scored. 1. Connectivity. Does the trail segment connect to other trails or bike -pedestrian facilities? Will the segment provide critical continuity by closing a gap or eliminating a barrier in the regional network? 5 = Extends/connects to existing trail or bike -pedestrian facility 3 = Extends/connects to funded trail or bike -pedestrian facility 0 = No connection to existing or funded facilities 2. Visitor Experience/Scenic Quality. What is the quality of the corridor and landscapes the trail traverses? Are there natural areas, historic sites, scenic vistas or other resources that provide for an exceptional user experience? Are there assets or attractions that can be interpreted? 10 = High visual quality / visitor experience (shaded corridor along stream, etc.) 5 = Mix of landscapes, some high quality, some low 0 = Low visual quality (along busy roadway, industrial land use, etc.) 3. Destinations. Does the trail connect destinations for commuters and recreational users, (i.e. schools, employment centers, community facilities, parks, commercial areas)? 5 = Direct access to multiple destinations 3 = Proximity/indirect access to some destinations 0 = No access to job sites, schools, commercial centers, etc. 4. Landownership/Right-of-way. Will the trail segment be located in existing public right- of-way or will easements or fee simple purchase be needed from private land owner(s)? 10 = 100% in public ownership or secured through easement 5 = Part of right-of-way is secured; part is not 1= Some support from landowners; easement under negotiation 0 = 100% privately owned; entire segment needs negotiation with property owner(s) Appendix E - 14 S. Feasibility/Site Constraints and Costs. Are there technical and physical barriers to trail completion? Rivers/streams to cross? Highways or rail lines to traverse? Environmentally sensitive areas? Wetlands? Steep slopes? How costly is construction, i.e. board -walking, bridges, or other infrastructure improvements? 5 = Limited or no barriers to development; limited environmental impacts 3 = Some barriers that could be addressed but solutions may be costly 0 = Numerous and high cost constraints, i.e. railroad crossing; environmental issues 6. Community Support. Do adjacent neighborhoods and the community at -large support this trail segment? What has the response been from the meetings, comment sheets, surveys or direct communication to staff? 5 = Community supports (i.e. lots of green dots on preference maps) 3 = Mixed review by community; no consensus on route 0 = Community opposition (i.e. negative survey responses, forum comments, notes on map) 7. Economic Development Potential/Financial Support. Does the segment provide an opportunity for economic development, business investment, private -public partnerships? Is a business or other funder providing financial support for trail development? 5 = High economic potential, business providing financial support 3 = Moderate opportunity for future economic development 1= Low economic development potential 8. Mitigates or Addresses Current Safety Issue. Does the segment address a current bike - pedestrian safety issue? 5 = Yes, addresses current safety concern (i.e. provides separate facility to move pedestrians and/or cyclists off the roadway, improves intersection safety, etc.) 0 = No, does not address a current bike -pedestrian safety issue Cumulative score: Range 0-50 Sample Ranking Form Total Appendix E - 15 (poor) Range (great) Score Connectivity 0 1 2 3 4 5 Visitor Experience/Scenic Quality 0 2 4 6 8 10 Destinations 0 1 2 3 4 5 Land Ownership/Right-of-way 0 2 4 6 8 10 Feasibility/Site Constraints, Cost 0 1 2 3 4 5 Community Support 0 1 2 3 4 5 Economic Development Potential/Financial Support 0 1 2 3 4 5 Mitigates Safety Issue 0 = no 5 = yes Total Appendix E - 15 E. Segment Analysis Results and Greenway Design Considerations The trail segment scores on the eight criteria were developed by staff from that locality. Those scores were compiled into a spreadsheet showing how each segment scored for each individual criteria, as well as a cumulative score (see Figure 5). Figure S. Tinker Creek Greenway Segment Analysis Matrix Ranking Categories xK CV to Gl (n i « y L r O y ' n 'L > a LL « C 0 a t 'O of GJ J O �_ f6 « �-� « O f0 C V LL O L O O E a E 7 O N U f6 .� « GJ V W d �. « .� N J Q I. - H E Gj H 1 Existing section - Tinker Creek Greenway Roanoke City 2 Segment not scored; in design phase Roanoke City 3 3 7 4 5 3 4 3 2 31 Roanoke City 4 0 5 3 1 2 3 2 2 19 1 Roanoke City 5 0 5 3 1 3 3 1 5 21 Roanoke City 6 4 10 3 2 1 2 3 0 25 Roanoke Co. 7 0 10 1 0 1 3 0 0 15 Roanoke Co. 8 5 4 3 6 2 3 1 5 29 Roanoke Co. 9 0 0 3 10 3 5 1 5 27 Roanoke Co. 10 0 6 0 0 1 2 2 0 11 Roanoke Co. 11 0 6 4 0 1 2 1 0 14 Roanoke Co. 12 4 4 2 4 2 0 0 0 16 Roanoke Co. 13 0 4 2 0 2 0 0 0 8 Roanoke Co. 14 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 2 Roanoke Co. 15 Existing sidewalk Roanoke Co. 16 5 10 4 0 0 5 3 0 27 Roanoke Co. 17 4 4 5 8 4 2 3 5 35 Roanoke Co. 18 0 6 1 2 3 2 2 0 16 Botetourt Co. 19 0 2 4 4 3 3 4 5 25 Botetourt Co. 20 0 2 4 4 3 3 4 5 25 Botetourt Co. 21 0 8 0 6 3 5 4 0 26 Botetourt Co. 22 0 10 5 4 3 5 5 5 37 Botetourt Co. 23 0 10 5 4 3 5 5 5 37 Botetourt Co. 24 0 10 5 4 3 5 5 5 37 Botetourt Co. 25 0 6 0 2 3 2 1 0 14 Botetourt Co. 26 0 2 4 4 3 3 4 5 25 Botetourt Co. 27 0 2 1 2 3 1 0 0 9 Botetourt Co. 28 5 8 3 2 2 4 2 0 26 Botetourt Co. 29 0 2 4 4 3 3 4 5 25 Botetourt Co. 30 Existing section - Tinker Creek Greenway Ro/Bot 31 5 0 5 102 5 3 5 35 Roanoke Co. 32 5 0 3 10 3 5 1 5 32 Roanoke Co. Appendix E - 16 Figure 5. Tinker Creek Greenway Segment Analysis Matrix (continued) The segments were then grouped into five subareas and evaluated further for greenway potential (see Figure 6). The five subareas are as follows: 1. Wise Avenue to Mason Mill Park (City of Roanoke) 2. Mason Mill Park to Hollins Road at the Roanoke City/Roanoke County boundary 3. Hollins Road to U.S. 11/Williamson Road at Carvin Creek (Roanoke County) 4. U.S. 11/Williamson Road at Carvin Creek (Roanoke County) to 1-81/Tinker Creek Overpass (Botetourt County) 5. 1-81/Tinker Creek overpass to Daleville Greenway and/or Greenfield (Botetourt County) Both Tinker Creek stream corridor and road right-of-way alternatives were considered. Lick Run Greenway, example of off-road option Garden City Trail, example of on -road option Appendix E - 17 Ranking Categories N E Gl (n i+ y r O y .L a W a+ C 0 a 'O of M d J O f6 +' a+ O f0 C V LL 0 7 O E a E 7 O N U 0 �' y V W a +' .� N Q H 0 E f0 aj H 33 0 10 3 0 3 3 3 5 27 Roanoke Co. 34 0 2 4 4 3 3 4 5 25 Botetourt Co. 36 0 2 4 4 3 3 4 5 25 Botetourt Co. 36 1 0 2 10 5 2 2 5 27 Roanoke Co. 37 5 2 5 10 2 5 4 5 38 Roanoke Co. 38 0 0 1 2 2 0 0 0 5 Roanoke Co. 40 Existing sidewalk Roanoke Co. 42 4 10 3 2 4 5 3 0 31 Roanoke Co. 43 0 10 3 0 1 0 1 0 15 Roanoke Co. 44 0 1 1 3 2 3 1 2 13 Roanoke City 45 4 9 4 4 1 2 4 1 3 1 5 35 Roanoke City 46 0 0 3 10 4 5 1 5 28 Roanoke Co. 47 4 0 5 10 3 3 3 5 33 Roanoke Co. 48 Segment added after evaluation exercise, based on public input Botetourt Co. The segments were then grouped into five subareas and evaluated further for greenway potential (see Figure 6). The five subareas are as follows: 1. Wise Avenue to Mason Mill Park (City of Roanoke) 2. Mason Mill Park to Hollins Road at the Roanoke City/Roanoke County boundary 3. Hollins Road to U.S. 11/Williamson Road at Carvin Creek (Roanoke County) 4. U.S. 11/Williamson Road at Carvin Creek (Roanoke County) to 1-81/Tinker Creek Overpass (Botetourt County) 5. 1-81/Tinker Creek overpass to Daleville Greenway and/or Greenfield (Botetourt County) Both Tinker Creek stream corridor and road right-of-way alternatives were considered. Lick Run Greenway, example of off-road option Garden City Trail, example of on -road option Appendix E - 17 Figure 6. Tinker Creek Greenway Subareas Va� lins\ 0 0.375 0.75 W 1.5 rn 1, Greenfield Industri I Park Greenfield Elemen ary School / �''^•t P `mac Lord • School Botefourf ounty bare: 4 Roanoke N Couin ca •. • RCIT t" r- O'f Rognok'` j � J School T win o - Vi nton 'm 3 ■Mile Appendix E - 18 Tinker Creek Subareas Legend Tinker Creek Alignments 2007 Conceptual Line --•• 2018 Alternatives - - - • Design Underway Built Tinker Creek Greenway o Roanoke River Greenway • • • • Conceptual Roanoke River Greenway Other Built Trails ----- Conceptual Connecting Greenways Existing Sidewalk Appalachian Trail —•••—• Conceptual Daleville Greenway Roanoke River o Streams Interstate 81 Industrial Park Daleville Town Center Roanoke Gas Property School Parcels WVWA Property Public Lands Railroad Railway Properties Subarea 1: Wise Avenue to Mason Mill Park (City of Roanoke) Distance: 1.8 miles Trail Access: Wise Avenue/Fallon Park, Orange Avenue, 13th Street, Mason Mill Road, Mason Mill Park Alignment Alternatives Considered: One: Creek corridor New trailhead proposed: 13th Street Scoring of Segments by Evaluation Criteria (p. 14-17) Seg# I Score I Locality I Location No segments were scored for this subarea, as the engineering and design are underway. Subarea 1 to w n* o'f Vinton Appendix E - 19 2007 Conceptual Line X14Legend 2018 Alternatives ____-- -- Engineered Built ------ Conceptual Connecting Greenway —•••—•••- Conceptual Daleville Greenway Existing Sidewalk Subarea 1 to w n* o'f Vinton Appendix E - 19 Trail Alignment Description: Design for this section is underway. The trail will be constructed as a shared -use, paved path, separated from vehicular traffic, following the creek from the existing trailhead at Wise Avenue to Orange Avenue. At Orange Avenue, the trail will utilize a grade -separated crossing under Orange Avenue to continue upstream along 131h Street, between the creek and the road, on river left (east). A new trailhead is proposed on 13th Street across from East Gate Park. A new trail bridge will be installed to cross the creek at the intersection of 13th Street and Mason Mill Road. The trail will then travel east, parallel to Mason Mill Road, on river right. At the next creek crossing along Mason Mill Road, a modification of the existing bridge deck will be feasible to continue to keep the trail separated from vehicular traffic. The trail will continue to the Mason Mill Park trailhead where it will connect to the proposed Read Mountain Greenway, a future connection to the Roanoke Centre for Industry and Technology and Read Mountain Preserve. For additional information on the Read Mountain Greenway see the Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan, 2018 Update, Chapter 4.2.38. Appendix E - 20 Subarea 2: Mason Mill Park to Hollins Road at the Roanoke City/Roanoke County Boundary Distance: 2.5 miles Trail Access: Mason Mill Park, Old Mountain Road, Hollins Road, Columbia Road Alignment Alternatives Considered: Two: East of the creek and west of the creek Scoring of Segments by Evaluation Criteria (p. 14-17) Seg# Score Locality Location 3 31 City Along the creek, Mason Mill to Old Mountain Road west side (river right) 4 19 City Along the creek, Old Mountain Road to Columbia Street 5 21 City Along the creek, Columbia Street to Hollins Road/Roanoke County line 44 13 City Old Mountain Road to Columbia Street, west side on -road to link with abandoned rail right-of-way 45 35 City Along the creek, Mason Mill to Old Mountain Rd east side (river left) Legend s Qeak Greenway �, 2007 Conceptual Line ------ 2018 Alternatives Monterey ------ Engineered Elementary School Built Subl area 2 ------ Conceptual Connecting Greenway 4j -•••-•••- Conceptual Daleville Greenway Existing Sidewalk LLCity of Roanoke � A 1 - 1 AI .p 1 1 1 1 T_ r h Appendix E - 21 Trail Alignment Descriptions: The west side route (#3, 44, 5) would follow the creek across several properties owned by the Western Virginia Water Authority and the Housing Authority. It would then follow an old railroad right -of- way through commercial properties (easement not yet secured). The trail would cross Columbia Street, at -grade, continue upstream to Hollins Road, and connect with the Roanoke County section at the American Tire property (#5). The east side alternative (#45, 4, 5) would go north from Mason Mill Park, on the east side of the creek, skirting two golf courses and private properties. At Old Mountain Road, the trail would cross under the road and continue on the east side (#4). A bridge would be needed upstream of Old Mountain Road to cross over to the west side of the creek and follow an old railroad right -of- way (easement not yet secured). The trail would cross Columbia Street, at -grade, continue upstream to Hollins Road, and connect with the Roanoke County section at the American Tire property (#5). Legend Option Under Consideration ------ Tnker Creek Alignments Built ak Green way ------ Engineered Conceptual Oalevllle Greenway terey 1 entary School ----- Conceptual Connecting Greenway �e Existing Sidewalk I f C I t Y 0� Roanoke gym` i �oJ, i I ' ma � �f 1 1 1 1 �I� I I� Subarea 2 j west Side Route Legend �\ ------ Option Under Consideration ------ Tnker Creek Alignments reen``�•� Built way ���ri ------ Engineered 1�—^-— Conceptual Oalevllle Greenway ry _School -----• Conceptual Connecting Greenway Existing Sidewalk I t Y o fL�/ �4�- Roanoke 4 a i i v�0 m i 1 I p 1 Subarea 2 �,% East Side Route Planning Considerations/Public Comment: • Both options require right-of-way: golf courses, private properties, commercial properties for rail trail segment. • Detailed analysis will be required for the trail alignment at the two existing bridges located at Hollins Road and Old Mountain Road and for any new trail bridge. • Both options require an at -grade crossing at Columbia Street. Appendix E - 22 Subarea 3: Hollins Road at the Roanoke City/Roanoke County Boundary to U.S. 11/Williamson Road at Carvin Creek (Roanoke County) Distance: Approximately 3 miles. Hollins Road to Mountain View Elementary School: 1.5 miles, Mountain View Elementary School to Williamson Road: 1.4 to 1.6 miles Trail Access: Hollins Road, Mountain View Elementary School. Depending on the route, there is potential for continuous access along Plantation Road and Williamson Road. Alignment Alternatives Considered: Three: On -road, along creek, combined creek -road Scoring of Segments by Evaluation Criteria (p. 14-17) Seg# Score Locality Location 6 25 Roanoke Co. Roanoke City/Roanoke County Jurisdiction Line to Hollins Road 7 15 Roanoke Co. Along the creek, Mountain View Elementary School to LaMarre Drive (2007 plan, conceptual line) g 29 Roanoke Co. LaMarre Drive: Tinker Creek to Williamson Road 9 27 Roanoke Co. Plantation Road: Old Manor Drive to Hedgelawn Avenue 10 11 Roanoke Co. Tinker Creek crossing east alternate, north of Ardagh property 11 14 Roanoke Co. Tinker Creek crossing to southern edge of Flora Farm Road, Mountain View Elementary School connection 12 16 Roanoke Co. Flora Farm Road through the Village at Tinker Creek 13 8 Roanoke Co. Village at Tinker Creek to Plantation Road 14 2 Roanoke Co. Village at Tinker Creek to Tinker Creek 15 -- Roanoke Co. U.S. 11/Williamson Road, existing sidewalk, south side between Plantation Road and Hollins Court Drive (Existing sidewalks not scored) 16 27 Roanoke Co. Along the creek from Williamson Road to the 1-81/Tinker Creek Greenway Trailhead 17 1 35 Roanoke Co. U.S. 11/Williamson Road from Campus Drive through Sadler Park to Roanoke/Botetourt County Line 31 35 Roanoke Co. Plantation Road west side: Carvin Creek to existing Vista Ave sidewalk 32 32 Roanoke Co. Plantation Road west side: from Santee Road to Old Manor Drive 33 27 Roanoke Co. Carvin Creek Greenway spur, between Cosmetic Essence Innovations (CEI) and Big Lick Driving Range to Plantation Road 36 27 Roanoke Co. U.S. 11/Williamson Road from near Sadler Park to Botetourt County 37 38 Roanoke Co. Plantation Road: Hedgelawn Avenue to existing CVS sidewalk 38 5 Roanoke Co. Old Manor Drive: Plantation Road to Tinker Creek 40 -- Roanoke Co. U.S. 11/Williamson Road, existing sidewalk, north side between Plantation Road and Marson Road (Existing sidewalks not scored) 42 31 Roanoke Co. Hollins Road to northern edge of Ardagh property 43 15 Roanoke Co. Northern edge of Ardagh property to segment 11 (Tinker Creek crossing to Flora Farm Road) 46 28 Roanoke Co. East side of Plantation Road: Vista Avenue to Old Manor Drive (other side of Plantation Road from #32) 47 33 Roanoke Co. Hollins Road: the Tinker Creek bridge to Plantation Road Appendix E - 23 Legend 2007 Conceptual Line ------ 2018 Alternatives ------ Engineered — Built ------ Conceptual Connecting Greenway —•••—•••- Conceptual Daleville Greenway Existing Sidewalk 1 j ♦�;� C,�e ♦� Mountaln4View EIemente ry S hool ♦ Monterey Subarea 3 Elementary School Ir • Ro�C Subarea 3 provided many alignment options. After evaluating all and listening to the community, staff combined segments into three trail alignment alternatives, described on following pages. Road corridor: Roanoke City/Roanoke County boundary to Hollins Road to Plantation Road to Williamson Road. Combined stream -road route: Roanoke City/Roanoke County boundary along the stream corridor to Mountain View Elementary School connecting to Plantation Road to Williamson Road. Creek corridor: Roanoke City/Roanoke County boundary to Williamson Road along Tinker Creek and Carvin Creek. Appendix E - 24 Subarea 3: Road Corridor Option Route Description: From the Roanoke City/Roanoke County boundary, the trail would continue on Hollins Road to Plantation Road, and then along the Plantation Road right- of -way (segments #31, 32, 46, 9 and 37) north to Williamson Road. From there the trail would be routed east along Williamson Road on existing sidewalk (#15) to the Hollins University entrance at Campus Drive. Planning Considerations/ Public Comment • This option received the greatest support from the residents in adjacent neighborhoods. • Plantation Road already has large right-of-way on many sections. • This route is considered the least scenic and the least connected to Tinker Creek. • Plantation Road on -road routes need to be coordinated with a future road improvement project and address safety concerns. Appendix E - 25 Legend ------ Option Under Consideration �Q D ------Tinker Creek Alignments (�� — ------ Built Engineered —^-•^- Conceptual Daleville Greenway -----• Conceptual Connecting Greenway %% Existing Sidewalk Roan C 0 U C � vY_ Mountain View Elementary School � IIN �h N I• i Monterey Elementary School j 1 Subarea 3 �e�� Road Corridor Option Appendix E - 25 Subarea 3. Combined Creek -Road Option Route Description: From the Roanoke City/Roanoke County boundary, the route would continue on the east side of Tinker Creek (#6) on the commercial Ardagh property (#42) and continue north along the creek to just south of Mountain View Elementary School (#43). A bridge would be needed to cross over to the west side of Tinker Creek near the school. The route would continue uphill to the school (#11), then to Plantation Road right-of- way (#12, #13 or other public road right-of-way). The route would follow Plantation Road to U.S 11/Williamson Road to the Hollins University entrance at Campus Drive. Planning Considerations/ Public Comment • Ardagh, a manufacturing company east of the creek on Hollins Road, has indicated a willingness to have the greenway on its property. • Easements need to be secured for most of the stream alignment section. • A bridge over the creek near Mountain View Elementary School will be an expensive component of the project. • Plantation Road on -road route needs to be coordinated with a future road improvement project and address safety concerns. Legend �- ------ Option Under Consideration �5 y ------ Tinker Creek Alignments Built ------ Engineered -— Conceptual CDa onn lle Greenway .00� -----• Conceptual Connecting Greenway Existing Sidewalk R 4i��3 a C 19r � ek Mountain, iew Elementary�School i M ' i N j i 0 Monterey �� 1 Elementary Sch Y' Subarea 3 Combined Creek -Road �� h Option Appendix E - 26 Subarea 3. Creek Corridor Option Route Description: From Hollins Road, the route (#6 and 42) would continue on the east side of Tinker Creek from the Ardagh property (easement not yet secured) and north along the creek (#43) to Mountain View Elementary School. A bridge would be needed to cross over to the west side and on to the school property. The trail would continue upstream (#7) on the west side of the creek to LaMarre Drive where it would continue on - road (#8) to connect to Williamson Road across from the Hollins University entrance. Planning Considerations/ Public Comment: • Multiple property owners located along the creek do not support this option. • In several areas there is limited space between the creek and residential structures. • This route would be the most scenic and would provide opportunities for historical interpretation. • Easements need to be secured for most of the stream alignment route. • There are steep slopes along some sections of Tinker Creek. • A bridge over the creek near Mountain View Elementary School will be an expensive component of the project. .�' Legend ------ Option Under Consideration ------ Tnker Creek Alignments Built i ------- Engineered Conceptual Oaleville Greenway 00 -----• Conceptual Connecting Greenway C9� � Existing Sidewalk 1, R o a C o GlIr Mountain View Elementary School 1 M 1 � 1 �1 1 1 Subarea 3 '�`••�` Creek Corridor Monterey � Appendix E - 27 Subarea 4: U.S. 11/Williamson Road at Carvin Creek (Roanoke County) to 1-81/Tinker Creek Overpass (Botetourt County) Distance: 3.4 to 4 miles Trail Access: Lee Highway, Hollins University, Tinker Creek Trailhead, potential connection to Carvins Cove, Tinker Mountain Road Alignment Alternatives Considered: Three: On -road, combination of on and off-road, off-road around Tinker Mountain Scoring of Segments by Evaluation Criteria (p. 14-17) Seg# Score Locality Location Along Carvin Creek from Williamson Road under 1-81 to the existing I- 16 27 Roanoke Co. 81/Tinker Creek Greenway Trail head U.S. 11/Williamson Road from Campus Drive through Sadler Park to the 17 35 Roanoke Co. Roanoke/Botetourt County Line Roanoke/Botetourt County Line to U.S. 11/Lee Highway via Cufftown 18 16 Botetourt Co. Road and Brown Road U.S. 11/Lee Highway: from the Tinker Creek bridge near Vista Drive to 19 25 Botetourt Co. Gibson Lane 20 25 Botetourt Co. Along Tinker Creek from U.S. 11/Lee Highway to the 1-81 overpass 25 14 Botetourt Co. Private land east of 1-81: Old Mill Drive to Bryant Road to Gibson Lane Bryant Road: U.S. 11/Lee Highway to road ending at the 1-81 emergency 26 25 Botetourt Co. access Gibson Lane: U.S. 11/Lee Highway to private driveway and back to Tinker 27 9 Botetourt Co. Creek Side of Tinker Mountain: from the existing Tinker Creek Greenway to 28 26 Botetourt Co. Roanoke Gas property and Tinker Creek near the 1-81 overpass U.S. 11/Lee Highway: from the Roanoke/Botetourt County Line to the 29 25 1 Botetourt Co. Tinker Creek bridge near Vista Drive Roanoke/Botetourt Tinker Creek Greenway: existing section from 1-81 Trailhead to Carvins 30 Counties Cove (Existing trail segment was not scored) U.S. 11/Williamson Road from near Sadler Park on U.S. 11 to the 36 27 Roanoke Co. Roanoke/Botetourt County Line Note: An alignment along the creek was initially considered between LaMarre Drive and Gibson Lane, but after further study, it was found to be severely limited due to existing development. From LaMarre Drive to the Summer View Drive/U.S. Route 11 intersection, the creek is constricted by residential developments with limited space between the creek and structures. From Summer View Drive to Gibson Lane, the creek crosses under U.S. Route 11 three times and is constricted by the highway and commercial/industrial development. Appendix E - 28 Subarea 4 is bisected by 1-81, which restricts the development of options. Currently, there are three locations where it is possible to cross under the interstate: one at Hollins University, one on Reservoir Road and one at Tinker Creek. After evaluating the options, staff combined segments into three trail alignment alternatives, described on the following pages. Road corridor: U.S.11/Lee Highway corridor from Hollins University to Cloverdale and 1-81 underpass at Tinker Creek. Combined stream -road route: Use U.S. 11 Lee Highway corridor but route off the highway where feasible between Williamson Road at Hollins University and the 1-81 underpass at Tinker Creek. Off-road corridor: Tinker Mountain option. Cross under 1-81 at Hollins University and continue on the northwest side of 1-81, off-road, around the base of the mountain to the Tinker Creek underpass. These options are described in more detail on the following pages. Appendix E - 29 N X00 I, c� I' O I♦ ♦ ♦ _ 1 *01 io o -' i O'er 1 �� ,,i Legend Hollins University �r�, 2007 Conceptual Line 6 ♦ ��� -=---- 2018 Alternatives 1♦-i -- Engineered Built `` ♦---' ��\ ------ Conceptual Connecting Greenway • \♦- Subarea 4 �\-•••-•••- Conceptual Daleville Greenway Existing Sidewalk Subarea 4 is bisected by 1-81, which restricts the development of options. Currently, there are three locations where it is possible to cross under the interstate: one at Hollins University, one on Reservoir Road and one at Tinker Creek. After evaluating the options, staff combined segments into three trail alignment alternatives, described on the following pages. Road corridor: U.S.11/Lee Highway corridor from Hollins University to Cloverdale and 1-81 underpass at Tinker Creek. Combined stream -road route: Use U.S. 11 Lee Highway corridor but route off the highway where feasible between Williamson Road at Hollins University and the 1-81 underpass at Tinker Creek. Off-road corridor: Tinker Mountain option. Cross under 1-81 at Hollins University and continue on the northwest side of 1-81, off-road, around the base of the mountain to the Tinker Creek underpass. These options are described in more detail on the following pages. Appendix E - 29 Subarea 4. U.S.11/Lee Highway On -Road Option Route Description: The trail would be routed along Lee Highway from Hollins University to Gibson Lane (#17, #36, #29, #19), and then on Gibson Lane or along Tinker Creek to the 1-81 overpass (#27 or #20). There is limited space and private property at the 1-81 overpass. N Legend - Option Under Consideration ------ Tinker Creek Alignments Gj Built ------ Engineered ♦♦ rp. —^-•- Conceptual Daleville Greenway ♦, V -----• Conceptual Connecting Greenway Existing Sidewalk I� 0-0 I� I� I .� i Hollins University 1 . Subarea 4 On -Road Option Planning Considerations/Public Comment: • The crossing of 1-81 presents a significant physical barrier. Tinker Creek's passage under 1-81 is constricted by an active rail line and private property on both sides. • Right-of-way would need to be secured from VDOT and/or private property owners along Lee Highway. • Trail design options will require coordination with VDOT and will need to address safety concerns. • The Lee Highway option is the most direct, and desirable for commuters, but land use and vehicular traffic make it less desirable aesthetically and less desirable for recreation. • Development of the Gateway Crossing UDA needs to be integrated into future planning (see Subarea 5 for additional information). Appendix E - 30 Subarea 4. U.S.11/Lee Highway On -Road and Off -Road Option Route Description: The trail would be routed along Lee Highway in front of Hollins University (#17) but then off-road at the campus southeast border to Sadler Park, and along Emerald Lane to Reservoir Road. The route would continue onto low volume back roads including Old Mill Drive, Brown Road, Cufftown Road, and Bryant Road (#18, #25, #27) connecting to Gibson Lane. There are significant sections where the trail would be routed across private property to connect road segments. At Gibson Lane, the trail would be routed to the 1-81 overpass (#20). Legend JO ------ Option U n de r Cc n s de ration ------ Tinker Greek Alignments g — Built ------ Engineered Q —^-^- Conceptual 6aleville Greenway h 1 -----• Conceptual Connecting Greenway N Existing Sidewalk i i 1 Hollins^University Subarea 4 �� v On -Road and Off -Road Option Planning Considerations/Public Comment: • The crossing of 1-81 presents a significant physical barrier. Tinker Creek's passage under 1-81 is constricted by an active rail line and private property on both sides. • Right-of-way would need to be secured from numerous private property owners. • Highway segments will require coordination with VDOT and will need to address safety concerns. • Development of the Gateway Crossing UDA needs to be integrated into future planning (see Subarea 5 for additional information). Appendix E - 31 Subarea 4. Tinker Mountain Off -Road Option Route Description: From Lee Highway the trail would be routed along Carvin Creek on Hollins University or adjacent private property, and under 1-81 utilizing the existing tunnel and section of the Tinker Creek Greenway (#16, #30). Mid -way up the mountain the trail would be routed on a contour around the southeast side of Tinker Mountain (#28) connecting back to the creek near Tinker Mountain Road. Easements would be needed from Hollins University, utilities, and several private property owners. N �O �I cy �� w � I t , Legend �♦ \�� ------ Option Under Consideration ♦♦ ------ Tinker Creek Alignments ♦♦` Hollins University — Built ------ Engineered -^- Conceptual Qalevllle Greenway ►, ��.\ -----• Conceptual Connecting Greenway Existing Sidewalk Subarea 4 ��, Mountain Option Planning Considerations/Public Comment: • 1-81 presents a significant physical barrier. This option could utilize the existing access under the interstate near the Tinker Creek trailhead off Plantation Road. • Right-of-way would need to be secured from Hollins University, Appalachian Power, Roanoke Gas, and individual private propertyowners. • Future trail development should consider completion of Segment #16, in order to provide an improved connection to Carvins Cove, regardless of which Tinker Creek Greenway option is selected. If Tinker Creek Greenway alignment takes an alternative route, #16 and #30 could become part of Carvin Creek Greenway. • Trail design for the Tinker Mountain route option would need to address steep slopes and might require construction as a natural surface trail. • The Tinker Mountain route could provide an exceptional recreational experience, but would be less useful than other options as a commuter route. • Development of the Gateway Crossing UDA needs to be integrated into future planning (see Subarea 5 for additional information). Appendix E - 32 Subarea 5: 1-81/Tinker Creek Overpass to Daleville Greenway and/or Greenfield (Botetourt County) Distance: 2.0 — 2.4 miles Trail Access: Lord Botetourt High School, Daleville Town Center, other sites to be determined Alignment Alternatives Considered: Three: On -road along US 220, along Tinker Creek to Daleville Greenway at Rt. 779, along Tinker Creek to Greenfield Elementary School, with some on -road sections Scoring of Segments by Evaluation Criteria (p. 14-17) Seg# Score Locality Location 21 26 Botetourt Co. Along the creek from the 1-81 overpass to Tinker Mountain Road 22 37 Botetourt Co. Tinker Mountain Road past Lord Botetourt High School to Azalea Road 23 37 Botetourt Co. Daleville Greenway: Azalea Road to Catawba Road connection to Daleville Town Center 34 25 Botetourt Co. Along Tinker Mountain Road and U.S. 220/Roanoke Road to connect back with Tinker Creek near College Drive 48 - Botetourt Co. Along Tinker Creek from Tinker Mill Road to Etzler Road (connects to Greenfield Elementary School and Greenfield Recreation Park) Legend 2007 Conceptual Line ------ 2018 Alternatives ------ Engineered - Built ------ Conceptual Connecting Greenway -•••-•••- Conceptual Daleville Greenway Existing Sidewalk Greenfield Industrial Park ate:: f i Greenfie/d ^.. 'It", •i°• Elementary School ��. �Daleville 'Town Center I° • i -A. 1 orb Lord ourt °Creek High School i ip i N 1 1 Roanoke Gas- Subarea 5 Property Appendix E - 33 Botetourt County developed the Gateway Crossing Area Plan in 2016. This Urban Development Area (UDA) Plan includes the following recommendations, which were considered when developing alternatives for Subarea 5:1 • Development of a system of shared use paths that connect new development in Gateway Crossing to Daleville Town Center • Improvements along U.S. 220 consisting of a landscaped buffer between the travel lane and sidewalk, street trees for shade, and a wide shoulder or bicycle lane for bicyclists. • Development of a bicycle and pedestrian path along Tinker Creek under Interstate 81 to connect the west and east sides of the district. • The plan also identifies opportunities for bicycle and pedestrian amenities on the eastern side of Gateway Crossing that would connect to Tinker Creek. • A potential new public park and trailhead for the AT, along the proposed extension of Commons Parkway. • Safety improvements for the AT crossing of U.S. 220, which could include a pedestrian- activated signal, a pedestrian safety island in the U.S. 220 median, or a bridge over the highway. 1 Gateway Crossing Area Plan, Final, prepared by Renaissance Planning, on behalf of Botetourt County, Virginia, November 2016 Appendix E - 34 Figure 7. Gateway Crossing Area Plan, Botetourt County N LEGEND f MILES 0 .25 .5 1 •••• Proposed NATURAL FEATURES PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE ROADWAYS/TRAILS INTERSECTIONS Gateway — Water Mixed Use Residential —Existing Roadway � Existing Signalized Crossing Urban Development Floodplain Mixed Use Neighborhood —r Existing Roadway w/ Intersection Commercial Proposed Streetscape i Potential Sig nalizedArea Steep Slopes Mixed Use Highway ImprovementsS Sidewalks IntersectionParcels (,25%J Commercial ----- Roadway Under Construction h Approx. location we Industrial / Flex Potential Collector Street ,t Future Roundabout of Overhead National Forest/ •- .. Potential Local Street "" Potential Right -In, Power Lines Appalachian Trail R.O.W. — Existing Appalachian Trail Right -Out p+R Potential Park & Open / Park Space �� = Civic Overlay (Potential Potential Shored Use Paths will, Potential Improved Ride Lot Community Park w Potential Lang -Term Path Connection A.T. Crossing Trailhead, focused on A.T.) Appendix E - 35 Subarea S. U.S. 220/Roanoke Road corridor to Daleville Greenway Route Description: From the 1-81 overpass, the trail would extend north along Tinker Mountain Road to U.S. 220/Roanoke Road, where it would continue north in the road right-of-way to a point near the intersection of College Drive. The route would then connect back to Tinker Creek just downstream of Tinker Mill Road and the Lord Botetourt High School ball fields. There the route would connect to Daleville Greenway, which will go north across Azalea Drive to Catawba Road and connect with the Daleville Town Center. Greenfield Industrial jPark-:� 1 1� Greenfield Elementary School j6aleville / Town Center Jq- Lord Botetourt �Um er Creek High School Legend ------ Option Under Consideration ------ Tinker Creek Alignments Built ---- Engineered —^—^•— Conceptual l7aleville Greenway 1 1 -----• Conceptual Connecting Greenway W Exi sing Sidewalk 1 'P 1 I� 1 .SII I Roanoke Gat,I N Property Subarea S Road Option Planning Considerations/Public Comment • Trail routing needs to be integrated with the Gateway Crossing and Daleville Town Center UDA planning efforts, currently underway. • The U.S. 220 highway corridor provides the most direct link to commercial services. • Trail design will need to be coordinated with VDOT and take into account safety concerns. • Right-of-way may need to be secured from private property owners. Appendix E - 36 Subarea S. Tinker Creek Corridor to Daleville Greenway Route Description: From the 1-81 overpass, the trail would extend north along the creek from Tinker Mountain Road, cross over Tinker Mill Road and connect to the Daleville Greenway near the Lord Botetourt High School ball fields. Greenfield Industrial Park t' Greenfield Elementary School i r,..,� Daleville Town Center i,1°cc ♦ ,C ♦` ��'V4Lord Botetourt �Pr CreekHigh School Legend ------ Cptlon Under Consderation ------ Tinker Creek Alignments Built ------ Engineered -^-^- Conceptual Daleville Greenway -• Conceptual Connecting Greenway Nlj Existing Sidewalk \� l� I N Roanoke Gasl\, Tinker Creek to Subarea 5 Property ; Daleville Greenway Planning Considerations/Public Comment • Trail routing needs to be integrated with the Gateway Crossing and Daleville Town Center UDA planning efforts, currently underway. • Stream corridor options provide a more aesthetic setting than the U.S. 220 on -road corridor. • Right-of-way will need to be secured from several private properties. • This route provides a direct connection to Daleville Town Center. • Several property owners have expressed concern over routing of the trail near their property. Mitigation of impacts should be evaluated during trail design. • The Appalachian Trail crosses this segment and a trail crossing will require coordination with the National Park Service and Appalachian Trail Conservancy. Appendix E - 37 Subarea S. Tinker Creek Corridor to Greenfield Route Description: From the 1-81 overpass, the trail would extend north along Tinker Creek approximately 2 miles, and then overland to the intersection of Catawba Road and Etzler Road. The route would then continue along Etzler Road to connect to Greenfield Elementary School, Greenfield Recreation Park and Botetourt Center trails. Route 49 was added based on public input; it was not ranked by staff against the evaluation criteria. Planning Considerations/Public Comment • This option extends the greenway all the way to Greenfield with most of the alignment off road. • Trail routing needs to be integrated with the Gateway Crossing and Daleville Town Center UDA planning efforts, currently underway. • The stream corridor option provides a more aesthetic setting than the U.S. 220 highway corridor. • Several property owners have expressed concerns about routing the trail near their property or through their farms. • The Appalachian Trail crosses this segment, and a trail crossing will require coordination with the National Park Service and Appalachian Trail Conservancy. • Design of the on -road sections and crossing of Rt. 779 will need to be coordinated with VDOT and take into account safety concerns. Appendix E - 38 Greenfield Industrial Park 401 Greenfield ., = �` Elementary School \ �' I �� � D4 eville Town Center Ism erCreek' Lord Botetourt Hig School Legend ------ Option under Consideration ------ Tinker Creek Alignments N N — Built ------ Engineered —^—• — Coneeptual 11,1,,ille Greenway 1 4 -----• Conceptual Connecting Greenway Existing Sidewalk l 1 lF /N Roanoke Gas =\,' Tinker Creek Subarea. S Property to Greenfield Planning Considerations/Public Comment • This option extends the greenway all the way to Greenfield with most of the alignment off road. • Trail routing needs to be integrated with the Gateway Crossing and Daleville Town Center UDA planning efforts, currently underway. • The stream corridor option provides a more aesthetic setting than the U.S. 220 highway corridor. • Several property owners have expressed concerns about routing the trail near their property or through their farms. • The Appalachian Trail crosses this segment, and a trail crossing will require coordination with the National Park Service and Appalachian Trail Conservancy. • Design of the on -road sections and crossing of Rt. 779 will need to be coordinated with VDOT and take into account safety concerns. Appendix E - 38 IV. Implementation Development of the Tinker Creek Greenway will not occur immediately but will evolve over time as funding and right-of-way easements are secured. As with previous segments, local jurisdiction staff will be following a multi -step trail development process. Primary steps include: — Establish funding mechanism for acquisition, design, and construction. — Establish an outreach plan for keeping the public informed of progress. — Secure approval of trail right- of -way from property owner(s) through land acquisition, purchase of easements, etc. — Develop design and construction documents. — Complete environmental review and permitting. — Build trail segment and trailhead facilities. — Develop management program (maintenance and operations). — Develop and install signage. — Revise marketing literature, maps, on-line guides. A. Public Comment from Community Meetings Approximately 100 citizens provided comments on the proposed Tinker Creek Greenway Plan at the various community meetings and forums. The majority of citizens supported a greenway and trail connection that linked the Roanoke River and downtown Roanoke to the Daleville Greenway and Greenfield. Other popular sites for connections included Carvins Cove, Read Mountain, community facilities, schools, and employment areas in the corridor. Some concerns were expressed by residents where the stream corridor was narrow and there was limited space between the creek and residences. This was a particular concern of residents in the neighborhoods near LaMarre Drive, where residents favored an alignment on Plantation Road away from private property. Several other residents in Botetourt County also expressed concerns about routing the trail near their property. These concerns will need to be addressed in the future as more detailed trail planning occurs. B. Project Phasing Each jurisdiction (City of Roanoke, Roanoke County, and Botetourt County) will advance their greenway segments while coordinating with adjacent jurisdictions to realize economies of scale when possible. Short -Term. 1-5 vears — Roanoke City: from Fallon Park to Mason Mill Park — Botetourt County: Daleville Greenway Mid -Term, 5-10 years — Roanoke County: from U.S. 11/Williamson Road to the Botetourt County line — Botetourt County: from 1-81/Tinker Mountain Road to Daleville Greenway Appendix E - 39 Long -Term, 10-20 years — Roanoke City: from Mason Mill Park to Roanoke County line — Roanoke County: from Roanoke City line to U.S. 11/Williamson Road — Botetourt County: from Roanoke County line to 1-81/Tinker Mountain Road C. Cost and Funding Strategy In the past, the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission, the Roanoke Valley MPO/TPO, and local il jurisdictions have been successful in securing transportation funds for greenway development. It is envisioned that the Tinker Greenway will also utilize these funding sources as well as private donations and in-kind support where feasible. Funding secured to -date includes: 1. Botetourt County, $476,000 in Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) funding for the Daleville Greenway portion of the project, engineering underway. Awarded March 2015. 2. Roanoke County, $217,424 in TAP funding for Williamson Road Pedestrian Improvements. Awarded June 2017. 3. City of Roanoke, $225,000 Roanoke Economic Development Authority for the trail extension from Mason Mill Park to Blue Hills Drive (Phase 2 Ext, Read Mountain Greenway) 4. City of Roanoke, $1,620,000 (UPC #110101) in Regional Surface Transportation Program (RSTP) funds were approved by the Roanoke Valley Transportation Planning Organization for the Tinker Creek Greenway, on April 27, 2017. An additional RSTP award of $1,008,413 was approved June 2018. 5. City of Roanoke, $484,413 in Transportation Alternatives funding was awarded June 2018 for Tinker Creek Greenway. 6. Town of Vinton, $417,710 in Transportation Alternatives funding for Phase II of Glade CreekGreenway, awarded June 2016. Extends Phase I, which will connect the Town to the Tinker Creek Greenway. 7. Town of Vinton, $1,446,282 in RSTP funds were approved March 22, 2018 for an on - road connection on Walnut Avenue from the Tinker Creek Greenway to Glade Creek Greenway in Vinton. (UPC# 111649). Additional information on funding can be found in the Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan, 2018 Update, Chapter 2.2.7 and Table 6-1. Appendix E - 40 Appendix F Web Sites for Referenced Documents and Organizations Appendix F - 1 Web Sites for Referenced Documents and Organizations 2018 Greenway Plan Name of Organization or Document Web Address 2007 Greenway Plan Map tD://www... re�ys.orci/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/2007pIanmappdf 2007 Update to the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan (2007 Plan) http:// re�ys.org/wp-contenVuploads/2018/06/2007 re�yplan.pdf Appalachian Trail Conservancy http://www.appalachiantrail.oa// Bikeway Plan for the Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization http://rvarc.orci/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/RVAMPO-BikewayPlan-2012Up- dateweb.pdf City of Roanoke, Carvins Cove https://www.playroanoke.com/parks-facilities/carvins-cove-natural-reserve Conceptual Greenway Plan, Roanoke Valley, Virginia, 1995 Plan http:// re�ys.org/wp-contenVuploads/2018/06/ re�yiDlanl995.pdf Eagle Rock Greenway Engineering Study http://www.botetourtva.ciov/documents/parks rec/102715 Eagle Rock Green- way Prelim.pdf Explore Park http://www.explorepark.orq/ Explore Park Adventure Plan https://www.roanokecountyparks.com/454/Explore-Park-Adventure-Plan Gateway Crossing Area Plan, Botetourt County http://www.botetourtva.ciov/documents/planning/GatewayCrossingArea Plan FINAL. pdf Havens Wildlife Management Area, Department of Game and Inland Fisheries httr)s://www.d iq f.vir i�gov/wma/havens/ Lick Run Greenway Phase III Feasibility study https://issuu.com/roanokeparks/docs/lick runrely phase iii feasibility study Mill Mountain Park Management Plan https://issuu.com/roanokeparks/docs/millmountain?laout=http%253A%252F%252F- skin.issuu.com%252Fv%252Flight%252Flayout.xml&showFlipBtn=true Murray Run Greenway Extension Feasibility Study http://www.playroanoke.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Murray-Run-Feasibility- Report3.pdf National Park Service, Appalachian Trail httr)s://www.nps.gov/state/va/index.htm Poor Mountain Preserve http://www.dcr.vir. iq nia.ciov/natural-heritage/natural-area-preserves/poormt Read Mountain Preserve https://www.roanokecountyr)arks.com/facilities/facility/details/readmountainpre- serve- Regional Pedestrian Vision Plan, A Coordinated Approach to a Walkable Roanoke Valley http://rvarc.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/REGIONAL-PEDESTRIAN- VISION-PLAN-2015.pdf Roanoke Appalachian Trail Club. https://www.ratc.org/ Roanoke River Blueway http://www.roanokeriverblueway.g / Roanoke Valley Transit Vision Plan http://rvarc.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/TVP FINAL -ES 9-22-16.pdf Roanoke Valley/ Blue Ridge Parkway Trail Plan https://parkplanninc.nnps..ocLv/projectHome.cfm?projectlD=10392 Rural Bikeway Plan http://rvarc.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/RVARCRuralBikewayPlan2006-web. pdf Upper James River Water Trail ttpL//uWe�amesriverwatertrail.com/ US Bicycle Route 76, A study of the Roanoke Valley -Alleghany Region http://rvarc.orci/wp-content/uploads/2017/1lNir. ini�ycle-Route-76-Final.pdf Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisher- ies, Birding and Wildlife Trail https://www.d igif.vir iq nia ova Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation's Multimodal System Design http://www.drpt.virciinia.gov/planning/multimodal-guidelines/ Western Virginia Water Authority, Carvins Cove https://www.westernvawater.org/i-am-a-/recreationaIisUcarvins-cove-natural-reserve Appendix F - 2 Appendix G Bibliography of Design Standards Appendix G - 1 Appendix G Bibliography of Design Standards Alta Planning + Design (2017), The Impact of Greenways in the Triangle: How the East Coast Greenway Benefits the Health and Economy of North Carolina's Research Triangle, Commissioned by the East Coast Greenway Alliance, 27p. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) (1991), Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, Washington DC, 44 p. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) (2012 4th Edition), Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, Washington DC, 7 chapters. Beckley, Bob, (2000) Accessible Loading Platform for Boaters, USDA Forest Service, Missoula, MT. Beneficial Designs Inc. (1998), The Universal Trail Assessment Process Training Guide, PAX Press, Santa Cruz, CA, 74p. Birchard, William Jr., Robert Proudman, and Michael Dawson, (2000), Appalachian Trail Design, Construction and Maintenance, Appalachian Trail Conference, Harpers Ferry, WV, 237p. Birkby, Robert (1996), Lightly on the Land: The SCA Trail -Building and Maintenance Manual, Student Conservation Corps Inc., The Mountaineers, Seattle, WA, 271 p. Bowker, J.M., John C. Bergstrom and Joshua K. Gill (2004, December), The Virginia Creeper Trail: An Assessment of User Demographics, Preferences, and Economics — Final Report Prepared for the Virginia Department of Conservation. Bowker, J.M., John C. Bergstrom and Joshua K. Gill (2004, December), The Waterway at New River State Park: An Assessment of User Demographics, Preferences, and Economics — Final Report Prepared for the Virginia Department of Conservation. Bowker, J.M., John C. Bergstrom, Joshua K. Gill and Ursula Lemanski (2004, December), The Washington & Old Dominion Trail: An Assessment of User Demographics, Preferences, and Economics — Final Report Prepared for the Virginia Department of Conservation. City of Raleigh, Parks, Recreation and Cultural Resources Department (2014), Capital Area Greenway Planning & Design Guide. 103p. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 36, Volume 1, Part 4, Vehicles and Traffic Safety, Sec 4.3 Bicycles, Revised as of July 1, 1998. Community Trails Handbook (1997), The Brandywine Conservancy, Inc., Chadds Ford, PA, 97p. Daly, Judi, "Sharing the Trail with Horses: Understanding Their Instincts," article published by American Trails, in Trail Tracks, Stuart MacDonald, editor, Volume 32, Number 2, Summer 2003, 22p. Duffy, Hugh (1991, June), Developing Sustainable Mountain Trail Corridors, National Park Service, Rivers & Trails Program, Denver, CO. Appendix G - 2 Edwards, Rich (2003 January), "A Report and Recommendations for the Blue Ridge Parkway Trails in the Roanoke Area" (2003, January), Unpublished report, International Mountain Bicycling Association, 10p. Edwards, Rich (2006), "Recommendations for Improving Sustainability and Connectivity of the Carvins Cove Trail System", Unpublished report, International Mountain Bicycling Association, 29p. Finstick, Eric, "Managing Heavily -Used Trails: Alternative Day Zoning," article published by American Trails, in Trail Tracks, Stuart MacDonald, editor, Volume 32, Number 2, Summer 2003, 26p. Flink, Charles, Loring Schwarz and R. Stearns (1993), Greenways: A Guide to Planning, Design, and Development, Washington DC, Island Press, 351p. Graefe, A.R, Kuss, and Vaske (1990), Visitor Impact Management: The Planning Framework, National Parks and Conservation Association, Washington DC, 106p. Groenier, James Scott, Steve Monlux, Brian Vachowski, (2008), Geosynthetics for Trails in Wet Areas, USDA Forest Service, Technology and Development Program, in cooperation with U.S. Dept. of Transportation, 0823-2813-MTDC, Missoula, MT, 26p. Hancock, Jan, Kim Jones Vander Hoek, Sunni Bradshaw, James D. Coffman, Jeffrey Engelmann, (2007), Equestrian Design Guidebook for Trails, Trailheads, and Campgrounds, USDA Forest Service, Technology and Development Program, 0723-2816-MTDC, Missoula, MT, 312p. Hellmund, P.C. 1998. Planning Trails with Wildlife in Mind: A Handbook for Trail Planners. Denver, CO: Colorado State Parks. Hesselbarth, Woody, Brian Vachowski, and Mary Ann Davies (2007), Trail Construction and Maintenance Notebook, USDA Forest Service, Technology and Development Program, in collaboration with the Recreational Trails Program of the Federal Highway Administration, Missoula, MT, 0723-2806-MTDC, 166p. Hooper, Lennon, (1988), NPS Trail Management Handbook, National Park Service, Washington, DC. International Mountain Bicycling Association (2004), Trail Solutions: IMBA's Guide to Building Sweet Singletrack, International Mountain Bicycling Association, Boulder, CO. Kelley, Michael (1998, October), "Bikes and Horses: A Case for Sharing," presented at the National Symposium on Horse Trails in Forest Ecosystems, Clemson University. Labaree, Jonathan (1992), How Greenways Work: A Handbook on Ecology, National Park Service and Atlantic Center for the Environment. LaPorta, Liz and Woody Keen (2008), Jake and Bull Mountain Trail Assessment and Management Plan: Promoting Recreation and Environmental Protection through Assessment, Collaboration and Education, USDA Forest Service, R8, Southern Region, Chattahoochee -Oconee National Forest, Blue Ridge Ranger District, 94p. Little, Charles E. (1995), Greenways forAmerica, Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD. Lopes, Brian and Lee McCormack (2005), Mastering Mountain Bike Skills, Human Kinetics, Champaign, IL, 196p. Appendix G - 3 Marion, Jeffery, Joseph Roggenbuck, and William Manning (1993), Problems and Practices in Backcountry Recreation Management: A Survey of National Park Service Managers, National Park Service, Natural Resources Publication Office, Denver, CO, 65p. Marion, Jeffrey L. and Yu-Fai Leung. 2004. Environmentally Sustainable Trail Management. In: Buckley, Ralf (ed.), Environmental Impact of Tourism, Cambridge, MA: CABI Publishing, p.229-244. McCoy, M. and M. Stoner (1992) Mountain Bike Trails: Techniques for Design, Construction, and Maintenance, Missoula, MT, Bikecentennial, 19p. Miller, Jay S., (1983) Construction & Maintenance of Horse Trails, prepared in cooperation with Arkansas Trails Council, U.S. Forest Service, Arkansas Trail Ride Association, and the Northwest Arkansas Horse Trail construction volunteers, 32p. Moore, Roger (1994), Conflicts on Multiple -Use Trails: Synthesis of the Literature and State of the Practice, sponsored by The Federal Highway Administration and the National Recreational Trails Advisory Committee, (Report #FHWA-PD-94-031), Washington DC, 70p. Moore, Roger and Kelly Barthlow (1998, March), The Economic Impacts and Uses of Long -Distance Trails, United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service. National Park Service Rivers, Trails, and Conservation Assistance Program (1992), Economic Impacts of Protecting Rivers, Trails, and Greenway Corridors, National Park Service. National Park Service Management Policies (2001), Chapter 9, Park Facilities, National Park Service, Washington DC. Neese, Jasen and Mark Eriksson (2002), Floating Trail Bridges and Docks, USDA Forest Service, Missoula, MT. North Carolina State University, Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management, Office of Parks, Tourism Research, 1995-96 Economic Impact of Travel to the Blue Ridge Parkway Virginia and North Carolina, Prepared for the Coalition for the Blue Ridge Parkway and the National Park Service. Parker, Troy Scott, (2003), Natural Surface Trail Design: The Pattern That Works, Natureshapes, Inc. Parker, Troy Scott, (2004), Natural Surface Trails by Design: Physical and Human Design Essentials of Sustainable, Enjoyable Trails, Natureshape, LLC, Boulder, Co., 78p. Parker, Troy Scott, (1994), Trails Design and Management Handbook, Open Space and Trails Program, Pitkin County, CO. Parsons Harland Bartholomew & Asso., Inc. (1999), Connecting Our Commonwealth, The Virginia Greenways and Trails Toobox, Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation and Virginia Trails Association. PFK Consulting (1994), Analysis of Economic Impacts of the Northern Central Rail Trail, Maryland Greenways Commission. Penn State Center for Dirt and Gravel Road Studies (2004), Trail Mix Purchasing Specifications, Penn State University, University Park, PA. Proudman R.D and Rajala (1981), Trailbuilding and Maintenance, Boston, MA, Appalachian Mountain Club, 286p. Appendix G - 4 Rathke, David M. and Melvin Baughman (1994), Recreational Trail Design and Construction, Minnesota Extension Service and University of Minnesota, 28p. Ritter, Mike, Jan Ritter, Joey Klein, Rich Edwards, and Jen Edwards (2001), Building Better Trails: Designing, Constructing, and Maintaining Outstanding Trails, International Bicycling Association, Boulder, CO, 64p. Roanoke Parks and Recreation (2007), Carvins Cove Natural Reserve Park Management Plan, Western Virginia Water Authority and Roanoke Parks and Recreation, Roanoke, VA, 84p. Roanoke Parks and Recreation (2010), Carvins Cove Natural Reserve Trail Management Plan, Roanoke Parks and Recreation, Roanoke, VA, 86p. Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (2012), Bikeway Plan for the Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization, Roanoke, VA. Roanoke Valley, Blue Ridge Parkway Trail Plan, Final Draft, (2004 January 20), Unpublished plan compiled by Blue Ridge Parkway, Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission, National Park Service Rivers and Trails Program, and Roanoke Valley Blue Ridge Parkway Planning Team, 79p. Ryan, Karen-Lee, editor (1993, 2000), Trails for the Twenty-First Century: Planning, Design, and Management Manual for Multi-Use Trails, Rails-To-Trails Conservancy, Island Press, Washington DC, 214p. State of Minnesota, Department of Natural Resources, (2007), Trail Planning, Design, and Development Guidelines, St. Paul, MN, 306p. Steinholtz, Robert T. and Brian Vachowski, (2007), Wetland Trail Design and Construction, USDA Forest Service, Technology and Development Program, Missoula, MT, 0723-2804-MTDC, 82p. Trail Solutions: (MBA's Guide to Building Sweet Singletrack, (2004), International Mountain Bicycling Association, Boulder, CO, 272p. United States Access Board (2004), Americans with Disabilities Act and Architectural Barriers Act Accessibility Guidelines. 304p. United States Access Board (2009), Proposed Accessibility Guidelines for Outdoor Developed Areas. 48p. United States Access Board (2011), Draft Final Accessibility Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities in the Public Right- of-Way. 112p. United States Department of Agriculture (2012), Accessibility Guidebook for Outdoor Recreation and Trails. 122p. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (2013), Outdoor Accessibility Guidelines (FSORAG), https://www. corada. com/docu me nts/2013-fsorag/tech n ical-provisions United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (supercedes 1996), Standard Specifications for the Construction of Trails, Washington DC, http://www.fs.fed.us/database/acad/dev/trails/traiIs.htm, 140p. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service (2016), Trail Fundamentals and Trail Management Objectives. 84p. Appendix G - 5 United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service (1998), A Blue Ridge Parkway Toolbox. United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service (2015), Roanoke Valley/Blue Ridge Parkway Trail Plan and Environmental Assessment, 174p. United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, (1999), Designing Sidewalks and Trails for Access. FHWA-HEP-99-006, HEHE/8-99/(5M)E, and FHWA-EP-01-027, HEPH/8-01(10M)E, 2 volumes. United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Federal Railroad Administration, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Federal Transit Administration (2002, August), Rails -with -Trails: Lessons Learned. FTA -MA -26-0052-04-1. United States Forest Service, Angeles National Forest, (1991, February), Trail Selection Criteria for Mountain Bike Use on Existing Forest Trails. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation (2000, updated 2011), The Virginia Greenways and Trails Toolbox, Commonwealth of Virginia, Richmond, VA. Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Planning and Recreation Resources (2013, draft update 2018), Virginia Outdoors Plan, Commonwealth of Virginia, Richmond, VA. Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, Discover Our Wild Side: Virginia Birding and Wildlife Trail, Mountain Area. Virginia Department of Transportation (2002, January), Virginia Bicycle Facility Resource Guide, Virginia Department of Transportation, Commonwealth of Virginia, Richmond, VA. Virginia Greenways and Trails Toolbox, (2000), Department of Conservation and Recreation, Commonwealth of Virginia, Richmond, VA. Webber, Pete, editor (2007), Managing Mountain Biking: IMBA's Guide to Providing Great Riding, International Mountain Bicycling Association, Boulder, CO, 256p. Whitesell Orrison, Inc. (2000), Carvins Cove Land Use Plan, City of Roanoke, VA, 81 p. Appendix G - 6 Appendix H 2018 Greenway Plan Network Map Appendix H - 1 Page Intentionally Left Blank Appendix H - 2 13 � Buchanan Eagle Rock 25 35 26 Botetourt B o t e t o u r t County 35 , ��-'; County r c r � r 21 i i 12 ;` Craig County ,1 1 9 7 t i-' 8 t- 6 30 43 43Botetourt 1 8 County ✓',. 3 24 39 36 43 22 38 17 7 Y City of 43 5 36 Salem City of 10 14 40 Roanoke O 27 18Town of 9 44 _ 2027 Vinton 40 10 10 43 19 40 44 10 3 34 31 40 10 32 40 41 3 33 34 15 42 28 16 Roanoke County, 5 4.1 10 ` -�2 5 1 k 36 Legend Proposed Greenways Category 1 Roanoke River Greenway, Unbuilt Category 2 Hard Surface Greenways and Trails, Unbuilt Category 3 Greenways and Trails in Design Category 4 Conceptual Greenways and Trails Category 5 Built Greenways and Trails National Forest Trails Appalachian Trail U.S. Bicycle Route 76 �f QLocality Boundaries Public Lands 0 o Appendix H-3 alternative alignments for Tinker Creek and Daleville Greenways. .7s s 3 4.5 6Miles 2018 Greenway Plan Network Map IN0 Prepared by the REGIONALC 1 -Appalachian Trail 17 - Gish Branch Greenway 32 - Mill Mountain Park Trails 2 - Back Creek Greenway 18 - Glade Creek Greenway 33 - Mudlick Creek Greenway 3 - Barnhardt Creek Greenway 19 - Gladetown Trail 34 - Murray Run Greenway 4 - Birding and Wildlife Trail Sites 20 - Green Hill Park Trails 35 - National Forest Connections 5 - Blue Ridge Parkway Trails 21- Greenfield Trails 36 - Perimeter Trail 6 - Carvin Creek Greenway 22 - Hanging Rock Battlefield Trail 37 - Poor Mountain Trails 7 - Carvins Cove Trail Network 23 - Havens Wildlife Management 38 - Read Mountain Greenway 8 - Carvins Cove Connections Area Trails 39 - Read Mountain Trails 9 - Catawba Greenway 24 - Hinchee Trail 40 - Roanoke River Greenway 10 - City, County and 25 - James River Greenway 41 - Roanoke River Greenway Town Park Trails 26 - Jefferson National Forest Trails Extensions 11 -Craig Creek Trail 27 - Lick Run Greenway 42- Spring Hollow Trails 12 - Daleville Greenway* 28 - Long Ridge Trail 43 -Tinker Creek Greenway* 13 - Eagle Rock Greenway 29 - Mason Creek Greenway 44 - Wolf Creek Greenway 14 - Elizabeth Greenway 30 - Masons Cove Greenway 15 - Explore Park Trail Network 31 - Mill Mountain Greenway 16 - Garden City Greenway *Please see Appendix E for more information about the Legend Proposed Greenways Category 1 Roanoke River Greenway, Unbuilt Category 2 Hard Surface Greenways and Trails, Unbuilt Category 3 Greenways and Trails in Design Category 4 Conceptual Greenways and Trails Category 5 Built Greenways and Trails National Forest Trails Appalachian Trail U.S. Bicycle Route 76 �f QLocality Boundaries Public Lands 0 o Appendix H-3 alternative alignments for Tinker Creek and Daleville Greenways. .7s s 3 4.5 6Miles Legend Proposed Greenways Category 1 Roanoke River Greenway, Unbuilt Category 2 Hard Surface Greenways and Trails, Unbuilt Category 3 Greenways and Trails in Design Category 4 Conceptual Greenways and Trails Category 5 Built Greenways and Trails National Forest Trails Appalachian Trail U.S. Bicycle Route 76 � QLocality Boundaries + Public Lands Appendix H-3 alternative alignments for Tinker Creek and Daleville Greenways. 0 0.75 1.5 3 4.5 6Miles 2018 Greenway Plan Network Map � IIS Prepared by the 0 REGIONALI i 13 1 -Appalachian Trail 17 - Gish Branch Greenway Buchanan - Mill Mountain Park Trails Eagle Rock 18 - Glade Creek Greenway 33 - Mudlick Creek Greenway 3 - Barnhardt Creek Greenway 19 - Gladetown Trail 34 - Murray Run Greenway 4 - Birding and Wildlife Trail Sites 20 - Green Hill Park Trails 35 26 5 - Blue Ridge Parkway Trails 21- Greenfield Trails 36 - Perimeter Trail 6 - Carvin Creek Greenway 22 - Hanging Rock Battlefield Trail 37 - Poor Mountain Trails 7 - Carvins Cove Trail Network 23 Botetourt 38 B o t e t o u r t County 8 - Carvins Cove Connections 35 , ��-'; County 9 - Catawba Greenway 24 - Hinchee Trail 40 r r c � 25 - James River Greenway 41 - Roanoke River Greenway Town Park Trails 26 - Jefferson National Forest Trails Extensions 11 -Craig Creek Trail 27 - Lick Run Greenway 42- `• 21 ) ' - Long Ridge Trail 43 -Tinker Creek Greenway* 13 - Eagle Rock Greenway 29 - Mason Creek Greenway 44 - Wolf Creek Greenway 14 - Elizabeth Greenway 30 12 ;` 15 - Explore Park Trail Network 31 - Mill Mountain Greenway 16 - Garden City Greenway *Please see Appendix E for more information C r a ig C o u my ,1 1 6 7 s 30 43 43 Botetourt 1 8 County +24 o'' 3 39 43 36 6 22 38 17 7 City of 43 5 36 Salem City of 10 O 14 Roanoke 27 40 9 18Town of 44 -2U 40 27 V i n ton 43 10 10 19 44 40 10 3 34 31 40 70 32 40 41 3 28 33 34 15 42 16 Roanoke County 5 41 10 2 5 36 Legend Proposed Greenways Category 1 Roanoke River Greenway, Unbuilt Category 2 Hard Surface Greenways and Trails, Unbuilt Category 3 Greenways and Trails in Design Category 4 Conceptual Greenways and Trails Category 5 Built Greenways and Trails National Forest Trails Appalachian Trail U.S. Bicycle Route 76 � QLocality Boundaries + Public Lands Appendix H-3 alternative alignments for Tinker Creek and Daleville Greenways. 0 0.75 1.5 3 4.5 6Miles 2018 Greenway Plan Network Map IIS Prepared by the 0 REGIONALI i 1 -Appalachian Trail 17 - Gish Branch Greenway 32 - Mill Mountain Park Trails 2 - Back Creek Greenway 18 - Glade Creek Greenway 33 - Mudlick Creek Greenway 3 - Barnhardt Creek Greenway 19 - Gladetown Trail 34 - Murray Run Greenway 4 - Birding and Wildlife Trail Sites 20 - Green Hill Park Trails 35 - National Forest Connections 5 - Blue Ridge Parkway Trails 21- Greenfield Trails 36 - Perimeter Trail 6 - Carvin Creek Greenway 22 - Hanging Rock Battlefield Trail 37 - Poor Mountain Trails 7 - Carvins Cove Trail Network 23 - Havens Wildlife Management 38 - Read Mountain Greenway 8 - Carvins Cove Connections Area Trails 39 - Read Mountain Trails 9 - Catawba Greenway 24 - Hinchee Trail 40 - Roanoke River Greenway 10 - City, County and 25 - James River Greenway 41 - Roanoke River Greenway Town Park Trails 26 - Jefferson National Forest Trails Extensions 11 -Craig Creek Trail 27 - Lick Run Greenway 42- Spring Hollow Trails 12 - Daleville Greenway* 28 - Long Ridge Trail 43 -Tinker Creek Greenway* 13 - Eagle Rock Greenway 29 - Mason Creek Greenway 44 - Wolf Creek Greenway 14 - Elizabeth Greenway 30 - Masons Cove Greenway 15 - Explore Park Trail Network 31 - Mill Mountain Greenway 16 - Garden City Greenway *Please see Appendix E for more information about the Legend Proposed Greenways Category 1 Roanoke River Greenway, Unbuilt Category 2 Hard Surface Greenways and Trails, Unbuilt Category 3 Greenways and Trails in Design Category 4 Conceptual Greenways and Trails Category 5 Built Greenways and Trails National Forest Trails Appalachian Trail U.S. Bicycle Route 76 � QLocality Boundaries + Public Lands Appendix H-3 alternative alignments for Tinker Creek and Daleville Greenways. 0 0.75 1.5 3 4.5 6Miles AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 2018 RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THE CLOSED MEETING WAS HELD IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CODE OF VIRGINIA WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia has convened a closed meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provisions of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and WHEREAS, Section 2.2-3712 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that such closed meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby certifies that, to the best of each member's knowledge: 1. Only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the closed meeting which this certification resolution applies; and 2. Only such public business matters as were identified in the motion convening the closed meeting were heard, discussed or considered by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. Page 1 of 1