HomeMy WebLinkAbout2/10/2026 - RegularPage 1 of 4
INVOCATION: Reverend Rob Lough, Bonsack United Methodist 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
February 10, 2026
Page 2 of 4
Good afternoon and welcome to our meeting for February 10, 2026. Regular meetings
are held on the second and fourth Tuesday at 2:00 p.m. Public hearings are held at
6:00 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 Friday 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 them on silent.
A.OPENING CEREMONIES
1.Roll Call
B.REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA
ITEMS
C.PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS
1.Resolution recognizing Roanoke County’s snow removal team members during
the January 24 and January 30, 2026 winter storms. (Richard L. Caywood,
County Administrator)
D.BRIEFING
1.Briefing to discuss with the Board of Supervisors the real estate assessment
process. (Richard L. Caywood, County Administrator)
E.NEW BUSINESS
1.Resolution authorizing the use of competitive negotiation in the procurement of
professional services for the redevelopment of the Hollins Fire Station, pursuant
to the Public-Private Educational Facilities and Infrastructure Act of 2002.
(George Assaid, Capital Projects Administrator)
Roanoke County
Board of Supervisors
Agenda
February 10, 2026
Page 3 of 4
F. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE
1.Ordinance authorizing the temporary relocation of the Hollins District Precinct
206 polling place pursuant to Virginia Code Section 24.2-306, 24.2-307, and
24.2-310. (Anna Cloeter, Registrar) (First Reading and Request for Second
Reading)
G.CONSENT AGENDA
ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED BY
THE BOARD TO BE ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION
IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT
ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE
CONSIDERED SEPARATELY
1.Approval of minutes – January 27, 2026
2.Ordinance authorizing the granting of easements to the Western Virginia Water
Authority for the Gish Mill Water Line Improvement Project on property owned by
the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. (Second Reading)
3. Ordinance accepting and appropriating $24,849 from Firehouse Subs Public
Safety Foundation for new armor plates for the SWAT Team. (Second Reading)
4.Ordinance accepting and appropriating a donation from the Friends of the
Roanoke County Public Library in the amount of $46,000 for use by the Roanoke
County Library Department. (Second Reading)
5.Request to Accept and Allocate grant funds of $27,796.31 from the Virginia
Department of Health Rescue Squad Assistance Fund along with a local match
of $27,796.31 for a total of $55,592.62.
6.Resolution Directing the Roanoke County Planning Commission to Study and
Provide Recommendation Regarding Whether to Amend the Provisions of the
Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance to Restrict the Operation of Abortion Clinics
Within the County's Various Zoning Districts.
7. Resolution adopting the updated Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional
Commission Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan 2025 Update.
H.CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
This time has been set aside for Roanoke County citizens, County property owners,
and County business owners to address the Board on matters of interest or concern.
While the Board desires to hear from all who desire to speak, this agenda item is
limited to a duration of 30 minutes, Each individual speaker shall be afforded 3
minutes to speak.
Page 4 of 4
I.REPORTS
1. Unappropriated Balance, Board Contingency and Capital Reserves Report
2.Outstanding Debt Report
J.REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS
1.Paul M. Mahoney
2.David F. Radford
3.Phil C. North
4.Martha B. Hooker
5.Tammy E. Shepherd
K.WORK SESSIONS
1.Work session to review with the Board of Supervisors the County Administrator's
Proposed Fiscal Year 2027 - 2036 Capital Improvement Program (CIP). (Laurie
Gearheart, Chief Financial Officer)
2.Work session to review with the Board of Supervisors SMART SCALE Round 7
Potential Applications. (Megan Cronise, Assistant Director of Planning)
3.Work session to discuss Opioid Abatement Authority grant opportunities.
(Madeline Hanlon, Assistant County Administrator and Josh Fridley, Constituent
Services Administrator)
L.CLOSED MEETING
1.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. The
Board will discuss potential business location or expansion in the five magisterial
districts.
M.CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION
N.ADJOURNMENT
Page 1 of 1
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: February 10, 2026
AGENDA ITEM: Resolution recognizing Roanoke County’s snow removal
team members during the January 24 and January 30, 2026
winter storms
SUBMITTED BY: Doug Blount
Deputy County Administrator
APPROVED BY: Richard L. Caywood
County Administrator
ISSUE:
This time has been set aside to recognize Roanoke County’s snow removal team
members for their exceptional dedication and professionalism during the recent winter
storms.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adoption of the resolution.
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, FEBRUARY 10, 2026
RESOLUTION RECOGNIZING ROANOKE COUNTY’S SNOW
REMOVAL TEAM MEMBERS DURING THE JANUARY 24 AND
JANUARY 30, 2026 WINTER STORMS
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors hereby commends Roanoke County’s snow
removal team members for their exceptional dedication and professionalism during the
recent winter storms, including working extended hours over seventeen consecutive days
to prepare for, respond to, and recover from severe winter weather conditions; and
WHEREAS, through solid planning and early action, including extensive pre -
treatment of parking lots, staff helped reduce hazardous conditions before the first snowfall,
setting the foundation for a safe and effective response; and
WHEREAS, staff worked tirelessly to clear snow and later remove accumulated
snow piles, often under challenging and hazardous conditions, demonstrating a strong
commitment to public safety and service continuity; and
WHEREAS, their efforts ensured that Roanoke County’s 24/7/365 operations staff
including police officers, fire and rescue personnel, and emergency communications
officers, were able to access county facilities quickly and safely, allowing emergency and
public safety services to remain fully operational throughout the storm; and
WHEREAS, because of this work, county buildings were able to reopen efficiently,
enabling employees and citizens to safely access essential services such as libraries,
recreation facilities, and other public spaces once the storm had passed; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia does hereby
extend its sincere appreciation to the following staff members from the Parks, Recreation
Page 2 of 2
and Tourism Department, and staff members from Development Services’ Stormwater
Drainage Division: Robert Arno, Braden Ashby, Micheal Blair, Tabby Blaylock, Steve
Brammer, Austin Brookman, Morgan Edwards, Chris Firebaugh, Desmond Gallaher, Eddie
Goode, Keith Hill, David Jordan, Gerald Landes, Dylan Marron, Chris McVey, Hunter
Meador, Jerome Robinson, Scott Schescke, Emmett Smith, Trent Terry, Jeff Willard, Eric
Vest, Dalton Hughes, Jimmy Fralin, DJ Myers, Jason Rakes, Jimmy Sutphin, and Nathan
Wimmer.
Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Board of Supervisors formally recognizes and
thanks county staff for their outstanding service, commitment to safety, and unwavering
support of county operations during this winter weather event.
Page 1 of 1
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: February 10, 2026
AGENDA ITEM: Briefing to discuss with the Board of Supervisors the real
estate reassessment process
SUBMITTED BY: Laurie Gearheart
Chief Financial Officer
APPROVED BY: Richard L. Caywood
County Administrator
ISSUE:
Time has been set aside to discuss the real estate reassessment process
Page 1 of 2
ACTION NO.
ITEM NO. E.1
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE: February 10, 2026
AGENDA ITEM: Resolution authorizing the use of competitive negotiation in
the procurement of professional services for the
redevelopment of the proposed Hollins Fire Station, pursuant
to the Public-Private Education Facilities and Infrastructure
Act of 2002
SUBMITTED BY: George G. Assaid
Capital Projects Administrator
APPROVED BY: Richard L. Caywood
County Administrator
ISSUE:
Board of Supervisors' determination of procurement procedures for redevelopment of
the Hollins Fire Station, pursuant to the County's Public-Private Education Facilities and
Infrastructure Act of 2002, as revised January 2021.
BACKGROUND & DISCUSSION:
The Board of Supervisors accepted an unsolicited PPEA proposal (pursuant to the
Public-Private Education Facilities and Infrastructure Act (PPEA) for review of the
Hollins Fire Station redevelopment project, located at 7401 Barrens Road in the County
of Roanoke (the "Hollins Fire Station"). For simultaneous consideration, the County
solicited any competing proposals that comply with the PPEA and the Guidelines. No
competing proposals were received.
The County's PPEA Guidelines state that "The Board of Supervisors will determine at
the initial stage review" the procedures that will be used in procuring services for
completion of a project.
Insofar as the proposals predominantly involve professional services (as defined in
Section 2.2-4301 of the Code of Virginia), it would be proper and lawful to use the
procurement process of "competitive negotiation" for professional services (as set forth
Page 2 of 2
in Section 2.2-4302.2(A)(4) of the Code of Virginia).
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact associated with this determination by the Board.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the adoption of this resolution.
Page 1 of 1
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 2026
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE USE OF COMPETITIVE
NEGOTIATION IN THE PROCUREMENT OF PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE HOLLINS FIRE
STATION, PURSUANT TO THE PUBLIC-PRIVATE EDUCATIONAL
FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE ACT OF 2002
WHEREAS, The Board of Supervisors accepted an unsolicited proposal pursuant
to the Public-Private Educational Facilities and Infrastructure Act (PPEA) for the
redevelopment of the Hollins Fire Station, which building is located at 7401 Barrens Rd.
in the County of Roanoke; and
WHEREAS, the County, pursuant to its adopted PPEA guidelines, solicited
competing proposals, but the solicitation produced no competing proposals; and
WHEREAS, the County’s PPEA Guidelines state that “The Board of Supervisors
will determine at the initial stage review” the process that will be used in procuring
services for completion of a project; and
WHEREAS, insofar as the proposals predominantly involve professional services
(as defined in Section 2.2-4301 of the Code of Virginia), it would be proper and lawful to
use the procurement process of “competitive negotiation” for professional services (as
set forth in Section 2.2-4302.2(A)(4) of the Code of Virginia.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, that the Board directs the County’s Purchasing Division Director and other
appropriate County staff to use the procurement process of competitive negotiation for
professional services in regard to the above-mentioned project.
Page 1 of 2
ACTION NO.
ITEM NO. F.1
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE: February 10, 2026
AGENDA ITEM: ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE TEMPORARY
RELOCATION OF THE HOLLINS DISTRICT PRECINCT
206 POLLING PLACE PURSUANT TO VIRGINIA CODE
SECTION 24.2-306, 24.2-307, AND 24.2-310
SUBMITTED BY: Anna Cloeter
General Registrar and Director of Elections
APPROVED BY: Richard L. Caywood
County Administrator
ISSUE:
The current polling place for Hollins Precinct 206 is the Hollins Library. Due to planned
construction in 2026 at the Hollins Library, it is necessary to temporarily relocate the
polling place from the Hollins Library.
BACKGROUND:
Virginia Code § 24.2-306, § 24.2-307, and § 24.2-310 authorize the governing body of
each county to establish the polling place for each precinct in that jurisdiction by
ordinance.
DISCUSSION:
The current polling place for Hollins Precinct 206 is the Hollins Library. There is planned
construction scheduled to begin at the Hollins Library in May 2026, which is expected to
conclude in July 2027. Election officials have determined that the citizens would be
better served with the temporary relocation of the Hollins District Precinct 206 polling
place to North Roanoke Baptist Church, located at 6402 Peters Creek Road, Roanoke,
Virginia 24019. Leaders at the North Roanoke Baptist Church have shared that the
church agrees to serve as the temporary polling place for Hollins Precinct 206 during
construction at the Hollins Library. An ordinance is needed from the Board of
Supervisors to effectuate this temporary change in polling place.
Page 2 of 2
FISCAL IMPACT:
To comply with the Virginia Code, this matter was noticed by publication in the Roanoke
Times, and the County provided funds for that notice. There will also be costs
associated with notices that must be sent by mail to registered voters impacted by this
proposed polling place change.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve the first reading of this
ordinance and schedule a second reading for February 24, 2026.
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 2026
ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE TEMPORARY RELOCATION OF THE
HOLLINS DISTRICT PRECINCT 206 POLLING PLACE PURSUANT TO
VIRGINIA CODE SECTION 24.2-306, 24.2-307, AND 24.2-310
WHEREAS, Virginia Code § 24.2-306, § 24.2-307, and § 24.2-310 authorize the
governing body of each county to establish the polling place for each precinct in that
jurisdiction by ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the current polling place for Hollins District Precinct 206 is the Hollins
Library; and
WHEREAS, there is planned construction scheduled to begin at the Hollins Library
in May 2026, which is expected to conclude in July 2027; and
WHEREAS, election officials have determined that the citizens would be better
served by temporarily relocating the Hollins District Precinct 206 polling place during
construction at the Hollins Library to North Roanoke Baptist Church, located at 6402
Peters Creek Road, Roanoke, Virginia 24019; and
WHEREAS, leaders of North Roanoke Baptist Church have shared with Roanoke
County staff that North Roanoke Baptist Church may be used as the temporary polling
place for Hollins District Precinct 206 during construction at the Hollins Library; and
WHEREAS, in order to comply with Virginia Code § 24.2-306, this matter was
noticed by publication in The Roanoke Times on February 10, 2026 and February 17,
2026; and
WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on February 10, 2026, and
the second reading was held on February 24, 2026.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. The Hollins District Precinct 206 polling place shall be temporarily relocated
from the Hollins Library located at 6624 Peters Creek Road, Roanoke,
Virginia 24019 to North Roanoke Baptist Church located at 6402 Peters
Creek Road, Roanoke, Virginia 24019.
2. Once construction at the Hollins Library is complete, the polling place for
Hollins District Precinct 206 will return to its original location at the Hollins
Library located at 6624 Peters Creek Road, Roanoke, Virginia 24019.
3. The General Registrar for the County of Roanoke, Virginia, is hereby
authorized to take all measures necessary to comply with Virginia law and
regulations regarding a change in polling place and for reasonable
notification to the voters of this change in their polling location.
4. The County Administrator, Deputy County Administrator, Assistant County
Administrator, and the General Registrar are hereby authorized and
directed to take such other actions as may be necessary to accomplish the
intent of this ordinance.
5. This ordinance shall take effect from and after the date of adoption.
Page 1 of 1
A T A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 2026
RESOLUTION APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET
FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE
DESIGNATED AS ITEM G - CONSENT AGENDA
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as
follows:
That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for February 10,
2026, designated as Item G - Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred
in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 7
inclusive, as follows:
1.Approval of minutes – January 27, 2026
2.Ordinance authorizing the granting of easements to the Western Virginia Water
Authority for the Gish Mill Water Line Improvement Project on property owned by the
Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. (Second Reading)
3. Ordinance accepting and appropriating $24,849 from Firehouse Subs Public Safety
Foundation for new armor plates for the SWAT Team. (Second Reading)
4.Ordinance accepting and appropriating a donation from the Friends of the Roanoke
County Public Library in the amount of $46,000 for use by the Roanoke County
Library Department. (Second Reading)
5.Request to Accept and Allocate grant funds of $27,796.31 from the Virginia
Department of Health Rescue Squad Assistance Fund along with a local match of
$27,796.31 for a total of $55,592.62.
6.Resolution Directing the Roanoke County Planning Commission to Study and
Provide Recommendation Regarding Whether to Amend the Provisions of the
Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance to Restrict the Operation of Abortion Clinics
Within the County's Various Zoning Districts.
7.Resolution adopting the updated Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission
Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan 2025 Update.
Page 1 of 6
The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia met this day at the Roanoke
County Administration Center, this being the second regularly scheduled meeting of the
month of January 2026. Audio and video recordings of this meeting will be held on file
for a minimum of five (5) years in the office of the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors.
Before the meeting was called to order, an invocation/a moment of silence was
observed. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all present.
A.OPENING CEREMONIES
1.Roll Call
Present: Supervisors Radford, Hooker, North, Mahoney, Shepherd
Absent: None
Staff Present: Richard L. Caywood, County Administrator; Doug Blount,
Deputy County Administrator; Madeline Hanlon, Assistant
County Administrator, Peter S. Lubeck, County Attorney;
Amy Whittaker, Public Information Officer and Rhonda D.
Perdue, Chief Deputy Clerk to the Board
B.REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA
ITEMS
C.PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS
Action No. 012726-1 Item C.1
1.Resolution of appreciation to David F. Radford for his service as Chairman of the
Board of Supervisors in 2025. (Tammy E. Shepherd, Chair of the Board of
Supervisors)
Supervisor North moved to adopt the resolution. Supervisor Hooker seconded the
motion. Motion approved.
Ayes: Supervisors Hooker, North, Mahoney, Shepherd
Nays: None
No Vote: Supervisor Radford
Roanoke County
Board of Supervisors
Agenda
January 27, 2026
Page 2 of 6
2. Recognition of Roanoke County employees recognized in the Roanoker
magazine as the 40 under 40 young professionals. (J. Eric Orange, Sheriff)
Recognition was given to DSIV Ethan Sweeney and Sgt. Alex Wertz.
D. NEW BUSINESS
Action No. 012726-2 Item D.1
1. Ordinance accepting and appropriating a donation from the Friends of the
Roanoke County Public Library in the amount of $46,000 for use by the Roanoke
County Library Department. (Jim Blanton, Director of Library Services) (First
Reading and Request for Second Reading)
Supervisor Mahoney moved to approve the first reading of this ordinance and
scheduling the second reading for February 10, 2026. Supervisor Hooker seconded
the motion. Motion approved.
Ayes: Supervisors Radford, Hooker, North, Mahoney, Shepherd
Nays: None
E. APPOINTMENTS
Action No. 012726-3 Item E.1-2
1. Roanoke Regional Airport Commission
Gary S. Powers – term to expire February 10, 2030
2. Western Virginia Regional Industrial Facility Authority
Richard Caywood – County Representative – term to expire February 4, 2030
Alex Jones – County Alternate – term to expire February 4, 2030
Doug Blount – County Alternate – term to expire February 3, 2028
Supervisor Radford moved to approve all appointments. Supervisor North seconded
the motion. Motion approved.
Ayes: Supervisors Radford, Hooker, North, Mahoney, Shepherd
Nays: None
F. CONSENT AGENDA
Action No. 012726-4.a-e Item F.1-5
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
Page 3 of 6
ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE
CONSIDERED SEPARATELY
Action No. 012726-4.a Item F.1
1. Approval of minutes – January 13, 2026
Action No. 012726-4.b Item F.2
2. Ordinance Amending Chapter 2 (Administration), Article V (County Board
Organization and Procedure), Section 2-110 (Roll Call) of the Roanoke County
Code. (Second Reading)
Action No. 012726-4.c Item F.3
3. Ordinance authorizing the granting of easements to the Western Virginia Water
Authority for the Gish Mill Water Line Improvement Project on property owned by
the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia (First Reading and
Request for Second Reading)
Action No. 012726-4.d Item F.4
4. Ordinance accepting and appropriating $24,849 from Firehouse Subs Public
Safety Foundation for new armor plates for the SWAT Team. (First Reading and
Request for Second Reading)
Action No. 012726-4.e Item F.5
5. Request to accept and allocate grant funds in the amount of $25,000 from the
Department of Criminal Justice Services to Roanoke County Fire and Rescue.
Supervisor North moved to remove the Resolution adopting the updated Roanoke
Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan 2025 Update
from the consent agenda, for staff to review and to postpone the matter until
February 10, 2026. Supervisor Hooker seconded the motion. Motion approved.
Ayes: Supervisors Radford, Hooker, North, Mahoney, Shepherd
Nays: None
Supervisor Mahoney moved to adopt all remaining matters on the consent agenda.
Supervisor Hooker seconded the motion. Motion approved.
Ayes: Supervisors Radford, Hooker, North, Mahoney, Shepherd
Nays: None
G. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
This time has been set aside for Roanoke County citizens, County property owners,
and County business owners to address the Board on matters of interest or concern.
Page 4 of 6
While the Board desires to hear from all who desire to speak, this agenda item is
limited to a duration of 30 minutes. Each individual speaker shall be afforded 3
minutes to speak.
No citizens were present.
H. REPORTS
Action No. 012726-7 Item H.1-6
1. Unappropriated Balance, Board Contingency and Capital Reserves Report
2. Outstanding Debt Report
3. Comparative Statement of Budgeted and Actual Revenues as of December 31,
2025
4. Comparative Statement of Budgeted and Actual Expenditures and
Encumbrances as of December 31, 2025
5. Accounts Paid – December 2025
6. Statement of the Treasurer’s Accountability per Investment and Portfolio Policy,
as of December 31, 2025
Supervisor Hooker moved to receive and file the reports that have been included
with the agenda under Item H. Supervisor Radford seconded the motion. Motion
approved.
Ayes: Supervisors Radford, Hooker, North, Mahoney, Shepherd
Nays: None
I. WORK SESSIONS
1. Work session to review with the Board of Supervisors fiscal year 2025-2026 mid-
year revenues and expenditures. (Steve Elliott, Budget Administrator)
2. Work session to review with the Board of Supervisors the real estate assessment
process. (Ken Fay, Real Estate Valuation)
J. CLOSED MEETING
Action No. 012726-6
1. 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. The
Board will discuss potential business location or expansion in the five magisterial
districts.
Page 5 of 6
Supervisor Shepherd moved to go to closed session. Supervisor Hooker seconded
the motion. Motion approved.
Ayes: Supervisors Radford, Hooker, North, Mahoney, Shepherd
Nays: None
EVENING SESSION – 6:00 PM
K. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION
Action No. 012726-7
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 Hooker moved to adopt the certification resolution. Supervisor Radford
seconded the motion. Motion approved.
Ayes: Supervisors Radford, Hooker, North, Mahoney, Shepherd
Nays: None
L. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE AND PUBLIC HEARING
Action No. 012726-8 Item L.1
1. The petition of Katie Gray (on behalf of Wal-Mart Real Estate Business Trust) to
amend a special use permit condition regarding the architectural plans including
exterior materials and colors for the Clearbrook Walmart on approximately 29.97
acres of land zoned C-2S, High Intensity Commercial District with conditions, and
CVOD, Clearbrook Village Overlay District, located at 5350 Clearbrook Village
Lane, Cave Spring Magisterial District. (Philip Thompson, Director of Planning)
(Second Reading and Public Hearing)
Citizens were provided with the opportunity to participate in the meeting remotely.
Three (3) citizens were present and spoke against this item. No remote
participation.
Supervisor Mahoney found that the proposed special use permit amendment
request:
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. Does not align specifically to the Clearbrook Village Overlay District's design
guidelines, however it is in conformance with the remaining terms of the
Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan; and
Page 6 of 6
3. Will have a minimum adverse impact on the surrounding neighborhood and
community.
Therefore, moved that the Board approve the petition to amend the existing special
use permit as follows:
2. All buildings on the 41 +/- acre site shall be constructed in substantial
conformance with the architectural plans, including exterior materials and
colors, prepared by WD Partners, dated 06/23/25 and as last revised on
01/23/26, entitled “Exterior Elevations—A2”.
All other special use permit conditions shall remain in place.
Supervisor North seconded the motion. Motion approved.
Ayes: Supervisors Radford, Hooker, North, Mahoney, Shepherd
Nays: None
M. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS
1. Martha B. Hooker
2. Paul M. Mahoney
3. David F. Radford
4. Phil C. North
5. Tammy E. Shepherd
Supervisors were offered the opportunity to share comments and provide updates to
their peers and the public on items of interest to them.
N. ADJOURNMENT
Action No. 012726-9
Supervisor Hooker moved to adjourn the meeting. Supervisor North seconded the
motion. Motion approved.
Ayes: Supervisors Radford, Hooker, North, Mahoney, Shepherd
Nays: None
Submitted by: Approved by:
__________________________ __________________________
Richard L. Caywood Tammy E. Shepherd
Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Chair
Page 1 of 2
ACTION NO.
ITEM NO. G.2
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBMITTED BY:
APPROVED BY:
ISSUE:
BACKGROUND:
DISCUSSION:
Page 2 of 2
cognizant of utility lines on the property) with the WVWA. Pursuant to the terms of the
easement, the WVWA agrees to restore and repair any actual damage to the property
which may be directly caused by the construction, reconstruction, or maintenance of the
waterline as near as is practicable to the condition at the time the easement is granted.
There have been no changes since the first reading held on January 27, 2026.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Payment of $1.00 has been proposed by the WVWA as fair market value compensation
for this easement.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the ordinance.
Page 1 of 2
Prepared and Recorded By:
Western Virginia Water Authority
Consideration: $1.00, see exemption below 601 S. Jefferson St., Suite 300
Roanoke, Virginia 24011
Tax Map No. 060.11-04-17.00-0000 Return to same address noted above
This Deed is exempt (i) from recordation taxes pursuant to Section 58.1-811 (A)(3) and (C)(5) of the Code of
Virginia (1950), as amended, and (ii) from the payment of Clerk's fees pursuant to Section 17.1 -266 of the Code of
Virginia (1950), as amended.
NOTICE TO THE CLERK: When indexing this instrument, please refer to the Western
Virginia Water Authority Gish Mill Water Improvements project.
THIS EASEMENT AGREEMENT, made this ______ day of _________________, 2026,
by and between the ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, a political
subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia (whether one or more, the "Grantor"); and the
WESTERN VIRGINIA WATER AUTHORITY, a water and sewer authority created pursuant
to Chapter 51 of Title 15.2 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended ("Grantee").
: W I T N E S S E T H :
That for and in consideration of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00), paid in hand at and with
the execution and delivery of this Easement Agreement, and other good and valuable
consideration, the receipt, adequacy and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Grantor
does hereby GRANT and CONVEY with General Warranty and Modern English Covenants of
Title unto the Grantee, its successors and assigns, the following described easements, to-wit:
A new twenty foot (20’) RIGHT and EASEMENT and a ten foot (10’) temporary
construction easement, to construct, install, improve, operate, inspect, use,
maintain, repair or replace a water line together with related improvements
including slope(s), if applicable (collectively, the “easement”), together with the
right of ingress and egress thereto from a public road, upon, over, under, and across
those tracts or parcels of land belonging to the Grantor, acquired by deed dated the
8th day of August, 2013, and recorded in the Clerk's Office for Circuit Court of the
County of Roanoke, Virginia, as Instrument Number 201313869, and designated on
the Land Records as Tax Map No. 060.11-04-17.00-0000 (the “Property”). The
location of said easement is generally described on the exhibit attached hereto as
“Exhibit A” and more particularly described as being centered over the constructed
water line or lines.
The Grantee agrees to restore and repair any actual damage to Grantor’s property which
may be directly caused by the construction, reconstruction, or maintenance of said project except
as hereinafter provided. The Grantor agrees that the Grantee will not be expected to restore the
Property to the identical original condition, but rather as near thereto as is practicable to the
condition at the time the easement was granted, and that the Grantor will cooperate with the
Grantee in effectuating such restoration.
It is expressly agreed between the parties hereto that the Grantee and its agents shall have
the right to inspect the easement herein granted and to cut, clear, and remove all undergrowth,
obstructions, or improvements lying within, upon, or adjacent to said easement, that in any way
endangers or interferes with the proper use of the same. The Grantor covenants that no building or
structure shall be erected upon or within the easement herein granted or placed in such location as
to render said easement inaccessible. In the event that this covenant is violated, the Grantee shall
not be obligated to repair, replace, or otherwise be responsible for such improvements if damaged
or removed.
The Grantor acknowledges that the plans for the aforesaid project as they affect the
Property have been fully explained to Grantor or Grantor’s authorized representative. The fixtures,
facilities, lines, utilities, and any other improvements placed upon, under, or across the Property by
the Grantee or its assigns and further grantees shall remain the property of the Grantee or its
assigns and further grantees. The easement herein granted is in addition to, and not in lieu of, any
easement or right-of-way now in existence or which may be acquired in the future.
Page 2 of 2
The Grantor covenants and agrees for themselves, and for their heirs, successors,
successors in title, executors, legal representatives and assigns that the consideration
aforementioned and the covenants herein shall be in lieu of any and all claims to compensation and
damages by reason of the location, construction, operation, maintenance, or reconstruction of or
within the easement herein granted.
The grant and provision of this Easement Agreement shall constitute a covenant running
with the land for the benefit of the Grantee, its successors and assigns forever.
To have and to hold unto the Grantee, its successors and assigns forever.
WITNESS the following signature(s):
GRANTOR: ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
By:
Title:
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
COUNTY OF ROANOKE to wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _______ day of
_____________, 2026, by , its
of _____________________________, on behalf of said entity, Grantor.
___________________________________
Notary Public
My Commission Expires: My Registration Number is:
GRANTEE: WESTERN VIRGINIA WATER AUTHORITY
By: _________________________________
Dr. Irene “Tesha” Okioga, P.E., PhD. DBIA, LEED AP, ENV SP
Title: Director – Engineering Services
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
CITY OF ROANOKE to wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _______ day of
___________________, 2026, by Dr. Irene “Tesha” Okioga, P.E., PhD. DBIA, LEED AP, ENV
SP, Director of Engineering Services for the Western Virginia Water Authority, on behalf of said
corporation, Grantee.
___________________________________
Notary Public
My Commission Expires: My Registration Number is:
Mattern & Craig
Sheet 1 of 2
Mattern & Craig
Sheet 2 of 2
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 2026
ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE GRANTING OF EASEMENTS TO THE
WESTERN VIRGINIA WATER AUTHORITY FOR THE GISH MILL
WATER LINE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ON PROPERTY OWNED BY
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA
WHEREAS, the Western Virginia Water Authority (“WVWA”) is conducting a water
line improvement project with plans to proceed across property owned by the Board of
Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia known as Glade Creek Park; and
WHEREAS, in furtherance of the WVWA’s project, the WVWA has requested that
the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia grant it a temporary construction
easement and a permanent waterline easement across Glade Creek Park; and
WHEREAS, Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter directs that the
acquisition and disposition of real estate be authorized only by ordinance; and
WHEREAS, a first reading of this ordinance was held on January 27, 2026 and the
second reading was held on February 10, 2026; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1.That pursuant to the provision of Section 16.01 of the Roanoke County
Charter, the interest in real estate to be conveyed is hereby declared to be surplus and is
hereby made available for conveyance to the WVWA for purposes of a public utility
easement and a temporary construction easement.
2.That conveyance to the WVWA of the public utility easement and temporary
construction easement as shown and described upon the plat entitled “EASEMENT PLAT
FOR WESTERN VIRGINIA WATER AUTHORITY SHOWING NEW 20’ PERMANENT
WATERLINE EASEMENT BEING ACQUIRED FROM ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS SITUATED AT 325 GUS NICKS BOULEVARD VINTON MAGISTERIAL
DISTRICT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA” prepared by Mattern & Craig, dated
November 6, 2025, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, is hereby authorized
and approved.
3. That the County accepts and appropriates the payment of $1.00 as fair
market value compensation for this easement.
4. That the County Administrator, the Deputy County Administrator, or
Assistant County Administrator, is hereby authorized to execute such documents and
take such further actions as may be necessary to accomplish this conveyance, all of which
shall be on a form approved by the County Attorney.
5. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption.
Page 1 of 2
ACTION NO.
ITEM NO. G.3
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBMITTED BY:
APPROVED BY:
ISSUE:
BACKGROUND:
DISCUSSION:
Page 2 of 2
These funds will be utilized for the specific purpose of purchasing the Safariland armor
plates from Strohman Enterprises.
There have been no changes since the first reading held on January 27, 2026.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The grant funds awarded are $24,849 and will cover 100% of the cost for the items. No
county match is required.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the ordinance.
1
Joshua Pegram
From:Spencer Hoopes
Sent:Tuesday, January 6, 2026 9:55 AM
To:Mia Nguyen; Joshua Pegram
Cc:Wesley Campbell; Steve Short; Jeffrey A. Johnson; Mark Tuck; Mike Poindexter; Christopher J. Gunter
Subject:FW: APPROVED: Q1 2026 Firehouse Subs Public Safety Foundation Grant
Attachments:Q1 2026 US Press Release Template - FOR GRANT RECIPIENT FINAL.docx; Q1 2026 US Social Media
Templates - FOR GRANT RECIPIENT FINAL.docx; Foundation_Full Color Logo CMYK.pdf; Foundation
Full Color Logo CMYK.jpg; Foundation_Full Color Logo CMYK.eps
Mia and Josh,
Please see the email below regarding the grant award from Firehouse Subs.
Let me know when you would like me to get this on the Board Agenda, and I will let you know when I hear more
from the Foundation.
Thanks!
From: Firehouse Subs Public Safety Foundation <foundation@firehousesubs.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 6, 2026 09:33
To: Spencer Hoopes <SHOOPES@roanokecountyva.gov>; Christopher J. Gunter <CGUNTER@roanokecountyva.gov>
Cc: Firehouse Subs Public Safety Foundation <foundation@firehousesubs.com>; Kowalsky, Jonathon
<jkowalsky@firehousesubs.com>; Carla, Wissemann <carla.wissemann@firehousesubs.com>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] - APPROVED: Q1 2026 Firehouse Subs Public Safety Foundation Grant
Dear Sgt. Hoopes & Christopher, We are pleased to announce that the Firehouse Subs Public Safety Foundation Board of Directors has awarded County of Roanoke, on behalf of Roanoke County Police Department in Roanoke, VA the requested 36 Safariland ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerStart
WARNING: This Message Is From an External Sender, Use Caution!
This message was sent from outside the Roanoke County email system. Report Suspicious
ZjQcmQRYFpfptBannerEnd
Dear Sgt. Hoopes & Christopher,
We are pleased to announce that the Firehouse Subs Public Safety Foundation Board of Directors has
awarded County of Roanoke, on behalf of Roanoke County Police Department in Roanoke, VA the
requested 36 Safariland Armor Plates (Including Freight up to $40) valued up to $24,849.00. If
your grant award must be approved by a governing body (i.e., your city council or Board of Directors),
please add this item to the agenda immediately, and contact us with the meeting date.
PROCUREMENT:
We will contact you no later than Friday, February 27, 2026, to initiate the procurement process. There
are two possible methods for procurement, to be determined by our Foundation:
•Direct Purchase made by the Foundation
OR
W.S. Hoopes | Sergeant Uniform Division
Police Department
5925 Cove Road | Roanoke, VA 24019
(O) 540-777-8674 | (C) 540-266-2162
www.roanokecountyva.gov/police
2
• Memo of Understanding. NOTE: Our Foundation provides funding via ACH transfer only. We are
unable to fund a grant award by paper check.
Do not make advanced purchases until you have heard from the Foundation with the next
steps. Failure to follow this process will jeopardize your grant award. If you have any fulfillment
questions, please email Procurementfoundation@firehousesubs.com.
PUBLIC RELATIONS (PR) NOTES
• PR announcements from your organization regarding the grant award are optional. If you choose to
share the good news, please use the attached press release template and/or social media post
template and send it back to Foundation@firehousesubs.com for review and approval (allowing for
72 hours turnaround time). Please do not pitch or post before receiving approval from the
Foundation team.
Use of the Firehouse Subs Public Safety Foundation logo:
• We ask that your organization acknowledge the grant by displaying our Foundation logo on granted
items/equipment whenever possible. Our Foundation logo is attached for your convenience. Please
note that the final artwork will need to be approved by our Foundation via
Foundation@firehousesubs.com before being displayed.
Did you know?
More than 70% of the funds raised for the Firehouse Subs Public Safety Foundation come from the
generosity of Firehouse Subs guests and the restaurant brand? Please consider supporting a Firehouse
Subs restaurant near you.
We are very excited to assist your organization and ultimately improve the lifesaving capabilities of your
community.
Firehouse Subs Public Safety Foundation
Deerwood North 4600 Touchton Road E, Bldg 100, Ste 300 Jacksonville, FL 32246
foundation@firehousesubs.com
FirehouseSubsFoundation.org
Twitter Facebook
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information and attachments contained in this electronic communication are confidential and intended only
for the use of the intended recipients. If you are not an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, use, dissemination,
distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us
immediately of the error by return e-mail and please permanently remove any copies of this message from your system and do not retain any
copies, whether in electronic or physical form or otherwise. PLEASE NOTE THAT I DO NOT CONSENT TO THE ELECTRONIC/DIGITAL
RECORDING OF ANY COMMUNICATIONS, INCLUDING MEETINGS, VIDEO CONFERENCES AND TELEPHONE CALLS, AND MY
PARTICIPATION IN ANY MEETING, VIDEO CONFERENCE OR CALL SHOULD NOT BE CONSTRUED AS CONSENT (IMPLIED OR
OTHERWISE) TO RECORDING THE COMMUNICATION.
The information contained in this message may be proprietary, confidential or trade secret and may be legally
privileged. The message is intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any use, dissemination, disclosure or reproduction is strictly prohibited and may be a
violation of law. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by return e-mail and destroy all
copies of the original message.
Les renseignements contenus dans ce message peuvent être de propriété exclusive, de nature privilégiée,
confidentiels ou relever du secret commercial. Ce message est strictement réservé à l’usage de son ou ses
destinataires. Si vous n’êtes pas le destinataire prévu, vous êtes, par la présente, informé que toute utilisation,
distribution, divulgation ou reproduction est strictement interdite et peut constituer une infraction à la loi. Si
vous n’êtes pas le destinataire prévu, veuillez communiquer avec l’expéditeur par courriel et détruire tous les
exemplaires du message original.
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 2026
ORDINANCE ACCEPTING AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS IN THE
AMOUNT OF $24,849 FROM FIREHOUSE SUBS PUBLIC SAFETY
FOUNDATION FOR NEW ARMOR PLATES FOR THE SWAT TEAM
WHEREAS, the Firehouse Subs Public Safety Foundation has awarded the
Roanoke County Police Department a grant in the amount of $24,849 to purchase 36
Safariland armor plates from Strohman Enterprises; and
WHEREAS, the grant amount represents 100% of the equipment costs, and no
matching funds are required; and
WHEREAS, Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter provides that funds be
appropriated by ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on January 27, 2026, and
the second reading was held on February 10, 2026.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as
follows:
1.That Firehouse Subs Public Safety Foundation grant in the amount of
$24,849 is accepted and hereby appropriated to the County’s grant fund.
2.That this ordinance shall take effect from and after the date of adoption.
Page 1 of 2
ACTION NO.
ITEM NO. G.4
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE: February 10, 2026
AGENDA ITEM: Ordinance accepting and appropriating a donation from the
Friends of the Roanoke County Public Library in the amount
of $46,000 for use by the Roanoke County Library
Department
SUBMITTED BY: James L. Blanton
Director of Library Services
APPROVED BY: Richard L. Caywood
County Administrator
ISSUE:
Acceptance and appropriation of $46,000 received as a donation from the Friends of the
Roanoke County Public Library (Friends), and to recognize the Friends for its donation
to the Library’s Summer Reading Program and annual programming and services for all
ages.
BACKGROUND:
The Friends of the Roanoke County Public Library is a non-profit fundraising group that
advocates and supports library reading programs for all ages, and promotes the value
of libraries. The Friends believe a strong public library is essential to the Roanoke
Valley, and have supported Library programs since the organization formed in the early
1990s. The Library Department is requesting these funds be accepted and appropriated
for use by the Library Department for Library programming and services.
DISCUSSION:
The Library Department will use the funds to support Library programs and services.
No changes have been made since the first reading held on January 27, 2026.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Page 2 of 2
Funds in the amount of $46,000 are from the Friends of the Library for use by the
Library to support Library programming and services. No County matching funds are
required.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the ordinance.
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 2026
ORDINANCE ACCEPTING AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS IN THE
AMOUNT OF $46,000 FROM THE FRIENDS OF THE ROANOKE
COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY FOR USE BY THE ROANOKE COUNTY
LIBRARY
WHEREAS, the Friends of the Roanoke County Public Library is a non-profit
fundraising group that advocates and supports library reading programs for all ages,
promotes the value of libraries, and believes a strong public library is essential, supporting
Library programs since the organization formed in the early 1990s; and
WHEREAS, the Friends of the Roanoke County Public Library wishes to donate
$46,000 for use by the Library Department for the Library’s 2026 Summer Reading
Program as well as annual programming and services for all ages; and
WHEREAS, Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter provides that funds be
appropriated by ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on January 27, 2026, and
the second reading was held on February 10, 2026.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as
follows:
1.That the sum of $46,000 made available to the Roanoke County Public
Library is accepted and appropriated to the General Fund.
2.That this ordinance shall take effect from and after the date of adoption.
Page 1 of 2
ACTION NO.
ITEM NO. G.5
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE: February 10, 2026
AGENDA ITEM: Request to Accept and Allocate grant funds of $27,796.31
from the Virginia Department of Health Rescue Squad
Assistance Fund along with a local match of $27,796.31 for
a total of $55,592.62
SUBMITTED BY: C. Travis Griffith
Chief of Fire and Rescue
APPROVED BY: Richard L. Caywood
County Administrator
ISSUE:
Request to accept grant funding from the Virginia Department of Health Rescue Squad
Assistance Fund to purchase an Automatic External Defibrillator (AED) to replace an
end-of-life defibrillator currently in service. The grant is a 50/50 matching grant with a
total project cost of $55,592.62. State funding will provide $27,796.31, with a required
local match of $27,796.31.
BACKGROUND:
The Rescue Squad Assistance Fund (RSAF) is a state -level grant program
administered by the Virginia Department of Health (VDH), Office of Emergency Medical
Services (OEMS) to provide financial support to nonprofit Emergency Medical Services
(EMS) agencies and rescue squads across the Commonwealth of Virginia.
DISCUSSION:
The Virginia Department of Health Rescue Squad Assistance Fund (RSAF) has
awarded grant funding to support the purchase of an Automatic External Defibrillator
(AED) to replace an end-of-life defibrillator currently in service. Replacing this
equipment will ensure continued compliance with current clinical standards and
maintain reliable lifesaving capability during cardiac arrest responses. AEDs are a
critical component of emergency medical operations and improve patient outcomes by
Page 2 of 2
enabling rapid defibrillation before advanced medical intervention.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The total VDH grant award is $55,592.62, with 50% funded by the state and the
remaining 50% provided as matching funds by Fire & Rescue. The required match will
come from the F&R funds have already been secured within the department’s budget.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the acceptance and allocation of grant funds to the Fire and Rescue
Department in the amount of $27,796.31 with the required local match of $27,796.31 for
a total of $55,592.62 from the Virginia Department of Health Rescue Squad Assistance
Fund.
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
Department of Health
PO BOX 2448 TTY 7-1-1 OR
RICHMOND, VA 23218 1-800-828-1120
January 01, 2026
Charles Rucker
Roanoke County Fire & Rescue
5925 Cove Road
Roanoke, VA 24019
Dear Grant Administrator:
The Office of Emergency Medical Services (OEMS) is pleased to announce that your agency has been awarded funding
from the Financial Assistance for Emergency Medical Services Grant Program, known as the Rescue Squad Assistance
Fund (RSAF). The attached Award Page itemizes the actual dollar value, quantity, funding level and item(s) your agency
has been awarded under this program. The following documents can be completed and submitted via E-Gift:
Memorandum of Agreement: Must be submitted by February 28, 2026.
Instructions for Grant Reimbursement: All items must be submitted in order to process your reimbursement.
Equipment Status/Final Report Form: This form must be submitted sixty (60) days after the grant cycle deadline.
If your agency has had special conditions placed on your grant award, any and all conditions must be met in order to receive
reimbursement. Items awarded may be available by state contract, www.eva.virginia.gov, OEMS recommends your agency
purchase under state contract if applicable.
Any funding your agency receives through Return to Localities funding cannot be used as the matching share of Rescue
Squad Assistance Fund grants or any grants offered using Four-For-Life funds. "Any funds received from Section 16.2-694
by a non-state agency cannot be used to match any other funds derived from Section 46.2-691 by that same non-state agency".
All items awarded funding must be ordered from the vendor by February 28, 2026 invoices for all items awarded funding
must be submitted to OEMS by July 31, 2026. You must contact OEMS prior to the February 28, 2026 deadline if your
agency has encountered difficulties in meeting these deadlines.
If you have any questions, please contact Michael Berg, OEMS Grant Program Manager at (804)
888-9106, Michael.Berg@vdh.virginia.gov or Linwood P. Pulling, Grant Specialist at (804) 888-9105,
Linwood.Pulling@vdh.virginia.gov or 1-800-523-6019 for additional grant information.
Congratulations,
MARIA BEERMANN-FOAT
EMS Director
Office of Emergency Medical Services
Consolidated Grant Program
AWARD PAGE
January 1, 2026 - December 31, 2026 Grant Period
Agency Name: Roanoke County Fire & Rescue
Grant Number: WV-C01/12-25
Item Type (Item)Status Quantity
Funded
Funding
% Level
Amount Funded
Stryker Life Pak 35 FUNDED 1 50 / 50 $27,796.31
Conditions:
13: Acknowledgment must be provided on any printed material, equipment or vehicle as follows: "Funding was made
possible by a grant from the Virginia Department of Health, Office of Emergency Medical Services."
28: Agencies must remain compliant with EMS data submissions (Code of Virginia Section 32.1-116.1). This includes
documenting "No Runs to Submit" as applicable. The monthly Data Quality Report will be used to monitor compliance.
Total: $27,796.31
Page 1 of 1
ACTION NO.
ITEM NO. G.6
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE: February 10, 2026
AGENDA ITEM: Resolution Directing the Roanoke County Planning
Commission to Study and Provide Recommendation
Regarding Whether to Amend the Provisions of the Roanoke
County Zoning Ordinance to Restrict the Operation of
Abortion Clinics Within the County's Various Zoning Districts
SUBMITTED BY: Peter S. Lubeck
County Attorney
APPROVED BY: Richard L. Caywood
County Administrator
ISSUE:
Whether to amend the provisions of the Roanoke County zoning ordinance to restrict
the operation of abortion clinics within the County's various zoning districts.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION:
It has been proposed that the Board direct the Roanoke County Planning Commission
to study and provide recommendation regarding whether to amend the provisions of the
Roanoke County zoning ordinance to restrict the operation of abortion clinics within the
County's various zoning districts.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact associated with this referral to the County's Planning
Commission.
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, FEBRUARY 10, 2026
RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE ROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING
COMMISSION TO STUDY AND PROVIDE RECOMMENDATION
REGARDING WHETHER TO AMEND THE PROVISIONS OF THE
ROANOKE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE TO RESTRICT THE
OPERATION OF ABORTION CLINICS WITHIN THE COUNTY’S
VARIOUS ZONING DISTRICTS
WHEREAS, it has been proposed that the Board direct the Roanoke County
Planning Commission to study and provide recommendation regarding whether to
amend the provisions of the Roanoke County zoning ordinance to restrict the operation
of abortion clinics within the County’s various zoning districts.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County that this matter (whether to amend the provisions of the County’s zoning
ordinance to restrict the operation of abortion clinics within the County’s various zoning
districts) be referred to the Planning Commission for study and recommendation.
Page 1 of 2
ACTION NO.
ITEM NO. G.7
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBMITTED BY:
APPROVED BY:
ISSUE:
BACKGROUND
Page 2 of 2
DISCUSSION
FEMA defines "mitigation" as any sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate long
term risk to life and property from a hazard event. Mitigation, also known as prevention,
encourages reduction of hazard vulnerability. The goal of mitigation is to save lives and
reduce property damage. Mitigation can accomplish this, and should be cost-effective
and environmentally sound. This, in turn, can reduce the enormous cost of disasters to
property owners and all levels of government. In addition, mitigation can protect critical
community facilities, reduce exposure to liability, and minimize community disruption.
Examples of mitigation include land use planning, adoption of building codes and
floodplain regulations, and acquisition or flood-proofing of flood-prone homes.
An adopted Hazard Mitigation Plan allows local governments to apply for disaster
mitigation funds which become available following a natural disaster. In September
2024 Hurricane Helene struck Virginia and received a federal disaster declaration.
Quick adoption of this plan update is important for those local governments which are
applying for funds associated with the Hurricane Helene disaster.
This plan incorporates the following jurisdictions. All of these jurisdictions have been
active participants in the plan.
Alleghany County; Botetourt County; Craig County; Roanoke County; City of Covington;
City of Roanoke; City of Salem; Town of Buchanan; Town of Clifton Forge; Town of
Fincastle; Town of Vinton; Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission; Roanoke
Valley Resource Authority; and Western Virginia Water Authority.
The plan also covers the geographic area of the Towns of New Castle and Iron Gate.
While New Castle and Iron Gate did not meet the threshold of participation in this plan,
their emergency services efforts operate jointly with Craig County and Alleghany County
respectively.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Adoption of the plan does not obligate the County financially or legally to accomplish
any of the goals or projects contained in the plan. Please note that even though this is a
"regional" plan, the goals, strategies and projects for Roanoke County are unique for
Roanoke County and are outlined in the section designated specifically for Roanoke
County. Accordingly, no appropriation of funds is required.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the approval of the resolution adopting the Roanoke Valley-
Alleghany Regional Commission Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan.
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
ON FEBRUARY 10, 2026
RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE UPDATED ROANOKE VALLEY-
ALLEGHANY REGIONAL COMMISSION PRE-DISASTER MITIGATION
PLAN 2025 UPDATE
WHEREAS the Commission recognizes the threat that natural hazards pose to
people and property within the region; and
WHEREAS, the Commission has prepared a multi-hazard mitigation plan, hereby
known as the Hazard Mitigation Plan 2025 Update, in accordance with federal laws,
including the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, as
amended; the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended; and the National Dam
Safety Program Act, as amended; and
WHEREAS the Hazard Mitigation Plan 2025 Update identifies mitigation goals and
actions to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and property in the region from the
impacts of future hazards and disasters; and
WHEREAS adoption by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors demonstrates
its commitment to hazard mitigation and achieving the goals outlined in the Ha zard
Mitigation Plan.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD
OF SUPERVISORS, that the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Pre-Disaster Mitigation
Plan, as updated in 2025, is hereby approved and adopted.
HAZARD
MITIGATION
PLAN
2025 UPDATE
i
Staff Contributors:
Amanda McGee, Director of Community Development
Jon Stanton, Transportation Planner II
Shira Goldman, Regional Planner I
Kevin Jenks, Regional Planner I
With special thanks to:
Cole Taggart, VDEM
Daniel Murray, Botetourt County
ii
Terms and Definitions
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)
The codification of the general and permanent rules published in the Federal Register by the
departments and agencies of the Federal Government.
Community Rating System (CRS)
A voluntary incentive program that recognizes and encourages community floodplain
management practices that exceed the minimum requirements of the National Flood Insurance
Program (NFIP).
Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000)
This act requires state and local governments to develop hazard mitigation plans as a condition
for federal grant assistance.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
A United States government agency that helps people before, during, and after disasters. FEMA's
mission is to improve the nation's ability to prepare for, respond to, and recover from all hazards.
Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM)
Official map of a community on which FEMA has delineated the Special Flood Hazard Areas
(SFHAs), the Base Flood Elevations (BFEs) and the risk premium zones applicable to the
community.
National Center for Environmental Information (NCEI)
A United States government agency that manages and archives environmental data. NCEI's data
includes information about the climate, oceans, coasts, and the Earth's surface.
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
A United States government agency that studies and predicts changes in the weather, climate,
oceans, and coasts. A branch of the Department of Commerce.
National Weather Service (NWS)
A United States government agency that provides weather forecasts and warnings. The NWS is
part of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which is a branch of the
Department of Commerce.
Roanoke Valley – Alleghany Regional Commission (RVARC)
One of 21 Virginia Planning District Commissions established by the General Assembly to
promote regional cooperation between local governments. RVARC members include the counties
of Alleghany, Botetourt, Craig, and Franklin, the cities of Covington, Roanoke, and Salem, and
the towns of Clifton Forge, Vinton, and Rocky Mount.
iii
Table of Contents
CHAPTER 1. THE HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN ................................................................................. 1-1
1.1 OVERVIEW OF THE PLAN .............................................................................................................. 1-1
1.2 PLANNING PROCESS ................................................................................................................... 1-2
1.3 ADOPTION OF THIS PLAN .............................................................................................................. 1-7
1.4 FUTURE UPDATES ....................................................................................................................... 1-8
1.5 IMPLEMENTATION OPPORTUNITIES .................................................................................................. 1-9
CHAPTER 2. THE REGIONAL PROFILE ............................................................................................ 2-1
2.1 THE PLANNING REGION ............................................................................................................... 2-1
2.2 INFRASTRUCTURE AND CRITICAL FACILITIES ..................................................................................... 2-11
CHAPTER 3. HAZARD IDENTIFICATION .......................................................................................... 3-1
3.1 HAZARDS FOR ASSESSMENT .......................................................................................................... 3-1
3.2 EARTHQUAKE ............................................................................................................................ 3-5
3.3 EXTREME TEMPERATURE ............................................................................................................. 3-11
3.4 FLOODING ............................................................................................................................. 3-15
3.5 HURRICANE AND TROPICAL STORM ............................................................................................... 3-41
3.6 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS ................................................................................................................ 3-44
3.7 WILDFIRE ............................................................................................................................... 3-47
3.8 WIND EVENT ........................................................................................................................... 3-48
3.9 WINTER STORM ....................................................................................................................... 3-53
3.10 HAZARDS NOT ASSESSED ........................................................................................................... 3-55
CHAPTER 4. RISK ASSESSMENT .................................................................................................... 4-1
4.1 DISASTER RANKINGS ................................................................................................................... 4-1
4.2 EARTHQUAKE ............................................................................................................................ 4-7
4.3 EXTREME TEMPERATURE ............................................................................................................. 4-12
4.4 FLOODING ............................................................................................................................. 4-19
4.5 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS ................................................................................................................ 4-26
4.6 WILDFIRE ............................................................................................................................... 4-35
4.7 WIND EVENT ........................................................................................................................... 4-41
4.8 WINTER STORM ....................................................................................................................... 4-45
CHAPTER 5. CAPABILITIES ASSESSMENT ...................................................................................... 5-1
5.1 CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK ............................................................................................ 5-1
5.2 ALLEGHANY COUNTY .................................................................................................................. 5-3
5.3 CITY OF COVINGTON ................................................................................................................... 5-6
5.4 TOWN OF CLIFTON FORGE ............................................................................................................ 5-9
5.5 BOTETOURT COUNTY................................................................................................................. 5-11
5.6 TOWN OF BUCHANAN ............................................................................................................... 5-14
5.7 TOWN OF FINCASTLE ................................................................................................................. 5-15
5.8 TOWN OF TROUTVILLE ............................................................................................................... 5-16
5.9 CRAIG COUNTY ....................................................................................................................... 5-17
5.10 ROANOKE COUNTY ................................................................................................................... 5-20
5.11 CITY OF ROANOKE .................................................................................................................... 5-24
iv
5.12 CITY OF SALEM ........................................................................................................................ 5-31
5.13 TOWN OF VINTON..................................................................................................................... 5-34
5.14 ROANOKE VALLEY-ALLEGHANY REGIONAL COMMISSION .................................................................... 5-38
5.15 ROANOKE VALLEY RESOURCE AUTHORITY ...................................................................................... 5-42
5.16 WESTERN VIRGINIA WATER AUTHORITY .......................................................................................... 5-43
CHAPTER 6. MITIGATION GOALS AND STRATEGIES ........................................................................ 6-1
6.1 IDENTIFIED GOALS ...................................................................................................................... 6-1
6.2 REGIONAL STRATEGIES ................................................................................................................ 6-2
6.3 ALL HAZARDS ........................................................................................................................... 6-2
6.4 EARTHQUAKE ............................................................................................................................ 6-4
6.5 EXTREME TEMPERATURE ............................................................................................................... 6-4
6.6 FLOODING ............................................................................................................................... 6-5
6.7 GEOLOGIC HAZARDS .................................................................................................................. 6-7
6.8 WIND ...................................................................................................................................... 6-7
6.9 WILDFIRE ................................................................................................................................. 6-8
6.10 WINTER STORM ......................................................................................................................... 6-8
CHAPTER 7. MITIGATION ACTION PLANS ....................................................................................... 7-1
7.1 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND PRIORITIZATION .................................................................................... 7-1
7.2 ALLEGHANY COUNTY .................................................................................................................. 7-2
7.3 CITY OF COVINGTON ................................................................................................................... 7-6
7.4 TOWN OF CLIFTON FORGE .......................................................................................................... 7-11
7.5 BOTETOURT COUNTY................................................................................................................. 7-16
7.6 TOWN OF BUCHANAN ............................................................................................................... 7-22
7.7 TOWN OF FINCASTLE ................................................................................................................. 7-26
7.8 TOWN OF TROUTVILLE ............................................................................................................... 7-29
7.9 CRAIG COUNTY ....................................................................................................................... 7-31
7.10 ROANOKE COUNTY ................................................................................................................... 7-35
7.11 CITY OF ROANOKE .................................................................................................................... 7-42
7.12 CITY OF SALEM ........................................................................................................................ 7-50
7.13 TOWN OF VINTON..................................................................................................................... 7-55
7.14 ROANOKE VALLEY-ALLEGHANY REGIONAL COMMISSION .................................................................... 7-61
7.15 ROANOKE VALLEY RESOURCE AUTHORITY ...................................................................................... 7-64
7.16 WESTERN VIRGINIA WATER AUTHORITY .......................................................................................... 7-66
REFERENCES
APPENDIX LIST
v
Figures
Figure 1: Timeline of the Plan .................................................................................................... 1-2
Figure 2: Concern About Future Disaster Events ...................................................................... 1-6
Figure 3: The Planning Region .................................................................................................. 2-1
Figure 4: River Basins and Flood Areas .................................................................................... 2-3
Figure 5: Regional Topography .................................................................................................. 2-3
Figure 6: NRI Social Vulnerability Rating ................................................................................... 2-5
Figure 7: Regional Transportation Facilities ............................................................................. 2-12
Figure 8: Regional Transit Connections ................................................................................... 2-12
Figure 9: Modified Mercalli Intensity Levels\ .............................................................................. 3-6
Figure 10: Virginia Seismic Zones, Virginia Department of Energy ........................................... 3-7
Figure 11: Community Intensity Map, New Castle Earthquake 2019 ......................................... 3-8
Figure 12: Community Intensity Map, Roanoke County Earthquake 2021 ................................ 3-9
Figure 13: Community Intensity Map, North Carolina Earthquake 2020 .................................. 3-10
Figure 14: WBGT vs Heat Index, Weather.gov ........................................................................ 3-11
Figure 15: WBGT and Safety ................................................................................................... 3-12
Figure 16: Extreme Cold Days by Year, Roanoke, VA ............................................................. 3-14
Figure 17: Extreme Heat Days by Year, Roanoke, VA ............................................................. 3-14
Figure 18: Dam Classifications, FEMA .................................................................................... 3-34
Figure 19: Karst Map, VDEQ ................................................................................................... 3-44
Figure 20: EF Ratings Definitions, Weather.gov ...................................................................... 3-48
Figure 21: Tornado Paths, NOAA ............................................................................................ 3-51
Figure 22: NESIS Scale ........................................................................................................... 3-53
Figure 23: Water Supply Planning Areas, DEQ ....................................................................... 3-55
Figure 24: Earthquake Risk Mapping, USGS ............................................................................ 4-9
Figure 25: Urban Heat Island Effect, City of Roanoke ............................................................. 4-14
Figure 26: USGS Sinkhole Hotspots, Accessed 2025 ............................................................. 4-29
Figure 27: Regional Critical Facilities in Above-Average Landslide Susceptible Areas. .......... 4-30
Figure 28: Regional Vulnerable Facilities in Above-Average Landslide Susceptible Areas ..... 4-31
Figure 29: Landslide Susceptibility Model in the Region ......................................................... 4-32
Figure 30: Characteristic Fire Intensity Scale, VDOF .............................................................. 4-35
Figure 31: Total Mileage by Locality in 2024, VDOT ................................................................ 4-47
vi
Tables
Table 1: Steering Committee ...................................................................................................... 1-3
Table 2: Average High and Low Temperatures .......................................................................... 2-4
Table 3: Population Projections by Locality, CEDS 2025 ........................................................... 2-6
Table 4: Population Distribution by Age, CEDS 2025 ................................................................ 2-6
Table 5: Median Household Income, American Community Survey .......................................... 2-6
Table 6: 50 Largest Regional Employers ................................................................................... 2-7
Table 7: Number of Licensed and Staffed Beds in Area Hospitals, 2025 ................................... 2-8
Table 8: Priority Project Categories, CEDS 2025 ....................................................................... 2-8
Table 9: Regional Sewer and Septic Needs, VDH ................................................................... 2-14
Table 10: 2023 Tax Revenues from Travel, VTC...................................................................... 2-15
Table 11: Hazard Events and Locations ..................................................................................... 3-2
Table 12: FEMA Disaster Declarations since 2018 .................................................................... 3-4
Table 13: Flood Events per the NCEI Database, 2019-2024 ................................................... 3-19
Table 14: High Hazard Potential Dams .................................................................................... 3-38
Table 15: Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale, National Weather Service ........................... 3-41
Table 16: Infections, Hospitalizations, and Deaths due to COVID-19, 2020-2021 ................... 3-57
Table 17: All Hazards Ranking Table ......................................................................................... 4-4
Table 18: Expected Annual Loss and Exposure Values for Earthquake, NRI ............................ 4-7
Table 19: Annualized Frequency Values for Earthquakes, NRI .................................................. 4-8
Table 20: Homes Built Before 1970, ACS 5-Year Estimate 2023 ............................................. 4-10
Table 21: Hazard Ranking for Earthquake ............................................................................... 4-11
Table 22: Expected Annual Loss for Cold Wave, NRI .............................................................. 4-13
Table 23: Annualized Frequency of Cold Waves, NRI ............................................................. 4-15
Table 24: Social Vulnerability, NRI ........................................................................................... 4-15
Table 25: Vulnerable Populations by Age ................................................................................. 4-17
Table 26: Heating Fuel Source by Locality, ACS 5-year Estimates .......................................... 4-17
Table 27: Hazard Ranking for Extreme Temperature ............................................................... 4-18
Table 28: Estimated Annual Loss for Flooding, NRI ................................................................. 4-20
Table 29: WVWA Facilities in the Floodplain ............................................................................ 4-21
Table 30: Annualized Frequency for Flooding, NRI .................................................................. 4-21
Table 31: Repetitive Loss Structures by Locality, FEMA .......................................................... 4-23
Table 32: Hazard Ranking Table for Flooding .......................................................................... 4-25
Table 33: Expected Annual Loss, NRI ...................................................................................... 4-27
Table 34: Events on Record 2010-2021, NRI .......................................................................... 4-28
Table 35: Critical Facilities in Above-Average Landslide Susceptible Areas by Location ......... 4-33
Table 36: Vulnerable Facilities in Above-Average Landslide Susceptible Areas by Location .. 4-33
Table 37: Hazard Ranking for Geologic Hazards ..................................................................... 4-34
Table 38: Characteristic Fire Intensity, VDOF .......................................................................... 4-36
Table 39: Expected Annual Loss for Wildfire, National Risk Index ........................................... 4-37
Table 40: Annualized Frequency Value for Wildfire, NRI .......................................................... 4-38
Table 41: Housing Unit Risk, Virginia Department of Forestry ................................................. 4-39
Table 42: Hazard Ranking Table for Wildfire ............................................................................ 4-40
Table 43: Expected Annual Loss for Wind Events, NRI ........................................................... 4-41
Table 44: Annualized Frequency Value for Wind Events, NRI ................................................. 4-42
vii
Table 45: Mobile and Manufactured Homes, ACS 2019-2023 Estimates ................................ 4-43
Table 46: Hazard Ranking for Wind Events ............................................................................. 4-44
Table 47: Costs of a Winter Weather Event ............................................................................. 4-45
Table 48: Hazard Ranking for Winter Storm ............................................................................ 4-48
Table 49: Comparison of Revenue Across RVARC Member Local Governments ..................... 5-2
Table 50: Alleghany County Budget 2023, Commonwealth of Virginia ...................................... 5-3
Table 51: City of Covington Budget 2024 ................................................................................... 5-6
Table 52: Adopted Budget Town of Clifton Forge, 2025 ............................................................. 5-9
Table 53: Botetourt County Budget, 2024 ................................................................................ 5-11
Table 54: Craig County Budget 2024 ....................................................................................... 5-17
Table 55: Roanoke County Revenues, 2024 ........................................................................... 5-20
Table 56: City of Roanoke Revenues 2023 .............................................................................. 5-24
Table 57: City of Salem Revenues 2024 .................................................................................. 5-31
Table 58: RVARC Budget FY2026 ........................................................................................... 5-39
Chapter 1: The Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-1
Chapter 1. The Hazard Mitigation Plan
1.1 Overview of the Plan
The purpose of the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission Hazard Mitigation Plan is to
fulfill the Federal requirements for the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000. The plan identifies hazards;
estimates losses; and establishes community goals, objectives and mitigation activities that are
appropriate for the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany region and the various organizations which are
represented in this document.
The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (DMA 2000) requires that local governments, as a condition
of receiving federal disaster mitigation funds, have a mitigation plan that: describes the process
for identifying hazards, risks and vulnerabilities; identifies and prioritizes mitigation actions;
encourages the development of local mitigation; and provides technical support for those efforts.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) defines pre-disaster mitigation as any
sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to life and property from a hazard
event. Mitigation, also known as prevention, encourages long-term reduction of hazard
vulnerability. Mitigation should be cost-effective, appropriate for the community, and
environmentally sound. Mitigation activities can protect critical and vulnerable community
facilities, reduce exposure to liability, and minimize community disruption resulting from natural
disasters. The goal of mitigation is to save lives and reduce property damage, which in turn can
reduce the cost and impact of disasters across communities.
This plan incorporates the following jurisdictions. All of these jurisdictions have been active
participants in the plan.
Alleghany County
Botetourt County
Craig County
Roanoke County
City of Covington
City of Roanoke
City of Salem
Town of Buchanan
Town of Clifton Forge
Town of Fincastle
Town of Vinton
Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional
Commission
Roanoke Valley Resource Authority
Western Virginia Water Authority
The plan also covers the geographic area of the Towns of New Castle and Iron Gate. While New
Castle and Iron Gate did not meet the threshold of participation in this plan, their emergency
services efforts operate jointly with Craig County and Alleghany County respectively.
Chapter 1: The Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-2
1.2 Planning Process
The Steering Committee for this effort was made up of jurisdiction representatives and state and
federal agency representatives. However, consultation with numerous community stakeholders
occurred during planning. Public input was also a key element of the plan. The full details of
steering committee meetings, stakeholder engagement, and broader public input efforts are
available in Appendix A: Public Engagement and Appendix B: Survey Results.
Figure 1: Timeline of the Plan
Update Priorities
Proposed timelines for this process originally began in August 2023. However, numerous staffing
challenges delayed the start of work on this effort until August 2024 – one month before the
expiration of the 2019 plan. Additionally, new and more rigorous federal guidelines for document
development meant that large sections of this plan were developed from scratch. Additional
changes in local and regional staffing continued throughout the planning process.
Additionally, in September 2024, at the same time that the first stakeholder meeting was being
convened, Hurricane Helene struck Southwest Virginia. While most of the localities represented
by this plan sustained minimal damage, regional stakeholders were heavily involved in disaster
response efforts.
As a result of all of these challenges, the primary focus of this update is in right-sizing a new
regional vision of pre-disaster hazard mitigation and rebuilding programs and relationships
between jurisdictions and stakeholders.
Chapter 1: The Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-3
Table 1: Steering Committee
Locality Representatives
Locality Representative
Alleghany County Jonathan Fitch, Director of Public Safety
Melissa Munsey, Assistant to the County Administrator
City of Covington Allen Dressler, City Manager
Christopher Smith, Chief of Police & Public Safety Director
Town of Clifton Forge Chuck Unroe, Town Manager
Maria Saxton, Director of Planning and Community Development
Town of Iron Gate Kawhana Persinger, Mayor
Botetourt County Daniel Murray, Emergency Manager
Jason Ferguson, Fire and EMS Chief
Nicole Pendleton, Director of Community Development
Matt Lewis, Operations Support Coordinator
Nick Baker, Planner II
Town of Buchanan Jon Elistad, Town Manager
Angela Lawrence, Former Town Manager
Town of Fincastle Melanie Young McFadyen, Town Manager
Town of Troutville Michael Mansfield, Mayor
Craig County Dan Collins, County Administrator
Darryl Humphreys, Emergency Management Coordinator
Roanoke County Tarek Moneir, Director of Development Services
David Henderson, County Engineer (Retired)
Cindy Linkenhoker, Stormwater Program Manager
Butch Workman, Stormwater Operations Manager (Retired)
Dustin Campbell, Deputy Chief
Nickie Mills, Floodplain Manager
Philip Thompson, Director of Planning
Ross Hammes, Planner II
Chapter 1: The Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-4
Locality Representatives (continued)
Locality Representative
City of Roanoke Dwayne D'Ardenne, Tranportation Division Manager
Ian Shaw, Stormwater Manager
Laura Schmidt, Deputy Emergency Management Coordinator
Leigh Anne Weitzenfeld, Sustainability Coordinator
Mckenzie Brocker, Water Quality Administrator
Ross Campbell, Director of Public Works
Trevor Shannon, Battalion Chief
DeAnthony Pierce, Building Plans Examiner II
City of Salem Jeff Ceaser, Assistant Director Streets and General Maintenance
Mary Ellen H Wines, Planning and Zoning Administrator
Robert Paxton, Battalion Chief/Fire Marshal
Sam Driscoll, Stormwater Manager
William L. Simpson, Jr, Assistant Director Community Development
Town of Vinton Anita McMillan, Planning and Zoning Director
Nathan McClung, Assistant Planning and Zoning Director
Special Districts
Organization Representative
Western Virginia Water Authority Roger Blankenship, Director of Plant Assets
Tesha Okioga, Director of Engineering
Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Jon Lanford, Chief Executive Officer
State/Federal Agency Representatives
Agency Representative
NOAA Phil Hysell, Warning Coordination Meteorologist
Nicholas Fillo, Service Hydrologist
VDOF Dennis McCarthy, Area Forester
Rachel Kim, Community and Area Forester
VDEM
Cole Taggart, All Hazards Planner Region 6
Jonathan T. Simmons, Disaster Response and Recovery Officer
Mike Guzo, Chief Regional Coordinator
Chapter 1: The Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-5
Steering Committee
Between September 2024 and September 2025, the steering committee guided development of
the Hazard Mitigation Plan through a series of meetings focused on timeline management, plan
content, and stakeholder engagement. The process began with a kickoff meeting to discuss the
plan framework, timeline, and outreach strategy. Following Hurricane Helene, FEMA and VDEM
emphasized the urgency of applying for disaster mitigation funding. This prompted the committee
to prioritize eligibility requirements and expand participation requirements. Meetings which
occurred early in 2025 focused on public engagement and outreach while spring sessions
reviewed stakeholder input, survey results, and drafts of chapters. By May 2025, the committee
began to finalize chapter updates, preparing the plan for locality review and submission to VDEM
and FEMA ahead of the federal funding deadline in early December. Due to staffing constraints,
VDEM regional staff played a critical role in finalizing the plan, conducting final meetings with
locality staff which are documented in Appendix A. The final steering committee meeting was
held in September.
Stakeholder Engagement
In order to maximize stakeholder engagement, staff worked with various stakeholder groups
already convening in the region before engaging in some individual outreach. Membership of
these groups is included in Appendix A.
Groups Consulted
• Southwest Virginia Public Works Academy
• Roanoke Valley Collective Response Stakeholder Group
• Roanoke Foodshed Network
• Roanoke Regional Housing Network
• Roanoke Valley Transportation Technical Committee
Individual Organizations
• Alleghany Highlands Chamber of Commerce and Tourism
• CHIP of Roanoke Valley
• Roanoke Valley Rescue Mission
Many additional stakeholders could have been consulted in this planning process. In future
updates to the plan, the following stakeholders are recommended for outreach. Some of these
stakeholders may be interested in participating as special districts.
• Area hospitals, especially Roanoke Memorial Hospital
• Alleghany Highlands Economic Development Corporation
• Alleghany Highlands Public Schools
• Craig-Botetourt Electric Co-op
• Local Area Office on Aging
• RVARC Committee on Economic Development Strategies
• Roanoke Regional Airport
• Soil and Water Conservation Districts
• Valley Metro
Chapter 1: The Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-6
Public Input
Staff worked with the Steering Committee to design an electronic survey that was open from
February through March of 2025. Full details of survey responses are available in Appendix B.
The survey received 251 responses, a marked improvement from the 2019 plan. Ninety-five
percent of respondents identified as White. Only about 1.5 percent of respondents identified as
Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish in origin. Response by household income was more varied, about
13 percent of households reporting an income of less than $50,000. Responses were spread
across zip codes, but the vast majority of responses were seen in the City of Salem (zip code
24153) with 81 responses. Only 5 respondents stated they relied on public transit. Most of the
respondents owned their own home, with about 13 percent renting their home.
Flood was the greatest disaster of concern, followed by wind. This echoes results of the
vulnerability assessment. Earthquake, Karst and Landslide (the latter two collectively assessed)
were marked as of least concern.
Generally, respondents expressed increased concerns about natural disasters in the region
compared to five years ago.
Figure 2: Concern About Future Disaster Events
Chapter 1: The Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-7
1.3 Adoption of this Plan
The Virginia Department of Emergency Management (VDEM) was an active participant in
development of this plan and a key funding partner. VDEM representatives have reviewed this
plan and provided input on compliance with the 2025 Local Mitigation Policy Guide in the hopes
of streamlining the federal approval process.
The Policy Guide Checklist with relevant page numbers for each element is included in
Appendix I.
The plan was submitted for federal approval on October 10, 2025. Approval documentation
is included in Appendix J.
Resolutions by participating jurisdictions are included in Appendix J.
Chapter 1: The Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-8
1.4 Future Updates
This plan will be reviewed every year by the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission for
project progress and opportunities for implementation.
Annual review will be initiated by Regional Commission staff. Project updates will be provided
promptly by representatives from the respective jurisdictions incorporated into this plan.
The annual review will result in a project progress document which will be posted on a designated
Regional Commission public engagement site and shared with the participating jurisdictions and
the Regional Commission board. Public engagement around specific projects that reach
implementation stage will be provided by request of the jurisdiction that is primary on the project.
Success of the plan will be evaluated during the annual review by tracking progress on proposed
projects, including projects completed, substantial milestones reached, and grant dollars secured.
Metrics will be included in the annual project progress document but may also be included in the
Regional Commission’s annual report and other internal and external communication documents.
The Regional Commission will lead the five-year update process. Future five-year updates offer
opportunities for planning process improvements. While many of the complications in the planning
process for this update were due to staffing issues experienced at the Regional Commission,
some other areas for improvement in the next plan update include:
• Expanding outreach to unreached stakeholders identified in this planning process and
considering the creation of a formal stakeholder committee to inform the plan.
• Incorporating new special districts where appropriate and where interest exists.
• Increasing public input around project development and offering more consistent outreach
throughout the planning process, including at least two community meetings.
• Targeting broader public engagement efforts to underrepresented populations and census
tracts in innovative ways, including direct mailers and pop-ups in community spaces.
• Streamlining the project update process which can be facilitated by annual updates and
reviews of this document.
In addition, some potential improvements to the vulnerability assessment have been included as
projects in Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans.
Chapter 1: The Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-9
1.5 Implementation Opportunities
Many of the localities within the planning region may have capacity issues which challenge their
ability to implement this plan, as discussed in Chapter 5. One way to address these challenges
is to proactively identify projects which could benefit from technical assistance through the
Regional Commission.
The Regional Commission creates an annual budget and workprogram each year to identify
projects of regional significance or which are high priority for local technical assistance. Projects
identified in this plan as either of regional significance or as critical to a local government’s ability
to address hazards should be considered on an annual basis for incorporation into that document.
In the first round of project updates, the Regional Commission will work with member localities to
identify candidates for the FY2028 workprogram. This review will be conducted annually.
Chapter 1: The Hazard Mitigation Plan 1-10
[blank]
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile 2-1
Chapter 2. The Regional Profile
2.1 The Planning Region
The Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission service area lies in western Virginia and
includes the counties of Alleghany, Botetourt, Craig, Franklin and Roanoke; the cities of
Covington, Roanoke and Salem; and the towns of Boones Mill, Buchanan, Clifton Forge,
Fincastle, Iron Gate, New Castle, Rocky Mount, Troutville, and Vinton. The localities of Franklin
County, Boones Mill and Rocky Mount, are also served by West Piedmont Planning District
Commission, and are covered by that district’s plan. All other localities within the Roanoke Valley-
Alleghany service area will be covered by this document. These are the same localities that
participated in the 2006 and 2013 and 2019 iterations of this plan.
Communities within the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Region may have vastly different capacities
and planning ability, which is reflected in this plan. Unincorporated areas within broader
jurisdictions may be referenced where appropriate.
Figure 3: The Planning Region
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile 2-2
Location and Topography
The Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Region (the region) is on the eastern border of the Appalachian
Plateau and the western slope of the Blue Ridge Mountains. Two major river basins characterize
the region. The James River, flowing east through Botetourt County, ultimately reaches the
Chesapeake Bay and the Atlantic Ocean. The Roanoke River flows through the district in a
southeasterly direction to North Carolina before reaching the Atlantic. Both river basins serve as
development corridors. Although the planning area includes the Roanoke metropolitan area,
much of the region is rural. Approximately 212,039 acres of federal land lies within the National
Forest and Blue Ridge Parkway system.
The predominant physical characteristic of the region is the mountainous terrain. Forty-eight
percent of the land area has slopes of 25 percent or greater. Within the region, mountain ridges
run southwest to northeast. There are large concentrations of steep land in northern Botetourt
County and Alleghany County. A broken ring of steep lands surrounds the Roanoke metropolitan
area. Past development has been influenced greatly by topographic characteristics. The higher
elevations have remained in open or forest use while the more moderate foothills and river valleys
have been developed.
Floodplains impose considerable restraints on land development activities. In the past, heavy
flooding has caused considerable property damage to existing development in floodplains. The
region has several major floodplain areas along the Roanoke, James and Jackson Rivers, and
the Peters, Mason, Carvin, Tinker, Glade, Mud Lick and Smith Creeks.
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile 2-3
Figure 5: Regional Topography
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile Page | 2-4
Climate
The region is located in agricultural zones 7a and 7b and is characterized by hot, wet summers,
cold winters with mild to moderate precipitation, and fluctuating shoulder seasons. Summer high
temperatures average around the mid-80s across the region, with higher temperatures in the
urbanized areas of the Roanoke Valley. Winter low temperatures average in the 40s in the coldest
months of December and January, with colder temperatures felt in the higher elevations of the
Alleghany Highlands. The area receives significant annual rainfall, with annual averages in the
Roanoke Valley typically around 40 inches per year according to National Weather Service
records.
Table 2: Average High and Low Temperatures
Daily average high and low temperatures (°F)
High
Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
Roanoke 46 50 59 69 76 83 86 85 78 68 58 49
Covington 43 46 56 66 74 80 84 82 76 66 56 46
Low
Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec
Roanoke 30 32 40 48 56 64 68 67 60 49 40 34
Covington 27 29 37 46 54 62 66 65 58 47 38 31
Data from Weatherspark.com, accessed 5/15/25.
Population
In 2023, the overall population of the region was around 280,000 people, with the majority of
residents located in the City of Roanoke and Roanoke County. Key demographic factors to assess
in a community’s resilience to hazards include age and income. These factors can indicate
vulnerability to shocks – for example, a family with children may have a harder time relocating or
require more services at a public shelter; the elderly often have special medical needs; and
households with low income can face inhibited options post-disaster and require more public
assistance. Tables 3 through 5 show basic population data for the region.
Much of the population in Alleghany County, Botetourt County, and the Town of Clifton Forge is
aging, with the median age being 48 years or older. This is ten years older than the median age
across the Commonwealth. As this trend progresses over the lifetime of this planning document,
it will likely have impacts on how hazard mitigation and response are carried out in these localities.
There is a projected increase in population across the region in the next 25 years. However, some
localities, including Alleghany and Craig Counties, are projected to see a fall in population, likely
due to aging and internal migration.
The National Risk Index displays information about social vulnerability based off the CDC Social
Vulnerability Index. Highest levels of social vulnerability occur in the Cities of Roanoke and
Covington.
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile Page | 2-5
Figure 6: NRI Social Vulnerability Rating
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile Page | 2-6
Table 3: Population Projections by Locality, CEDS 2025
Locality 2023 2030 2040 2050
Alleghany County* 11,479 13,993 12,805 11,809
Botetourt County 33,875 33,556 34,588 36,138
Craig County 4,881 4,528 4,363 4,264
Roanoke County* 89,755 100,027 104,046 109,621
City of Covington 5,671 5,434 5,075 4,792
City of Roanoke 98,677 101,514 102,529 105,079
City of Salem 25,477 25,519 25,438 25,737
Town of Clifton Forge 3,483 - - -
Town of Vinton 8,038 - - -
RVARC Region 280,336 284,571 288,844 297,440
Virginia 8,657,499 9,129,002 9,759,371 10,535,810
*Excludes Town of Clifton Forge. Excludes Town of Vinton population.
Table 4: Population Distribution by Age, CEDS 2025
Locality
Alleghany
County* 48.1 603 2,268 2,420 3,211 2,338 3,801
53.5 231 607 589 640 524 892
Virginia 38.8 495,281 1,410,160
Table 5: Median Household Income, American Community Survey
Locality Median Household Income
Alleghany County $ 52,546.00
Botetourt County $ 77,680.00
Craig County $ 66,286.00
Covington City $ 45,737.00
Roanoke City $ 51,523.00
Roanoke County $ 80,872.00
Salem City $ 68,402.00
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile Page | 2-7
Development Trends
The region contains a significant portion of the Roanoke, Virginia Metropolitan Statistical Area,
which includes the counties of Botetourt, Craig, Roanoke and Franklin, the Cities of Roanoke and
Salem. This is the fourth largest MSA in Virginia and the largest in the western half of the state.
Most of the region’s largest employers are in the industries of government, healthcare, education,
banking and insurance, and retail.
Table 6: 50 Largest Regional Employers
1. Roanoke Memorial Community Hospital 26. City of Salem School Board
2. HCA Virginia Health System 27. Carter Machinery Company
3. Roanoke County School Board 28. Marvin Windows
4. U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs 29. Yokohama Tire Corp.
5. Wal Mart 30. Roanoke College
6. Carilion Services 31. YMCA
7. City of Roanoke 32. Lake Region Medical
8. Roanoke City School Board 33. County of Franklin
9. Kroger 34. VDOT
10. Wells Fargo Bank NA 35. Alleghany Highlands Public Schools
11. County of Roanoke 36. Carilion Healthcare
12. Cornerstone Building Brands Service 37. Dynax America Corporation
13. U.P.S. 38. Adams Construction Company
14. Franklin County School Board 39. Davis H. Elliot Company, Inc.
15. Alliance Group Rock Tenn 40. Steel Dynamics Roanoke Bar Div
16. Altec Industries Inc 41. Coca Cola Bottling Company
17. Friendship Manor 42. Bimbo Bakeries USA INC
18. Postal Service 43. Paychecks Plus
19. Advance Auto Parts 44. Virginia Western Community College
20. Botetourt County School Board 45. Branch Highways
21. Virginia Transformer Corporation 46. County of Botetourt
22. Food Lion 47. Franklin Memorial Hospital
23. Lowes' Home Centers, Inc. 48. US Foodservice
24. Elbit Systems of America - Night Vision 49. Metalsa Roanoke
25. City of Salem 50. Mcdonald’s
Source: Virginia Employment Commission, Economic Information & Analytics, Quarterly Census of Employment and
Wages (QCEW), 3rd Quarter (July, August, September) 2024. Note: Data includes all localities within Roanoke Valley-
Alleghany Regional Commission service area.
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile Page | 2-8
Of particular interest to this planning effort is the importance of healthcare to the regional
economy. Carilion Medical Center (also known as Roanoke Memorial Hospital) is one of only six
Level I Trauma Centers in the Commonwealth. It is also one of only three Level I Pediatric Trauma
Centers. Disruptions to service at Roanoke Memorial Hospital can have far-reaching effects
across the Southwest Virginia region. Nearby LewisGale Medical Center in Salem is a Level II
Trauma Center. Both facilities may provide critical services in disaster events to communities
outside of the Roanoke Valley – Alleghany Region. Table 7 shows staffed and licensed beds for
area hospitals, which can be used to assess capacity in disaster events. Nearby hospitals outside
of the service area include Carilion New River Valley Medical Center, LewisGale Montgomery,
Carilion Franklin Memorial, and Carilion Rockbridge Community, and, further afield, Centra
General Hospital and UVA Medical Center.
Table 7: Number of Licensed and Staffed Beds in Area Hospitals, 2025
Hospital Number of Staffed Beds Number of Licensed Beds
Carilion Medical Center 694 752
LewisGale Salem 321 506
LewisGale Alleghany 110 205
Totals 1,125 1,463
The RVARC produces a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy document every five
years which should be referenced to better understand the economic picture of the region. Key
project areas from the 2025 CEDS are included in Table 8. A full list of projects can be found in
the CEDS document.
Table 8: Priority Project Categories, CEDS 2025
Priority Project Categories
1. Develop regional broadband infrastructure and increased connectivity.
2. Encourage and develop advanced manufacturing facilities
3. Focus for workforce development programs to meet needs in target industry
sectors.
4. Focus on transportation infrastructure: Roanoke-
Amtrak, highways, and commuting
5. Continue success in outdoor tourism with regional and local greenway systems,
Explore Park
6. Support and encourage industrial site development and upgrades.
7. Develop a wider range of homeownership and rental housing opportunities.
8. Promote and encourage attraction of biotech and life sciences clusters
9. Support local agriculture, growers, and producers.
10. Perform a gap analysis to develop regional quality of life amenities.
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile Page | 2-9
Local governments were asked to provide building permit data to help clarify development
patterns in the region. The following overview reflects building trends including new construction,
demolitions, and improved parcels from 2019 to September 2025.
Internal tracking systems vary widely among jurisdictions, and in some cases, data are incomplete
or inconsistent across time periods. Some localities do not distinguish between types of structures
when measuring improvements (e.g. homes vs. mobile home hookups vs. storage units). Others
provided only parcel data while some reported only structures built before a certain time, current
occupied housing units, or buildings which receive refuse collection. Some localities were not able
to provide this data. As a result, the dataset may not capture the full extent of building activity and
development across years or jurisdictions.
• Alleghany County
o 7,123 buildings recorded in the 2019 refuse collection file; 6,439 in the 2025 refuse
collection file.
o 65 demolitions recorded in this period.
• Clifton Forge
o There has been very little growth since 1990.
o Residential Historic Overlay District with 730 contributing structures; Commercial
Historic Overlay District with 77 contributing structures.
o Currently 13 churches, 109 commercial buildings, and 140 vacant buildings.
• Craig County
o 232 building permits from 2019-2025 (over 256 sq ft).
o 34 units were demolished in this period.
• Roanoke County
o 67,425 buildings before 2019.
o 72,832 buildings in 2025.
o 203 demolitions recorded in this period.
• City of Roanoke
o 1,018 building permits issued for new residential and commercial structures
(including accessory structures and 82 demolitions) since January 1, 2020.
• City of Salem
o 10,582 parcels (9,565 improved) in 2019.
o 10,650 parcels (9,690 improved) in 2025.
o 20 demolitions recorded in this period.
• Town of Vinton
o Steady decline in building permits since 2008.
o As of 2022, there were 3,686 occupied housing units.
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile Page | 2-10
Historic and Cultural Resources
Virginia has a deep cultural history, and this portion of Virginia is no exception. The service area
is located within Southwest Virginia and shares cultural ties to the wider Appalachian region. For
many communities, historic and cultural resources are a catalyst for economic development and
source of pride for residents. Historic properties can be located throughout a locality and the
number of structures varies widely. The potentially devastating effects that flooding and other
disasters can have on historic properties are not always considered in mitigation planning. More
information about specific considerations of hazard mitigation on historic properties is included in
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment.
Local governments should work with the Virginia Department of Historic Resources, VDEM, and
local preservation groups to identify historic buildings and sites in need of hazard mitigation.
These efforts should follow the guidance in Integrating Historic Property and Cultural Resource
Considerations into Hazard Mitigation Planning (FEMA 386-6).
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile Page | 2-11
2.2 Infrastructure and Critical Facilities
Infrastructure
Several infrastructure elements contribute to a robust regional socioeconomic space. These
elements affect how people get around, how they meet basic needs, and how they access
employment.
Transportation
Interstate 64 bisects Alleghany County in an east-west direction while passing through the City of
Covington and Town of Clifton Forge. Interstate 81 crosses Botetourt and Roanoke counties in a
northeast-southwest direction and includes an urban connector I-581 that links I-81 to the central
business district of the City of Roanoke. Other arterial routes in the area include US 11 in Botetourt
and Roanoke counties; US 60 in Alleghany County; US 220 passing through Alleghany, Botetourt,
and Roanoke counties; US 221 and 460 in Roanoke County; and State Primary Route 311 in
Alleghany and Craig counties.
Air service is available at the Roanoke Regional Airport that provides nonstop service from
Roanoke, Virginia to nine major cities. Rail service for freight is provided by the Buckingham
Branch Railroad, CSX Transportation and Norfolk Southern Railway. Passenger train service is
available from Amtrak at stations in the Town of Clifton Forge and City of Roanoke, and an
additional passenger rail station is planned in Christiansburg, with rights-of-way managed by the
Virginia Passenger Rail Authority. There are also several fixed-route bus lines in the region.
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile Page | 2-12
Figure 7: Regional Transportation Facilities
Figure 8: Regional Transit Connections
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile Page | 2-13
Housing
The region faces a housing shortage as the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Housing Market
Study Analysis (2021). The biggest challenges to the regional housing market are identified as
follows:
• The Region's population has been slowly but consistently growing over the last 50 years,
with the percentage of the elderly population increasing.
• One, two, and three-person households comprise the largest share of households in the
Region, but over the last five years, more growth has occurred in larger households of four
or more people.
• The number of vacant units has been increasing in the Region. This, in part, has been
driven by the seasonal home market, which accounts for 30% of all vacant units.
• Nearly 82% of housing units in the Region were constructed before 1980, leaving the
Region with a much older housing stock than what is found in many other parts of the
Commonwealth.
• Over the last five years, the median gross rent in the Region increased by 14%. The
average rent for a single-family home is around $1,000 per month, while rent in multifamily
buildings averaged $1,200 per month.
• There are significant differences in the percentage of renter of owner households
classified as cost burdened across the Region. Approximately 20% of owner households
are experiencing some level of cost burden compared to 41% of renters. It is typical to see
a broad difference between these two groups, but it also speaks to the need for affordably
priced housing for renter households.
• The number of renter households that qualify for affordable rental housing at the 30% of
AMI level exceeds the number of units available at that price point. There is a projected
deficit of 5,324 units, meaning many extremely low-income households are having to
spend more than is recommended on housing costs. This further exacerbates housing
affordability and cost burden challenges.
The CEDS offers a more updated overview of housing statistics, including annual home sales and
estimated vacancy rates.
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile Page | 2-14
Utilities
The region contains three major electricity providers, Appalachian Power, Dominion Power, and
Craig-Botetourt Electric Co-op. The City of Salem also operates a substation. Roanoke Gas and
Columbia Gas are other major energy service providers in the region. This form of infrastructure
relies on long, linear facilities often bracketed by substations. The location of these facilities can
impact development in the region. Major energy production projects such as large-scale wind and
solar are a new type of development that continues to expand in the area. Mountain Valley
Pipeline is another key infrastructure project which has provided additional natural gas service to
the region.
Disruptions to energy can have disproportionate impacts on vulnerable populations. Energy
service provision is a key first step in post-disaster response, and future involvement of these
stakeholders in hazard mitigation plans is recommended.
Clean water and sanitation are also key concerns following a disaster event. While regional water
supply planning is mandated by the state, a high level overview of drought as a hazard is included
in Chapter 3: Hazard Identification. Key players in the provision of water and sanitation include
the Western Virginia Water Authority (WVWA), which provides water and sewer services to much
of the service area, including the City of Roanoke, Roanoke County, Botetourt County, the Town
of Fincastle, and the Town of Vinton. Additionally, the Craig-New Castle PSA, which provides
water and sewer services to Craig County and the Town of New Castle, has recently entered into
an administration agreement with WVWA. WVWA is a special district included in this plan.
Additional water and sewer provision is provided by Alleghany County, the Cities of Covington
and Salem, and the Towns of Buchanan, Clifton Forge, Iron Gate, and Troutville. Small private
service providers also exist in the region.
In December of 2023 the Virginia Department of Health published a report on infrastructure needs
which focuses on sewer and on-site facilities such as septic. This report estimates that $288
million of investment are needed to maintain or improve current systems across the RVARC
service area. Many sewage processing facilities are located near rivers and streams. Septic
systems are also vulnerable to flooding, which can have downstream impacts on water quality
and cause ripple effects for the community. These cost estimates are valuable data points in
posing future projects and solutions for the region, including hazard mitigation projects.
Table 9: Regional Sewer and Septic Needs, VDH
Locality Community Needs Onsite Needs Total Needs
Alleghany $ 9,344,076.00 $ 18,631,769.00 $ 27,975,845.00
Botetourt $ 6,857,960.00 $ 44,805,866.00 $ 51,663,826.00
Covington $ 5,605,860.00 $ 207,632.00 $ 5,813,492.00
Craig $ - $ 6,752,172.00 $ 6,752,172.00
Roanoke County $ - $ 168,614,006.00 $ 168,614,006.00
Roanoke City $ - $ 9,335,610.00 $ 9,335,610.00
Salem $ 17,593,337.00 $ 569,056.00 $ 18,162,393.00
Total $ 39,401,233.00 $ 248,916,111.00 $ 288,317,344.00
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile Page | 2-15
Outdoor Recreation Facilities
Outdoor recreation is a key part of the regional economy with more than $42 million in local tax
revenue coming from visitors to the region. Greenways and trails are often located in areas
particularly vulnerable to disaster events, such as on steep slopes or in floodplains. The
Appalachian Trail is a key draw to the region, but other facilities of note include Carvins Cove, the
Explore Park, the Roanoke Valley greenway network, the Jackson River Trail, Douthat State Park,
the Blue Ridge Parkway, and the George Washington and Jefferson National Forests.
Table 10: 2023 Tax Revenues from Travel, VTC
Locality 2023 Tax Revenue
Alleghany $ 1,236,865.00
Botetourt $ 3,104,204.00
Craig $ 145,191.00
Roanoke City $ 24,463,510.00
While much of the public lands in the area are managed by federal and state partners, local
governments maintain numerous parks and trails in the region, including the Explore Park,
Carvins Cove, and the greenway network. Managing these facilities is a significant part of local
budgets, and even relatively mild storm events can have a disproportionate impact on staff time
and materials costs. In some cases, greenway and park networks serve as transportation
infrastructure for those who use alternative transportation to commute.
Chapter 2: The Regional Profile Page | 2-16
Critical and Vulnerable Facilities
Critical Facilities are those that provide services to the public during an emergency. Examples
of this include Public Safety structures, Public Assembly Sites & Shelters, Medical Structures,
Utility Structures, and Transportation Structures.
Vulnerable Facilities are those that will require special attention during an emergency. Examples
of this include Large Scale Housing Complexes of 50 or more total units or those with elderly or
sick residents, Child / Day Care Facilities, Manufacturing Sites / Warehouses, and Tier 2 Facilities.
These definitions collectively fulfill the requirement for critical facilities listings for pre-disaster
hazard mitigation planning and the community rating system program.
A full listing of Critical and Vulnerable Facilities identified in this plan is included in Appendix G.
High hazard dams are also included in this plan and references to these facilities are located in
Chapter 3, Section 3.4; Chapter 4, Section 4.3; and Appendix H.
Critical Facilities Vulnerable Facilities
•
Enforcement, etc.
•
Centers, etc.
•
Pharmacies etc.
• Utility Structures: Pumps, Wells, Water
Treatment, Power Generation, etc.
•
Transit Hubs, Evacuations Routes, etc.
•
Living Homes, Recovery Care, etc.
• Child / Day Care Facilities
•
Potential for dangerous Materials
• Tier 2 Facilities
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-1
Chapter 3. Hazard Identification
3.1 Hazards for Assessment
The region is subject to a variety of hazard events, many of which will be assessed in this
document. The following kinds of hazard events have been documented through the NCEI
database maintained by NOAA.
• Debris Flow
• Drought
• Extreme Cold/Wind Chill
• Flash Flood
• Flood
• Hail
• Heavy Rain
• Heavy Snow
• High Wind
• Lightning
• Strong Wind
• Thunderstorm Wind
• Tornado
• Winter Storm
• Winter Weather
The locations and number of events for each of these hazard events is visible in Table 1: Hazard
Events and Locations.
The Steering Committee identified several hazards for assessment in the plan based off of this
data, federal disaster declarations included in Table 2, and historic hazard assessments.
• Extreme Temperature
• Flooding
• Hurricane and Tropical Storm
• Wind Event
• Winter Storm
Additional hazards which will be assessed will include:
• Earthquake
• Karst
• Landslide
• Wildfire
Hazards not assessed in this document include drought and pandemics. High hazard potential
dams are assessed under flooding unless otherwise noted, with supplementary materials
contained in Appendix H.
The 2019 Plan details all historic disaster declarations and disaster events by hazard. This
document will only provide details around disaster events which have occurred since the data
collected in the 2019 Plan, or historic events which can provide key learning for hazard mitigation.
A comprehensive record of all events since data collection began is not the aim of this chapter.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-2
Table 11: Hazard Events and Locations
Event Types Events Event Types Events
ROANOKE CITY 1 (ZONE) 1
Drought 11 (ZONE) 1
BOTETOURT (ZONE) 3 (ZONE) 5
CRAIG (ZONE) 3 (ZONE) 5
Chill 3 (ZONE) 20
ALLEGHANY CO. 2 CITY 1
CRAIG CO. 1 (ZONE) 2
ROANOKE CITY 6 (ZONE) 3
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-3
Event Types Events Event Types Events
Flood 37 Wind 168
Hail 27 CITY 2
ROANOKE CITY 2 (ZONE) 6
SALEM CITY 2 (ZONE) 7
ALLEGHANY CO. 1 (ZONE) 7
CRAIG CO. 3 (ZONE) 2
ROANOKE CO. 4 (ZONE) 1
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-4
Table 12: FEMA Disaster Declarations since 2018
Declaration Date Incident Type Title or Name Affected Areas
Friday, April 4, 2025 Severe Storm WINTER
FLOODING
Craig (County)
Tuesday, October 1, 2024 Tropical Storm TROPICAL
STORM HELENE
Botetourt (County)
Sunday, September 29, 2024 Tropical Storm
POST-TROPICAL
CYCLONE
HELENE
Craig (County)
Thursday, April 2, 2020 Biological COVID-19
PANDEMIC
Alleghany (County)
Friday, March 13, 2020 Biological COVID-19
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-5
3.2 Earthquake
Definition of Hazard
An earthquake is a sudden, rapid shaking of the Earth caused by the breaking and shifting of rock
beneath the Earth's surface. Ground shaking from earthquakes can collapse buildings and
bridges; disrupt gas, electric, and phone service; and sometimes trigger landslides, avalanches,
flash floods, and fires. Buildings with foundations resting on unconsolidated landfill and other
unstable soil as well as trailers and homes not tied to their foundations are at risk because they
can be shaken off their mountings during an earthquake. When an earthquake occurs in a
populated area, it may cause deaths and injuries and extensive property damage.
Ground movement during an earthquake is seldom the direct cause of death or injury. Most
earthquake-related injuries result from falls, collapsing walls, flying glass, and falling objects.
Much of the damage in earthquakes is predictable and preventable. Primary impacts from
earthquakes are structural damage and loss of life.
There are two common ways of measuring earthquake intensity. The Modified Mercalli Intensity
Scale, composed of 12 increasing levels of intensity that range from imperceptible shaking to
catastrophic destruction, is a value assigned to a specific site after an earthquake has occurred,
and is assigned based on the severity of the effects of the event. The lower numbers of the
intensity scale generally deal with the way the earthquake is felt by people. The higher numbers
of the scale are based on observed structural damage. Structural engineers usually contribute
information for assigning intensity values of VIII or above. In contrast, the more common Richter
scale is used to scientifically measure an earthquake’s magnitude, regardless of impact, based
on the energy released by the event.
The Virginia Tech Seismological Observatory (VTSO) operates a digital seismic network with
stations in Virginia and southern West Virginia. Along with other southeastern regional seismic
networks and the U.S. National Seismic Network (USNSN), VTSO contributes to earthquake
monitoring, information dissemination and seismic hazard assessment objectives in the
southeastern United States. In 1991, Virginia Tech combined with other institutions in North
Carolina and Tennessee to form the Southern Appalachian Cooperative Seismic Network to
coordinate earthquake monitoring and data exchange.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-6
people do not recognize it as an earthquake. Standing motor cars may rock slightly.
Vibrations similar to the passing of a truck. Duration estimated.
Dishes, windows, doors disturbed; walls make cracking sound. Sensation like heavy truck
striking building. Standing motor cars rocked noticeably.
objects overturned. Pendulum clocks may stop.
plaster. Damage slight.
in well-built ordinary structures; considerable damage in poorly built or badly designed
structures; some chimneys broken.
substantial buildings with partial collapse. Damage great in poorly built structures. Fall of
chimneys, factory stacks, columns, monuments, walls. Heavy furniture overturned.
collapse. Buildings shifted off foundations.
destroyed with foundations. Rails bent.
greatly.
Figure 9: Modified Mercalli Intensity Levels\
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-7
Historic Event Descriptions
The southern portion of the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Region is part of the Giles County Seismic
Zone, including the Cities of Roanoke and Salem, the Counties of Craig, Roanoke, and the
southern portion of Botetourt, and the Town of Vinton. Map 1 shows data collected by the Virginia
Department of Emergency Management, where historical event information was used to
approximate the three seismic zones across the Commonwealth.
Figure 10: Virginia Seismic Zones, Virginia Department of Energy
Since 1774, the year of the earliest documented Virginia earthquake, there have been over 300
earthquakes in or near the Commonwealth. Of those, 18 earthquakes had reports of intensity VI
or higher. The largest earthquake in Virginia was the 1897 Giles County shock which registered
an intensity of VIII. It was felt over 11 states (approximately 280,000 square miles). The estimated
magnitude for this event was 5.8, making it the third largest earthquake in the eastern United
States in the last 200 years (second largest in the southeastern U.S.). On August 23, 2011, a
magnitude 5.8 earthquake occurred 5 miles south-southwest of Mineral, Virginia (150 miles
northeast of Roanoke). The Mineral event was Virginia’s strongest earthquake in over a century.
While several small quakes have occurred, no major earthquakes have occurred in Virginia since
2011.
There have only been two earthquakes with epicenters in the planning area since the last update
of this plan. One occurred near New Castle at a magnitude of 2.5 in December of 2019. The
second occurred near the Roanoke County and Montgomery County border at a magnitude of
2.6 in September of 2021. Neither registered as higher than III or IV on the Mercalli Intensity
Scale. One earthquake affected the region with an epicenter outside of the region. On August 9,
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-8
2020 a magnitude 5.1 earthquake struck near the Virginia border of North Carolina, with effects
felt throughout the study area.
There has not been a Presidential or State Disaster Declaration in the planning region for
earthquakes.
Figure 11: Community Intensity Map, New Castle Earthquake 2019
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-9
Figure 12: Community Intensity Map, Roanoke County Earthquake 2021
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-10
Figure 13: Community Intensity Map, North Carolina Earthquake 2020
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-11
3.3 Extreme Temperature
Definition of Hazard
As described in Section 3.1, for the purposes of this plan Extreme Temperature will mean both
extreme heat and extreme cold. While some strategies to address extreme heat and extreme cold
may differ, the general strategies of weatherization, temperature control in the home, and
emergency shelters remain consistent across these disaster events.
There is no unified definition of extreme heat, and there are numerous ways to evaluate potential
heat stress. The wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT) is an international standard of measurement
that is often utilized by athletic programs and is best suited for those performing strenuous activity
outside. This measurement factors in solar radiation, temperature, relative humidity, and wind
speed. The heat index, more commonly seen in cell phone applications available to average
citizens, does not factor in solar radiation or wind speed, but does factor in relative humidity. This
is a more suitable temperature for assessing impacts of heat on indoor, unconditioned spaces.0F
1
The climate of the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Region is subject to high levels of humidity, meaning
that actual WBGT is likely higher than both the measured temperature and the heat index. Studies
of heat impacts do exist in the study area and focus primarily on urban heat island effect.
Figure 14: WBGT vs Heat Index, Weather.gov
Per the EPA, heat is the leading cause of weather-related death in the United States.1F
2 Further
methods of evaluating heat and heat impacts should be assessed. For the purposes of this plan,
extreme heat will be defined as daytime high temperatures in excess of 90 degrees Fahrenheit.
Extreme heat most often affects individual health, especially of the elderly, children, homeless
populations, and people with underlying health issues, but may also affect worker productivity,
infrastructure such as roads and the electric grid, and cause excess energy consumption. Such
impacts are further assessed in Chapter 4.
1 (National Weather Service)
2 (Environmental Protection Agency, 2025)
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-12
Figure 15: WBGT and Safety
Similar to extreme heat, there is no unified definition of extreme cold. The way heat or cold is felt
likely depends on a variety of factors, including acclimatization of the individual. Factors such as
wind speed and humidity can affect how cold is felt in the body the same way that they can
exacerbate high temperatures. Extreme cold can have additional impacts on infrastructure
beyond those experienced with extreme heat, including most commonly frozen pipes. Frozen
pipes can cause a lack of access to clean, potable water, as seen in Richmond in January of
2025, and extensive property damage if not quickly identified and addressed. More information
on impacts of extreme cold is available in Chapter 4.
For the purposes of this plan, extreme cold will be defined as daytime high temperatures of 32
degrees or less.
Collectively, extreme temperature will be defined as days when high temperatures are greater
than 90 degrees or less than 32 degrees Fahrenheit. As this is the first time this hazard has been
assessed in an RVARC plan, all historic instances for which there is existing data are included in
this section.
Historic Event Descriptions
Historical temperature data is available from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) going back to 1948. Since that time, the Roanoke region has experienced
1,855 days of temperatures above 90 degrees Fahrenheit and 510 days of highs at or below 32
degrees Fahrenheit. Extreme heat days average around 24 days per year over this time period.
In the last ten years, extreme heat days have averaged 32 days per year. In contrast, the annual
average number of extreme cold days has been only 7 days per year, with the number dropping
to 5 days a year in the past ten years.
The Commonwealth has declared a state of emergency in the past due to winter weather, but no
declarations in the past five years dealt solely with extreme cold. Winter weather is further
analyzed later in this chapter.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-13
Average daily lows can better reflect extreme heat in some cases, especially in urban areas. The
City of Roanoke undertook a heat island mapping study which provided more insight into the
effects of heat on City residents. More details of this mapping can be found on the Urban Heat
Island Effect page of the City’s website. Further discussion of the City’s work in this area will be
included in Chapter 4: Risk Assessment.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-14
Figure 16: Extreme Cold Days by Year, Roanoke, VA
Figure 17: Extreme Heat Days by Year, Roanoke, VA
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
19
4
8
19
5
1
19
5
4
19
5
7
19
6
0
19
6
3
19
6
6
19
6
9
19
7
2
19
7
5
19
7
8
19
8
1
19
8
4
19
8
7
19
9
0
19
9
4
19
9
7
20
0
0
20
0
4
20
0
8
20
1
1
20
1
4
20
1
7
20
2
2
Extreme Cold Days by Year
Extreme Cold Days Number of Days
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
19
4
8
19
5
1
19
5
4
19
5
7
19
6
0
19
6
3
19
6
6
19
6
9
19
7
2
19
7
5
19
7
8
19
8
1
19
8
4
19
8
7
19
9
0
19
9
3
19
9
6
19
9
9
20
0
2
20
0
5
20
0
8
20
1
1
20
1
4
20
1
7
20
2
0
20
2
3
Extreme Heat Days by Year
Number of Hot Days
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-15
3.4 Flooding
Definition of Hazard
Widespread flooding or flash flooding impacts a large portion of the region. Watersheds in the
Roanoke Valley-Alleghany region are typical of the Blue Ridge region in which smaller streams
collect water which then flows through steep terrain, picking up velocity, and into the valleys and
flatlands along major rivers where development has occurred. The flood plains throughout these
mountainous areas are narrow, averaging less than 250 feet in most areas. These are also the
only flat areas where development could take place in this mountainous region. Most flood-
producing storms generally occur in the winter and spring. However, flooding due to intense local
thunderstorms or tropical disturbances can occur in any season.
Flood hazard areas, along with repetitive loss clusters, dams, flood prone roads, rain gauges and
other relevant spatial information for each jurisdiction participating in the plan are mapped in
Appendix D: Flood Hazard Areas.
It is important to note that the Regional Commission was not provided data regarding repetitive
loss property locations by FEMA due to a variety of issues, including the federal shutdown in
2025. Contact was made to FEMA during drafting and again in the revision process. The data in
Appendix D has been provided piecemeal from local governments where it has been updated and
otherwise reflects data available from the 2019 update.
Historic Event Descriptions
Alleghany County has experienced floods since its original settlement. Large floods occurred in
1877, 1913, 1936, 1969, 1972, 1973 and 1985. Hurricane Jeanne caused severe storms and
flooding in October 2004. Flood damage in the area is typically concentrated in and near
Covington and Clifton Forge. Because of the rural nature of the county, damages from flooding
are widespread. Damage occurs to roads, bridges, and public facilities such as schools.
The Jackson River flows through the City of Covington, towns of Clifton Forge and Iron Gate and
the communities of Low Moor and Selma. Gathright Dam, constructed in 1974, partially controls
flooding along the Jackson River. Despite this, floods still occur. Covington experienced large
floods on November 1877, March 1913, March 1936, March 1967, August 1969 (Hurricane
Camille), 1972 (Tropical Storm Agnes), March and December 1973, and November 1985. Tropical
Storm Agnes was the most severe of the events with as much as one-third of the city underwater.
In all, one church, three public buildings, two industrial plants, 8 commercial buildings, and 490
private residences were damaged. In November 1985, a 100-year frequency rainstorm caused a
reported $17 million in damages in the City of Covington.
The US Army Corps of Engineers, 1986 report titled Flood Control Study, Jackson River, Lower
Jackson Street Residential Area, Covington, provides information about the major flood that
occurred in November 1985. An approximate 90-year flood event resulted in residential,
commercial, and municipal damage in the lower Jackson Street / Rayon Terrace neighborhood.
Residential losses included yard, basement, and first-floor damage in sixty-four (64) homes and
four (4) businesses. Municipal damage included debris in the city park, a sewage pump station
and damage to a storm sewer. Total residential, commercial and municipal damage were
estimated at $544,000. Structural and non-structural alternatives for this section of the city were
explored in a cost-benefit analysis and found to be infeasible.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-16
Floods used in the 1978 Federal Insurance Administration study to describe the impact on the
town of Clifton Forge include the Flood of 1950 and Flood of 1969 - both of which occurred prior
to construction of Gathright Dam. The 1950 flood included the flooding of basements, a
lumberyard, and the armory. The town’s water supply was cut off when two water mains were
washed away.
Smith Creek flows north to south though the residential and commercial center of the Town of
Clifton Forge. In Clifton Forge, residential, public, and commercial development are concentrated
on both sides of Smith Creek. A number of large commercial buildings in the downtown area have
been constructed directly over Smith Creek. Floods have inundated portions of this land in the
past, and a substantially greater area is within reach of larger floods in the future. The 1969 Smith
Creek flooding caused the evacuation of 40 families and caused over $200,000 in damage to
town owned property.
Numerous flood events have been recorded in the Upper James River Basin in the counties of
Alleghany, Botetourt and Craig. The following water bodies in the basin have flooded: Dunlap
Creek, Potts Creek, Cowpasture River, Johns Creek, Craig Creek, and Catawba Creek. Records
show a history of major and frequent flooding. One of the worst floods to occur in Tinker Creek in
Botetourt County was in 1940. Another large flood occurred in 1961 along Buffalo Creek in what
is considered to be one of the worst storms of record. The unincorporated communities of Eagle
Rock, Glen Wilton, and Gala located in Botetourt County along the James River have all
experienced flooding. One of the worst floods for the James River occurred as a result of Tropical
Storm Agnes in 1972. Glen Wilton was isolated in 1972 due to floodwaters covering the only road
access to the community. The Botetourt Communities of Strom, Lithia, Cloverdale, and Coyner
have also been victims of floodwaters. A 1940 event caused severe damage in the Tinker Creek
basin. Buffalo Creek was impacted by a flood in 1961.
Historic floods in the community of Eagle Rock occurred in November 1985, November 1877,
March 1913, June 1972, April 1978, March 1936, and August 1969. The November 1985 and April
1978 floods were the only two significant flood events to affect the Eagle Rock area since the
completion of Gathright Dam. The community of Eagle Rock was severely flooded during the
November 1985 storm causing substantial damage to the commercial district and to many
residences. The 1985 storm was the storm of record with an exceedance frequency of 460 years.
Seventeen commercial properties and about 16 residences were damaged during the November
1985 flood.
The Town of Troutville has been damaged by flooding from Buffalo Creek several times in the
past. The flood in August 1961 was one of the worst floods in this basin, when “after two hours of
intense downpour, Buffalo Creek overflowed its banks. Several homes and basements were
flooded and travel on Highway 11 was hazardous due to excessive water. Also, there was about
2 feet of water around Rader Funeral Chapel in the major commercial area of the town”.2F3
Like other communities, the Town of Fincastle experienced extensive flooding as a result of
tropical storm Agnes in 1972. Town Branch overflowed its banks and, due largely to insufficient
bridge capacity at Highway 606, flooded the area between U.S. Highway 220 and Factory Street.
Neither discharges nor frequencies are currently available.
3 (Roanoke Times, 1961).
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-17
The James River in Botetourt County has experienced large floods in 1877, 1913, 1936, and
1969. The remains of hurricane Camille in 1969 caused flooding that destroyed homes, roads,
railroads, and bridges along the James River.
River stages and discharges on the James River at Buchanan have been recorded since 1895
by the USGS. Since 1877, the bank at full stage of 15 feet has been exceeded at least 60 times.
The greatest flood known to have occurred in Buchanan was in November 1877 and measured
34.9 feet at the USGS gage. Other large floods occurred in April 1886, March 1889, March 1902,
March 1913, January 1935, March 1936, March 1963, and August 1969. Tropical Storm Agnes in
1972 was the second highest storm of record. Few flood related problems have occurred on
Purgatory Creek in the Town of Buchanan because of lack of development in its watershed.
The Town of Buchanan has a primary sewage treatment plant on the James River. The plant is
subject to flooding and during the November 1985 flood was out of operation for 6 months. The
historic flood of record in Buchanan occurred in November 1985 (after completion of Gathright
Dam). The Town of Buchanan was devastated during the November 1985 storm which produced
the Flood of Record with an exceedance of 600 years. The river caused water damage and
structural damage to numerous buildings. Some buildings were completely washed away. The
railroad station was washed off its foundation and the historic footbridge was washed
downstream. People who expected their basements to be flooded had water up to their ceilings.
The history of flooding in the Roanoke Valley has been well documented since records were kept.
The flood of record was the November 1985 event. The most severe flooding on the Roanoke
River is usually the result of heavy rains associated with tropical storms, while tributary stream
flooding is usually the result of local thunderstorms or frontal systems. Flooding along tributaries
is compounded when the streams in lower elevations back-up into feeder streams.
Major floods in the area have occurred in 1940 and 1972 with discharges of 24,400 and 28,800
cfs, respectively, as measured at the USGS gage on the Roanoke River at Niagara Dam. On
Tinker Creek at Dale Avenue, the August 1940 storm produced a discharge of 9,000 cfs. The flood
damage from the August 1940 event was extensive and resulted in major damage to buildings,
roads, bridges, and agricultural crops. The 1972 flood on the Roanoke River, which was the result
of Tropical Storm Agnes, was estimated as a 50-year flood. The Roanoke River crested at 19.6
feet as measured at Walnut Avenue. Approximately 400 homes were damaged by flooding from
Hurricane Agnes in the Roanoke-Salem area. On April 22, 1992, the river once again exceeded
its banks and spread floodwaters in the Valley when it crested at 18.1 for the second time during
the century.
The flood of record occurred in November of 1985 when rains from Hurricane Juan caused the
Roanoke River to rise and crest at a level of 23.4 feet from the bottom of the River, as measured
from Walnut Avenue. A total of 11 inches of rain fell between Thursday October 31 and the
following Monday. The last six inches fell during the last 24 hours of that five-day period. The
result of that single weather event created floodwaters in downtown Roanoke that rose over five
feet inside some businesses. Ten lives were lost and damage to property cost $520,000,000.3F4
This was estimated as a 130-year flood event. The 1985 spurred major work along the corridor,
sparking the creation of the greenway system.
4 The Roanoke Times, November 1985.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-18
Since 2018, 58 flood events have occurred in the region. It should be noted that quantified
damages are largely self-reported and may not reflect the full damages that occurred from a given
flood event.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-19
Table 13: Flood Events per the NCEI Database, 2019-2024
Jurisdiction Date Flood Damage Event Description
BOTETOURT
CO. 2/23/2019 / Snow Melt
-
The James River at Buchanan (BNNV2) reached flood stage of 17 feet
on the 24th, cresting at 17.92 feet shortly thereafter. Several roads were
closed including Thrasher Road and River Road due to flooding. The
peak discharge of 35300 cfs at the gage was very close to a 2.33-year
according to USGS data. This is also close the bankfuli stage.
BOTETOURT
CO. 4/13/2020 Heavy Rain
33,000.00
Tinker Mill Road was closed due to high water and several other roads
in the Buchanan area. Poor Farm Road near Fincastle was also reported
to be underwater. There was some damage to roads in the county per
VDOT.
CRAIG CO. 4/13/2020 Heavy Rain
12,000.00
reported across the bridge. The IFLOWS stream gage at this location
was out of service at the time, but the upstream IFLOWS gage on Craig
Creek near Abbott (ABBV2) crested at 11.6 feet. This was over the flood
stage of 10 feet and the 2nd highest (highest is 11.9 feet in Oct. 2018
with remains from Hurricane Michael) in a fairly short period of record
(back to 2010). A water rescue was also preformed in the Abbott area,
where a car drove into flood waters.
ROANOKE
CITY 4/13/2020 Heavy Rain
-
The Roanoke River at Roanoke crested at 11.74 feet (10,500 cfs) on the
afternoon of the 13th, above the Minor flood stage of 10 feet. Several low
water bridges were flooded along with the Roanoke Greenway.
Jurisdiction Date Flood Damage Event Description
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-20
ROANOKE
CITY 4/13/2020 Heavy Rain
25,000.00
closed. Social media photos showed flooding on Franklin Road at Wonju
Street. A mudslide at a car dealership caused two cars to slide into the
resulting sinkhole with some damage to the vehicles.
ROANOKE
CO. 4/13/2020 Heavy Rain
-
The Roanoke River at Glenvar (GNVV2) crested at 13.14 feet (11700
cfs) in the early afternoon of the 13th. Flood stage is 9 feet. Several roads
Hollow Road bridge (Route 734) about 1 mile upstream from gage was
overtopped.
ROANOKE
CO. 4/13/2020 Heavy Rain
5,000.00
Numerous roads were flooded and some damage reported in Roanoke
County.
ROANOKE
CITY 5/20/2020 Heavy Rain
-
Wise Avenue was closed due to overflow from Tinker Creek. This is a
low-water bridge that is inundated below flood stage on the creek. The
gage height on the USGS Tinker Creek above Glade Creek gage was
around 7 feet at the time of this report. The stream crested at 14.77 feet
on the afternoon of the 21st.
Jurisdiction Date Flood Damage Event Description
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-21
ROANOKE
CITY 5/20/2020 Heavy Rain
-
Tinker Creek was reported to be flooding portions of 13th Street from
Eastgate Avenue to Mason Mill Road. The gage height on the USGS
Tinker Creek Upper near Columbia gage was around 9 feet at the time
of this report. The stream crested twice during the event, at 12.58 feet
late on the 20th and 13.49 on the afternoon of the 21st. Per USGS data,
the peak discharge of 3920 cfs was slightly below a 5-year flood event
(0.20 annual chance of occurrence) on upper Tinker Creek.
ROANOKE
CITY 5/20/2020 Heavy Rain
-
A spotter reported water several inches deep on Bennington Street from
the Roanoke River around 850 PM EST on May 20th. The stage at the
time of the report was around 13 feet on the Roanoke River gage at
Walnut Street (RONV2). Several hour later the footbridge to the Carilion
hospital were under varying amounts of water, up to a depth of a few
feet. The reading on the Roanoke River gage was around 15.7 feet at
the time of this report. The river crested at 15.89 feet at 310 PM EST on
the 21st. Moderate flood stage is currently 12 feet and Major flood stage
is 16 feet. This was the 8th highest stage on record at this gage, with
records back to 1899. According to USGS statistics it was slightly under
a 10-year event (0.1 annual chance of occurrence). Social media images
also showed floodwaters from the Roanoke River covering several feet
although this may have been backup along Ore Branch.
Jurisdiction Date Flood Damage Event Description
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-22
BOTETOURT
CO. 5/21/2020 Heavy Rain
15,000.00
The intersection of Craig Creek Road and Roaring Run Road was closed
due to high water. The gage on Craig Creek at Parr (CRGV2) was around
13.3 feet at the time of the report. Minor flood stage is 12 feet. The stream
crested at a stage of 16.20 feet (16200
plowed through the area. It was the 7th highest on record at the gage
since 1925 and was slightly below a 10-
chance of occurrence). Moderate flood stage is 15 feet and several roads
were flooded.
BOTETOURT
CO. 5/21/2020 Heavy Rain
10,000.00 Tinker Mill Road was flooded and Tinker Creek reported out of its banks.
BOTETOURT
CO. 5/21/2020 Heavy Rain
13,000.00
crested at 7.87 feet (3660 cfs)|early on the 21st. This was the 8th highest
stage on record at this gage with data back to 1954.
Michael in October 2018 has had a higher stage (7.98 feet) in the past
15 years, dating back to September 2004. According to USGS data this
was close to a 5-year recurrence interval flood (0.2 annual chance of
occurrence).
SALEM CITY 5/20/2020 Heavy Rain
-
The Mill Lane low water bridge in Salem was entirely underwater and
portions of W. Riverside Drive was flooded and closed along with several
other roads in Salem. The nearby Salem Pump Station IFLOWS gage
(SPSV2) crested at around 9.1 feet. Minor flood stage is 7 feet.
Jurisdiction Date Flood Damage Event Description
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-23
ROANOKE
CO. 5/20/2020 Heavy Rain
-
The Roanoke River at Glenvar (GNVV2) crested at 14.14 feet (13400
cfs) in the early afternoon of the 21st. Flood stage is 9 feet. It was the 9th
highest stage on record but data only extends back to 1992 at this gage.
Several roads were closed near the riv
Road. Bohon Hollow Road bridge (Route 734) about 1 mile upstream
from gage was overtopped. According to USGS statistics it was near a
5-year flood event (0.2 annual chance of occurrence).
CRAIG CO. 5/20/2020 Heavy Rain
50,000.00
around midday on May 21st. This was the 3rd highest crest in the fairly
roads were flooded and partially damaged Craig County according to
VDOT information.
ROANOKE
CITY 5/21/2020 Heavy Rain
5,000.00
in Roanoke leading to the evacuation of 13 homes due to the potential
risk of a dam failure.
ROANOKE
CO. 6/17/2020 Heavy Rain
-
Walnut Avenue near Glade Creek was closed due to water flowing over
it. Flooding also occurred along Tinker Creek where the USGS gage near
the confluence of Glade Creek crested at 16.96 feet in the afternoon of
the 17th. No flood stage has been set at this
station, but Tinker Creek overflows the low-water bridge on Wise Avenue
at a stage of around 7 feet.
BOTETOURT
CO. 6/17/2020 Heavy Rain
-
A social media post showed the road completely flooded in front of the
Cloverdale Post Office.
Jurisdiction Date Flood Damage Event Description
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-24
BOTETOURT
CO. 6/17/2020 Heavy Rain
-
Wildwood Mobile Home Park. Some evacuations were conducted in the
area.
CO. 6/17/2020 Heavy Rain - likely from nearby Glade Creek.
CO. 6/17/2020 Heavy Rain - with water flowing over the road.
CITY 6/17/2020 Heavy Rain - Craig Avenue, South Royal Avenue and and South Highland Avenue.
ALLEGHANY
CO. 6/17/2020 Heavy Rain
-
Up to a foot of water was observed flowing over Valley Ridge Road at
the corner of Woodland Road and Magnolia Street.
ALLEGHANY
CO. 6/19/2020 Heavy Rain
-
Water over six inches in depth was seen flowing over portions of Highway
159 after 1.5 inches of rain fell in a short duration. The water was not
from Dunlap Creek itself which had returned to below flood stage from
the previous day.
ALLEGHANY
CO. 6/17/2020 Heavy Rain
-
flood stage of 9 feet early on the 18th, cresting at 9.16 feet. Several roads
very close to the creek may have been flooded.
Jurisdiction
Beginning
Date Flood
Reported
Damage Event Description
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-25
CRAIG CO. 6/17/2020 Heavy Rain
-
11.03 feet on the afternoon of June 17th after heavy rains the previous
September 28, 2004 when it reached 12.87 feet and the 6th highest since
records began in 1927. The 3-day rainfall at the nearby NWS COOP site
at New Castle was 4.12 inches.
BOTETOURT
CO. 6/17/2020 Heavy Rain
-
feet (12500 cfs) very early on June 18th. It was the 8th highest on record
at this gaging station since 1925 and was approximately a 5-year flood
event (0.2 annual chance of occurrence) according to USGS studies. A
road or two was likely affected.
ROANOKE
CITY 6/17/2020 Heavy Rain
-
The Roanoke River at Roanoke (RONV2) crested at 11.91 feet, above
the Minor flood stage of 10 feet early in the morning of June 18th. Several
roads and low water bridges were flooded.
SALEM CITY 6/17/2020 Heavy Rain
-
above Minor flood stage of 7 feet early on the 18th, cresting at 7.60 feet
and closing several roads in Salem, including the Mill Lane Bridge.
ROANOKE
CITY 11/12/2020 Heavy Rain
-
14.07 feet (14,000 cfs) at 12:35 PM EST on November 12th, the 13th
highest crest on record for this gauge. This was between a 5- and 10-
year Average Return Interval per the USGS StreamStats website.
Jurisdiction
Beginning
Date Flood
Reported
Damage Event Description
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-26
ROANOKE
CITY 5/4/2021 Heavy Rain
-
period. Runoff from the rainfall caused water to pond 12-18 inches deep
intersection known to flood during heavy rainfall. The intersection closed
by police, but was reopened after the water receded.
ROANOKE
CITY 5/4/2021 Heavy Rain
2,500.00
within a 45 minute period across portions of the downtown area in the
City of Roanoke. Runoff from this rainfall resulted in about three feet of
standing water near the intersection of Sale
unknown if the occupant(s) required rescue. The road was reopened to
traffic after the flood waters receded.
ROANOKE
CITY 8/19/2021 Heavy Rain
25,000.00
4 feet of standing water as heavy rain overwhelmed the storm sewer
system. Five water rescues were performed as cars drove into the flood
waters, causing the vehicles to stall. No injur
Broadcast media reported that multiple cars parked along Salem Avenue
experienced water intrusion into the vehicle passenger compartments
and exhaust systems, with some of the vehicle needed to be towed.
BOTETOURT
CO. 9/22/2021 Heavy Rain
20,000.00
flow across Indian Rock Road. The bridge crossing Renick Run was
being eventually reopened.
BOTETOURT
CO. 9/22/2021 Heavy Rain
-
Runoff from heavy rain caused Purgatory Creek to flood out of its banks
around one foot deep across both Greyledge and Frontage Roads. The
roads reopened after flooding subsided. No damage was reported.
Jurisdiction Date Flood Damage Event Description
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-27
BOTETOURT
CO. 9/22/2021 Heavy Rain
15,000.00
Runoff from heavy rain caused Jennings Creek to flood out of its banks
and across Jennings Creek Road, both of which are located in the bottom
flooding were able to abandon the vehicle to safety, however the vehicle
was reportedly washed down the creek.
BOTETOURT
CO. 9/22/2021 Heavy Rain
-
Runoff from heavy rain caused Laurel Run to flood out of its banks across
The road was reopened afterward.
BOTETOURT
CO. 9/22/2021 Heavy Rain
- No damage was reported.
BOTETOURT
CO. 9/22/2021 Heavy Rain
-
the railway tunnel on 19th Street and across Highway 11 a few hundred
feet further downstream. No damage was reported and the roads were
passable again after the flooding receded.
BOTETOURT
CO. 9/22/2021 Heavy Rain
-
Runoff from heavy rain caused a tributary of Ellis Run to flow out of its
banks, flooding across portions of Mountain Valley Road. No damage
receded.
Jurisdiction
Beginning
Date Flood
Reported
Damage Event Description
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-28
ROANOKE
CO. 8/25/2022 Heavy Rain
-
(TKRV2) recorded Tinker Creek rising more than 8 feet within 2 hours to
caused by 2 to more than 4 inches of rainfall from a thunderstorm near
the Botetourt County border.
ROANOKE
CO. 8/25/2022 Heavy Rain
-
The stream gauge at Tinker Creek Above Glade Creek recorded Tinker
Creek cresting at 7.95 feet. This was caused by 2 to more than 4 inches
of rainfall from a thunderstorm near the Botetourt County border.
BOTETOURT
CO. 8/25/2022 Heavy Rain
15,000.00 Sanderson drive.
ALLEGHANY
CO. 2/17/2023 / Burn Area
-
(Flood stage is 10 feet). This was a little over a 2-year event (50% AEP)
per USGS Streamstats. The flooding was caused by between 1.5 and
2.75 inches of rain over a 24-25 hour period. No snow melt or frozen
ground was involved, but the ground was moist from widespread rainfall
on the 12th and 13th a few days prior. Minor lowland flooding was the
only impact observed.
ROANOKE
CITY 7/23/2023 Heavy Rain
-
impassible by several inches of flowing water caused by 3 to 4 inches of
rainfall, with rates as high as 6 inches per hour. No damage was reported
at the intersection, and the road was reopened to traffic after the flooding
receded. MRMS FLASH CREST Unit Streamflow was estimated to be
between 600 and 800 cfs per mile^2, while FLASH 1-hour ARIs indicated
that rainfall amounts were as high as a 100-year event in spots around
the City of Roanoke during this event.
Jurisdiction
Beginning
Date
Cause of
Flood
Reported
Damage Event Description
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-29
ROANOKE
CITY 7/23/2023 Heavy Rain
-
Shafer���s Crossing between 24th Street and Boulevard Street
is flooded and impassible due to 2 to 3 inches of rainfall within a 90-
minute period, with rainfall rates ranging from 4 to 5 inches per hour per
MRMS estimates. CREST Unit Streamflow was estimated to be between
400 and 600 cfs per mile^2 for this event. No damage was reported to
the road, and it was reopened to traffic after the flooding receded.
ROANOKE
CITY 7/23/2023 Heavy Rain
-
Glade Creek was observed out of its banks and flowing across Walnut
Avenue at least 6 inches deep due to between 3 and locally 5 inches of
rainfall within a 2-hour period falling in the basin. Rainfall rates were
observed to be as high as 5 inches per hour at times. No damage was
receded.
ROANOKE
CITY 6/17/2024 Heavy Rain
-
making the road impassible for a brief period of time. The road was
reopened after the flooding receded, with no damage reported.
ROANOKE
CITY 6/17/2024 Heavy Rain
-
Melrose Avenue, making the intersection impassible for a brief period of
time. Rainfall rates briefly reached up to 3
damage reported.
Jurisdiction
Beginning
Date
Cause of
Flood
Reported
Damage Event Description
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-30
ROANOKE
CITY 6/17/2024 Heavy Rain
-
standing water near near the 900 block of Van Buren Street NW, making
the street impassible for a brief period of time. Rainfall rates briefly were
estimated to be around 3 inches per hour.
ROANOKE
CITY 8/8/2024 System
-
Runoff from heavy rain caused the railroad underpass along Wiley Drive
to become flooded with about two feet of standing water and impassible
until the water drained away. No damage was reported.
ROANOKE
CITY 8/8/2024 System
-
A poor drainage issue during heavy rain caused Campbell Avenue to
become flooded by several inches of standing water. The road was open
to traffic after the drain blockage was cleared.
ROANOKE
CITY 8/8/2024 System
-
submerged as Tinker Creek rose to a crest of 5.85 feet, which is well
within its banks. No damage to the road was reported as it is designed
to begin becoming flooded at this stage.
ROANOKE
CITY 8/8/2024 System
-
Portions of Boulevard Street and 24th Street were flooded between three
and four feet deep in spots by runoff from heavy rain. No damage was
reported to the roads, which were reopened to traffic after the flooding
receded.
ROANOKE
CITY 8/8/2024 System
-
across the intersection of Walnut Avenue and 8th Street. No damage to
the roadways was reported.
Jurisdiction
Beginning
Date
Cause of
Flood
Reported
Damage Event Description
ROANOKE
CITY 9/19/2024 Heavy Rain
15,000.00
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-31
during periods of heavy rain. Multiple vehicles were stranded in standing
water that rose to nearly 3 feet deep as a result of poor drainage. Six
individuals had to be assisted from their vehicles in the flood waters by
emergency personnel. The damage estimate is the estimated damage to
the vehicles due to water intrusion.
SALEM CITY 9/25/2024 Heavy Rain
-
around 2.5 feet deep to pool along Kessler Mill Road. No damage was
reported to the road, which was open to traffic after the water receded.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-32
Additional flood damage has been recorded from Hurricane Helene which was not included in the
NCEI data. As this was a major federal disaster, impacts from this event will be quantified further
in section 3.5: Hurricane and Tropical Storm. However, it is worth noting that flooding is so
frequent in the region that the NCEI data may not be comprehensive in terms of the impacts of
this disaster.
CRS Communities: Special Considerations
Three communities within the region currently have a Community Flood Rating System (CRS)
designation. Roanoke County entered the CRS program in October 1991 and has a rating of 8
(10% discount). The Town of Vinton entered the CRS program in October 1, 2016 and has a class
8 rating. The City of Roanoke entered the CRS program in 1996 and maintains a class 6 rating
(20% discount on flood insurance premiums for parcel owners within City limits).
Several additional localities have listed this as a desired goal in their project listings, though
capacity remains an inhibiting factor. Accordingly, this section specifically speaks to additive
requirements for CRS planning in the region’s jurisdictions.
Review of Existing Studies and Plans
The following existing studies and plans speak specifically to flooding. They are summarized and
recommendations are noted where appropriate. A general overview of existing plans and studies
consulted to develop project recommendations and guide planning implementation work is
contained in Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment. For the purposes of this section, only local
government entities are listed.
Alleghany County
Flood Insurance Study, Alleghany County, Virginia and Incorporated Areas (2010): This study also
includes the incorporated areas of the City of Covington, and Towns of Clifton Forge and Iron
Gate.
Emergency Operations Plan (2021): This document details emergency operations procedures,
including operations in a flood event.
City of Covington
City of Covington Drainage Study (2025): This document, funded through the Community Flood
Preparedness Fund, includes a condition assessment of the storm sewer system and a hydraulic
and hydrologic model which will feed into a forthcoming Resilience Plan.
Botetourt County
Flood Insurance Study, Botetourt County, Virginia and Incorporated Areas (2010): This study also
includes the incorporated areas of Botetourt County which include Buchanan, Fincastle, and
Troutville.
Botetourt County Emergency Operations Plan (2017): This document details emergency
operations procedures, including operations in a flood event.
Craig County
Flood Insurance Study, Craig County, Virginia and Incorporated Areas (2009): This study also
includes the incorporated area of the Town of New Castle.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-33
Roanoke County
Flood Insurance Study, Roanoke County, Virginia and Incorporated Areas (DATE): This study also
includes the incorporated areas of the Town of Vinton, City of Roanoke, City of Salem.
City of Roanoke
City of Roanoke Flood Resilience Plan (2023): This plan deals specifically with flooding and
flooding impacts within the City. Several of these recommendations will be incorporated into
Chapter 6 and Chapter 7.
NFIP Community Rating System Repetitive Loss Area Analysis (2021): This is an update of the
repetitive loss analysis for the City.
Emergency Operations Basic Plan (2020): This plan details emergency operations procedures
within the City.
Peters Creek Watershed Master Plan (2019): This plan is part of a series of master plans
conducted across the City each watershed. While the primary emphasis is on water quality, there
are flooding applications.
Trout Run Watershed Master Plan (2017): This master plan focuses on watershed management
of the Lick Run watershed through three implementation goals, which parallel those for the Trout
Run Watershed Master Plan.
Lick Run Watershed Master Plan (2017): This master plan focuses on watershed management of
the Lick Run watershed through three implementation goals, which parallel those for the Trout
Run Watershed Master Plan.
Tinker Creek and Tributaries Watershed Master Plan (2016): This master plan focuses on
watershed management of the Lick Run watershed through three implementation goals, which
parallel those for the Trout Run Watershed Master Plan.
Flooding Incident Annex (2007): This Annex to the Emergency Operations Basic Plan details
specific actions to take in flood situations.
Dam Safety Support Annex (2007): This Annex to the Emergency Operations Basic Plan details
specific actions to take in situations where key impoundment infrastructures become a safety risk.
City of Salem
Resilience Plan (2023): This plan was prepared through funding from the Virginia Flood
Preparedness Fund and deals directly with flooding impacts in the City of Salem. Several of these
recommendations will be incorporated into Chapter 6 and Chapter 7.
This section of the plan and other relevant sections were reviewed and discussed with the
Floodplain Program Planner at DCR.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-34
High Hazard Potential Dam Inventory and Planning
Flooding due to dam failure is considered as part of overall flood mitigation assessment and
planning within this document. Within the region there are twenty-five known high hazard potential
dams per DCR. To collect data in this section, Regional Commission staff reached out to the
following partners:
• All signatories for the plan, including the WVWA and the local governments
• Mountain Castles Soil and Water Conservation District
• Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation
Responses from signatories to the plan regarding their dam safety activities are included in
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment.
Figure 17 shows the Hazard Potential Classification for dams produced by FEMA. It is important
to note that even impoundment failure that impacts a lifeline (such as a water treatment plant or
key infrastructure element) does not per se result in a high hazard potential dam classification.
HHPD classification is focused on the probable loss of life in an impoundment failure.
DCR’s Division of Dam Safety and Floodplain Management administers the Virginia Dam Safety
Program, under the authority of the Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Board. Virginia’s Dam
Safety Regulations4F5 were last updated in 2016. The owner of each regulated high, significant, or
low hazard potential dam is required to apply to the board for an Operation and Maintenance
Certificate. The application must include an assessment of the dam by a licensed professional,
an Emergency Action Plan and the appropriate fee(s), submitted separately. An executed copy of
the Emergency Action Plan or Emergency Preparedness Plan must be filed with the appropriate
local emergency official and the Virginia Department of Emergency Management.
Figure 18: Dam Classifications, FEMA5F6
The City of Roanoke maintains a Dam Safety Support Annex to their Emergency Operations Plan.
The Western Virginia Water Authority also maintains required Emergency Action Plans specific to
operation of the dams owned by the Authority, one of which is Spring Hollow Lake Dam listed in
Table 2. Inundation maps for Spring Hollow Lake Dam are included in Appendix H.
5 (Commonwealth of Virginia, 2016)
6 (Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2004)
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-35
The VSWCB issues Regular Operation and Maintenance Certificates to a dam owner for a period
of six years. If a dam has a deficiency but does not pose imminent danger, the board may issue
a Conditional Operation and Maintenance Certificate, during which time the dam owner is to
correct the deficiency. After a dam is certified by the board, annual inspections are required either
by a professional engineer or the dam owner, and the Annual Inspection Report is submitted to
the regional dam safety engineer.
There are no comprehensive databases of historical dam failures or flooding following a dam
failure in Virginia. Dam failure can be caused by a variety of scenarios. Thirty-four percent of all
dam failures are caused by overtopping, when water spills over the top of a dam. The majority of
dam failure incidents are driven by flooding due to excessive precipitation. Proper maintenance
of a dam structure is key to mitigating the impacts of flooding. DCR administers the Virginia Dam
Safety, Flood Prevention, and Protection Assistance Fund. Other funding sources also exist for
dam failure mitigation.
The Association of State Dam Safety Officials maintains a voluntary database of dam safety
incidents, the ASDSO Dam Incident Database. Only one safety incident is recorded in this
database in the region, which references overtopping of Spring Valley Lake dam. However,
consultation with DCR clarifies the incident. Spring Valley Lake saw their emergency spillway
activated, and a Stage 3 emergency was declared in accordance with their Emergency Action
Plan in May 2020. There was no overtopping, and the dam was not in immediate danger of failure.
In the 2019 Plan, several Dam Safety Incidents and remediation efforts were documented. These
have been updated with more accurate information from DCR.
Rainbow Forest Lake Dam: In May 2011, DCR order the Rainbow Forest Recreation
Association (RFRA) in Botetourt County to reduce the pool level of Rainbow Forest Lake
in order to provide extra storage capacity behind the dam until the spillway could be
improved. The RFRA has been working with the state to address concerns about the
structure since 1997.
Gathright Dam: In May 2009, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) inspected the
Gathright Dam as part of Screening Portfolio Risk Analysis and routine inspections. Later
in the year on September 2, the USACE assigned the dam a Safety Action Classification
(DSAC) II which is defined as "Urgent (Unsafe or Potentially Unsafe)". The rating is
attributed to concerns about possible increased seepage at the toe of the dam, and an
undetermined flow rate at the river spring a quarter mile downstream, and potential flow
channels through limestone below the spillway during pool events above 1,600 feet.
Because of this rating, the USACE has implemented risk reduction measures which
include increased monitoring, updating emergency operation plans and reducing the water
level in the reservoir. As of early 2010, the USACE has reduced and continues to maintain
the reservoir at an elevation of 1,562 ft above sea level compared to the normal level of
1,582 feet. Throughout 2010, the USACE conducted safety exercises with local/state
officials, conduct a series of investigations on the dam, update inundation mapping and
reevaluate the DSAC status. In November 2010, Lake Moomaw was restored to a level of
1,582 ft. and the DSAC will be reevaluated in the future.
Clifton Forge Dam: Clifton Forge Dam impounds a 12.5 square mile drainage area of
Smith Creek with an 11.5-acre normal pool. The dam is classified as a High Hazard Dam
by DCR and operates under a conditional 2-year, renewable, Operation and Maintenance
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-36
Certificate. It has been issued an alteration permit by DCR that will be used during
upgrades in 2018-19. A Dam Breach Inundation Zone Analysis was done in 2013 that
showed a failure would impact 650 residential units, 1,400 people and downtown
commercial, retail, public administration and infrastructure. An Emergency Action Plan
was completed in 2014 and a preliminary engineering report for proposed improvements
was done in 2016. Major improvements proposed include raising crest of non-overflow
sections; raise concrete core wall and surrounding earthfill; seal a leaking concrete joint;
remove spillway piers to expand spillway capacity; anchor the principal spillway; replace
spillway bridge; and repair the deteriorated concrete face. The estimated cost for this work
was approximately $4.3 million. The town worked with its consulting engineers to develop
a funding package from USDA Rural Development in cooperation with Alleghany County.
The proposed schedule anticipates construction to be complete by December 2019.
Johns Creek Watershed Dam #1 (McDaniel’s Lake): Craig County Board of Supervisors
and Mountain Castles Soil and Water Conservation District own and operate the Johns
Creek watershed Dam #1. Four floodwater-retarding structures were built in the Johns
Creek Watershed between 1966 and 1967.
The dam has a drainage area of 12,241 acres and a normal pool surface area of 28 acres.
It was designed to store runoff of 50-year storm. The dam was originally designed as
“Significant” hazard and later reclassified to “High” hazard due to downstream
development that was allowed to occur. The dam operates under a conditional Operation
and Maintenance Certificate from DCR that expired in September 2018.
A breach inundation study for the dam was done in 2009 which concluded the dam is a
High Hazard Potential dam. The study found 68 occupied structures and 16 bridges within
the inundation zone below the dam. An additional study by URS Group completed in 2010
found the population at risk to be 150 people.
Mountain Castles SWCD has been working jointly with Virginia's DCR and federal partners
to facilitate a design to rehabilitate Johns Creek Dam #1 to increase spillway capacity for
future flooding. So far, the rehabilitation team has accomplished a wetland delineation
survey, riser condition survey, and a geotechnical investigation survey. A complete design
is expected by spring of 2026 that involves extending the embankment through the
existing auxiliary spillway, installing a new roller-compacted spillway, and installing a new
concrete riser to meet the new requirements.
Niagara Dam: Niagara Dam is one of two federally regulated dams in the region. The dam
was recently relicensed by the FERC in 2025. On November 4, 1985, high flows recorded
at 52,300 cfs resulted in the breach of the right abutment to the dam. Repairs to the right
abutment resulted in the Niagara Hydroelectric Project being taken out of service from
November 4, 1985 through March 17, 1986. The average flow of the river at this location
is 573 cfs. The same event affected Smith Mountain Lake dam downstream, a key
infrastructure asset for the region and also federally regulated. The reservoir elevation
increased from its normal operating limit of 795 NGVD to 799.5 NGVD. That elevation is
0.5 ft. below the emergency level of 800.0 NGVD allowed under the license for this
structure.
Three additional dams of interest may be high hazard dams but have not yet been classified as
such. These dams are listed in DSIS as High-Preliminary, which means that there has been a
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-37
preliminary study that raised concerns, but an inundation study has not been submitted by the
dam owner to properly establish the hazard classification yet.
• Orchard Lake Dam – 023002
• Wilburn Dam – 023010
• Stokes Dam – 023013
This section of the plan was reviewed by the Regional Dam Safety Engineer at DCR. Dam safety
data sheets were also provided for all High Hazard Potential Dams and are included in Appendix
H.
The Role of the State
While local governments play a role in reviewing dam safety activities for those dams within their
jurisdictions, the Commonwealth of Virginia requires that DCR play an active role in dam
regulation working directly with the dam owner. The following powers are within the province of
DCR:
• Activities and studies that determine risks associated with eligible dams
• Environmental studies for NEPA compliance
• Development of operation and maintenance plans
• Dam risk and consequence assessments Feasibility studies
• Preliminary engineering studies Alternatives analysis
• Mapping, engineering survey, and inundation modeling
• Coordination of EAP and EOPs for different release conditions
• Engineering design
• Development of specifications
DCR coordinates these activities directly with the dam owner, and the local government is
generally informed of many of these plans and elements after the fact unless they also fill the role
of dam owner. While the local government may coordinate on safety elements such as public
communication or evacuation plans, most of the mitigation actions possible for high hazard
potential dams are the responsibility of the dam owner or the state.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-38
Table 14: High Hazard Potential Dams
Federal
ID Dam Name
Dam
Name
Dam
Type Owner Name Location
VA00500
3 Dam Gravity Forge Alleghany
VA00500
4
Landfill No. 2
Dam Lagoon Earth
Westvaco/WestRoc
k Alleghany
VA00500
9
Virginia Pulp
Dam B Earth
Westvaco/West
Rock Alleghany
1 Dam Moomaw Rockfill District Alleghany
VA00501
3
Embankmen
t Dam Earth
Westvaco/WestRoc
k
Alleghany/Covingto
n
VA02300
4 Estates Dam
Emerald
Lake Earth
Homeowners
Association Botetourt
VA02300
5
Botetourt
Country
Club Dam Earth Club Botetourt
VA02301
0 Wilburn Dam Earth and Anne P. Wilburn Botetourt
3 Stokes Dam Earth Sandra J Stokes Botetourt
2 Lake Dam Earth Dearl & Julie Fraze Botetourt
VA02300
3
Rainbow
Forest Dam Earth Inc Botetourt
1 Dam Masonry Water Authority Botetourt/Roanoke
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-39
Federal
ID Dam Name
Dam
Name
Dam
Type Owner Name Location
VA04500
1
Johns Creek
Dam #2 Earth
Conservation
District Craig
VA04500
2
Johns Creek
Dam #1
McDaniel
s Lake Earth
Conservation
District Craig
VA04500
3
Johns Creek
Dam #3 Earth
Conservation
District Craig
VA04500
4
Johns Creek
Dam #4
Dicks
Creek
Lake Earth
Conservation
District Craig
VA01901
0
Creek
Reservoir
Dam Earth Water Authority Roanoke County
1 Gravity Company Roanoke County
2 Lake Dam Gravity Company LLC Roanoke County
VA16100
4
Craig
Memorial
Dam
Hollow
Reservoir
Dam
Concret
e Water Authority Roanoke County
VA16100
5 Dam
Valley
High
School
Dam Earth Roanoke County Roanoke County
VA16100
8 Darr Dam
Hudick
Dam Earth
Richard C. & Norma
Lee Darr Roanoke County
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-40
Federal
ID Dam Name
Dam
Name
Dam
Type Owner Name Location
VA16101
3
Roanoke
College Dam Earth Roanoke College Salem
VA77000
2
Spring
Dam Earth Lake, LLC City of Roanoke
VA77000
1
Windsor
Lake Dam Earth Corporation City of Roanoke
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-41
3.5 Hurricane and Tropical Storm
Definition of Hazard
Hurricanes, tropical storms, and tropical depressions occasionally strike the region, causing
multiple impacts, most often flooding and wind damage. While damages from these events are
referred to in other sections of this document, this section looks at past storm events more
holistically.
The National Weather Service offers the following definitions of these storm events:
• Tropical Depression: Tropical cyclone with maximum sustained surface winds of 38 mph;
• Tropical Storm: Maximum sustained surface winds of 39-74 mph;
• Hurricane: Maximum sustained surface winds of 74+ mph.
The Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale rates hurricane’s sustained wind speed from 1 to 5.
Wind is a major factor in hurricane and tropical storm damage. By the time that these storms
reach the region, they are generally downgraded to a tropical storm or tropical depression. Rarely
do hurricane force storm winds make it as far inland as southwestern Virginia.
Table 15: Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale, National Weather Service
While this hazard is discussed individually in this chapter, it is important to note that the primary
impacts of hurricane and tropical storm in the region are due to wind damage and riverine flooding
caused by excess precipitation. In Chapter 4, this hazard is assessed as part of section 4.4
Flooding and section 4.8 Wind Event.
Historic Event Descriptions
Virginia has been struck by 48 hurricanes from 1900 to 2018 according to records from the
National Hurricane Center. The Roanoke Valley – Alleghany region has not experienced a direct
hurricane in over 100 years. The region is impacted by the remnants of the hurricanes as tropical
depressions and subtropical storms bringing heavy rains and winds. The following major events
have occurred in the region.
August 20, 1969, Hurricane Camille: Camille made landfall as a Category 5 hurricane smashing
the Mississippi Coast with 200 mph winds on August 17. Camille was the strongest hurricane to
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-42
make landfall on the U.S. this century. The hurricane maintained force for 10 hours as it moved
150 miles inland. The storm tracked northward weakening and becoming less defined. It moved
toward Virginia on the 19th and was only a tropical depression. Moisture from the warm Gulf
Stream waters moved northwest toward the storm and new feeder bands formed. These
thunderstorms "trained" (one followed the other), into the Blue Ridge south of Charlottesville. In
just 12 hours, up to 31 inches of rain fell with devastating results (153 killed, most in Nelson
County). Major flooding followed as the bulge of water moved down the James River into
Richmond. Waynesboro on the South River saw eight feet of water in its downtown and Buena
Vista had five and one-half feet in its business section. Damage was estimated at 113 million
dollars (1969 dollars). The remains of this storm caused flooding that destroyed homes, roads,
railroads, and bridges along the James River in Botetourt County.
June 21, 1972, Hurricane Agnes. Agnes originated in the Gulf of Mexico and was downgraded to
a tropical storm by the time it reached Virginia, yet still caused 13 deaths in the Commonwealth.
The storm impacted the entire region. Tropical Storm Agnes was a severe event and resulted in
as much as one-third of the City of Covington under water where one church, three public
buildings, two industrial plants, 8 commercial buildings, and 490 private residences were
damaged. During the event, Glen Wilton was isolated due to floodwaters covering the only road
access to the community. The storm impacted communities along the James and Roanoke Rivers.
Tropical Storm Agnes was the second highest storm of record along the James River in
Buchanan. The storm caused a 50-year flood. The Roanoke Valley was hit with the effects of
Agnes, causing the Roanoke River to crest at 19.6 feet and approximately 400 homes were
damaged by flooding in the Roanoke-Salem area.
Sept. 28, 2004, Hurricane Jeanne. The remnants of Hurricane Jeanne, in the form of a tropical
depression, moved through the vicinities of Greenville, SC, Roanoke, VA and Washington, DC
and finally to the New Jersey coast on Tuesday, Sept. 28. Maximum sustained wind speeds
ranged from 25 mph to 30 mph near the storm's center. The primary impact on the Commonwealth
was flooding, although one F1 tornado touched down in Pittsylvania County. The heaviest rainfall
occurred from the New River Valley to the Southern Shenandoah Valley. Rainfall in this region
ranged from 3 inches to 7 inches, with the highest amounts falling in Patrick, eastern Floyd,
eastern Montgomery, Giles, Roanoke, Botetourt and Rockbridge counties.
September 14-16, 2018, Hurricane Florence. Hurricane Florence made landfall along the North
Carolina coast on September 14, and after slowly tracking westward through South Carolina, the
remnants of Florence did not reach western Virginia until September 16, accelerating again by
that time. The track of the remnant circulation through the southern Appalachians resulted in
heavy rain and flooding, and at least one landslide, over a large part of the NWS Blacksburg
forecast area, with especially heavy rain along portions of the Blue Ridge due to enhanced
upslope easterly flow. In addition to the heavy rain and flooding, gusty winds (although below
tropical storm force) combined with saturated ground to cause numerous uprooted trees and
some scattered power outages. Rainfall amounts across the area varied form less than 1 inch in
Eagle Rock, 2.6 inches at the Roanoke Regional Airport to 5.6 inches on Bent Mountain. Winds
were from 38 mph at the Roanoke Regional Airport to 13 mph at Springwood in Botetourt County.
The Roanoke River crested at 11.14 feet (0.5 feet above flood stage) and the James River in
Buchanan crested at 14.7 feet (2.3 feet below flood stage).
October 10-11, 2018, Hurricane Michael. Hurricane Michael made landfall along the Florida
panhandle as Category 4 hurricane on October 10, 2018, then tracked northeastward with the
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-43
northern portion of the storm circulation tracking across portions of Southside Virginia, Thursday
afternoon, the 11th. As the storm circulation approached on October 11th a cold front moving in
from the west and interacted with the storm and enhanced rainfall especially east of Interstate 81.
Widespread rainfall amounts of 4 to 8 inches were reported, along with local amounts over 10
inches, mainly from the mountains of North Carolina up through Southside Virginia. This resulted
in significant flash flooding with flash flood emergencies issued for the city of Roanoke, as well as
Roanoke County. Rainfall amounts ranged from 1.97 inches at Gathright Dam, 3.3 inches at
Daleville, 3.15 at the Roanoke Regional Airport to 7.16 inches in the Cave Spring area of Roanoke
County. The Roanoke River at Glenvar crested at 17.1 feet (8.1 feet above flood stage) and in
Roanoke at 16.4 feet (6.4 feet above flood stage).
September 27, 2024, Hurricane Helene: Helene made landfall in Florida as a powerful Category
4 hurricane late Thursday, September 26, and moved quickly northward into the southeastern
states, and then turned slightly northwestward towards the southern Appalachian Mountains
overnight into Friday morning, weakening as it moved over land. Helene’s intensity and fast
forward motion led to impacts being felt well inland, from the Florida Big Bend area into the
Appalachians only 12 hours after landfall, and there was extensive damage in southwest Virginia.
Widespread cellular service and power outages, some lasting for several days, occurred as high
winds downed thousands of trees across the region. Winds gusted as high as 55 mph to 65 mph
in southwest Virginia. There were three confirmed tornadoes associated with the remnants of
Hurricane Helene in the Piedmont region of Virginia. Flooding impacts from Hurricane Helene
were extensive across the area and were exacerbated by a predecessor rainfall event that
occurred a day before Helene reached the region, which brought six to eight inches of rain to the
mountains prior to the arrival of the remnants of Helene. The three-day rainfall totals associated
with the remnants of Hurricane Helene were highest in Grayson and Smyth Counties, where
observations of 10 to locally 15 inches of rain were recorded. The Piedmont of Virginia received
much less rain, between one and two inches, with a couple areas around three inches. Total
economic losses for Virginia, which include Virginia’s agriculture, forestry, and other industries,
are expected to range between $416 million and $630 million per an economic analysis released
by Virginia Tech researchers. Within the planning region, at least 20,000 people lost power due
to downed trees in Alleghany, Botetourt, Craig, and Roanoke Counties. One woman was killed
when struck by a flying chicken coop. Others, including a postal worker and a police officer, were
injured by downed trees and flying debris. Total losses from agriculture damages in Craig County
were estimated at $85,000. In Troutville, twenty-one acres of sunflowers at Beaver Dam Farm
were flattened by strong winds.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-44
3.6 Geologic Hazards
Definition of Hazard
Karst is defined as a landscape with sinkholes, springs, and streams that sink into subsurface
caverns. In karst areas, the fractured limestone rock formations have been dissolved by flowing
groundwater to form cavities, pipes, and conduits. Sinkholes, caves, sinking streams, and springs
signal the presence of underground drainage systems in karst areas.
Sinkholes are natural depressions on the land surface that are shaped like a bowl or cone. They
are common in regions of karst, where mildly acidic groundwater has dissolved rock such as
limestone, dolostone, marble, or gypsum. Sinkholes are subsidence or collapse features that form
at points of local instability. Their presence indicates that additional sinkholes may develop in the
future. The probability for karst hazards cannot be determined as easily as other hazards due to
lack of accurate mapping and historical data.
The most notable karst related event in the region was a sinkhole in Botetourt County that
occurred on Route 670 in 2005. That hole eventually expanded to 50 feet deep and 75 feet wide.
Several smaller sinkholes have damaged Interstate 81 to the north in Augusta, Rockbridge and
Shenandoah counties and south in Washington County in the past along with damage to Route
460 in Bedford County to the east. To date, there have been no federal disaster declarations or
NCEI recorded events for karst related sinkhole events. Currently, there is no comprehensive
long-term record of past events in Virginia.
Figure 19: Karst Map, VDEQ
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-45
The term landslide describes many types of downhill earth movements, ranging from rapidly
moving catastrophic rock avalanches and debris flows in mountainous regions to more slowly
moving earth slides and other ground failures.
Though most landslide losses in the United States accrue from many widely distributed events,
landslides can be triggered by severe storms and earthquakes, causing spectacular damage in a
short time over a wide area. Some landslides move slowly and cause gradual damage, whereas
others move so rapidly that they can destroy property and take lives. Debris flows are a common
type of fast-moving landslide that generally occurs during intense rainfall on saturated soil. Their
consistency ranges from watery mud to thick, rocky mud (like wet cement) which is dense enough
to carry boulders, trees, and cars. Debris flows from many different sources can combine in
channels, where their destructive power may be greatly increased.6F7
Landslides can be triggered by both natural changes in the environment and human activities.
Inherent weaknesses in the rock or soil often combine with one or more triggering events, such
as heavy rain, snowmelt, and changes in groundwater level, or seismic activity. Erosion may
remove the toe and lateral slope support, triggering potential landslides. Human activities
triggering landslides are usually associated with construction and changes in slope and surface
water and groundwater levels. Changes in irrigation, runoff and drainage can increase erosion
and change groundwater levels and ground saturation.
Historic Event Descriptions
Historical records tell us that destructive landslides and debris flows in the Appalachian Mountains
occur when unusually heavy rain from hurricanes and intense storms soaks the ground, reducing
the ability of steep slopes to resist the downslope pull of gravity. For example, during Hurricane
Camille in 1969, such conditions generated debris flows in Nelson County, Virginia. The storm
caused 150 deaths, mostly attributed to debris flows, and more than $100 million in property
damage. Likewise, 72 hours of storms in Virginia and West Virginia during early November 1985
caused debris flows and flooding in the Potomac and Cheat River basins that were responsible
for 70 deaths and $1.3 billion in damage to homes, businesses, roads, and farmlands.
Most localities of the RVARC region have experienced small, localized landslide events,
especially areas in the valleys. The mountain slopes are characterized by the USGS as having a
high susceptibility but a low incidence, indicating that few events have occurred on the higher
slopes. Chapter 2: Regional Profile contains a topographic map of the region.
The only documented concentration of landslides in the planning region has been along Smith
Creek in the Town of Clifton Forge. A State Emergency Declaration was issued in November of
1987 for the area. Heavy rain caused landslides along Smith Creek in Clifton Forge, the third
occurrence in the past decade. The area is landslide prone and structures are at risk from further
landslides. A study is warranted to determine scope of the problem and a method to stabilize the
area.
In 2008 a rockslide occurred on Route 220 just north of the City of Covington. No property damage
estimates were reported. In 2019, another event on Route 220 closed a section of the road north
of Covington for a two-week period. Small landslides just outside of Eagle Rock have closed
7 Debris Flow Hazards in the Blue Ridge of Virginia, USGS Fact Sheet 159-96P. L. Gori and W. C. Burton, 1996.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-46
Route 43 multiple times. Landslides on Route 220 south in the Bent Mountain area of Roanoke
County have resulted in closures of that road multiple times.
In 2021 a debris flow event triggered by heavy rain was reported in the City of Roanoke with
$25,000 in damages. A car wash sustained severe structural damage when the hillside
immediately behind the building gave way and smashed through the rear wall of the building. No
deaths or injuries were reported.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-47
3.7 Wildfire
Definition of Hazard
Wildfire is a particularly pernicious natural disaster that can have wide effects across the region,
affecting air quality, property, and safety. A significant portion of the region is forested and
managed by public entities, including the National Park Service, National Forest Service, Virginia
Department of Forestry, Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, and the Virginia
Department of Wildlife Resources.
Several factors affect wildfires, including meteorological factors such as temperature and wind,
and non-meteorological factors such as soil moisture, topography, debris accumulation of dead
or dying vegetation, and forest density and age. Wildfires across the state are primarily caused
by debris burning. Fire laws proscribe burning until after 4pm from February 15th to April 30th, the
major fire season across the Commonwealth. Other causes include powerlines, lightning,
campfires, and arson.
The Virginia Department of Forestry is the primary agency involved in wildfire education and
response in Virginia; however, other entities which may engage in wildfire response include local
EMS and federal entities. Data in this section comes from the VDOF unless otherwise noted.
Historic Event Descriptions
Historically, three major fire events have occurred in the region.
In 1999, Fort Lewis Mountain in the western part of Roanoke County burned out of control for a
week, endangering multiple homes before it was brought under control.
In April 2012, a series of wildfires burned more than 38,000 acres in western Virginia. One of the
largest fires impacting the region was in a remote area in Alleghany County 10 miles west of
Covington. The U.S. Forest Service reported the Alleghany Tunnel Fire burned 11,381 acres and
resulted in temporary closure of sections of routes 770 and 850. The largest fire originated in Rich
Hole Wilderness area of Alleghany County. This fire spread to private lands, grew to 15,454 acres,
and closed parts of Interstate 64 in both directions. 7,351 acres burned in the Barbers Creek Fire
in Alleghany and Craig counties. All fires posed threats to structures on private lands. Fires also
occurred in Page and Shenandoah counties.
On the first weekend of March 2018, VDOF responded to 127 wildfires spread by high winds.
Across the Commonwealth. These fires burned a total of 690 acres and impacted Botetourt
County and multiple other localities across the state. A month later in Roanoke County, several
fires ignited along the shoulder of Virginia Highway 311 on Catawba Mountain, near the highway’s
intersection with the Appalachian Trail. The fires grew quickly in dry and windy conditions. Several
of these fires merged into one fire which grew to 165 acres and threatened the safety of dozens
of hikers who were on the trail to McAfee Knob.
Since 2018, approximately 74 fires have occurred in the region, with 38 occurring in Alleghany
County, 18 occurring in Botetourt County, five occurring in Craig County, and 13 occurring in
Roanoke County. Of these the largest occurred in October of 2023, when 97 acres burned near
Penny Hollow and Cumberland Gap Road in Craig County. The threshold for a major fire is 100
acres. A full incident list is contained in Appendix E: Regional Wildfire Report.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-48
3.8 Wind Event
Definition of Hazard
For the purposes of this plan, wind events shall refer to straight line wind events such as derecho
or thunderstorm winds as well as other wind events such as tornadoes.
Straight line wind is a term used to define any thunderstorm wind that is not associated with
rotation and is used mainly to differentiate from tornadic winds. Most straight-line winds are a
result of outflow generated by a thunderstorm downdraft. High winds are also associated with
hurricanes, with two significant effects: widespread debris due to damaged and downed trees and
building debris; and power outages. Half of all severe weather reports in the lower 48 states are
due to damaging winds. Since most thunderstorms produce some straight-line winds as a result
of outflow generated by the thunderstorm downdraft, anyone living in thunderstorm-prone areas
is at risk for experiencing straight line winds. The majority of the wind events experienced in the
region are considered straight line wind events, with the vast majority of these driven by
thunderstorms.
Straight line wind events can occur anywhere in the planning region and have the potential to
impact all types of buildings, power and telecommunication transmission lines, and transportation
services.
Figure 20: EF Ratings Definitions, Weather.gov
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-49
A tornado is a violent windstorm characterized by a twisting, funnel-shaped cloud. It is spawned
by a thunderstorm (or as a result of a hurricane) and produced when cool air overrides a layer of
warm air, forcing the warm air to rise rapidly. The damage from a tornado is a result of the high
wind velocity and wind-blown debris. Tornado season is generally April through September,
although tornadoes can occur at any time of year.
In February 2007, the National Weather Service adopted the Enhanced Fujita scale to measure
tornadoes. The EF scale replaces the original Fujita scale that led to inconsistent tornado ratings
due to a lack of damage indicators, no account of construction quality and variability, and no
definitive correlation between damage and wind speed. For example, a weak structure combined
with a slow-moving storm could lead to a tornado’s rating being higher than it should be. The EF
scale accounts for these and other variables for a more accurate measurement.
Low-intensity tornadoes appear to occur most frequently in Virginia. Tornadoes rated EF2 or
higher are very rare, although EF2, EF3, and a few EF4 storms have occurred.
Historic Event Descriptions
In total, 242 wind events have occurred in the region since the last update of the plan (see Table
3-1). More events were reported in Roanoke County than in any other jurisdiction. Almost all of
these events resulted in some level of damages, with a total reported cost across all events of
$2,223,850. Crop damage alone was reported at $140,000, though this number is likely
underreported. The average cost per wind event was $10,640. Sixteen events with damages
estimated at greater than $20,000 occurred in the region in this time period.
The largest scale event in the region was the derecho on June 29, 2012 that arrived with 80 mph
winds and left over a million people without power and caused extensive wind damage throughout
Virginia. The event was caused by a series of days with high temperatures in excess of 100
degrees created by a heat dome over the central and eastern US followed by a line of strong
thunderstorms that moved quickly from the Chicago area to the east on the afternoon of June
29th. Emergency services personnel dealt with fires caused by downed powerlines, collapsed
roofs, and wrecked vehicles. Many businesses in the area remained closed for an extended time
and lost revenue due to the power outages while hardware stores experienced a run on
generators and propane fueled grills. It took more than two weeks for utility companies to restore
power to all residents in the region. Recovery, including the clean-up of hundreds of downed trees,
roofs and building repairs lasted throughout July and August. A federal disaster declaration was
made for this event.
Significant straight line wind events have occurred since 2019. In February 2019, a strong cold
front passed over western and southwestern Virginia. In its wake, high winds intensified in the
overnight hours particularly along and west of the Blue Ridge. Impacts were amplified by
waterlogged soil, allowing trees to be uprooted or displaced more easily. At the peak of the event,
approximately 40,000 homes in Virginia were without power.
Thunderstorms struck in May of 2019 during the afternoon and evening hours. The storms
produced hail up to the size of half dollar coins and produced damaging winds that blew down
numerous trees and power lines. At least 4,000 people lost power due to trees falling on to power
lines, and a few structures also suffered damage. In June of the same year, multiple
thunderstorms developed, some of which intensified to severe levels and produced damaging
winds that knocked down numerous trees. Numerous trees and tree limbs, as well as power lines,
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-50
were blown down by straight line thunderstorm winds in eastern Roanoke and around the
community of Vinton. Siding panels from the Roanoke Times Newspaper office were blown down
onto the street. One tree fell onto a parked car on Underhill Avenue. Damage was most
concentrated along Shelbourne Avenue in Vinton; however, damage was observed from Hardy
Road to the Roanoke River, about a 3/4-mile-wide swath. Winds picked up a metal shed on
Shelbourne Avenue and blew it into a telephone pole. The damage resulted in a loss of
commercial power to about 2,000 customers in eastern Roanoke County.
On Halloween of 2019, a cold front brought strong winds both ahead and behind the frontal
passage during the afternoon and evening hours. These winds were not associated with any
thunderstorms, but they blew down trees and power lines in southwest Virginia, particularly
impacting Botetourt and Alleghany County.
In July of 2020, thunderstorm winds brought two trees down on Catawba Valley Road in Roanoke
County. One of the trees fell onto a home in the 3700 block. Damage values are estimated at
$50,000.
A large thunderstorm complex moved east from the Ohio and Tennessee Valleys across
southwest Virginia in May of 2021. The system caused dozens of trees to be toppled across the
region particularly in Botetourt County. Heavy rainfall from these storms also caused localized
flooding in the City of Roanoke, where rainfall rates were in excess of 4 inches per hour at one
point, between a 5-year and 10-year rainfall event per NOAA Atlas 14 Point Frequency Estimates,
showing that weather events are complex and often create multiple hazards.
In June of 2022, numerous trees and power lines were downed by thunderstorm winds in
Botetourt County. Near Iron Gate, one tree fell onto a garage and damaged a vehicle.
April of 2023 saw a $60,000 estimated damage event when wind gusts resulted in many trees
and power lines down in the Cities of Salem and Roanoke and portions of Roanoke County. This
resulted in an estimated one to two thousand customers without power. Among the fallen trees,
one fell and destroyed a raptor enclosure at the Southwest Virginia Wildlife Center which cost
around $25,000 to replace. Additionally a power pole and a telephone pole were split in two.
In May of 2024, thunderstorm cells produced a tornado (discussed later in this section). In
September of 2024, Hurricane Helene caused widespread impacts across the region, with over
3,200 customers reported without power at the peak of the high winds. A peak wind speed of 68
mph was measured. There was one confirmed fatality. A woman was killed when struck by a
chicken coop that was lofted by the high winds. A deputy was also injured at the scene. Total
losses from agriculture damages were around $85,000, including losses from crops and
structures.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-51
Figure 21: Tornado Paths, NOAA
Several tornadoes have touched down in the planning region. On April 24, 1896, around 4:30 pm,
a tornado moved northeast from Salem into Roanoke destroying a bowling alley and several other
buildings. A framed home near the bowling alley was leveled, killing three of the eight-member
family in the house. The five others were injured.
In Bath and Alleghany counties, the Cowpasture Valley is at an elevation of 1,500 feet and lies
between two ridges that rise 1,000 feet above the valley. On May 2, 1929, a tornado struck around
6 pm. Property losses in the communities of Coronation and Sitlington were great. At least 10
people were injured, but none were killed. There were five tornadoes reported on that day. More
may have struck remote areas. Twenty-two people were killed and over 150 injured with at least
half a million dollars in damage in Alleghany and Bath counties.
April 3-4, 1974 is known as the "Super Outbreak" with 148 tornadoes, 315 people killed and 5,484
injured across the United States. It was the most tornadoes ever in recorded in a 24-hour period
and it was the worst tornado outbreak since February 19, 1884. In Virginia, eight tornadoes hit.
One person was killed and 15 injured, all in mobile homes. Over 200 homes and barns and over
40 mobile homes and trailers were damaged or destroyed. The Saltville area and Roanoke were
the hardest hit. An F3 tornado touched down on the west edge of Roanoke, near Salem around
5 a.m., and moved through the north part of Roanoke to Bonsack and into Botetourt County to
the Blue Ridge area. The path was initially a mile wide, but it continued to narrow to 75 yards
across near the end of its track of damage. It hit four schools (two lost portions of their roof and
two had windows broken out) and two apartment complexes, Grandview Village Apartments (18
buildings damaged) and Ferncliff Apartments (lost roof). The Red Cross reported 120 homes
damaged or destroyed in the Roanoke area. Trees were down on buildings and cars. Carports,
garages, and porches were flattened. Roofs were partly blown off several houses in Botetourt.
A small tornado struck northern Roanoke County on August 5, 2003. The storm had winds of 110-
113 miles per hour and caused damage to ITT Industries and Sunnybrook Garage on Plantation
Road in addition to damaging roofs, fences and a car in the area. No injuries were reported as a
result of the tornado.
A small tornado touched down in the City of Roanoke on June 4, 2008. The tornado was rated
EF-0 on the Enhanced Fujita Scale of tornado intensity. The National Weather Service reported
that the storm knocked down power lines and trees, including on houses along a 1.4-mile path.
Appalachian Power stated that the storm knocked out power to 4,000 customers.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-52
A tornado touched down just east of the Town of New Castle on April 15, 2018. Classified as an
EF-1, estimated windspeeds reached 105 mph and had a path length of 0.5 miles. The tornado
damaged 6 homes, several outbuildings and garages, and approximately 50 trees in the vicinity.
Three cars and a double axel trailer were moved including one truck that was flipped over. The
tornado was part of a wide regional outbreak made up of several supercells on April 15th
impacting communities in Virginia and North Carolina.
On August 1, 2020 an isolated storm produced an EF0 tornado, resulting in a discontinuous path
of damage with uprooted trees and small trees snapped aloft, with damages estimated at $3,500.
An EF-1 tornado touched down near the intersection of Karen Drive and Joan Circle, on May 26,
2024. Several tree trunks were snapped. Additional trees were snapped and uprooted as the
tornado moved east-northeast, with loss of roofing material noted at several homes and apartment
buildings just south of the Roanoke River. The tornado lifted just east of Electric Road near the
intersection of Midland and Easton Roads. The estimated peak wind speeds were 100 to 105
mph. Damage was estimated to be 1.17 million dollars. The same storm cells spawned straight
line winds which resulted in an estimated $22,000 worth of damages.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-53
3.9 Winter Storm
Definition of Hazard
Winter storms are events which create snow, freezing rain, or sleet. This frozen precipitation can
accumulate on powerlines, trees, roofs and roads and cause damage or fatalities through car
wrecks, loss of electricity, and, in extreme cases, damage to buildings. The planning region
experiences a handful of winter storm events each year.
Winter storms are commonly assessed with the Northeast Snowfall Impact Scale (NESIS). Some
Category 1 or 2 storms are recorded in the NESIS database which have a southern extent within
the planning region over the past five years. However, the core of these storms was not localized
in the planning region.
Figure 22: NESIS Scale
Historic Event Descriptions
While typical snow and ice events result in low accumulations, several larger winter storms have
been documented in the region.
February of 1960 found the area blanketed with 27.6 inches and March delivered 30.3 inches that
same year. The March storm registered as a Category 4 storm across the northeast. In January
of 1966, the area received a total of 41.2 inches of snow in a Category 3 storm. The second
greatest official snow accumulation in a single 24-hour period occurred on February 11th and 12th
of 1983 when 18.6 inches covered the region in another Category 3 storm. The storm resulted in
snowdrifts of up to three feet in height. This was the third heaviest snowfall in over 100 years.
The "Storm of the Century" hit the valley in March 1993, the first Category 5 since the NESIS
scale became commonly used to directly impact the region. With blizzard-like conditions and
nearly 30 inches of snow, this was the biggest winter storm in 10 years. Localities in the region
received a Presidential Declaration of Emergency and the National Guard was mobilized to help
with emergency transportation needs. Shelters were open for those without electricity.
A devastating storm struck the region and surrounding jurisdictions in February 1994, with one to
three inches of solid ice from freezing rain and sleet. Roads were blocked, electric and phone
lines were damaged, and a large portion of the valley was without electricity.
The “Blizzard of ’96,” also a Category 5, dropped 22.2 inches officially in 24 hours in early January
of 1996 and remains the current record 24-hour snowfall. Many areas of the region received more
than 36 inches during the same period.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-54
In March 2009 snowfall reports in the region ranged from 6 to 9 inches and were the largest snow
event since 2005. The Winter of 2009-2010 brought three major winter storms to the area. On
December 18th, with areas of Craig and Alleghany County reporting up to 23 inches, snow
continued to fall for the next 11 days. The first week of February 2010, saw another 8-10 inches
fall on top of an event in late January that had already dropped 10-12 inches causing power
outages, and dangerous driving conditions. The biggest snowstorm on record for the City was
December 18-19, 2009 with 17.8 inches.
The City of Roanoke’s snowiest single day in December occurred in 2018 with 15.2 inches.
Since the last iteration of this plan, 31 winter storm or winter weather events have been recorded
by NCEI in the planning region. These events are generally widespread and affect multiple
localities, meaning that it is more truthful to say that only about 11 individual events have occurred.
These events have mostly been characterized by snowfall of less than 10 inches or ice
accumulation, with the most widespread impacts being power outages.
In January of 2019, a winter storm event resulted in snow and ice across much of the region, with
snow accumulations of up to 4.8 inches in some places followed by slight ice accumulations from
sleet and freezing rain. In February, another storm affected the region, with around 4 inches of
accumulation.
The 2020-2021 winter storm season began early in December, when snow and ice accumulations
of a half inch to 2.5 inches were observed across the region. Another region-wide storm struck at
the end of January, with snowfall amounts of 4-7 inches recorded across the region. Two small
winter weather events struck Craig and Roanoke Counties respectively in February. These
episodes were brief and resulted in less than half inch accumulations of sleet. Another storm event
affected the whole region later in the month, with accumulations of less than 1.5 inches.
January of 2022 saw two regional winter storm events. Accumulations in the region ranged from
1.5 to 6.5 inches in the first storm event, and from 1 to 8 inches in the second storm event.
January of 2024 saw a small episode of winter weather in Alleghany, followed by an episode of
heavy snow in Botetourt and Roanoke Counties with accumulations of 4.8 and 3.5 inches
respectively in higher elevations.
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-55
3.10 Hazards Not Assessed
Drought
Drought is defined by four factors: precipitation, groundwater levels, streamflow, and reservoir
levels. The Virginia Department of Environmental Quality monitors drought across the state to
designate drought events.
Five major droughts affected Virginia in the 20th century, during 1930-32, 1938-42, 1962-71,
1980-82, and from 1998 to 2002. Following the 2002 drought, the Local and Regional Water
Supply Planning Regulation was established in Virginia, which required each locality to develop
and submit a plan by 2011, either alone or in collaboration with other localities. The Virginia State
Water Resources Plan (SWRP) was finalized and released to the public in October 2015. An
update of the document was conducted in 2020.
There are three water supply plans which overlap the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany region included
in the 2020 SWRP:
• The Upper James Water Supply Plan: this plan covers Alleghany, Bath, and Highland
Counties, as well as Lexington, Buena Vista, Covington, Clifton Forge and Iron Gate and
was produced in partnership with Central Shenandoah Planning District Commission.
• The Roanoke River Water Supply Plan: this plan covers Roanoke, Bedford, Botetourt, and
Franklin Counties as well as the cities of Roanoke and Salem, and the Towns of Boones
Mill, Buchanan, Fincastle, Rocky Mount, Troutville and Vinton.
• The Craig County – Town of New Castle Regional Water Supply Plan: this plan covers
Craig County and the Town of New Castle.
Figure 23: Water Supply Planning Areas, DEQ
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-56
The Regional Commission is currently in the process of assisting with updates to regional Water
Supply plans following new watershed boundary guidance released in 20247F8. Two plans will be
completed for the Roanoke River basin and Upper James basin respectively. These will supply
data and information for a future iteration of the SWRP. Water supply planning includes
information concerning community water systems and self-supplied users, existing and potential
sources of water supply, existing use, and anticipated future water demand. Further integration of
water supply planning with the hazard mitigation plan may be advantageous in future plan
iterations.
Pandemic
A pandemic is an epidemic that has reached a global level of spread. On January 30, 2020, the
World Health Organization declared a Public Health Emergency of Concern following
identification of the coronavirus COVID-19, followed by a declaration of pandemic on March 11th
of that year. The pandemic had harsh economic ripple effects across the Commonwealth and the
country. While this document does not assess future pandemic risk, a brief summary of local
impacts is included below as a learning opportunity for future disaster events.
In Virginia, a State of Emergency was declared on March 12th of 2020. On March 13th all K-12
schools in the Commonwealth were ordered closed. On March 23rd, businesses such as bowling
alleys, gyms, and theaters were also ordered closed. On March 24th, restaurants were ordered to
close dining rooms. On March 30th, a statewide Stay at Home order was issued. The Stay at
Home order remained broadly in effect until May 15th. During Phase One reopening, people were
still encouraged to maintain social distancing and mask fully in public. Social gatherings were
capped at 10 people, and outdoor dining was allowed at restaurants. On May 29th, Virginians
received an official order requiring all people to mask indoors. Phase Two reopening began on
June 5th, which allowed an increase in social gatherings from 10 to 50 people. Limited indoor
dining returned to restaurants and gyms were able to reopen. On June 8th, evictions proceedings
were suspended. On July 1st, Virginia entered Phase Three reopening, which further loosened
restrictions. On November 15th, new restrictions were placed limiting all indoor and outdoor
gatherings to 25 people due to surging case numbers. On December 14th, a universal stay-at-
home order was issued between 12 am and 5 am, along with a universal mask mandate. Social
gatherings were limited to 10 people.
A vaccine was first made available in Virginia in December of 2020, but was restricted to frontline
workers due to availability. As of April 2021, the vaccine was officially available to all Virginians
aged 16 or older. The universal indoor mask mandate was lifted in May of 2021, along with all
social distancing and venue capacity restrictions.
Economic impacts from the pandemic can be seen in a variety of data points, including
unemployment rates, spending and tax revenues, and business closures.8F
9
Many community stakeholders found their operations directly affected by the pandemic. While a
full list of discussions can be found in Appendix A: Public Engagement Summary, a major
takeaway was that non-governmental organizations and nonprofits serving marginalized
communities found themselves quickly adapting in order to meet sharp increases in demand for
services which government programs were not able to fully cover. This shows that, while NGO
8 (Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, n.d.)
9 (Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission, 2025)
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-57
and nonprofit aid programs cannot replace government assistance, they are a pivotal part of the
post-disaster response, in many cases providing immediate emergency aid while other, longer-
term aid was being processed.
Hospitals were additionally a frontline for disaster response. Hospitalizations and deaths from the
pandemic in the years of 2020-2021 are captured in Table 15. Data comes from Virginia’s Open
Data Portal.
Table 16: Infections, Hospitalizations, and Deaths due to COVID-19, 2020-2021
Locality Total Cases Hospitalizations Deaths
The total number of deaths reported per the Virginia Department of Health and Human Services
was 5,000 for the year 2020, 614 more than were observed in 20199F10. The total number of deaths
reported due to COVID-19 in 2020 was 560. It is safe to assume that deaths and hospitalizations
due to COVID-19 represent an increased burden on hospital and health services staff. Bed
capacity at area hospitals is included in Chapter 2: Regional Profile.10F
11.
In 2025, there are 1,463 licensed beds in three area hospitals within the service area. Hospitals
outside of the service area may receive patients in a diversion event. In the case of the COVID-
19 pandemic, lockdown and social distancing measures reduced spread sufficiently to allow for
the care of all patients. In a more acute disaster, hospital bed capacity may be a limiting factor to
disaster response, causing a greater loss of life. In the case of Hurricane Helene, further
discussed in Section 3.5 in this chapter, diverted patients from Asheville, North Carolina reached
Roanoke’s area hospitals in cases where specific treatments were needed for patients (e.g. in
high-risk pregnancies) as reported in stakeholder interviews with CHIP. Further study of hospital
capacity in disaster situations is recommended but could not be encompassed fully in this plan.
10 (Division of Health Statistics, Virginia Department of Health, n.d.)
11 (Virginia Health Information, 2021)
Chapter 3: Hazard Identification Page | 3-58
[blank]
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-1
Chapter 4. Risk Assessment
4.1 Disaster Rankings
Hazards assessed in this chapter include all listed hazards from Chapter 3 with the exception of
section 3.11 Hazards Not Assessed and 3.5 Hurricane and Tropical Storm. While the region
experiences the impacts of a few tropical storms or depressions and remnants of hurricanes,
these impacts are experienced as flooding and wind events, and assessment of these two events
reasonably addresses risk from Hurricane and Tropical Storm.
This section summarizes the contents of the following sections of the chapter. For more
information on what data was used for individual hazard assessment, please refer to the relevant
section of this chapter. Definitions of ranking methodology are included for reference.
Projected Scale of Event: Hazard events may occur on site-specific, community, or regional
scales. Estimated scale of event is derived from the impacts of historic events and the projected
likelihood of events to remain substantially similar in the future. Scores are defined by the
approximate land area affected by a single event.
Projected Scale of Event
Local Effects Jurisdiction-Wide Effects Region-Wide Effects
Effects of an event are
localized to a parcel or
Effects of an event affect a
Effects of an event affect multiple
jurisdictions or the region as a
Projected Costs per Annum: Costs are a concrete way to estimate impact from a hazard event.
Costs have been derived where possible from NRI and NCEI data, HAZUS modeling, and other
sources. Costs are represented as high, medium, and low based off of thresholds defined by the
individual jurisdictions. This may mean that costs that are considered high for one jurisdiction are
low for another jurisdiction.
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-2
Projected Costs per Annum
Low Medium High
Alleghany County Under $25,000 $25,000-$35,000 $35,000 or higher
City of Covington Under $25,000 $25,000-$35,000 $35,000 or higher
Town of Clifton Forge Under $25,000 $25,000-$35,000 $35,000 or higher
Town of Iron Gate Under $25,000 $25,000-$35,000 $35,000 or higher
Craig County Under $25,000 $25,000-$35,000 $35,000 or higher
Town of New Castle Under $25,000 $25,000-$50,000 $50,000 or higher
Botetourt County Under $50,000 $50,000-$200,000 $200,000 or higher
Town of Buchanan Under $25,000 $25,000-$50,000 $50,000 or higher
Town of Fincastle Under $25,000 $25,000-$50,000 $50,000 or higher
Town of Troutville Under $50,000 $50,000-$200,000 $200,000 or higher
Roanoke County Under $200,000 $200,00-$1.5 million $1.5 million or higher
Town of Vinton Under $25,000 $25,000-$50,000 $50,000 or higher
City of Roanoke Under $200,000 $200,00-$1.5 million $1.5 million or higher
City of Salem Under $200,000 $200,00-$1.5 million $1.5 million or higher
Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Under $25,000 $25,000-$50,000 $50,000 or higher
Western Virginia Water Authority Under $25,000 $25,000-$50,000 $50,000 or higher
Projected Frequency of Events: This takes into account the data accumulated in Chapter 3
regarding historical events. Frequent small to medium events can be just as impactful as a single
large event, and more costly over the long term for communities.
Projected Frequency of Event
Less than Annual Annual Multiple Times per Year
An event occurs once every
two or more years.
An event occurs on average once a
year.
An event occurs on average
multiple times a year.
Projected Local Vulnerabilities: This is the most individual of the rankings. Projected local
vulnerability to a hazard may be dependent on many factors, including the location of critical and
vulnerable facilities, age of population, and other specific vulnerabilities which may be important
to modeling impacts of that hazard. For example, certain hazards become more critical in areas
with steeper slopes, or with increased impervious surfaces. When possible, NRI data will inform
this ranking.
Projected Local Vulnerability
Low Medium High
Thresholds for these rankings are defined for each hazard.
Rankings are made for each locality, using a variety of data sources as appropriate or available.
Rankings have then been consolidated for the region and special district service areas.
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-3
Sections of this chapter will specifically cite annual probability and expected annual loss provided
by the National Risk Index when available and appropriate. When not available, the closest
reasonable estimate will be supplied for comparison purposes.
In the case where HAZUS modeling or other improved local estimates of loss or risk exist, those
numbers will be given preference. It is understood that the regional agencies that operate in the
region are impacted by the hazards equivalent to the jurisdictions wherein they operate. Further
discussion of regional entities included in this plan will occur in Chapter 6: Regional Mitigation
Action Plan and Chapter 7: Jurisdiction-Specific Mitigation Action Plans.
Once values are assigned to each of these elements, the total score is ranked on the following
scale:
• Hazard of Low Concern (4 to 6 points)
• Hazard of Medium Concern (7 to 9 points)
• Hazard of High Concern (10 to 12 points)
A regional score and a locality specific score are assigned for each hazard.
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-4
All Hazard Ranking Table
Table 17: All Hazards Ranking Table
Hazard Ranking Table: All Hazards
Locality Earthquake
Extreme Geologic
Alleghany County Medium Medium High Medium Medium High Medium
City of Covington Medium Low Medium Low Low High Medium
Town of Clifton
Forge Medium Low High Low Medium Medium Medium
Town of Iron Gate Low Low High Low Medium High Medium
Craig County Low Low Medium Low Low High Medium
Town of New
Castle Low Low Medium Low Low High Medium
Botetourt County Medium Medium High Low Low High Medium
Town of Buchanan Medium Medium High Low Low High Medium
Town of Fincastle Medium Medium High Low Low High Medium
Town of Troutville Medium Medium High Low Low High Medium
Roanoke County Medium Medium High Medium High High Medium
Town of Vinton Medium Medium High Low Low Medium Medium
City of Roanoke Medium High High Low Low Medium Medium
City of Salem Low Medium High Low Low Medium Medium
WVWA Service
Area Medium Medium High Low Low Medium Medium
RVRA Service Area Medium Medium High Low Low High Medium
Regional Score Medium Medium High Low Low High Medium
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-5
Considerations for Special Districts
While impacts to specific special district facilities historically are generally discussed in Chapter
3, quantifying future vulnerability is more difficult. For the purposes of this assessment, the service
area of each special district will be used as a way to assess risk. Future risk assessment models
should further individualize risk for special districts based on service type and systems reliability.
Factors for analysis may include infrastructure reliability, employee safety standards, and facilities
vulnerabilities.
Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission
As the Regional Commission service area maps to the planning area with the exception of
Franklin County, the overall regional score will describe Regional Commission’s service area risk.
In a significant crisis event, the Regional Commission is likely to provide technical support
services to all signatories of the plan.
Roanoke Valley Resource Authority
The RVRA serves the localities of the Cities of Roanoke and Salem, the County of Roanoke, and
the Town of Vinton. While facilities are primarily located in the Cities of Roanoke and Salem, the
RVRA or their partners must access all roadways and localities to provide services and maintain
operations. Accordingly, the modal score across the member localities is used to assess overall
risk to the RVRA. Notably, outcomes from the risk assessment support the high vulnerability to
flooding that RVRA has seen historically. This does not mean the RVRA is not susceptible to other
hazard events which affect their service area, especially winter storm, where shutdown of
roadways may inhibit service provision; wind events, where gusts may create flying shrapnel from
solid waste; and extreme temperature, which may inhibit employees from moving to collect solid
waste in harsh outdoor conditions or reduce productivity.
Western Virginia Water Authority
The WVWA serves a broader region than the planning area. The WVWA provides drinking water
service for residents and businesses in the City of Roanoke, the Counties of Roanoke, Franklin
and Botetourt and the Towns of Boones Mill, Iron Gate and Vinton. Sanitary wastewater service
is provided for the greater Roanoke Valley. Through a contractual agreement, water and
wastewater service is provided in the Town of Fincastle. They are also working to provide service
to the Craig-New Castle Public Service Authority. For the purposes of this assessment, the WVWA
risk will be determined the modal score across the City of Roanoke, the Counties of Roanoke,
Botetourt, and Craig, and the Towns located therein.
Notably, outcomes from the risk assessment support the high vulnerability to flooding that WVWA
has seen historically. This does not mean the WVWA is not susceptible to other hazard events
which affect their service area, especially extreme temperature, which may affect water and sewer
lines as well as pump stations; and drought, which is not assessed in this plan. Additionally, high
hazard potential dam documentation located in Appendix H captures facilities located outside of
the planning region, including two facilities in Bedford County, as these facilities are critical to
water service provision for the region and owned by the WVWA.
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-6
High Hazard Potential Dams
High hazard potential dams are a unique structure within the region which may complicate hazard
events. Key risks to dam structures include flooding, earthquake, and geologic hazards. Flooding
is one of the most commonly occurring hazards in the region, and improving structures to
withstand increased flooding frequency and increasingly high flood events is important in reducing
risk of dam failure and downstream inundation. Further analysis is needed to assess structural
vulnerability to increased rain and flood events and potential downstream impacts; however,
efforts have been made to collect emergency action plans, inundation maps, and dam safety fact
sheets where available.
Earthquakes may negatively impact dam structures, which can cause the loss of water supply for
a community, loss of energy generation, and downstream flooding resulting in loss of life and
property damage. Earthquakes may also cause landslides or trigger other geologic hazards which
can negatively affect both water quality in the reservoir and impoundment structure access. In
1979, the first Federal Guidelines for Dam Safety. However, further documentation in the form of
the Earthquake Analyses and Design of Dams guidance was not completed until May 2005. This
indicates that dams within the region, largely built before that time, may be susceptible to
earthquakes. Further analysis is needed to determine the compounding risk factors of
earthquakes on high hazard potential dams in the region.
A comprehensive list of High Hazard Potential Dams in the region is located in Chapter 3. Dam
safety fact sheets and select inundation maps are located in Appendix H.
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-7
4.2 Earthquake
Earthquake is a rare hazard in the region, but several factors make a potential occurrence
concerning. The age of housing stock, social vulnerability factors, steep slopes and the lack of
experience with this hazard could make a large earthquake deadly in the planning region.
Projected Scale of Event
In Chapter 3, historic events were discussed. Generally, earthquakes are considered a wide-
ranging event which ignore geographic boundaries. The 2020 earthquake was felt throughout
most of the service area, despite originating in North Caroline, and was only measured at a V to
VI at its epicenter. It is reasonable to expect that a larger earthquake anywhere across the western
portion of Virginia or North Carolina could have effects in the region. A large earthquake with an
epicenter in the region would likely be felt across the region even if it were a smaller event. The
small 2021 earthquake which occurred on the Montgomery County border was felt through parts
of Roanoke County, the City of Salem, and the City of Roanoke.
Projected Costs of Event
Expected losses for this event are difficult to quantify. No historical loss information was found to
support this plan.
Table 18: Expected Annual Loss and Exposure Values for Earthquake, NRI
Locality Expected Annual Loss Exposure Value
Alleghany County $ 27,538.00
$
179,683,942,000.00
City of Covington $ 12,797.00
$
67,930,465,000.00
Botetourt County $ 58,140.00
$
395,469,648,000.00
Craig County $ 10,382.00
$
57,657,907,000.00
Roanoke County $ 293,168.00
$
1,141,602,462,000.00
City of Roanoke $ 454,632.00 1,181,643,712,000.00
City of Salem $ 116,212.00 300,396,037,000.00
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-8
Projected Frequency of Event
The USGS Hazard Mapping for earthquakes shows that the region has a 5-25% chance of an
earthquake measuring VI or greater on the Mercalli Intensity scale in the next 100 years. This is
a relatively low probability consistent with much of Virginia and the east coast. The nearest higher
risk center for earthquakes is located on the far side of Kentucky and Tennessee.
NRI data indicates the following annual probability and expected annual loss for earthquakes in
the region. Towns are included in counties for the purposes of this analysis.
Table 19: Annualized Frequency Values for Earthquakes, NRI
Locality Annualized Frequency Value (%)
Alleghany County 0.03
City of Covington 0.03
Botetourt County 0.03
Craig County 0.04
Roanoke County 0.039
City of Roanoke 0.048
City of Salem 0.04
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-9
Figure 24: Earthquake Risk Mapping, USGS
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-10
Projected Local Vulnerability
Eighty percent of the housing stock in the region was built prior to 1980. These structures are
likely not protected from earthquakes. Per FEMA, existing buildings are the biggest contributor to
seismic risk in the United States today. Building codes prior to 1970 may not have included
seismic design, which is a key factor in mitigating possible damage from earthquakes. A deeper
look at the numbers shows that residences in Alleghany County, the City of Covington, and the
City of Roanoke may be uniquely vulnerable to earthquakes. In the City of Covington, three out
of four dwelling units are likely at risk from earthquakes.
Table 20: Homes Built Before 1970, ACS 5-Year Estimate 2023
Housing Units Built before 1970 Percentage built before 1970
Virginia
1,080,622 30%
Alleghany County
4,082 52%
City of Covington
2,341 77%
Botetourt County
4,119 27%
Craig County 803 34%
Roanoke County
14,370 34%
City of Roanoke
31,496 64%
City of Salem
5,406 49%
The 2024 Edition of FEMA’s Seismic Design Category Maps show designations for the
International Building Code and the International Residential Code regarding seismic design11F12.
The majority of the planning region is located in category B of the International Residential Code.
Other factors that are worth assessing in future plans may include soil composition, building
height, and number of manufactured homes. Soil composition is directly considered in the
applicability the 2024 Edition of FEMA’s Seismic Design Category Maps. High risk soils must do
site specific assessment.
For the local vulnerability score, designations of low, medium and high were assigned at natural
thresholds of under 50 percent of aged dwellings, 50-75 percent of aged dwellings, and 75 percent
or more of aged dwellings. Towns share the same score as the county in which they are located.
This is not a perfect methodology and should be revisited in future iterations of the plan. Age of
housing or building stock in towns may trend significantly higher than that of the enclosing county.
12 (Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2024)
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-11
Hazard Ranking Table
Table 21: Hazard Ranking for Earthquake
Hazard Ranking
Table: Earthquake
Locality Scale of Event
Costs per
Annum
Frequency of
Event
Local Vulnerability
Score
Overall
Score
Alleghany County
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Less than
Annual Medium Medium
City of Covington
Region-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual High Medium
Town of Clifton
Forge
Region Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium Medium
Town of Iron Gate
Region-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low
Craig County
Region-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low
Town of New
Castle
Region Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low Low
Botetourt County
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Less than
Annual Low
Town of
Buchanan
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Less than
Annual Low
Town of Fincastle
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Less than
Annual Low
Town of Troutville
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Less than
Annual Low
Roanoke County
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Less than
Annual Low
Town of Vinton
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Less than
Annual Low
City of Roanoke
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Less than
Annual Medium
City of Salem
Region-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low
RVRA
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Less than
Annual Low Medium
WVWA
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Less than
Annual Low Medium
Regional Score
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Less than
Annual Low Medium
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-12
4.3 Extreme Temperature
Many models project an increase in extreme weather conditions in the coming years, particularly
in experiences of heat waves. While the thresholds used to attempt to analyze historical events
are detailed in Chapter 3, these measurements are not perfect comparisons to the national
definitions for a cold wave and a heat wave. NRI uses these terms to describe extreme
temperature.
Heat wave: a period of abnormally and uncomfortably hot and unusually humid weather
typically lasting two or more days with temperatures outside the historical averages for a
given area.
Cold wave: a rapid fall in temperature within 24 hours and extreme low temperatures for
an extended period. The temperatures classified as a cold wave are dependent on the
location and defined by the local National Weather Service (NWS) weather forecast office.
While having a national standard for temperature is important, localized conditions can create
very different experiences of temperature, as discussed in the previous chapter. Additionally,
changing norms in the region due to increased impervious surfaces and general trends in weather
conditions can mean that heat events in particular are perceived as more critical by a given
region’s residents even when actual temperatures are less than in neighboring regions.
Generally, more data is needed to fully support this section. However, an initial attempt to assess
impacts of extreme temperatures is included below.
Projected Scale of Event
Generally, weather-based hazards tend to be the most boundary-crossing. However, land use
and elevation vary widely throughout the planning area. Temperatures in the rural and higher
elevations of Craig County, northern Botetourt County, and the Alleghany Highlands trend slightly
lower than temperatures in the Roanoke Valley.
Case Studies of Extreme Temperature Impacts
Two case studies of extreme heat and extreme cold incidents are worth looking at to guide this
assessment: the heat dome in Seattle, Washington, and the cold wave in Richmond, Virginia.
These are extreme events which show the scale of potential damage for this hazard should
compounding factors occur. Both of these studies highlight impacts on critical infrastructure as
being a compounding factor for extreme temperatures as well as other hazards. Specifically,
power grids, healthcare facilities, and water utilities may be at risk from these events.
Richmond, Virginia Cold Wave of 2025
On January 6, 2025, residents across Richmond lost access to water during a cold wave that
caused major failures to water infrastructure. Specifically, power was lost to the main water
treatment plant. Backup battery power failed, the facility flooded and submerged critical electrical
systems. There was a complete water treatment plant power outage for nearly 36 hours.12F
13 Water
production was restored on January 9th, but a boil water notification was in place until January
11th. Water losses affected area hospitals and other critical facilities.
13 (HNTB Corporation, 2025)
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-13
Power failure at the water treatment plant occurred during a prolonged cold wave and concurrent
winter storm event which caused power loss. An article in The Richmonder on January 1st
predicted around two weeks of below average temperatures driven by a polar vortex event.13F14
The Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin modeled economic and fiscal costs of a
water supply disruption in the National Capital Region. Notable economic losses from water
disruption begin in as little as two hours from the event, with impacts disproportionately felt by
small businesses.14F
15
Seatle, Washington Heat Wave of 2021
In the summer of 2021 Seattle, Washington experienced a heat dome event. This area of the
country does not have typically hot summers – however, triple digit temperatures were recorded.
The Washington Department of Health tracked 136 heat-related deaths across the state from
June 26 through July 6, 2021. No planning was done for an event of that scale, because no
models predicted it. Many of the care facilities in the region did not have air conditioning, making
them particularly vulnerable. Power outages occurred due to the stress on the grid, and critical
equipment such as imagining and laboratory equipment overheated.15F
16
Impacts from this event were largely felt in healthcare facilities, which were already strained by
COVID-19, and in the power grid. Vulnerable populations including the elderly, homeless, and
those in healthcare facilities or otherwise lacking mobility to evacuate were especially impacted.
Projected Costs of Event
Costs of opening shelters, mortality costs and crop damage may all be important costs to consider
when assessing the costs of extreme temperature events. For example, consistent temperatures
over 90 degrees reduce or halt the growth rate of most grasses used for cattle feed in this region,
increasing costs of meat production for farmers and reducing their margins. Higher temperatures
result in increased energy costs for home owners, and higher demand on the grid can have
complicating factors for utility service providers. These costs are hard to quantify in assessing the
impacts of this hazard.
Table 22: Expected Annual Loss for Cold Wave, NRI
Locality
Expected Annual
Loss Exposure Value
Alleghany County $42,546 $179,478,356,906
City of Covington $9,600 $67,930,487,195
Botetourt County $36,708 $394,929,053,010
Craig County $8,338 $57,558,866,073
Roanoke County $65,026 $1,141,152,733,759
City of Roanoke $100,139 $1,181,121,995,799
City of Salem $25,405 $300,396,106,588
14 (Sublette, 2025)
15 (Tonya E. Thornton, 2024)
16 (ASPR TRACIE, 2023)
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-14
This hazard is one of the main hazards for which shelters are regularly opened in the planning
region. Shelters serve as heating and cooling centers when other weather events cause power
outages, or simply when temperatures become extreme enough that those without reliable shelter
have need. Further plan iterations should seek to quantify the cost of opening shelters for extreme
heat and extreme cold to close the gap in national data, as well as the cost of illness and mortality
in the housing insecure via coordination with EMS staff, local area hospitals, and local area
homeless shelters.
Figure 25: Urban Heat Island Effect, City of Roanoke
Projected Frequency of Event
Annual average of extreme heat and extreme cold historically are discussed in Chapter 3, with 32
extreme heat days and 5 extreme cold days by definitions used in that chapter. Annual frequency
by that definition is multiple times per year. NRI data which is based off of different definitions,
contests this. The annualized frequency value for cold waves remains low in the region, at
between 0.1 and 0.3 events per year.
No annualized frequency data is available for heat wave in the planning region. However, heat
waves occur and multiple heat advisories were issued in the region during the writing of this plan.
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-15
Table 23: Annualized Frequency of Cold Waves, NRI
Locality
Annualized Frequency
Value
Alleghany County 0.3
City of Covington 0.3
Botetourt County 0.1
Craig County 0.3
Roanoke County 0.1
City of Roanoke 0.1
City of Salem 0.1
The City of Roanoke conducted urban heat island mapping to capture the risks of extreme heat
within this locality. Mapping from this study recorded a variation in temperature of up to 15 degrees
Fahrenheit across the City, with temperatures highest in downtown and low-income
neighborhoods. Late evening temperatures of greater than 89 degrees were observed in these
areas.
Projected Local Vulnerability
Factors that can increase vulnerability to extreme temperature include the weatherization rate of
buildings, impervious surfaces ratios, and age of residents. For very few other hazards is social
vulnerability, including factors of age, health and well-being, and poverty, such a key marker of
risk. For this reason, social vulnerability numbers from the NRI are a key indicator of local
vulnerability for this hazard.
Table 24: Social Vulnerability, NRI
Locality Social Vulnerability
Alleghany
County Relatively Low
City of
Covington Very Low
Botetourt
County Very Low
Craig County Very Low
Roanoke County Very Low
City of Roanoke Very High
City of Salem Relatively Low
Specific data readily available for this iteration of the plan include demographic numbers around
the age of the population, information on how houses are heated, age of housing stock, and
information around vulnerable homeless populations.
Table 25 shows Vulnerable Populations by Age. Age increases susceptibility to temperature-
related mortality. The table below shows the percentage of the population less than 5 years old
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-16
and older than 65 years old. Percentages of this vulnerable population do not directly parallel the
NRI social vulnerability estimate. Clifton Forge and Alleghany County have the most vulnerable
population in the region by age, likely due to the size of the 65 and older population.
Table 20: Homes Built Before 1970, ACS 5-Year Estimate 2023 shows that the City of Roanoke
and City of Covington have the oldest housing stock by percentage, with City of Roanoke having
the highest count of older housing stock. This is an important data point for extreme temperatures.
Older housing stock is typically less weatherized, and so extreme temperatures are harder to
counteract through heating and cooling systems. Keeping the house regulated is a greater
financial burden on the homeowner. Some older houses may not have cooling systems at all,
especially in lower income neighborhoods.
Heating fuel data is available through the 2023 ACS 5-year estimates. For the purposes of this
assessment, several fuel sources have been combined into a non-utility, non-renewable fuel
source category. These include bottled, take, or LP gas; fuel oil, kerosene, etc.; coal or coke;
wood; and other fuel. Some houses reported no fuel used; these are obviously the most
vulnerable households to extreme temperatures. Alleghany and Craig see the highest percentage
of non-utility fuel sources used. However, the Counties of Alleghany and Roanoke and the City of
Roanoke see high numbers of no fuel source reported, a concerning statistic especially in extreme
cold events. These populations are likely to need warming or cooling centers in an extreme
temperature wave.
As of January 2025, 389 people in the Roanoke Region were currently experiencing
homelessness according to the Blue Ridge Continuum of Care Point in Time report. This data is
only specifically collected in the Roanoke Valley. While homelessness likely exists in rural areas,
it is less extreme and less visible. One factor is that many homeless persons may migrate within
the region to find services, which are largely clustered in more urbanized areas.
Extreme temperature, especially extreme heat, potentially affects multiple assets, including
infrastructure and healthcare facilities, and further assessment of this hazard is needed. It is
notable that most of the key assets most impacted by extreme temperature, including the area
Level I Trauma Center Roanoke Memorial Hospital and the main headquarters of the Western
Virginia Water Authority, are located in the City of Roanoke.
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-17
Table 25: Vulnerable Populations by Age
Locality Total Population Under 5 65 and over Total
Vulnerable
Percent
Vulnerable
Alleghany County* 14,641 603 3,801 4,404 30%
Botetourt County 33,875 1,437 8,005 9,442 28%
Craig County 4,881 359 939 1,298 27%
Roanoke County 88,755 3,891 19,573 23,464 26%
Covington City 5,671 332 1,103 1,435 25%
Roanoke City 98,677 6,353 17,227 23,580 24%
Salem City 25,477 1,039 4,965 6,004 24%
Town of Clifton Forge 3,483 231 892 1,123 32%
Town of Vinton 8,008 431 1,531 1,962 25%
Table 26: Heating Fuel Source by Locality, ACS 5-year Estimates
Electricity
4,110
1,378
8,791
1,131
18,842
21,155
4,047
Utility Gas
749
944
2,028
8
16,290
19,215
5,508
Solar
Energy
-
-
56
-
13
25
-
Non-
utility,
non-
1,394
2,195
3,993
2,914
No fuel
used 39 8 35 9 93 120 27
Total
Units
Assessed
6,292
2,493
13,105 1,752
39,231
43,429
10,140
Percent
Utility
Percent
Non-
23% 7% 17% 35% 10% 7% 6%
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-18
Hazard Ranking Table
Table 27: Hazard Ranking for Extreme Temperature
Hazard Ranking
Table: Extreme Temperatures
Locality Scale of Event
Costs per
Annum
Frequency of
Event
Local Vulnerability
Score
Overall
Score
Alleghany County
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Less than
Annual Medium Medium
City of Covington
Region-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low Low
Town of Clifton
Forge
Region Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium Low
Town of Iron Gate
Region-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low
Craig County
Region-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low
Town of New
Castle
Region Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low Low
Botetourt County
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Less than
Annual Low
Town of
Buchanan
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Less than
Annual Low
Town of Fincastle
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Less than
Annual Low
Town of Troutville
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Less than
Annual Low
Roanoke County
Region-Wide
Effects Medium Annual Medium
Town of Vinton
Region-Wide
Effects Medium Annual Medium
City of Roanoke
Region-Wide
Effects Medium Annual High
City of Salem
Region-Wide
Effects Low Annual Medium
RVRA
Region-Wide
Effects Medium Medium Medium Medium
WVWA
Region-Wide
Effects Medium Low Medium Medium
Regional Score
Region-Wide
Effects Medium Annual Low Medium
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-19
4.4 Flooding
Flooding is one of the most impacting hazards to the region. All of the jurisdictions and special
districts within this plan have to deal directly with flooding on at least an annual basis. The HAZUS
model for flooding in the region includes a 100-year and 500-year model. All reports are located
in Appendix D. Flood Hazard Areas are also mapped in Appendix D.
There are two types of flooding of concern in the region. Riverine flooding is most common. Most
of the data in this chapter will focus on riverine flooding. Flooding due to failed infrastructure is
also an issue across the planning region, specifically failure of culverts and other stormwater
detention or diversion infrastructure, and failure of dams.
Stormwater infrastructure failure is an issue in some localities, most commonly in more urbanized
areas including in the Cities of Covington, Roanoke, and Salem. Infrastructure typically fails when
not designed to transmit the volume of water produced by a given precipitation event. Culverts,
which allow stormwater to pass under roads or railways, are designed for 100-year events in most
cases, though some may be designed for higher flow where safety impacts are of particular
concern.16F
17 Documenting failed or overwhelmed stormwater infrastructure, especially where it can
directly impact critical facilities beyond roadways, is an important potential project for local
governments. The City of Covington recently received funding from the Community Flood
Preparedness Fund to complete their Drainage Study mentioned in Chapter 3. Resilience Plans
from the City of Roanoke and the City of Salem also address this kind of flooding.
A flood prone roadway study was completed by the Regional Commission in 2005. The outcomes
of the study were documented in the 2019 Plan. This study has not been updated.
One of the most common drivers of extreme precipitation events which produce flooding in the
region is hurricanes. For this reason, hurricane hazards are considered included for assessment
in this section. The history of hurricane events and hurricane-derived flooding is included in
Chapter 3.
Several localities in the region are CRS communities. Other localities have indicated interest.
Where appropriate information in this section will support this designation.
Projected Scale of Event
The frequency of large-scale flood events is projected via the 100-year and 500-year floodplain
for given parcels. The majority of flood events are more likely to be smaller, semi-local events
driven by precipitation.
Because riverine flooding specifically is tied to streams which flow through multiple localities, a
flood in a specific watershed also usually affects multiple localities in the planning region. For
example, a flood of the Roanoke River would affect Roanoke County, the City of Salem, the City
of Roanoke, and the Town of Vinton to varying degrees. Similarly, a flood event on the James
River could affect Botetourt County and the Town of Buchanan, or, if the entire Upper James
watershed is impacted, the Alleghany Highlands localities. Flooding is largely driven by
precipitation. Changes in precipitation patterns in the region have resulted in stronger individual
precipitation events over the last several years, which increase flooding impacts.
17 (Virginia Department of Transportation, 2002)
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-20
As discussed in Chapter 3: Hazard Identification, multiple high hazard dams exist in the region.
Specific known structural vulnerabilities and safety incidents are documented in that chapter.
Although flood inundation maps are a requirement of the current Impounding Structure
Regulations, Virginia DCR does not currently have this information available in a digital form.
Were these maps available, they would illustrate the probable area of flooding downstream of a
dam in the event of failure.
Projected Costs of Event
For this plan, a HAZUS model was run for riverine flooding at the 100-year and 500-year
thresholds. The full reports are contained in Appendix D: Flooding HAZUS Reports.
Table 28: Estimated Annual Loss for Flooding, NRI
Locality Expected Annual Loss Exposure Value
Alleghany County $1,269,955 $16,809,384,028
City of Covington $175,909 $6,391,387,076
Botetourt County $504,537 $16,236,678,289
Craig County $31,287 $3,055,738,660
Roanoke County $600,519 $26,537,346,445
City of Roanoke $752,345 $38,605,696,944
City of Salem $621,251 $34,391,371,524
While the estimated annual loss for flooding is already high for many localities, a 100-year flood
event could have catastrophic impacts to the region. The following include possible outcomes of
a 100-year flood event. An event is unlikely to occur across the entire region at the same time, as
multiple watersheds are represented. However, as Hurricane Helene showed in western North
Carolina, this is not an impossible scenario.
• Damage to Roanoke Memorial hospital resulting in the loss of 703 beds in the region.
• 11,401 people living in the region displaced; 1,632 people requiring temporary shelter.
• Significant damage to transportation systems across the region.
• Damage to water and wastewater systems in Alleghany County and City of Salem, and
damage to wastewater systems in Botetourt, Covington, Craig, and Roanoke County and
the City of Roanoke.
• Damage to public schools in Covington, Craig, and Salem.
• Damage to two emergency operations centers and two fire stations in Covington.
• Damage to one fire station in the Roanoke area.
• Damage to police stations in Alleghany, Covington, and the Roanoke area.
Mitigation of these facilities for a 100-year or greater flood event is a desirable outcome of this
plan.
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-21
Roanoke Valley Resource Authority
The following vulnerabilities were identified by Roanoke Valley Resource Authority staff.
• Smith Gap Landfill: The landfill is outside of the 100-year floodplain but the initial portion
of the access road located off the Exit 128 of I-81 would be impacted by the 100-year flood
based on current FEMA mapping.
• Tinker Creek Transfer Station: Much of this facility is located in the 100-year floodplain,
though the main operations building is located outside the floodplain.
• Salem Transfer Station: This facility is located entirely in the 100-year floodplain.
Western Virginia Water Authority
Several facilities owned and operated by the Western Virginia Water Authority are within the 100-
year floodplain.
Table 29: WVWA Facilities in the Floodplain
Facility Location Address
Muse Spring Water Treatment
Facility
Roanoke
City
2135 MOUNT PLEASANT BLVD SE,
Roanoke, VA, 24014
Roanoke Regional Wastewater
Treatment Facility
Roanoke
City
1502 Brownlee Ave, Roanoke SE, VA
24014
Eagle Rock Wastewater Treatment
Facility
Botetourt
Co. 14501 Church St. Eagle Rock, VA 24085
Projected Frequency of Event
Overall frequency of flood events by locality is best assessed through the National Risk Index. A
definition for the threshold of riverine flooding captured by the NRI (e.g. 2-year flood, 5-year flood,
etc.) was not readily available. However, more frequent flood events do directly impact operations
for many localities in the region, specifically outdoor recreation operations and roadways.
Table 30: Annualized Frequency for Flooding, NRI
Locality
Annualized Frequency
Value (Events per Year)
Alleghany County 1.1
City of Covington 0.3
Botetourt County 1.7
Craig County 0.6
Roanoke County 2.1
City of Roanoke 1.6
City of Salem 0.9
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-22
Projected Local Vulnerability
One way to demonstrate specific local vulnerability is by looking at the number of repetitive loss
structures in the locality. Repetitive loss structures are defined as a structure that has had two or
more claims within any 10-year period since 1978 of more than $1,000 paid by the National Flood
Insurance Program (NFIP). Identifying repetitive loss structures is one of the ways to receive
points in the CRS program.
As a point-to-point comparison the most effective way to assess local vulnerability would be to
assess the percentage of structures that are repetitive loss structures within the locality. However,
for the purposes of this plan comparison will be made between real count of structures.
Maps of the estimated locations of repetitive loss structures are included in Appendix D. However,
these maps date from 2019, the last available data to the Commission, so the estimates below
are more accurate. In looking at Local Vulnerability for this hazard, towns are grouped with the
counties in which they are located in all cases, as more specific geographic data is not known.
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-23
Table 31: Repetitive Loss Structures by Locality, FEMA
Locality
NFIP
Repetitive
Loss
NFIP
Serious
Repetitive
Loss
Federal
Mitigation
Assistance
Repetitive
Mitigation
Assistance
Serious
Repetitive Primary
Single Family Dwelling 22 0 1 0 12
Single Family Residential
Building 3 0 0 0 1
Non Residential Building 2 0 0 0 0
Single Family Dwelling 19 3 1 3 5
Non Residential Building 8 2 0 2 0
Non Residential Building B 1 1 0 1 0
Single Family Dwelling 4 0 0 1 1
Non Residential Building 1 0 0 0 0
Single Family Dwelling 4 0 0 1 3
Non Residential Building 2 0 0 0 0
Single Family Dwelling 47 4 2 5 26
2-4 Unit Residential Building 2 0 0 0 0
Residential Building More
than 4 Units 7 0 0 0 0
Non Residential Business 1 0 0 0 0
Single Family Residential
Building 6 0 0 0 6
Non Residential Building 22 7 0 11 0
Single Family Dwelling 29 1 1 3 23
Residential Building More
than 4 Units 1 0 0 0 0
Single Family Residential
Building 9 1 0 1 9
Non Residential Building 1 1 0 1 0
Non Residential Building B 1 0 0 0 0
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-24
Locality
NFIP
Repetitive
Loss
NFIP
Serious
Repetitive
Loss
Federal
Mitigation
Assistance
Repetitive
Mitigation
Assistance
Serious
Repetitive Primary
Single Family Dwelling 56 9 4 15 41
2-4 Unit Residential Building 5 1 0 1 1
Residential Building More
than 4 Units 12 12 0 12 0
Non Residential Business 2 2 0 2 0
Single Family Residential
Building 8 4 1 4 7
Residential Manufactured
Home 1 0 0 0 1
Non Residential Building 6 1 0 1 0
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-25
Hazard Ranking Table
Table 32: Hazard Ranking Table for Flooding
Hazard Ranking
Table: Flooding
Locality Scale of Event
Costs per Frequency of Vulnerability Overall
Alleghany
County
Region-Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year Medium
City of
Covington
Region Wide
Effects High Less than Annual Low Medium
Town of Clifton
Forge
Region Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year Medium High
Town of Iron
Gate
Region Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year Medium High
Craig County
Region Wide
Effects Medium Less than Annual Low Medium
Town of New
Castle
Region Wide
Effects Medium Less than Annual Low Medium
Botetourt
County
Region Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year Medium High
Town of
Buchanan
Region Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year Medium High
Town of
Fincastle
Region Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year Medium High
Town of
Troutville
Region Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year Medium High
Roanoke County
Region Wide
Effects Medium
Multiple Times
per Year Medium High
Town of Vinton
Region Wide
Effects Medium
Multiple Times
per Year Medium High
City of Roanoke
Region Wide
Effects Medium
Multiple Times
per Year High High
City of Salem
Region-Wide
Effects Medium Annual High
RVRA
Region-Wide
Effects Medium
Multiple Times
per Year Medium High
WVWA Effects Medium per Year Medium High
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-26
4.5 Geologic Hazards
For the purposes of this assessment, landslide and karst have been grouped under geologic
hazards. Both of these hazards include often localized sudden ground movement.
Landslide is most common in areas with high slopes, which includes much of the planning region.
In Chapter 3, only one historic landslide of note was recorded in the past five years. However, the
region has many characteristics which make landslides a hazard of concern.
Karst is a hazard unique to particular geologies. As such it is difficult to find national resources for
assessing this hazard. Data in this section comes from the Virginia Department of Energy,
Department of Conservation and Recreation, and Department of Emergency Management.
The major risk for karst areas is the development of sinkholes that directly or indirectly affect
critical infrastructure. The Virginia Department of Energy began mapping karst via KarstView
along the I-81 corridor following several sinkhole events that directly affected this interstate.17F
18
However, this mapping is somewhat opaque in terms of capturing likelihood of a sinkhole or
potential costs.
The second impact from karst is pollution of groundwater. In the planning region, groundwater
remains a major source of water supply for several localities, including the Western Virginia Water
Authority service area and the Alleghany Highlands. A full list of known wells is included in the
Critical Facilities Inventory in Appendix F. This hazard impact is not fully explored in this plan.
Both of these hazards show a relationship with high rain events.
Projected Scale of Event
Sinkhole events are highly localized events, usually affecting a specific facility or lot. Most
landslide events are also localized, some impacting as little as one parcel. In extreme conditions,
such as Hurricane Helene in Asheville, multiple landslides may occur. Sometimes landslides can
build upon one another as was the case in Nelson and Albemarle Counties.
Case Study: Past Landslides in Nelson and Albemarle Counties
Nelson and Albemarle Counties share similar topographic characteristics to the region. In August
1969, an extreme rainfall event instigated by Hurricane Camille caused over 7,800 landslides,
which created approximately 2,000 acres worth of impact. One hundred and twenty-five people
died in Nelson County alone from impacts of this storm system, which included flooding and
landslide impacts.18F19 This was a similar event to Hurricane Helene, which struck western North
Carolina and Southwest Virginia in September of 2024.
Geology and Mineral Resources, an office of the Virginia Department of Energy, received funding
through VDEM and FEMA in 2017 and 2020 to complete a landslide hazard mapping study for
Nelson and Albemarle Counties. This kind of local study can have greater accuracy than national
models. The events in 1969 and in 2024 highlight the importance of having good information to
plan emergency response to this hazard. Working with Geology and Mineral Resources is the
best path forward for specific and nuanced geologic hazards studies in the region.
18 (Virginia Department of Energy, n.d.)
19 (Landslide Hazard Mapping, n.d.)
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-27
Projected Costs of Event
Costs of sinkholes can range depending on the location of the sinkhole. A sinkhole directly
affecting a major roadway is probably one of the most costly events. Costs come from direct
damage to infrastructure at inception and then include stabilization efforts for the sinkholes once
established. The largest of the three sinkholes which affected I-81 in Augusta County cost over
$100,000 to repair. It measured 20 feet by 11 feet and 22 feet deep.19F
20
Many sinkholes open up in fields and other open spaces, and therefore have limited and localized
costs, if any.
Expected annual loss for landslide is available in the National Risk Index. Costs are generally low,
but it is important to note that the cost of landslides varies widely depending on location. Because
this is such a localized event, impacts can be quite targeted. The landslide recorded in 2021
included $25,000 in damages from a single building. Widespread events in more populated areas
could quickly accrue costs.
Table 33: Expected Annual Loss, NRI
Locality Loss Exposure Value
Alleghany
County $46,739 $140,941,177,976
City of
Covington $21,900 $48,638,641,691
Botetourt
County $37,168 $226,916,018,449
Craig County $21,900 $38,621,453,915
Roanoke County $333,796 $653,035,188,326
City of Roanoke $122,400 $679,915,744,515
City of Salem $21,900 $198,922,958,937
Projected Frequency of Event
There is no good data on the frequency of sinkholes for each separate jurisdiction. The closest
comparison may be to the expected annual frequency of landslides in the area, which, despite
the increased susceptibility to landslides shown in the topographic data, is relatively low.
The National Risk Index measures projected landslide frequency based off of the number of
landslides recorded over a twelve-year period between 2010 and 2021. All of the localities in the
region showed a projected frequency of zero landslides per year, despite some localities having
events on record during that time period. The landslide noted in Chapter 3 was not captured in
this dataset.
20 (Virginia Department of Emergency Management, 2023)
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-28
Table 34: Events on Record 2010-2021, NRI
Locality Events on Record (2010-2021)
Alleghany County 1
City of Covington 0
Botetourt County 1
Craig County 0
Roanoke County 5
City of Roanoke 0
City of Salem 0
Despite the NRI data, the USGS Landslide Susceptibility model shows strong landslide
vulnerability in the area. Darker red indicates increased vulnerability to landslides. Steep slopes
mean that most of the region is vulnerable to landslides in the right conditions, though notably the
more populated areas show less vulnerability.
Projected Local Vulnerability
Local vulnerability to karst is poorly understood – it is unknown what factors may make a
jurisdiction more or less vulnerable to karst. One potential factor for consideration is the number
of households using unmonitored groundwater wells – this could show a locality specific
vulnerability to this particular hazard. Alternatively, karst may be more prevalent in climates where
long dry spells are followed by periods of intense rain. Further assessment is needed to
understand the unique factors that predispose jurisdictions to karst damage.
A small portion of the planning region is located inside of a USGS recognized sinkhole hotspot,
mostly in Craig and northern Roanoke Counties. Less populous portions of Alleghany and
Botetourt Counties may also be at risk. A full definition of a sinkhole hotspot is not readily available
on the USGS website. Studies done in the Commonwealth are largely completed on a case-by-
case basis by state agencies, including VDCR, VDOT, and the Virginia Department of Energy.
Thus, while it is known that some risk around sinkholes exists in the planning region, there is no
definitive data across the whole region that can be used to address local vulnerability.
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-29
Figure 26: USGS Sinkhole Hotspots, Accessed 2025
Landslides are also difficult to quantify. During Hurricane Helene, one of the complicating factors
experienced by neighboring communities in North Carolina and far Southwest Virginia was
landslides caused by extreme rain. The Virginia Department of Energy recommends identifying
areas prone to future landslide hazards in order to target evacuation orders during severe
rainstorm events, defined as greater than 5 inches in 24 hours. The NOAA Atlas shows projected
rainfall event frequency. Rainfall data for the City of Covington, Craig County, and the City of
Roanoke show that 5 inches in 24 hours is more or less a 25-year storm in Covington and Craig,
but closer to a 10-year storm in the City of Roanoke. A framework based on rainfall frequency
could be a way to further assess potential landslide risk in future updates of this plan.
Mapping of Critical and Vulnerable Facilities against the USGS Landslide Susceptibility Model
shows that many facilities are endangered by landslides in the region. The Regional Commission
classifies critical and vulnerable facilities as having higher-than-average susceptibility when over
half of the area within each 90-m grid cell is susceptible to landslides. Using this methodology, a
total of 91 critical facilities and 42 vulnerable facilities were in an above average risk area. Future
projections around this hazard should take into account more advanced analysis of vulnerability
to landslides via GIS manipulation and analysis of rainfall probability as a major determinant of
likelihood of landslides.
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-30
Figure 27: Regional Critical Facilities in Above-Average Landslide Susceptible Areas.
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-31
Figure 28: Regional Vulnerable Facilities in Above-Average Landslide Susceptible Areas
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-32
Figure 29: Landslide Susceptibility Model in the Region
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-33
Table 35: Critical Facilities in Above-Average Landslide Susceptible Areas by Location
Locality
Critical Facilities in
Above-Average Landslide
Alleghany County 17
Bath County 1
Bedford County 2
Botetourt County 5
Craig County 1
Franklin County 4
Roanoke County 17
City of Covington 1
City of Roanoke 12
City of Salem 5
Town of Vinton 8
Town of Troutville 2
Town of New Castle 1
Town of Fincastle 3
Town of Clifton Forge 7
Town of Buchanan 4
Town of Iron Gate 1
Table 36: Vulnerable Facilities in Above-Average Landslide Susceptible Areas by Location
Locality
Vulnerable Facilities in
Above-Average Landslide
Craig County 3
Roanoke County 1
City of Roanoke 18
City of Salem 9
Town of Vinton 5
Town of Troutville 1
Town of New Castle 1
Town of Fincastle 1
Town of Clifton Forge 2
Town of Buchanan 1
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-34
Hazard Ranking Table
Table 37: Hazard Ranking for Geologic Hazards
Hazard Ranking
Table:
Geologic
Hazards
Locality
Scale of
Event
Costs per
Annum
Frequency of
Event
Local Vulnerability
Score
Overall
Score
Alleghany County Local Effects High
Less than
Annual High Medium
City of Covington Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low Low
Town of Clifton
Forge Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low Low
Town of Iron Gate Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low
Craig County Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual High
Town of New
Castle Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium Low
Botetourt County Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium
Town of
Buchanan Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low
Town of Fincastle Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low
Town of Troutville Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low
Roanoke County Local Effects Medium
Less than
Annual High
Town of Vinton Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium
City of Roanoke Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual High
City of Salem Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low
RVRA Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual High Low
WVWA Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low Low
Regional Score Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual Low Low
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-35
4.6 Wildfire
Wildfire risk analysis benefits from some of the most robust data available. Data in this section
comes from the National Risk Index to establish easy points of comparison for risk ranking, and
from the Southern Wildfire Risk Assessment tool. Assistance was provided by VDOF staff in
gathering the data for this section. The entire regional report for wildfire risk is available in
Appendix E: Wildfire Reports.
Projected Scale of Event
The VDOF and the Southern Wildfire Risk Assessment tool provides a Characteristic Fire Intensity
Scale, which uses data on significant fuel hazards, wind, and weather conditions in a WildEST
framework to provide a standard scale to measure potential wildfire intensity.
Figure 30: Characteristic Fire Intensity Scale, VDOF
This evaluation varies by locality. Data is available for Clifton Forge in this model.
Class 1, Very Low:
Very small, discontinuous flames, usually less than 1 foot in length; very low rate of spread; no
spotting. Fires are typically easy to suppress by firefighters with basic training and non-
specialized equipment.
Small flames, usually less than two feet long; small amount of very short range spotting possible.
Fires are easy to suppress by trained firefighters with protective equipment and specialized
tools.
Flames up to 9 feet in length; short-range spotting is possible. Trained firefighters will find these
fires difficult to suppress without support from aircraft or engines, but dozer and plows are
generally effective. Increasing potential for harm or damage to life and property.
Large Flames, up to 40 feet in length; short-range spotting common; medium range spotting
possible. Direct attack by trained firefighters, engines, and dozers is generally ineffective,
indirect attack may be effective. Significant potential for harm or damage to life and property.
Class 5, Very High:
Flames exceeding 200 feet in length; expect extreme fire behavior
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-36
Table 38: Characteristic Fire Intensity, VDOF
Alleghany County City of Covington Clifton Forge Botetourt County
Scale Category Acreage Percentage Acreage Percentage Acreage Percentage Acreage Percentage
0 12,813 4% 1,887 52% 930 47% 28,661 8%
1 8,755 3% 308 8% 233 12% 10,930 3%
1.5 19,694 7% 218 6% 67 3% 35,497 10%
2 77,686 27% 422 12% 277 14% 84,988 24%
2.5 117,072 41% 480 13% 368 19% 102,757 29%
3 33,840 12% 185 5% 31 2% 65,435 19%
3.5 7,383 3% 117 3% 28 1% 11,030 3%
4 6,119 2% 12 0% 41 2% 7,634 2%
4.5 1,858 1% 2 0% 8 0% 2,433 1%
5 8 0% 0 0% 0 0% 37 0%
Greater than 5 - 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
Total Acreage 285,227 3,630 1,981 349,400
Craig County Roanoke County City of Roanoke City of Salem
Scale Category Acreage Percentage Acreage Percentage Acreage Percentage Acreage Percentage
0 8,381 4% 27,374 17% 21,475 78% 7,134 76%
1 4,872 2% 8,320 5% 2,080 8% 859 9%
1.5 10,334 5% 10,114 6% 291 1% 164 2%
2 48,606 23% 32,438 20% 1,352 5% 566 6%
2.5 90,580 43% 52,508 33% 1,363 5% 360 4%
3 34,794 16% 19,715 12% 817 3% 217 2%
3.5 6,349 3% 4,895 3% 38 0% 11 0%
4 4,759 2% 2,066 1% 33 0% 23 0%
4.5 2,778 1% 2,884 2% 15 0% 2 0%
5 144 0% 355 0% 0 0% 0 0%
Greater than 5 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%
Total Acreage 211,596 160,668 27,464 9,337
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-37
Projected Costs of Event
Expected Annual Loss and Exposure Value are not particularly high for this hazard. However,
some context is missing from the NRI data.
Table 39: Expected Annual Loss for Wildfire, National Risk Index
Locality
Expected Annual
Loss Exposure Value
Alleghany
County $2,536 $3,900,729,935
City of
Covington $194 $1,969,158,111
Botetourt
County $8,737 $10,057,952,335
Craig County $784 $1,237,584,666
Roanoke County $4,347 $62,863,692,940
City of Roanoke $3,671 $62,717,344,368
City of Salem $1,285 $17,697,712,831
Roanoke County Fire & Rescue (RCFRD) has demonstrated a substantial financial commitment
to wildland fire protection, ensuring the community is safeguarded against the growing risks of
brush and wildland-urban interface fires. The County’s Wildland Fire Team responds to
approximately 80 calls for service annually, deploying 33 specially trained personnel in wildland
fire suppression. This capability is supported by a dedicated fleet of eight brush trucks, one
Wildland Fire Engine, and one deployable trailer equipped with specialized resources. In addition
to serving local needs, Roanoke County maintains a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with
the Federal Forestry Department, enabling the department to provide mutual aid on federal
property within the County and to deploy trained personnel and assets to assist in wildfire
suppression efforts in other states. This dual capability reflects both a strong local investment and
a regional commitment to public safety, resource protection, and interagency cooperation.
Projected Frequency of Event
The NRI Annualized Frequency Value for this hazard is low throughout the planning region. It is
important to note that while wildfires do occur frequently in the planning region, the majority of
fires are small, with negligible risk and impact. The threshold for a major fire cited in Chapter 3 is
100 acres. One major fire has occurred in Roanoke County in the past five years, which implies
a 20 percent chance of a major fire in a given five-year period. More data is needed to assess,
but the frequency value for Roanoke County’s assessment was adjusted up in the risk
assessment.
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-38
Table 40: Annualized Frequency Value for Wildfire, NRI
Locality Annualized Frequency Value (%)
Alleghany County 0.027
City of Covington 0.001
Botetourt County 0.047
Craig County 0.008
Roanoke County 0.002
City of Roanoke 0.001
City of Salem 0.001
Projected Local Vulnerability
Housing Unit Risk represents the relative potential risk to housing units. This allows for an
estimate of how many housing units are at a high risk of wildfire damage. The Housing Unit Risk
Category is defined by four qualities: likelihood, intensity, susceptibility, and exposure. A raster at
30-m resolution was used in this methodology, with full details provided in Jaffe et al., 2024.20F
21
Values moved from 0 (no damage to structure) to -100 (complete loss). This metric is used to
estimate the acreage at a risk category of 4 to 6 within each of the available localities for, and that
percentage value is ranked as high, medium, or low in the vulnerability table. Category 6 would
be a total loss of structure, whereas category 4 would be a 50 percent loss of structure.
Data for towns was unavailable from this data source with the exception of Clifton Forge, which
has reverted in status from a city to a town. Towns share the ranking of the county in which they
are located.
Another factor that may affect local vulnerability is the percentage of federal forest land and the
topography. Rural areas of Roanoke County, Craig County, and Alleghany County are federally
managed. Events on federally managed lands may not reflect accurately in historical event
databases or in models generated by state agencies due to issues with jurisdiction, meaning
actual vulnerability may be higher for these localities. Local vulnerability has been adjusted to
account for that factor.
21 (Jaffe, et al., 2024)
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-39
Table 41: Housing Unit Risk, Virginia Department of Forestry
Alleghany County City of Covington Clifton Forge Botetourt County
Risk Ranking Acreage Percentage Acreage Percentage Acreage Percentage Acreage Percentage
1 2 0% 0 0% 0 0% 6 0%
2 180 0% 21 1% 4 0% 312 0%
3 11,411 4% 430 12% 149 7% 30,108 9%
4 33,308 12% 1,617 45% 832 42% 75,424 22%
5 5,820 2% 761 21% 683 34% 7,258 2%
6 - 0% 0 0% 12 1% 0 0%
Total Acreage 285,227 3,630 1,981 349,400
No Risk 234,506 82% 801 22% 301 15% 236,293 68%
Risk Greater than 4 39,128 14% 2,378 34% 1527 77% 82,682 24%
Craig County Roanoke County City of Roanoke City of Salem
Risk Ranking Acreage Percentage Acreage Percentage Acreage Percentage Acreage Percentage
1 0 0% 42 0% 322 1% 116 1%
2 5 0% 495 0% 857 3% 498 5%
3 16,588 8% 15,771 10% 5,165 19% 2,592 28%
4 23,711 11% 59,729 37% 7,527 27% 4,543 49%
5 686 0% 9,941 6% 1,794 7% 595 6%
6 0 0% 17 0% 1 0% 0 0%
Total Acreage 211,596 160,668 27,464 9,337
No Risk 170,607 81% 74,673 46% 11,798 43% 993 11%
Risk Greater than 4 24,397 12% 69,687 43% 9,322 34% 5,138 55%
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-40
Hazard Ranking Table
Table 42: Hazard Ranking Table for Wildfire
Hazard Ranking
Table: Wildfire
Locality Scale of Event
Costs per Frequency of Vulnerability Overall
Alleghany
County
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual High
City of
Covington
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium
Town of Clifton
Forge
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual High
Town of Iron
Gate
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual High
Craig County
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium
Town of New
Castle
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium
Botetourt
County
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium
Town of
Buchanan
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium
Town of
Fincastle
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium
Town of
Troutville
Jurisdiction Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium Low
Roanoke County
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects High Annual High
Town of Vinton
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium
City of Roanoke Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium
City of Salem Local Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium
RVRA
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium Low
WVWA
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Less than
Annual Medium Low
Regional Score Effects Low Annual Medium Low
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-41
4.7 Wind Event
Wind events are one of the most frequent hazards in the planning region. They can also be costly.
This section looks at data from the National Risk Index, National Centers for Environmental
Information, and other sources to evaluate risk of wind events including straight line winds and
tornados.
One major cause of extreme wind in the region is hurricanes. Effects from hurricanes generally
spawn straight line winds, but may occasionally spawn tornado winds.
Projected Scale of Event
Generally, the majority of events experience in the region are straight line winds. Wind events
often spawn from bands of storm cells which cut across the region. Most wind events are multi-
jurisdictional within a given 24-hour period, though individual impacts are usually most localized.
Projected Costs of Event
Costs for wind events can vary greatly. In Chapter 3, one of the most expensive wind events
documented, an F1 tornado which damaged a local business, resulted in over a million dollars of
damages. However, the majority of wind event records in the past five years do not contain
damage estimates. In fact only eight percent of the records in the NCEI database for the planning
region contained damage estimates. The average cost across events with recorded damages
was $112,906, but the average across all wind events was only $10,640. This makes it difficult to
estimate the probable economic impact of a given event for the region.
The National Risk Index tracks two wind event categories relevant to this hazard (excluding
hurricanes, which also spawn wind damages). The Expected Annual Loss for Strong Wind and
Tornado are included in the table below.
Table 43: Expected Annual Loss for Wind Events, NRI
Locality
Expected Annual Loss - Expected Annual Loss -
Alleghany County $ 172,445.00 $ 45,378.00
City of Covington $ 110,402.00 $ 20,258.00
Botetourt County $ 361,702.00 $ 106,201.00
Craig County $ 84,036.00 $ 14,927.00
Roanoke County $ 1,018,060.00 $ 352,206.00
City of Roanoke $ 1,043,952.00 $ 409,594.00
City of Salem $ 344,362.00 $ 114,772.00
Projected Frequency of Event
Wind events occur more than annually around the region. The highest number of occurrences are
projected in the Roanoke Valley, which includes the City of Roanoke, City of Salem, Roanoke
County, and the Town of Vinton.
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-42
Table 44: Annualized Frequency Value for Wind Events, NRI
Events per Year
Locality
Annualized Frequency
Value - Strong Wind
Annualized Frequency
Value - Tornado
Alleghany County 2.3 0.1
City of Covington 2.5 0
Botetourt County 2.7 0.1
Craig County 2.6 0
Roanoke County 3.4 0
City of Roanoke 3.4 0
City of Salem 3.4 0
Projected Local Vulnerability
Wind events can compound other hazards, including winter weather and extreme cold. Wind is
often a primary factor in power loss following storm events, as strong winds blow down trees and
impact powerlines. Power lines are generally privately owned and maintained. Strong winds can
also negatively affect RVs and other outdoor recreation users, who can be particularly vulnerable
in an event. While a full inventory of mobile homes and RV parks is not currently available, the
ACS does provide some data on mobile and manufactured homes which has been used to derive
local vulnerability for this plan update. Further analysis is needed in this area, as manufactured
homes do not generally have the same level of vulnerability to this hazard as mobile homes. RV
park facilities are not captured in this data. For the purposes of this analysis, less than 100
estimated mobile and manufactured homes will be low risk, between 100 and 500 homes will be
medium risk, and greater than 500 homes will be considered high risk. Towns are included with
their counties unless otherwise noted.
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-43
Table 45: Mobile and Manufactured Homes, ACS 2019-2023 Estimates21F22
Locality
ACS
Estimated
Alleghany County
(including Town of
986 17.5%
City of Covington 4.9%
Town of Clifton
Forge 0 0%
Craig County
(including Town of
353 14.7%
Botetourt County 1210 9.4%
Roanoke County 2.06%
Town of Vinton 1.1%
City of Roanoke 0.83%
City of Salem 2.64%
22 (ESRI Demographics Team, 2025)
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-44
Hazard Ranking Table
Table 46: Hazard Ranking for Wind Events
Hazard Ranking
Table: Wind Event
Locality Scale of Event
Costs per Frequency of Vulnerability Overall
Alleghany
County
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year High
City of
Covington
Jurisdiction Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year Medium High
Town of Clifton
Forge
Jurisdiction Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year Low Medium
Town of Iron
Gate
Jurisdiction Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year High High
Craig County
Jurisdiction Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year Medium High
Town of New
Castle
Jurisdiction Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year Medium High
Botetourt
County
Jurisdiction Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year High High
Town of
Buchanan
Jurisdiction Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year High High
Town of
Fincastle
Jurisdiction Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year High High
Town of
Troutville
Jurisdiction Wide
Effects High
Multiple Times
per Year High High
Roanoke
County
Jurisdiction Wide
Effects Medium
Multiple Times
per Year High High
Town of Vinton
Jurisdiction Wide
Effects Medium
Multiple Times
per Year Low Medium
City of Roanoke
Jurisdiction Wide
Effects Medium
Multiple Times
per Year Medium Medium
City of Salem
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Medium
Multiple Times
per Year Medium
RVRA
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Medium High Medium Medium
WVWA Effects High High High High
High
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-45
4.8 Winter Storm
Winter storm is another frequent hazard in the area. Localities and the Virginia Department of
Transportation spend money every winter preparing the transportation network for winter storm
events and ice and snow accumulation. These events also impact powerlines and the electrical
grid, similar to wind events and extreme cold. The National Risk Index includes two event types
of relevance: ice storm, a freezing rain event with significant ice accumulations of .25 inches or
greater; and winter weather, which includes winter storm events in which the main types of
precipitation are snow, sleet, or freezing rain.
Projected Scale of Event
As discussed in Chapter 3, events are generally wide-spread and affect multiple jurisdictions.
While effects may vary across the jurisdictions, winter storms are generally a region-wide event.
Projected Costs of Event
Generally, expected annual loss is higher for winter weather generally than for ice storms
specifically, which makes sense given the relative frequency of these events. However, NRI
numbers for Craig County are reversed. This may reflect an inaccuracy in the national database.
The higher value will be used in ranking this element of the hazard impact.
Table 47: Costs of a Winter Weather Event
Locality
Expected Annual Loss - Expected Annual Loss - Ice
Alleghany
County $ 11,190.00 $ 1,819.00
City of
Covington $ 6,372.00 $ 3,081.00
Botetourt
County $ 19,959.00 $ 6,391.00
Craig County $ 3,092.00 $ 20,097.00
Roanoke
County $ 103,699.00 $ 2,120.00
City of Roanoke $ 135,292.00 $ 20,524.00
City of Salem $ 37,482.00 $ 6,921.00
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-46
Projected Frequency of Event
Winter storms occur frequently, several times a year. Ice storms with greater than .25 inches of
accumulation are less frequent but still occur at least every other year across the planning region,
more frequently than many other hazards.
Locality
Annualized Frequency
Value - Winter Weather
Annualized Frequency
Value - Ice Storm
Alleghany
County 3.8 0.5
City of
Covington 3.8 0.5
Botetourt
County 3.5 0.6
Craig County 3.3 0.5
Roanoke County 3.4 0.6
City of Roanoke 3.4 0.6
City of Salem 2.4 0.6
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-47
Projected Local Vulnerability
Some localities specifically maintain their roads and winter storm response vehicles. Others are
dependent on the Virginia Department of Transportation. Extensive roadway mileage in rural
areas combined with topography challenges mean that rural localities are much more sensitive to
winter storm events. Accumulations are generally higher, and roadways are generally impacted
longer, especially non-arterial feeder roads. Impacted road systems can have numerous negative
outcomes, including but not limited to increased car wreck events, increased medical response
times or lack of medical access, and economic impacts due to missed work and delayed delivery
of goods.
VDOT’s priorities for road clearing are included below:
• VDOT clears interstates and most primary roads (generally numbered 1 through 599) first.
• Crews also plow major secondary roads (numbered 600 and up) with vital emergency and
public facilities or those with high traffic volumes.
• Snow emergency routes are key among the top priorities. Localities designate these roads
for immediate snow removal so emergency vehicles can use them.
• Other secondary roads and subdivision streets will be treated if multiday storms hit
Virginia, but crews will focus their efforts on roads that carry the most traffic.
• Once the snow stops and main roads are clear, residential streets will be sanded or
plowed.22F23
Roadway mileage is a metric tracked by VDOT. Localities with higher mileage rates will take
longer to fully clear. Data for mileage was taken from the 2024 VDOT Mileage Table Book.
Localities with an asterisk maintain their own roads in whole or in part and thus incur greater costs
for roadway maintenance. Alternative factors for evaluation in future plans include average
precipitation accumulation per event, cost of transit interruptions, or cost of roadway maintenance.
Figure 31: Total Mileage by Locality in 2024, VDOT23F24
23 (Virginia Department of Transportation, 2025)
24 (Virginia Department of Transportation, 2024)
878.18
41.44
23.2
1527.61
480.57
1530.71
490.68
135.59
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
ALLEGHANY COUNTY
CITY OF COVINGTON*
TOWN OF CLIFTON FORGE*
BOTETOURT COUNTY
CRAIG COUNTY
ROANOKE COUNTY
CITY OF ROANOKE*
CITY OF SALEM*
Total Mileage
Chapter 4: Risk Assessment Page | 4-48
Hazard Ranking Table
Table 48: Hazard Ranking for Winter Storm
Hazard Ranking
Table: Winter Storm
Locality Scale of Event
Costs per Frequency of Vulnerability Overall
Alleghany
County
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year High
City of
Covington
Jurisdiction Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year Low Medium
Town of Clifton
Forge
Jurisdiction Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year Low Medium
Town of Iron
Gate
Jurisdiction Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year Low Medium
Craig County
Jurisdiction Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year Medium Medium
Town of New
Castle
Jurisdiction Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year Low Medium
Botetourt
County
Jurisdiction Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year High Medium
Town of
Buchanan
Jurisdiction Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year Low Medium
Town of
Fincastle
Jurisdiction Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year Low Medium
Town of
Troutville
Jurisdiction Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year Low Medium
Roanoke
County
Jurisdiction Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year High Medium
Town of Vinton
Jurisdiction Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year Low Medium
City of Roanoke
Jurisdiction Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year Medium Medium
City of Salem
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year Low
RVRA
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year Low Medium
WVWA Effects Low per Year Low Medium
Regional Score
Jurisdiction-Wide
Effects Low
Multiple Times
per Year Low Medium
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-1
Chapter 5. Capabilities Assessment
5.1 Capability Assessment Framework
While Chapter 2: Regional Profile contains a general picture of the region, including of the local
jurisdictions served by this document, this chapter will build on that baseline information. The
following sections contain a more detailed analysis of the capacity of each of the jurisdictions in
this planning effort.
Each section will include the following elements:
• A general assessment of budget and resources, including staffing.
• A list of plans the jurisdiction has or maintains, when they were last updated if that
information is available, and which of these plans address hazards.
• A list of ordinances and policy mechanisms which can be used to assist with
implementation of the Hazard Mitigation Plan, and any barriers that may exist to their use.
• Additional NFIP compliance documentation.
• Documentation of dam safety activities and concerns.
• Other factors that may help with mitigation efforts.
Plans and documents previously discussed in Chapter 3: Hazard Identification to meet the
goals of the CRS program are marked with an asterisk. Responses to worksheets provided by
the localities, which contain more in-depth information about their capabilities and their NFIP
programs, are included in Appendix G: Jurisdiction Capability Assessment Surveys.
The table below explores one of the best points of comparison between the localities in the region
by showing overall revenues and revenues per capita. This clearly illustrates capacity to operate
key government services, including mitigation services and disaster response. Data in this chapter
comes from a variety of sources. Where possible, data is provided by the Auditor of Public
Accounts to the Commonwealth of Virginia. This data reflects real budgets in the years 2024 if
available and 2023 if 2024 data was not available. Where neither dataset is available, 2025 or
2026 adopted budgets have been referenced. These budgets are adopted based off of best
available information regarding revenues and expenses.
In Section 4.3: Extreme Temperature, the NRI Social Vulnerability Index for larger localities within
the region was examined. The City of Roanoke was the only locality which ranked Very High in
terms of social vulnerability. All other localities ranked Relatively Low or Very Low.
Population numbers may vary in this chapter. These were taken from two separate sources, one
provided by the Commonwealth’s Auditor of Public Accounts, one provided by the CEDS. Sources
are noted as appropriate.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-2
Table 49: Comparison of Revenue Across RVARC Member Local Governments
Locality Population Total Revenue Total Revenue per Capita
Alleghany County*
14,898 $81,004,953.00 $5,437.30
City of Covington
5,567 $32,225,593.00 $5,788.68
Town of Clifton Forge**
3,483 $5,613,161.00 $1,611.59
Botetourt County
33,466 $139,116,476.00 $4,156.95
Craig County
4,855 $18,953,496.00 $3,903.91
Roanoke County
96,519
$
441,121,263.00 $4,570.30
City of Roanoke*
99,634 $603,957,800.00 $6,061.76
City of Salem
24,985 $164,155,327.00 $6,570.16
Town of Vinton**
8,038 $15,756,600.00 $1,960.26
* Data comes from the 2023 Comparative Report
** Data comes from the website or adopted budget
a Data comes from the 2023 and 2024 Comparative Report where available. Where unavailable data
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-3
5.2 Alleghany County
Alleghany County is the northernmost county in the service area, characterized by largely rural
development patterns. Approximately half of the locality is federal forest land, and state-owned
lands are also present. The population of the County was 11,479 in 2023 excluding the Town of
Clifton Forge and is projected to be 13,993 in 2030. The median age is high for the region, at 48.1
years. Median household income is low at $52,546. One small rural hospital provides the majority
of medical emergency capacity for the locality.
Budget and Staffing Characteristics
The Comparative Report of Local Government Revenues and Expenditures shows the following
general information about Alleghany County’s real budget for the year 2023. Alleghany County
staffs a Chief Building Official and an Emergency Manager. The Zoning Administrator serves as
a combined Community Planner, Floodplain Manager, and GIS coordinator.
Federal share of revenue in the 2023 budget was over 14 percent. Revenue from the
Commonwealth was close to 50 percent, showing a significantly high vulnerability to outside
funding sources.
Table 50: Alleghany County Budget 2023, Commonwealth of Virginia
Alleghany County Budget 2023
Population 14,898
Per Capita $ 1,960.39
Percent of Revenue 36.05%
$ 40,281,474.00
Per Capita $ 2,703.82
Percent of Revenue 49.73%
Per Capita $ 720.16
Direct Federal Aid $ 788,558.00
0.97%
Total Federal Vulnerability $ 11,517,575.00
Total Revenue $ 81,004,953.00
Non-Revenue Receipts $ 77,240.00
Transfers from Other Funds
Total Sources Available $ 81,082,193.00
Plans and Planning Schedules
Alleghany County currently has two plans in place which specifically address hazard mitigation.
These are the Comprehensive Plan, currently being updated and last updated in 2019, and the
Emergency Operations Plan, the new version of which is expected to be adopted in November
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-4
2025. Additional plans in place which could incorporate hazard mitigation in the future include the
Capital Improvement Plan.
Ordinances and Policy Mechanisms
Alleghany County maintains a County code, several sections of which provide some opportunity
for hazard mitigation. Large amendments to the code are possible but may be constrained by
funding and staff capacity.
Chapter 30 of the County Code contains Erosion and Sediment Control regulations. These
provisions mirror Code of Virginia, § 10.1-563(C). Chapter 34 – Fire Prevention and Protection
adopts pertinent sections of the Code of Virginia, § 27-1 et seq. to do with fire management, and
additionally describes rules around the sale, possession, and use of fireworks. Chapter 47 of the
Code addresses Public Safety.
Chapter 52 of the County Code contains the Stormwater Ordinance. This was last adopted in
2014. It integrates the County's stormwater management requirements with its erosion and
sediment control, flood insurance, and floodplain management requirements into a unified
stormwater program. This facilitates the submission and approval of plans, issuance of permits,
payment of fees, and coordination of inspection and enforcement activities in a more convenient
and efficient manner.
Alleghany County adopted its most recent Floodplain District in December 17, 2010 that requires
new residential buildings to be elevated to or above the base flood elevation. The floodplain district
is an overlay that applies to all other zoning districts. Additional requirements prevent the
obstruction of the floodway. In addition to Federal Regulations, the County has established
guidelines for development within flood hazard areas. They can be found in Chapter 66-Zoning,
of the Code of the County of Alleghany, Virginia. No construction or development, including fill,
can be done in a designated floodway. Development can occur in the 100-year floodplain,
however the first-floor elevation of a structure must be at least one foot above the designated
flood elevations shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps . Also, structures in the 100-year
floodplain must be in compliance with building code requirements for structures in flood hazard
areas. Development can occur in the 500-year floodplain with compliance of building code
requirements for structures in flood hazard areas.
Chapter 66 - Zoning Ordinance, contains, among other things, the established flood hazard areas
and guidelines for development therein. Chapter 66 and Chapter 54 - Subdivision Ordinance both
contain key regulatory authority over land use in the county.
One factor in all localities, including Alleghany, is that many structures may have been built prior
to the adoption of these ordinances. Pre-existing structures built in flood prone areas are often
only mitigated directly if mitigation is triggered by improvements on the property.
NFIP Compliance
Community Development is the responsible department for NFIP compliance in Alleghany County.
The NFIP coordinator is not a Certified Floodplain Manager. NFIP services include permit review,
inspections, review of floodplain mapping for zoning and rezoning, and a GIS layer; however, staff
capacity is a barrier to running an effective NFIP program. Alleghany County entered the NFIP in
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-5
1987. The Indian Draft community within the County is vulnerable to flooding but has limited NFIP
policy coverage. The total amount of paid claims in the community is $2,867,632 for 172 claims.
Dam Safety
There are four dams in Alleghany County. These are the Clifton Forge Dam (owned and
maintained by the Town of Clifton Forge), Gathright Dam (owned and maintained by US Army
Corps of Engineers), Pond Lick Branch Dam (privately owned) and WestRock #2 Flyash Lagoon
Dam (owned and maintained by WestRock). Alleghany County staff review plans annually with
Smurfit WestRock, US ACE, and DCR. The County participated in an exercise with the US ACE
on October 2, 2025.
Town of Iron Gate
The Town of Iron Gate is a small town on the border of Alleghany and Botetourt Counties, which
shares a strong cultural identity with the Alleghany Highlands. The Town engages in water and
sewer service provision. They are not an active jurisdiction in this plan but participate through
Alleghany County. The Town Code deals mainly with solid waste management and water and
sewer service provision.
The Town of Iron Gate has very limited capacity for mitigation, but some utility lines and structures
may be vulnerable to hazards. The Town adopted Alleghany County’s floodplain ordinance to
maintain good standing with NFIP. The Town’s effective FIRM date is December 17, 2010.
Other Factors
The County has also entered into a number of mutual aid agreements in relation to Statewide Aid
for Emergency Management, radio communications with neighboring localities and fire and
rescue departments, and emergency services. They commonly collaborate with Covington and
Clifton Forge, and also with Bath County outside the region. Alleghany County provides support
for floodplain management in the Town of Iron Gate.
Alleghany County does maintain a Planning Commission and is a member government of the
Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-6
5.3 City of Covington
The City of Covington is a small city located in the Alleghany Highlands. The City shares strong
cultural connections and some infrastructure with Alleghany County and the Town of Clifton Forge.
Population in the City of Covington was 5,671 in 2023 and is expected to fall to 5,434 in 2030.
The median age is 41.5. Median household income is low at $45,737. The City provides water
and sewer to residents.
Budget and Staffing Characteristics
The statewide Comparative Report of Local Government Revenues and Expenditures shows the
following general information about the City of Covington’s real budget for the year 2024. The City
of Covington has a small staff. The Director of Development Services serves as a Building Official,
Community Planner, and Zoning Administrator. The Director of Public Safety also serves as Chief
of Police and primary Emergency Management response. Covington is a small locality, whose
employees generally wear many hats.
Funding is a large barrier to the City in expending mitigation efforts. Hazard mitigation grants were
uplifted as a main source of funding for mitigation activities. Additional funding sources for
mitigation activities include CIP allocations, utility fees, a stormwater utility fee, and other state
funding programs. Federal funding, either direct funding or pass-through from the state
government, is about 13 percent of the City’s revenue.
Table 51: City of Covington Budget 2024
City of Covington Budget 2024
Population 5,567
Per Capita $ 3,891.89
Percent of Revenue 67.23%
From the Commonwealth $ 6,405,092.00
Federal Pass-thru $ 1,170,444.00
Per Capita $ 210.25
Percent of Revenue 3.63%
Per Capita $ 536.00
Percent of Revenue 9.26%
Total Federal Vulnerability $ 4,154,366.00
Total Revenue $ 32,225,593.00
Non Revenue Receipts $ 2,233,967.00
Transfers from Other Funds
Total Sources Available $ 34,459,560.00
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-7
Plans and Planning Schedules
The City of Covington maintains a Capital Improvements Plan, a Continuity of Operations and
Local Emergency Operations Plan, a Stormwater Management Plan and an Economic
Development Plan.
The Emergency Operations Plan was updated in November 2023. The Stormwater Management
Plan was updated in March 2025. A Resilience Plan is in development which will directly affect
flooding and flood response in the City.
Ordinances and Policy Mechanisms
Chapter 18 – Environment of the City Code addresses Erosion and Sediment Control in
compliance with Code of Virginia § 10.1-560 et seq.
Chapter 19 – Stormwater Management, adopted pursuant to Code of Virginia, § 62.1-44.15:24 et
seq., addresses specific stormwater management regulations.
Chapter 20 – Fire Prevention and Protection; Emergency Medical Services designates the city
fire department and emergency medical services departments as integral to the safety program
of the city and additionally establishes open-air fire restrictions and regulations.
Appendix A addresses Subdivision regulations and Appendix B addresses Zoning. Article XIII-A
of Appendix B specifically establishes Floodplain Districts for the City, adopting the FIRM provided
by FEMA (effective date of December 17, 2010).
NFIP Compliance
The NFIP program within the City of Covington is maintained by Development Services. The
Development Services Director is the primary NFIP administrator. He was formerly certified, but
his certification has lapsed. The Development Services Director also serves as the building
administrator and zoning administrator, as discussed earlier in this section. Besides staff capacity,
one of the barriers to running an effective NFIP program within this jurisdiction is community
interest.
The City of Covington entered the NFIP in 1979. Since that time they have paid out 179 claims at
$1,904,162. There are five known repetitive or severe repetitive loss structures in the community.
Dam Safety
There are three dams in that could impact the City of Covington. These are the Gathright Dam
(owned and maintained by US Army Corps of Engineers), Pond Lick Branch Dam (privately
owned) and Mead Westvaco #2 Fly Ash Lagoon Dam (owned and maintained by Mead
Westvaco). These dams are not located within the City boundary and so do not fall under the
City’s jurisdiction.
Other Factors
The City of Covington engages in mutual aid agreements and joint planning and service provision
efforts with Alleghany County. The City utilizes open source precipitation and water level gauges
through water.gov, as well as a staff gauge posted at the Main St. Park.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-8
The City does maintain a Planning Commission and is a member government of the Roanoke
Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-9
5.4 Town of Clifton Forge
The Town of Clifton Forge, formerly the City of Clifton Forge, is an incorporated town within the
boundaries of Alleghany County. The population of the Town was 3,483 in 2023. Population
projections are not available in the data collected for this plan. The median age is the highest in
data available for the planning region at 53.5 years. No separate median household income is
available. The Town engages in utility service provision of water and sewer.
Budget and Staffing Characteristics
No budget information was available in the statewide Comparative Report. However, the
approved 2025 budget provides some context for Clifton Forge’s revenues and resources.
Numbers provided may lack some of the nuance available in the state audit document.
Clifton Forge staffs a Community Planner and an Emergency Manager. The current floodplain
administrator is the Director of Community Development.
Table 52: Adopted Budget Town of Clifton Forge, 2025
Town of Clifton Forge Budget 2025 Projected
Population 3,483
Local Revenue $ 2,672,548.00
Per Capita $ 767.31
Percent of Revenue 47.61%
From the Commonwealth $ 2,340,613.00
Direct Federal Aid $ 600,000.00
Per Capita $ 172.27
Percent of Revenue 10.69%
Plans and Planning Schedules
Clifton Forge maintains a Comprehensive Plan, a Land Use Plan, and a Local Emergency
Operations Plan. The Emergency Operations Plan is the most relevant to hazard mitigation, and
was last updated in 2023.
Ordinances and Policy Mechanisms
Chapter 50 – Fire Prevention and Protection establishes rules around open burning and the
acquisition and use of explosives and fireworks.
Appendix A – Subdivision Ordinance and Appendix B- Zoning contain information guiding new
development in the town. Article 5 of Appendix B, Floodplain Overlay District, formally adopts
floodplain regulations and the FIRM (effective date of December 17, 2010).
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-10
NFIP Compliance
An NFIP worksheet was not developed for the Town, so further details of the NFIP program could
not be provided.
Dam Safety
There are three dams in that could impact the Town of Clifton Forge. These are the Smith Creek
Dam, Gathright Dam, and Douthat Lake Dam. The Smith Creek dam, along with the associated
Smith Creek Reservoir is owned and maintained by the Town of Clifton Forge and serves as the
water supply for the Town of Clifton Forge, portions of Alleghany County, and the Town of Iron
Gate. The Town of Clifton Forge is responsible for the maintenance of the Smith Creek Dam. After
the dam was transferred to the Town, repairs were made and completed in early 2021. The dam
and reservoir are routinely maintained and inspected by water plant staff as well as being
inspected annually per dam safety regulations enforced by DCR. The other two dams are outside
of the town boundary and fall within the geography of Alleghany County.
Other Factors
The Town of Clifton Forge engages in collective operations with Alleghany County and Covington
regarding regional branding, tourism, and economic development. The Town also provides water
to portions of Alleghany County.
The Town does maintain a planning commission and is a member government of the Roanoke
Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-11
5.5 Botetourt County
Botetourt County has been one of the fastest growing localities in the region over the last decade.
The southern half of the locality has experienced significant development pressure in this time.
The northern half of the locality is still largely rural, with strong cultural ties to the Alleghany
Highlands. The population in 2023 was 33,875 and is projected to fall to 33,556 by 2030. Median
age is 48.1 and median household income is the second highest in the region at $77,680.
Botetourt County does not maintain an MS4 permit. Utility service provision for water and sewer
is handled by the Western Virginia Water Authority or private community providers.
Budget and Staffing Characteristics
State data is available regarding Botetourt’s revenue in 2024. Botetourt is one of the least
vulnerable to federal funding fluctuations, with only a little under 11 percent of revenue from
federal sources. The majority of Botetourt’s revenue is generated locally, at 54.5 percent.
Botetourt staffs a Certified Building Official, Community Planner, Emergency Manager, and
Floodplain Administrator. The Community Development Department contains multiple staff
positions, including several planners, building inspectors, a code enforcement officer, a combined
Erosion and Sediment Control and Stormwater Management Inspector and a separate
Administrator, and others. Botetourt’s emergency management response is supplemented by a
robust volunteer fire and EMS organization.
Table 53: Botetourt County Budget, 2024
Botetourt County Budget 2024
Population 33,466
Per Capita $ 2,265.54
Percent of Revenue 54.50%
From the Commonwealth $ 48,166,729.00
Federal Pass-thru $ 10,085,282.00
Per Capita $ 301.36
Percent of Revenue 7.25%
Per Capita $ 150.77
Percent of Revenue 3.63%
Total Federal Vulnerability $ 15,131,027.00
Total Revenue $ 139,116,476.00
Non Revenue Receipts
Transfers from Other Funds
Total Sources Available $ 139,116,476.00
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-12
Plans and Planning Schedules
Botetourt maintains a Capital Improvements Plan and a Comprehensive Plan. A Local Emergency
Operations Plan directly addresses hazards and was last updated in 2017.
Ordinances and Policy Mechanisms
Multiple sections of Botetourt’s code may affect mitigation activities and disaster response.
Chapter 8.5 – Drainage and Flood Control creates rules for impounding structures that control
runoff on a site.
Chapter 10 – Erosion and Sediment Control; Stormwater Management allows for local compliance
with the Erosion and Sediment Control Law of the Code of Virginia. The County adopted its most
current E&S ordinance in 2024. The towns of Buchanan, Fincastle and Troutville utilize Botetourt
County’s E&S staff for erosion and sediment control monitoring.
Chapter 11 – Fire Prevention and Protection addresses the coordinated fire and EMS system and
brush burning.
Chapter 21 – Subdivisions establishes subdivision regulations.
Chapter 25 – Zoning addresses various zoning rules for the County, including establishing a Flood
Hazard Overlay District based on the FIRM to bring the county in compliance with the NFIP.
NFIP Compliance
The Director of Community Development is the primary administrator of the NFIP in Botetourt
County, and is a Certified Floodplain Manager. The county also maintains a retainer contract with
an organization to assist in administrative functions. Like all rural, growing communities, the
County has difficulty maintaining budget and staff. Their success in NFIP is due to the dedication
of existing staff performing multiple auxiliary functions.
Botetourt County entered the NFIP in 1978. Since that time, 182 claims have been paid out in the
County, totaling $3,563,445. There are 1,752 structures exposed to flood risk in the community.
Twenty-eight are repetitive loss and six are severe repetitive loss. The community does not
participate in CRS. There were 137 NFIP policies in force in the County (including the towns of
Buchanan, Fincastle and Troutville) as of July 2025.
The boundaries of the floodplain district for the County are established as shown on the FIRM
(effective date of December 17, 2010).
Dam Safety
Botetourt County adopted a Drainage and Flood Control Ordinance in 1987. Division 2 Dam
Safety, in Sec. 8.5-31 addresses issues concerning impoundment construction, inspection and
maintenance stating “No one shall have a right to build or maintain an impoundment structure
which unreasonably threatens the life or property of another. The [county] administrator shall
cause safety inspections to be made of impounding structures on such schedule, as he deems
appropriate. The time of the initial inspection and the frequency of reinspection shall be
established depending on such factors as the condition of the structure and its size, type, location
and downstream hazard potential. The owners of impounding structures found to have
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-13
deficiencies which could threaten life or property if uncorrected, shall take the corrective actions
needed to remove such deficiencies within the time limits established by this article, or if no time
limit is established, within a reasonable time.”
There are five dams of significance in Botetourt County. These are the Blue Ridge Estates Dam
on Laymantown Creek, Carvin Cove Dam on Carvin Creek, Orchard Lake Dam on Glade Creek,
Rainbow Forest Dam on Laymantown Creek and Greenfield dam on an unnamed creek. Botetourt
staff regularly reaches out to dam owners.
Gathright Dam, located on the Jackson River in Alleghany County, was completed in 1979 and is
operated for flood control of the Jackson and James Rivers. The facility is managed by the Army
Corps of Engineers. The dam controls the runoff from a 345 square mile drainage area and
reduces the effects of flooding along the Jackson and James Rivers. The Corps of Engineers
estimates that the project has prevented more than $70 million in flood damages. The James
River passes through the northern part of Botetourt County and impacts the communities of Eagle
Rock and Glen Wilton and the Town of Buchanan.
Other Factors
Botetourt contains several Towns, which are further discussed in the following sections, and works
collaboratively with them to support their development when possible. Botetourt County is a
member government of the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission and the Roanoke
Valley Transportation Planning Organization. They are one of only two attainment counties in the
Appalachian Regional Commission service area.
Botetourt County has experienced some turnover challenges in the past few years, which is fairly
consistent with other governments in the area. The County does maintain a planning commission,
as well as a public relations position on staff.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-14
5.6 Town of Buchanan
The Town of Buchanan is a small, incorporated town within Botetourt County located on the James
River. Buchanan is an important tourist hub for Botetourt County. The Town provides water and
sewer service to residents.
Budget and Staffing Characteristics
The Town maintains four staff positions currently. The Town Manager acts as the floodplain
administrator for the Town and is the most likely to participate directly in mitigation planning.
The Town is too small to participate in the statewide audit document, but a proposed budget for
FY2025 is available on the website24F
25. The General Fund shows a balance of $903,351. $65,610
comes from the Commonwealth. Total revenues including water and sewer service fees are a little
over $2 million.
Plans and Planning Schedules
The Town maintains a Comprehensive Plan which is in the process of being updated.
Ordinances and Policy Mechanisms
Article II of Appendix A of the Code of the Town addresses Zoning, with Sec. 201 establishing a
Flood Hazard Overlay District to maintain participation in the NFIP.
Chapter 7 – Erosion & Sediment and Chapter 20 – Subdivisions establish additional restrictions
on development.
NFIP Compliance
Botetourt County has adopted a Flood Hazard Overlay District as part of its Zoning Ordinance
(2002). The boundaries of the floodplain district are established as shown on the flood boundary
and floodway and/or Flood Insurance Rate Maps (effective date of December 17, 2010). The
Town of Buchanan has adopted a Floodplain Management Ordinance that requires new
residential buildings to be elevated to or above the base flood elevation.
The Town participates in the NFIP as a consumer of flood insurance for local government
infrastructure and is in good standing with the County.
The Town of Buchanan uses Botetourt County’s E&S staff for erosion and sediment control
monitoring.
Other Factors
The Town of Buchanan collaborates with Botetourt County on some planning efforts. They are not
an official member of the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission due to their size, but
RVARC does some support work for the Town at the County’s request.
The Town does maintain a planning commission.
25 Invalid source specified.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-15
5.7 Town of Fincastle
The Town of Fincastle is a small town centrally located within Botetourt County and the county
seat. While administrative offices for Botetourt County have largely moved out of the Town, it
maintains a central position in Botetourt County’s identity. The Town has historically provided
water and sewer services; however, those services are now operated by the Western Virginia
Water Authority.
Budget and Staffing Characteristics
The Town of Fincastle maintains a very small staff, including a part-time Town Manager who is
charged with the majority of planning activities. The Town’s floodplain administrator is the Mayor.
While they are too small to be included in the Comparative Report, a budget for FY2024 is
available on the town’s website which details a General Fund of $173,000 and total revenues of
$537,700.
Plans and Planning Schedules
The Town does maintain a Comprehensive Plan, which was last updated in 2021.
Ordinances and Policy Mechanisms
The Town’s Zoning Ordinance is available online, with Sec. 201 establishing a Flood Hazard
District to maintain participation in the NFIP.
NFIP Compliance
Botetourt County has adopted a Flood Hazard Overlay District as part of its Zoning Ordinance
(2002). The boundaries of the floodplain district are established as shown on the flood boundary
and floodway and/or Flood Insurance Rate Maps (effective date of December 17, 2010). The
Town of Fincastle has adopted a Floodplain Management Ordinance that requires new residential
buildings to be elevated to or above the base flood elevation.
The Town participates in the NFIP as a consumer of flood insurance for local government
infrastructure and is in good standing with the County.
The Town of Fincastle uses Botetourt County’s E&S staff for erosion and sediment control
monitoring.
Other Factors
The Town of Fincastle holds several critical facilities for Botetourt County, including the
courthouse, Fire/EMS administrative offices, and the jail. They are not an official member of the
Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission due to their size, but RVARC does some
support work for the Town at the County’s request.
The Town maintains a planning commission of seven members, including a Zoning Administrator.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-16
5.8 Town of Troutville
The Town of Troutville is a small town within Botetourt County. It is located on the southern end
of the county, where development pressures are higher, and is an Appalachian Trail community.
Town limits are just under one square mile with boundaries including Interstate 81 and the Norfolk
Southern Railroad right of way. Troutville provides domestic water via pumped storage system
including areas outside of town boundaries. Town population is 468 people.
Budget and Staffing Characteristics
The Town maintains limited staff, including a volunteer Zoning Administrator, Utility Operator, and
Clerk as well as a Facilities and Equipment Manager and Town Attorney. The floodplain
administrator is the Utility Operator.
The FY26 Town budget for general fund is $187,000.00.
Plans and Planning Schedules
No plans or planning documents were available on the Town website. The last comprehensive
plan was completed in 2010.
Ordinances and Policy Mechanisms
The Town does maintain a Zoning Code and Erosion and Sediment Control regulations. Article
XIV of the Zoning Code details the Floodplain Overlay District.
NFIP Compliance
Botetourt County has adopted a Flood Hazard Overlay District as part of its Zoning Ordinance
(2002). The boundaries of the floodplain district are established as shown on the flood boundary
and floodway and/or Flood Insurance Rate Maps (effective date of December 17, 2010). The
Town of Troutville has adopted a Floodplain Management Ordinance that requires new residential
buildings to be elevated to or above the base flood elevation.
The Town participates in the NFIP as a consumer of flood insurance for local government
infrastructure, and is in good standing with the County.
The Town of Troutville uses Botetourt County’s E&S staff for erosion and sediment control
monitoring.
Other Factors
The Town does maintain a planning commission. They are not an official member of the Roanoke
Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission due to their size, but RVARC does some support work for
the Town at the County’s request.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-17
5.9 Craig County
Craig County is one of the most rural localities in the service area, with a population in 2023 of
4,881 and a projected population of 4,528 by 2030. The median age is 46.1 and the median
household income is $66,286. Nearly two thirds of the county is national forest or state parks.
Budget and Staffing Characteristics
Craig County budget information is available from the statewide Comparative Report for 2024.
About 46 percent of revenues received by the County come from the Commonwealth, and 15
percent is direct federal money or federal pass-thru dollars.
Craig maintains minimal staffing, with a part time County Administrator serving also as the Zoning
Administrator, a Building Official, and an Emergency Management Coordinator.
Table 54: Craig County Budget 2024
Craig County Budget 2024
Population 4,855
Local Revenue $ 7,394,865.00
Per Capita $ 1,523.14
Percent of Revenue 39.02%
From the Commonwealth $ 8,701,440.00
Federal Pass-thru $ 2,410,413.00
Per Capita $ 496.48
Percent of Revenue 12.72%
Per Capita $ 92.02
Total Federal Vulnerability $ 2,857,191.00
Total Revenue $ 18,953,496.00
Non Revenue Receipts
Transfers from Other Funds
Total Sources Available $ 18,953,496.00
Plans and Planning Schedules
The County maintains a Capital Improvements Plan, a Comprehensive Plan which addresses
land use, an Emergency Operations Plan and Continuity of Operations Plan. The Emergency
Operations Plan specifically addresses hazards and was last updated in 2025.
Ordinances and Policy Mechanisms
Chapter 26 – Fire Prevention and Protection establishes the volunteer fire service and establishes
rules for open burning.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-18
Chapter 46 – Erosion and Sediment Control regulates land disturbing activities. The Town of New
Castle utilizes the E&S Control services of Craig County.
Chapter 47 – Stormwater Management addresses required stormwater management plans.
Chapter 50 – Floods addresses flood hazard reduction and required elements for the NFIP.
Chapter 54 – Subdivisions and Chapter 58 – Zoning address new development in the County and
general land use.
NFIP Compliance
The Building Official is the floodplain administrator in Craig County, and is not certified. Staffing
challenges and financial restrictions combined with a low volume of required service are the
barriers to running an effective NFIP program. Since 1990, 71 claims have been paid out in the
community at $1,271,108. Two hundred and two structures are at flood risk in the community, with
six being repetitive loss structures. The community does not participate in CRS. There were 41
NFIP policies in force in the County and two in the Town of New Castle as of July 2025.
Dam Safety
There are four dams in Craig County. The Mountain Castles Soil and Water Conservation District
has responsibility for the operation and maintenance of these dams. The dams are located on
Johns Creek, Little Oregon Creek, Mudlick Branch, and Dicks Creek. The dams were constructed
during the period of 1966 to 1968 for the purpose of flood control in the Johns Creek watershed.
Future work will be occurring to rehabilitate several of these dams. Johns Creek Volunteer Fire
Department has observers for each dam when there are high water issues. Craig County staff
work regularly with MCSWCD. MCSWCD provided inundation maps for this plan, located in
Appendix H.
Town of New Castle
The Town of New Castle is included in this capabilities assessment despite not having met the
criteria for participation in the planning effort. Craig County serves as the planning authority for
the Town in hazard mitigation planning. The Town of New Castle is the county seat of Craig
County. They are not an active jurisdiction in this plan, but participate through Craig County. The
town has one staff person who functions as Town Clerk, Treasurer to the Town Council, and
Zoning Administrator. Limited information is available on the Craig County website regarding the
Town’s government. No budget information is available.
Other Factors
The County has participated in the VDEM Flood Intelligence Unit’s flood gauge program. Three
water level gauges and two precipitation gauges have been installed in key locations throughout
the County. The County receives support from RVARC as a member government and is within
the service area for the Appalachian Regional Commission. The boundaries of the floodplain
district for the County, including the Town of New Castle, are established as shown on the FIRM
maps (effective date of April 2, 2009).
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-19
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-20
5.10 Roanoke County
Roanoke County is one of the largest localities by population, with 89,755 residents in 2023 and
100,027 projected in 2030, excluding the population of the Town of Vinton. The development
patterns of the County are largely suburban and rural, with some more densely developed areas.
The median age is lower than many other localities in the region at 43.7. The median household
income is the highest in the region at $80,872. The County encircles the Cities of Roanoke and
Salem. The Town of Vinton is located within the County. The County additionally owns and
operates the Explore Park, a major regional outdoor recreation facility which is bifurcated by the
Roanoke River, other parks potentially impacted by flooding such as Green Hill Park and Wayside,
and several miles of the Roanoke River Greenway which are largely in the floodplain.
Budget and Staffing Characteristics
Data for the county is available in the statewide Comparative Report. Local revenue is over 56
percent of the revenue for the county in 2024. The percentage of federal revenue is low, at less
than 9 percent.
The County maintains numerous staff, including several community planners, stormwater
management staff and engineers, GIS staff, and emergency manager. They are a CRS
community.
Table 55: Roanoke County Revenues, 2024
Roanoke County Budget 2024
Population 96,519
Local Revenue $ 248,040,326.00
Per Capita $ 2,569.86
Percent of Revenue 56.23%
Per Capita $ 1,599.91
Federal Pass-thru $ 30,897,590.00
7.00%
Direct Federal Aid $ 7,761,572.00
Total Federal Vulnerability $ 38,659,162.00
Total Revenue $ 441,121,263.00
Non-Revenue Receipts
Transfers from Other Funds $ 1,405,682.00
Total Sources Available $ 442,526,945.00
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-21
Plans and Planning Schedules
The County maintains numerous plans, including a Capital Improvements Plan, a Comprehensive
Plan last updated in 2024 which addresses future land use, an Emergency Operations Plan, an
Economic Development Plan, an annual update of the Regional Stormwater Management Plan,
and other plans and planning documents.
Ordinances and Policy Mechanisms
The County has engaged in a variety of mechanisms to address hazards, including land
acquisition, maintaining an up to date building code, adopting the FIRM (effective date of
September 28, 2007) and a floodplain overlay, a subdivision ordinance, and a zoning ordinance,
all of which are tools that have been used to address hazards. An update was completed in 2025
and is being adopted.
Roanoke County has adopted an Erosion & Stormwater Management Ordinance (2025) and
Design Manual (2008) that require new residential buildings to be elevated two feet and new
commercial buildings one foot above the 100-year base flood elevation. The Stormwater
Management Design Manual that specifies acceptable methodologies, design events for a wide
variety of facilities, and administrative requirements such as submittal checklists. Appendices
provide a wide variety of charts and tables to be used in applying the approved methodologies.
The County has a floodplain overlay district, corresponding to areas identified on Flood Insurance
Rate Maps (FIRM) prepared by FEMA. Roanoke County also has up to date DFIRMS of all FEMA
studied streams. Additionally, the County has adopted regulations for development in areas that
contain more than 100 acres of drainage area that require flood studies for elevations of additions
or new construction.
Roanoke County has adopted a Roanoke River Corridor Conservation and Overlay District.
Although primarily designed to protect water quality, it also helps reduce siltation, which in turn
protects the channel that is carrying floodwaters. In this overlay district, smaller sites (2,500
square feet in lieu of standard 10,000 square feet minimum) must meet erosion and sediment
controls standards. Roanoke County has completed over one mile of stream restoration. Project
goals were aimed at reducing streambank erosion, improving channel stability during high flow
events, storing flood waters, and supporting aquatic and other life.
NFIP Compliance
Roanoke County primarily staffs the NFIP program through the twin roles of a Project Engineer
and a Floodplain Administrator. Floodplain management is a primary function for staff. They are
also a CRS community. Major barriers to running an effective NFIP program include challenges
with staffing following disasters to complete tasks in a timely manner. Limited knowledge beyond
primary staff member requires that individual to be present or involved with all mitigation activities
and disaster response. More training is sought, however, staff time in the face of additional duties
remains a challenge.
Roanoke County entered the NFIP in 1978. To date 797 claims have been paid out in the
community with a total amount of $18,582,734. There were 288 NFIP policies in force in the
County as of July 2025.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-22
Participating in the Community Rating System is an important program for Roanoke County. The
County maintains an established permit process, requires and tracks elevation certificates, and
provides public outreach and education. The County is challenged by the investment of financial
and staff resources to improve the class in this plan cycle.
Dam Safety
There are eight regulated dams that could impact properties in Roanoke County: Privately owned
Loch Haven Lake Dam located on a tributary of Deer Branch Creek; Appalachian Electric Power
owned Niagara Dam located on the Roanoke River; privately owned Orchard Dam on a tributary
of Glade Creek; Carvin Cove Reservoir Dam, located on a tributary of the Carvin Creek and
owned by the Western Virginia Water Authority, Spring Hollow Reservoir Dam located on a
tributary of the Roanoke River and owned by the Western Virginia Water Authority, Montclair Dam
and North lakes Dam in the Peters Creek watershed managed by Roanoke City, and Hidden
Valley Dam in southwest county managed by Roanoke County.
The County of Roanoke Emergency Management Coordinator receives and reviews annual
Emergency Action Plans (EAPs) from the Western Virginia Water Authority for the Spring Hollow
Reservoir, Carvins Cove Reservoir, Falling Creek, and Beaverdam Creek Dams along with
participation in their annual drill, last held in March of 2025. Additionally, American Electric Power
(AEP) submits annual Emergency Operations Plan updates for the Niagara Dam and conducts
annual drills, with the most recent completed August of 2025. An Annual Drill for Woods End Dam
was conducted in December 2025.
The County sees an opportunity for regional collaboration around high hazard potential dams,
and a need for dam breach inundation mapping for dams which could impact their community.
Other Factors and Activities
Roanoke County was first designated as a “StormReady” community in 2019 and has successfully
maintained this designation through the National Weather Service. The county’s next
recertification is scheduled for 2027.
The County has strategically deployed three (3) Department of Homeland Security (DHS) stream
flood sensors and three (3) locally monitored rain gauges to enhance real-time monitoring
capabilities. In addition, the County utilizes resources from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA), including the Water Prediction Center’s forecasts and mapping tools
(water.noaa.gov/va) and the NOAA rainfall monitoring system (weather.gov/rainfall).
Project Impact Roanoke Valley was a partnership of FEMA, Roanoke County, the cities of
Roanoke and Salem and the Town of Vinton to reduce destruction to life and property during
disasters through planning and mitigation. The Project Impact Roanoke Valley Steering
Committee and its work groups evaluated hazard mitigation needs from 1998 to 2001. The four
work groups were: Hazard Mitigation, Public Information and Community Education, Stormwater
Management and Partnership and Resource group. The Stormwater Management group was
responsible for the preparation of over 1,500 floodplain elevation certificates in the participating
localities. The Public Information and Community Education and Partnership and Resource
groups met with community organizations, civic groups, businesses and the general public to
promote hazard mitigation activities. The Land Use group focused on the how local plans and
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-23
ordinances relate to hazard mitigation and published Hazard Mitigation through Land Use
Planning in 2001. The Hazard Mitigation group addressed flooding, wildfire, meteorological
events, and hazardous materials incidents in its report Hazard Analysis.
The County provides annual updates on the Roanoke Valley Regional Stormwater Management
Plan, which is further discussed in Section 5.14.
Roanoke County provides capacity to the Town of Vinton around stormwater issues. The County
is a member government of the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission and the
Roanoke Valley Transportation Planning Organization. Water and sewer is provided by the
Western Virginia Water Authority. The County is a member of the Roanoke Valley Resource
Authority. Valley Metro serves this locality and they are a member of the Greenway Commission.
They have a robust public outreach program and are a member of Roanoke Valley Television.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-24
5.11 City of Roanoke
The City of Roanoke has the highest population in the region, with a 2023 population of 98,677
and a projected 2030 population of 101,514 per the regional CEDS. The median age is 38, the
lowest in the region. The median household income is $51,523, the second to lowest in the region.
The City owns and maintains Carvins Cove, a large park which surrounds a key reservoir for
water in the Roanoke Valley. The region’s only level 1 trauma center is located within the City.
The City is encircled by Roanoke County and adjoined by the City of Salem and Town of Vinton,
meaning that many environmental issues are shared between these localities.
Budget and Staffing Characteristics
Budget information for the City is available most recently in the 2023 publication of the statewide
Comparative Report. A little over 46 percent of the City’s revenue is local, with slightly less than
17 percent of the revenue being federal or federal pass-thru dollars.
The City maintains a robust stormwater management department, multiple planning staff, and
several emergency response professionals, as well as dedicated GIS staff. They are a CRS
community in good standing. The City sees an opportunity for increased emergency response
training amongst their staff.
Table 56: City of Roanoke Revenues 2023
City of Roanoke Budget 2023
Population 99,634
Local Revenue $ 280,458,617.00
Per Capita $ 2,814.89
From the Commonwealth $ 221,242,528.00
36.63%
Federal Pass-thru $ 86,449,186.00
Direct Federal Aid $ 15,807,469.00
Per Capita $ 158.66
Percent of Revenue 2.62%
Percent of Revenue 16.93%
Total Revenue $ 603,957,800.00
Non-Revenue Receipts $ 713,029.00
Transfers from Other Funds $ 1,961,500.00
$ 606,632,329.00
Plans and Planning Schedules
The City maintains a variety of plans and planning documents. Many of these are listed in Section
3.4: Flooding.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-25
• Comprehensive Plan
• Downtown Roanoke Plan (2017)
• Urban Forestry Plan
• Parks and Recreation Plan
• Climate Action Plan
• CIP
• NFIP Community Rating System Repetitive Loss Area Analysis (2021)*
• City of Roanoke Flood Resilience Plan (2023)*
• Emergency Operations Basic Plan (2020)*
• Peters Creek Watershed Master Plan (2019)*
• Tinker Creek and Tributaries Watershed Master Plan (2016)*
• Trout Run Watershed Master Plan (2017)*
Additionally, they have conducted research into the urban heat island effect, mapping critical
hotspots within the City and working with the local Roanoke Memorial Hospital on improving
health outcomes for City residents and educating residents on the impacts of heat.
Key amongst these plans, the Flood Resilience Plan could be updated to include additional flood
mitigation actions.
The City is working on a collaborative plan to mitigate wildland fire in multiple park areas
throughout the City. The current Substantial Damage Management procedures are being
consolidated into an effective plan. They are also in the process of revising the Emergency
Operations Plan, which will provide opportunities to include mitigation language. The Debris
Management Annex will be revised during the next update to our EOP to include a more circular
economy framework.
Ordinances and Policy Mechanisms
The City has a robust ordinance, including most mechanisms allowed in the Commonwealth. The
FIRM, with an effective date of September 28, 2007, is adopted in the Floodplain Overlay District
(Chapter 36.2 Zoning). An update was completed in 2025 and is being adopted. Additionally, a
River and Creek Corridors Overlay District seeks to manage water quality of the numerous
streams running through the City.
The City has adopted the River and Creek Corridors Overlay District (RCC) to recognize the
Roanoke River and its tributaries as valuable water resources in the City and to designate certain
areas along their banks as being critical to their protection in order to ensure that such streams
and adjacent lands will fulfill their natural functions. Streams have the primary natural functions of
conveying storm and ground water, storing floodwater, and supporting aquatic and other life.
Vegetated lands adjacent to the stream channel in the drainage basin serve as a buffer to protect
the stream system's ability to fulfill its’ natural functions. Primary natural functions of the buffer
include protection of water quality by filtering pollutants, provision of storage for floodwaters, and
provision of suitable habitats for wildlife. Within the River and Creek Overlay District, riparian
buffers shall be established and shall consist of all land adjacent to, and fifty (50) feet landward
from, the top of the banks of the Roanoke River or the applicable tributary. Further, riparian buffers
shall be retained and maintained if present, and where it does not exist, shall be established and
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-26
maintained upon any land disturbing activity. To retain ecological functional value, native
vegetation shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible.
Other sections of the ordinance relevant to this effort include Chapter 11.3: Stormwater Discharge
Requirements, Chapter 11.5 Stormwater Utility, Chapter 11.6 Stormwater Management, Chapter
11.7 Erosion and Sediment Control, and Chapter 12 Fire Prevention and Protection. Building
regulations, subdivision regulations, and general land use are also provided for in the ordinance.
Current zoning standards restrict floodway development to specific permitted uses including
agricultural operations, recreational use, botanical gardens, and accessory residential use. Other
acceptable floodway uses must be granted by special exception. All floodway development must
meet “no-rise” qualifications and all new floodplain development or substantially improved
structures must meet the freeboard requirements for elevation or flood-proofing and be within
NFIP compliance. After reviewing, the City finds its current zoning and floodplain management
ordinance adequate and does not plan to assert stricter permitted uses in the floodway or other
flood zones.
Enforcing stricter building codes within flood zones can further reduce flood risk by requiring more
strict elevation, or floodproofing requirements in the floodplain. The City currently requires 2 feet
of freeboard within the regulatory floodplain but otherwise follows the Virginia Uniform Statewide
Building Code. Current City standards are in line with City’s goals and will update alongside any
state level changes.
Subdivision ordinance language help to ensure that the threat of flooding is considered and
addressed in the planning process. The City’s ordinance language requires that subdivision
layouts be consistent with minimizing flood damage and ensuring there are clear and safe
evacuation routes during a flood event. It also requires adequate subdivision drainage and
locating utilities and facilities in areas subject to minimal flood damage. After review, there are no
areas of the subdivision ordinance in regard to floodplains that have been deemed in need of
change.
Stormwater management regulations, specifically those addressing water quantity, reduce the
severity of flooding when applied across the community. These regulations ensure development
impacts on stormwater runoff are offset by solutions such as green infrastructure best
management practices. The city code follows the Virginia Stormwater Management Program
(VSMP) to address both stormwater quality and quantity, and also employs a stormwater credits
program that encourages both residential and commercial properties to employ stormwater best
management practices that assists the city in managing stormwater issues. There are no current
plans to revise the stormwater management ordinance beyond the state standards.
The City of Roanoke has adopted more stringent regulations, references, guidelines, standards
and specifications than promulgated by the Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Board (and any
local handbook or publication of the board) for the effective control of soil erosion and sediment
deposition to prevent the unreasonable degradation of properties, stream channels, waters and
other natural resources.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-27
Notable amongst the other localities, the City has designated a Stormwater Utility Fee in 2014
which is used to fund water quality improvements in the region and encourage alternative
development practices. These activities have co-benefits to reduce flooding in many cases.
Project examples include:
• Planning, design, engineering, construction, and debt retirement for new facilities and
enlargement or improvement of existing facilities, including the enlargement or
improvement of dams, levees, and floodwalls, that serve to control stormwater;
• Water Quality Projects including stream restorations and other green infrastructure to
reduce pollutants and erosion and to enhance runoff infiltration;
• Facility operation and maintenance, including the maintenance of publicly owned
stormwater and flood mitigation infrastructure;
• Monitoring of stormwater control devices and ambient water quality monitoring; and
• Other activities consistent with the state or federal regulations or permits governing
stormwater management, including, but not limited to, public education, watershed
planning, inspection and enforcement activities, and pollution prevention planning and
implementation.
• Creation of a Stormwater Utility Flood Mitigation Program as a supplement to nationally
competitive FEMA grants.
• Outreach and Education on water quality, stream health, floodplain natural functions, flood
insurance and substantial damage and substantial improvement requirements.
NFIP Compliance
The City participates in, and is in good standing with, the National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP) by enforcing floodplain management regulations that meet federal requirements. This
program allows property owners to purchase flood insurance from NFIP. As of 2025, there are
385 NFIP policies in force in the City.
The Zoning Administrator is the primary responsible staff person for floodplain management, but
is not a certified floodplain manager. The City entered the NFIP in 1981. In that time there have
been 797 claims at $18,852,734 total. There are 85 repetitive loss properties and 11 severe
repetitive loss properties in the City.
The City identified land use demands in an urban environment as a primary inhibiting factor for
running an effective NFIP program, as well as staff expertise continuity and maintenance.
The City of Roanoke entered the CRS program in 1996 and maintains a class 6 rating (20%
discount on flood insurance premiums for parcel owners within City limits).
Dam Safety
Spring Hollow Reservoir Dam, located on a tributary of the Roanoke River and owned by the
Western Virginia Water Authority, could impact properties in the City of Roanoke if it failed. Carvins
Cove Reservoir Dam, located on a tributary of the Carvins Creek and owned by the Western
Virginia Water Authority, could impact properties in the City if it failed. Two other smaller private
lakes in the City are designated high hazard by the DCR; Windsor Lake and Spring Lake, both
have conducted significant spillway improvements, and owners closely coordinate with the City.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-28
The City works work directly with them during storm events and potential flooding impacts that
would or could potentially see impacts in on dam structures.
Windsor Lake and Spring Valley Lake dams are privately-owned dams located within the City of
Roanoke. The emergency communication protocol for both includes notification to City of
Roanoke Emergency Management.
Windsor Lake Corporation reaches out to Emergency Management annually for communication
tests and every three years for a tabletop exercise and revision of their Emergency Action Plan.
They have shared a copy of their 2025 plan with the City, as well as GIS shapefiles of inundation
extents. A drill at the Windsor Lake Dam occurred on January 3, 2025. City personnel participated
as part of testing the notification procedure. A tabletop exercise was conducted on Jun 3, 2025.
Spring Valley Lake LLC is due for a revision of their Emergency Action Plan. The last revision of
the plan is dated 2013. They conducted a joint evaluation with City of Roanoke Emergency
Management after a 2020 emergency event.
Other Mitigation Implementation Activities
The City continues to maintain open space as recreational areas as well as seeking to expand
the open space in the floodplain through acquisition and demolition of highly flood prone
structures, then maintaining them as deed restricted parcels. Acquisition, demolition, and open
space preservation has been and will continue to be one of the City’s strategies to reduce
community flood risk. The City participates in State and Federal grant funding programs to be
able to fund these projects.
Stream restorations have been a significantly beneficial strategy for flood loss prevention. Stream
restorations allow for channel design and streambank stabilization that protects surrounding
infrastructure, with the added benefit of renaturalizing the surrounding floodplain. This not only
provides flood storage and property protection benefits, but also improves water quality and local
habitat. The City plans to continue to seek high priority stream segments and apply for grant
funding for projects in those areas.
Star City Alerts allows for direct alerting to citizen devices which helps save lives and property by
shortening warning times and informing the public during flood events. The City has plans to
leverage local stream gauge data to trigger automatic communications through this alerting
system. Currently the system has a manual communication chain during flood events. Grant
funding is being sought to establish the gauges and software necessary to make this connection
happen.
The City has a large backlog of Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) to improve stormwater
drainage throughout problem areas in the City. The CIP project prioritization system now allows
the best use of Stormwater Utility funds and awarded grants to upgrade and repair the stormwater
drainage system.
The City has successfully maintained a consistent flooding outreach program that involves a
brochure that goes to all floodplain properties, a flood safety website, social media posts,
repetitive loss letters, and hosting a Prepareathon (an event focused on emergency preparedness
including flooding preparedness). New projects are always being considered to ensure flood
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-29
hazard and mitigation information is reaching the community. Outreach projects are typically
funded through the City general fund and the Stormwater Utility fund.
The City of Roanoke was designated a Storm Ready community in February 2010 by the National
Weather Service. The City was certified based on it level of emergency preparedness including:
a 24-hour warning point and emergency operations center; development of at least four methods
by which weather warnings can be received and disseminated; creation of a system to monitor
local weather conditions; conducting community seminars to promote disaster readiness; and
development of a formal hazardous weather plan, including spotter training and emergency
exercises. An additional benefit of the designation to the residents and business owners in the
City is reduced rate for flood insurance.
The Stream Hydrology And Rainfall Knowledge System (SHARKS) is a platform that integrates
USGS precipitation gauge data as well as stream sensors across the City of Roanoke to show
real time stream height and rain data. This facilitates staff understanding and analysis of flooding
in real-time events as well as past flood data. The SHARKS system helps inform flood planning,
emergency responders, road closures and stormwater projects.
The City partners with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to monitor and study local waterways
to better understand local water quality dynamics and inform management decisions. Monitoring
objectives include: continual stream levels, water temperature, pH, conductivity, dissolved
oxygen, and turbidity. Statistical relationships between sediment and turbidity have been
developed at each station in order to estimate sediment loading with the goal of effective
management of suspended sediment. In addition, the monitoring data are being used with aquatic
insect data to better understand the relationship between hydrology, water quality and aquatic
insect health in the City. These monitoring and science efforts support the City’s science-informed
watershed management strategy; more information is available at the USGS’ Roanoke Project
Site.
The City has also partnered with the USGS to install precipitation monitoring gauges in a selected
spatial distribution pattern to optimize data capture. This robust precipitation monitoring network
can provide many benefits to a variety of stakeholders within the city, including stormwater and
other utilities, first responders, educational programs, and others. The monitoring network can
provide critical data to aid the management and modeling of the stormwater infrastructure and
first responders could utilize the real-time monitoring to better allocate resources during extreme
precipitation events. The network could also be used as an outreach tool to educate residents
and students about precipitation and potential risks of precipitation and flooding.
Project Impact Roanoke Valley was a partnership of FEMA, Roanoke County, the cities of
Roanoke and Salem and the Town of Vinton to reduce destruction to life and property during
disasters through planning and mitigation. The Project Impact Roanoke Valley Steering
Committee and its work groups evaluated hazard mitigation needs from 1998 to 2001. The four
work groups were: Hazard Mitigation, Public Information and Community Education, Stormwater
Management and Partnership and Resource group. The Stormwater Management group that
originated with the Project Impact Roanoke Valley initiative was responsible for the preparation of
over 1,500 floodplain elevation certificates. The Public Information and Community Education and
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-30
Partnership and Resource groups met with community organization, civic groups, businesses and
the general public to promote hazard mitigation activities.
Other Factors
The City identified several factors as potentially inhibiting mitigation activities. State ordinance
and national building codes may offer some limitations. Funding for acquiring land may be limited.
The loss of multiple federal funding sources will severely impact mitigation efforts. Potential losses
include BRIC grants, funding from the Inflation Reduction Act, Community Bloc Grants, and
funding from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. These have all been key sources of mitigation
funding in the past.
The City is a member of the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission, the Roanoke Valley
Resource Authority, the Greenway Commission, the Western Virginia Water Authority, Valley
Metro, and the Roanoke Valley Transportation Planning Organization. They maintain a planning
commission and a board of zoning appeals. They have a robust public outreach program and are
a member of Roanoke Valley Television. Mitigation-related programming is common in their public
outreach.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-31
5.12 City of Salem
The City of Salem is a small city adjoining the City of Roanoke and encircled by Roanoke County.
Route 11, a key transportation corridor, bisects the City and LewisGale hospital, the region’s other
major hospital, is located within its boundaries. The City had a population of 25,477 in 2023 with
a projected population of 25,519 in 2030. The median age is 40.3, and the median household
income is $68,402.
Budget and Staffing Characteristics
The City staffs several positions, including all relevant positions to mitigation planning. A floodplain
administrator, a GIS coordinator, emergency management personnel, building officials and civil
engineers, as well as a community planner, are all covered by staff. The Comparative Report
shows a low 7 percent federal funding ratio, and local revenue makes up a hearty 61 percent of
revenues for the locality.
Table 57: City of Salem Revenues 2024
City of Salem Budget 2024
Population 24,985
Per Capita $ 4,025.53
Percent of Revenue 61.27%
$ 52,065,597.00
Per Capita $ 2,083.87
Percent of Revenue 31.72%
Per Capita $ 220.46
Direct Federal Aid $ 6,003,705.00
3.66%
Total Federal Vulnerability $ 11,511,894.00
Total Revenue $ 164,155,327.00
Non-Revenue Receipts $ 720,018.00
Transfers from Other Funds $ 3,305,679.00
Total Sources Available $ 168,181,024.00
Plans and Planning Schedules
The City of Salem maintains numerous plans, many of which are listed in section 3.4: Flooding.
The Resilience Plan and the Emergency Operations Plan are perhaps most relevant to this effort.
The Comprehensive Plan was recently updated in 2025.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-32
Ordinances and Policy Mechanisms
Chapter 30. – Environment of the City ordinance contains several sections relevant to mitigation
planning and emergency response, including Article III. Erosion and Sediment Control and Article
IV. Stormwater Management. Chapter 34 – Fire Prevention and Protection deals with hazardous
materials, bonfires, and creates the role of a fire marshal.
The City of Salem has adopted the regulations, references, guidelines, standards and
specifications promulgated by the Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Board (and any local
handbook or publication of the board) for the effective control of soil erosion and sediment
deposition to prevent the unreasonable degradation of properties, stream channels, waters and
other natural resources. Salem’s ordinance, in addition to referencing the Virginia Erosion and
Sediment Control Handbook, states in Section 30-117 that the erosion and sediment control plan
must consider “Peak runoff from a ten year or 100-year frequency storm, based on present and
future developed conditions …” and “If the watershed is greater than one square mile in area, a
peak runoff study of the 100-year frequency storm shall be prepared.”
The City of Salem adopted a Floodplain Management Ordinance in 1993 (revised in 2007) that
requires new residential buildings to be elevated to a minimum of one foot (1’) above the base
flood elevation. The City has a floodplain overlay district corresponding to areas identified on
Flood Insurance Rate Maps prepared by FEMA. The Flood Insurance Rate Maps have an
effective date of September 28, 2007. An update was completed in 2025 and is being adopted.
The City has a Stormwater Management Ordinance that is part of the City Code. It was developed
to bring the City into compliance with state laws on stormwater management and is consistent
with the statewide Stormwater Management Model Ordinance.
Chapter 106 establishes the zoning code, which includes the floodplain overlay district in
accordance with the NFIP. An urban forest overlay is also designated as a method to combat
urban heat island effect.
NFIP Compliance
The Director of Community Development is the program administrator for the NFIP. He is
floodplain manager certified. There were 252 policies in the community in 2025. Since Salem
joined the NFIP in 1978, 592 claims have been paid out in the community at $18,080,710. Flood
risk is high in the community, with 2,592 structures at risk. Ninety are repetitive loss structures,
with 29 being severe repetitive loss structures. Staff note that the program is understaffed and
underfunded – staffing constraints remain a repetitive issue for localities across the region in
running an effective NFIP program.
Dam Safety
Spring Hollow Reservoir Dam, located on a tributary of the Roanoke River and owned by the
Western Virginia Water Authority, could impact properties in the City of Salem if it failed. The
WVWA is a recognized jurisdiction in this plan. Further information about potential impacts from
this dam is available in Appendix H.
Other Factors
The City stated a desire to improve public awareness around hazards. They stated that their
approach to mitigation is proactive and adaptive.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-33
The City maintains many of their own utility systems, including their own water and sewer system
and some electrical infrastructure. They are a member of the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional
Commission, the Roanoke Valley Transportation Planning Organization, and the Greenway
Commission. The locality does maintain a planning commission. Valley Metro serves this locality.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-34
5.13 Town of Vinton
The Town of Vinton is one of the largest towns in the Commonwealth with a 2023 population of
8,038 per the CEDS. Located within Roanoke County, the town also borders the City of Roanoke.
The median age is 39.7 making this the second youngest locality in the region.
Budget and Staffing Characteristics
No budget information is available in the statewide Comparative Report for the past two years.
However, the adopted FY2025 budget is available on the Town website.25F
26 The document states
FY2023 actual revenues in the General Fund, Capital Fund and Stormwater Fund were
$15,756,600. Combined revenue from non-categorical aid, state sales tax, and categorical aid in
that year were about 23 percent of the revenues received.
Vinton uses this money to, among other things, staff several positions, including several
community planners, a code enforcement officer, floodplain manager, and a capital projects
manager. Some of these may be collected in one position. Vinton has a relatively small staff
compared to some other localities in the region.
Plans and Planning Schedules
The Town maintains a Capital Improvement Plan (updated annually), Comprehensive Plan last
updated in 2025 which also serves as a land use plan, and an Emergency Operations Plan and
Continuity of Operations Plan updated in 2022. All of these plans include mitigation actions.
They also maintain a transportation plan and an economic development plan.
Ordinances and Policy Mechanisms
Chapter 79 – Stormwater Management establishes stormwater and erosion and sediment control
regulations. Appendix B contains the zoning ordinance, including establishing a Floodplain
Overlay District.
The Town of Vinton floodplain management regulations were originally adopted in 1982. These
regulations are designed as an overlay district and adopted as part of the 1995 Zoning Ordinance.
The regulations have been amended subsequently in 2007 and 2014 and comply with the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) floodplain regulations. The Floodplain Overlay District
applies to properties that have been identified on a Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) as being
in a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA). The land area covered by the floodwaters of the base
flood is the SFHA.
There are two (2) flood zones in the Town:
1. Floodway – The land immediately adjoining the watercourse channel that is the natural
conduit for floodwaters; and
2. Special Flood Hazard Area – Any area of land that is susceptible to a one percent (1%)
chance of flooding annually. The most recent FIRM for the Town of Vinton was completed
on September 28, 2007. An update was completed in 2025 and is being adopted.
26 https://www.vintonva.gov/100/Budgets-Reports
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-35
The Town’s floodplain management regulations ordinance requires that new residential structures
be at least two (2) feet above base flood elevation, and that new non-residential structures be at
least one (1) foot above flood elevation.
The Town follows Roanoke County’s Combined Erosion & Stormwater Management Ordinance
that is part of the County Code. It was developed to bring the County into compliance with state
laws on stormwater management and erosion and sedimentation control. In addition to using the
Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook, Roanoke County publishes a separate
Stormwater Management Design Manual that specifies acceptable methodologies, design events
for a wide variety of facilities, and administrative requirements such as submittal checklists.
Appendices provide a wide variety of charts and tables to be used in applying the approved
methodologies.
Roanoke County administers the Town of Vinton Erosion and Sediment Control program under
the adopted regulations, references, guidelines, standards and specifications promulgated by the
Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Board (and any local handbook or publication of the board)
for the effective control of soil erosion and sediment deposition to prevent the unreasonable
degradation of properties, stream channels, waters and other natural resources. Such regulations,
references, guidelines, standards and specifications for erosion and sediment control are included
in, but not limited to, the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Regulations and the Virginia
Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook, as amended from time to time. In 2025, Erosion and
Sediment Control standards, specifications and regulations were adopted under a new joint
combined Erosion & Stormwater Management Ordinance
Vinton staff note that a complication of implementation of these ordinances is equity. The
enforcement of these ordinances inadvertently impact lower-income populations and
neighborhoods.
NFIP Compliance
The Town participates in, and is in good standing with, the National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP) by enforcing floodplain management regulations that meet federal requirements. This
program allows property owners to purchase flood insurance from NFIP. There are currently 27
NFIP policies in force in the Town.
The Assistant Planning and Zoning Director is responsible for floodplain management in this
community and is a Certified Floodplain Manager. One hundred and sixty structures are exposed
to flood risk in the community. Three of these are repetitive loss structures. The Midway
Community has limited policy coverage but is at risk of flooding.
As of October 1, 2016, the Town is one of the few communities in Virginia that have been accepted
into the Community Rating System (CRS) program. Due to the continuing efforts of Town
administration, every Town of Vinton property owner – residential or commercial – whose property
is located within the Special Hazard Flood Area (SHFA), may be eligible for a 10% discount on
their annual flood insurance premium due to the Town’s CRS Classification of 8.
Relative to CRS requirements, Vinton undertakes the following CRS specific activities, among
many others.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-36
• Higher Regulatory Standards: Credit is provided for enforcing regulations that require
freeboard for new construction and substantial improvement, and local drainage
protection. Credit is also provided for the enforcement of building codes, a Building Code
Effectiveness Grading Schedule (BCEGS) Classification of 4/3, and regulations
administration.
• Open Space Preservation: Credit is provided for preserving approximately 20 percent of
the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) as open space and protecting open space land
with deed restrictions.
Dam Safety
Carvins Cove Reservoir Dam, located on a tributary of the Carvin Creek and owned by the
Western Virginia Water Authority (WVWA) could impact the western side of the Town of Vinton.
Inundation maps for this dam are included in Appendix H.
Other Mitigation Activities
The Town obtained two FEMA Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) grant funding in April
1998 and July 2004. Through these two grant programs, 19 properties that were either developed
with residential structures or vacant lots located in the SFHA were acquired. Eleven structures
that were located in the floodway were demolished and the occupants and/or tenants were
relocated from the SFHA and the properties were rezoned to public/open space district. The Town
purchased a mobile home park in 2024 using local funds which involved the relocation or
demolition of nine manufactured home units that were in the floodway. Additionally, the Town
purchased and demolished a single-family residence located in the floodway in March 2025 using
local funds. The Town has an overarching goal of continuing to purchase flood prone properties
throughout its jurisdiction using a piecemeal strategy by working with current or future
homeowners and vacant landholders.
In January 2010, the Town of Vinton and Roanoke County entered a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) for Operations, Oversight, and Management of the Merged Emergency
Communications Center. By the agreement, the Roanoke County Emergency Communications
Center shall provide emergency and non-emergency dispatch services for the Town of Vinton,
including the Vinton Police Department and the Vinton Public Works Department. Services
delivery procedures will be documented in General Orders (GO) Standard Operating Procedures
(SOPs), and Directives, with input provided by the Inter-Agency Operational Team, and the
Advisory Board.
In partnership with the City of Roanoke, the Town purchased a flood warning system in 2022.
Other Factors
Increased assistance with grants administration is an opportunity for regional support to Vinton;
especially in regards to hazard mitigation grant programs provided by VDEM and DCR.
Additionally, less regulations and requirements on federal grants would be helpful in administering
the projects that are awarded. Additional grant assistance (especially from State agencies) is the
Town’s biggest need in terms of addressing capacity constraints.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-37
The Town receives support on stormwater work and some other services through Roanoke
County. The Town of Vinton is a member of the Roanoke Valley – Alleghany Regional Commission
and the Roanoke Valley Transportation Planning Organization. Valley Metro serves this locality
and they are a member of the Greenway Commission. The Town is a member of the Roanoke
Valley Resource Authority and the Western Virginia Water Authority. They have a robust public
outreach program and are a member of Roanoke Valley Television.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-38
5.14 Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission
The Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission is the regional planning district commission
and the holder of this planning document. The Regional Commission also staffs the Roanoke
Valley Transportation Planning Organization, which, while not a direct adopter to this plan, is
nonetheless a critical organization in providing transportation planning and funding to the region.
The Commission engages in planning across a wide variety of planning areas, including rural
transportation, alternative transportation and transportation demand management, public health
and opioid abatement, housing, water quality and stormwater management, and general technical
assistance including comprehensive plan and zoning assistance.
Budget and Staffing Characteristics
A breakdown of the Regional Commission budget is included below. The Commission does not
own public land or levy taxes upon citizens. All revenue comes from organizational dues,
individual contracts with locality or regional partners, state appropriations, state grant programs,
or federal grant programs and pass-thru dollars. In fact, more than a quarter of the revenue for
the Commission is federal or federal pass-thru.
The annual workprogram and budget of the Commission and TPO guide the work of the
Commission from year-to-year. The Strategic Plan guides the work of the Commission over a five-
year period.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-39
Table 58: RVARC Budget FY2026
Roanoke Valley Alleghany Regional Commission
Budget Comparison FY2026 Final
Budget
2026
Revenues: Revenues
Localities Per Capita Regional Commission $ 400,274
Localities Per Capita TPO $ 35,882
Blueway Funding From Localities $ 11,491
Franklin County for Micro Transit Study $ 35,000
Department of Housing & Community Development $ 114,971
Federal Highway Administration - PL $ 726,273
Virginia Department of Transportation - PL $ 90,784
Federal Highway Administration - SPR $ 58,000
Federal STBG VDOT Glade Creek Funding $ 268,892
Virginia Department Rail & Public Transit, FTA Federal $ 184,682
Virginia Department Rail & Public Transit, FTA State $ 23,085
VA Dept. Rail & Public Transit, RideSolutions (Roanoke) $ 187,696
VA Department Rail & Public Transit Franklin County Micro
Transit $ 60,000
City of Roanoke Better Bus Stops $ 79,667
Federal Economic Development Administration $ 80,420
Virginia Department of Forestry $ 8,000
Virginia Department of Environmental Quaility $ 107,754
Virginia Environmental Endowment $ 20,798
Virginia Department of Emergency Management $ 38,619
Appalachian Regional Commission $ 67,614
Appalachian Regional Commission Ready LDD Grant $ 47,000
Mountain Castle Water Conservation District $ 7,000
Southeast Cresent $ 15,000
City of Roanoke Bike Coordination $ 12,000
ARP ACT City of Roanoke Carryover $ 68,327
Department of Health & Human Services-Peer Recovery $ 495,496
City of Roanoke Virginia Opioid Abatement Authority Funds $ 425,000
Western Virginia Regional Industrial Facility Authority $ 25,000
Virginia Housing $ 931,569
SERDI Website Administration Contract $ 1,538
RVARC Interest Income $ 40,000
Miscellaneous Income $ 2,500
Sponsorships $ 2,000
Blueway Carryover $ 28,000
Regional Bike Carryover $ 7,412
Total Revenues $ 4,707,744
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-40
Plans and Planning Schedules
The Regional Commission maintains a variety of regional plans mandated by the federal and
state governments, as well as several regional studies and documents which have been
generated by local interest. The Commission also staffs the TPO, whose documents will be
included in this section. Most relevant to the goals of this plan are the Long Range Transportation
Plan (LRTP), the Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP), the Rural Long Range Transportation
Plan (Rural LRTP), and the Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy document (CEDS).
Together these four documents, in conjunction with this plan, guide significant investment across
the region.
Schedule of Updates:
• CEDS: The CEDS receives an annual review and demographics update, with a full update
and revision every 5 years. The last 5-year update was conducted in 2024.
• LRTP: The LRTP was last approved in 2023. The next update will begin in 2026.
• Rural LRTP: The Rural LRTP was last updated in 2011, and an update is planned to
conclude in 2026.
• TIP: The TIP is approved every four years. The current TIP covers FFY24-27. Updates will
begin on the next TIP in 2026.
The Regional Commission has also historically contributed to stormwater collaboration and water
quality activities throughout the region which can have direct impact on flood resilience.
Specifically, the Regional Commission is currently involved in Chesapeake Bay Watershed
Improvement Plan implementation work in partnership with the Virginia Department of
Environmental Quality. The Commission also coordinates a regional stormwater advisory group
which allows local governments and other entities operating under an MS4 permit to meet and
share information and ideas.
Roanoke Valley Regional Stormwater Management Plan (1997)
All four Roanoke Valley jurisdictions (Roanoke County, Cities of Roanoke and Salem, Town of
Vinton) participated in the development of a stormwater management plan that was coordinated
through the efforts of the Fifth Planning District Commission (Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional
Commission). It offers alternative solutions for both flooding and flash flooding problems. These
alternatives include clearing stream channels, enlarging drainage openings, constructing regional
detention facilities, and flood proofing individual structures. The plan presents a total of 138
individual projects to address flooding in the 16 watersheds. These are ranked in order of priority
within each watershed but no overall ranking within the valley is presented. Cost estimates are
presented for each project, but neither individual project benefits, nor cumulative benefits are
discussed. It would be essential to analyze the benefits of these projects before the plan can be
used as a guideline for specific activities. The identified projects would cost a total of $66 million
in 2001 dollars, not including land acquisition or efforts to flood proof or move over 2,200 buildings.
A formal quantification of the corresponding benefits would go a long way toward justifying this
cost, which can initially seem overwhelming to both citizens and community officials. For example,
the 1997 plan reports that between 1972 and 1992, floods caused over $200 million in damages
in the valley, and resulted in 10 deaths. The plan’s Financing Options Report recommends
creation of a regional stormwater utility as a means of funding the identified work.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-41
Other Factors
The Regional Commission is the primary holder of this plan and issues with capacity or staffing
directly affect the ability to update or maintain the document. Historically, the Commission has
also been a key partner for small localities in applying for mitigation grant funding, either by
providing assistance with the application process or by administering grants. The Commission
also serves as an incubator for regional initiatives.
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-42
5.15 Roanoke Valley Resource Authority
The Roanoke Valley Resource Authority is a solid waste management organization serving the
Roanoke Valley. Member communities include the City of Roanoke, Roanoke County, City of
Salem, and Town of Vinton.
Budget and Staffing Characteristics
The annual revenue for the RVRA totals at $19,116,734 per the adopted FY2026 budget26F
27. They
maintain seven administrative staff positions, including a Director of Community Engagement, a
Director of Operations, and an Operations Manager.
Plans and Planning Schedules
The RVRA maintains an annual budget, a Master Plan that functions as the Capital Improvements
Plan, a Comprehensive Plan, and a Stormwater Management Plan. The plan was last updated in
2025. Any ordinances that cover solid waste are enacted by localities. RVRA does not have
regulatory authority.
Other Factors
The RVRA is primarily a support agency for response to disasters. They operate critical facilities
within the Roanoke Valley. RVRA sees the primary need for mitigation efforts to be better cross-
agency engagement.
27 https://www.rvra.net/135/Annual-Budget
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-43
5.16 Western Virginia Water Authority
The Western Virginia Water Authority provides critical water and sewer services and maintains
and operates infrastructure for many of the communities within this plan, including the counties of
Roanoke, Botetourt, and Craig, the City of Roanoke, and the Towns of New Castle, Fincastle, and
Vinton.
Budget and Staffing Characteristics
The WVWA staffs 309 full-time employees across multiple divisions within the organization. All of
the divisions might be directly or indirectly impacted by mitigation work or disaster events. Staff
members include those with skills in engineering, emergency management, and GIS. The WVWA
revenue in FY2025 was projected at $50.5 million.27F28
Plans and Planning Schedules
The WVWA maintains a Master Plan, a Capital Improvements Plan, Emergency Response Plans
for their various treatment facilities, and Emergency Actions Plans for High Hazard Potential Dams
under their ownership. They are all updated annually, and all include mitigation activities.
Ordinances which may impact the operations of the WVWA are controlled by the localities in which
they operate.
Dam Safety
The WVWA operates several dams within the region. Inundation mapping for WVWA-owned dams
is available in Appendix H. As a dam owner, WVWA has listed projects in their mitigation action
plan specific to dam safety.
Other Factors
The WVWA is primarily a support agency for response to disasters, but the Authority is the primary
maintenance agency for two high hazard potential dams in the region. They operate critical
facilities within the region.
28 https://www.westernvawater.org/about-us/financial-documents-reports/annual-budget
Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment Page | 5-44
[blank]
Chapter 6: Mitigation Strategies Page | 6-1
Chapter 6. Mitigation Goals and Strategies
Goals and strategies are guiding elements which help shape the action plans of the jurisdictions
participating in this planning process. Goals and strategies are housed regionally, emphasizing a
regional approach highlighting partnership and intentional strategy, representative of all
participants.
6.1 Identified Goals
Three goals were identified in the planning process. Goals are broad statements allowing for
establishment of tailored, focused strategy. These are aspirational, vision statements that guide
implementation efforts.
Goal 1
Minimize the loss of life, structures and critical
infrastructure during a disaster, as well as reduce
risk to the built environment and natural resources.
Goal 2
Minimize the economic impact to communities and
the region in the wake of disaster
Goal 3
Minimize impacts to social systems and community
resources following disaster.
Chapter 6: Mitigation Strategies Page | 6-2
6.2 Regional Strategies
Strategies are conceptual statements wherein projects can be developed, detailed and executed.
In applying mitigation strategies to the region and participants, a wide range of activities were
considered in order to achieve the goals and to lessen the vulnerability of the area to the impact
of natural hazards. Goals are pursued regardless of financial resources. However, advancement
of identified strategies is largely contingent upon meaningful, sustainable projects relying on
availability and timeliness of non-local funding from a variety of partners and sources.
Strategies are generally organized conceptually around five areas of work, which are:
1. Local Plans and Regulations
2. Structure and Infrastructure Projects
3. Natural Systems Protection and Nature-Based Solutions
4. Education and Awareness Programs
5. Community Safety and Partner Efforts
Strategies were developed by jurisdictions in partnership with VDEM staff.
6.3 All Hazards
Local Plans and Regulations
1. Support local development codes that promote disaster resiliency.
2. Support robust, deliberate emergency operations planning.
3. Pursue opportunities to study, research and plan to build resiliency throughout
communities based on hazard data, new research and concepts. This could include
risk and vulnerability assessments, operational assessments among others.
Structure and Infrastructure Projects
4. Equip and maintain critical facilities and resources with redundant power resources,
such as generators, hookups/quick connects, and battery/solar backups.
5. Assess and develop where practical, loan, grant, or similar programs to support
increased resilience of privately owned facilities, structures and property.
6. Seek opportunities to build resiliency within utilities to reduce impact from all-
hazards.
7. Develop redundancy in water sources and water distribution systems.
8. Establish, sustain and develop dam maintenance and replacement programs to
ensure dam safety, access to water sources and sustainment of natural recreation
areas.
Natural Systems Protection and Nature-based Solutions
9. Integrate regional environmental and natural resources preservation efforts with
hazard mitigation planning.
Education and Awareness Programs
10. Pursue educational programs and outreach activities that promote individual, family
and business safety and resiliency
11. Provide planning resources tailored to business continuity.
Chapter 6: Mitigation Strategies Page | 6-3
12. Make home safety and individual preparedness resources available to community
members
13. Participate in special outreach/awareness programs and activities.
14. Seek opportunities to communicate effectively across multiple methods with the
public well in advance of disaster to communicate forecast and preliminary action
steps, including the use of social media and non-emergency alert systems. Ensure
capability to speak with vulnerable communities including non-English speaking
community members and individuals with access and function needs.
Community Safety and Partner Efforts
15. Participate, seek or maintain certification as a “Storm Ready” Community with the
National Weather Service.
16. Improve region-wide interoperability across radio systems.
17. Improve citizen access to emergency reporting mechanisms including but not limited
to 911 and post disaster recovery tools.
18. Pursue, sustain and develop emergency alerting tools that allow emergency services
to alert members of the community through a variety of methods, to impending
emergency, particularly mass notifications systems.
19. Develop, resource and sustain locations, physical and virtual, where whole of
government and community partners may coordinate to respond to the impacts of
hazards.
20. Conduct resiliency assessments of public facilities with an emphasis on critical
infrastructure and utilities.
21. Undertake deliberate research, planning and effort to develop comprehensive,
compliant and innovative debris management programs following all hazards
disasters that generate manageable debris.
22. Support the development of weather reading and monitoring equipment to increase
situational awareness, alert and warning.
23. Support the development and sustainment of Community Emergency Response
Teams (CERT) within localities.
24. Support the maintenance and expansion of locality sheltering locations and
resources.
25. Develop, sustain and support capabilities to shelter pets during disaster.
26. Resource capabilities related to assisting special needs and vulnerable populations.
27. Develop, sustain and support capabilities to conduct family reunification and
assistance.
28. Engage partners to share capability and situation information, pre, during and post
disaster.
29. Develop capabilities to conduct multi-jurisdiction sheltering when applicable.
30. Regularly train first responders, coordinate with regional partners, and ensure clear
post-disaster communication and recovery.
Chapter 6: Mitigation Strategies Page | 6-4
6.4 Earthquake
Education and Awareness Programs
1. Conduct public information activities such as the “Great Shakeout” to provide individuals
with tactics to take when earthquakes strike.
Community Safety and Partner Efforts
2. Engage with subject matter experts to understand the scope and risk to facilities and life
as a result of an earthquake.
3. Develop “critical area” maps based on geotechnical information to identify locations
where damage potential could be high.
4. Engage partners to share capability information.
6.5 Extreme Temperature
Local Plans and Regulations
1. Plan to develop adaptation features to build individual, community and infrastructure
resilience.
Structure and Infrastructure Projects
2. Identify vulnerable structures and implement infrastructure retrofit projects to include
measures that reduce risk to existing utility systems.
3. Consider use of reflective roof coatings, radiant barriers and other tactics to mitigate
heat interaction with structures.
Natural Systems Protection and Nature-based Solutions
4. Increase urban tree cover to mitigate heat island effect.
Education and Awareness Programs
5. Inform community members of the danger of extreme temperature and provide
resources through multiple methods, such as NWS HeatRisk.
Community Safety and Partner Efforts
6. Identify locations and partnerships that create opportunity for community members to
seek reprieve from extreme temperatures.
Chapter 6: Mitigation Strategies Page | 6-5
6.6 Flooding
Local Plans and Regulations
1. Encourage a comprehensive approach to floodplain management
2. Support programs that update FEMA’s Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM). Consider
participation in FEMA’s Cooperating Technical Partners (CTP) program that establishes
partners with local jurisdictions to develop and maintain up-to-date flood maps.
3. Participate in FEMA’s Digital Flood Insurance Rate Maps (DFIRM) program.
4. Support FIRM remapping projects that address flood prone areas in the region
5. Maintain an accurate database and map of repetitive loss properties
a. Localities will work with RVARC, VDEM and FEMA to update list of repetitive loss
properties annually.
b. Localities will obtain updated list of repetitive loss properties annually from
VDEM/FEMA.
c. Localities will review property addresses for accuracy and make necessary
corrections.
d. Localities will determine if and by what means each property has been mitigated.
e. Localities will map properties to show general site locations (not parcel specific in
order to maintain anonymity of the property owners).
f. Localities will determine if properties have been mitigated and inform
FEMA/VDEM through submission of an updated list/database and mapping.
6. Participate in, and remain in good standing with the NFIP, in accordance with NFIP
regulatory requirements including:
a. Adoption of the NFIP minimum floodplain management criteria via local
regulation;
b. Adoption of the latest effective Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), when
applicable;
c. Implementation and enforcement of local floodplain management regulations to
regulate and permit development in SFHAs;
d. Appointment of a designee or organization to implement the commitments and
requirements of the NFIP;
e. Implementation of the substantial improvement/damage provisions of their
floodplain management regulations after an event, as applicable.
7. Strengthen and support the insurance aspects of the NFIP through participation in
relevant programs, such as the Community Rating System.
8. Work to reduce flood damage to insurable property.
9. Develop, support and sustain Stormwater Management Plans, such as the Roanoke
Valley Regional Stormwater Master Plan.
a. Explore the number of watersheds studied in the Roanoke Valley Regional
Stormwater Master Plan, consider expanding the number of inclusions as
appropriate and develop watershed plans for each.
Structure and Infrastructure Projects
10. In cooperation with local governments, utilize GIS tools to inventory at risk infrastructure
and public and private structures within flood prone areas.
Chapter 6: Mitigation Strategies Page | 6-6
11. Support local and state transportation projects that call for improved ditching,
replacement of inadequate and undersized culverts, enlargements of bridge openings,
drainage piping and other physical work needed to minimize flooding.
12. Pursue the acquisition of residential and commercial property in floodplains with an
emphasis on repetitive loss properties.
13. Support structural elevation projects where buildings can be safely elevated to avoid loss
or damage during flood events.
14. Seek opportunities to floodproof structures.
15. Pursue acquisition of elevation certificates for flood prone properties.
Natural Systems Protection and Nature-based Solutions
16. Consider seeking funding to prepare site-specific hydrologic and hydraulic studies that
look at areas that have chronic and repetitive flooding problems.
17. Consider increasing conveyance standard to handle more intense precipitation, while
avoiding streambank erosion.
18. Pursue opportunities to utilize pervious hard surfaces when possible.
19. Pursue opportunities to stabilize soil along river, creek and stream banks to prevent
undercutting roads and other facilities.
20. Promote green infrastructure to prevent flooding, manage excess runoff and increase
filtration.
21. Promote the use of green roofs and rainwater harvesting systems
22. Restore and protect riparian areas.
23. Restore waterways that have been covered or buried due to natural conditions.
24. Protect and restore wetlands, forests, and other natural buffers to reduce storm surge
and flooding impacts.
Education and Awareness Programs
25. Enhance pre-disaster community situational awareness of flood hazards and hazard
prone locations, by cooperating with all relevant partners to support a comprehensive
public information and education program on all aspects of preparedness related to
flooding. Tools such as the FloodView App (2025) provide information and resources
supporting this strategy.
Community Safety and Partner Efforts
26. Provide early flood warning
a. Identify target areas for monitoring, including flood prone areas, streams and
rivers to provide advance warning for downstream impacts.
b. Identify, acquire and maintain equipment that will perform required monitoring for
specific locations and needs. Ensure equipment is appropriately supported and
networked to enhance data coordination and empower early warning.
c. Configure systems and tools that monitor water levels and flooding conditions to
support data and early warning interoperability with organizations that have
responsibility to provide alerts, store, and monitor data. Ensure sustainment of
these systems and data interoperability.
Chapter 6: Mitigation Strategies Page | 6-7
6.7 Geologic Hazards
Local Plans and Regulations
1. Develop, sustain and enforce, as appropriate, steep slope ordinances/guidelines for
development in steep slope/marginal soils areas.
Education and Awareness Programs
2. Develop an education and awareness program for home, land and business owners, to
inform life and property safety measures on an individual basis, as well as financial
considerations associated with geologic hazards.
Community Safety and Partner Efforts
3. Encourage the delineation of karst areas and areas susceptible to sinkholes through a
cooperative effort with the Virginia Karst Mapping Project, Virginia Speleological Survey,
and Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation (Virginia Cave Board).
4. Encourage the delineation of susceptible areas and different types of landslide hazards
at a scale useful for planning and decision-making, led by USGS and State geological
surveys.
5. Work with state and Federal agencies to develop data that will assist in reducing and
eliminating impacts from landslides.
6.8 Wind
Local Plans and Regulations
1. Promote building codes and retrofitting practices that enhance wind resistance for
homes, utilities, and critical facilities.
Structure and Infrastructure Projects
2. Identify vulnerable structures and implement infrastructure retrofit projects to include
measures that reduce risk to existing utility systems.
3. Identify, maintain, and publicize designated tornado shelters, and encourage safe room
installation in schools, public buildings, and homes.
Natural Systems Protection and Nature-based Solutions
4. Research and install landscape mitigation for strategic planting of trees and hedge rows.
5. Conduct pre-storm tree assessments and pruning to help minimize wind born debris and
protect infrastructure.
Education and Awareness Programs
6. In cooperation with Federal and State governments, support a comprehensive public
information and education program on wind hazards, including straight line winds,
tornados and thunderstorm winds. This can be accomplished through regional
workshops and educational materials for citizens, business, local staff, and elected
officials.
Chapter 6: Mitigation Strategies Page | 6-8
7. Strengthen community access to NOAA Weather Radio, mobile alerts, and local
emergency notifications to ensure residents receive timely tornado warnings.
8. Support school level preparedness activities including tornado drills.
Community Safety and Partner Efforts
9. Strengthen operational coordination relationships with utility providers to coordinate and
collaboratively support the community following disaster related impacts.
6.9 Wildfire
Structure and Infrastructure Projects
1. Encourage residents and developers to use NFPA Firewise USA TM building design,
siting, and materials for construction.
2. Continue to support domestic water line infrastructure into communities who currently
operate off well water.
Natural Systems Protection and Nature-based Solutions
3. Create Defensible Space – implement perimeters around homes, structures, and critical
facilities through the removal or reduction of flammable vegetation.
4. Continue to utilize the Va. Dept. of Forestry “Dry-Hydrant” program to support access to
private water sources
Community Safety and Partner Efforts
5. Identify buildings or locations vital to the emergency response effort and buildings or
locations that, if damaged, would create secondary disasters in forested areas.
6. Encourage VDOF to continue its Community Wildfire Assessments.
6.10 Winter Storm
Structure and Infrastructure Projects
1. Implement pavement temperature sensors to increase real-time planning, execution and
public information efforts.
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-1
Chapter 7. Mitigation Action Plans
7.1 Project Development and Prioritization
This section contains the mitigation action plans of each participating jurisdiction within the plan.
Projects in this section are prioritized as high, medium, or low priority. Prioritization of projects
was based on the benefit-to-cost and the strategy’s potential to mitigate the impact from natural
hazards in line with long term planning efforts.
The anticipated level of cost effectiveness of each measure was a primary consideration when
developing the list of proposed projects. Reduced damages over the lifespan of the projects, the
benefits, are likely to be greater than the project cost in all cases. Although detailed cost and
benefit analysis was not conducted during the mitigation action development process, these
factors were of primary concern when prioritizing the proposed projects.
Additionally, if a project was already clearly scoped in an existing plan, that project was given
higher priority. Consideration was also given to availability of funding, the department or agency
responsible for implementation, and the ability of the locality to implement the project. Under each
identified project, applicable participant departments will be the lead in making sure that each
project or action will be implemented in a timely manner by coordinating with other departments,
other participant representatives and/or other regional agencies.
The timeline of anticipated project execution is categorized as short, medium, or long term. Short
term projects are projects where work is likely to begin in the next two years. Medium term projects
are likely to begin within four years. Long term projects are a five year or longer planning horizon,
and may carry into future plan iterations. When projects repeat from year to year, this will also be
noted. When a project has been completed, canceled, or rescoped the timeline will be noted as
none (n/a) excepting when more specific data was collected. Future project tracking will improve
under the new annual review process and in future iterations of this document (see Chapter 1).
Project status is defined here using the following descriptors:
• Complete: Projects from previous years which are completed.
• Ongoing: Projects which have been completed but which require maintenance at regular
intervals, often annually.
• In Progress: Projects currently in progress.
• Scoping: Projects undergoing preliminary work necessary to begin implementation.
• Not Started: Projects which are scoped but for which work has not begun.
• On Hold: Projects currently experiencing blocks or barriers to completion but which are
still planned for completion.
• Rescoped: Projects which have been rescoped from a previous plan – this is noted
predominantly for continuance between the 2019 plan and this document. Rescoped
projects may have been moved to the Regional Commission project list when appropriate
or been eliminated due to lack of specificity or clarity.
• Not Completed: Projects which met unavoidable barriers and which will not be included in
future plans.
For more information about each locality, including active mitigation programs and ordinances,
please see Chapter 5: Capabilities Assessment.
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-2
7.2 Alleghany County
The mitigation actions contained in this section also cover mitigation actions for the Town of Iron Gate.
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/Lead Added Proposed
Acquisition of
flood prone
households from
flood hazard areas;
reduce repetitive
loss; reduce loss of
FEMA,
VDEM, Local
Local government,
Engineering & Building
2019
Communication
equipment
All
hazards
Improved
coordination among
jurisdictions;
improved response
FEMA, Local
2019
residents and
developers to use
Fire-Wise building
design, siting, and
materials for
Reduction in
damages from
VDOF, Local
2019 N/A
Determine the
need for
generators at
public emergency
All
Hazards
Ensure that
emergency facilities
can be operational
FEMA, Local
2019 N/A
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-3
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/Lead Added Proposed
Participate in, and
remain in good
standing with, the
National Flood
Insurance
flood damage
through enforcement
of floodplain
ordinances and
availability of
discounted flood
insurance for
N/A 2019 N/A
Community
wildfire
wildfire, through
collaborative
assessments and
tailored mitigation
VDOF, USFS,
2019
recurring flood
problems and
request additional
stream/rain
warning of flooding;
ensure that these
areas are adequately
covered and
2019
Short
Term
Install Generators
at emergency
All
Hazards
Ensure that
emergency facilities
can be operational
CSB,
Schools,
VDEM
Shelter
Upgrade
Grant,
Grantor with
an
appropriate
grant
Public Safety, Public
Works, General
2025
Short
Term
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-4
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/Lead Added Proposed
Evaluate critical
facilities and
public utilities for
-
owned critical
facilities and public
utilities for
retrofitting or flood-
proofing to prevent
failure during
FEMA, Local
Public Works/ General
2019
Medium
Term
Hazardous
Materials Risk
Assessment and
Education
All
Hazards
that result
in
Hazardous
Materials
Release
Evaluate risk and
community safety
information for
Hazardous Materials
Release
County,
Grantor with
an
appropriate
grant
2025
Long
Term
warrant site-
specific
hydrologic and
hydraulic studies
emphasizing
chronic and
repetitive flooding
Possible
determination of
solutions to
repetitive loss
Cost
Pending
County,
Grantor with
an
appropriate
grant
Community
2019
Long
Term
or locations vital
to the emergency
response effort
and buildings or
locations that, if
damaged, would
create secondary
disasters in
Available inventory of
structures that need
additional or unique
protection from
VA Dept. of
Forestry, US
Forest
Service,
Local
2019
Long
Term
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-5
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/Lead Added Proposed
Local codes
All
hazards
Review of
development codes
to evaluate need for
changes that would
improve disaster
FEMA, Local
2019
Long
Term
participation in
FEMA DFIRM
of flood hazard areas
through sharing of
FEMA, Local
2019 N/A
Develop and
maintain an
inventory of flood
prone roadways for
planning purposes
(road improvements,
limitation of
FEMA,
VDEM,
RVARC,
VDOT, Local
2019 N/A
accurate
database and
map of repetitive
Identification of
repetitive loss
properties that
Local government,
2019 N/A
All
hazards
Inform public about
hazards and
FEMA,
VDEM, Local
2019 N/A
Support FIRM re-
mapping projects Flooding
Increased accuracy
of flood hazard areas
through sharing of
FEMA, Local
2019 N/A
Support Virginia
Department of
Transportation
projects that
repair banks to
prevent backup,
erosion and flooding
of existing drainage
FEMA,
Local government or
2019 N/A
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-6
7.3 City of Covington
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/Added to Proposed
Participate in, and
remain in good
standing with, the
National Flood
Insurance
flood damage
through
enforcement of
floodplain
ordinances and
availability of
discounted flood
insurance for
N/A 2019 N/A
Structures - City
Pool and
Reduced damages
City & Local
Foundation
2019 2016
Improvements –
Craig Avenue and
Reduced damages
VDEM /
FEMA /
2019 2020-22
improvements -
West Jackson
Reduced damages
VDEM/FEMA
2019 2020-22
Improvements -
Parrish Court,
Marshall Street,
and Rayon View
Area
Reduced damages
VDEM/FEMA
2019 2020-22
monitoring
equipment to
locality water
timely information to
public works to
identify system
City, I&I
2025
Short
Term
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-7
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/Added to Proposed
Mobile Generator
Acquisition with
Quick Connects
All
Hazards
generating
power
Continue to operate
wastewater pump
stations during
Development
Services/Public
2025
Short
Term
Add / Replace
Generators at Fire
Station, City Hall,
Emergency
All
Hazards
generating
power
outage,
Extreme
Temperatu
re
facilities and install
appropriate
generating
equipment and
controls to allow
them to be better
utilized during
disasters and severe
~$220,000
+
City/ Grantor
with an
appropriate
grant
Development
Services/Public
Works/ Emergency
2019
Short
Term
Joint
Communications
Center with
All
Hazards
Improved
coordination
between responders
and response
records between
~$10,000,0
00
City, County,
City PD/Alleghany
Public Safety/
Alleghany Sheriff’s
2025
Medium
Term
Study potential of
Landslide on 220
Geologic
Prevent impact of
Grantor with
an
Apporpriate
Grant
2025
Study former
Geologic
Mitigate flow in the
area that could be
the cause of sink
City, Grantor
with an
appropriate
grant
2025
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-8
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/Added to Proposed
Drainage
Improvements:
Chestnut &
Monroe ST Flooding
Reduced Damage
and repair costs;
access and
response between
areas of the City
during moderate or
greater rainfall $7,000,000 High
City, Post
Helene
Mitigation
Development
Services/Public
Works/ Emergency
Management 2025 On Hold
Medium
Term
The upgrading of
the present
weather terminal
at the Covington
All
Weather
timely weather
information will
allow first
responders to make
better decision
about actions to
take, evacuations,
and the possibility of
flooding and other
City, Grantor
with an
appropriate
Emergency
2019
Communications
Equipment
All
Hazards
Improved
coordination
between City,
County, and State
VDEM/FEMA
2019 n/a
Acquisition of
flood prone
households from
flood hazard areas;
reduce repetitive
loss; reduce loss of
FEMA,
VDEM, Local
Local government,
Engineering &
Building
2019 n/a
accurate database
and map of
repetitive loss
Identification of
repetitive loss
properties that
Local government,
2019 N/A
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-9
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/Added to Proposed
Additional Hazard
Certificates for
residential,
business, and
critical facilities.
Increased accuracy
of hazard mitigation
VDEM/FEMA
2019 N/A
Structure
Acquisition -
residential and
commercial Flooding
Removal of
structures from
flood hazard areas;
reduce repetitive
loss; reduce the loss
of life and property $3,800,000 Medium
VDEM/FEMA
/Local Govt Local government 2019 Rescoped N/A
Public Education
All
hazards
Inform public about
hazards and
VDEM, Local
2019 N/A
Evaluate Public
Utilities for Flood
Evaluation of public
utilities for
retrofitting or flood
proofing to prevent
failures and lessen
damages during
VDEM/FEMA
2019 N/A
Local code and
All
Hazards
Reduction in flood
insurance rates;
reduction in flood
VDEM/FEMA
2019 N/A
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-10
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/Added to Proposed
Add/Replace
Generators at
emergency
facilities, public
utilities, and City
All
Hazards
Evaluate the
facilities and install
appropriate
generating
equipment and
controls to allow
them to be better
utilized during
disasters and severe
VDEM/FEMA
2019 N/A
Add local IFLOWS
monitoring and
additional stream
more timely
information to allow
faster, more
accurate warnings to
be issued to the
VDEM/FEMA
2019 N/A
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-11
7.4 Town of Clifton Forge
Project
Hazard Funding Implementation/Lead Added to Proposed
Communications
Communication
Local
Government, Police
2019 N/A
Participate in,
and remain in
good standing
with, the
National Flood
Insurance
Program (NFIP) Flooding
Reduction of
future flood
damage
through
enforcement of
floodplain
ordinances and
availability of
discounted
flood insurance
for property
owners N/A High FEMA Local government 2019 COMPLETE N/A
Public Education All Hazards
Inform public
about hazards
and mitigation
FEMA, Local
Local government,
Community
2019 N/A
need for
generators at
public
emergency
facilities All hazards
Ensure that
emergency
facilities can be
operational
during hazard
events $250,000 Medium
FEMA, Local
government
Local government,
Public Works 2019 COMPLETE 2013
Local Flood
Identify Hazards
associated with
VA Soil and Water
2019 2014-15
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-12
Project
Hazard Funding Implementation/Lead Added to Proposed
Communication
equipment
coordination
among
jurisdictions;
improved
FEMA, Local
Local government,
2019
Current /
Community
wildfire
assessments Wildfire
Reduction of
loss to wildfire,
through
collaborative
assessments
and tailored
mitigation
action $25,000 Medium
VDOF, USFS,
Public Safety Public Safety 2019 In Progress Ongoing
Update and
Develop Town
Specific GIS
All-
situational
awareness
related to
assets, problem
areas and
special
functions of the
$15,000-
$25,000 High
Local
Government,
Local Government,
2019
Short
Term
Local codes
development
codes to
evaluate need
for changes that
would improve
disaster
Local government,
Community
Development,
2019
Short
Term
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-13
Project
Hazard Funding Implementation/Lead Added to Proposed
Identify buildings
or locations vital
to the emergency
response effort
and buildings or
locations that, if
damaged, would
create secondary
disasters in
Available
inventory of
structures that
need additional
or unique
protection from
VA Dept. of
Forestry, US
Forest
Service,
Local
Local government,
2019
Medium
Term
-
wide study
Identify Geologic
Hazard Areas,
and appropriate
mitigation
Earthquake,
Geologic
Increased
situational
awareness and
planning
Local
FEMA, Local
Government,
Community
2025
Medium
Term
Water Reservoir
Town Water
Health,
Local Government, VA
2019
Medium
Term
Stream Bed
Identify Repairs
RWA, Local
Local Government
2019
Long
Term
Hazardous
Materials
All Hazards
resulting in
HAZMAT
release
awareness and
planning
capability to
decrease loss
of life, property
and enhance
response
$15,000-
$25,000 High
Town,
Grantor with
an
appropriate
grant
Emergency Services,
2025
Long
Term
Degree of
Urgency Flooding
Identify
Problem Areas $25,000 Medium
Local
government Local government 2019 Rescoped N/A
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-14
Project
Hazard Funding Implementation/Lead Added to Proposed
Maintain an
accurate
database and
map of repetitive
repetitive loss
properties that
should be
Local government,
2019 N/A
with recurring
flood problems
and request
additional IFLOW
stream/rain
warning of
flooding; ensure
that these areas
are adequately
covered and
Local Government,
2019 N/A
Continue
participation in
FEMA DFIRM
accuracy of
flood hazard
areas through
sharing of local
FEMA, Local
2019 N/A
Support FIRM re-
mapping
projects Flooding
Increased
accuracy of
flood hazard
areas through
sharing of local
knowledge Unknown High
FEMA, Local
government Local government 2019 Rescoped N/A
Encourage
residents and
developers to
use Fire-Wise
building design,
siting, and
materials for
Reduction in
damages from
VDOF, Local
Local government,
2019 N/A
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-15
Project
Hazard Funding Implementation/Lead Added to Proposed
Support local
street projects
that minimize
and repair
banks to
prevent backup,
erosion and
flooding of
existing
drainage
Local government,
2019 N/A
Evaluate critical
facilities and
public utilities
critical facilities
and public
utilities for
retrofitting or
flood-proofing
to prevent
FEMA, Local
Local government,
2019 N/A
Identify Geologic
Geologic
Hazards,
Local
Government,
Community
2019 N/A
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-16
7.5 Botetourt County
Project
Hazard
Mitigated Benefit
Cost
Estimate Priority
Funding
Partners
Implementation/Lead
Agency
Date Added to
Plan Status
Proposed
Schedule
Participate in the
“StormReady”
All
Hazards
Community is
better
prepared
through
planning and
FEMA,
VDEM, NWS,
local
2025
Community
notification
system
All
hazards
Reduced loss
through
improved
warning
system $55,000 Low
FEMA,
VDEM, ODP,
Local
Government
Local government,
ESC, Sheriff Dept. 2019 COMPLETE Ongoing
Obtain more up-
to-date and
comprehensive
GIS system
All
hazards
Increased
information for
better incident
response $350,000 High
Local
Government Local Government 2019 COMPLETE N/A
Participate in,
and remain in
good standing
with, the
National Flood
Insurance
future flood
damage
through
enforcement
of floodplain
ordinances
and availability
of discounted
flood
insurance for
property
N/A 2019 N/A
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-17
Project
Hazard
Mitigated Benefit
Cost
Estimate Priority
Funding
Partners
Implementation/Lead
Agency
Date Added to
Plan Status
Proposed
Schedule
Evaluate critical
facilities and
public utilities
for flood-
proofing Flooding
Evaluation of
critical
facilities and
public utilities
for retrofitting
or flood-
proofing to
prevent failure
during
disasters,
particularly
emergency
services
facilities
located in
flood hazard
FEMA, Local
2019
Short
Term
Communication
equipment
All
hazards
Improved
coordination
among
jurisdictions;
improved
response
FEMA, Local
Local government,
2019
Short
Term
Identification
and tracking of
special needs
All
hazards
Preparation for
assisting
special needs
populations to
prevent loss of
life and
Local
2019
Short
Term
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-18
Project
Hazard
Mitigated Benefit
Cost
Estimate Priority
Funding
Partners
Implementation/Lead
Agency
Date Added to
Plan Status
Proposed
Schedule
Identification
and installation
of generator
quick-connect
locations for
critical public
service facilities,
shelter facilities,
and other critical
All
Hazards
resulting
in power
Continuity of
critical
services during
FEMA,
2019
Short
Term
Obtain portable
generators to be
used on various
infrastructure
components as
needed during
All
Hazards
resulting
in power
outage,
including
deployment of
generator to
critical
infrastructure
when power
fails to certain
facilities, to
include
mountain
Local
2019
Short
Term
Installation and
Maintenance of
River and
Precipitation
of a water and
flooding
common
operating
picture
supporting
early warning
and situational
awareness
Local
Government,
HMGP:
Botetourt County
Emergency
2025
Short
Term
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-19
Project
Hazard
Mitigated Benefit
Cost
Estimate Priority
Funding
Partners
Implementation/Lead
Agency
Date Added to
Plan Status
Proposed
Schedule
Capital
Improvement
Project for new
Daleville Fire
Station/Dispatch
All
Hazards
Creation of a
new dispatch
center to
address new
development
in Daleville
Local
2025
Medium
Term
Landslide and
Geologic
Hazards Training
for land
disturbance
Geological
Due to
increased
consequential
development
in the
community
and land
disturbance,
inspectors will
have
increased
perspective
and
consideration
for these types
County,
Grantor with
an
appropriate
grant
Community
2025
Medium
Term
Development of
Sheltering
All-
Hazards
Expand
capability to
operate
shelters within
emergency
management
grant
sources as
Botetourt County
Emergency
2025
Medium
Term
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-20
Project
Hazard
Mitigated Benefit
Cost
Estimate Priority
Funding
Partners
Implementation/Lead
Agency
Date Added to
Plan Status
Proposed
Schedule
Construct an
Emergency
Operations
Center for use
during disasters
to support
response and
All
hazards
Allow for
central
location to
coordinate all
response and
recovery
resources
during and
Local
2019
Long
Term
Develop and
maintain an
inventory of
flood prone
flood prone
roadways for
planning
purposes
(road
improvements,
limitation of
FEMA,
VDEM,
RVARC,
VDOT, Local
2019 N/A
accurate
database and
map of repetitive
of repetitive
loss properties
that should be
Local government,
2019 N/A
All
Hazards
Inform public
about hazard
mitigation
FEMA,
VDEM, Local
2019 N/A
workshops for
tornado drills
(public,
businesses, and
informed
about how to
protect
yourself during
Local
2019 N/A
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-21
Project
Hazard
Mitigated Benefit
Cost
Estimate Priority
Funding
Partners
Implementation/Lead
Agency
Date Added to
Plan Status
Proposed
Schedule
Evaluate and
Participate in
FEMA's
Cooperating
Technical
Partners
Continuing
updates to
flood hazard
FEMA, Local
2019 N/A
Local codes
All
Hazards
Review of
developent
codes to
evaluate need
for changes
that would
improve
disaster
FEMA, Local
Local governmnet,
Emergency Services,
2019 N/A
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-22
7.6 Town of Buchanan
Several projects from the 2019 plan are currently listed as not completed in this document. This is due to staff changes at the Town
and County which have resulted in lost progress and information, and to the nature of the projects, which must be executed by VDOT.
Towns in Virginia do not own or maintain their own roadways.
Project
Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Priority
Added
to Plan
Evaluate public utilities for
floodproofing Flooding
Evaluation of public utilities for
retrofitting or floodproofing to
prevent failure during disasters $10,000 High
FEMA,
Local
government
Local government,
Public Works Dept 2019 COMPLETE Ongoing
Acquire and demolish derelict
property in the floodplain
through local program Flooding
Reduction of derelict
structures within the flood
plain Unknown Low
Town, and
Grantor
with an
appropriate
grant
program Town Manager 2025 Not Started
Long
Elevation of the Water St Pump
Station, Pump replacement,
movement of sewer line under
the river Flooding
Continuation of sewer service
during disasters $1,800,000 High DEQ, Town
Town Water System
Operator 2025 In Progress
Medium
Evaluate effectiveness of Flood
Wall to protect Lowe Street and
Main Street Flooding
Elimination of street, business
and residential flooding
downtown Unknown High
FEMA,
VDEM,
Local
government Local government 2025 Not Started
Short
Elevate Parkway Dr from Main
St to Quarry Flooding Elevate Parkway Dr. $1,000,000 Medium 2025 Scoping
Long
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-23
Project
Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Priority
Added
to Plan
grant
program
Study residential and
agricultural property existing in
steep slope areas to identify
mitigation solutions
Geologic
Hazards,
Wildfire
Study landslide, karst and
wildfire risk associated with
residential and agricultural
property existing in steep slope
areas to identify mitigation
solutions $50,000 Medium Town Manager 2019 Scoping
Short
Plan Buchanan Library and
elementary school as a backup
area shelter and POD.
Extreme
Temperature,
Wind, Winter
Development of a redundant
location for local emergency
sheltering $5,000 Medium
County Emergency
Manager 2025 In Progress
Long
Identification and installation
of generator quick-connect
locations for critical public
service facilities, shelter
facilities, and other critical
infrastructure
All Hazards
resulting in
power outage during disasters $200,000 High
FEMA,
VDEM,
Local
government
Botetourt Co
Emergency
Management 2019 In Progress
Short
Participate in, and remain in
good standing with, the
National Flood Insurance
Program (NFIP) Flooding
Reduction of future flood
damage through
enforcement of floodplain
ordinances and availability
of discounted flood
insurance for property
owners $2,500 High
FEMA,
VDEM,
Local
government Local Government 2019 Rescoped
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-24
Project
Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Priority
Added
to Plan
Maintain an accurate database
and map of repetitive loss
properties Flooding
Identification of repetitive
loss properties that should
be mitigated $2,500 High
FEMA,
VDEM,
Local
government Local Government 2019 Rescoped
Local Code Review All Hazards
Review of development
codes to evaluate need for
changes that would
improve disaster mitigation $5,000 High
FEMA,
VDEM,
Local
government Local Government 2019 Rescoped
Identification of appropriate
properties for acquisition
and/or elevation out of flood
area Flooding Reduction of flood loss Unknown Low
FEMA,
VDEM,
Local
government Local Government 2019 COMPLETE
Public education All Hazards
Inform public about hazards
and mitigation options $5,000 High
FEMA,
VDEM,
Local
government Local Government 2019 Rescoped
Protection of the Town Sewage
Treatment Plan on Parkway
Drive Flooding
Continuation of sewer service
during disasters Unknown High
FEMA,
VDEM,
Local
government Local Government 2019
Not
Completed
Protection of the Town Lift
Station on Parkway Drive Flooding
Continuation of sewer service
during disasters Unknown High
FEMA,
VDEM,
Local
government Local Government 2019
Not
Completed
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-25
Project
Hazard
Mitigated Benefit Priority
Added
to Plan
Mitigation of culvert at
intersection of 19th Street and
New Town Road Flooding
Elimination of street and
business flooding Unknown High
FEMA,
VDEM,
Local
government Local Government 2019
Not
Completed
Mitigation of culvert at Main
Street and 19th Street Flooding
Elimination of street and
business flooding Unknown High
FEMA,
VDEM,
Local
government Local Government 2019
Not
Completed
Mitigation of culvert between
Main Street and Lowe Street
near Alley Flooding
Elimination of street, business
and residential flooding
downtown Unknown High
FEMA,
VDEM,
Local
government Local Government 2019
Not
Completed
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-26
7.7 Town of Fincastle
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/Lead Added Proposed
Procure
Trailer Drawn
Generator
and Install
Quick
All Hazards
generating
Power
Outage, i.e.
Flood, Wind,
Winter,
Extreme
generator to support 2
town wells and the
WWTP, upon which
quick connects will be
installed. Available
resource for the
Ventilator Dependent
Skilled Nursing Facility
located within the
town, in the event of
Town, County,
VDEM Hazard
Mitigation,
FEMA Post
Disaster
Mitigation Grant
Town Manager,
County Emergency
2025
In
Progress
Short
Term
Evaluate
public
utilities for
floodproofing Flooding
Study public utilities for
retrofitting or
floodproofing to
prevent failure during
disasters $10,000 High
Town, County,
Available
Grantors with
appropriate
grant programs,
when scope of
work is
developed Town Council 2025 Scoping
Short
Term
Study
vulnerability
of the
Wastewater
Treatment
generating
power
outage,
Flooding,
Geologic
Hazards,
Wildfire,
Study to determine
flood risk, power failure
and resiliency, slope
stability, road access,
defensible space and
security measures at
Town, County,
Available
Grantors with
appropriate
grant programs,
when scope of
work is
2025
Not
Medium
Term
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-27
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/Lead Added Proposed
Study:
Stream Bank
Restoration-
Town Branch Flooding
Determine course of
action and cost to
restore the banks of
Town Branch to
minimize flooding in
the low lying area of
VDOT, Available
Grantors with
appropriate
grant programs,
when scope of
work is
2025
Not
Medium
Term
Local Code
codes to evaluate need
for changes that would
improve disaster
FEMA, VDEM,
Local
2019 N/A
in, and
remain in
good
standing
with, the
National
Flood
Insurance
Program
Reduction of future
flood damage through
enforcement of
floodplain ordinances
and availability of
discounted flood
insurance for property
FEMA, VDEM,
Local
2019 N/A
accurate
database
and map of
repetitive
loss
Identification of
repetitive loss
properties that should
FEMA, VDEM,
Local
2019 N/A
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-28
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/Lead Added Proposed
Identification
of
appropriate
properties
for
acquisition
and/or
elevation out
FEMA, VDEM,
Local
2019 N/A
Public
hazards and mitigation
Local
2019 N/A
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-29
7.8 Town of Troutville
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/Lead Proposed
Transfer Switch
and Generator
Upgrade for
All Hazards
generating
power
power for Town
Hall, Fire
Department,
Water Tower,
Pump Station,
Training Center
-
Town,
County,
Grantor with
an
appropriate
grant
Town Water
2025
Local Code
development
codes to
evaluate need for
changes that
would improve
disaster
Town,
County,
Grantor with
an
appropriate
grant
2019
Conduct study
for public
utilities
Evaluation of
public utilities for
retrofitting or
floodproofing to
prevent failure
County,
Grantor with
an
appropriate
grant
Town Water
2019
Not
Stream
Restoration in
Safe community
park area and
preservation of
Town,
County,
Grantor with
an
appropriate
grant
2025
Not
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-30
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/Lead Proposed
Identify Water
Distribution
Infrastructure
vulnerable to
hazardous
environmental
concerns
including
extreme cold
Extreme
temperature
and
Geologic
Identify and
prioritize
vulnerable
infrastructure to
prevent
customer/system
Town,
County,
Grantor with
an
appropriate
grant
Town Water
2025
Not
Participate in,
and remain in
good standing
with, the
National Flood
Insurance
future flood
damage through
enforcement of
floodplain
ordinances and
availability of
discounted flood
insurance for
FEMA, VDEM,
Local
2019 N/A
accurate
database and
map of
repetitive loss
Identification of
repetitive loss
properties that
should be
FEMA, VDEM,
Local
2019 N/A
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-31
7.9 Craig County
The mitigation actions located in this section also cover mitigation actions for the Town of New Castle.
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/Added to Proposed
Develop and
maintain an
inventory of
flood prone
critical structures that
need additional or
unique protection from
FEMA,
Local
2019 N/A
Reverse 911
(Mass
Notification)All hazards
Reduced loss through
improved warning
VDEM,
local
governm
Local
government,
ESC, Sheriff
2019 2020-22
Department of
Transportation
projects that
minimize
Clear debris and repair
banks along roads to
prevent backup, erosion
and flooding of existing
FEMA,
VDEM,
2019
In
Progress Ongoing
Communicatio
n equipment
interoperability
All
hazards,
enhanced
capability
for Wildfire
Improved coordination
among jurisdictions;
improved response
times $4,700,000+ High
Local
Govern
ment,
US
Congres
s,
General
Assembl
y
Local
government,
ESC, Sheriff
Dept. 2019
In
Progress Short Term
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-32
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/Added to Proposed
Install
generators at
communication
All hazards
resulting in
power
Redundant power for
public safety
communications, part
Govern
ment,
US
Congres
s,
General
Assembl
y ESC
In
Progress Short Term
Install
Generator at
Shelter-
Simmonsville
All
Hazards
requiring
shelter/wa
rming/cool
Resilient shelter and
community location in
VDEM
Shelter
Upgrade
2019
In
Progress Short Term
Safety
improvements
to Johns Creek
dams #1, #2,
Protection of life and
property downstream
FEMA,
DCR,
USDA,
Mountain Castle
2019
In
Progress Long Term
Downtown New
Castle Flooding Flooding
Work with VDOT to
address downtown
stormwater drainage
problems $400,000 High
FEMA,
VDOT,
VA
DHCD
County
Administrator
and VDOT 2019 Scoping Long Term
Identify projects
that would
mitigate
repetitive
flooding at
properties
along Craig’s
Reduction of property
and community impacts
from flooding along
Grantors
with
appropri
ate grant
program
s 2019
Not
Medium
Term
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-33
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/Added to Proposed
Add additional
stream and
precipitation
timely information to
allow faster, more
accurate warnings to be
VDEM /
FEMA /
2019
Not
and support
programs that
update FEMA’s
Flood Insurance
Updated flood hazard
Building
2019
Not
special section
in local
newspaper with
emergency
information on
Earthquak
e
Increased level of
knowledge and
FEMA,
Local
2019 N/A
Acquisition of
flood prone
from flood hazard areas;
reduce repetitive loss;
reduce loss of life and
VDEM,
Local
governm
government,
Engineering &
Building
2019 N/A
Participate in,
and remain in
good standing
with, the
National Flood
Insurance
Program (NFIP) Flooding
Reduction of future
flood damage through
enforcement of
floodplain ordinances
and availability of
discounted flood
insurance for property
owners $2,500 High
FEMA,
VDEM,
Local
governm
ent
Local
Government 2019 Rescoped N/A
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-34
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/Added to Proposed
Develop and
maintain an
inventory of
flood prone
roadways Flooding
Inventory of flood prone
roadways for planning
purposes (road
improvements,
limitation of
development) $25,000 Medium
FEMA,
VDEM,
RVARC,
VDOT,
Local
governm
ent RVARC 2019 Rescoped N/A
Community
wildfire
Reduction of loss to
Local
governm
Local
2019 N/A
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-35
7.10 Roanoke County
Project
Hazard Funding Implementation/Added Proposed
Publish Public
Safety
Announcements
(PSA) using Multi –
Media Outlets with
emergency
information on
Increased level of
knowledge and
FEMA,
government /
Roanoke Co
Public
Information
Office &
Emergency
2019
Publish Public
Safety
Announcements
(PSA) using Multi-
Media Outlets and
utilizing practice
drills to increase
knowledge and
impacts risks
associated with high
winds in business
Public informed about
how to protect yourself
during a tornado in case
you are at home, in a car,
Mediu
m
Local
governm
Local
government /
Roanoke Co
Emergency
Management and
Participating
2019
Participate in, and
remain in good
standing with, the
National Flood
Insurance Program
Reduction of future flood
damage through
enforcement of
floodplain ordinances
and availability of
discounted flood
insurance for property
Unkno
wn
Local
2019
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-36
Project
Hazard Funding Implementation/Added Proposed
Maintain an
accurate database
and map of
repetitive loss
properties. Request
Identification of
repetitive loss properties
Unkno
wn
FEMA,
Local
government /
Roanoke Co
Development
2019
Develop and
maintain an
inventory of flood
prone critical
Available inventory of
critical structures that
need additional or unique
Mediu
m
FEMA,
government /
Roanoke Co
General Services
and
Development
2019
Maintain an
inventory of flood
prone residential
properties and
repetitive loss
Available inventory of
repetitive loss properties
that could be used for
No
external
Roanoke Co
Development
2019
Additional hazard
related GIS
Increased accuracy of
hazard mitigation
$100,0
00
USGS,
NOAA,
FEMA,
VDEM,
VDOT,
Roanoke Co
Development
Services and
2019
Citizen Warning and
Reduced loss through
$20,00
0
annuall
Mediu
m
VDEM,
Local
Govern
Roanoke Co
Emergency
2019
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-37
Project
Hazard Funding Implementation/Added Proposed
Research and
consider
participating in the
National Weather
Service “Storm
All Weather
Community will be better
prepared through
planning and education
Mediu
m
Local
government /
Roanoke Co
Emergency
2019 N/A
Communication
equipment
Improved coordination
among jurisdictions;
Unkno
wn
FEMA,
Local
governm
FEMA, Local
2019 N/A
management and
floodplain
management
Up to date hazard related
ordinances to provide
guidance for planning
Unkno
wn
Local
governm
Local
2019 2025
Develop and
maintain an
inventory of flood
Inventory of flood prone
roadways for planning
purposes (road
improvements, limitation
$25,00
0
Mediu
m
VDEM,
RVARC,
VDOT,
Local
governm
RVARC, Roanoke
Co Development
2019
In
progress Ongoing
Support Virginia
Department of
Transportation
projects that
Clear debris and repair
banks along roads to
prevent backup, erosion
and flooding of existing
varies
annuall
y, due
to work
perfor
me
Mediu
m
FEMA,
VDEM,
Roanoke Co
Development
2019
In
progress Ongoing
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-38
Project
Hazard Funding Implementation/Added Proposed
Seek funding to
prepare site-specific
hydrologic and
hydraulic studies
that look at areas
that have chronic
and repetitive
Possible determination
of solutions to repetitive
$100,0
00
Mediu
m
Local
governm
Roanoke Co
Development
2019
In
Progress Ongoing
Public education All hazards
Inform public about
hazards and mitigation
$50,00
0
VDEM,
Local
governm
Local
government,
Emergency
2019
In
progress Ongoing
Participate in
special statewide
outreach/awareness
activities, such as
Winter Weather
Awareness Week,
Flood Awareness
Inform public about
hazards and mitigation
$10,00
0
VDEM,
FEMA,
Roanoke Co
Emergency
2019
In
progress Ongoing
Upgrade/repairs to
stormwater system Flooding
Reduce frequency and
impact of flooding
$10,00
0,000 High
FEMA,
VDEM,
VDOT
Roanoke Co
Development
Services 2019
In
progress Ongoing
Drainage system
banks to prevent backup,
erosion and flooding of
existing drainage
$1,000,
000
annuall
FEMA,
VDEM,
Roanoke Co
Development
2019
In
progress Ongoing
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-39
Project
Hazard Funding Implementation/Added Proposed
Identify buildings or
locations vital to the
emergency response
effort and buildings
or locations that, if
damaged, would
add complexity to a
response. Apply
community wildfire
assessments as
Available inventory of
structures that need
additional or unique
protection from wildfires.
Support property owners
in taking mitigation
actions such as
defensible space,
building and siting
$80,00
0
Mediu
m
VA Dept.
of
Forestry,
US
Forest
Service,
Local
governm
Local
government,
VDOF, USFS, and
Roanoke County
Fire & Rescue
2019
In
progress Ongoing
Repetitive Loss
Property Acquisition
and Demolition of a
Property located in
Mitigation of repetitive
~$1,00
FEMA,
Roanoke Co
Development
2019
Dixie Cavern Landfill
Replace aging system to
$1,000,
000
Mediu
m
Partners
with
Mitigatio
n
Grants;
other
relevant
develop
ment
Roanoke Co
Development
2025
Identify locations for
additional rain, river
and stream
Provide better, more
timely information to
allow faster, more
accurate warnings to be
$25,00
0
Mediu
m
VDEM /
FEMA /
LOCAL
Local
2019
Not
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-40
Project
Hazard Funding Implementation/Added Proposed
Develop and
maintain damage
assessment
Knowledge of hazard
caused damage for
planning and disaster
Unkno
wn
Local
2019 N/A
Additional hazard
Elevation certificates for
residential, business,
and critical facilities;
increased accuracy of
hazard mitigation
$75,00
0
FEMA,
VDEM,
Local
Govern
Local
Government,
Engineering
2019 N/A
Commercial
Structure
Removal of structure
$15,00
FEMA,
Government,
Engineering
2019 N/A
Identify funding and
resources for
delineating landslide
Geologic
Landslide Tool for
planning and decision-
making; limitation of new
$15,00
0
Mediu
m
VDEM,
2019 N/A
ordinance/guideline
s for development in
steep
slope/marginal soils
areas
Geologic
Landslide Tool for
planning and decision-
making; limitation of new
$10,00
0
Mediu
m
Local
2019 N/A
Stormwater facilities
Reduce frequency and
$15,00
FEMA,
Government,
Engineering
2019 N/A
Stormwater
Management Master
Plan Flooding
Watershed/mitigation
planning and project
identification
$750,0
00 High
FEMA,
Local
governm
ent, PDC
Local
Government,
Engineering
Department 2019 Rescoped N/A
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-41
Project
Hazard Funding Implementation/Added Proposed
Encourage residents
and developers to
use Fire-Wise
building design,
siting, and materials
Reduction in damages
Mediu
m
VDOF,
Local
governm
Local
2019 N/A
Community wildfire
Reduction in loss to
$25,00
0
Mediu
m
Local
governm
VDOF, Local
2019 N/A
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-42
7.11 City of Roanoke
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/
Added
to Proposed
Develop and
maintain an
inventory of flood
prone critical
Available inventory of
critical structures
that need additional
or unique protection
government,
Stormwater
Utility,
Emergency
2019
participation in
FEMA’s DFIRM
Updated flood hazard
FEMA, local
Local
2019
Assistance
Center Plan,
Standard
Operating
Guidelines for
Family
Assistance
Center
deployment, and
identify staffing
needs
Supporting
government and
private employers in
Roanoke by
developing SOGs to
implement Family
$0
City &
private
partner
City of Roanoke
Emergency
Management,
City
Schools Complete Ongoing
Secure grants to
purchase and
maintain
Volunteer
Management
and Reception
Supporting
spontaneous
volunteers in a
Roanoke Valley
2019
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-43
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/
Added
to Proposed
Additional
Hazard related
Increased accuracy
of hazard mitigation
USGS,
NOAA,
FEMA,
Government,
Stormwater
Utility,
Department of
Technology,
Emergency
2019
Star City Alerts
(Rave Mobile
Safety) All Hazards
Reduced loss of life
and property through
improved warning
system. $25,000 High
Local
Government
Local
Government,
Emergeny
Management 2019 Complete Ongoing
Maintain an
accurate
database and
map of repetitive
Identification of
repetitive loss
properties that
Stormwater
2019
Attain CRS Class
6
insurance rates;
reduction in flood
government;
Stormwater
2025 2021
Operating
Guidelines for
Volunteer
Reception
Supporting
spontaneous
volunteers in a
$0
City
Emergency
City EM, Police
Department,
Animal
Wardens Complete
Develop Disaster
Pet Sheltering
Disaster by
developing
Community Animal
City
Emergency
City EM & Police
2019 2022
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-44
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/
Added
to Proposed
Structure
acquisition Flooding
Removal of
structures from flood
hazard areas; reduce
repetitive loss;
reduce loss of life
and property.
$200,000 per
year High
FEMA,
VDEM,
Local
Government
Local
government,
Stormwater
Utility 2019 In progress Ongoing
Acquisition of
flood prone
households from
flood hazard areas;
reduce repetitive
loss; reduce loss of
FEMA,
VDEM, Local
Local
government,
Stormwater
2019
Inform public about
hazards and
mitigation options
FEMA,
VDEM,
Local
government,
Stormwater
Utility,
Emergency
2019
Upgrade / repairs
to storm water
Reduce frequency
and impact of
$140,000,000 High
FEMA,
VDEM,
Local
government
Local
2019
Implementation
of Tinker Creek
and Tributaries
Watershed
and sediment
transport, reduction
of stream bank
erosion, increase in
water quality
Variable
$300,000 to
VADEQ,
potentially
Local
2025
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-45
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/
Added
to Proposed
Implementation
of Lick Run
Watershed
and sediment
transport, reduction
of stream bank
erosion, increase in
water quality
Variable
$300,000 to
VADEQ,
potentially
Local
2025
Implementation
of Trout Run
Watershed
and sediment
transport, reduction
of stream bank
erosion, increase in
water quality
Variable
$300,000 to
VADEQ,
potentially
Local
2025
Implementation
of Peters Creek
Watershed
and sediment
transport, reduction
of stream bank
erosion, increase in
water quality
Variable
$300,000 to
VADEQ,
potentially
Local
2025
Watershed
Stormwater needs on
a per watershed basis
with comprehensive
modeling and
identification of
$700,000 per
Local
Government,
Stormwater
2025
Drainage System
repair banks to
prevent
backup, erosion and
flooding of existing
$500,000 High
FEMA,
VDEM,
Local
government
Local
2019
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-46
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/
Added
to Proposed
Flood Hazard
mapping update
/ modernization Flooding
Increased accuracy
of flood maps and
more effective
regulation and
enforcement of
regulations. $212,800 High FEMA, VDEM
Local
government,
Stormwater
Utility, Planning
Division 2019 In progress
Short
Term
Attain CRS Class
5
insurance rates;
reduction in flood
government;
Stormwater
2019
Long
Term
Sponsor
Community
efforts to develop
resilience hub, by
supporting funding
Partner
identification
underway
Sustainability
and Emergency
2025
Medium
Term
Develop Crisis
Communications
establish
coordinated public
information and
warning throughout
the incident
City, Grantor
with an
appropriate
grant
Emergency
Management,
2025
Medium
Term
Develop Heat
Resilience Plan
Extreme
temperature
Develop adaptation
features to build
resiliency $150,000 High
City, Grantor
with an
appropriate
grant
program Sustainability 2025 Not Started
Medium
Term
Study on power
All Hazards
generating
power
Solutioning long
term, multi disaster
City, Grantor
with an
appropriate
grant
Sustainability,
Emergency
2019
Long
Term
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-47
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/
Added
to Proposed
Pavement
Temperature
Winter
Storm,
extreme
Operational
efficiency generating
City, USGS,
Grantor with
an
appropriate
grant
Transportation
2025
Long
Term
Develop
Continuity of
Government
Increased decision
making and
coordination
City, Grantor
with an
appropriate
grant
Emergency
Management,
2025
Long
Term
Elevation
Certificate
Updates Flooding
Once the LOMR is
updated as a result of
the Roanoke River
Flood Reduction
Project, new
elevation certificates
along the river
corridor may be
needed. Unknown Medium
Silver
Jackets,
VDEM, FEMA
Local
government,
Stormwater
Utility 2019 On Hold
Medium
Term
Inundation
understand what
flooding depths will
be based on RR
stream gauge
Silver
Jackets,
local
Stormwater
2019
Medium
Term
Stream
and sediment
transport, reduction
of stream bank
erosion, increase in
water quality
Variable
$300,000 to
VADEQ,
potentially
Local
2019 N/A
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-48
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/
Added
to Proposed
Participate in,
and remain in
good standing
with, the
National Flood
Insurance
flood damage
through enforcement
of floodplain
ordinances and
availability of
discounted flood
insurance for
$0
Local
government,
Stormwater
2019 N/A
Reverse 911 All Hazards
Reduced loss of life
and property through
improved warning
system $50,000 High
FEMA,
VDEM, Local
Government
Local
Government,
Emergency
Management 2019 Rescoped N/A
Participate in
insurance rates;
reduction in flood
government;
Stormwater
2019 N/A
Stormwater
Management
Watershed/mitigation
planning and project
FEMA, local
government,
Local
2019 N/A
Urban GI Lab Flooding
Bringing together
local partners to
increase capacity of
local green
infrastructure
projects to bring long-
term water quality
and flood reduction
benefits No Cost High
Earth
Economics
Stormwater
Utility 2019
Not
Completed N/A
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-49
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/
Added
to Proposed
Resiliency
Scorecard All Hazards
Assessment of
readingess and
specific areas of
vulnerability to
hazards and climate
change Unknown High
DCR, VDEM,
FEMA
Stormwater
Utility 2019
Not
Completed N/A
Economic
Valuation of
development
decision making
DCR, VDEM,
Stormwater
2019
Not
N/A
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-50
7.12 City of Salem
Project
Hazard Funding Implementation/ Added Proposed
Open Drainage
system
and mitigation of
flooding; Clear debris
and repair banks to
prevent backup,
erosion and flooding of
existing drainage
FEMA,
VDEM, City,
grantor with
app grant
Community
Development,
Street
2019
Closed Stormwater
system
construction,
Reduce frequency and
VDEM, City,
grantor with
app grant
Community
2019
Additional hazard
for residential,
business and critical
facilities; increased
accuracy of hazard
FEMA,
VDEM,
Local
Local
government,
Community
2019
Mass notification
Reduced loss through
improved warning
N/A N/A
FEMA,
VDEM,
Local
Local
government, Fire
& Emergency
Services, Police,
IT 2019 N/A
Communication
equipment
Improved coordination
among jurisdictions;
improved response
$1,000,000
to
FEMA, Local
Local
government, Fire
& Emergency
Services, Police,
IT 2019
2018-
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-51
Project
Hazard Funding Implementation/ Added Proposed
Defensible Space Wildfire
Partner with the Virginia
Department of Forestry
to mitigate wildfire risk
by focusing on fire
prevention and creating
defensible space.
TBD by
project Low
DOF, Local
government
Local
government,
Community
Development,
Fire & Emergency
Services, Streets
and General
Maintenance 2019 In Progress Ongoing
Use HEC GeoRAS,
HEC-GeoHMS, or
HAZUS software to
model potential
flood scenarios and
identify high-hazard
areas
Use software to model
potential flood areas
and identify high risk
areas to help mitigate
FEMA,
VDEM,
Local
Community
2019
Short
Term
Revision of
floodplain
Up to date floodplain
and zoning ordinance to
provide guidance for
with an
appropriate
grant
Local
government,
Community
2025
Medium
Term
Participate in FEMA
Hazard Mitigation
Programs such as
FMA, PDM, and
HMGP for
acquisition of flood
prone properties or
flood-proofing
funding for
acquisition/demolition
projects, structure
elevation, mitigation
reconstruction project,
flood-proofing critical
facilities, flood-proofing
commercial structure,
infrastructure
upgrades, and
FEMA,
VDEM,
Local
government,
grantor with
an
appropriate
grant
Community
2019
Long
Term
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-52
Project
Hazard Funding Implementation/ Added Proposed
Identify and equip a
community
resource center
Extreme
temps,
winds,
earthquake,
winter
Provide community
space for warming/
cooling and power
needs in a disaster $200,000 Medium
FEMA,
VDEM, City,
grantor with
an
appropriate
grant
program Fire and EMS 2025
Not
Started
Medium
Term
Seek funding to
prepare site-specific
hydrologic and
hydraulic studies
that look at areas
that have chronic
and repetitive
Possible determination
of solutions to
repetitive loss
FEMA,
VDEM, City,
grantor with
app grant
Community
2019
Not
Long
Term
Reduction in flood
insurance rates;
grantor with
an
appropriate
grant
Community
2019
Long
Term
accurate database
and map of
repetitive loss
Indentification of
repetitive loss
properties that should
N/A
FEMA,
Local
government,
Community
2019 N/A
Develop and
maintain an
inventory of flood
prone critical
Available inventory of
critical structures that
need additional or
unique protection from
N/A
FEMA,
Local
government,
Community
Development,
Fire & Emergency
2019 N/A
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-53
Project
Hazard Funding Implementation/ Added Proposed
Continue
participation in
FEMA's DFIRM
Updated flood hazard
N/A
FEMA, Local
government,
Community
2019 N/A
Annual review of
floodplain
and zoning ordinance to
provide guidance for
N/A
Local
government,
Community
2019 N/A
Application of
Ignition-resistant
Apply ignition resistant
techniques to new or
existing structures and
N/A
FEMA,
VDEM,
Local
Local
government,
Community
Development,
Fire&Emergency
Services, Streets
and General
2019
Not
N/A
Hazardous Fuels
Removal of vegetative
fuels in proximity to at-
risk structures and
N/A
FEMA,
VDEM,
Local
Local
government,
Community
Development,
Fire&Emergency
Services, Streets
and General
2019
Not
N/A
mapping update/
modernization/
Additional hazard
related GIS
Increased accuracy of
flood maps and
increased accuracy of
hazard mitigation
N/A
FEMA,
2019
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-54
Project
Hazard Funding Implementation/ Added Proposed
Public education All hazards
Develop web
application(s) for
informing public about
hazards and mitigation
options Utilize ArcGIS
to allow real-time
citizen input regarding
N/A
FEMA,
VDEM,
Local
2019
Continue headwall and
riverbank stabilization
to reduce road
undercutting in multiple
areas as scoping
VDEM,
Local
government
CFPF,
grantor with
app grant
2019
2025-
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-55
7.13 Town of Vinton
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/Lead
Added
to Proposed
Maintain an
inventory of flood
prone residential
properties and
repetitive loss
Available inventory of
repetitive loss
properties that could be
used for planning
RVARC, Roanoke County
2019
Implement Mass
impending danger.
Encourage voluntary use
of the National Weather
Service or private
warning mechanisms,
such as The Weather
Channel NOTIFY! and
the Specific Area
Message Encoding
RVARC
RVARC and Local
2019 N/A
informational
brochure or handout
on Flood Safety in
Public better informed
VDEM, FEMA,
RVARC
2019 N/A
Determine the need
for generators at
public infrastructure
facilities, emergency
shelters, and public
sewer service can be
operational during
hazard events. Needed
services can be
provided during
FEMA, Local
Town of Vinton Public
Works and Police
2019 N/A
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-56
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/Lead
Added
to Proposed
Local codes review All hazards
Review development
codes to evaluate need
for changes that would
improve disaster
FEMA,
Roanoke
County and
Town of
Town of Vinton Planning
2019 N/A
prepare site-specific
hydrologic and
hydraulic studies
that look at areas
that have chronic
and repetitive
Study Gish Mill
redevelopment area and
Tinker Creek Tributary to
determine effective
FEMA, VDEM,
and RVARC
2019 N/A
Flood hazard
mapping update/
flood maps and more
effective regulation and
enforcement of
RVARC, County of
Roanoke, and Town of
2019 N/A
Evaluate public
utilities for
utilities for retrofitting or
floodproofing to prevent
FEMA, VDEM,
Town of
Town of Vinton Public
2019 N/A
Communication
equipment
Improved coordination
among jurisdictions;
improved resposne
FEMA,
RVARC,
Town of Vinton
Emergency Coordinator,
Roanoke County/Vinton
2019 N/A
Obtain CRS
Reduction in flood
insurance rates;
$10,000,
Localities,
Town of
Town of Vinton Planning
2019 2016
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-57
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/Lead
Added
to Proposed
Continue to enforce
steep slope
ordinance/guidelines
for development in
steep slope/marginal
Geologic
Landslide Tool for
planning and decision
making; limitation of
VDCR,
Roanoke
County, Town
2019 2016
Property acquisition
– single-family and
commercial
and other structures
from flood hazard areas;
reduce repetitive loss;
reduce loss of life and
FEMA, VDEM,
Town of
Town of Vinton Planning
2019
Short
Term
Identify locations for
additional stream
Flooding /
Provide better, more
timely information to
allow faster, more
accurate warnings to be
Roanoke City,
Roanoke
County,
Grantor with
an
appropriate
Town of Vinton Planning
2019
Short
Term
Community Wildfire
Reduction of loss to
RVARC
Roanoke County and
2019
Short
Term
Retrofit and
Floodproof Gish Mill
Historical Structure Flooding
Protect structure and
tenants from flooding,
improve economic
community value $400,000 High
Town, Private
Developers,
Helene Post
Disaster
Mitigation
Town Planning and
Zoning Department 2019 In Progress
Short
Term
Town-wide
Stormwater facilities
Reduce frequency and
Vinton,
Grantor with
Appropriate
Grant
Town of Vinton Planning
2019
Not
Charles R. Hill
Community Center
Retrofit building with
generator and supplies
Town,
Roanoke Co, Town Emergency
2019
Not
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-58
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/Lead
Added
to Proposed
War Memorial is
upgraded
appropriate
grant program
Transportation
corridor debris
removal and bank
banks along roads to
prevent backup, erosion
and flooding of existing
drainage systems. Hardy
Rd, Walnut Ave, Virginia
Ave, as well as, other
roadways as determined
by Town, VDOT,
Town, VDOT,
Roanoke City,
Town Planning and
2019
Medium
Term
use of the National
Weather Service or
private warning
mechanisms, such
as The Weather
Channel NOTIFY!
and the Specific Area
Message Encoding
(SAME) All Hazards
Public able to receive
warnings from
appropriate sources Unknown High
RVARC
Localities
RVARC and Local
government 2019 Rescoped N/A
Participate in special
statewide
outreach/awareness
activities such as
Winter Weather
Awareness Week,
Flood Awareness
Inform public about
hazards and mitigation
VDEM, FEMA,
NWS, RVARC,
RVARC and Local
2019 N/A
Reverse 911
improved warning
Local
Town of Vinton, Roanoke
2019 N/A
hazards and mitigation
Local
2019 N/A
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-59
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/Lead
Added
to Proposed
Additional hazard
related GIS
Increased accuracy of
hazard mitigation
FEMA, VDEM,
VDOT, VDOF,
RVARC,
RVARC, County of
Roanoke, and Town of
2019 N/A
support Community
Emergency
Response Team
Coordinated
2019 N/A
Participate in, and
remain in good
standing with, the
flood damage through
enforcement of
floodplain ordinances
and availability of
discounted flood
insurance for property
FEMA, DCR,
Town of Vinton and
2019 N/A
Develop and
maintain an
inventory of flood
roadways for planning
purposes (road
improvements,
limitation of
FEMA, VDEM,
RVARC, Local
governments,
2019 N/A
maintain damage
assessment
caused damage for
planning and disaster
2019 N/A
Additional hazard
residential, business,
and critical facilities,
increased accuracy of
hazard mitigation
FEMA, VDEM,
RVARC,
Town of Vinton and
2019 N/A
Stormwater Master
planning and project
RVARC,
Town of Vinton an other
2019 N/A
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-60
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/Lead
Added
to Proposed
Upgrade/repairs to
Reduce frequency and
Vinton,
Grantor with
Appropriate
Grant
Town of Vinton Public
2019 N/A
Drainage system
banks to prevent
backup/erosion/flooding
of existing drainage
$100,00
FEMA, VDEM,
VDOT, Town
Town of Vinton Public
2019 N/A
resources for
delineating landslide
Geologic
planning and decision
making; limitation of
VDEM, VDCR,
RVARC,
2019 N/A
Public education
workshops for
how to protect
themselves from
RVARC
2019 N/A
and developers to
use Fire-Wise
building design,
siting and materials
Reduction in damages
VDOF, RVARC
Roanoke County and
2019 N/A
section in local
newspaper with
emergency
information on
earthquakes Earthquake
Increased level of
knowledge and
awareness in citizens $2,500 Low
FEMA, VDEM,
Local
governments
RVARC and participating
local governments 2019
Not
Completed N/A
Develop "critical
area" maps for
Identification of
earthquake hazard
2019
Not
N/A
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-61
7.14 Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/Lead
Added
to Proposed
Identify areas with
recurring flood
problems and
prepare funding
scope for additional
warning of flooding;
ensure that these
areas are adequately
covered and
DHCD,
2019
In
Progress
Short
Term
Train staff in hazard
mitigation All Hazards
Increased staff
capacity for 2030 plan
update
$10,000-
$15,000 High RVARC 2025
In
Progress
Short
Term
Request additional
stream/rain gauges
on behalf of
interested local
warning of flooding;
ensure these areas are
adequately covered
2019
Short
Term
temperature data
collection in
partnership with
Extreme
Improved data around
extreme temperature
impacts for 2030 plan
VDOF, VDH,
RVARC, local
2025
Medium
Term
Improve Landslide
Susceptibility Model
by evaluating rain
Geologic
around geologic
hazards, specifically
landslides, for 2030
$5,000-
$10,000 High VDE, NWS RVARC Scoping
Medium
Term
the Regional
Stormwater
action items for
stormwater
$100,000-
$150,000 Medium
To be
2019
Long
Term
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-62
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/Lead
Added
to Proposed
Expand assessment
of wildfire risk to
incorporate new
data regarding air
quality mortality in
partnership with
regional health
Improved data around
wildfire risk and public
Regional
health
partners,
2025
Long
Term
agencies to improve
sinkhole
susceptibility data
for the region.
Geologic
Hazards
Improved information
around geologic
hazards, specifically
sinkholes.
$5,000-
$30,000 Low
DCR, VDE,
VDOT RVARC 2025 Scoping
Long
Term
Improve risk
assessment
methodologies for
special districts and
evaluate addition of
other special
districts as
Improved risk
assessment in 5-year
update and improved
stakeholder
$20,000-
$25,000 Medium
VDEM,
FEMA,
Special
2025
Long
Term
Regional and Local
project progress and
implementation
tracking and public
$5,000-
$10,000 High Localities RVARC, localities
Not
Annual public
information
and federal
communication
efforts, and
partnership with
VDEM,
FEMA, Local
2025
Not
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-63
Project
Hazard Cost Funding Implementation/Lead
Added
to Proposed
Update the 2005
Flood Prone
information about
roadway flooding in
$10,000-
$30,000 High TPO RVARC
Not
Short
Term
Vulnerable Facilities
Flood Vulnerability
Study and action
Improved and updated
information on the
regional impacts to
$30,000-
$60,000 Medium TPO, other RVARC
Not
Medium
Term
home and RV park
locations in the
Improved wind model
$10,000-
$20,000 High RVARC
Not
Medium
Term
Regional Transit
Flooding,
Winter
Improved information
around transit impacts
$40,000 -
$80,000 Low TPO RVARC
Not
Medium
Term
vulnerable facilities
that lack generators
and incorporate list
into future project
Wind,
Winter
Storm,
Extreme
Improved information
regarding electric
generator needs
$10,000-
$15,000 Medium
VDEM, Local
2025
Not
Medium
Term
regional database of
repetitive loss
Improved information
$5,000-
$10,000 High FEMA, VDEM RVARC On Hold
Short
Term
Substantial
Damage/Substantial
Improvement
Improved regional
$2,000-
$5,0000 Medium
VDEM,
FEMA, Local
2025
Short
Term
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-64
7.15 Roanoke Valley Resource Authority
Project
Hazard Cost Benefit-Funding Implementation/Lead
Added
to Proposed
Increase
relationships
with service
area
jurisdictions
All-
Hazards
RVRA has
significant
relationships
across the
operational region,
both contractually
and
organizationally
and seeks to share
resource
information,
capability and
contribute to
regional public
$0
All
localities
and
partners
within
service
district on
a case by
RVRA Executive
2025
In
Progress Ongoing
Implement 2
trailer drawn
emergency
generators
to support 2
pump
stations
primarily,
with
flexibility to
support
All Hazards
that result
in power
outage:
Wind,
Winter,
Keep pump
stations
operational during
power outage:
protection of illicit
discharge to VA
waters. Trailer
mounted set-up
provides flexibility
for other internal
Sourcing
FEMA Post
Disaster
Mitigation
RVRA- Dir. Of
Operations/
Operations
2025
In
Progress
Short
Term
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-65
Project
Hazard Cost Benefit-Funding Implementation/Lead
Added
to Proposed
Leachate
Bypass
Pump
Station and
Tank
capacity,
protection of
pumps, improved
pump out capacity
through efficiency
gains. Builds
resiliency and
prevents system
from being overrun
Sourcing
FEMA Post
Disaster
Mitigation
RVRA- Dir of
Operations/
Operations
2025
In
Progress
Short
Term
Haul Road
Flooding,
Geologic
Hazards,
Study of a critical
access road, along
with several state
roads leading to the
area. This area
experiences
routine short term
and occasional
long term flooding.
The area is at risk
for karst events and
runs alongside a
Unknown,
pending
development
of a scope of
Seeking
grant
funding
that would
be
applicable.
This could
be from
any
RVRA Executive
2025
Not
Long
Term
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-66
7.16 Western Virginia Water Authority
Project
Hazard Cost
Benefit
-to-Funding Implementation/Lea
Adde
d to
Propose
d
Identify
distribution
infrastructure
vulnerable to
hazardous
environmenta
l concerns
including
extreme cold
and geologic
Extreme
Temperature
, Geologic
Identify and
prioritize
vulnerable
infrastructure to
prevent
customer/syste
Routine
effort. Cost
WVWA,
Grantor
with an
appropriat
e grant
WVWA Engineering
2025
In
Progres
s
Identify
critical
facilities
within WVWA
Network to
install
generators
All Hazards
resulting in
power
outage
Promote
resiliency of
water
distribution
system during
power outages
$5,000,00
0 Medium High
WVWA,
Grantor
with an
appropriat
e grant
program WVWA Water Quality 2025 Scoping
Medium
Term
Water
Pollution
Control Plant
Flood
Protection-
Ferrum Flooding
Study and
execute a
solution to
prevent flooding
within the water
pollution control
$4,000,00
0
FEMA Post
Disaster
2025
Not
Short
Term
Chapter 7: Mitigation Action Plans Page | 7-67
Project
Hazard Cost
Benefit
-to-Funding Implementation/Lea
Adde
d to
Propose
d
Water
Pollution
Control Plant
Flood
Protection-
Boones Mill Flooding
Construction of
stormwater
conveyance
system to
prevent flooding
within the water
pollution control
FEMA Post
Disaster
2025
Not
Short
Term
Study WVWA
Dams and
establish a
replacement
Flooding,
Geologic
Hazards,
Long term
planning to
evaluate dam
Low-
WVWA,
Grantor
with an
appropriat
e grant
2025
Not
Long
Term
Distribution
System
All-
resiliency of
water
distribution and
collection
Mediu
m
Grantor
with an
appropriat
e grant
WVWA Engineering
2025
Not
Long
Term
Carvins Cove
Forestry
Management
Wildfire,
Geologic
mitigate wildfire,
to create
resiliency in
water quality
from source to
tap, including
reservoir and
WVWA,
City of
Roanoke,
Grantor
with an
appropriat
e grant
2025
Medium
Term
Additional Materials a
References
ASPR TRACIE. (2023). Extreme Heat Events: Lessons from Seattle's Record-Breaking
Summers. Retrieved from https://files.asprtracie.hhs.gov/documents/extreme-heat-
events-lessons-from-seattles-record-breaking-summers.pdf
CISA, MARISA, GLISA. (n.d.). Climate and Hazard Mitigation Planning Tool. Retrieved June 20,
2025, from https://champ.rcc-acis.org/
Commonwealth of Virginia. (2016). Impounding Structure Regulations. Retrieved August 1,
2025, from DCR.Virginia.gov: https://www.dcr.virginia.gov/dam-safety-and-
floodplains/document/ds-va-code-4vac50-20-10.pdf
Division of Health Statistics, Virginia Department of Health. (n.d.). Statistical Reports and
Table. Retrieved June 20, 2025, from
https://apps.vdh.virginia.gov/HealthStats/stats.htm
Environmental Protection Agency. (2025, March 27). Extreme Heat. Retrieved June 20, 2025,
from EPA.gov: https://www.epa.gov/climatechange-science/extreme-heat
Federal Emergency Management Agency. (2004). Federal Guidelines for Dam Safety.
Government.
Federal Emergency Management Agency. (2024, July). FEMA.gov. Retrieved from
Introduction to 2024 Edition Seismic Design Category Maps:
https://www.fema.gov/sites/default/files/documents/fema-
seismicdesigncategorymaps-july2024.pdf
HNTB Corporation. (2025). After-Action Assessment Report. City of Richmond.
Landslide Hazard Mapping. (n.d.). Retrieved August 15, 2025, from Virginia Department of
Energy: https://energy.virginia.gov/geology/FEMA_landslide.shtml
National Weather Service. (n.d.). Wet Bulb Globe Temperature Informational Guide.
Retrieved June 20, 2025, from Weather.gov:
https://www.weather.gov/media/ilm/WBGT_Handout.pdf
Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission. (2025). Comprehensive Economic
Development Strategy, 2025-2029.
Sublette, S. (2025, January 1). A consistently cold start to 2025, with opportunities for snow.
The Richmonder.
Additional Materials b
Tonya E. Thornton, P. a. (2024). The Economic and Fiscal Costs of Water Supply Disruption
to the National Capital Region. Interstate Commission on the Potomac River Basin.
Virginia Department of Emergency Management. (2023). Commonwealth of Virginia Hazard
Mitigation Plan. Richmond: Commonwealth of Virginia.
Virginia Department of Energy. (n.d.). KarstView User Guide and Explanation. Retrieved
https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/165901d938ae458f8e9e44d656b74389
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. (n.d.). Water Supply Planning. Retrieved
August 4, 2025, from https://www.deq.virginia.gov/our-programs/water/water-
quantity/water-supply-planning
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality. (n.d.). Water Supply Planning Resources.
Retrieved July 14, 2025, from https://www.deq.virginia.gov/our-
programs/water/water-quantity/water-supply-planning/water-supply-planning-
resources
Virginia Department of Transportation. (2002). VDOT Drainage Manual. Richmond:
Commonwealth of Virginia. Retrieved August 2025, from
https://www.vdot.virginia.gov/doing-business/technical-guidance-and-
support/technical-guidance-documents/drainage-manual/
Virginia Department of Transportation. (2024). Mileage Tables: The State Highway Systems.
Richmond: Commonwealth of Virginia.
Virginia Health Information. (2021, February 26). Retrieved June 20, 2025, from
https://www.vhi.org/Hospitals/vahospitals.asp
Additional Materials c
Appendices
Appendix A: Public Engagement Summary and Documentation
Appendix B: Hazard Mitigation Survey Results
Public Input Survey Report
Stakeholder Form Responses
Appendix C: Flood Hazard Areas
Appendix D: Flooding HAZUS Reports
100 Year Flood Model
500 Year Flood Model
Appendix E: Wildfire Incident Reports and Regional Wildfire Report
Wildfire Incident Reports
Regional Wildfire Risk Model Report
Appendix F: Critical and Vulnerable Facilities Inventory
Appendix G: Jurisdiction Capability Assessment Worksheets
Appendix H: High Hazard Dam Supplemental Information
Dam Safety Fact Sheets
Inundation Maps Beaverdam Creek
Inundation Maps Carvin Cove
Inundation Maps Falling Creek
Inundation Maps Johns Creek 1
Inundation Maps Johns Creek 2
Inundation Maps Johns Creek 3
Inundation Maps Johns Creek 4
Inundation Maps Spring Hollow
Resilience Analysis and Planning Tool Outputs
Appendix I: Policy Guide Checklist
Appendix J: Resolutions and Adoption
[blank]
Capital
Unappropriated % of Board Expenditure
Balance Revenues Contingency Contingency Reserves
Audited balance as of June 30, 2025 31,213,980$ -$ -$ 613,094$
Approved Sources:
Appropriated from 2025-26 budget (Ordinance 052725-2) - 50,000 - 1,420,700
Addition from 2024-25 close out and reimbursements of completed projects - - - 147,219
Appropriated from 2025-26 budget (Ordinance 121625-5) 1,448,997 680,479
Approved Uses:
Appropriated from 2025-26 budget (Ordinance 052725-2) - - - (1,746,047)
Items for Brian Epperley memorial - (1,282) - -
Balance at February 10, 2026 32,662,977$ 12.0% 48,718$ 680,479$ 434,966$
County of Roanoke
Unappropriated Balance, Board Contingency, and Capital Reserves
Fiscal Year 2025-2026
General Government
Changes in outstanding debt for the fiscal year to date were as follows:
Unaudited
Outstanding Outstanding
June 30, 2025 Additions Deletions February 10, 2026
Debt type:
VPSA School Bonds 109,321,388$ -$ 7,026,556$ 102,294,832$
Lease Revenue Bonds 72,515,000 20,040,000 4,715,000 87,840,000
Temporary Literary Loans*31,674,051 28,618,429 - 60,292,480
Subtotal 213,510,439 48,658,429 11,741,556 250,427,312
Premiums 13,244,796 1,709,584 - 14,954,380
226,755,235$ 50,368,013$ 11,741,556$ 265,381,692$
Summary by entity:
County 77,345,868$ 21,749,584$ 4,715,000$ 94,380,452$ 35.56%
Schools 149,409,367 28,618,429 7,026,556 171,001,240 64.44%
100.00%
* The County has been approved for $75 million in Literary Loans. This amount will not be turned into permanent
loans until all monies are drawn down for the three school projects approved for funding which are:
Glen Cove and W.E. Cundiff Elementary Schools and the Roanoke County Career and Technology Center
Submitted By Laurie L. Gearheart
Chief Financial Officer
Approved By Richard L. Caywood
County Administrator
Page 1 of 2
ACTION NO.
ITEM NO. K.1
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE: February 10, 2026
AGENDA ITEM: Work session to review with the Board of Supervisors the
County Administrator's Proposed Fiscal Year 2027 - 2036
Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
SUBMITTED BY: Laurie Gearheart
Chief Financial Officer
APPROVED BY: Richard L. Caywood
County Administrator
ISSUE:
Review of the proposed fiscal year 2027 - 2036 Capital Improvement Program (CIP)
with the Board of Supervisors.
BACKGROUND:
As part of the annual budget development process, County staff conducts a series of
work sessions with the Board of Supervisors to discuss the capital and operating
budgets. This work session will provide information on the fiscal year 2027 - 2036
Capital Improvement Program (CIP) which will be proposed by the County Administrator
to the Board of Supervisors on March 24, 2026.
DISCUSSION:
This work session will provide information to the Board of Supervisors on the capital
requests made for the fiscal year 2027 - 2036 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and
specifically, those projects which will be proposed for fiscal year 2027.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no fiscal impact associated with the receipt of this information.
Page 2 of 2
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Board of Supervisors receive information on the fiscal year 2027
- 2036 Capital Improvement Program (CIP).
Page 1 of 1
ACTION NO.
ITEM NO. K.2
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE: February 10, 2026
AGENDA ITEM: SMART SCALE Round 7 Potential Applications
SUBMITTED BY:
APPROVED BY: Richard L. Caywood
County Administrator
ISSUE:
Time has been set aside to review and discuss potential SMART SCALE Round 7
applications.
Roanoke County’s
Approach to
SMART SCALE Round 7
Board of Supervisors Work Session
February 10, 2026
1
Background
2
The Office of Intermodal Planning and Investment (OIPI) has advised that
application success is much more likely when projects address needs on
Virginia’s Transportation Plan (VTrans) Priority 1 and 2 segments. Many
Priority 1 and 2 segments in Roanoke County have already been
addressed with past funding awards:
•Route 419 in the Tanglewood area (three projects)
•Route 460 in Bonsack (three projects combined into two)
•Route 220 between Route 419 and Clearbrook (one project)
Background
3
Roanoke County has identified the greatest number of remaining
VTRANS Priority 1 and 2 segments (both Statewide and Construction
District) in these locations:
•Peters Creek/Williamson Road Project Pipeline Round 2 study corridor
•Route 419 (Starkey Road to Springwood Park) Project Pipeline Round 3 study
corridor
These two corridors and potentially components from the
Virginia Walkability Action Institute Study are our focus for Round 7.
Important Project Considerations
4
•VTrans Priority 1 and 2 segments –Propose project components that directly address
these needs.
•Crashes between 2021 and 2025 –Address factors relating to Fatalities and Severe
Injury crashes with high benefit Crash Modification Factors for proposed solutions.
•Economic Development Potential –Properties identified as “Sites” in the Virginia
Economic Development Partnership (VEDP) Sites and Building Search located within a
certain distance of the project generate higher Economic Development scores.
•Corridor Application Components –In a change from Round 6 for corridor-wide/High
Priority Program applications, OIPI is allowing project features to be divided into Mid-
Term Recommendations to apply for now, and Long-Term Recommendations to
remove for later investigation.
Route 419 Phase 3
Starkey Road to Springwood Park Drive
5
Roanoke County Plan Implementation
•2019 Route 419 Town Center Plan (Starkey Road to railroad tracks)
•2024 Roanoke County 200 Plan
•2025 Safe Streets and Roads For All Comprehensive Safety Action Plan
Community Engagement
•June 2-16, 2025: 1,056 survey responses
•November 5-24, 2025: 313 survey responses
•November 10, 2025: 19 community meeting attendees
•January 7, 2026: Meeting with Promenade Park and West Village
business owners, VDOT,consultants and County staff
6
Route 419 Multimodal Safety Improvements, Phase 3
Project Pipeline Round 3 Study (St arkey Rd. to Springwood Park Dr.)
Route 419 Multimodal Safety Improvements, Phase 3
Project Pipeline Round 3 Study (St arkey Rd. to Springwood Park Dr.)
Construction District Needs
Priority 1
Priority 2
Priority 3
Priority 4
•Multiple Priority 1 and 2 Construction District segments
•Most needs:
•Between Springwood Park Drive and Colonial Avenue
•Colonial Avenue/Route 419 intersection
•Chaparral Drive/Route 419 intersection
•Between Bernard Drive and Starkey Road
Route 419 Multimodal Safety Improvements, Phase 3
Project Pipeline Round 3 Study (St arkey Rd. to Springwood Park Dr.)
Crash Data from 2021 through June 2025
Fatalities: 1 at the Colonial/419 intersection in November 2025
Severe Injuries: 6
Route 419 Multimodal Safety Improvements, Phase 3
Project Pipeline Round 3 Study (St arkey Rd. to Springwood Park Dr.)
Route 419 Multimodal Safety Improvements, Phase 3
Project Pipeline Round 3 Study (St arkey Rd. to Springwood Park Dr.)
Route 419 Multimodal Safety Improvements, Phase 3
Project Pipeline Round 3 Study (St arkey Rd. to Springwood Park Dr.)
Route 419 Multimodal Safety Improvements, Phase 3
Project Pipeline Round 3 Study (St arkey Rd. to Springwood Park Dr.)
Indicates Long Range Goals to
be considered at a future date
Route 419 Multimodal Safety Improvements, Phase 3
Project Pipeline Round 3 Study (St arkey Rd. to Springwood Park Dr.)
Indicates Long Range Goals to
be considered at a future date
Route 419 Multimodal Safety Improvements, Phase 3
Project Pipeline Round 3 Study (St arkey Rd. to Springwood Park Dr.)
Indicates Long Range Goals to
be considered at a future date
TPO Application: All Mid-Term Recommendations
•Sidewalk: Extend from Starkey Road to Bernard Drive, both sides of Electric Road
•Chaparral Drive Intersection:
•Thru-cut intersection reconfiguration
•Pedestrian signals and crosswalks
•West Village/Promenade Park:
•Install an RCUT at the crossover with a complimentary U-Turn, planning for a future left turn at the West Village right-in/right-out to be constructed by others
•Colonial Avenue:
•Install protected left turn phasing for left turns from eastbound and westbound Route 419 to Colonial Avenue
•Option B to include a median on Colonial at Manassas
•Extend right turn lane eastbound on Route 419
•Extend left turn lane westbound on Route 419
•Construct right turn lane southbound on Colonial Avenue if not too expensive
•Bicycle lanes: Extend from Starkey Road to Chaparral Drive if not too expensive
15
Route 419 Multimodal Safety Improvements, Phase 3
Project Pipeline Round 3 Study (St arkey Rd. to Springwood Park Dr.)
Potential County applications:
Application 1
•Colonial Avenue:
•Install protected left turn phasing for left turns from eastbound and westbound Route 419 to Colonial Avenue
•Option B to include a median on Colonial at Manassas
•Extend right turn lane eastbound on Route 419
•Extend left turn lane westbound on Route 419
•Construct right turn lane southbound on Colonial Avenue if not too expensive
•West Village/Promenade Park:
•Install an RCUT at the crossover with a complimentary U-Turn, planning for a future left turn at the West Village right-in/right-out to be constructed by others
Application 2
•Chaparral Drive Intersection:
•Thru-cut intersection reconfiguration
•Pedestrian signals and crosswalks
16
Route 419 Multimodal Safety Improvements, Phase 3
Project Pipeline Round 3 Study (St arkey Rd. to Springwood Park Dr.)
Peters Creek Road/
Williamson Road
Wood Haven Road to Plantation Road
17
18
Peters Creek Road/Williamson Road
Project Pipeline Round 2 Study Corridor (Wood Haven to Plantation)
Roanoke County Plan Implementation
•2020 Hollins Center Plan
•2024 Roanoke County 200 Plan
•2025 Safe Streets and Roads For All Comprehensive Safety Action Plan
Community Engagement
•August 1-15, 2023: 494 survey responses
•March 18, 2024: 48 attendees
•March 18-April 1, 2024: 928 survey responses
Peters Creek Road/Williamson Road
Project Pipeline Round 2 Study Corridor (Wood Haven to Plantation)
•Priority 2 Statewide need at
Williamson Rd/Plantation Rd
•Multiple Priority 1 and 2
Construction District
segments
Construction District Needs
Priority 1
Priority 2
Construction District Needs
Priority 1
Priority 2
Peters Creek Road/Williamson Road
Project Pipeline Round 2 Study Corridor (Wood Haven to Plantation)
SMART SCALE Round 6 (Salem District):
•#9: Peters Creek Rd (Wendover to
Dwight incl. Airport), $38 million
•Benefit Score: 4.83
•SS Score: 1.27
•#17: Peters Creek Rd/Williamson Rd
(Full Corridor), $148 million, TPO app
•Benefit Score: 14.12 (#1 District)
•SS Score: 0.95
•#22: Peters Creek Rd/Williamson Rd
(Deer Branch to Plantation incl.
Williamson), $57 million after leverage
•Benefit Score: 4.65
•SS Score: 0.81
21
Peters Creek Road/Williamson Road
Project Pipeline Round 2 Study Corridor (Wood Haven to Plantation)
Crash Data from 2021 through June 2025
Fatalities: 2 (one vehicle crash, one pedestrian crash)
Severe Injuries: 7
22
Potential County application: Modify the Peters Creek application
•Remove Wendover, Newland, Dwight intersection improvements (no current crashes)
•Consider removing thru-cut at Airport/Archcrest intersection (low Crash Modification Factor)
•Consider removing sidewalk (no pedestrian crashes, lowers cost)
•Keep Peters Creek at Airport/Archcrest left turn lane offsets/extensions, pedestrian crosswalks/signals, double
left turn lanes from Airport to Peters Creek and Airport median from Peters Creek to Burlington
Peters Creek Road/Williamson Road
23
Potential County application: Consider the Barrens Road Intersection
•Remove the North Roanoke Baptist Church RCUT (no crashes, lowers cost)
•Remove the South Barrens realignment because it provides no benefit for significant cost
•Retain sidewalk due to pedestrian crash and if sidewalk is included along the Hollins Library
frontage, it could be a good sidewalk terminus
Peters Creek Road/Williamson Road
•Keep Peters Creek offset left turn
lanes, flashing yellow arrow left
turn phase, pedestrian
signals/crosswalks
24
Potential County application: Modifying the Peters Creek/Williamson application
•Consider other Peters Creek/Williamson intersection alternatives to potentially lower cost
•Consider a leading pedestrian interval at the Plantation Road intersection (high CMF)
•Determine if the right turn lanes at Williamson/Plantation are too expensive for the benefit
•Request to extend the study area to include the pedestrian crash on Williamson at the southern end of
the North Market Village building
Peters Creek Road/Williamson Road
25
Peters Creek Road/Williamson Road
26
Peters Creek Road/Williamson Road
27
Peters Creek Road/Williamson Road
28
Peters Creek Road/Williamson Road -Entire Corridor
29
Peters Creek Road/Williamson Road
TPO Application: Include all (new) Mid-Term Recommendations
•Peters Creek/Airport/Archcrest intersection reduced scope
•Peters Creek/Barrens intersection reduced scope
•Peters Creek/Williamson intersection (different concept?)
•Williamson/Plantation intersection reduced scope
•Minimize sidewalk to reduce cost
Plantation Road
Hershberger Road to Hollins Road
30
31
Roanoke County Plan Implementation
•2024 Roanoke County 200 Plan
•2025 Safe Streets and Roads For All Comprehensive Safety Action Plan
Other Plan Implementation
•2025 Virginia Walkability Action Institute Action Plan
Community Engagement
•May 2025: 51 survey responses
•May 2025: Focus group conducted at Edinburgh Square
•If selected to move forward, a community meeting will be held in Spring
2026
Plantation Road
VWAI Study (Hershberger Road to Hollins Road)
Plantation Road
VWAI Study (Hershberger Road to Hollins Road)
32
•VTrans Priority 2 Construction
District segment on Plantation
Road
•Roanoke County ’s only top 1%
segment in VDOT’s Pedestrian and
Bike Safety Action Plan
•Two Valley Metro bus stops are
located on either side of
Plantation Road near the Walmart
Neighborhood Market and the
Food Lion shopping center
Plantation Road
VWAI Study (Hershberger Road
to Hollins Road)
33
Crash Data from 2021 through 2025
Fatalities: 0
Severe Injuries: 5
Walmart
Neighborhood
Market
Plantation Road
VWAI Study (Hershberger Road to Hollins Road)
34
Proposed Project Features (in priority
order):
1.Pedestrian-activated midblock crosswalk with
refuge island between the Walmart Neighborhood
Market and Food Lion to serve the transit stops,
which may need to be shifted
2.Concrete pads and bus shelters at both transit stops
3.Ingress/egress modifications at the Food
Lion/Walmart Neighborhood Market intersection to
reduce crashes
4.Crosswalks with pedestrian signals and ramps at the
Plantation Road and Hollins Road intersection
5.Sidewalk connecting the midblock crosswalk
location to the Plantation/Hollins crosswalks
Summary
35
Potential County Applications
(Allowed 5 pre-applications, 4 final applications):
1.Route 419 between Colonial Avenue and West
Village/Promenade Park
2.Route 419 at Chaparral Drive
3.Peters Creek Rd at Airport Road/Archcrest Dr
4.Peters Creek Road at Barrens Road
5.Peters Creek Road/Williamson Road to Williamson
Road/Plantation Road
6.Plantation Road between Walmart Neighborhood
Market/Food Lion and Hollins Road/John
Richardson Road
County staff and VDOT will evaluate these potential
applications to determine which four may be most
competitive
Requested TPO/RVARC Applications
(Allowed 10 pre-applications, 8 final
applications):
1.Route 419 between Colonial Avenue and
Starkey Road
2.Peters Creek Road/Williamson Road between
Airport Road/Archcrest Drive and Plantation
Road
Roanoke County requested that the TPO/RVARC
submit these two applications on our behalf for
High Priority Program funding
Next Steps
36
1.Today: Board of Supervisors projects discussion
2.March 1 –April 1: SMART Portal opens for pre-applications
3.June 1: SMART Portal re-opens for final applications
4.June 23: Request a resolution of support from the Board of Supervisors
5.August 1: Final applications are due
6.January 2027: Recommended funding scenario released
7.June 2027: Anticipated Six-Year Plan Adoption by the Commonwealth
Transportation Board
Discussion and Questions
37
Page 1 of 2
ACTION NO.
ITEM NO. K.3
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE: February 10, 2026
AGENDA ITEM: Work session to discuss Opioid Abatement Authority grant
opportunities
SUBMITTED BY: Madeline Hanlon
Assistant 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 FY
2027.
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 unobligated balance of $1,395,796.79.
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, FEBRUARY 10, 2026
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.