Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3/26/2024 - RegularPage 1 of 4 INVOCATION: Pastor Adam Hughes, Bethel Baptist Church PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE UNITED STATES FLAG 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.” Roanoke County Board of Supervisors March 26, 2024 Page 2 of 4 Good afternoon and welcome to our meeting for March 26, 2024. 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 Sunday from 10:00 a.m. until 5 p.m. Board of Supervisors meetings can also be viewed online through Roanoke County’s website at www.RoanokeCountyVA.gov. 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 1. Presentation of the Proposed Fiscal Year 2024-2025 Operating Budget and Proposed Fiscal Year 2025-2034 Capital Improvement Program (Richard Caywood, County Administrator) D. 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- March 12, 2024 Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Agenda March 26, 2024 Page 3 of 4 2. The petition of Sheetz, Inc. to remove the proffered conditions on approximately 0.978 acres of land zoned C-2C, High Intensity Commercial with conditions, located at 4143 Franklin Road, Cave Spring Magisterial District (First Reading and Request for Second Reading and Public Hearing) 3. The petition of the City of Salem Water Department to obtain a special use permit for a major utility service (water tank) on approximately 0.38 acre of land zoned R-1, Low Density Residential District, located at 1490 Hearth Lane, Catawba Magisterial District (First Reading and Request for Second Reading and Public Hearing) 4. Ordinance authorizing the granting of new public drainage easements to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, on property owned by 1) Alice B. Kefauver (Tax Map# 079.01-01-64.00-0000), located at 3020 Pebble Drive, 2) Roy M. Carpenter (Tax Map# 079.01-01-61.00-0000), located at 3017 Woodway Road, 3) Leonard W. Stiff and Rebecca G. Stiff (Tax Map 079.01 -01-63.00- 0000), located at 3012 Pebble Drive, and, 4) David L. Bratton (Tax Map # 079.01-01-62.00-0000), located at 3006 Pebble Drive, for the purpose of constructing drainage improvements; Vinton Magisterial District (Second Reading) 5. Ordinance to amend Chapter 19 of the Roanoke County Code; Solicitors and Solicitations (First Reading and Request for Second Reading) E. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS F. REPORTS 1. Unappropriated, Board Contingency and Capital Reserves Report 2. Outstanding Debt Report 3. Comparative Statement of Budgeted and Actual Revenues as of February 29, 2024 4. Comparative Statement of Budgeted and Actual Expenditures and Encumbrances as of February 29, 2024 5. Accounts Paid – February 29, 2024 G. WORK SESSIONS 1. Work Session to discuss Opioid Abatement Authority Spring 2024 Grant Applications (Madeline Hanlon, Assistant to the County Administrator) 2. Work session for any additional discussion on the Proposed Fiscal Year 2024- 2025 Operating Budget and Proposed Fiscal Year 2025 -2034 Capital Improvement. (Richard Caywood, County Administrator) Page 4 of 4 (Note: No new presentation materials will be shared. This time is set aside for the Members of the Board to discuss information presented during Item C.1 o f the agenda.) H. CLOSED MEETING, pursuant to the Code of Virginia as follows: 1. Section 2.2-3711 (A)(3) of the Code of Virginia, to discuss or consider the acquisition of real property in the Cave Spring Magisterial Dis trict for a public purpose, where discussion in an open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body 2. Section 2.2-3711(A)(5) of the Code of Virginia, for discussion concerning a prospective business or industry or the expansion of an existing business or industry where no previous announcement has been made of the business’ or industry’s interest in locating or expanding its facilities in the community. Specifically, the Board will discuss potential business location or expansion in the Cave Spring, and Catawba Magisterial Districts. I. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION EVENING SESSION – 7:00 PM J. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. The petition of Kevin Manor to obtain a special use permit to operate a short-term rental on approximately 1.23 acres of land zoned R-1, Low Density Residential District, located at 4127 Mockingbird Hill Road, Hollins Magisterial District (Philip Thompson, Director of Planning) K. CITIZEN COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS L. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS 1. David F. Radford 2. Tammy E. Shepherd 3. Martha B. Hooker 4. Paul M. Mahoney 5. Phil C. North M. ADJOURNMENT Page 1 of 2 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. C.1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 26, 2024 AGENDA ITEM: Presentation of the Proposed Fiscal Year 2024-2025 Operating Budget and Proposed Fiscal Year 2025-2034 Capital Improvement Program. SUBMITTED BY: Laurie Gearheart Director of Finance and Management Services APPROVED BY: Richard L. Caywood County Administrator ISSUE: Presentation of the Proposed Fiscal Year 2024 -2025 Operating Budget and Proposed Fiscal Year 2025-2034 Capital Improvement Program. BACKGROUND: As part of the annual budget process, a balanced operating budget and a balanced 10 year capital improvement program is presented for consideration by the Board of Supervisors. This presentation provides an overview of the Proposed Fiscal Year 2024 - 2025 Operating Budget and the 10 Year Proposed Fiscal Year 2025 -2034 Capital Improvement Program. DISCUSSION: This time has been scheduled to provide the Board of Supervisors with a presentation on the Proposed Fiscal Year 2024 -2025 Operating Budget and Proposed Fiscal Year 2025-2034 Capital Improvement Program. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this briefing. The fiscal impact of the budget will be determined at budget adoption scheduled for May 28, 2024. Page 2 of 2 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors receive information regarding the Proposed Fiscal Year 2024-2025 Operating Budget and Proposed Fiscal Year 2025 - 2034 Capital Improvement Program. 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, MARCH 26, 2026 RESOLUTION APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM D - 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 March 26, 2024, designated as Item D - 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 – March 12, 2024 2.The petition of Sheetz, Inc. to remove the proffered conditions on approximately 0.978 acres of land zoned C-2C, High Intensity Commercial with conditions, located at 4143 Franklin Road, Cave Spring Magisterial District (First Reading and Request for Second Reading and Public Hearing) 3.The petition of the City of Salem Water Department to obtain a special use permit for a major utility service (water tank) on approximately 0.38 acre of land zoned R-1, Low Density Residential District, located at 1490 Hearth Lane, Catawba Magisterial District (First Reading and Request for Second Reading and Public Hearing) 4.Ordinance authorizing the granting of new public drainage easements to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, on property owned by 1) Alice B. Kefauver (Tax Map# 079.01-01-64.00-0000), located at 3020 Pebble Drive, 2) Roy M. Carpenter (Tax Map# 079.01-01-61.00-0000), located at 3017 Woodway Road, 3) Leonard W. Stiff and Rebecca G. Stiff (Tax Map 079.01-01-63.00-0000), located at 3012 Pebble Drive, and, 4) David L. Bratton (Tax Map # 079.01-01-62.00-0000), located at 3006 Pebble Drive, for the purpose of constructing drainage improvements; Vinton Magisterial District (Second Reading) 5.Ordinance to amend Chapter 19 of the Roanoke County Code; Solicitors and Solicitations (First Reading and Request for Second Reading) Page 1 of 5 INVOCATION: Lavania Harrell, Church Alive International A. OPENING CEREMONIES 1. Roll Call Present: Supervisors Radford, Hooker, Mahoney, Shepherd, North Absent: None B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS 1. Mr. Caywood requested that Item C(1) be removed from the agenda at the request of Mr. Hull, who is unable to join the Board this afternoon. It is anticipated that Mr. Hull will be able to present his briefing at a Board meeting in the near future. C. Briefings 1. Briefing by staff on Virginia Department of Transportation 419/220 Project Update (Megan Cronise, Assistant Director of Planning) Briefing given by Megan Cronise. D. NEW BUSINESS Action No. 031224-1 Item D.1 1. Resolution approving updates to the bylaws of Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare (Madeline L. Hanlon, Assistant to the County Administrator) Supervisor Mahoney moved to approve the resolution. Supervisor Hooker seconded the motion. Motion approved. Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Minutes March 12, 2024 Page 2 of 5 Ayes: Supervisors Radford, Hooker, Mahoney, Shepherd, North Nays: None E. PUBLIC HEARING 1. Public hearing for citizen comments on the Real Estate effective tax rate for calendar year 2024 (Laurie Gearheart, Director of Finance and Management Services) One (1) citizen spoke urging the Board of Supervisors to decrease the tax rate. F. Consent Agenda Action No. 031224-2 Item 2.a 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 Action No. 031224-2.a Item F.1 1. Approval of minutes – January 4, 2024, January 8, 2024, January 9, 2024, and January 11, 2024 Supervisor Shepherd requested to remove and separately vote on item 1, which is the approval of minutes for the Board’s January 4th, 8th, 9th, and 11th meetings. Supervisore Sheperd did not participate in these meetings in her capacity as a supervisor and would need to abstain from voting on this item. There were no objections to this request. Supervisor Radford moved to approve the minutes listed as Item 1 on the consent agenda. Supervisor Hooker seconded the motion. Motion approved. Ayes: Supervisors Radford, Hooker, Mahoney, North Nays: None Abstain: Supervisor Shepherd Action No. 031224-3 Item 3.b-d 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 Page 3 of 5 Action No. 031224-3.b Item F.2 2. Approval of minutes- January 23, 2024, February 13, 2024, and February 27, 2024 Action No. 031224-3.c Item F.3 3. Ordinance authorizing the relocation of Windsor Hills district precinct 303 polling place pursuant from our lady of Nazareth Church at 2505 Electric Road in Roanoke to Christ the King Church at 2335 Electric Road in Roanoke (Second Reading) Action No. 031224-3.d Item F.4 4. Resolution amending and re-adopting a Grievance Procedure Supervisor Mahoney moved to adopt all remaining matters on the consent agenda. Supervisor Hooker seconded the motion. Motion approved. Ayes: Supervisors Radford, Hooker, Mahoney, Shepherd, North Nays: None G. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS One (1) citizen spoke concerning Forest Homeowners Management Association. H. REPORTS Action No. 031224-4 Item H.1-2 1. Unappropriated, Board Contingency and Capital Reserves Report 2. Outstanding Debt Report Supervisor Radford moved to receive and file the reports that have been included with the agenda under Item H. Supervisor Mahoney seconded the motion. Motion approved. Ayes: Supervisors Radford, Hooker, Mahoney, Shepherd, North Nays: None I. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS 1. Paul M. Mahoney 2. David F. Radford 3. Tammy E. Shepherd 4. Martha B. Hooker 5. Phil C. North Page 4 of 5 Supervisors were offered the opportunity to share comments and provide updates to their peers and the public on items of interest to them. J. WORK SESSIONS 1. Work session to review proposed changes to Chapter 19 of the Roanoke County Code, which pertains to solicitors and solicitations. (Peter Lubeck, County Attorney; Doug Barber, Sr. Assistant County Attorney). K. CLOSED MEETING, pursuant to the Code of Virginia as follows: Action 031224-5 Item K.1 1. Section 2.2-3711 (A)(3) of the Code of Virginia, to discuss or consider the acquisition of real property in the Cave Spring Magisterial District for a public purpose, where discussion in an open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body. Supervisor North moved to go to closed session. Supervisor Mahoney seconded the motion. Motion approved. Ayes: Supervisors Radford, Hooker, Mahoney, Shepherd, North Nays: None L. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION Action No. 031224-6 Item K.1 In the closed session just concluded, nothing was discussed except the matter which was identified in the motion to convene in closed session. Only those matters lawfully permitted to be discussed under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act were discussed. Supervisor Mahoney moved to adopt the certification resolution. Supervisor Hooker seconded the motion. Motion approved. Ayes: Supervisors Radford, Hooker, Mahoney, Shepherd, North Nays: None The Board of Supervisors returned to Work Session for Item 2. 2. Work session to review the provisions of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act (Peter Lubeck, County Attorney). Page 5 of 5 M. CLOSED MEETING, pursuant to the Code of Virginia as follows: Action No. 031224-7 Item K.2 2. Section 2.2-3711(A)(5) of the Code of Virginia, for discussion concerning a prospective business or industry or the expansion of an existing business or industry where no previous announcement has been made of the business’ or industry’s interest in locating or expanding its facilities in the community. Specifically, the Board will discuss potential business location or expansion in the Cave Spring, and Catawba Magisterial Districts. Supervisor North moved to go to closed session. Supervisor Mahoney seconded the motion. Motion approved. Ayes: Supervisors Radford, Hooker, Mahoney, Shepherd, North Nays: None N. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION Action No. 031224-8 Item K.2 In the closed session just concluded, nothing was discussed except the matter which was identified in the motion to convene in closed session. Only those matters lawfully permitted to be discussed under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act were discussed. Supervisor Mahoney moved to adopt the certification resolution. Supervisor Hooker seconded the motion. Motion approved. Ayes: Supervisors Radford, Hooker, Mahoney, Shepherd, North Nays: None M. ADJOURNMENT Meeting Adjourned. Submitted by: Approved by: __________________________ __________________________ Richard L. Caywood Phil C. North Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Chairman Page 1 of 2 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. D.1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 26, 2024 AGENDA ITEM: The petition of Sheetz, Inc. to remove the proffered conditions on approximately 0.978 acres of land zoned C- 2C, High Intensity Commercial with conditions, located at 4143 Franklin Road, Cave Spring Magisterial District SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: Richard L. Caywood County Administrator ISSUE: Consent agenda item for first reading of an ordinance. BACKGROUND: The first reading of this ordinance is accomplished by adoption of this ordinance in the manner of consent agenda items. The adoption of these items does not imply approval of the substantive content of the requested zoning actions; rather, approval satisfies the procedural requirements of the County Charter and schedules the required public hearing and second reading of these ordinances. The second reading and public hearing on this ordinance is scheduled for April 23, 2024. The title of this ordinance is as follows: The petition of Sheetz, Inc. to remove the proffered conditions on approximately 0.978 acre of land zoned C-2C, High Intensity Commercial with conditions, located at 4143 Franklin Road, Cave Spring Magisterial District. DISCUSSION: There is no discussion on this item. FISCAL IMPACT: Page 2 of 2 There is no fiscal impact on this agenda item. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends as follows: 1. That the Board approve and adopt the first reading of this ordinance for the purpose of scheduling the second reading and public hearing for April 23, 2024. 2. That this section of the agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately, and that the Clerk is authorized and directed where required by law to set forth upon any of said items the separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant to this action. kv I MILES& k STOCKBRIDGERc. Maxwell H. Wiegard 804.905.6932 mwiegardmilesstockbridge.com February 9, 2024 VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS AND EMAIL (pIanning(roanokecountyva.gov; pthompson(roanokecountyva.gov) Department of Planning County of Roanoke 5204 Bernard Drive, SW Roanoke, Virginia 24018-0798 Attn: Mr. Philip Thompson, Director of Planning Re: Rezoning Application for Roanoke County Tax Parcel ID: 077.20-01-40.00-0000 Address of Subject Parcel: 4143 Franklin Road SW, Roanoke, VA 24018 Dear Mr. Thompson: As prospective tenant of certain parcels of property located at 4143 Franklin Road SW, Roanoke, VA 24018, Sheetz, Inc. (the "Applicant") submits this rezoning application for the 0.978-acre parcel of real property commonly identified as Roanoke County tax parcel ID 077.20- 01-40.00-0000 (the "Subject Parcel"). The purpose of this rezoning application is to remove certain existing proffered conditions governing the development and use of the Subject Parcel, in connection with Sheetz's plan to redevelop the Subject Property and the adjacent parcel, commonly known as 4145 Franklin Road SW, Roanoke, VA 24018, and Roanoke County tax parcel ID 077.20-01-40.01-0000 (the "Adjacent Parcel") and operate a Sheetz Fuel Center and Convenience Store on the Subject Parcel and the Adjacent Parcel. The Subject Parcel is zoned C-2-C (High Intensity Commercial district with conditions) and the Adjacent Parcel is zoned C-2 (High Intensity Commercial district without conditions). Fuel Center and Convenience Store are uses permitted by-right in the C-2 (High Intensity Commercial) zoning district in Roanoke County. The Subject Parcel and the Adjacent Parcel (collectively, the "Sheetz Site") both are owned by 4143 Franklin Road Associates, LLC. The parcels comprising the Sheetz Site are designated as Core on the Roanoke County Future Land Use Map. In 1989, to facilitate the redevelopment and use of the Subject Parcel as a Central Fidelity Bank branch, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors approved certain amended proffered conditions governing the use of the Subject Parcel. The amended proffered conditions approved by the Board of Supervisors in 1989, which continue to govern development and use of the Subject Parcel, include certain conditions that are inconsistent with Sheetz's plan to redevelop the parcels 901 East Byrd Street, Suite 950 I Richmond, VA 23219 I 804.905.6900 I mslaw.com BALTIMORE, MD EASTON, MD • FREDERICK. MD • ROCKVILLE, MD • TYSONS CORNER, VA • WASHINGTON, D.C. Sheetz, Inc. February 9, 2024 Page 2 MILES & £ STOCKBRIDGE comprising the Sheetz Site and use such parcels for operation of a Fuel Center and Convenience Store. Such conflicting conditions include: (1) development of the Subject Parcel in substantial conformity with a concept plan dated March 15, 1989; (2) limitations on lighting; (3) limitations on the size and height of free-standing signs; and (4) restrictions regarding the entrance to the Subject Parcel from U.S. Route 220. In consultation with the Roanoke County Planning Department and Zoning Division staff, Sheetz determined that it is necessary to remove the existing proffered conditions governing the Subject Parcel to allow for the redevelopment of the Subject Parcel and the Adjacent Parcel and the operation of a Sheetz Fuel Center and Convenience Store on the Sheetz Site. Following the approval of this rezoning application by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, the Subject Parcel and the Adjacent Parcel both would be zoned C-2 (High Intensity Commercial district) without conditions. Thus, as C-2 (High Intensity Commercial district without conditions) zoned parcels, after the conditions governing the Subject Parcel are removed upon the approval of this application, then Sheetz' s proposed use of the Sheetz Site as Fuel Center and Convenience Store would be permitted. The Applicant submits the following exhibits in support of this rezoning application: Exhibit 1 - Justification Statement Exhibit 2 - Existing Proffered Conditions Exhibit 3 - Concept Plan for the Proposed Redevelopment of the Sheetz Site Exhibit 4 - Elevations Showing Design of Sheetz Fuel Center and Convenience Store Exhibit 5— Landscape Plan Exhibit 6— Lighting Plan Exhibit 7 - Metes and Bounds Description of Subject Parcel Exhibit 8 -List of Adjacent Property Owners Exhibit 9 - Traffic Impact Analysis ("TIA") Exhibit 10 - Concurrence Letter from VDOT Regarding TIA The proposed development and operation of a Sheetz Fuel Center and Convenience Store on the Subject Parcel and the Adjacent Parcel will conform to the C-2 (High Intensity Commercial) district development conditions and design standards. The Applicant does not request any exceptions to such district standards. The Applicant is a family-owned convenience store chain based in Altoona, Pennsylvania. For more than 70 years, Sheetz has been meeting the needs of customers on the go and serving the communities in which it operates. Sheetz is excited to establish and operate a Fuel Center and Convenience Store at the corner of Franklin Road and Valley Avenue and looks forward to continuing to serve the Roanoke community. 119345\000002\4888-6103-6196.v2 Sheetz, Inc. February 9, 2024 Page 3 lMILES & fi, STOCKBRIDGE Please do not hesitate to reach out if you have any questions or need any additional information about the attached rezoning application materials. Regards, axwell H. Wiegard Enclosures Cc: Ms. Megan Cronise, Assistant Director of Planning (mcroniseroanokecountvva.gov) Ms. Rebecca James, Zoning Administrator (rjamesroanokecountyva.gov) Ms. Alyssa Dunbar, Planner (adunbarroanokecountyva.gov) Rachel W. Lower, Esq., Deputy County Attorney (r1owerroanokecountyva.gov) Mr. Tony Caruso, PE, Sheetz, Inc. (tcaruso@sheetz.com) Mr. Todd Cosado, Sheetz, Inc. (tcasado@sheetz.com) Coryell Barlow, Esq., Sheetz, Inc. (cbarlow@sheetz.com) Mr. David W. Andrews (David.Andrews@tscg.com) Mr. David Whitby (whitby9907(gmail.com) I 19345\000002\4888-6103-6196.v2 JUSTIFICATION FOR REZONING, SPECIAL USE PERMIT WAIVER OR COMP PLAN (15.2-2232) REVIEW REQUESTS Applicant: Sheetz, Inc. The Planning Commission will study rezoning, special use permit waiver or community plan (15.2-2232) review requests to determine the need and justification for the change in terms of public health, safety, and general welfare. Please answer the following questions as thoroughly as possible. Use additional space if necessary. Please explain how the request furthers the purposes of the Roanoke County Ordinance as well as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning district classification in the Zoning Ordinance. Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Community Plan. Please describe the impact(s) of the request on the property itself, the adjoining properties, and the surrounding area, as well as the impacts on public services and facilities, including water/sewer, roads, schools, parks/recreation and fire and rescue. 3 See Section VI of attached justification for rezoning narrative. See Section VI of attached justification for rezoning narrative. See Section VII of attached justification for rezoning narrative. CONCEPT PLAN CHECKLIST A concept plan of the proposed project must be submitted with the application. The concept plan shall graphically depict the land use change, development or variance that is to be considered. Further, the plan shall address any potential land use or design issues arising from the request. In such cases involving rezonings, the applicant may proffer conditions to limit the future use and development of the property and by so doing, correct any deficiencies that may not be manageable by County permitting regulations. The concept plan should not be confused with the site plan or plot plan that is required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Site plan and building permit procedures ensure compliance with State and County development regulations and may require changes to the initial concept plan. Unless limiting conditions are proffered and accepted in a rezoning or imposed on a special use permit or variance, the concept plan may be altered to the extent permitted by the zoning district and other regulations. A concept plan is required with all rezoning, special use permit, waiver, community plan (15.2-2232) review and variance applications. The plan should be prepared by a professional site planner. The level of detail may vary, depending on the nature of the request. The County Planning Division staff may exempt some of the items or suggest the addition of extra items, but the following are considered minimum: ALL..APPLICANTS a. Applicant name and name of development Date, scale and north arrow Lot size in acres or square feet and dimensions Location, names of owners and Roanoke County tax map numbers of adjoining properties Physical features such as ground cover, natural watercourses, floodplain, etc. The zoning and land use of all adjacent properties v1 All property lines and easements All buildings, existing and proposed, and dimensions, floor area and heights V i. Location, widths and names of all existing or platted streets or other public ways within or adjacent to the development Dimensions and locations of all driveways, parking spaces and loading spaces Additional information requiredfor REZONING and SPECIAL USE PERMITAPPLICANTS k. Existing utilities (water, sewer, storm drains) and connections at the site V"1 Any driveways, entrances/exits, curb openings and crossovers in. Topography map in a suitable scale and contour intervals n. Approximate street grades and site distances at intersections o. Locations of all adjacent fire hydrants p. Any proffered conditions at the site and how they are addressed q. If project is to be phased, please show phase schedule I certify that all items required in the helist above are complete. Signa re •applicVt ZlIV-( Date 6 Community Development Planning & Zoning Division POTENTIAL OF NEED FOR TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AND/OR TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY The following is a list of potentially high traffic-generating land uses and road network situations that could elicit a more detailed analysis of the existing and proposed traffic pertinent to your rezoning, subdivision waiver, public street waiver, or special use permit request. If your request involves one of the items on the ensuing list, we recommend that you meet with a County planner, the County traffic engineer, and/or Virginia Department of Transportation staff to discuss the potential additional traffic related information that may need to be submitted with the application in order to expedite your application process. (Note this list is not inclusive and the County staff and VDOT reserve the right to request a traffic study at any time, as deemed necessary) High Traffic-Generating Land Uses: • Single-family residential subdivisions, Multi-family residential units, or Apartments with more than 75 dwelling units • Restaurant (with or without drive-through windows) • Gas station/Convenience store/Car wash • Retail shop/Shopping center • Offices (including: financial institutions, general, medical, etc.) • Regional public facilities • Educational/Recreational facilities • Religious assemblies • Hotel/Motel • Golf course • Hospital/Nursing home/Clinic • Industrial site/Factory • Day care center • Bank • Non-specific use requests Road Network Situations: • Development adjacent to/with access onto/within 500-ft of intersection of a roadway classified as an arterial road (e.g., Rte 11, 24, 115, 117, 460, 11/460, 220, 221, 419, etc) • For new phases or changes to a development where a previously submitted traffic study is more than two (2) years old and/or roadway conditions have changed significantly • When required to evaluate access issues • Development with ingress/egress on roads planned or scheduled for expansion, widening, improvements, etc. (i.e. on Long Range Transportation Plan, Six-Yr Road Plan, etc.) • Development in an area where there is a known existing traffic and/or safety problem • Development would potentially negatively impact existing/planned traffic signal(s) • Substantial departure from the Community Plan • Any site that is expected to generate over one hundred (100) trips during the peak hour of the traffic generator or the peak hour on the adjacent streets, or over seven hundred fifty (750) trips in an average day Effective date: April 19, 2005 7 Community Development Planning & Zoning Division NOTICE TO APPLICANTS FOR REZONING, SUBDIVISION WAIVER, PUBLIC STREET WAIVER, OR SPECIAL USE PERMIT PETITION PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION ACCEPTANCE PROCEDURE The Roanoke County Planning Commission reserves the right to continue a Rezoning, Subdivision Waiver, Public Street Waiver or Special Use Permit petition if new or additional information is presented at the public hearing. If it is the opinion of the majority of the Planning Commissioners present at the scheduled public hearing that sufficient time was not available for planning staff and/or an outside referral agency to adequately evaluate and provide written comments and suggestions on the new or additional information prior to the scheduled public hearing then the Planning Commission may vote to continue the petition. This continuance shall allow sufficient time for all necessary reviewing parties to evaluate the new or additional information and provide written comments and suggestions to be included in a written memorandum by planning staff to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission shall consult with planning staff to determine if a continuance may be warranted. POTENTIAL OF NEED FOR TRAFFIC ANALYSES AND/OR TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY The Roanoke County Planning Commission reserves the right to continue a Rezoning, Subdivision Waiver, Public Street Waiver, or Special Use Permit petition if the County Traffic Engineer or staff from the Virginia Department of Transportation requests further traffic analyses and/or a traffic impact study that would be beneficial in making a land use decision (Note: a list of potential land uses and situations that would necessitate further study is provided as part of this application package). This continuance shall allow sufficient time for all necessary reviewing parties to evaluate the required traffic analyses and/or traffic impact study and to provide written comments and/or suggestions to the planning staff and the Planning Commission. If a continuance is warranted, the applicant will be notified of the continuance and the newly scheduled public hearing date. - Name of Petition -Z I •) ?- Li Date Effective date: April 19,2005 8 Exhibit 1 Justification Statement JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT FOR REZONING APPLICATION 4143 FRANKLIN ROAD PROPERTY (Tax Parcel ID 077.20-01-40.00-0000) February 2024 I. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL The subject parcel, comprised of approximately 0.978 acres, is located at 4143 Franklin Road SW, Roanoke, Virginia 24018 (the "Subject Parcel"). The Subject Parcel is commonly known as Tax Parcel ID 077.20-01-40.00-0000 and is more particularly described in the metes and bounds description attached hereto as Exhibit 7. The purpose of this rezoning application is to remove certain existing proffered conditions governing the development and use of the Subject Parcel, in connection with Sheetz's plan to redevelop the Subject Property and the adjacent parcel, commonly known as 4145 Franklin Road SW, Roanoke, VA 24018, and Roanoke County tax parcel ID 077.20-01-40.01-0000 (the "Adjacent Parcel") and operate a Sheetz Fuel Center and Convenience Store on the Subject Parcel and the Adjacent Parcel. The Subject Parcel is zoned C-2-C (High Intensity Commercial district with conditions) and the Adjacent Parcel is zoned C-2 (High Intensity Commercial district without conditions). Fuel Center and Convenience Store are uses permitted by-right in the C-2 (High Intensity Commercial) zoning district in Roanoke County. The Subject Parcel and the Adjacent Parcel (collectively, the "Sheetz Site") both are owned by 4143 Franklin Road Associates, LLC. The parcels comprising the Sheetz Site are designated as Core on the Roanoke County Future Land Use Map. II. PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA The Property is located on the west side of Franklin Road (U.S. Route 220), immediately north of its intersection with Valley Avenue. Existing development on the Subject Parcel consists of a vacant 3096.5 square foot bank style building, as well as a drive-thru banking canopy and surface parking area. The Subject is located within a cluster of commercial buildings that line both sides of Franklin Road. To the north of the Subject Parcel Property, there are office buildings housing an optician business and a title insurance agency. To the east, across Franklin Road from the Subject Parcel, is a restaurant building housing a Starbucks coffee shop. To the west of the Subject Parcel 1 19345\000002\4871-1247-5556.v2 is a self-storage facility. To the south of the Subject Parcel is a retail building that houses a Fleet Feet running shoe and apparel store. III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Sheetz proposes to demolish the existing buildings located on the Subject Parcel and the Adjacent Parcel and develop a new Sheetz Ful Center and Convenience Store (the "Project") on the combined parcels. The Project would include a 6,139 square foot Convenience Store building, a drive-thru lane for Sheetz Made-to-Order food service, a fuel island and canopy, a dumpster enclosure, a stand-alone pole sign, surface parking areas containing 38 parking spaces, and entrance off of U.S. Route 220 and an entrance/exit onto Valley Avenue. A concept plan showing the proposed layout of the Project, and the proposed locations of the Convenience Store building, the drive-thru lane, the fuel island and canopy area, the dumpster enclosure area, the pole sign, the parking areas and the entrances to the Sheetz Site is attached hereto as Exhibit 3. Elevations showing the proposed design of the Sheetz Fuel Center and Convenience Store, including the Convenience Store building, the fuel center island and canopy, the dumpster enclosure, and the pole sign are attached hereto as Exhibit 4. And landscaping and lighting plans for the Project are attached hereto as Exhibits 5 and 6 respectively. The Project will conform to the C-2 (High Intensity Commercial) district development conditions and design standards set forth in Section 30-54-3 of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance. The Applicant does not request any exceptions to such district development conditions and design standards. IV. EXISTING PROFFERED CONDITIONS To facilitate the redevelopment and use of the Subject Parcel as a Central Fidelity Bank branch, in 1989, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors approved a set of amended proffered conditions governing the use of the Subject Parcel. A copy of the existing proffered conditions approved by the Board of Supervisors in 1989 (the "Existing Proffers") is attached hereto as Exhibit 2. The Existing Proffers approved by the Board of Supervisors in 1989, which continue to govern development and use of the Subject Parcel, include certain conditions that are inconsistent with Sheetz's plan to redevelop the parcels comprising the Sheetz Site and use such parcels of 2 119345\000002\4871-1247-5556.v2 property for operation of a Sheetz Fuel Center and Convenience Store. Specifically, the Existing Proffers that conflict with Sheetz's proposed redevelopment and use of the Subject Parcel include: 1) The site will be developed in substantial conformity to the concept plan prepared by Balzer and Associates, Inc. and dated March 15, 1989. The building may be oriented in a slightly different manner to improve visibility and drive-thru access. 2) Site lighting will be directed downward, and will not exceed 20 feet in height. Signs will not be lighted after 10:00 p.m. 3) Free standing signs will be limited to 50 square feet, and will not exceed 20 feet in height. 4) The entrance on U.S. Route 220 will be placed adjacent to the northern property line to facilitate a shared entrance between the proposed bank site and the remaining property to the north. V. REMOVAL OF EXISTING PROFFERED CONDITIONS Sheetz proposes to remove the Existing Proffers as a necessary step in the process of redeveloping the Subject Parcel and the Adjacent Parcel and to facilitate its proposed use of such parcels to operate a Sheetz Fuel Center and Convenience Store. Following the approval of this rezoning application by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, the Subject Parcel and the Adjacent Parcel both will be zoned C-2 (High Intensity Commercial district) without conditions. Thus, as C-2 (High Intensity Commercial district without conditions) zoned parcels, after the Existing Proffers applying to the Subject Parcel are removed upon the approval of this application, then Sheetz's proposed use of the Subject Parcel and the Adjacent Parcel as a new Sheetz Fuel Center and VI. THE REQUEST FURTHERS PURPOSES OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE C-2 (HIGH INTENSITY COMMERCIAL) DISTRICT The Project will further the applicable goals and recommendations of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance. The Zoning Ordinance expressly is designed to promote the general welfare of the public by (a) providing for convenience of access, (b) reducing or preventing congestion in the 3 119345\000002\4871-1247-5556.v2 public streets, and (c) encouraging economic development activities that provided desirable employment and enlarge the tax base. See Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, Section 30-3. The purpose of the C-2 (High Intensity Commercial) zoning district stated in Section 30- 54-1 of the Zoning Ordinance "is to provide locations for a variety of commercial and service- related activities within the urban service area serving a community of several neighborhoods ore large areas of the county." Accordingly, "[h]igh intensity commercial districts are most appropriately found along major arterial thoroughfares which serve large segments of the county's population" like the U.S. Route 220 corridor south of the St. Route 419 interchange, where the Subject Parcle is located. See Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, Section 30-3. Moreover, "the C-2 district permits a wide variety of retail and service-related uses" including the Fuel Center and Convenience Store uses proposed by Sheetz. Zoning Ordinance, Section 30-54-1. Further, '[1]and uses permitted in this district are generally consistent with the recommendation set forth in the transition and core land use categories of the comprehensive plan." Zoning Ordinance, Section 30-54-1. As noted above, the Subject Parcel is designated as "Core" on the Roanoke County Future Land Use Map. The Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan describes the Core land use category as "[t]hese are commercial, retail areas where suburban centers of high intensity urban development are present or expected." Comprehensive Plan, Chapter 3. The Fuel Center and Convenience Store use proposed by Sheetz is consistent with the designation of the Subject Parcel as Core on the Future Land Use Map and the description of the Core lad use category set forth in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed redevelopment of the Subject Parcel and the Adjacent Parcel as a Sheetz Fuel Center and Convenience Store furthers the following objectives for the Core land use category established in Chapter 3 of the Comprehensive Plan: 4 119345\000002\4871-1247-5556.v2 A. Encourage Redevelopment of congested Core areas. B. Create pedestrian-oriented Core areas to ease traffic congestion. C. Concentrate intensive commercial uses into one area rather than in long linear corridors. Sheetz proposes to redevelop two unutilized or underutilized parcels in a congested Core area along U.S. Route 220 south of the State Route 419 interchange and concentrate the proposed Fuel Center and Convenience Store uses on such underutilized parcels along a major throughfare serving a significant portion of Roanoke County, in close proximity to other similar and complimentary commercial uses, such as the Starbucks located at 4109 Southern Hills Drive SW, the Chick-fl-A located at 4110 Southern Hills Drive SW, and the Exxon located at 4111 Franklin Road SW, Roanoke VA 24014. To facilitate pedestrian access, Sheetz proposes to install sidewalks along the Franklin Road and Valley Avenue road frontage, as shown on the Landscaping Plan attached hereto as Exhibit 5. To further these objectives for the Core land use category articulated in Chapter 3 of the Comprehensive Plan, Sheetz has designed this Project and will develop the Sheetz Fuel Center and Convenience Store on the Subject Parcel and the Adjacent Parcel in accordance with the guidelines for the Core land use category established in Chapter 3 of the Comprehensive Plan, and the development conditions and design standards governing the C-2 (High Intensity Commercial) zoning district under Section 30-54-3 of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance. VII. ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES Public facilities are adequate to serve the proposed change in use of the Subject Parcel and the Adjacent Parcel. The Project will be served by existing public water and sewer facilities, which are adequate. As demonstrated by the Traffic Impact Analysis report attached hereto as Exhibit 9 and the letter of concurrence issued by the Virginia Department of Transportation attached hereto as Exhibit 10, vehicular and pedestrian systems are also adequate to serve the Project. The Applicant understands that VDOT and Roanoke County plan to implement the Route 220 Signal Improvements project in 2024, in an effort to improve certain signalized intersections along U.S. Route 220—including the Valley Avenue/Southern Hills Drive intersection—using an intersection design known as a Thru-Cut. The improved Valley Avenue/Southern Hills Drive intersection also 5 119345\000002\4871-1247-5556.v2 will include pedestrian signals and crosswalks. The Applicant further understands that the "Thru- Cut" intersection design will restrict movements straight across the Valley Avenue/Southern Hills Drive intersection from side street to side street, while keeping right and left turns from each side street onto U.S. Route 220 at the intersection, with the objective being to increase "green time" for all traffic signal phases. The concept plan attached hereto as Exhibit 3 reflects entrances to the Project from U.S. Route 220 South and Valley Avenue that have been designed with the planned improvements to the Valley Avenue/Southern Hills Drive intersection with U.S. Route 220 in mind. VIII. CONCLUSION Based on the foregoing, Applicant respectfully requests that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors approve the rezoning application. Respectfully submitted, Miles & Stockbridge P.C. By: Name: Max lard, Esq. Riverfront Plaza West Tower 901 E. Byrd Street Suite 950 Richmond, Virginia 23219 (804) 905-6932 (Direct) (540) 815-8040 (Mobile) Attorney for Applicant 6 i 19345\000002\4871-1247-5556V2 Exhibit 2 Existing Proffered Conditions APPROVED AS TO CONTENT VIRGINIA: B1M)RE THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNT? A 1.02 acre parcel of land, generally located on U.S. Route 220 0 Valley Street within the Cave Spring Magisterial District, and recorded as parcel # 77.20-1-40 in the Roanoke County Tax Records. FINALORDER TO THE HONORABLE SUPERVISORS OFR0AKE COUNTY: WHEREAS, your Petitioner Central Fidelity Bank, Inc. did petition tie Board of County Supervisors to rezone the above-referenced parcel B-2 General Commercial B-2, General Commercial from wi tf1 Conditions District to with Amended Conditions District for the purpose of constructing and operation of a branch bank. WHEREAS, after due legal notice, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing of the petition on May 2 , 19 89 , at -which time, all parties in interest were given an opportunity to 'be heard; and WHEREAS, after full consideration at the public hearing held on May 23, 19 89, the Board of County Supervisors determined that the rezoning be NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDERED that the aforementioned parcel of land, which is contained in the Roanoke County Tax Maps as Parcel 1'7 2-O I -'Ic and recorded in Deed Book 10B2.. Page and legally described below, be rezoned from District to District. - 10 - VI1INIA: BETURE THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROAtOKE COUNTY 0 0 0 A 1.02 acre parcel of land, generally located on U.S. Route 220 recorded as parcel # 77.20-1-40 in the Roanoke County Tax Records. @ Valley Street within the Cave Spring Magisterial District, and A MM EN D ED TO THE HONORABLE SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY: PROFFER OF CONDITIONS Being in accord with Sec. 15.1-491.1 et s. of the code of Virginia and sec. 21-105E of the Roanoke County Z :irig Ordinance, the Petitioner Central Fidelity Bank, Inc. hereby voluntarily proffers to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia the following conditions to the rezonina of the above-referenced oarcc1 ef 1;n• 1) The site will , be developed in substancial conformity to the concept plan prepared by Balzer and Associates, Inc. and dated March 15, 1989. The building may be oriented in a slightly different manner to improve visibility and drive-thru access. 2) Site lighting will be directed downward, and will not exceed 20 feet in height. Signs will not be lighted after 10:00 p.m. 3) Free standing signs will be limited to 50 square feet, and will not exceed 20 feet in height. 4) The entrance on U.S. Route 220 will be placed adjacent to the northern property line to facilitate a shared entrance between the proposed bank site and the remaining property to the north. 5) Central Fidelity Bank, Inc. will co-ordinate with Roanoke County to enable the County to upgrade the storm sewer along the eastern property line (beside U.S. Route 220) prior to Central Fidelity paving an entrance onto U.S. Route 220, so long as said cooperation does not delay the planned Branch opening on December 12, 1989. - 12 - C2,iy1 1c4// (fh4ic. An-l-Iler Exhibit 3 Concept Plan for the Proposed Redevelopment of the Sheetz Site I 2 F I I I I 4' 4' 4221 VALLEY AVE 077.20-01-41DO-0000 RENT A SPACE INC ZONING, C2C LAND USE, STORAGE BUILDINGS PROPOSED SHEETZ BunSrLC LEEk ± 63S SC LICHENS NOES PESCOSCO OJUPSINO 4119 FRANKUN RD D77.20-D1-38UO-ODDD REDEEMER LLC ZONING, C2 LAND USE, OFFICE / PESCOSCO USIT POS (no.) PRSCO REEANPLN WOE. ARLEnE SCALE IN FAST DRAFT a U AET 1 OF 1 K XSI1NC OWRFLAD IMPROVEMENTS '4221 VALLEY AVE 07720-D1-41.00--0000 RENT A SPACE INC ZONING: C2C LAND USE: STORAGE BUILDINGS Alft' 4-I'i_4 I •I I PROPOSED SHEETZ 10— 4T MM MM MM LV 122 1000.1 ()F 4919 FRANKLIN RD 077.2D-D1-3a DC-DODD REDEEMER LLC ZONING: C2 LANG USE: OFFICE EN202IC VF IS FEET lo — I DRAFT z ZID /-50 S-lw LU C) I OF 1 Exhibit 4 Elevations Showing Proposed Sheetz Fuel Center and Convenience Store SHEETZ, INCORPORATED 5700 SIXTH AVENUE ALTOONA, PA 16602 (814) 946-3611 NEW S-IEETZ STØ1E INT. ØP PIANt<.LIN 1C->A ANt \'ALLE -r TaA \'I1INIA eUILDING ELEVATIONS 2.63 50. Fr. 2411 ORJVE TI4RU SIGN SIGNAGE SQUARE FOOTAGE i5REAKDMN SI-I!ETZ SIGN = 16.55 SQ. FT. )< 3 = 45.65 $0. PT. 1110 VINYL GRAPHIC = 21.44 SQ. P1.2< I = 21.44 $0. PT. 2411 SIGN = 12.63 SQ. PT. 2< I = 12.63 SQ. PT. TOTAL = 8312 SQ. PT. 53.12 SQ. PT. GAS PRI CE ROLE SIGN SI-IEETZ SIGN 24.15 sa PT. 2< I = 24.15 SQ. PT. GAS PRICE SIGN 61.53 SQ. PT. 2< I = 61.53 $Q. PT. TOTAL = 52.25 SQ. FT. 52.25 SQ. PT. (6.55 50 FT. 514001Z SIGN : GAS CANOPY AWNING SI-I!ETZ SIGN AREA = I3.S SQ. PT. 2< 3 = 3524 SQ. PT. FUEL OFFERING FLAG AREA = 2.16 SQ. PT. 2< 12 = 33.12 SQ. PT. TOTAL = 12.56 SQ. FT. 12.36 SQ. PT. LI TOTAL SITE SIGN AREA = 245.36 SQ. PT. CREATED ØIIQS/2023 3.0550 FT AWNING SlGN 11111111 TI Des SO Fr AUJFING SIGN 21.4.4 50 FT. ('ITO ViNyl. GRAPHIC 6.55 50, FT. SI4EEIZ SIGNS 3.08 50 FT. AWNING SIGN APRO)C LOCATION OF PROPOSED 52,25 50 FT. POLE SIGN SIGN LOCATIONS Convenience Architecture and Design P.C. 7Qt23d2318S88!o - - 0 EE 0 0 O 2300 @1 rao'ooaeo 080000 0000023223 0 0 0 0 230003230000088 0 0230e0 0 230444020023 00 ®0 e 08eO4 0 00230402323 0 0 003804234408 0 0 23800823 0 0000048323 0 0 404002382304 23230823231004804 0 10804 84884480023 -op 0EI-I€ETZg! - FRONT ELEVATION LEFT ELEVATION SH-EETZ A WALL MOUNTED "SHEETZ8 BUILDING SIGN WALL MOUNTED "MTO" DECAL "C ®WALL MOUNTED 2417 DRIVE THRU BUILDING SIGN P030 181412300013 .nnolrtoolornbo@,no.8.oao NEW SHEETZ STORE Roanoke FRAfKUN ROAD SOUT HWEST InL of Franklin Road Southweot and Volley Road Roonoke, Virginio 24018 SHEETS. INC. 5700 SIXTH AVE. ALT000A, PA 16602 PRO ISSU U 12.08.2023 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A200 Convenience Architecture and Design P.C. ELEVATION 811 0 C) socoaoao @2 @1 @1 @2 ®coaso - 1aolC) - ®RIGHT ELEVATION CUPOLA ELEVATION FROM ROOF 6 CUPOLA ELEVATION FROM ROOF NEW SHEETZ STORE Roanoke FRAKIN ROAD SOUTHWEST Idol Fracklin Road SouthwoRt aed valley Road 000esko, Voainia 24010 SHEETZ, INC. 5700 SIXTH HAVE, ALTOONA, PA 16602 ISSUt 12.08.2023 Au EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A201 DOUBLE-FACED GAS FCE SIGN DETAIL - PARTIAL ELEVATION SCALE lit AREA: 52.25 SC. FT. D0ULE FACED GAS PRICE SIGN SIDE ELEVATION SCALE. l/tC0 Convenience Architecture arId Oeolgn P.C. - NEW SI-IEETZ SITE ROANOKE SIGN CAeINET DETAILS TOTAL SIGN AEEAS: Ra.25 SC Ft. AU FAIRS no Ce 4? cusue ce IcIer uugnju Ins ci Franklin noad and Valley Avenue Roanoke VotinG snccia. inc. 5700 SDcTH AVE. ALTOONA, PA 16602 ISSUE 113/2024 POLE SIGN DETAILS SIGN SIDE '5 ELEVATION WIDE '0' ELEVATION WIDE A' LEFT WIDE ELEVATION WOE 'C' RIGHT WOE ELEVATION _[ 00000 DO,dWLE PACED FUEL OFFERNA FLAG SIGN DETAILS STONE COLUMN EASE DETAIL CONCAVE FASCIA MOUNTING DETAIL NEUJ WO4EETZ STORE 5135 50. FT. PLAN VIEW FOR LOGO LOCATIONS COLUMN ELEVATION CANOPY MOUNTED SHEETZ SIGN DETAIL Convenience Architecture and Design P.C. 051 SM.I0WV.0la0,bN. PAI602S 51.05 1014)2666013 .061 000616005503 NEW SHEETZ SITE ROANOKE nt of Planklin Road and Valley Aveeuo ROaeOke VirginIa OMER SHEE1Z, INC. 5700 SlOTH AVE. ALTOONO, PA 16602 R0U6 12)13/2023 GAS AWNING AWNING SEE no' cr5515 SCARES. COlE 50Cr (SEE CETAS. 55.010 IE-IEECOEC 11 GATE AND POST DETAIL FOR QUANTITIES OF GATES AND POSTS SEE PLOT PLAN RIGHT ELEVATION SECTION DETAIL T." STEEL HINGE/COLLAR DETAIL SCALE HOT TO SCALE CANE EOLT DETAIL DUMPSTER GATE DETAILS SCALE: NOT TO SEAl PARK 550555 ACM CAP PLAN VIEW SCALE 7 ME PARK DROOlS ACM COT It 0.155 FOUNDATiON CT -G COFUC STE 11 1•1 CCN0RETE/ONT ELEVATION FOOT1SS SCAlA C/B' BRCKTo MArdi BLMLOIIOl It 0.110 FOUNDATION S CII IS' CONCRETE DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE COMPOSITE SCARCE, IMP COWER TORE PARK BRONZE RE: COIlS SOUr PETAL TIlE SWEET PARK BRONZE ACM CAP 111111 I I I I I I I I I I I Eli III 1_li 111,1 III iI I. REAR ELEVATION SCALE T/S CII l'-000NCRETE FOOT NC Convenience Architecture and Design P.C. ph.. (814)229.013 .501504113158h0K1111 PROJECT NAME: ISSUE 07-24-22 PROUECT NO' AUTHOR BY NMI REVI­SHeETTITLE TRASH ENCLOSURE 1 Exhibit 5 Landscape Plan I L-. •) .. .• 2 FRANKLIN ROAD AND VALLEY AVENUE 222 P20201 S a P 2 2 U I 8 S 8 0 S PREPARED FOR SHEETZ 0022022 COUNTY LANDSCAPE RENDERING 113020011 11/29/2023 0 > -n -H KimIey Horn VIRGINIA 2221221 LOU Exhibit 6 Lighting Plan ­3 SITE IS LOC—D IN A REGION "ERE LIGNTING IS IN DESCR­ION COLUMN NORTH GRAPHIC SCALE iF REDLEONARD IQ ASSOCIATES 120 11 21 111 211 11-211 I. 11 LABEL 1= All IIE Ss 1. 211 SINGLE 11Z. 6001 NOON 020 0006000 6266000 O0060 606560016000460010060 I SINGLE III 111 11 11 IM 01 00 400 006110 00 40 NORM A 90) "P 60 RI P 5 0574 60010 750 7.600 NA 0 20 OPt 11007749 INC.WILLAMSOU1500R 0645121061271.406NM405II7204RIIOONNI 60401706 760400606 0160. BLOCS, 5060!) 7 ANaL SINGLE 1521 1.000 MiSS-GO 16 112 VWU-H-LII/540,TL.502CGLCIUSV BRONZE CR160 700611 1 6 SINGLE 10040 61100 53.0001 132 132 ONCE U5211NO B16073ROS00#Il" 'L '' OB.7.0L705'TOO (563217 060 FINISH, 0626620 E2pCSSRH,O) Z SINGLE 1. 000 Is— —IR..M-NIIB LINEAR.—L-T IS SHEETZ ROANOKE, VA RL-9285-SI .qsehg a tADOmOMAL DIXTURD INFO [_J E' REDLEONARD ASSOCIATES CREED- LIGHTING CREEX- LIGHTING' a a a a a a a a :x00 To r' CREE+ LIGHTING CREE+ LIGHTING •-tl-IINDVAAT:a a a STREET WRAP FLEX RACK-BEND OPRL OH -- LR ILLUMINATION BULLET - MINI I' lE'IAIII'IIA.I EEO a Styk Exterior Wall - Stern SMI Ct,T'TG SHEETZ ROANOKE, VA RL-9285-SI ILL lUr. LS4-1z v,.nlIm1I.. REOLEONARD ASSOCIATES SHEETZ ROANOKE, VA RL-9285-S AREA/FLOOD MMLML ok STREET WRAP OOWNLIGHT WAIL MOUNTED WAIL MOUNTED 'I[ REDLEONARU ASSOCIATES SNEETZ ROANOKE, VA RL-9285-S1 IQ REDLEONARD ASSOCIATES SHEETZ ROANOKE, VA RI-9285-S1 I' REDLEONARD IA ASSOCIATES SHEETZ ROANOKE, VA RL-9285-S1 Exhibit 7 Legal Description of Subject Parcel 119345\000002\4895-8088-5156.v1 METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PARCEL: ALL THAT CERTAIN LOT, TRACT OR PARCEL OF LAND SITUATE, LYING AND BEING IN THE CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT, ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA BEING MORE PARTICULARLY BOUNDED AND DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT AN IRON ROD FOUND, SAID POINT BEING THE INTERSECTION OF THE WESTERLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF FRANKLIN ROAD (VARIABLE WIDTH R.O.W.) AND THE NORTHERLY SIDE OF VALLEY AVENUE (VARIABLE WIDTH R.O.W.), RUNNING THENCE; SOUTH 23°24'04" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 48.24 FEET TO AN IRON ROD FOUND, THENCE; SOUTH 64°19'24" WEST A DISTANCE OF 82.87 FEET TO AN IRON ROD FOUND, THENCE; SOUTH 54°43'37" WEST A DISTANCE OF 76.75 FEET TO A NAIL FOUND IN THE CONCRETE CURB, THENCE; SOUTH 40°51'19" WEST A DISTANCE OF 25.19 FEET TO AN IRON ROD FOUND, THENCE; NORTH 19°59'56" WEST A DISTANCE OF 233.03 FEET TO AN IRON ROD FOUND, THENCE; NORTH 69°59'58" EAST A DISTANCE OF 211.65 FEET TO AN IRON ROD FOUND, THENCE; SOUTH 19°59'56" EAST A DISTANCE OF 157.30' TO THE SAID POINT AND PLACE OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 42,582.7 SQUARE FEET OR 0.978 ACRES OF LAND MORE OR LESS. TAX PARCEL ID: 077.20-01-40.00-0000 ADDRESS: 4143 FRANKLIN ROAD, ROANOKE VA 24018 Exhibit 8 List of Adjacent Property Owners LIST OF ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNERS 1. 4145 Franklin Road Property (Adjacent Parcel to be developed by Sheetz in conjunction with development of the Subject Parcel) o Tax Parcel ID: 077.20-01-40.01-0000 o Owner Name: 4143 FRANKLIN ROAD ASSOCIATES, LLC o Owner Address: 9970 Kingsbridge Road, Henrico, VA 23238 2. 4119 Franklin Road Property (Pike Title) o Tax Parcel ID: 077.20-01-38.00-0000 o Owner Name: REDEEMER LLC o Owner Address: 4119 A Franklin Road, Roanoke, VA 24018 3. 4347 Franklin Road Property (Fleet Feet) o Tax Parcel ID: 087.08-05-02.00-0000 o Owner Name: WONDERLAND LLC o Owner Address: 4347 Franklin Road, Roanoke, VA 24018 4. 4221 Valley Avenue Property (Rent-A-Space) o Tax Parcel ID: 077.20-01-41.00-0000 o Owner Name: RENT A SPACE INC o Owner Address: 3501 Concord Road, Suite 350, York, PA 17402 Attn: Betsey Stewart 5. 4224 Valley Avenue Property (Lowe's) o Tax Parcel ID: 087.08-05-01.00-0000 o Owner Name: LOWES HOME CENTERS INC o Owner Address: 1000 Lowes BLVD, Mooresville, NC 28117 Attn: TAX DEPT 6. 4109 Southern Hills Drive SW Property (Starbucks) o City of Roanoke Tax Parcel ID: 5480718 o Owner Name: Silk Purse Properties o Owner Address: Carmichael, CA 95608 Attn: Frances C. Slate 1 19345\000002\4882-0908-4324.vl Exhibit 9 Traffic Impact Analysis TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS SHEETZ AT FRANKLIN ROAD & VALLEY AVENUE ROANOKE, VIRGINIA REVISED JANUARY 2024 Prepared By: 2035 Maywill Street Suite 200 Richmond, VA 23230 (804) 673-3882 Copyright © 2024, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Version 3 January 2024 kimley-horn.com Traffic Impact Analysis Sheetz at Franklin Road and Valley Avenue i TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Executive Summary ......................................................................................................... 1 2 Introduction...................................................................................................................... 2 2.1 Purpose ............................................................................................................... 2 2.2 Methodology ........................................................................................................ 2 2.3 Project Area ......................................................................................................... 2 2.4 Development Information ..................................................................................... 2 3 Traffic Operational Analysis ............................................................................................. 4 3.1 Methodology ........................................................................................................ 4 3.2 Key Assumptions ................................................................................................. 4 4 Existing Conditions .......................................................................................................... 5 4.1 Existing Roadway Characteristics ........................................................................ 5 4.2 Existing Traffic Volumes....................................................................................... 5 4.3 Existing Conditions Intersection Capacity Analysis .............................................. 7 4.4 Existing Conditions Queuing Analysis .................................................................. 7 5 Projected No-Build Conditions ......................................................................................... 7 5.1 Traffic Growth Rate .............................................................................................. 7 5.2 No-Build Conditions Intersection Capacity Analysis ............................................. 7 5.3 No-Build Conditions Queuing analysis ................................................................. 8 6 Build Conditions ............................................................................................................ 10 6.1 Site Trip Generation ........................................................................................... 10 6.2 Site Trip Distribution and Assignment ................................................................ 11 7 Build Conditions Intersection Capacity Analysis ............................................................ 17 7.1 Build Conditions Queuing Analysis .................................................................... 17 8 Access Management and Turn Lane Warrants .............................................................. 19 9 Conclusion and Recommendations ............................................................................... 21 Version 3 January 2024 kimley-horn.com Traffic Impact Analysis Sheetz at Franklin Road and Valley Avenue ii TABLE OF FIGURES Figure 1: Project Location Map ...................................................................................................3 Figure 2: Existing Turning Movement Volumes ...........................................................................6 Figure 3: No-Build Turning Movement Volumes ..........................................................................9 Figure 4: Trip Distribution ..........................................................................................................12 Figure 5: Trip Assignment .........................................................................................................13 Figure 6: Pass-by Trip Distribution ............................................................................................14 Figure 7: Pass-by Trip Assignment ...........................................................................................15 Figure 8: Build Turning Movement Volumes ..............................................................................16 Figure 9: Access Management ..................................................................................................20 TABLE OF TABLES Table 1: Intersection Level of Service (LOS) Analysis Criteria .....................................................4 Table 2: Existing Roadway Characteristics .................................................................................5 Table 3: Proposed Development Trip Generation .....................................................................10 Table 4: Control Delay and LOS Summary ...............................................................................18 Table 5: SimTraffic Queuing Summary......................................................................................18 APPENDICES Appendix A: Site Plan Appendix B: Traffic Count Data Appendix C: Synchro 11TM Output Sheets for Operational and Queue Analyses Appendix D:SimTraffic Output Sheets Appendix E: Trip Generation Calculations Appendix F: Turn Lane Warrants Version 3 January 2024 kimley-horn.com Traffic Impact Analysis Sheetz at Franklin Road and Valley Avenue 1 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) documented in this report evaluates the traffic impacts of the proposed 6,139 square-foot Sheetz gas station and convenience store with 12 fueling positions (the ‘Project’) in Roanoke, Virginia. The proposed development will be located within the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Franklin Road (US Route 220), hereafter referred to as Franklin Road, and Valley Avenue/Southern Hills Drive. Access to the proposed development will be provided via one full-access driveway along the north side of Valley Avenue (south project driveway) and one partial access (right-in only) driveway (north project driveway) along the west side of Franklin Road. A site plan of the proposed development is included in Appendix A. Traffic operations were analyzed at the intersection of Franklin Road and Valley Avenue/Southern Hills Drive during the AM and PM peak hours using Synchro 11 for the Existing (2023), projected No-Build (2025), and projected Build (2025) conditions. Additionally, based on correspondence with VDOT, SimTraffic queues were reported for information purposes only. The intersection of Franklin Road and Valley Avenue/Southern Hills Drive was analyzed as a signalized thru-cut in No-Build and Build conditions based on future intersection improvements confirmed by VDOT. To mitigate the additional traffic volumes generated by the proposed development, signal timing modifications are recommended to improve delay at the proposed signalized thru-cut at Franklin Road and Valley Avenue/Southern Hills Drive. With the implemented signal timing improvements, during the AM and PM peak hours, all movements and approaches at the intersection of Franklin Road and Valley Avenue/Southern Hills Drive operate at LOS D or better except for the eastbound left-turn movement. Note that movement delay is expected to decrease by approximately 9.5 seconds during the AM peak hour and 8.8 seconds during the PM peak hour under Build conditions. Further note that all minor street movement delays are expected to decrease and the overall intersection operates at LOS C or better under build conditions. During the AM and PM peak hours, the southbound stop-controlled approach at the south project driveway located on Valley Avenue is expected to operate at LOS C or better. Therefore, additional traffic generated by the proposed development is not expected to significantly or adversely impact the study intersection. Based on access management spacing standards reviewed, the proposed north project driveway does not meet access management spacing and will require an access management exception (AM-E) form for submittal to VDOT for review. The proposed south project driveway will also require an AM-E form for review. Turn lane warrant analyses were conducted at the proposed project driveways. The right-turn lane warrant analysis at the north project driveway showed that a full-width southbound right-turn lane with taper is warranted. Note that there is currently an existing southbound right-turn lane along Franklin Road which will serve the north project driveway. The turn lane warrant analyses at the south project driveway showed that a full-width westbound right- turn lane with taper is warranted. However, given geometric limitations and practicality, no turn lanes are proposed at the south project driveway. Note that the turn lane warrants conducted are applicable along a 2-lane highway. As Valley Avenue is not a 2-lane highway, the turn lane warrants conducted are not a direct representation of the warrant criteria. The development will however consolidate three existing driveways along Valley Avenue into one entrance/exit (south project driveway) to improve access management conditions. Nonetheless, a design wavier will be provided for the proposed south project driveway. Justification will be provided regarding the constraints and limitations to provide a right-turn taper at the proposed driveway within the design wavier document. Version 3 January 2024 kimley-horn.com Traffic Impact Analysis Sheetz at Franklin Road and Valley Avenue 2 2 INTRODUCTION 2.1 PURPOSE Kimley-Horn has performed a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) to evaluate the traffic impacts of the proposed 6,193 square-foot Sheetz with 12 fuel pumps development located in Roanoke, Virginia. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the future impacts of the proposed development traffic on the surrounding roadway network and to identify potential mitigation measures to accommodate the proposed development. 2.2 METHODOLOGY In preparation of this TIA, Kimley-Horn coordinated with VDOT to receive concurrence on the scope and limits of the study. As determined through VDOT coordination, the study area includes the intersection of Franklin Road and Valley Avenue/Southern Hills Drive. Intersection analyses performed using Synchro 11 included an evaluation of Existing (2023), projected No-Build (2025), and projected Build (2025) conditions. Existing conditions represent the roadway network geometry and traffic volumes at the time of this study. No-Build conditions represent the future roadway network prior to the completion of the proposed development. Build conditions represent the future roadway network with the proposed development. Additionally, based on correspondence with VDOT, vehicle queuing analyses were conducted using 95th percentile and maximum queues by lane obtained from SimTraffic measured in feet. Note that SimTraffic models were not calibrated for this study and are included for information purposes only. 2.3 PROJECT AREA The proposed development is located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Franklin Road and Valley Avenue/Southern Hills Drive in Roanoke, Virginia. The site location and study intersection are shown in Figure 1. 2.4 DEVELOPMENT INFORMATION The site for the proposed development is currently occupied by a vacant bank and 4,157 square feet of medical office space. Upon full project build-out, the proposed development will contain a 6,139 square- foot convenience store and fast-food restaurant with 12 fueling positions. As presented and agreed to with VDOT, 1,430 square feet of the proposed development is dedicated for fast-food restaurant space and 4,709 square feet of the proposed development is dedicated for convenience store/gas station space. Consistent with the proposed zoning designation and anticipated future land uses, Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition land use codes were assigned to each land use for this study. Detailed trip generation calculations are summarized in Section 6.1. Land use code (LUC) 934 (fast-food restaurant with drive-through window) and LUC 945 (convenience store/gas station) were used for this study. © 2023 Sheetz – Franklin Road & Valley Avenue Roanoke County, VA N Legend: Project Area Proposed Driveway Study Intersection Version 3 January 2024 kimley-horn.com Traffic Impact Analysis Sheetz at Franklin Road and Valley Avenue 4 3 TRAFFIC OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS 3.1 METHODOLOGY The traffic operational analysis performed for this study using Synchro 11 was conducted in accordance with VDOT’s Traffic Operations Safety Analysis Manual (TOSAM) for deterministic, intersection capacity analyses. Consistent with prior VDOT coordination, the study team used Synchro 11 using existing signal timings provided by VDOT. The evaluation of traffic operations within the study area was comprised of an intersection capacity level of service (LOS) analysis during the AM and PM peak hours. For the traffic operational analysis, the projected No-Build conditions served as the baseline for evaluating intersection delays and identifying potential mitigation measures under the Build conditions. Intersection capacity defines the traffic volume that can be accommodated by an intersection at a specified delay and corresponding LOS. Capacity is affected by various geometric factors, including roadway type (e.g., divided or undivided), number of lanes, lane widths, and grades. Delay, which is a measure of the level of intersection congestion expressed in seconds per vehicle, and associated LOS, ranges from LOS A (free flowing) to LOS F (a congested, forced flow condition). Delay and the associated LOS thresholds for signalized and unsignalized intersections based on HCM methodologies are present in Table 1. Table 1: Intersection Level of Service (LOS) Analysis Criteria Level of Service (LOS) Average Control Delay per Vehicle (sec/veh)Description of Traffic Conditions Signalized Unsignalized A £ 10 £ 10 No delays at intersections with continuous flow traffic. Uncongested operations; high frequency of long gaps available for all left- and right-turn traffic; no observable queues.B > 10 and £ 20 > 10 and £ 15 C > 20 and £ 35 > 15 and £ 25 Moderate delays at intersections with satisfactory to good traffic flow. Light congestion; infrequent backups on critical approaches. D > 35 and £ 55 > 25 and £ 35 Increased probability of delays on every approach. Heavy congestion on critical approaches, but intersection is functional. No existing long-standing queues. E > 55 and £ 80 > 35 and £ 50 Heavy traffic flow condition. Long delays probable. No available gaps for cross-street traffic or main street turning traffic. Limit of stable flow. F > 80 > 50 Unstable traffic flow. Heavy congestion. Traffic moves in forced flow condition. Average delays greater than one minute highly probable. Total breakdown. 3.2 KEY ASSUMPTIONS The following assumptions were applied to the traffic operational analysis. §Traffic signal timings were optimized for the Franklin Road and Valley Avenue/Southern Hills Drive intersection in the Build condition. §Per TOSAM, peak hour factors were calculated using existing traffic count data and then used for all existing conditions analyses. For all No-Build and Build signalized intersection analyses, the higher of the calculated peak hour factor or 0.92 was used. Version 3 January 2024 kimley-horn.com Traffic Impact Analysis Sheetz at Franklin Road and Valley Avenue 5 §Peak hour factors and heavy vehicles percents at the proposed project driveways were assumed to be similar to the intersection of Franklin Road and Valley Avenue. §The signalized intersection was evaluated using HCM 2000 reporting as the No-Build and Build signal phasing does not permit HCM 6th Edition reporting. §2040 traffic volumes referenced from Synchro files provided by VDOT at the intersections of Franklin Road at Pheasant Ridge Rod and Franklin Road at Old Rocky Mountain Road were balanced with collected traffic counts at Franklin Road and Valley Avenue/Southern Hills Drive. No volume or level of service results are reported at the intersections of Franklin Road at Pheasant Ridge Road and Franklin Road at Old Rocky Mountain Road. The additional intersections were included in the Synchro models for the purposes of capturing vehicle progression between the three intersections along Franklin Road. 4 EXISTING CONDITIONS 4.1 EXISTING ROADWAY CHARACTERISTICS Roadway characteristics including geometry and posted speed limits for roadway facilities adjacent to the proposed development are summarized in Table 2. Table 2: Existing Roadway Characteristics Road Direction Lanes Posted Speed (mph) Functional Classification Franklin Road Northbound/Southbound 4 Lanes Divided 45 Principle Arterial Valley Avenue Eastbound/Westbound 2 Lanes Undivided 25 Local Street Southern Hills Drive Eastbound/Westbound 2 Lanes Undivided 25 Local Street 4.2 EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES Existing AM and PM peak hour turning movement counts (TMCs) were collected on October 12, 2023 (Thursday) at the intersection of Franklin Road and Valley Avenue/Southern Hills Drive. The existing turning movement counts are shown in Figure 2. Traffic count data including heavy vehicle percents for each movement during the peak hours are provided in Appendix B. 1 'Int 1'!(65)(1,293)(51)5 471,612(62)39 (23)6 121(40)49837605 (15) 68 (128)(90)(47)62 (69)(1,712)N NOT TO SCALE Figure 2 Existing Peak Hour Traffic© 2023 Legend Study Roadway Study Intersection XX A.M. Peak Hour Traffic (XX) P.M. Peak Hour Traffic FranklinRoadValley Avenue Southern Hills Drive Version 3 January 2024 kimley-horn.com Traffic Impact Analysis Sheetz at Franklin Road and Valley Avenue 7 4.3 EXISTING CONDITIONS INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS During the AM and PM peak hours, all movements and approaches at the intersection of Franklin Road and Valley Avenue/Southern Hills Drive operate at LOS D or better except for the following movements/approaches: · Eastbound left-turn movement · Eastbound shared left-turn/through movement · Eastbound right-turn movement · Eastbound approach · Westbound shared left-turn/through movement · Westbound approach The control delay and LOS results are summarized in Table 4 following the analysis sections. The intersection capacity analysis results are included in Appendix C. 4.4 EXISTING CONDITIONS QUEUING ANALYSIS The SimTraffic 95th percentile and maximum queue lengths were calculated for all movements at the intersection of Franklin Road and Valley Avenue/Southern Hills Drive. Queue analysis reports were generated based on the average of 10 microsimulation runs. Note that no SimTraffic model calibration was conducted. Therefore, based on discussions with VDOT, vehicle queue length results are summarized in Table 5 for informational purposes only. The queuing analysis results are included in Appendix D. 5 PROJECTED NO-BUILD CONDITIONS The projected No-Build conditions represent the future roadway network and background traffic growth without the addition of the proposed development. Based on correspondence with VDOT, the South Peak development located within the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Franklin Road and Valley Avenue was identified to be included in the projected No-Build conditions for this study. Additionally, thru- cut intersection improvements at Franklin Road and Valley Avenue are proposed prior to the build out of the proposed development. Therefore, the intersection of Franklin Road and Valley Avenue/Southern Hills Drive was analyzed as a thru-cut in No-Build conditions. 5.1 TRAFFIC GROWTH RATE A traffic growth rate of 0.6% was applied to the turning movement counts as presented and agreed to by VDOT. No-Build AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes are shown in Figure 3. 5.2 NO-BUILD CONDITIONS INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS During the AM and PM peak hours, all movements and approaches at the intersection of Franklin Road and Valley Avenue/Southern Hills Drive operate at LOS D or better except for the following movements/approaches: · Eastbound left-turn movement · Eastbound right-turn movement · Eastbound approach · Westbound left-turn movement · Westbound right-turn movement Version 3 January 2024 kimley-horn.com Traffic Impact Analysis Sheetz at Franklin Road and Valley Avenue 8 · Westbound approach The control delay and LOS results are summarized in Table 4. The intersection capacity analysis results are included in Appendix C. 5.3 NO-BUILD CONDITIONS QUEUING ANALYSIS The SimTraffic 95th percentile and maximum queue lengths were calculated for all movements at the intersection of Franklin Road and Valley Avenue/Southern Hills Drive. Queue analysis reports were generated based on the average of 10 microsimulation runs. Note that no SimTraffic model calibration was conducted. Therefore, based on discussions with VDOT, vehicle queue length results are summarized in Table 5 for informational purposes only. The queuing analysis results are included in Appendix D. 1 'Int 1'! (95)47 (0) (171) 0 28 1231,631122(66)(1,309)(137)0 (0)(48)66 65(1,733)(78)(106)71 (137)84761NNOT TO SCALE Figure 3 No-Build Peak Hour Traffic© 2023 Legend Study Roadway Study Intersection XX A.M. Peak Hour Traffic (XX) P.M. Peak Hour Traffic FranklinRoadValley Avenue Southern Hills Drive Version 3 January 2024 kimley-horn.com Traffic Impact Analysis Sheetz at Franklin Road and Valley Avenue 10 6 BUILD CONDITIONS The projected Build conditions represent the future roadway network with the addition of background traffic growth, vested development traffic, and the addition of the proposed development traffic. Build conditions include the analysis of the proposed full-access driveway (south project driveway) along the north side of Valley Avenue and partial access (right-in only) driveway (north project driveway) along the west side of Franklin Road. Consistent with No-Build conditions, the intersection of Franklin Road and Valley Avenue/Southern Hills Drive was modeled as a thru cut. Signal timing optimization was conducted under Build conditions at the study intersection. 6.1 SITE TRIP GENERATION Traffic projections were estimated for the proposed development based on the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition.Table 3 summarizes the expected project trip generation during the AM and PM peak hours. The total trips represent the estimated number of vehicles entering and exiting the proposed development to and from the adjacent street network. Note that to provide a conservative analysis, no trip generation credit was taken for the existing medical office. Note that given the land uses for the proposed development, pass-by is anticipated during the AM and PM peak hours. Based on ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition supplemental pass-by appendices, the proposed fast-food restaurant with drive-through window is anticipated to have a pass-by rate of 50% during the AM peak hour and 55% during the PM peak hour, and the proposed convenience store and gas station is anticipated to have a pass-by rate of 76% during the AM peak hour and 75% during the PM peak hour. The expected net new project trips presented in Table 3 represent the gross project trips minus the pass-by trips attributable to the proposed land uses. Detailed trip generation calculations are included in Appendix E. Table 3: Proposed Development Trip Generation Description ITE Code Intensity Weekday AM Peak Hour Weekday PM Peak Hour Total In Out Total In Out Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Through Window 934 1,430 SF 64 33 31 47 24 23 Convenience Store/Gas Station 945 4,709 SF / 12 pumps 324 162 162 273 136 137 Total Trips:388 195 193 320 160 160 Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Through Window Pass-By Trips (50% AM, 55% PM) 32 16 16 26 13 13 Convenience Store/Gas Station Pass-By Trips (76% AM, 75% PM)246 123 123 205 102 103 Subtotal Pass-By Trips:278 139 139 231 115 116 Net New External Trips:110 56 54 89 45 44 Version 3 January 2024 kimley-horn.com Traffic Impact Analysis Sheetz at Franklin Road and Valley Avenue 11 6.2 SITE TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT The distribution of traffic at study area intersections, including proposed access locations, was established based on existing traffic patterns and anticipated future traffic patterns. The proposed trip distribution is shown in Figure 4. Trip assignment based on the trip distribution is shown in Figure 5.The AM and PM pass-by distribution is shown in Figure 6.The AM and PM pass-by trip assignment based on the pass-by distribution is shown in Figure 7. The assignment of traffic generated by the site was calculated by applying the distribution percentage for a specific turning movement to the total number of inbound or outbound trips generated to establish the turning movement volume at that location. The resulting build volumes for the AM and PM peak hours are shown in Figure 8. The Build condition traffic volumes were calculated by adding the site generated trips to the projected No-Build traffic volumes. 2 'Int 2'! 3 'Int 3'!1 'Int 1'!47%5%(47%)(3%)5%(97%)50% 3% (50%) (47%)50%N NOT TO SCALE Figure 4 Trip Distribution© 2023 Legend Study Roadway Study Intersection XX% Entering Trip Distribution (XX%)Exiting Trip Distribution SITE SouthProjectDrivewayNorth Project Driveway FranklinRoadValley Avenue 2 'Int 2'! 3 'Int 3'!1 'Int 1'!(21)2628(23)(1)(43)3 (2)25228 (23) (1)2 (21)25 (23)28(22)27 N NOT TO SCALE Figure 5 Trip Assignment© 2023 Legend Study Roadway Study Intersection XX A.M. Peak Hour Trip Assignment (XX) P.M. Peak Hour Trip Assignment SITE SouthProjectDrivewayNorth Project Driveway FranklinRoadValley Avenue 2 'Int 2'! 3 'Int 3'!1 'Int 1'!47%-47%-53%(53%)(100%)-47%53% (53%) (47%)53%-53%N NOT TO SCALE Figure 6 Peak Hour Pass-by Distribution© 2023 Legend Study Roadway Study Intersection XX% Entering Pass-by Trip Distribution (XX%)Exiting Pass-by Trip Distribution SITE SouthProjectDrivewayNorth Project Driveway FranklinRoadValley Avenue 2 'Int 2'! 3 'Int 3'!1 'Int 1'!(54)(-54)65-650(0)(-54)(116)139-6574 (61) (61)74 (61)(-61)74-74(55)65 N NOT TO SCALE Figure 7 Pass-by Trip Assignment© 2023 Legend Study Roadway Study Intersection XX A.M. Peak Hour Pass-by Trip Assignment (XX) P.M. Peak Hour Pass-by Trip Assignment SITE SouthProjectDrivewayNorth Project Driveway FranklinRoadValley Avenue 2 'Int 2'! 3 'Int 3'!1 'Int 1'! 192 (1)2 76 65(1,505)(1)2191102 (84)2251,557(248) 120 (258) (267)(159)71 (137) 69 (80)(75)919077821,773(177) 146 61(48)(1,679)(1,832)(106)122(221)(66)(1,248)N NOT TO SCALE Figure 8 Build Peak Hour Traffic© 2023 Legend Study Roadway Study Intersection XX A.M. Peak Hour Traffic (XX) P.M. Peak Hour Traffic SITE SouthProjectDrivewayNorth Project Driveway FranklinRoadValley Avenue Version 3 January 2024 kimley-horn.com Traffic Impact Analysis Sheetz at Franklin Road and Valley Avenue 17 7 BUILD CONDITIONS INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS Note that signal phase split times and offsets were optimized under Build conditions. Build conditions were compared to No-Build condition results from signal timing inputs modeled in Synchro files provided by VDOT. A consistent cycle length of 110 seconds was used to compare results between No-Build and Build conditions as requested by VDOT. During the AM and PM peak hours, all movements and approaches at the intersection of Franklin Road and Valley Avenue/Southern Hills Drive operate at LOS D or better except for the eastbound left-turn movement. Note that movement delay is expected to decrease by approximately 9.5 seconds during the AM peak hour and 8.8 seconds during the PM peak hour under Build conditions. Further note that all minor street movement delays are expected to decrease and the overall intersection operates at LOS C or better under build conditions. During the AM and PM peak hours, the southbound stop-controlled approach at the south project driveway is expected to operate at LOS C or better. Based on the Build condition results summarized, no improvements are warranted nor recommended at the intersection of Franklin Road and Valley Avenue/Southern Hills Drive given the already planned future thru-cut improvements. The control delay and LOS results are summarized in Table 4. The intersection capacity analysis results are included in Appendix C. 7.1 BUILD CONDITIONS QUEUING ANALYSIS The SimTraffic 95th percentile and maximum queue lengths were calculated for all movements at the intersection of Franklin Road and Valley Avenue/Southern Hills Drive and project driveways. Queue analysis reports were generated based on the average of 10 microsimulation runs. Note that no SimTraffic model calibration was conducted. Therefore, based on discussions with VDOT, vehicle queue length results are summarized in Table 5 for informational purposes only. The queuing analysis results are included in Appendix D. Version 3 January 2024 kimley-horn.com Traffic Impact Analysis Sheetz at Franklin Road and Valley Avenue 18 Table 4: Control Delay and LOS Summary (1) Intersection is configurated as a thru-cut in no-build and build conditions, therefore, no westbound or eastbound through movement LOS is reported. (2) Intersection does not exist under existing and no-build conditions, therefore, no LOS is reported. (3) HCM overall intersection delay is not reported for two-way stop-controlled intersections. Table 5: SimTraffic Queuing Summary (1) Movement does not exist under no-build or build conditions as the intersection is configured as a thru-cut. (2) Lane assignment does not existing under existing conditions. (3) Lane assignment does not exist under no-build and build conditions. (4) Lane is continuous under no-build and build conditions. (5) Intersection does not exist under existing and no-build conditions. (6) Adjacent through movement queue blocks lane from being used. Therefore, queue reported does not represent the actual vehicle movement queue. Delay (sec) LOS Delay (sec) LOS Delay (sec) LOS Delay (sec) LOS Delay (sec) LOS Delay (sec) LOS L 60.7 E 69.4 E 68.4 E 67.5 E 58.9 E 58.7 E LT 60.7 E 68.2 E (1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1) R 58.3 E 60.5 E 60.3 E 58.7 E 36.4 D 37.0 D Approach 60.4 E 66.2 E 65.3 E 61.8 E 48.7 D 46.0 D L ----78.9 E 90.7 F 44.8 D 47.6 D LT 59.7 E 64.1 E (1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1) R 53.8 D 51.9 D 62.0 E 58.1 E 39.4 D 39.0 D Approach 57.0 E 60.2 E 70.8 E 78.9 E 42.2 D 44.5 D L 8.6 A 23.7 C 1.4 A 34.6 C 5.6 A 51.1 D T 23.3 C 20.1 C 3.1 A 8.9 A 7.4 A 14.5 B R 10.3 B 12.0 B 0.1 A 2.7 A 0.7 A 8.6 A Approach 22.0 C 19.9 B 2.8 A 11.0 B 6.7 A 19.5 B L 18.5 B 13.9 B 9.2 A 6.7 A 13.1 B 8.7 A T 13.2 B 29.5 C 7.9 A 19.2 B 13.5 B 35.2 D R 9.6 A 12.2 B 5.6 A 8.5 A 9.7 A 12.5 B Approach 13.4 B 28.2 C 7.9 A 18.2 B 13.2 B 33.2 C 21.5 C 28.2 C 9.0 A 21.8 C 13.6 B 29.9 C L (2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)7.9 A 8.0 A Approach (2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)---- LR (2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)12.3 B 16.5 C Approach (2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)12.3 B 16.5 C (2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(2)(3)(3)(3)(3) 2025 No-Build2023 Existing Intersection Approach Movement AM PM PM EB SB WB NB SB Overall Intersection Overall Intersection 3. Route 220/Franklin Road and South Project Driveway AM 1. Route 220/Franklin Road and Valley Avenue/Southern Hills Drive EB 2025 Build AM PM 95th Max 95th Max 95th Max 95th Max 95th Max 95th Max L 130 (4)14 25 36 74 95 126 172 228 173 187 262 282 LT Continuous 67 90 115 138 (1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1)(1) R 130 16 25 64 94 24 34 128 130 (6)106 130 (6)166 130 (6) L Continuous (2)(2)(2)(2)120 134 190 205 99 127 160 187 LT Continuous 96 112 198 234 (3)(3)(3)(3)(3)(3)(3)(3) R Continuous 74 90 73 97 33 52 34 46 40 61 29 48 L 400 82 130 66 84 70 94 163 201 139 170 247 270 T Continuous 409 473 387 426 137 183 252 301 203 240 286 322 R 380 160 308 111 131 36 47 33 47 50 57 46 54 L 300 79 112 196 299 88 112 144 231 97 144 119 162 T Continuous 233 264 613 696 196 241 480 530 282 327 765 843 R 300 23 34 173 272 33 42 162 275 56 91 146 173 EB LT Continuous (5)(5)(5)(5)(5)(5)(5)(5)6 12 28 51 SB LR Continuous (5)(5)(5)(5)(5)(5)(5)(5)78 102 126 167 3. Route 220/Franklin Road and South Project Driveway 1. Route 220/Franklin Road and Valley Avenue/Southern Hills Drive EB NB SB WB 2025 Build Intersection Approach Movement Storage (ft) 2023 Existing AM PM AM PM 2025 No-Build AM PM Version 3 January 2024 kimley-horn.com Traffic Impact Analysis Sheetz at Franklin Road and Valley Avenue 19 8 ACCESS MANAGEMENT AND TURN LANE WARRANTS Figure 9 summarizes the required and proposed access spacing. The requirements are based on the spacing standards outlined Table 2-2 and Figure 4-11 in Appendix F of the VDOT Road Design Manual. Access to the proposed development will be provided via one full-access driveway along the north side of Valley Avenue (south project driveway) and one partial access (right-in only) driveway (north project driveway) along the west side of Franklin Road. The VDOT spacing standard between a traffic signal and a right-in (partial access) entrance in Table 2-2 is 305 feet for a 45 mph, principle arterial (Franklin Road). The distance from the signalized intersection to the partial access entrance is approximately 190 feet, which does not meet the spacing requirement. An access management exception (AM-E) form will be submitted for VDOT review as a separate document to address the deficient driveway spacing. The VDOT spacing standard for commercial entrances on local streets in Figure 4-11 is 50 feet between their entrance radii. The proposed full-access driveway will tie into Valley Avenue west of Franklin Road and will serve as the northern leg of the intersection. At the full-access driveway on Valley Avenue, there is approximately 120 feet of separation between its own entrance radii and the radii at the intersection of Franklin Road and Valley Avenue/Southern Hill Drive which meets spacing standards. However, based on correspondence with VDOT, the intersection was determined to be within the functional area of the intersection and will require an AM-E form for approval. Turn lane warrant analyses were conducted at the proposed project driveways using turn lane warrant standards outlined in Appendix F of the VDOT Road Design Manual. The right-turn lane warrant analysis at the north project driveway showed that a full-width southbound right-turn lane with taper is warranted. Note that there is currently an existing southbound right-turn lane along Franklin Road which will serve the north project driveway. The right and left-turn lane warrant analyses at the south project driveway showed that a full-width westbound right-turn lane with taper is warranted. However, given geometric limitations and practicality, no turn lanes are proposed at the south project driveway. Note that the turn lane warrants conducted are applicable along a 2-lane highway. As Valley Avenue is not a 2-lane highway, the turn lane warrants conducted are not a direct representation of the warrant criteria. The development will however consolidate three existing driveways along Valley Avenue into one entrance/exit (south project driveway) to improve access management conditions. Nonetheless, a design wavier will be provided for the proposed south project driveway. Justification will be provided regarding the constraints and limitations to provide a right-turn taper at the proposed driveway within the design wavier document. The turn lane warrant analysis using Appendix F of the VDOT Road Design Manual is included in Appendix F. Version 3 January 2024 kimley-horn.com Traffic Impact Analysis Sheetz at Franklin Road and Valley Avenue 20 Figure 9: Access Management Version 3 January 2024 kimley-horn.com Traffic Impact Analysis Sheetz at Franklin Road and Valley Avenue 21 9 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS The Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) documented in this report evaluates the traffic impacts of the proposed 6,139 square-foot Sheetz gas station and convenience store with 12 fueling positions (the ‘Project’) in Roanoke, Virginia. The proposed development will be located within the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Franklin Road (US Route 220), hereafter referred to as Franklin Road, and Valley Avenue/Southern Hills Drive. Access to the proposed development will be provided via one full-access driveway along the north side of Valley Avenue (south project driveway) and one partial access (right-in only) driveway (north project driveway) along the west side of Franklin Road. Traffic operations were analyzed at the intersection of Franklin Road and Valley Avenue/Southern Hills Drive during the AM and PM peak hours using Synchro 11 for the Existing (2023), projected No-Build (2025), and projected Build (2025) conditions. Additionally, based on correspondence with VDOT, SimTraffic queues were reported for information purposes only. The intersection of Franklin Road and Valley Avenue/Southern Hills Drive was analyzed as a signalized thru-cut in No-Build and Build conditions based on future intersection improvements confirmed by VDOT. To mitigate the additional traffic volumes generated by the proposed development, signal timing modifications are recommended to improve delay at the proposed signalized thru-cut at Franklin Road and Valley Avenue/Southern Hills Drive. With the implemented signal timing improvements, during the AM and PM peak hours, all movements and approaches at the intersection of Franklin Road and Valley Avenue/Southern Hills Drive operate at LOS D or better except for the eastbound left-turn movement. Note that movement delay is expected to decrease by approximately 9.5 seconds during the AM peak hour and 8.8 seconds during the PM peak hour under Build conditions. Further note that all minor street movement delays are expected to decrease and the overall intersection operates at LOS C or better under build conditions. During the AM and PM peak hours, the southbound stop-controlled approach at the south project driveway located on Valley Avenue is expected to operate at LOS C or better. Therefore, additional traffic generated by the proposed development is not expected to significantly or adversely impact the study intersection. Based on access management spacing standards reviewed, the proposed north project driveway does not meet access management spacing and will require an access management exception (AM-E) form for submittal to VDOT for review. The proposed south project driveway will also require an AM-E form for review. Turn lane warrant analyses were conducted at the proposed project driveways. The right-turn lane warrant analysis at the north project driveway showed that a full-width southbound right-turn lane with taper is warranted. Note that there is currently an existing southbound right-turn lane along Franklin Road which will serve the north project driveway. The turn lane warrant analyses at the south project driveway showed that a full-width westbound right- turn lane with taper is warranted. However, given geometric limitations and practicality, no turn lanes are proposed at the south project driveway. Note that the turn lane warrants conducted are applicable along a 2-lane highway. As Valley Avenue is not a 2-lane highway, the turn lane warrants conducted are not a direct representation of the warrant criteria. The development will however consolidate three existing driveways along Valley Avenue into one entrance/exit (south project driveway) to improve access management conditions. Nonetheless, a design wavier will be provided for the proposed south project driveway. Justification will be provided regarding the constraints and limitations to provide a right-turn taper at the proposed driveway within the design wavier document. Exhibit 10 Concurrence Letter from VDOT Regarding TIA COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA STEPHEN C. BRICH, P.E. COMMISSIONER January 31, 2024 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 714 South Broad Street Salem, VA 24153 Ms. Denise Sowder Department of Community Development County Of Roanoke P. 0. Box 29800 Roanoke,VA 24018 RE: Sheetz Franklin Road TIA Route 220 - Franklin Road Roanoke County Concurrence - Traffic Impact Analysis Denise: The traffic impact analysis for the above-mentioned development, received by our office on January 30, 2024 has been reviewed and it appears that all applicable standards and specifications have been met as the Virginia Licensed Professional Engineer has acknowledged by signing and stamping the analysis. This concurrence is based on the proposed land use covered in the submitted Traffic Study. Any future changes to these proposed land uses will require review and approval of a revised Traffic Study. Please be aware this concurrence does not constitute approval of the required site plan for the development which would include entrance location/spacing, intersection sight distance, proposed drainage, etc., nor does it constitute approval of any design waivers or access management exceptions. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me. Thank you. Sincerely, I Steven B Mullins Steven B. Mullins, P.E. Area Land Use Engineer VDOT, Salem Residency ckb/ cc: Alex lliev, P.E. - Kimley Horn & Associates, Inc. www.Virginiadot.org We Keep Virginia Moving Roanoke County, Va 2022, Roanoke County, Source: Es ri, Maxar, Earths tarGeograp hics , and the GIS Us er Community Roanoke County, Virginia2019 0 70 14035 Feet Date: 2/15/2024 1:1,128 Subject Site Aerial Map Sheetz, Inc. 4143 Franklin Rd Tax Map# 077.20-01-40.00-0000 Lot Size: 0.978 Acres Magisterial District: Cave Spring Current Zoning: C-2C Proposed Zoning: C-2 C2CC2C C2C2 C2SC2S Roanoke Cou nty, Virg inia 2019 Roanoke Cou nty, Virg inia2019 0 70 14035 Feet Date: 2/15/2024 1:1,128 Ju ris dictions Zoning C2 Zoning Map Sheetz, Inc. 4143 Franklin Rd Tax Map# 077.20-01-40.00-0000 Lot Size: 0.978 Acres Magisterial District: Cave Spring Current Zoning: C-2C Proposed Zoning: C-2 Subject Site COCO Roanoke Cou nty, Virginia 2019 Roanoke Cou nty, Virginia2019 0 70 14035 Feet Date: 2/15/2024 1:1,128 Ju risdictions Future Land Use Core Subject Site Future Land Use Map Sheetz, Inc. 4143 Franklin Rd Tax Map# 077.20-01-40.00-0000 Lot Size: 0.978 Acres Magisterial District: Cave Spring Current Zoning: C-2C Proposed Zoning: C-2 Page 1 of 2 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. D.2 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 26, 2024 AGENDA ITEM: The petition of the City of Salem Water Department to obtain a special use permit for a major utility service (water tank) on approximately 0.38 acre of land zoned R-1, Low Density Residential District, located at 1490 Hearth Lane, Catawba Magisterial District SUBMITTED BY: Philip Thompson Director of Planning APPROVED BY: Richard L. Caywood County Administrator ISSUE: Consent agenda item for first reading of an ordinance. BACKGROUND: The first reading of this ordinance is accomplished by adoption of this ordinance in the manner of consent agenda items. The adoption of these items does not imply approval of the substantive content of the requested zoning actions; rather, approval satisfies the procedural requirements of the County Charter and schedules the required public hearing and second reading of these ordinances. The second reading and public hearing on this ordinance is scheduled for April 23, 2024. The title of this ordinance is as follows: The petition of the City of Salem Water Department to obtain a special use permit for a major utility service (water tank) on approximately 0.38 acre of land zoned R -1, Low Density Residential District, located at 1490 Hearth Lane, Catawba Magisterial District. DISCUSSION: There is no discussion on this item. Page 2 of 2 FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact on this agenda item. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends as follows: 1. That the Board approve and adopt the first reading of this ordinance for the purpose of scheduling the second reading and public hearing for April 23, 2024. 2. That this section of the agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately, and that the Clerk is authorized and directed where required by law to set forth upon any of said items the separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant to this action. Roanoke County, Va 2022, Roanoke County, Source: Es ri, Maxar, Earths tarGeograp hics , and the GIS Us er Community Roanoke County, Virginia2019 0 70 14035 Feet Date: 2/16/2024 ² Dis claimer: It is und ers tood that the d ata d is p layedthrough this ap p lication is s ubject to cons tant changeand that its accuracy cannot be guaranteed . Themap s have been created from information p rovid edby various government and p rivate s ources at variouslevels of accuracy. The d ata is p rovid ed to you as is ; with no w arranty, rep res entation or guaranty as to the content, s equence, accuracy, timeliness or comp letenes s of any of theinformation p rovid edherein. It is theres p onsibility of the us er ofthe d ata to be aw are of thed ata’s limitations and toutilize the d ata in anap p rop riate manner. 1:1,128 Aerial Map 6DOHP:DWHU 'HSDUWPHQW 1490 Hearth Ln Tax Map #: 035.04-03-46.00-0000 Lot Size: .38 Acres Current Zoning: R-1 Proposed Zoning: R-1S Proposed SUP for Utility Services, Major Magisterial District: Catawba Roanoke Co. Planning (540) 772-2068 5204 Bernard Dr. Roanoke VA 24018 Subject Site R1R1 Roanoke County, Virginia 2019 Roanoke County, Virginia2019 0 70 14035 Feet Date: 2/16/2024 ² Disclaimer: It is understood th at th e data displayedth rough th is application is subject to constant ch angeand th at its accuracy cannot be guaranteed. Th emaps h av e been created from information prov idedby v arious gov ernment and priv ate sources at v ariouslev els of accuracy. Th e data is prov ided to you as is; w ith no w arranty, representation or guaranty as to th econtent, sequence, accuracy, timeliness or co ate 1:1,128 Jurisdictions R1 Roanoke Co. Planning (540) 772-2068 5204 Bernard Dr. Roanoke VA 24018 Subject Site Zoning Map 6DOHP:DWHU 'HSDUWPHQW 1490 Hearth Ln Tax Map #: 035.04-03-46.00-0000 Lot Size: .38 Acres Current Zoning: R-1 Proposed Zoning: R-1S Proposed SUP for Utility Services, Major Magisterial District: Catawba Zoning DEDE Roanoke County, Virginia 2019 Roanoke County, Virginia2019 0 70 14035 Feet Date: 2/16/2024 ² Disclaimer: It is understood th at th e data displayedth rough th is application is subject to constant ch angeand th at its accuracy cannot be guaranteed. Th emaps h av e been created from information prov idedby v arious gov ernment and priv ate sources at v ariouslev els of accuracy. Th e data is prov ided to you as is; w ith no w arranty, representation or guaranty as to th e content, sequence, accuracy, timeliness or completeness of any of th einformation prov idedh erein. It is th eresponsibility of th e user ofth e data to be aw are of th edata’s limitations and toutilize th e data in anappropriate manner.1:1,128 Jurisdictions Future Land Use Dev elopment Future Land Use Map 6DOHP:DWHU 'HSDUWPHQW 1490 Hearth Ln Tax Map #: 035.04-03-46.00-0000 Lot Size: .38 Acres Current Zoning: R-1 Proposed Zoning: R-1S Proposed SUP for Utility Services, Major Magisterial District: Catawba Future Land Use Subject Site Development Roanoke Co. Planning (540) 772-2068 5204 Bernard Dr. Roanoke VA 24018 Page 1 of 3 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. D.3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 26, 2024 AGENDA ITEM: Ordinance authorizing the granting of new public drainage easements to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, on property owned by 1) Alice B. Kefauver (Tax Map# 079.01-01-64.00-0000), located at 3020 Pebble Drive, 2) Roy M. Carpenter (Tax Map# 079.01-01-61.00-0000), located at 3017 Woodway Road, 3) Leonard W. Stiff and Rebecca G. Stiff (Tax Map 079.01-01-63.00-0000), located at 3012 Pebble Drive, and, 4) David L. Bratton (Tax Map # 079.01-01-62.00-0000), located at 3006 Pebble Drive, for the purpose of constructing drainage improvements; Vinton Magisterial District SUBMITTED BY: Tarek Moneir Director of Development Services APPROVED BY: Richard L. Caywood County Administrator ISSUE: Ordinance authorizing the acquisition of new public drainage easements to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County for multiple properties (Tax Map #s. 079.01 -01-64.00- 0000, 079.01-01-61.00-0000; 079.01-01-63.00-0000; and 079.01-01-62.00-0000) for the purpose of drainage improvements, in the Vinton Magisterial District. BACKGROUND: Alice B. Kefauver, Roy M. Carpenter, Leonard W. Stiff and Rebecca G. Stiff, and David L. Bratton, who own properties located between Pebble Drive and Woodway Road, are granting drainage easements to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors located as shown on the attached plats. These easements are of the purpose of correcting long-standing drainage problems. DISCUSSION: Page 2 of 3 The subject parcels were developed in the 1960s, and the drainage system consists of un-reinforced concrete pipe that is cracking and separating at the joints. Portions of the drainage system in this area have already been replaced, and the current proposed work will address long-standing problems. Total failure of said pipe could result in significant flooding and property damage to the homes in the area. In order to correct this long-standing drainage issue, additional easements are needed. As shown on Exhibit “A,” there is an existing 15 feet wide sanitary and drainage easement that was established when the development occurred, which crosses the same properties that are the subject of this ordinance. The owners of the impacted parcels (see Exhibit "A") have agreed to donate public drainage easements to Roanoke County for construction and maintenance of the proposed improvements. Properties considered for this ordinance include: Alice B. Kefauver (Tax Map# 079.01-01-64.00-0000) Roy M. Carpenter (Tax Map # 079.01-01-61.00-0000) Leonard W. Stiff and Rebecca G. Stiff (Tax Map 079.01-01-63.00-0000) David L. Bratton (Tax Map # 079.01-01-62.00-0000) Maps indicating the location of each proposed easement are attached to this report (see "Exhibit A"). The easements are necessary for the installation and maintenance of a new drainage system. The new drainage system will be designed and constructed to provide positive drainage. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no cost to Roanoke County for preparation of the easement deeds as they have been prepared by Roanoke County staff. Roanoke County will advertise for bids for construction of the drainage improvements. The estimated cost of $380,000 for this project is covered by the American Rescue Plan Act known as ARPA funding available for the Department of Development Services and previously approved by the Board of Supervisors. Future maintenance for this said easement will be covered by routine maintenance efforts by Department of Development Services. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Page 3 of 3 There have been no changes since the first reading of this ordinance. Staff recommends approval of this ordinance. Page 1 of 3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, MARCH 12, 2024 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE GRANTING OF NEW PUBLIC DRAINAGE EASEMENTS ON PROPERTY OWNED BY 1) ALICE B. KEFAUVER (TAX MAP# 079.01-01-64.00-0000), LOCATED AT 3020 PEBBLE DRIVE, 2) ROY M. CARPENTER (TAX MAP# 079.01-01-61.0000), LOCATED AT 3017 WOODWAY ROAD, 3) LEONARD W. STIFF AND REBECCA G. STIFF (TAX MAP# 079.01-01-63.00-0000), LOCATED AT 3012 PEBBLE DRIVE, AND 4) DAVID L. BRATTON (TAX MAP# 079.01-01-62.00-0000), LOCATED AT 3006 PEBBLE DRIVE, FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTING DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS; VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, it is proposed that Alice B. Kefauver, Roy M. Carpenter, Leonard W. Stiff and Rebecca G. Stiff, and David L. Bratton, who own properties located between Pebble Drive and Woodway Road in the Vinton Magisterial District, grant drainage easements to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors to enable the Board to assist in correcting long-standing drainage problems; and WHEREAS, the subject parcels were developed in the 1960s, and the drainage system consists of un-reinforced concrete pipe that is cracking and separating at the joints. Portions of the drainage system in this area have already been replaced, and the current proposed work will address long-standing problems. Total failure of said pipe could result in significant flooding and property damage to the homes in the area; and WHEREAS, the owners of the impacted parcels have agreed to donate public drainage easements to Roanoke County for construction and maintenance of the proposed improvements to the following parcels: 1) Property owned by Alice B. Kefauver (Tax Map# 079.01 -01-64.00-0000), located at 3020 Pebble Drive, Page 2 of 3 2) Property owned by Roy M. Carpenter (Tax Map# 079.01-01-61.00-0000), located at 3017 Woodway Road, 3) Property owned by Leonard W. Stiff and Rebecca G. Stiff (Tax Map 079.01-01- 63.00-0000), located at 3012 Pebble Drive, and, 4) Property owned by David L. Bratton (Tax Map # 079.01-01-62.00-0000), located at 3006 Pebble Drive. A map indicating the location of each proposed easement is attached to this ordinance as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, receipt of the proposed easements is necessary to enable the County to assist with the installation and maintenance of a new drainage system; and WHEREAS, the estimated cost for this project is $380,000, and is proposed to be funded with distributions received by the County under the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA); such funding was previously allocated by the Board for use by the Department of Development Services; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on February 27, 2024, and the second reading of this ordinance was held on March 12, 2024. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the conveyance new public drainage easements by 1) Alice B. Kefauver, 2) Roy M. Carpenter, 3) Leonard W. Stiff and Rebecca G. Stiff, and 4) David L. Bratton, to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, as depicted set forth on the attached Exhibit A, all of which are located in the Vinton Magisterial Di strict, are hereby approved. Page 3 of 3 2. That the County Administrator, Deputy County Administrator, or Assistant County Administrator, any 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 such further actions as any of them may deem necessary or desirable in connection with this project. The form of the deeds is hereby approved with such completions, omissions, insertions and 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. 3. That this ordinance shall be effective from and after the date of its adoption. Page 1 of 2 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. D.4 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 26, 2024 AGENDA ITEM: Amendments to County Code Chapter 19 – Solicitors and Solicitations SUBMITTED BY: Peter S. Lubeck County Attorney APPROVED BY: Richard L. Caywood County Administrator ISSUE: Proposed Amendments to County Code Chapter 19 - Solicitors and Solicitations. BACKGROUND: Recent U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit case law has rendered portions of this Chapter unconstitutional, and the General Assembly has implemented a comprehensive statutory scheme governing solicitations by charitable and civic organizations which severely limits the county’s ability to legislate in this area. DISCUSSION: Panhandling: Recent U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit case law has rendered portions of our Code unconstitutional with regards to personal solicitation of charitable contributions (i.e. begging/panhandling). See, e.g., Reynolds v. Middleton, 779 F.3d 222 (4th Cir. 2015) (Henrico County’s ordinance, which prohibited solicitation within county roadways, was ruled unconstitutional.). Charitable Solicitation: As noted above, the state has implemented a comprehensive statutory scheme governing charitable and civic organizations. The state statute allows the county to pass an ordinance but only if it is not inconsistent with the state code, and severely restricts the type of organizations which the county can regulate. Those limitations boil down to only allowing the county to require local civic organizations to apply for a permit prior to soliciting funds. Further, before any such ord inance can take Page 2 of 2 effect, it must be submitted to and approved by the Commissioner of Agriculture and Consumer Services. We propose deleting “Article II Permit for Charitable Solicitations” (County Code sections 19-21 through 28) and taking advantage of Virginia Code § 57 - 63(D). Section 57-63(D) allows the locality to pass an ordinance requiring charitable organizations, that are required to register with the state, to also register with the county when they are planning on soliciting contributions in the county, and to inform the county of the names of its solicitors that will be in the county. If the Board decides to delete sections 19-21 through 28, the county will still have a remedy against problematic fund raisers. For example, if the police become aware of an organization soliciting funds while committing misrepresentation or fraud, they can enforce County Code 19 - 8(c) (prohibiting misrepresentation and fraud). In addition, the County Attorney is specifically authorized by Virginia Code § 57-59(D) to bring an action, in the name of the Commonwealth, to enjoin the violation of any of the applicable state code provisions. The Proposed Changes Commercial Solicitation: The County has more freedom to regulate in this area; therefore, the few commercial solicitation regulations in Chapter 19 do not require major modification. However, staff recommends adding that commercial solicitors may begin their planned activities as soon as they have submitted the required information and fee. Regarding Panhandling: Staff proposes deleting the unconstitutional portions of Chapter 19 regarding panhandling (personal solicitations). Regarding Charitable Solicitation: Staff proposes deleting “Article II Permit for Charitable Solicitations” (County Code 19-21 through 28) and taking advantage of Virginia Code § 57-63(D) which allows the County to require charitable organizations, which are required to register with the state, to inform the county when they will be soliciting in the County and the names of their solicitors. Regarding Commercial Solicitation: Staff proposes adding that the commercial solicitors may begin their planned activities as soon as they have submitted the required information and fee. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with the proposed changes to Chapter 19 of the County Code. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approving the first reading of the proposed ordinance, and scheduling the second reading for April 9, 2024. Page 1 of 8 Note: Text additions are in red font. Text deletions are in red font and are struck through. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, APRIL 9, 2024 ORDINANCE AMENDING ROANOKE COUNTY CODE – CHAPTER 19 FOR SOLICITORS AND SOLICITATIONS WHEREAS, recent U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit caselaw has rendered portions of this Chapter unconstitutional; and WHEREAS, the General Assembly has implemented a comprehensive statutory scheme governing solicitations by charitable and civic organizations which has invalidated portions of the Code, and severely limited the county’s ability to legislate in this area; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on March 26, 2024, and the second reading was held on April 9, 2024. NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that the Roanoke County Code is hereby amended to read and provide as follows: Chapter 19 SOLICITORS AND SOLICITATIONS ARTICLE I. IN GENERAL Sec. 19-1. Definition. A. For the purpose of this chapter, the term "commercial solicitation" shall mean and include any one or more of the following activities: (1) Seeking to obtain orders for the purchase of goods, wares, merchandise, foodstuffs or services of any kind, character or description. (2) Seeking to obtain prospective customers for application for, or purchase of, insurance of any type, kind or character. Page 2 of 8 Note: Text additions are in red font. Text deletions are in red font and are struck through. (3) Seeking to obtain subscriptions to books, magazines, periodicals, newspapers or any other type or kind of publication. B. For purposes of this chapter, the term “charitable solicitation” shall mean and include the following: (4) Seeking to obtain contributions for charitable nonprofit organizations or selling any goods, wares, merchandise or other things for the benefit of such an organization. (5) Seeking to obtain donations for individual usage by requesting food, money or any other goods or offering services for these goods. Sec. 19-2. Violation of chapter. Any person violating any provision of this chapter shall be guilty of a Class 4 misdemeanor. Sec. 19-3. Solicitor's permit generally. (a) It shall be unlawful for any person to engage in commercial solicitation in the county unless such person shall have first obtained a permit at a cost as from time to time is established by the board of supervisors. The applicant must provide the commissioner of the revenue with his name, local address, acceptable identification and the name of his employer. The applicant may begin soliciting as soon as the required information and payment is tendered. Any person wishing to solicit subscriptions for books, magazines or other publications may also be required to must also obtain a permit from the commissioner of labor and industry, as required by section 40.1-112 of the Code of Virginia. (b) The provisions of this section shall not be applicable to school children of the county when soliciting for school-sponsored activities. or to solicitations conducted pursuant to a permit issued under article II of this chapter. Sec. 19-4. Commercial or charitable Ssoliciting prohibited during certain hours and at certain locations. (a) It shall be unlawful for any person to engage in commercial or charitable solicitation in the county at any time prior to 9:00 a.m. or after 9:00 p.m. (b) It shall be unlawful for any person to engage in solicitation from any operator or passenger of a motor vehicle that is in traffic on a public road without a permit for charitable solicitation from the county as outlined in article II, sections 19-21 to 19-28, Roanoke County Code. A public road shall include the areas of the median and the public right-of- way along the curbside. Sec. 19-5. Commercial Solicitors to make certain disclosures to prospects. A person making a commercial solicitation shall disclose to the prospect, at the outset, theirhis name and the company and product or charitable organization theyhe represents. TheyHe shall carry and show, upon request, company or organization identification, setting forth theirhis name and the company or organization name and address. Created: 2023-10-03 15:59:45 [EST] (Supp. No. 38) Page 3 of 8 Sec. 19-6. Soliciting on posted premises. It shall be unlawful for any person to engage in solicitation upon any premises or residence located thereon, if such premises or residence is posted against solicitation by means of a notice prominently displayed, upon which is printed the legend "NO SOLICITORS." Sec. 19-7. Solicitors to leave premises upon request. No person engaged in solicitation shall remain on any premises, or in any dwelling house, apartment or other residence located thereon, after having been asked by the owner or occupant thereof to leave such premises or residence. Sec. 19-8. Fraudulent and deceptive practices by commercial and charitable solicitors. (a) No person who engages in commercial solicitation shall use any plan, scheme or use or make any statement which indicates or implies that the purpose of such person's visit is other than to obtain orders for or to make sales of goods or services or obtain contributions. (b) No person who engages in commercial solicitation shall misrepresent the right of a buyer of goods or services to rescind or cancel a sale under the provisions of law. (c) It shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly make or perpetrate, or assist or aid in making or perpetrating, in any manner whatsoever, any misstatement, deception or fraud in connection with any commercial or charitable solicitation for property or financial assistance for any purpose in the county. Secs. 19-9—19-20. Reserved. ARTICLE II. PERMITREGISTRATION FOR CHARITABLE SOLICITATIONS1 Sec. 19-21. Required; exceptions. Registration of Charitable Solicitors. Any charitable organization undertaking a charitable solicitation in the county which is required to register with the Commonwealth of Virginia pursuant to the provisions of sections 57-48 through 69, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, shall register with the County Administrator or their designee, on forms to be promulgated by the County Administrator: (1) The name of the charitable organization; (2) The names of any solicitors engaged or to be engaged in charitable solicitations on behalf of the organization; and Page 4 of 8 Note: Text additions are in red font. Text deletions are in red font and are struck through. (3) The dates and times that the solicitors will be soliciting in the county. (a) It shall be unlawful for any person to make any solicitation for the benefit of a charitable nonprofit organization, unless a permit for such solicitation has been issued pursuant to the provisions of this article. This requirement shall apply to any such solicitation made, in any public or private place or by mail or telephone. (b) The provisions of this section shall not apply to any solicitation conducted only among the members of the organization involved by other members or officers thereof, voluntarily and without remuneration for such solicitation, or to any solicitation in the form of collection of contributions as the regular exercises or services of any church, religious society, lodge, benevolent order or fraternity or similar organization, or of any branch thereof. Membership drives of any organization, either among active or prospective members, shall not be considered to be solicitations for the purposes of this section. Sec. 19-22. Application. Any person desiring a permit required by this article shall file a written application therefor with the clerk to the board of supervisors. Such application shall contain the following information: (1) The applicant's name and address and the name and address of the organization for the benefit of which the solicitation is to be made. (2) The name and address of the principal officer or manager of the applicant, if the applicant is other than an individual. (3) The purpose for which any receipts derived from the solicitation are to be used. (4) The name of the person by whom the receipts of the solicitation will be received and disbursed. (5) The name and address of the person who will be in direct charge of conducting the solicitation. (6) An outline of the method to be used in conducting the solicitation. (7) The time during which the solicitation will be made, giving the proposed dates for the beginning and ending of the solicitation, which time period shall not exceed ninety (90) days. (8) A full statement of the character and extent of the charitable, educational or philanthropic work being done within the county by the organization for the benefit of which the solicitation is to be made. (9) The federal tax employer identification number. (10) State and federal tax-exempt identification numbers. (11) Such other information as may be required by the clerk to the board of supervisors in order for him to fully determine the kind, character and worthiness of the proposed solicitation and for the security of the county and its inhabitants. Sec. 19-23. Investigation as to purposes of proposed solicitation. Upon receipt of an application for a permit under this article, the clerk to the board of supervisors shall make or cause to be made, within a reasonable period of time, such investigation as he deems necessary in regard thereto to determine that the proposed solicitation is, in fact, to be conducted for nonprofit purposes. Sec. 19-24. Issuance or denial. (a) Upon approval of an application for a permit under this article, the clerk to the board of supervisors shall issue the permit authorizing the solicitation described in such application. (b) If the clerk to the board of supervisors disapproves the application, he shall deny the permit. In such case, the applicant shall, upon request, be granted a hearing by the county administrator. (c) Upon investigation if it has been determined the applicant has previously violated any section of this code then the application shall automatically be denied. (d) If the county administrator still denies the application, the applicant shall, upon request, be granted a hearing before the board of supervisors. Sec. 19-25. Does not constitute endorsement by county or clerk to the board of supervisors. No permit issued under this article shall, in any case, be construed as, or be deemed to be, an endorsement by the county or the clerk to the board of supervisors of any of the solicitation or of the purpose for which the same is made. Sec. 19-26. Not transferable. A permit issued under this article shall be nontransferable; provided, however, that this shall not prevent any permittee from using such number of solicitors as are required to conduct the solicitation. Sec. 19-27. Revocation. (a) If, upon receipt of written information or upon his own investigation, the clerk to the board of supervisors shall find: (1) That the holder of a permit issued under this article, or any agent or representative of such holder, is making or has made misrepresentations or untrue statements in conducting the authorized solicitation; or (2) That such solicitation has been or is being conducted in a manner inconsistent or not in conformity with the intent and purpose of this chapter or in a manner which endangers the health, life or property of the citizens of the county; or Page 6 of 8 Note: Text additions are in red font. Text deletions are in red font and are struck through. (3) That any person connected with such solicitation is making or has made any representation that such permit is an endorsement of the solicitation; The clerk to the board of supervisors shall revoke such permit and it shall thereafter be unlawful for any person to make any solicitation pursuant thereto. (b) Before any permit is revoked under this section, the clerk to the board of supervisors shall give the permittee a minimum of twenty-four (24) hours' notice, in writing, that a hearing is to be had before the county administrator and that, at such hearing, the county administrator shall ascertain the facts, and if any reason above set forth for revoking the permit is found to exist, the permit shall be revoked by the clerk to the board of the supervisors. (c) If the county administrator agrees with revocation of the permit the permittee shall be allowed to appeal to the board of supervisors whereas the board will review the facts and determine whether is justification for the permit to be revoked. Sec. 19-28. Permit for street solicitation. The prohibition on soliciting from a vehicle on a public road set forth in subsection 19-4(b), above, does not apply to a charitable organization, and its authorized solicitors, which has applied for and been issued a permit under this section and which is in compliance with all other provisions of this chapter. In order to solicit contributions while standing in a public road, a charitable organization must comply with the following requirements: (1) Not less than thirty (30) days prior to the date desired for beginning solicitation, the charitable organization shall submit a complete application to the clerk of the board of supervisors for a charitable solicitation permit. In addition to the information required by section 19-22, the form shall require the charitable organization to provide its full name, the name, address and phone number of a local point of contact for the organization, the desired date(s), time(s) and specific location(s) for soliciting which shall be limited to not more than six (6) intersections with a traffic control signal light, the name, mailing address and phone number of each individual who will be engaged in solicitation activities on behalf of such charitable organization. Further the charitable organization shall provide an agreement or document whereby such organization shall indemnify the county, its officers, employees and agents, and hold the county, its officers, employees and agents, harmless from any and all claims, suits, demands, damages and attorney fees arising out of or related to the acts or omissions of individuals or entities soliciting for such organization. The charitable organization shall have an ongoing obligation to update or correct any information submitted in its application for a solicitation permit so as to maintain all information in the county's possession as accurate. The county may require such additional or supplemental information as may be reasonably necessary to facilitate the direct enforcement of this section and the purposes of this chapter. (2) When submitting a completed application to the county, the charitable organization shall also submit the following: a. Written proof of general commercial liability and property damage insurance coverage issued by a company authorized to conduct business in the Page 7 of 8 Note: Text additions are in red font. Text deletions are in red font and are struck through. commonwealth in the amount of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per occurrence that insures the organization and all individuals and entities who may be soliciting on its behalf. The proof of insurance shall include the board of supervisors of the county, as an additional insured and must specify that the insurance is primary over any insurance which the county may carry or any provisions for self-insurance by the county. b. An application permit fee in the amount of ten dollars ($10.00) shall be payable at the time the application is submitted. This fee shall be used to defray the county's cost of processing the application and for insuring compliance with the conditions of any permit issued through monitoring of the public roads. An applicant will be notified in writing of the approval or denial of their request within fifteen (15) days after the county's receipt of a completed application. Within the county's discretion, a portion of this fee may be refunded in the event a permit is denied. c. Written proof that the applicant organization is a charitable organization which has obtained qualification from the Internal Revenue Service as a Section 501c(3) entity under the Internal Revenue Code. d. A safety plan which shall describe the measures which the organization will implement during any solicitation period to insure the safety of those participating in its solicitation activities and of drivers and occupants of motor vehicles at intersections where solicitations are permitted. e. A roster listing all of the individuals who will be conducting solicitations. This roster shall include the name, address and physical description of each solicitor. (3) Additional solicitation activity restrictions shall include the following: a. No more than one (1) permit may be issued to an organization during each calendar year. Permits shall be valid for a period of ninety (90) days from the date of their issuance; b. Solicitation upon a public road in the county pursuant to a permit shall be authorized for no more than four (4) consecutive calendar days, and shall be limited to the period from 9:00 a.m. until one-half (½) hour prior to sunset, at the approved location(s) specified in the application and permit; c. Each individual solicitor shall have in his or her possession some form of official identification with a photograph, such as a driver's license and shall wear a high- visibility, reflective safety vest over their clothing at all times; d. A copy of the organization's solicitation permit shall be maintained at each approved solicitation location; e. All solicitors must be at least eighteen (18) years of age or older; f. No solicitor may impede traffic at any time; touching a vehicle or reaching inside a vehicle without the consent of the occupants of the vehicle shall be considered as impeding traffic; and Page 8 of 8 Note: Text additions are in red font. Text deletions are in red font and are struck through. g. The applicant for the permit or the local point of contact shall be present at the location of the solicitation during the all of the dates and times that solicitations are occurring. If multiple locations are permitted, then there shall be an identified local point of contact for each location. (4) Additional conditions for consideration of and issuance of permits: a. In additional to the provisions of section 19-24, an application for a solicitation permit under this section may be denied or revoked, in whole or in part, for the following reasons: 1. A solicitation permit has been issued to a charitable organization, and is currently in force, for one or more of the intersections at which the applicant seeks permission to solicit; 2. In the opinion of the chief of police or his designee, approval of the solicitation permit at one or more of the requested intersections is determined to create a reasonable potential for injury to solicitors, other pedestrians or vehicle occupants or an unreasonable potential for disruption to normal traffic flow; 3. The applicant has made a false or materially misleading statement on the application form or in any response to information requested on behalf of the county; and 4. A material violation of the solicitation permit granted under this section or any action by the organization or any individual solicitor acting in its behalf which creates a clear and immediate danger to public safety. b. Issuance of any permit under this section shall not represent an endorsement by the county of any charitable organization that the permittee may represent nor any indication of supervision of or control over the proceeds raised by the organization's charitable solicitations. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its adoption. CapitalUnappropriated  % of Board ExpenditureBalance Revenues Contingency Contingency ReservesAudited balance as of June 30, 2023 26,217,687$     ‐$              ‐$               11,810,663$  Addition of 2022‐23 operations and close out of completed projects479,410          Approved Sources:Appropriated from 2023‐24 budget (Ordinance 052323‐2) 2,974,113         50,000         608,162        Allocated from year end designations ‐ December 12, 20233,000,000       Approved Uses: Appropriated for 2023‐24 budget (Ordinance 052323‐3)(5,925,138)      Appropriated for 2023‐24 budget (Ordinance 052323‐3)(306,503)          MOU regarding the joint capital funding approved on April 11, 2023(5,000,000)     Balance at March 26, 202429,191,800$    12.0% 50,000$       608,162$      4,058,432$    County of RoanokeUnappropriated Balance, Board Contingency, and Capital ReservesFiscal Year 2023‐2024General Government Changes in outstanding debt for the fiscal year to date were as follows: Audited Outstanding Outstanding June 30, 2023 Additions Deletions March 26, 2024 VPSA School Bonds 77,829,551$ -$ 8,048,369$ 69,781,182$ Lease Revenue Bonds 82,760,000 - 4,365,000 78,395,000 Subtotal 160,589,551 - 12,413,369 148,176,182 Premiums 12,147,305 - - 12,147,305 172,736,856$ -$ 12,413,369$ 160,323,487$ Submitted By Laurie L. Gearheart Director of Finance and Management Services Approved By Richard L. Caywood County Administrator COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA CHANGES IN OUTSTANDING DEBT Revenues RevenuesBudget Revenues % of Budget Budget Revenues % of Budget Actuals % of VarianceReal Estate Taxes $110,497,500 $55,028,468 49.80% $119,492,000 $58,992,327 49.37% $3,963,859 6.72%Personal Property Taxes 39,000,000 2,397,166 6.15% 44,500,000 2,898,381 6.51% 501,215 17.29%Public Service Corp Base 4,040,928 3,917,800 96.95% 4,220,000 5,214,084 123.56% 1,296,284 24.86%Penalties & Interest on Property Taxes 529,072 617,280 116.67% 1,130,000 712,304 63.04% 95,023 13.34%Payment In Lieu Of Taxes 180,000 93,069 51.71% 210,000 90,922 43.30% (2,147) -2.36%Total General Property Taxes 154,247,500 62,053,784 40.23% 169,552,000 67,908,018 40.05% 5,854,234 8.62%Communication Taxes 2,650,000 1,598,534 60.32% 2,550,000 1,510,729 59.24% (87,805) -5.81%Local Sales Tax 14,267,641 8,984,341 62.97% 15,800,000 9,383,728 59.39% 399,388 4.26%Consumer Utility Tax 3,750,000 2,196,268 58.57% 3,750,000 1,899,568 50.66% (296,700) -15.62%Business License Tax 7,225,000 4,629,804 64.08% 7,800,000 4,178,793 53.57% (451,011) -10.79%Franchise Tax 700,000 (42,136) -6.02% 690,000 0 0.00% 42,136 0.00%Motor Vehicle License Fees 2,400,000 431,047 17.96% 2,450,000 429,818 17.54% (1,229) -0.29%Taxes On Recordation & Wills 1,800,000 708,774 39.38% 1,650,000 715,695 43.38% 6,921 0.97%Utility License Tax600,000 285,036 47.51% 575,000 179,917 31.29% (105,119) -58.43%Hotel & Motel Room Taxes 1,349,568 995,570 73.77% 1,650,000 1,183,040 71.70% 187,470 15.85%Taxes - Prepared Foods 4,800,000 3,363,262 70.07% 6,100,000 3,563,880 58.42% 200,618 5.63%Other Taxes 675,000 808,192 119.73% 1,345,000 748,302 55.64% (59,890) -8.00%Total Other Local Taxes 40,217,209 23,958,69259.57% 44,360,000 23,793,470 53.64% (165,221) -0.69%Animal Control Fees 42,500 31,580 74.31% 42,500 28,465 66.98% (3,115) -10.94%Land and Building Fees 15,850 6,640 41.89% 15,850 8,221 51.87% 1,581 19.23%Permits 924,107 368,188 39.84% 924,107 369,947 40.03% 1,759 0.48%Fees 64,600 53,389 82.65% 64,600 29,936 46.34% (23,453) -78.35%Clerk of Court Fees 127,000 85,247 67.12% 127,000 82,244 64.76% (3,003) -3.65%COUNTY OF ROANOKEComparative Statement of Budgeted and Actual RevenuesGeneral Fund - C100For the Eight Months Ending Thursday, February 29, 2024Prior Year Current Year Variances Revenues RevenuesBudget Revenues % of Budget Budget Revenues % of Budget Actuals % of VarianceCOUNTY OF ROANOKEComparative Statement of Budgeted and Actual RevenuesGeneral Fund - C100For the Eight Months Ending Thursday, February 29, 2024Prior Year Current Year VariancesPhotocopy Charges 210 0 0.00% 210 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Total Permits, Fees and Licenses 1,174,267 545,044 46.42% 1,174,267 518,814 44.18% (26,230) -5.06%Fines and Forfeitures 400,000 262,692 65.67% 558,500 237,360 42.50% (25,331) -10.67%Total Fines and Forfeitures 400,000 262,692 65.67% 558,500 237,360 42.50% (25,331) -10.67%Revenues from Use of Money 90,897 380,702 418.83% 500,000 1,050,785 210.16% 670,083 63.77%Revenues From Use of Property 178,200 132,266 74.22% 185,014 127,737 69.04% (4,530) -3.55%Total Use of Money and Property 269,097 512,968 190.63% 685,014 1,178,522 172.04% 665,554 56.47%Charges for Services 3,790,100 1,934,351 51.04% 3,750,400 2,612,688 69.66% 678,337 25.96%Charges for Public Services 70,000 445 0.64% 70,000 (83) -0.12% (528) 636.14%Education Aid-State 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Total Charges for Services 3,860,100 1,934,796 50.12% 3,820,400 2,612,605 68.39% 677,809 25.94%Reimb-Shared Programs Salem 996,464 371,425 37.27% 1,124,084 547,906 48.74% 176,482 32.21%Miscellaneous Revenue 314,036 305,581 97.31% 298,536 232,173 77.77% (73,409) -31.62%Recovered Costs 800,129 423,630 52.95% 950,000 631,462 66.47% 207,833 32.91%Total Miscellaneous 2,110,629 1,100,636 52.15% 2,372,620 1,411,541 59.49% 310,905 22.03%Non-Categorical Aid 402,000 989,317 246.10% 418,000 1,054,006 252.15% 64,690 6.14%Shared Expenses 5,772,874 3,214,188 55.68% 6,219,572 3,290,446 52.90% 76,257 2.32% Revenues RevenuesBudget Revenues % of Budget Budget Revenues % of Budget Actuals % of VarianceCOUNTY OF ROANOKEComparative Statement of Budgeted and Actual RevenuesGeneral Fund - C100For the Eight Months Ending Thursday, February 29, 2024Prior Year Current Year VariancesWelfare & Social Services-Categorical 4,000,727 2,471,848 61.78% 4,786,943 2,544,267 53.15% 72,419 2.85%Other State Categorical Aid 2,468,805 1,253,360 50.77% 2,468,805 1,335,232 54.08% 81,873 6.13%Welfare & Social Services 6,250,000 3,688,843 59.02% 6,550,000 3,986,886 60.87% 298,043 7.48%Education Aid-Federal 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Other Categorical Aid 0 0 0.00% 0 5,002 0.00% 5,002 100.00%Total State and Federal Revenue 18,894,406 11,617,555 61.49% 20,443,320 12,215,839 59.75% 598,284 4.90%Other Financing Sources 39,426,765 0 0.00% 35,285,442 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Total Other Financing Sources 39,426,765 0 0.00% 35,285,442 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Transfers 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Total Transfers 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Grand Totals 260,599,973 101,986,166 39.14% 278,251,563 109,876,168 39.49% 7,890,003 7.18% Expenditures Exp & Encum Expenditures Exp & Encum% ofBudget & Encumbrances % of Budget Budget & Encumbrances % of Budget Actuals VarianceLegislative 398,981 248,401 62.26% 498,070 278,758 55.97% 20,319 7.56%General & Financial Administration 8,809,620 5,744,129 65.20% 9,757,935 6,234,041 63.89% 472,777 7.61%Electoral Board & Officials 820,131 458,942 55.96% 878,412 515,148 58.65% 56,206 10.91%General Government Administration 10,028,732 6,451,472 64.33% 11,134,417 7,027,947 63.12% 549,302 7.85%Courts 1,715,404 978,197 57.02% 1,827,653 1,014,317 55.50% 36,120 3.56%Other Judicial Support 1,461,425 987,095 67.54% 1,571,959 1,063,522 67.66% 76,427 7.19%Judicial 3,176,829 1,965,292 61.86% 3,399,612 2,077,839 61.12% 112,547 5.42%Law Enforcement & Traffic Cont 16,914,417 11,234,705 66.42% 19,336,290 13,291,624 68.74% 2,105,528 15.84%Fire and Rescue 20,140,145 13,362,969 66.35% 23,102,403 16,118,739 69.77% 2,761,940 17.16%Correction & Detention 10,862,582 6,707,433 61.75% 12,301,166 7,695,254 62.56% 970,947 12.65%Animal Control 1,124,393 672,608 59.82% 1,368,078 867,069 63.38% 194,461 22.43%Public Safety 49,041,537 31,977,716 65.21% 56,107,937 37,972,685 67.68% 6,032,875 15.91%General Services Administration 949,179 605,016 63.74% 1,110,762 707,140 63.66% 102,124 14.44%Refuse Disposal 5,646,669 3,916,395 69.36% 5,841,569 3,890,157 66.59% 40,425 1.04%Maint Buildings & Grounds 5,424,601 3,587,152 66.13% 5,298,561 4,116,015 77.68% 528,093 12.90%Engineering 2,329,994 1,552,346 66.62% 2,599,144 1,868,923 71.91% 316,461 17.04%Inspections 1,117,938 693,222 62.01% 1,195,396 726,305 60.76% 33,083 4.55%Garage Complex 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Public Works 15,468,381 10,354,131 66.94% 16,045,432 11,308,539 70.48% 1,020,186 9.05%Mental Health 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Public Health 579,181 413,701 71.43% 579,181 434,386 75.00% 20,685 4.76%Social Services Administration 8,651,519 5,173,019 59.79% 9,678,936 6,077,290 62.79% 904,271 14.88%Comprehensive Services Act 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Public Assistance 4,918,666 2,982,458 60.64% 4,918,666 3,032,215 61.65% 49,757 1.64%Social Services Organizations 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 0 0.00%COUNTY OF ROANOKEComparative Statement of Budgeted and Actual Expenditures and EncumbrancesGeneral Fund - C100For the Eight Months Ending Thursday, February 29, 2024 Prior Year Current Year Variances Expenditures Exp & Encum Expenditures Exp & Encum% ofBudget & Encumbrances % of Budget Budget & Encumbrances % of Budget Actuals VarianceCOUNTY OF ROANOKEComparative Statement of Budgeted and Actual Expenditures and EncumbrancesGeneral Fund - C100For the Eight Months Ending Thursday, February 29, 2024 Prior Year Current Year VariancesHealth and Welfare 14,149,366 8,569,178 60.56% 15,176,783 9,543,891 62.88% 974,714 10.21%Parks & Recreation 2,546,009 1,602,695 62.95% 3,176,882 1,832,352 57.68% 232,134 12.67%Library 4,655,691 2,856,025 61.34% 4,879,066 3,089,228 63.32% 226,637 7.36%Cultural Enrichment 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Parks, Recreation & Cultural 7,201,700 4,458,720 61.91% 8,055,948 4,921,580 61.09% 458,771 9.34%Planning & Zoning 1,557,390 967,734 62.14% 1,973,508 1,134,673 57.50% 165,566 15.09%Cooperative Extension Program 87,097 56,613 65.00% 115,391 61,147 52.99% 4,534 7.41%Economic Development 563,335 285,311 50.65% 743,290 486,328 65.43% 160,379 36.27%Public Transportation 766,930 166,509 21.71% 510,000 371,985 72.94% 205,476 55.24%Contribution to Human Service Organizations 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Planning 2,974,752 1,476,168 49.62% 3,342,189 2,054,133 61.46% 535,955 27.17%Employee Benefits 1,666,434 838,778 50.33% 3,439,985 1,049,589 30.51% 210,811 20.09%Dixie Caverns Landfill Cleanup 67,000 21,351 31.87% 62,700 56,397 89.95% 30,955 59.18%Miscellaneous 9,994,982 7,386,937 73.91% 10,273,856 7,610,388 74.08% 223,452 2.94%Tax Relief/Elderly & Handicapp 1,110,000 734,408 66.16% 1,110,000 947,319 85.34% 212,911 22.48%Refuse Credit Vinton 225,000 110,000 48.89% 225,000 112,500 50.00% 2,500 2.22%Board Contingency 29,813,889 0 0.00% 30,952,084 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Unappropriated Balance 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 0 0.00%Non-Departmental 42,877,305 9,091,474 21.20% 46,063,625 9,776,194 21.22% 680,628 6.97%Interfund Transfers Out 109,864,921 80,785,336 73.53% 112,850,443 80,811,019 71.61% 25,683 0.03%Intrafund Transfers Out 5,816,452 4,751,856 81.70% 6,075,177 4,824,076 79.41% 72,220 1.50%Transfers Out 115,681,373 85,537,192 73.94% 118,925,620 85,635,095 72.01% 97,903 0.11%Grand Totals 260,599,975 159,881,343 61.35% 278,251,563 170,317,904 61.21% 10,462,881 6.15% ACTION NO. _______________ ITEM NO. __________________ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 26, 2024 AGENDA ITEM: Accounts Paid – February 2024 SUBMITTED BY: Laurie L. Gearheart Director of Finance and Management Services APPROVED BY: Richard L. Caywood County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Direct Deposit Checks Total Payments to Vendors -$ -$ 11,862,843.02$ Payroll 02/02/24 2,153,577.82 15,349.61 2,168,927.43 Payroll 02/16/24 1,984,449.57 20,542.79 2,004,992.36 Manual Checks - - - Grand Total 16,036,762.81$ A detailed listing of the payments to vendors is on file with the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors. Page 1 of 2 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. G.1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 26, 2024 AGENDA ITEM: Work session to discuss Opioid Abatement Authority grant opportunities SUBMITTED BY: Madeline Hanlon Assistant to County Administrator APPROVED BY: Richard L. Caywood County Administrator ISSUE: Work session to discuss Opioid Abatement Authority grant opportunities BACKGROUND: The Opioid Abatement Authority (OAA) was established by the Virginia General Assembly in 2021 as an independent entity established by the Commonwealth to utilize opioid settlement funds to abate and remediate the opioid epidemic in the Commonwealth and is financially supported by the Virginia Opioid Abatement Fund. The OAA offers grants for localities and cooperative partnerships. Cities and counties can apply to receive OAA Distributions to fund efforts designed to treat, prevent, or reduce opioid use disorder or the misuse of opioids through evidence - based or evidence-informed methods, programs, or strategies. DISCUSSION: This work session has been scheduled to review the potential grant opportunities for Spring 2024. Page 2 of 2 FISCAL IMPACT: The fiscal impact will be based on the direction of the Board and potential receipt of a grant requiring a County match. These funds will be taken out of the opioid settlement funds directly received by Roanoke County. As present our settlement funds have a current balance of $550,334. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Board of Supervisors hold the work session. Page 1 of 2 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: March 26, 2024 AGENDA ITEM: Work session for any additional discussion on the Proposed Fiscal Year 2024-2025 Operating Budget and Proposed Fiscal Year 2025-2034 Capital Improvement Program SUBMITTED BY: Laurie Gearheart Director of Finance and Management Services APPROVED BY: Richard L. Caywood County Administrator ISSUE: Additional discussion on the Proposed Fiscal Year 2024 -2025 Operating Budget and Proposed Fiscal Year 2025-2034 Capital Improvement Program BACKGROUND: As part of the annual budget development process, County staff conducts a series of work sessions with the Board of Supervisors on the operating and capital budgets. DISCUSSION: No new presentation materials will be shared. This time is set aside for the Members of the Board to discuss information presented during item C.1 on the agenda. Page 2 of 2 FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this work session. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Board of Supervisors hold the work session. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, March 26, 2024 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 2 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. J.1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 26, 2024 AGENDA ITEM: The petition of Kevin Manor to obtain a special use permit to operate a short-term rental on approximately 1.23 acres of land zoned R-1, Low Density Residential District, located at 4127 Mockingbird Hill Road, Hollins Magisterial District. SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: Richard L. Caywood County Administrator ISSUE: Agenda item for public hearing and second reading of ordinance for a special use permit for short-term rental in a residential district. BACKGROUND: · The Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance defines a short-term rental as “the provision of a room or space that is suitable or intended for occupancy for dwelling, sleeping, or lodging purposes, for a period of fewer than 30 consecutive days, in exchange for a charge for the occupancy. This use does not include existing uses defined in this ordinance including bed and breakfast, bed and breakfast inn, boarding house, country inn, and hotel/motel/motor lodge.” · A short-term rental has several use and design standards. In the R -1 and R-2 zoning districts, a special use permit is required for a short-term rental on lots less than five (5) acres in size. DISCUSSION: The Planning Commission held a public hearing on this application on March 5, 2024. No citizens spoke during the public hearing. The Planning Commission discussed house rules for the short-term rental, whether or not any neighbors had complained about the use, the applicant receiving a letter from the county and immediately Page 2 of 2 complying with getting a special use permit, how long the short-term rental had been in use, the owner residing on the upper level of the house, the platform used to advertise the short-term rental, access to the lower level used for the short-term rental, that the short-term rental is not available for rent when the property owner is on vacation, and the conditions proposed for the special use permit. The Planning Commission recommends approval of the special use permit for a short - term rental with the following conditions: 1. The short-term rental shall be limited to the lower level of the existing residential dwelling (approximately 2,200 square feet). 2. The number of overnight guests shall not exceed six (6) people. FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact on this agenda item. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve the second reading of an ordinance for a special use permit to operate a short -term rental on approximately 1.23 acres on property zoned R-1, Low Density Residential District, with two conditions: 1. The short-term rental shall be limited to the lower level of the existing residential dwelling (approximately 2,200 square feet). 2. The number of overnight guests shall not exceed six (6) people. 1 STAFF REPORT Petitioner: Kevin Manor Request: To obtain a special use permit to operate a short-term rental on approximately 1.23 acres of land zoned R-1, Low Density Residential District Location: Tax Parcel: 4127 Mockingbird Hill Road #040.17-02-24.00-0000 Magisterial District: Hollins Suggested Conditions: 1. The short-term rental shall be limited to the lower level of the existing residential dwelling (approximately 2,200 square feet). 2. The number of overnight guests shall not exceed six (6) people. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Kevin Manor is petitioning to obtain a special use permit to operate a short-term rental on approximately 1.23 acres of land zoned R-1, Low Density Residential District, located at 4127 Mockingbird Hill Road in the Hollins Magisterial District. The short- term rental is proposed for the lower level only of the single-family dwelling. The 2005 Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan indicates the Future Land Use Designation of this parcel is Neighborhood Conservation. Neighborhood Conservation is a future land use area where established single-family neighborhoods are delineated and the conservation of the existing development pattern is encouraged. The proposed special use permit is consistent with the Neighborhood Conservation future land use designation. 1. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS The Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance defines a short-term rental as “the provision of a room or space that is suitable or intended for occupancy for dwelling, sleeping, or lodging purposes, for a period of fewer than 30 consecutive days, in exchange for a charge for the occupancy. This use does not include existing uses defined in this ordinance including bed and breakfast, bed and breakfast inn, boarding house, country inn, and hotel/motel/motor lodge.” Section 30-85-24.55 of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance contains the following use and design standards for short-term rentals: (A) General Standards: 1. The applicant shall obtain a zoning permit prior to the occupation of a room or dwelling for short-term rental. The zoning permit application shall include, but not be limited to, the following information: a. All relevant parcel information including tax map number, zoning district, address, and magisterial district. b. The applicant’s name, address, and personal contact information. c. The name, address, and personal contact information of the authorized party responsible for resolving complaints, if different from the applicant. 2 2. The County shall be notified within thirty (30) days of any change in the applicant’s address or personal contact information, or any change in the name, address or personal contact information of the authorized party responsible for resolving complaints. 3. A short-term rental zoning permit expires upon any change in ownership of the property. 4. A short-term rental zoning permit may be revoked by the Zoning Administrator due to the failure of the applicant to comply with all applicable regulations set forth in this section or elsewhere in the Zoning Ordinance or County Code. (B) In the R-1 and R-2 zoning district, the following standard shall apply: 1. A special use permit shall be required on lots less than five (5) acres. Lots that are five (5) acres or greater in size, a short-term rental shall be considered a use permitted by right. Since the property for this proposed short-term rental is zoned R-1 and is not five (5) acres or greater, a special use permit is required. 2. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS Background – This property contains a single-family residence. The Roanoke County assessment records have estimated that this residence was built in 1972. The applicant purchased the property in August 2016. The lower level of the home has been used as a short-term rental for 3+ years. A zoning violation notice was sent to the applicant in December 2023 and upon receiving the letter the applicant contacted staff to begin the process of obtaining a special use permit for the short-term rental use. The home has five (5) bedrooms and three (3) full baths. The lower level being rented out has three (3) bedrooms and one (1) full bath. Topography/Vegetation –The property features a sloped terrain, characterized by a flat grassy front lawn adorned with a deciduous tree. The northern property line is lined with evergreen trees. The side yard to the south has a steeper slope with two (2) deciduous trees near the southern property line. Similarly, the rear yard is gradually sloped and adorned with deciduous trees running along the eastern property line, concentrated in the northeast corner. Surrounding Neighborhood – The subject parcel is located in an area that is primarily zoned R-1 with property zoned R-2, Medium Density Residential districts to the northeast of the parcel. The area primarily contains single family residences. Community Outreach – Approximately 17 letters were mailed out to adjoining property owners. The letters contained the application information, hearing dates, and aerial map along with direct contact information for staff and instructions on how to submit comments for the public hearings. 3. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Site Layout/Architecture – There are no proposed changes to the site. The lower level of the house has three (3) bedrooms, a full bathroom, a kitchen, a great room, and a laundry room that contains the furnace. There is a separate entrance to access the lower level at the rear of the single-family dwelling. Access/Traffic Circulation – The property is located on a cul-de-sac and has an existing paved driveway which serves as the property’s entrance from Mockingbird Hill Road and can serve up to eight (8) vehicles. There are additional parking spots within the enclosed garage. Screening & Buffering – No screening or buffering would be required for this development. Agencies Comments: The following agencies provided comments on this application: Office of Building Safety – The Office of Building Safety does not have any comments for this application. 3 Roanoke County Transportation – Transportation on has no comments to offer on the subject application. Fire and Rescue – Fire and Rescue does not object to this project and it will not impact the services we provide. General Services – General Services does not see any issues or have any comments. Western VA Water Authority – WVWA does not have any comments. 4. CONFORMANCE WITH ROANOKE COUNTY COMMUNITY PLAN The 2005 Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan indicates the Future Land Use Designation of this parcel is Neighborhood Conservation. Neighborhood Conservation is a future land use area where established single-family neighborhoods are delineated, and the conservation of the existing development pattern is encouraged. The proposed special use permit is consistent with the Neighborhood Conservation future land use designation. 5. STAFF CONCLUSIONS Kevin Manor is petitioning to obtain a special use permit to operate a short-term rental on approximately 1.23 acres of property zoned R-1, Low Density Residential District, located at 4127 Mockingbird Hill Road in the Hollins Magisterial District. The short-term rental is proposed for the lower level of the single-family dwelling. The 2005 Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan indicates the Future Land Use Designation of this parcel is Neighborhood Conservation. The proposed special use permit is consistent with the Neighborhood Conservation future land use designation. If the Planning Commission recommends approval, staff has suggested the following conditions: 1. The short-term rental shall be limited to the lower level of the existing residential dwelling (approximately 2,200 square feet). 2. The number of overnight guests shall not exceed six (6) people. CASE NUMBER: #3-3/2024 PREPARED BY: Skylar Camerlinck HEARING DATES: PC: March 5, 2024 BOS: March 26, 2024 ATTACHMENTS: Application Materials Maps (Aerial, Zoning, Future Land Use) R-1 District Regulations Neighborhood Conservation Roanoke Cou nty, Va 2022, Roanoke Cou nty, Sou rce: Esri, Maxar, EarthstarGeographics, and the GIS User Commu nity Roanoke Cou nty, Virginia2019 0 140 28070 Feet Date: 1/18/2024 ² Disclaimer: It is u nderstood that the data displayedthrou gh this application is su bject to constant changeand that its accu racy cannot be gu aranteed. Themaps have been created from information providedby variou s government and private sou rces at variou slevels of accu racy. The data is provided to you as is; with no w arranty, representation or gu aranty as to the content, sequ ence, accu racy, timeliness or completeness of any of theinformation providedherein. It is theresponsibility of the u ser ofthe data to be aw are of thedata’s limitations and to u tilize the data in anappropriate manner. 1:2,257 Roanoke Co. Planning (540) 772-2068 5204 Bernard Dr. Roanoke VA 24018 Aerial Map Kevin Manor 4127 Mockingbird Hill Road 040.17-02-24.00-0000 Lot Size: 1.23 Acres Current Zoning: R-1 Proposed Zoning: R-1S Proposed SUP for Short- Term Rental Magisterial District: Hollins Subject Site R2R2 R1R1 Roanok e County, Virginia 2019 Roanok e County, Virginia2019 0 140 28070 Feet Date: 1/18/2024 ² Disclaimer: It is understood that the data displayedthrough this application is subject to constant changeand that its accuracy cannot be guaranteed. Themaps have been created from information providedby various government and private sources at variouslevels of accuracy. The data is provided to you as is; w ith no w arranty, representation or guaranty as to thecontent, sequence, accuracy, timeliness or completeness of any of theinformation providedherein. It is theresponsibility of the user ofthe data to be aw are of thedata’s limitations and toutiliz e the data in anappropriate manner. 1:2,257 Zoning Map Kevin Manor 4127 Mockingbird Hill Road 040.17-02-24.00-0000 Lot Size: 1.23 Acres Current Zoning: R-1 Proposed Zoning: R-1S Proposed SUP for Short-Term Rental Magisterial District: Hollins Zoning R1 R2 Roanoke Co. Planning (540) 772-2068 5204 Bernard Dr. Roanoke VA 24018 Subject Site NCNC Roanoke County, Virginia 2019 Roanoke County, Virginia2019 0 140 28070 Feet Date: 1/18/2024 ² Disclaimer: It is understood that the data display edthrough this application is subject to constant changeand that its accuracy cannot be guaranteed. Themaps hav e been created from information prov idedby v arious gov ernment and priv ate sources at v ariouslev els of accuracy. The data is prov ided to y ou as is; with no warranty, representation or guaranty as to the content, sequence, accuracy, timeliness or completeness of any of theinformation prov idedherein. It is theresponsibility of the user ofthe data to be aware of thedata’s limitations and toutiliz ethedata in anappropriatemanner. 1:2,257 Future Land Use Map Kevin Manor 4127 Mockingbird Hill Road 040.17-02-24.00-0000 Lot Size: 1.23 Acres Current Zoning: R-1 Proposed Zoning: R-1S Proposed SUP for Short-Term Rental Magisterial District: Hollins Future Land Use Neighborhood Conserv ation Roanoke Co. Planning (540) 772-2068 5204 Bernard Dr. Roanoke VA 24018 Subject Site (A) (A) 1. 2. SEC. 30-41. - R-1 LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. Sec. 30-41-1. - Purpose. The R-1, low density residential district is established for areas of the county within the urban service area with existing low-middle density residential development, with an average density of from one (1) to three (3) units per acre, and land which appears appropriate for such development. These areas are generally consistent with the neighborhood conservation land use category as recommended in the comprehensive plan. In addition, where surrounding development and the level of public services warrant, these areas coincide with the development category recommended in the plan. This district is intended to provide the highest degree of protection from potentially incompatible uses and residential development of a significantly different density, size, or scale, in order to maintain the health, safety, appearance and overall quality of life of existing and future neighborhoods. In addition to single-family residences, only uses of a community nature which are generally deemed compatible are permitted in this district. This would include parks and playgrounds, schools and other similar neighborhood activities. (Ord. No. 042799-11, § 1f., 4-27-99; Ord. No. 042208-16, § 1, 4-22-08) Sec. 30-41-2. - Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted by right subject to all other applicable requirements contained in this ordinance. An asterisk (*) indicates additional, modified or more stringent standards as listed in article IV, use and design standards, for those specific uses. Agricultural and Forestry Uses Stable, Private* Residential Uses Accessory Apartment* Home Beauty/Barber Salon * Home Occupation, Type I * Manufactured Home * Manufactured Home, Emergency * Multiple Dog Permit* Residential Human Care Facility Single-Family Dwelling, Attached * 3. 4. 5. (B) 1. 2. Single Family Dwelling, Attached (Cluster Subdivision Option) * Single Family Dwelling, Detached Single Family Dwelling, Detached (Cluster Subdivision Option) * Single Family Dwelling, Detached (Zero Lot Line Option) * Civic Uses Community Recreation * Family Day Care Home * Park and Ride Facility * Public Parks and Recreational Areas * Utility Services, Minor Commercial Uses Bed and Breakfast * Short-Term Rental * Miscellaneous Uses Amateur Radio Tower * Wind Energy System, Small* The following uses are allowed only by special use permit pursuant to section 30-19. An asterisk (*) indicates additional, modified or more stringent standards as listed in article IV, use and design standards, for those specific uses. Residential Uses Alternative Discharging Sewage System * Civic Uses Cemetery * Crisis Center Day Care Center * Educational Facilities, Primary/Secondary * Halfway House * 3. 4. (A) 1. a. b. 2. a. b. 3. a. b. (B) 1. a. b. 2. a. b. Religious Assembly * Utility Services, Major * Commercial Uses Golf Course * Miscellaneous Uses Outdoor Gatherings * (Ord. No. 42793-20, § II, 4-27-93; Ord. No. 62293-12, §§ 3, 8, 6-22-93; Ord. No. 82493-8, § 2, 8-24-93; Ord. No. 62795-10, 6-27-95; Ord. No. 042799-11, § 2, 4-27-99; Ord. No. 042500-9, § II, 4-25-00; Ord. No. 072605-7, § 1, 7-26-05; Ord. No. 042208-16, § 1, 4-22-08; Ord. No. 052609-22 , § 1, 5-26-09; Ord. No. 030811-1 , § 1, 3-8-11; Ord. No. 052411-9 , § 1, 5-24-11; Ord. No. 111213-15 , § 1, 11-12-13; Ord. No. 020921-8 , § 1, 2-9-21; Ord. No. 011023-4 , § 1, 1-10-23) Sec. 30-41-3. - Site Development Regulations. General Standards. For additional, modified, or more stringent standards for specific uses, see Article IV, Use and Design Standards. Minimum lot requirements. All lots served by private well and sewage disposal systems: Area: 0.75 acre (32,670 square feet). Frontage: 90 feet on a publicly owned and maintained street. Lots served by either public sewer or water: Area: 20,000 square feet. Frontage: 75 feet on a publicly owned and maintained street. All lots served by both public sewer and water: Area: 7,200 square feet. Frontage: 60 feet on a publicly owned and maintained street. Minimum setback requirements. Front yard: Principal structures: 30 feet. Accessory structures: Behind the front building line. Side yard: Principal structures: 10 feet. 3. a. b. 4. (C) 1. a. b. (D) 1. 2. Accessory structures: 10 feet behind front building line or 3 feet behind rear building line. Rear yard: Principal structures: 25 feet. Accessory structures: 3 feet. Where a lot fronts on more than one street, front yard setbacks shall apply to all streets. Maximum height of structures. Height limitations: Principal structures: 45 feet. Accessory structures: 15 feet, or 25 feet provided they comply with the setback requirements for principal structures. Maximum coverage. Building coverage: 35 percent of the total lot area for all buildings and 7 percent for accessory buildings. Lot coverage: 50 percent of the total lot area. (Ord. No. 62293-12, § 10, 6-22-93; Ord. No. 42694-12, § 8, 4-26-94; Ord. No. 042208-16, § 1, 4-22-08; Ord. No. 111213-15 , § 1, 11-12-13) Neighborhood Conservation: A future land use area where established single-family neighborhoods are delineated and the conservation of the existing development pattern is encouraged. Land Use Types: Single-Family Residential - Attached and detached housing at a reasonable density that is not significantly higher than the existing neighborhood. Infill lots or community re-development should be designed to be sensitive to the surrounding neighborhood but can be at reasonably higher density. New single-family residential developments should incorporate greenways and bike and pedestrian trails. Cluster developments are encouraged. Neighborhood Institutional Centers - Uses that serve the neighborhood residents including parks, schools, religious assembly facilities, recreational and park facilities, community meeting areas and clubs. These facilities should be linked to the residential areas by greenways, bike trails and pedestrian paths. Neighborhood Commercial - Low impact services to serve the local neighborhood that are consistent with the Community Plan design guidelines. Land Use Determinants: EXISTING LAND USE PATTERN - Locations where limited density residential subdivisions have been platted and developed. EXISTING ZONING - Locations where limited density residential zoning has been established. EXPANSION AREAS - Locations where the expansion of the existing development pattern is logical. INFILL DEVELOPMENT - Locations where infill areas complement the surrounding development pattern. ACCESS - Locations served by a local street system. URBAN SECTOR - Locations served by urban services. Kevin Manor Special Use Permit for a Short-term Rental Board of Supervisors Public Hearing March 26, 2024 Location Map2 Project Site •4127 Mockingbird Hill Rd •1.23 Acres •Single Family Residence •Short-term Rental 3 Photographs4 5 Photographs Photographs6 Photographs7 Photographs8 Photographs9 Photographs10 Floor Plan11 12 Zoning Ordinance A short-term rental is defined as “the provision of a room or space that is suitable or intended for occupancy for dwelling, sleeping, or lodging purposes, for a period of fewer than 30 consecutive days, in exchange for a charge for the occupancy. This use does not include existing uses defined in this ordinance including bed and breakfast, bed and breakfast inn, boarding house, country inn, and hotel/motel/motor lodge.” 13 Zoning Ordinance (A)General Standards: 1. The applicant shall obtain a zoning permit prior to the occupation of a room or dwelling for short-term rental. The zoning permit application shall include, but not be limited to, the following information: a. All relevant parcel information including tax map number, zoning district, address, and magisterial district. b. The applicant’s name, address, and personal contact information. c. The name, address, and personal contact information of the authorized party responsible for resolving complaints, if different from the applicant. 14 Zoning Ordinance 2.The County shall be notified within thirty (30) days of any change in the applicant’s address or personal contact information, or any change in the name, address or personal contact information of the authorized party responsible for resolving complaints. 3.A short-term rental zoning permit expires upon any change in ownership of the property. 4.A short-term rental zoning permit may be revoked by the Zoning Administrator due to the failure of the applicant to comply with all applicable regulations set forth in this section or elsewhere in the Zoning Ordinance or County Code. 15 Zoning Ordinance (B)In the R-1 and R-2 zoning district, the following standard shall apply: 1.A special use permit shall be required on lots less than five (5) acres. Lots that are five (5) acres or greater in size, a short-term rental shall be considered a use permitted by right. Zoning Existing Zoning •R-1 –Low Density Residential 16 Surrounding Zoning •North – R-1 •East – R-2 -- Medium Density Residential •West – R-1 •South – R-1 Future Land Use17 Neighborhood Conservation •Established Single-Family Residential neighborhoods are delineated and the conservation of the existing development pattern is encouraged. Planning Commission Public Hearing –March 5, 2024 •No citizens spoke during the public hearing. •The Planning Commission discussed: •House rules for the short-term rental •Any complaints by neighbors •Applicant receiving a letter from the county and immediatelycomplyingwithgettingaspecialusepermit •How long the short-term rental had been in use •Owner residing on the upper level of the house •Platform used to advertise the short-term rental •Access to the lower level used for the short-term rental •The short-term rental not being available for rent when thepropertyownerisonvacation •Conditions proposed for the special use permit 18 Planning Commission The Planning Commission recommends approval of thespecialusepermitforashort-term rental with the followingconditions: •The short-term rental shall be limited to the lower level of the existing residential dwelling (approximately 2,200 square feet) •The number of overnight guests shall not exceed six (6) people. 19 Questions? 20 ROANOKE COUNTY OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY 5204 Bernard Drive, P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, Virginia 24018-0798 TEL: (540) 772-2071 FAX: (540) 772-2089 Peter S. Lubeck COUNTY ATTORNEY Rachel W. Lower DEPUTY COUNTY ATTORNEY Marta J. Anderson Douglas P. Barber, Jr. SENIOR ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEYS SAMPLE MOTIONS The petition of Kevin Manor to obtain a special use permit to operate a short -term rental on approximately 1.23 acres of land zoned R-1 (Low Density Residential) District located at 4127 Mockingbird Hill Road, in the Hollins Magisterial District. MOTION TO APPROVE I find that the proposed special use permit: 1. Meets the requirements of Section 30-19-1 of the Roanoke County Code and that the proposed special use conforms with the standards set forth in article IV, use and design standards of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance; 2. Is in conformance with the Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan; and 3. Will have a minimum adverse impact on the surrounding neighborhood and community. I therefore MOVE THAT WE APPROVE the petition to obtain a special use permit, with the following conditions: 1. The short-term rental shall be limited to the lower level of the existing residential dwelling (approximately 2,200 square feet). 2. The number of overnight guests shall not exceed six (6) people. MOTION TO DENY I find that the proposed special use permit request: 1. Is inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the County’s adopted comprehensive plan or good zoning practice, and/or 2. Will result in substantial detriment to the community. I therefore MOVE THAT WE DENY the request. MOTION TO DELAY ACTION I find that the required information for the proposal is incomplete. I therefore MOVE TO DELAY action until additional necessary materials are submitted to the Board. Page 1 of 2 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, MARCH 26, 2024 ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO KEVIN MANOR TO OPERATE A SHORT-TERM RENTAL ON APPROXIMATELY 1.23 ACRES OF LAND ZONED R-1 (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) DISTRICT, LOCATED AT 4127 MOCKINGBIRD HILL ROAD, HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, Kevin Manor has filed a petition for a special use permit to operate a short-term rental on approximately 1.23 acres of land zoned R-1 (Low Density Residential) District, located at 4127 Mockingbird Hill Road (Roanoke County Tax Map Number 040.17-02-24.00-0000), in the Hollins Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on February 27, 2024, and the second reading and public hearing were held on March 26, 2024; and WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on March 5, 2024; and WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission recommends approval of the petition to obtain a special use permit, with two conditions; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, as follows: 1. The Board finds that the proposed special use meets the requirements of Section 30-19-1 of the Roanoke County Code and that the proposed spec ial use conforms with the standards set forth in article IV, use and design standards of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance. Page 2 of 2 2. The Board further finds that the proposed special use is in conformance with the Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan, and will have a minimum adverse impact on the surrounding neighborhood and community. 3. The special use permit is hereby approved, with the following conditions: a. The short-term rental shall be limited to the lower level of the existing residential dwelling (approximately 2,200 square feet). b. The number of overnight guests shall not exceed six (6) people. 4. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage.