Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7/23/2002 - Regular July 23, 2002 459 Roanoke County Administration Center 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, Virginia 24018 July 23, 2002 The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia met this day at the Roanoke County Administration Center, this being the fourth Tuesday and the second regularly scheduled meeting of the month of July, 2002. INRE: CALL TO ORDER Chairman Church called the meeting to order at 3:01 p.m. The roll call was taken. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Joseph B. "Butch" Church, Vice Chairman Joseph McNamara, Supervisors Richard C. Flora, H. Odell "Fuzzy" Minnix (Arrived at 3:02 p.m.), Harry C. Nickens MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney; Diane S. Childers, Clerk to the Board; John M. Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator; Dan R. O'Donnell, Assistant County Administrator IN RE: OPENING CEREMONIES The invocation was given by the Reverend Diane Scribner-Clevenger, Unity Church of Roanoke Valley, Roanoke, Virginia. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all present. 460 July 23, 2002 REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS Supervisor Minnix advised that he would be unable to attend the evening session due to family commitments. Mr. Mahoney added an item to the closed meeting pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 A (5) discussion concerning a prospective business or industry where no previous announcement has been made. INRE: INRE: NEW BUSINESS 1.: Reauest to approve desianation of the ~ park in North Roanoke !!! Hollins Park. (Pete Haislip, Director of Parks, Recreation and Tourism) A-072302-1 Mr. Haislip advised that the new park, referred to as North Roanoke Park for construction purposes, should be complete this week and contains a soccer field, parking lot, and access roads. The playground is in place and will be completed within the next 30 days. Soccer play can begin at the fields on August 1. During the construction phase the park was referred to as North Roanoke Park; however, the County has traditionally named parks after roads or geographic features within an area. In concurrence with the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission members in the July 23, 2002 461 North Roanoke area and Supervisor Flora, it is recommended that the new park be named Hollins Park. In response to Supervisor Flora's question, Mr. Haislip advised that a walking path is planned in the next one to two years. He stated that the access road and the layout of the soccer area are already conducive to walking. Supervisor Flora moved to approve staff recommendation. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, McNamara, Minnix, Nickens, Church NAYS: None 2. Authorization to commence ª civil action aaainst Whitlow Auto Crushers and Sales. et al. to compel the removal of waste tires. (Paul Mahonev. County Attornev) A-072302-2 Mr. Mahoney requested authorization to commence a civil action against Whitlow Auto Crushers and Mr. and Mrs. Whitlow to compel them to remove the waste tires located on their property. He stated that the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) estimates that there are over 50,000 waste tires on the property. The Whitlow's own in excess of 500 acres located off Ridgelea Road. In September 1999, the Board authorized a Consent Order to allow the Whitlow's 18 months to bring their operations back into compliance with the zoning ordinance. They had operated their auto crushing business on approximately 30-35 acres of land. Based on aerial mapping at that time, it 462 July 23, 2002 appeared that the appropriate zoning area would have been approximately 17 acres. The Whitlow's have complied with the portion of the Consent Order that required the movement of junk cars off the ridgeline and back into the 17 acre area. There is still disagreement over the remaining 50,000 tires, and the County has been unsuccessful in obtaining prompt action from the Whitlow's to remove the tires. There is a provision in state law that allows Roanoke County to commence a civil action. Mr. Mahoney reported that staff is working closely with DEQ; however, the County is approximately one year further ahead in the legal process. DEQ will continue to pursue their administrative remedies to insure compliance, and County staff is seeking the Board's approval to commence a civil action in the County's name. Supervisor Minnix stated that the County should bring closure to this issue, particularly in light of the recent tire fire on the Keeling property. He questioned if there would be any funding available from the DEQ, State or Federal governments, or grants to assist with the cleanup costs. Mr. Mahoney indicated that he was not aware of any grants or assistance available from the State or Federal government. Supervisor Nickens stated that he understands this is an active, ongoing business which will be adding five additional tires to the site for every vehicle that is crushed. In response to Supervisor Nickens' question, Mr. Mahoney stated that the Whitlow's do not have a Special Use Permit due to the fact that their operations pre- date the relevant provisions of the County's zoning ordinance. The consent order that staff recommended to the Board was in September 1999, and the Whitlow operation July 23, 2002 463 dates back to the 1950s. It was ascertained from aerial photographs that the Whitlow operation has expanded, and this expansion was not brought before the Board for approval. The September 1999 consent order focused on bringing the junk cars back into the 17 acre area that was consistent with zoning 30-40 years ago. Mr. Mahoney stated that the Whitlow's do not have a zoning permit, but they do have a valid, non- conforming use based upon their use for the past 40-50 years. Supervisor Nickens stated it would appear that, in the absence of the Whitlow's compliance, the County's only remedy would be legal action as opposed to the withholding of a special use permit. He stated that he would support staff's recommendation. In response to Supervisor Church's question, Mr. Mahoney stated he is not aware of any reimbursement program for disposal of tires that would apply to this operation. To qualify for reimbursement from the state, the business must be an identified end user of a recycled tire product. Mr. Mahoney clarified that this business is situated in the Windsor Hills district. Supervisor McNamara stated the County should use the legal process to attempt to eradicate illegal tire dumps. He is in support of the staff recommendation. Supervisor McNamara moved to approve staff recommendation. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, McNamara, Minnix, Nickens, Church NAYS: None 464 July 23, 2002 3. Public Private Partnership (PPP) Policv Revision. (Doua Chittum. Director of Economic Development) A-072302-3 Mr. Chittum stated that the Public Private Partnership (PPP) Policy has been in effect in Roanoke County for approximately seven years, and this is the first revision to the policy. The policy is a method for public funds to be leveraged for private investment to create economic development opportunities within the County. Mr. Chittum indicated that the underlying objectives of the policy are to: (1) Attract companies to locate within Roanoke County. (2) Assist existing companies with expansions into Roanoke County in situations where it would not otherwise occur. (3) Enhance projects that are already scheduled for development in Roanoke County (i.e., enlarge the scope of the project, increase safety, etc.). The major revisions to the policy include: (1) Allow up to 100% of infrastructure improvements to be paid for with public funds, rather than the 50% which was previously allowed. (2) Incentives earned by companies will be reimbursable based upon a legal performance agreement. (3) Retail and commercial project participation, which accounts for approximately 20-25% of all projects, will be calculated based on a one year payback. Industrial projects will be based on a three year payback schedule. Supervisor McNamara stated his support of the policy which strengthens the staff's ability to be effective in competing for business in the Roanoke Valley. He re- July 23, 2002 465 stated his opposition to the use of public funds for development of retail space, but indicated that this does not translate to opposition of the Public Private Partnership Policy. Supervisor Nickens moved to approve staff recommendation. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, McNamara, Minnix, Nickens, Church NAYS: None REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS AND FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCES - CONSENT AGENDA Supervisor Nickens moved to approve the first readings and set the second readings and public hearings for August 27, 2002 with one comment. He indicated that he did not see any expression of the amended conditions noted on Item 4, and the map shows Spring Grove Drive intersecting with Baker Drive. He asked staff to verify the accuracy of the map and look into the matter of the amended conditions prior to the second reading. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, McNamara, Minnix, Nickens, Church NAYS: None INRE: 1.: First readinQ of ordinance to rezone 3.9 acres from C-2C, General Commercial District with conditions. to C-2C. General Commercial District with amended conditions. and to rezone 2.7 acres from C- 466 July 23, 2002 1. Office District . to C-2C. General Commercial District with conditions. to construct ª hotel and restaurant. located on North Electric Road, Catawba Maaisterial District. upon the petition of 419 Properties, LLC. (Postponed Qï the petitioner from the June 1.. 2002 Plannina Commission Public Hearina. AcreaQe and zoninQ have been amended.) 2. First readina of ordinance to rezone 6.15 acres from AR. Aaricultural Residential District. to 1-1, Industrial District. and to obtain ª Special Use Permit for ~ acres for ª mini-warehouse. located on 6227 : 6237 West Main Street. Catawba Maaisterial District. upon the petition of Triple S. Investments. 3. First readina of ordinance to rezone .64 acres from C-1. Office District. to C-2. General Commercial District. and to obtain ª Special Use Permit to operate a £!!: wash located on 3504 Electric Road. Cave Sprina Maaisterial District. upon the petition of James Dean Consultants. LLC. 4. First readinQ of ordinance to rezone 2.66 acres from C-1C. Office District with conditions. to C·1 C. Office District with amended conditions. located on the northwest corner of WashinQton Avenue and Sprina Grove Drive intersection. Vinton MaQisterial District. upon the petition of R. W. And Joan C. Bowers. July 23, 2002 467 INRE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1.: Second readina of ordinance authorizina conveyance of !!l easement to Appalachian Power Companv for electric service within the Public Utilitv Easement across propertv owned Qï the Board of Supervisors at the Center for Research and Technoloav. Catawba Maaisterial District. (Georae Simpson. Assistant Director of Community Development) 0-072302-4 Mr. Simpson reported that there have been no changes in this matter since the first reading. There was no discussion on this matter. Supervisor Church moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, McNamara, Minnix, Nickens, Church NAYS: None ORDINANCE 072302-4 AUTHORIZING CONVEYANCE OF AN EASEMENT TO APPALACHIAN POWER COMPANY FOR ELECTRIC SERVICE WITHIN THE PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT ALONG CORPORATE CIRCLE ACROSS PROPERTY OWNED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AT THE CENTER FOR RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY IN THE CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, Roanoke County staff is coordinating the development of the Center for Research and Technology; and, WHEREAS, Appalachian Power Company (APCO) requires a right of way and easement for underground transmission lines within the public utility easement on the County's property along Corporate Circle to provide electric service to the sites as shown on the 'Combination, Re-Subdivision and Vacation Plat for The Board of 468 July 23,2002 Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, Center for Research & Technology (CRT), Section One', dated February 8, 2002, and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County in Plat Book 25, page 54; and, WHEREAS, the proposed right of way will serve the interests of the public and is necessary for the public health, safety, and welfare of citizens of the County of Roanoke. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter, the acquisition and disposition of real estate can be authorized only by ordinance. A first reading of this ordinance was held on July 9, 2002, and a second reading was held on July 23,2002. 2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Charter of Roanoke County, the interests in real estate to be conveyed are hereby declared to be surplus, and are hereby made available for other public uses by conveyance to Appalachian Power Company for the provision of electrical service in connection with Roanoke County's development of the Center for Research and Technology. 3. That donation to Appalachian Power Company of an easement and right- of-way for underground transmission lines and related improvements, within the 15' "NEW PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT" on the County's property (Tax Map No. 54.00-1-2) along Corporate Circle to provide electric service to CRT as shown on the 'Combination, Re- Subdivision and Vacation Plat for The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, Center for Research & Technology (CRT), Section One', dated February 8, 2002, and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County in Plat Book 25, page 54, is hereby authorized and approved. 4. That the County Administrator, or any 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 form approved by the County Attorney. 5. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption. On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, McNamara, Minnix, Nickens, Church NAYS: None INRE: APPOINTMENTS 1. Roanoke County Cable Television Committee July 23, 2002 469 Supervisor McNamara stated that a letter had been received from Mr. Lee Eddy indicating his interest in serving on this committee. He asked that Mr. Eddy be placed on the August 13 consent agenda for appointment to this position. 2. Roanoke Vallev Reaional Cable Television Committee Supervisor McNamara stated that Mr. Lee Eddy had indicated his interest in also serving on this committee. He asked that Mr. Eddy be placed on the August 13 consent agenda for appointment to this position. Supervisor Nickens expressed concerns over having one individual serving on so many committees. He stated that Mr. Eddy currently serves on the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission, the Clean Valley Council, the Metropolitan Planning Organization and the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission. Supervisor Nickens indicated that he does not question Mr. Eddy's capabilities or ability to serve. but stated that the County may be depriving other individuals of an opportunity to serve. Supervisor McNamara moved that this appointment be placed on the consent agenda for the August 27 meeting to allow time for further discussion on the matter. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, McNamara, Minnix, Nickens, Church NAYS: None IN RE: CONSENT AGENDA 470 July 23, 2002 R-072302-5 Supervisor Minnix moved to adopt the Consent Resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, McNamara, Minnix, Nickens, Church NAYS: None RESOLUTION 072302-5 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM J . CONSENT AGENDA BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for July 23, 2002 designated as Item J - Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 4, inclusive, as follows: 1. Acceptance of water and sewer facilities serving The Orchards apartment homes 2. Acceptance of the Bureau of Justice Assistance Block Grant in the amount of $32,132 by the Police Department for law enforcement support 3. Acceptance of a Bureau of Justice Assistance Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant in the amount of $10,689.82 4. Request to accept donation of water easement located in the Plantation Grove Subdivision That the Clerk to the Board is hereby authorized and directed where required by law to set forth upon any of said items the separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant to this resolution. On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the Consent Resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, McNamara, Minnix, Nickens, Church NAYS: None July 23, 2002 471 INRE: REPORTS Supervisor Minnix moved to receive and file the following reports. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, McNamara, Minnix, Nickens, Church NAYS: None .1:. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Continaency Fund 4. Future School Capital Reserve 5. Accounts Paid -June 2002 6. Report of Claims Activity for the Self-Insurance Proaram 7. Proclamations Sioned -ºï the Chairman INRE: POSTPONEMENT OF WORK SESSION Mr. Hodge requested that the Board consider postponement of the work session with the Treasurer and Commissioner of the Revenue to discuss staffing needs at the two satellite DMV locations. He stated that this work session was scheduled during the budget process, and the Commissioner of the Revenue has since advised that she will be able to continue staffing the existing DMV satellite office. He stated that this discussion may be better served once the location of the new proposed DMV office is determined. 472 July 23,2002 Supervisor Minnix stated his support for postponing the work session until all necessary information is received. Supervisor Church requested that staff notify the constitutional officers of the Board's consensus to postpone the work session. INRE: CLOSED MEETING At 3:37 p.m., Supervisor Church moved to go into Closed Meeting pursuant to Code of Virginia Section 2.2-3711 A (3) discussion of the disposition of publicly held real property, namely, Salem Office Supply Building; Section 2.2-3711 A (7) consultation with legal counsel pertaining to probable litigation, BPOL Tax Home Shopping Network; Section 2.2-3711 A (1) discussion and consideration of the appointment of an appointee or employee; and Section 2.2-3711 A (5) discussion concerning a prospective business or industry where no previous announcement has been made. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, McNamara, Minnix, Nickens, Church NAYS: None IN RE: WORK SESSION (4TH FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM) 1.: Work session with Treasurer and Commissioner of the Revenue concerninQ staffina of Division of Motor Vehicles Office. (Fred Anderson. Treasurer; Nancv Horn. Commissioner of the Revenue) July 23,2002 473 It was the consensus of the Board to postpone this work session until additional information is available regarding the location of the second proposed DMV satellite office. INRE: CLOSED MEETING The closed meeting was held from 3:50 p.m. until 6:10 p.m. INRE: ABSENCE Supervisor Minnix left the meeting at 6:15 p.m. INRE: CHANGE IN ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS Supervisor Church advised that Item S-5, Second Reading of Ordinance to obtain a Special Use Permit to operate a surplus sales business, Petitioner William E. Lee, will be heard prior to Item S-1 due to the fact that the petitioner is requesting a continuance. IN RE: CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION R-072302-6 At 7:02 p.m. Supervisor Church moved to return to open session and adopt the Certification Resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, McNamara, Nickens, Church 474 July 23, 2002 NAYS: ABSENT: None Supervisor Minnix RESOLUTION 072302-6 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 members 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. On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the Certification resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, McNamara, Nickens, Church NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Minnix INRE: PROCLAMA nONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND PRESENTATIONS 1.: Resolution honorina the late Marv H. Allen. former Clerk to the Board. for contributions durin ;! her eiahteen years of service to Roanoke Countv. R-072302-7 July 23, 2002 475 Chairman Church and Mr. Hodge presented the resolution to the family members of Ms. Allen who were present at the meeting: Maribeth and Frank Thompson, Jeff Allen, and Alfie Allen. The Board members and staff reflected on their memories of Ms. Allen and her many contributions to the County. Supervisor McNamara moved to adopt the resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, McNamara, Nickens, Church NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Minnix RESOLUTION 072302-7 HONORING THE LATE MARY H. ALLEN, FORMER CLERK TO THE BOARD, FOR CONTRIBUTIONS DURING HER EIGHTEEN YEARS OF SERVICE TO ROANOKE COUNTY WHEREAS, the late Mary H. Allen was first employed on March 5, 1984, as a Clerk Steno II, and also served as Secretary II, Secretary III, Administrative Secretary and Deputy Clerk before her appointment as Clerk to the Board on July 1, 1989; and WHEREAS, Ms. Allen, who passed away on May 16, 2002, following a brief illness, was greatly admired by her fellow co-workers and will be greatly missed by everyone; and WHEREAS, Ms. Allen served with great distinction in her capacity as Deputy Clerk and Clerk to the Board of Supervisors for more than fourteen years, making many significant contributions to that office including the improvement of citizen communications by implementing the use of voice mail, e-mail, posting of information on the County and Board websites, and broadcasting of Board meetings on Roanoke Valley Television; and WHEREAS, Ms. Allen used her creative writing talents by editing and publishing the employee newsletter, the County Signal, and also assisted in the publication of the first Citizens Handbook of Services in 1992; and WHEREAS, Ms. Allen was responsible for planning and coordinating numerous special events including Student Government Day; County Government Day; Investiture Ceremonies; Dedication of Spring Hollow Reservoir; Co-Chair of the First Annual 476 July 23, 2002 County Clean Up Day; Design of the Roanoke County Afghan; Christmas Tree Lighting Ceremonies; and special meetings for the Board of Supervisors; and WHEREAS, Ms. Allen served on many committees including Chair of the March through Time Y2000 Committee; Y2000 Celebration Committee; Employees Advisory Committee; Special Events Committee; Volunteer Committee; Administration Center Beautification Committee; and Secretary to the Roanoke Valley Regional Cable TV Committee and the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority; and WHEREAS, Ms. Allen was appointed by the Board to serve on the Blue Ridge Alliance for Organ and Tissue Donation Committee where, as Vice-Chair, she spoke at the inaugural press conference and at a General Assembly subcommittee public hearing; and WHEREAS, Ms. Allen was a member of the International Institute of Municipal Clerks and active in the Virginia Municipal Clerks Association (VMCA), earning the designation of Certified Municipal Clerk in 1992 and Advanced Certification in 1998; serving as Region IV Director several times, and Chairing the Clerk of the Year and Scholarship Committees; and co-hosted the 1992 VMCA Annual Conference in Roanoke. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia: >- That the Board does hereby express its sorrow at the death of Ms. Allen and conveys its deepest sympathy to the members of her family; and >- That the Board wishes to honor Ms. Allen's memory and express its gratitude for her many significant contributions to the County and the Board and for her eighteen years of capable, loyal and dedicated service to the County; and >- That this resolution be presented to Ms. Allen's family with respect from the Board, the County Administrator and County staff. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, McNamara, Nickens, Church NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Minnix IN RE: PUBLIC HEARINGS AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1.: Second readina of ordinance to obtain ª Special Use Permit to operate ª surplus sales business Q!1 1.47 acres located at 3716 July 23,2002 477 Garman Road. Catawba Maaisterial District, upon the petition of William E. Lee. (Janet Scheid. Chief Planner) Ms. Janice Lee, wife of the Petitioner, requested that the Board postpone the second reading of this item until August 27, 2002. It was the consensus of the Board to allow the continuance. 2. Second readina of ordinance to amend conditions Q.!l ª Special Use Permit to operate ª construction yard Q.!l 2.62 acres zoned AV. Aaricultural Villaae District. located at 7210 Franklin Road. Cave Sprina Maaisterial District. upon the petition of McNeil Asphalt. Postponed until Auaust 27. 2002 at the reauest of the Petitioner. Supervisor Church confirmed with the Clerk that this item has been postponed until August 27,2002 at the request of the Petitioner. 3. Second readina of ordinance amendina and reenactina Section 18- 168 of Chapter 18. Article IV of the Roanoke Countv Code to provide for an increase in the base and volume charaes for sewer service, an increase in the sewer off-site facilitv fee. and the imposition of ª charae per eauivalent residential connection for developments that will reauire Roanoke County maintenance of ª sewaae pump station. (Garv Robertson. Utilitv Director: Danial Morris. Director of Finance) 0-072302-8 478 July 23, 2002 Mr. Robertson reported that the consent order, which the City of Roanoke signed with the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) in April 2002, requires that construction plans for improvements to the wastewater treatment plant be submitted by April 2003 and that construction begin by September 2003. The construction cost estimates for the project are $32 million, which does not carry a contingency fund. Roanoke County's share of these improvements is estimated to be between $7 and $9 million. It is anticipated that the County's share of the construction costs will be funded through loans from the Virginia Wastewater Revolving Loan Fund, and interest rates are expected to be below four percent. In order to fund the debt service on these loans, the following steps are being proposed effective September 1, 2002: (1) An average rate increase of 8.36%. (2) The cost of new connections to the County sewer system will be increased from $1,500 to $2,000 per equivalent residential connection. (3) Developments which require the installation of County maintained sewage pump stations will be charged $500 per equivalent residential connection. The second phase of this plan would be an additional 8.36% increase which would go in effect January 1, 2004. Supervisor Nickens questioned the impact on the County's borrowing ability if the January 1, 2004 proposed increase is not implemented at this time. Mr. Morris stated that approximately half of the total increase would be sufficient to fund the additional borrowing but would not cover the cost of repair and maintenance charges. July 23, 2002 479 In response to Supervisor Nickens question, Mr. Morris clarified that the initial 8.36% increase would be sufficient to cover the necessary borrowing, if the amount of the construction is no more than $7 million. Supervisor Nickens stated his concern that there may not be enough information available to know whether the 8.36% increase in January 2004 is necessary. Mr. Morris stated that this plan was based on a minimum of $7 million cost incurred in the project and a possible return of $500,000 which will be applied to the existing outstanding loan. This would reduce debt service by approximately $35,000 per year. If the project goes to $9 million and the loan is limited to $7 million, this will require the use of the remaining funding in surplus. Mr. Morris verified that postponement of the second rate increase would not adversely affect the County's ability to borrow or rating. He indicated that if costs exceed $7 million, staff will need to request an additional increase of at least 8.36%. Mr. Robertson stated that if the Board were to adopt the ordinance as outlined by staff, a work session could be held in August 2003 to review the financial records and determine if any adjustments are needed at that time. If the initial 8.36% increase is sufficient, no further action would be required by the Board. He stated his concern that for the past two years, the rate structure has not allowed repair and replacement to be funded out of the normal budget. These costs have been funded from surplus. One of the pending proposals from DEQ is that all localities will be asked to sign a separate consent order to increase the maintenance on sewer systems due to infiltration & inflow (1&1). This is an expensive process that will need to be funded by the _.---------~.__.._--_.._._-_._..._- 480 July 23, 2002 County, in addition to the upgrade of the wastewater treatment plant. Maintenance costs for the past 7-8 years have been approximately $380,000 per year, with a proposed increase to $580,000. Staff has projected a 10 year cost of over $10 million in the wastewater collection system, and Mr. Robertson stressed the need to maintain integrity in this portion of the budget. Supervisor Church questioned the amount of the average increase for citizens. Mr. Robertson stated that for an average customer using 5,000 gallons of water, the current bill would total $15.31 per month. The initial 8.36% increase would raise the cost to $16.60 per month (average increase of $1.29 per month) and the second 8.36% increase would raise the cost to $17.96. The total increase over the two years would be $2.65 per month. Supervisor McNamara stated that the decision regarding the increase is a matter of philosophy. He indicated that it is not feasible to use surplus revenues from the water fund to cover sewer fund operations due to the fact that they are separate enterprise funds. He stated that the initial 8.36% increase will cover the $7 million in new borrowing. If additional funds are needed, they can be covered from surplus. The second increase is essentially for the purpose of covering repair and replacement. He stated his desire to withhold the second increase until information is available concerning construction costs. In response to Supervisor Church's question, Mr. Robertson clarified that the Board would not be locked into a second increase if they were to adopt the July 23, 2002 481 proposed ordinance. Mr. Robertson stated that if the second 8.36% increase is not needed, the Board would have to hold a public hearing prior to January 2004 to reduce the amount of that increase. Mr. Morris stated that this rate projection was based on construction estimates of $7 million, although $9 million could be covered through surplus. Without the second rate increase, staff will likely have to return to the Board for an additional rate increase. In response to Supervisor Nickens' question, Mr. Mahoney advised that in the past, a public hearing has been held whenever a rate is lowered due to the fact that it requires adoption of an ordinance. Supervisor Nickens pointed out that a second public hearing will be necessary if only the first increase is implemented, as well as if both increases are implemented and there is a need to later lower the rate. In order to be conservative, he stated his support to only address the first increase at this time. Mr. Hodge reported that this is a situation where the County needs to move forward prior to having all the construction information available. The City is under a consent order from the state to design an upgrade to the plant within 12 months. The design of the plant upgrade to meet the state DEQ requirements is occurring simultaneously with the County working with the City and other localities. In the work session, it was stated that at the time the bonds are issued, the rate must be sufficient to cover the debt service. Mr. Hodge questioned whether staff is now stating that this can be covered with the first rate increase only. Mr. Morris indicated that the revenue generated from the first rate increase approximates the annual debt service on ---,,-~-,"._.----.---...-.---.-~'.-- 482 July 23,2002 a $7 million loan. If construction costs exceed this amount, Mr. Morris confirmed that an additional rate increase may be necessary by January 2004. Supervisor McNamara indicated that debt service assumption begins in Fiscal Year 2006, allowing the County several years to fund repair and replacement from the initial increase and determine the remaining costs. He is in favor of the initial increase at this time, and waiting until additional information is available to determine if a second increase is necessary. Ms. Nancy Hughes, 2506 Sharmar Road, spoke in support of assessments to pay for infrastructure improvements. She asked the Board to also consider implementing a 2% - 5% assessment on all new residential construction to provide capital for maintaining County services. Supervisor Nickens moved to approve adoption of the ordinance with the exception that the second 8.36% increase projected to take effect January 1, 2004 be withheld. Staff is directed to keep the Board advised as to future needs as information becomes available. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, McNamara, Nickens, Church NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Minnix ORDINANCE 072302-8 AMENDING AND REENACTING SECTION 18-168. "SCHEDULE OF CHARGES·, OF CHAPTER 18 SEWERS AND SEWAGE DISPOSAL, ARTICLE IV., "SEWER USE STANDARDS", OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE TO PROVIDE FOR AN INCREASE IN THE BASE AND VOLUME CHARGES FOR SEWER SERVICE, AN INCREASE July 23, 2002 483 IN THE SEWER OFF-SITE FACILITY FEE, AND THE IMPOSITION OF A CHARGE PER EQUIVALENT RESIDENTIAL CONNECTION FOR DEVELOPMENTS THAT WILL REQUIRE COUNTY MAINTENANCE OF A SEWAGE PUMP STATION WHEREAS, the Boatd of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, has adopted and established sewer user rates for Roanoke County utility customers, as provided in Roanoke County Code §18-168; and, WHEREAS, due to the anticipated costs of necessaty improvements and upgrades at the wastewater treatment facility, the Board of Supervisors has determined that an increase in sewer service rates is required¡ and, WHEREAS, the Board has determined that it is appropriate to make the adjustment of the sewer charges through an increase in the base and volume charges for sewer service, and through an increase in the off-site facilities fee; and, WHEREAS, the Board has determined that it is necessary to impose a pump station maintenance fee for new development to off-set the cost of maintaining sewage pump stations; and, WHEREAS, the provisions of this ordinance for rate increases are adopted pursuant to the authority found in Chapter 21, Title 15.2, more specifically §15.2-2111 and §15.2-2122 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended); and, WHEREAS, legal notice of these amendments has been published in a newspaper of general circulation within Roanoke County, pursuant to §15.2-107 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended) on July 2,2002, and on July 9,2002; and, WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on July 9, 2002, and the second reading and public hearing on this ordinance was held on July 23, 2002. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia: I. That Section 18-168, "Schedule of Charges", of Chapter 18 SEWERS AND SEWAGE DISPOSAL, ARTICLE IV., "SEWER USE STANDARDS", is hereby amended and reenacted as follows: Sec. 18-168. Schedule of charges. (a) Persons discharging wastewater shall pay a charge to cover the capital cost and the cost of collection and treatment of all wastewater discharged. (1) AIl Class I users discharging normal wastewater or Group B wastewater shall pay a user charge computed upon cost per volume of wastewater discharged. (2) AIl Class II users discharging Group A wastewater shall have their user charge computed upon a cost per unit volume basis for the base amount plus the unit cost of treatment for all over the base amount for volume, biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), suspended solids (SS), phosphorus (P) and total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN). In computing the contaminant loading, the parameter concentrations for normal wastewater will be considered as standard strength in determining the base amount in the effluent discharge flow. Initially, the responsibility for determining the contaminant loading for each category of establishment will be that of the control authority. However, each establishment must verify its own 484 July 23, 2002 contaminant loading monthly by initiating a sampling and analytical program at its own expense and with the approval of the control authority. (b) The unit costs to be used to compute the charge for Class I and II users shall be established by the approving authority. The unit costs for all users and the allowances for normal wastewater for users may be revised as necessary to correspond to current costs and experience. Revisions may be made, no more often than once a year, upon approval of the control authority. The user charge for users shall be computed as follows: Class I Users: Cu = Vu X Vd Class II Users: C8 = Vd + VsVc + BsBc + SsSc + PsPc + NsNc And: Cu = Charge for Class I users Cs = Charge for Class II users Vu = Unit cost of treatment chargeable to normal wastewater ($/1,000 gal.) Vd = Volume of wastewater from normal wastewater (1,000 gals) Vs = Volume of Class II wastewater (1,000 gals) in excess of Class I wastewater Vc = Cost of treating 1,000 gals. of Class II wastewater ($/1,000 gal.) Bs = Class II wastewater BOD contribution in excess of Class I wastewater limit (lbs.) Bc = Cost of treating Class II BOD contribution ($!lb.) Ss = Class II wastewater SS contribution in excess of Class I wastewater limit (lbs.) Sc = Cost of treating Class II SS contribution ($!lb.) Ps = Class II wastewater phosphorus contribution in excess of Class I wastewater limit (lbs.) Ns = Class II wastewater unoxidized nitrogen contribution in excess of Class I wastewater limit (lbs.) Nc = Cost of treating Class II phosphorus contribution ($!lb.) (c) The following schedule of base charges and volume charges for residential, commercial and industrial customers of the county shall apply for sewer service. The volume charge per one thousand (1,000) gallons will be based on water used. The volume charge is added to the base charge to determine the total sewer bill. SCHEDULE OF BASE CHARGES Volume Based SEWER RATES Water Supplied 1000 Gallons Per Month BASE CHARGE PER MONTH Effective 9·1-2002 Efketi." 1 i 2001 0--10 11--14 15--17 18--28 $ 8.31 12.17 20.78 31.50 $ 9.00 13.51 22.52 37.39 $-9,.ffl -l+.64 *4G 4GM July 23, 2002 485 29--39 18.20 52.23 .<;&6G 40--54 66.19 72.05 -1-&G8 55--69 ~ 92.76 ~ 70--111 l-38ðt 149.94 MM& 112--153 191.15 207.14 H+.46 154--210 MHG 284.13 ~ 211--267 ffi,U 361.13 39-hB 268--440 ~ 594.83 644M 441--613 -t6+.58 828.52 89-Hm 614--853 1,063.77 1,152.73 1,219.12 854--1,093 1,362.96 1,476.94 1,600.11 1,094--1,400 1,715.25 1,891.21 2,019.31 1,401--1,707 2,127.51 2,305.47 2,198.25 1,708--2,087 2,601.26 2,818.80 3,051.51 2,088--2,467 3,071.96 3,332.12 3,610.75 Volume Charge Per 1000 Gallons $ 1.10 1.52 -h64 (d) Connection fees. The total sewer connection fee shall consist of costs and considerations associated with (I) a basic connection fee; (ii) an off-site facilities fee; ,,00 (iii) a pump station maintenance fee; and (iv) an off-site and oversized line credit policy: (1) Basic connection fee. The basic connection fee for all applicants is to recover the cost of the service connection or service tap. The basic connection fee shall be assessed all connectors and the payment shall accompany the application for connection to the sewer system. (2) Off-site facilities fee. The off-site facilities fee for all applicants is to recover the cost of aH present and future capital facilities and improvements to the sewer system constructed by or on behalf of the county. Up to one-half of the off-site facilities fee will be subject to the off-site and oversized line credit policy. The off-site facilities fee shall be assessed all connectors and the payment shall accompany the application for connection to an existing or proposed establishment of a sewer system. (3) Pump station maintenance fee. The pump station maintenance fee is to recover the additional costs associated with county maintenance of a sewage pump station, including but not limited to daily monitoring, electrical expenses, and periodic replacement of pumps and other equipment. The pump station maintenance fee shaH be assessed all connectors to be served by a sewage pump station maintained or to be maintained by the county and the payment shaH accompany the appJication for connection to an existing or proposed estabJishment of a sewer system. (4) Off-site and oversized line credit policy. A credit will be aHowed against the off-site facilities fee for off-site extensions of a sewer line in excess of three hundred (300) feet and/or installation of line size in excess of minimum line size required by the county. For 486 July 23, 2002 any off-site extensions in a public right-of-way or easement adjacent to the owner's/applicant's property, credit will be allowed against the off-site facilities fee only for sewer line size in excess of the minimum diameter required by the county. No credit will be allowed where a line size greater than the minimum diameter size is required to adequately serve the owner/applicant. Credits shall be limited to a maximum of twenty- five (25) percent of the amount assessed for the off-site facilities fee and are subject to funds being appropriated and available for credits within the sewer off-site facilities fee fund. Credits shall be computed based upon the most recent bids received by the county for construction of similar sewer facilities. (45) The board of supervisors may authorize the utility director to enter into a reimbursement agreement with an owner/applicant for off-site facilities which may be required by the county, and which are not addressed by the off-site and oversized line credit policy. (56) The total connection fee shall be paid as follows: twenty-five (25) percent at time of plan approval, seventy-five (75) percent (balance) upon the earlier of either the application for building permit or prior to occupancy or sewer use by the facility. When the off-site facilities fee is increased, the applicant may pay the remaining balance of the prior fee before the effective date of the new fee. Thereafter, the remaining balance shall be calculated on the fee that exists at the time the balance is paid. (e) Installation payments. Any landowner may, at his option, request in writing on forms provided by the county, to be allowed to make payment on the off-site facilities fee portion of the connection fee, in thirty-six (36) monthly installments, provided that: (I) The amount of such fee shall be increased by twenty (20) percent. (2) The landowner shall execute a contract with the county for aforesaid installment payment a note evidencing such obligation in a form approved by the county attorney setting forth the amount and number of payments to be made together with other such terms and conditions deemed necessary and appropriate by the parties thereto. Such contract shall be recorded in the office of the clerk of circuit court of the county. (3) The counry shall have the right to collect such payments in the same manner as provided for collection of sewer service charges together with other means as set out in the sewer contract. (4) Such note shall be paid in full prior to the transfer of title to any land for which sewer service was provided, and if the same are not paid in full by the date of transfer, the county shall have the right to discontinue service and remove all of its facilities and require payment of the full amount of the connection fees prevailing at that time, as if service had never been installed (I) Authority of board of supervisors to waive connection fees: (l) The board of supervisors may, by resolution, waive a portion of the connection fees for sewer facilities installed under federal or state funded sewer projects. The portion of the fee that is waived shall be indicated as county financial participation in the sewer project. (2) The board of supervisors may, by resolution, authotize all or a portion of the off-site facilities fee to be paid from the general fund for those commercial or industrial owners (applicants) which the board of supervisors determines would be in the best interest of the county's economic development and which would generate significant employment. July 23, 2002 487 (g) Minimum connection fee. The minimum connection fee for any connection will be that established for a five-eighths-inch water meter. (h) Schedule of connection fees. The total connection fee is the sum of the basic connection fee (which is based upon sewer service to one equivalent residential connection or "ERC") plus the off-site facilities fee (which is determined by ERC, type of service and effective date), as indicated in Tables I and II, and the pump station maintenance fee, if applicable. Basic Connection Fee: The basic connection fee is one hundred dollars ($100.00) and includes Roanoke County personnel installing the physical tap to the sewer main after excavation by the customer. Table I Off-site Facilities Fee Type of Service Effeai., 9-f..94 Effcêti", 9---f-..95 Effective 9-1-2002 Single family & multifamily (per dwelling unit) Mate! and Hatd (pCI gtleJt I6or,,) HÔ'l3ital (l'eI bed) Od,êI re,ide.¡,tia! w¡"truetiof, (incltldiIlg nursing hÔIl.e." l3er bed) -l-;8OO- f,5OO 2,000 --500- --500- --500 ---f-5G ---500 ---f-5G Table II The Off-site Facilities Fee for Aall other applicants btl'¡he.3'e." industrial aI.d I'tlbliE btlilàir.g, will be based on meter size as follows: Water Meter Effi.::Ii", Effccrive Effective Size (inches) ERC 9-f..94 9 1 75 9-1-2002 3/8 1.00 $1,000.00 $1,500.00 $2,000.00 3/4 1.44 1,110.00 2,160.00 2,880.00 1 2.56 2,560.00 3,810.00 5,120.00 488 July 23, 2002 1% 12 5.76 5, 760.00 8,610.00 11,520.00 10.24 10,210.00 15,360.00 20,480.00 23.04 23,010.00 31,560.00 46.080.00 40.96 10,960.00 61, 110.00 81,920.00 92.16 92,160.00 138,210.00 184,320.00 63.84 163,810.00 215, 760.00 327.680.00 256.00 256,000.00 381,000.00 512,000.00 368.64 368,610.00 552,960.00 737,280.00 2 3 4 6 8 10 Pump Station Maintenance Fee: The pump station maintenance fee is five hundred dollars ($500.00) per one equivalent residential connection or "ERC" served or to be served by a sewage pump station that requires or will require County maintenance. (1) The director of finance is authorized to adjust utility charges arising from filling swimming pools with water when such water is not introduced into the sanitary sewer system. Any such adjustment shall be limited to once per year, and be for sewer charges only. The director of finance may promulgate regulations to implement this adjustment procedure. (j) For those customers that are sewer customers only and do not have water meters, sewer is billed at an estimated usage of thirty thousand (30,000) gallons per month for commercial customers and eighteen thousand (18,000) gallons per quarter for residential service. Such rates or charges shall be based on the schedule of charges established in this ordinance. -íkJ- T r"",itien pre. i,ier". (1) The 'e..er eòhhCaiör. fce fa, ,chic¿ eqtlal te 6[,C e<¡tli.alent re,ider,tial3e..er eôld,c<ctiol., öl "ERC" ,hall ir.ere""~ frm" fi.e Lm,dred dolla" ($500.00) to ""'" thetl,and dellar, ($1,000.00) eff<:cti.e SeptŒ,-ber 1, 1991, and ,hall inerea,e-tö ene tftBtlsa"d fi.e I,m.dred .bllar, ($1,500.00) effceti.e Septcfl.ber 1. 1995. (2) FBr ,ingle fa,nil, kt, of fèWld er, ..hkft t..er,t'¡ fi.e (25) 1'w:ent õf-the exi,tir.g fee has beer. 1'aid lsef"sle d.e effceti.e date õf d,i3 erdir.ar.ce, tl.t ô..I.er/ap1'liEar.t ,r,all 1'a, ,c.er.£) fi.e (75) pereent ef d,c r<r"air.ir,g iWe July 23, 2002 489 htl"drect dollar, ($500.00) ëonneeti"" fa "fi or berefe f.tlgtl,t 31, 1995. If I'tl{fhEflt ðf tL::. fEfil8.ÎIlekr i:J fiat Iuad¿ ôIl ðr h,:JôIE }(tlgtlJt 31, 1995, dd.fi tLe:. rCh,aining fee ,I.all be tI.e dHfefeI.ec bet..e"I. tk an.Gtlfit pI(;.iem[, !laid at.d the fee h. effeet at tI.at thue. (3) O..¡.e1,/"pplieat.t, that I.a.e md a !lIdih,;,¡aI, ,ite plan ö! 'llhdi.i3ie" !I[ar. !!fldl.a,e I'aid tweI,t, f1.e (25) pereeht d tI,e exi.tiI.g fee "', ôI bel"Ie /\Ilgll.t 31, 1991, ,l.aI[ l'a, ,c,er't} fì.e (75) peremt of tI.e leluaillir,g fì,e I.m,dwd dd[al3 ($500.00) fee ,,,, éJ[ hefDle f.tlgu,t 31, 1995. 11.cle"ftu, the reIuaifling fee ,I.all be the diffCleI.ee bethee¡, the aruOllht I'Ie.iôtI,[, paid ard the fee ir. effect at that tiIue. (1) O..I.e!8/applieant' tI,M ha,e filed a preliIüh.ar, ,ite plat. o[ .llbdi.i'¡OI. plan ôn ôf afteI S"ptcn,bcr 1, 1991, ,I,all pa, t..et.t} fì.e (25) puce"t of tI.e em,[,eEtie" fee it. effect at that tiIue at.d the ren.aining ,e.et.t} fì.e (75) peIeent of tI,e ône th,Jtl,a1,el della" ($1,000.00) fee ôn ôr befme Atlgtl.t 31, 1995, ôr cl,c re".air.ing fee ,I.all he the diffem.ee bet:\.cer. the aI..ötlM pre.ioll.[, paid a"d the fee ir, effeet at tl.at tin",. (k)œ- The provisions of this ordinance, and the rates and fees established hereby, shall be effective from and after September [, 2002 Jill, 1, 1991. 2. That transition shall be handled administratively by the Utility Director in accordance with the implementation policy provided by report to the Board. Any appeal of an administrative decision of the Utility Director under this policy shall be to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County. 3. That all subsections and provisions of §18-168 of the Roanoke County Code, not specifically amended herein, shall remain in full force and effect. 4. That the provisions of this ordinance and the rates established hereby shall be effective on and from the date of adoption. On motion of Supervisor Nickens to adopt the ordinance but withhold the second 8.26% increase scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2004, with the understanding that staff will provide appropriate notice if an additional increase is necessary, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, McNamara, Nickens, Church NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Minnix 4. Second readina of ordinance to obtain ª Special Use Permit to operate ª reliaious assemblv facilitv on 3.48 acres located at 2067 A Electric Road, Windsor Hills Maaisterial District. upon the petition of Calvary Chapel of Roanoke. (Janet Scheid. Chief Planner) 0-072302-9 490 July 23, 2002 Ms. Scheid reported that the property is currently zoned C-2 Commercial and is located within Oak Grove Shopping Center Plaza. Calvary Chapel would like to build a 100 seat sanctuary with offices and classroom space. The Department of Economic Development has concerns about allowing non-commercial uses within commercial centers, which may possibly lead to deterioration of the shopping center. Ms. Scheid stated that the Planning Commission reviewed this request on July 2 and expressed concerns about the compatibility of this use with the surrounding commercial uses and the objectives of the Roanoke County Economic Development Department. The Planning Commission denied approval of this request with a vote of 3-0. There were no citizens present to speak on this item. Supervisor McNamara stated that the shopping center in question is old. The layout and design was at one time conducive to a neighborhood village concept with offices. He indicated that he has lived behind this center for 14 years and during this time, the center has never been full. Despite the fact that our economy is in a retail slowdown, he noted that there are not many centers along Route 419 which have vacancies. He stated that he would support this request. He views this as a church in transition which will not be in this location for an extended period of time. He stated that this may be the best use for this retail space since there has not been any interest by other businesses to locate in the center. The parking situation is not an issue as the church operates during hours when the center is closed. July 23, 2002 491 In response to Supervisor Nickens' question, Ms. Scheid reported that the term of the lease is two years. Supervisor Nickens questioned the taxable status of the property if the church were to locate within the retail center. Mr. Mahoney stated that this portion of the property would likely be exempt from taxation since it is a religious facility. He indicated that research would need to be conducted to determine how this exemption would be applied in a lease situation. Dr. Nickens stated concerns about how the proration of this exemption would be handled for real estate tax purposes. Reverend Brian Phillips, pastor of Calvary Chapel, stated that the church is in transition and has outgrown their current space. The space in this center is compatible with the church because they do not compete for parking during peak hours. and they will provide an economic benefit to Mr. Line, the owner of the center. The church is seeking a short-term lease to allow them time to secure property to build a new facility. Supervisor McNamara questioned whether the petitioner could offer a payment in lieu of taxes to the County to offset the tax reduction. Mr. Mahoney stated that the state code prohibits a payment in lieu of taxes for churches. Mr. Charles Line, owner of the center, reported that a church was located in the center several years ago. Supervisor Flora stated that although a church might not be the best use for this location, empty space is more detrimental to the building. In view of the compatibility of the church with the other businesses in the center, he will support the approval of the special use permit. 492 July 23, 2002 Supervisor McNamara moved to approve the adoption of the ordinance. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, McNamara, Nickens, Church NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Minnix ORDINANCE 072302-9 GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO CALVARY CHAPEL ROANOKE TO OPERATE A RELIGIOUS FACILITY ON 3.48 ACRES LOCATED AT 2067A ELECTRIC ROAD (TAX MAP NO. 76.07-4-33), WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, Calvary Chapel Roanoke has filed a petition for a special use permit to operate a religious facility located at 2067A Electric Road (Tax Map No. 76.07-4-33) in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on July 2, 2002; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on June 25, 2002; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on July 23, 2002. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Board finds that the granting of a special use permit to Calvary Chapel Roanoke to operate a religious facility located at 2067 A Electric Road· (Tax Map No. 76.07-4-33) in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 2000 Community Plan pursuant to the provisions of § 15.2-2232 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and said Special Use Permit is hereby approved. 2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, McNamara, Nickens, Church NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Minnix July 23, 2002 493 5. Second readinQ of ordinance to obtain ª Special Use Permit to operate ª commercial kennel 2!1 18.16 acres located at 8232 Enon Drive. NW. Hollins Maaisterial District. upon the petition of St. Francis of Assisi Service Doa Foundation. (Janet Scheid. Chief Planner) 0-072302-10 Ms. Scheid reported that this petition has been classified as a request for a commercial kennel due to the number of dogs to be boarded. although no animals will be sold. The site contains 18 acres, is zoned AR - Agricultural Residential, and is located at the northern terminus of Enon Drive. The proposal generally complies with the community plan and impacts on surrounding property owners are expected to be very manageable. The mandatory use and design guidelines called for by the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance are: (1) A kennel silencer must be installed and operated. (2) Animal waste must be disposed of in a manner acceptable to the Department of Health. (3) Burial of animals is prohibited on the property.· (4) The minimum area required per kennel shall be two acres. (5) The minimum setback requirement is 100 feet from any property line. (6) Buffer yards shall be provided. These requirements are mandatory and are not part of the special use permit conditions. Ms. Scheid stated that St. Francis of Assisi has signed a contract to purchase the subject tract, convert the existing stable into a training and boarding center for dogs, and modify the house into administrative offices. No new 494 July 23,2002 buildings or outside dog runs are planned. Initially five service dogs in training will be kenneled, expanding to approximately 25 dogs over the next five years. All boarding and training will occur indoors. A maximum of five dogs will be allowed outdoors at any time and only on a leash or within a fenced enclosure. Staff concludes that St. Francis will be an excellent example of adaptive re-use. The Planning Commission heard this petition on July 2 and their only questions dealt with the distance between the closest homes and the active portions of this property. The Planning Commission unanimously approved the request with one condition which is that no vehicular access shall be permitted on Buckland Mill Road. Ms. Patsy Ford, 2626 Southwoods Drive, spoke in support of the request. She is the Office Manager at Cave Spring United Methodist Church where the St. Francis of Assisi staff currently trains their dogs. She stated that they are in no way disruptive, and that they should not adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood. Ms. Hazel Bernard, Executive Director of St. Francis, was available to answer any questions that may arise. Ms. Judy Mick, 6261 Buckland Mill Road, owns the property closest to the site and stated that she is looking forward to the St. Francis relocation to this property. Ms. Margaret Camper, 8005 Enon Drive, stated that she felt that St. Francis would be an asset to the neighborhood. Mr. Mike Whitlow, President of St. Francis of Assisi, thanked the July 23, 2002 495 neighbors for their support. He indicated that the staff report states that there will be no outside dog runs, which is not the exact intent of St. Francis. He reported that with respect to the existing stable, St. Francis plans to build an outside portion to the kennel runs with a door which allows the dogs access between the indoor and outdoor areas. During the day, dogs may have the ability to go outside but they will remain indoors at night. The majority of the kennels will be facing away from the homes in Buckland Forest. Supervisor Nickens inquired about the status of the $1 million in gifts which the contract requires St. Francis to secure by July 31, 2002. Mr. Whitlow stated that the donations are progressing on schedule. Supervisor Flora moved to approve the adoption of the ordinance. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, McNamara, Nickens, Church NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Minnix ORDINANCE 072302-10 GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ST. FRANCIS OF ASSISI TO OPERATE A COMMERCIAL KENNEL ON 18.16 ACRES LOCATED AT 8232 ENON DRIVE (TAX MAP NO. 18.17-2-22), HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, St. Francis of Assisi has filed a petition for a special use permit to operate a commercial kennel on 18.16 acres located at 8232 Enon Drive (Tax Map No. 18.17-2-22) in the Hollins Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on July 2, 2002; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on June 25, 2002; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on July 23,2002. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 496 July 23, 2002 1. That the Board finds that the granting of a special use permit to St. Francis of Assisi to operate a commercial kennel on 18.16 acres located at 8232 Enon Drive (Tax Map No. 18.17-2-22) in the Hollins Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 2000 Community Plan pursuant to the provisions of § 15.2-2232 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and said Special Use Permit is hereby approved with the following condition: (1) No vehicular access shall be permitted from Buckland Mill Road. 2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. On motion of Supervisor Flora to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Flora, McNamara, Nickens, Church NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Minnix INRE: CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS Ms. Gail Bowyer, 1209 Beaumont Road, presented a petition regarding noise from the Cloverdale Bandit Corporation, which was rezoned in 1992 from light industrial to heavy industrial use. The company has recently installed a new filtration system which makes considerable noise and is disruptive to the surrounding neighborhood. Ms. Bowyer requested that the Board consider rezoning this property to light industrial, and assist Cloverdale Bandit Corporation in purchasing the necessary equipment to reduce the noise levels in the area. Mr. Hodge reported that staff has been working on this matter and will continue working to resolve the issue. In response to Supervisor Nickens' question, Ms. Bowyer reported July 23, 2002 497 that the noise from the corporation had not been disruptive prior to the installation of the new equipment. IN RE: REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS Supervisor Flora: (1) He requested that staff consider developing a citizen resource applicant pool of individuals willing to fill committee appointments. (2) He questioned if there was a program available to assist individuals with the cost of 1&1 (infiltration and inflow) modification requirements. Mr. Hodge indicated that staff would obtain information regarding this matter. Supervisor Nickens: (1) He submitted a petition to Gary Robertson from residents of the Southeast County area (Eanes Road) regarding connection to the County water system rather than the private system they are currently utilizing. Mr. Robertson will evaluate the cost of connecting to the County water system for these residents. (2) He requested that the Economic Development Strategy Resolution received from the Fifth Planning District Commission be placed on the agenda for the August 13 meeting. Supervisor Church: (1) He expressed his appreciation to Sara Franklin for her presence at the County Board meetings. (2) He asked staff to repair the exit sign in the Board meeting room. (3) He expressed his pleasure with the National Softball Association tournament held in Roanoke which brought approximately 3,000 players and 15,000 fans. (4) He advised that the Little League State tournament opening ceremonies are being held Thursday evening, and games will take place in Starkey Park beginning on Friday. 498 July 23,2002 INRE: COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR COMMENTS Mr. Hodge voiced his appreciation to the County staff and board members for their support of the NSA tournament, as well as the City of Salem and City of Roanoke. He also thanked Ms. Franklin for her attendance at the Board meetings. INRE: ADJOURNMENT Chairman Church adjourned the meeting at 8:40 p.m. until Friday, July 26 at 12:00 p.m. at the Vinton War Memorial to attend the Local Governments Regional Summit. Submitted by: Approved by: fJinJOJ~. f}JV)r/JAlJ. ') Diane S. Childers Clerk to the Board Jo eph B. "Butch" Church Chairman