Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5/24/2005 - Regular May 24, 2005 593 Roanoke County Administration Center 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, Virginia 24018 May 24, 2005 The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia met this day atthe Roanoke County Administration Center, this being the fourth Tuesday and the second regularly scheduled meeting of the month of May, 2005. IN RE: CALL TO ORDER Chairman Altizer called the meeting to order at 3:02 p.m. The roll call was taken. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Michael W. Altizer, Vice-Chairman Michael A. Wray, Supervisors Joseph B. “Butch” Church, Richard C. Flora, Joseph McNamara MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney; John M. Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator; Dan R. O’Donnell, Assistant County Administrator; Diane D. Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer; Diane S. Childers, Clerk to the Board IN RE: OPENING CEREMONIES The invocation was given by Pastor Keith Beasley, Good Shepherd Lutheran Church. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all present. May 24, 2005 594 IN RE: REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS Mr. Mahoney added a closed meeting pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.2-3711 A (7) consultation with legal counsel pertaining to probable litigation, namely Verizon broadcast tower. IN RE: BRIEFING 1. Briefing from the Parks, Recreation and Tourism Department regarding “The Big Deal” outdoor concert to be held in Green Hill Park on June 11, 2005. (Pete Haislip, Director of Parks, Recreation and Tourism; Wendi Schultz, CFE, Tourism and Event Coordinator) Mr. Haislip advised that Clear Channel Radio is Roanoke County’s partner in this event and he noted that they are one of the largest radio companies in the United States and operates six stations in the Roanoke Valley. He stated that Clear Channel has been a strong sponsor of County media events, and noted that they have hosted the Jamboree by the James event in Lynchburg for the past five years. He advised that “The Big Deal” event will be held on Saturday, June 11 at Green Hill Park. The bands that will be featured include Foghat, Blue Oyster Cult, and the Renegades of Southern Rock. It is anticipated that approximately 5,000 people will attend the event, and the gates will open at 4:00 p.m. The park will be closed to the general public at approximately 2:00 p.m. to begin preparations. Mr. Haislip stated that signs will be May 24, 2005 595 posted in the park next week advising the public of the upcoming event and early closing time. He further stated that no coolers will be allowed in the park and individuals are invited to bring blankets, lawn chairs, etc. Staff has coordinated with the Police Department who will be handling traffic control. There will be a fireworks show at 10:30 p.m. and the event will conclude at 10:45 p.m. Supervisor Church thanked the staff for presenting the briefing in light of the size of the event. He noted concerns regarding notification of area residents and questioned how this will be handled. Ms. Schultz responded that staff is producing a flyer that will be distributed to the surrounding neighbors on the Monday preceding the concert. She advised that she and the Marketing Manager for Clear Channel will personally visit the neighbors along Harborwood Road and in the area of the Equestrian Center to advise them of the upcoming event. She stated that if a resident is not at home, a flyer will be left for them which will include Ms. Schultz’s phone number if the citizen has any questions. Supervisor Church stated that this door-to-door contact should be made for residents on Harborwood Road and Diuguids Lane. He noted that many of the residents in the area have animals, and he requested that staff be mindful that fireworks can alarm the animals. Supervisor Church inquired what type of lighting will be used. Mr. Haislip stated that the lights are similar to the ones used by highways crews, and that one light will cover approximately 5-7 acres and is powered by a generator. He further advised that all parking and spectator areas will be lighted. In response to a concern voiced by May 24, 2005 596 Supervisor Church regarding traffic, Mr. Haislip stated that tickets will not be sold on the road to avoid traffic congestion; all cars will be parked first and attendees will be directed to one of three entrance gates. In addition, Ms. Schultz advised that the road going into the park will be two-way. Supervisor Church questioned if there would be sufficient security for the event. Mr. Haislip responded in the affirmative. In response to an inquiry from Supervisor Church regarding the availability of alcohol at the event, Mr. Haislip advised that no coolers will be allowed but beer will be sold. Ms. Schultz stated that the beer will be sold at a “beer garden” which will be an enclosed, fenced area within a fenced area. Mr. Haislip stated that this will be tightly monitored and limits will be in effect. Ms. Schultz advised that staff has met with the ABC Board and they have approved the arrangement for this area. In addition, she noted that the beer garden area will be as far away from the main entrance as possible so that those visitors not wishing to visit the beer garden will not have to pass by this area to access their seating. Supervisor Church stressed the importance of notifying the residents, particularly with respect to the fireworks. Ms. Schultz stated that staff will make two attempts to contact the residents: once in the morning and once in the evening. If they are not at home on either attempt, a flyer will be left at the home. Ms. Schultz also clarified that wine coolers will be offered in the beer garden in addition to beer. Supervisor Wray questioned if emergency personnel will be available. Ms. Schultz responded in the affirmative and stated that there will be 10 police officers in May 24, 2005 597 uniform and the Police Department is working to secure an additional eight. There will also be 20 private security personnel. Ms. Schultz noted that there will be an EMS unit onsite dedicated to the event. Supervisor Wray questioned if this is the first time that fireworks have been used in Green Hill Park. Mr. Haislip and Ms. Schultz stated that to their knowledge, this is the first time. Mr. Haislip noted that in the past, the County has had cannon fire in conjunction with various events held in the park. The main difference is that this will occur later in the evening and may produce louder sounds. Supervisor Wray questioned who is in charge of the fireworks. Ms. Schultz advised that Johnny Cosgrove is in charge of the fireworks and a permit has been secured through Roanoke County. She stated that the Fire Marshal has been to the site with the crew that will be handling the fireworks. Supervisor Church stated that the County has had business dealings with Mr. Cosgrove in the past, and he requested that staff be consistent regarding all the check points since fireworks are specialized and caution should be exercised. Mr. Haislip advised that tickets are on sale now for $15 and will be available at the gate for $20. Supervisor Altizer questioned if there will there be a fire truck on site. Ms. Schultz responded in the affirmative and stated that there will be a fire truck as well as EMS onsite. May 24, 2005 598 IN RE: NEW BUSINESS 1. Request to appropriate funds in the amount of $23,640 from the Board Contingency Fund to cover the costs of the June 14, 2005 state-wide dual primary. (Judy Stokes, General Registrar) A-052405-1 Ms. Stokes reported that she is requesting $23,640 to cover the cost of the June 14 state-wide dual primary. She advised that there will be two ballots: the democratic ballot has one office and the republican ballot has three offices. She indicated that there are also costs for the election officials which have to be absorbed. Supervisor Altizer inquired if two voting machines will be used since this is a dual primary. Ms. Stokes advised that both ballots will be loaded on one machine and the election official will determine whether the citizen is voting in the democratic or republican primary and the election official will activate the ballot accordingly. She noted that the State Board of Elections had expressed concerns that if separate machines were used, there may be longer lines for one machine than another; therefore, this approach was used to eliminate the potential for this type of problem. Supervisor Wray questioned if the voters would receive a color coded card. Ms. Stokes responded in the affirmative and advised that there will be two sets of poll books and voters will be checked in to determine which ballot they are voting on. Voters will then be given a color coded card (blue for the republican primary and white May 24, 2005 599 for the democratic primary) to signify the appropriate ballot to the election official. The election official will then re-confirm with the voter the desired ballot before it is activated. Supervisor McNamara moved to approve staff recommendation (appropriate $23,640 from the Board Contingency Fund for the June 14 primary). The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None 2. Request to adopt a resolution approving the forming of the Western Virginia Regional Jail Authority and appointing members thereto. (Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; John M. Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator; Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney) R-052405-2 Mr. Hodge stated that staff has incorporated into this action the requests that have been made by the Board at work sessions and other meetings. He stated that staff is presenting the information and requesting authorization to form the Authority and appoint members to the Regional Jail Authority Board. Mr. Chambliss will review this in greater detail. Mr. Hodge noted that the three partner localities have already approved this request, and stated that the other action item before the Board is the appointment of representatives to the Authority. These appointments have been made by the other partner localities and Mr. Hodge advised that Mr. Chambliss has this information. Mr. May 24, 2005 600 Hodge stated that with respect to the Authority Board, the staff representative is normally the Chief Administrative Officer or County Administrator; however, he requested that the Board consider appointing John Chambliss to this position since he has worked with this project from the beginning and his knowledge will be valuable in continuing to follow through this process. He further requested that the Board consider appointing Diane Hyatt as the alternate staff member. Supervisor Flora inquired if there was a recommendation for the appointment of the alternate member from the Sheriff’s Office. Mr. Hodge advised that this appointment is made by the Sheriff, and Major Mike Winston has been selected as the alternate member. In response to a further inquiry from Supervisor Flora, Mr. Hodge confirmed that no action is needed by the Board with respect to the appointment of the alternate member for the Sheriff’s Office. Mr. Chambliss reported that at the May 10 Board meeting, a briefing was presented concerning the agreement for the creation of the Authority. He noted that two changes have been made since that time: (1) The suggested name has been changed to the Western Virginia Regional Jail Authority (WVRJA). He stated that the name Fort Lewis Regional Jail Authority was initially recommended; however, several requests were received asking that this name not be considered. (2) In Article X, Section II, the original document included language regarding amending the agreement which required 75% of the governing body vote. Further, Section I spoke of concurring resolutions by all members, which is 100% of the governing bodies. He stated that the 100% is what May 24, 2005 601 was initially intended; however, it was not removed as intended. Mr. Chambliss stated that as Mr. Hodge had indicated, the other three partner localities have approved the agreement and appointed their members to the Authority Board. It is anticipated that the Authority Board will be constituted in June 2005 in order to file the appropriate paperwork with the Board of Corrections to allow them to take action on the application at their July 20, 2005 meeting. He noted that the application package has been submitted which includes the community based corrections plan and the project plan, which is the architectural and engineering (A&E) study, prior to the March 1, 2005 filing date. The Department of Corrections (DOC) has reviewed the community based corrections plan and responses to their inquiries have been filed with the consultant for use in preparing an addendum to the report for submittal back to the DOC. He indicated that a group meeting will be held later this week to discuss the architectural and engineering (A&E) report which is scheduled to be completed in June. If the Authority is constituted, the following will occur: (1) develop a contract for the architect, (2) develop construction plans for the project; and (3) continue with any testing required for the site. Once the plans and application are approved by the Board of Corrections, the package goes to Governor’s Office for inclusion in the state capital budget. It will then be considered as part of the budget in the 2006 session of the General Assembly and if approved, funding will be available for reimbursement effective July 1, 2006. Construction is anticipated to begin in fall 2006 with a 24 month construction window, which will allow the facility to begin use in September 2008. May 24, 2005 602 Mr. Chambliss stated that the establishment of the Authority has unique characteristics. A regional jail facility must operate under one of the following models: (1) A cooperative agreement: one of the localities serves as a lead agency that borrows funds and operates the facility. By contract, the lead agency would then provide jail services to the remaining partner agencies. (2) An Authority: the Authority will own and operate the jail. They will also be responsible for constructing the facility and issuing their own bonded debt for payment of the facility. Mr. Chambliss advised that staff recommends adoption of the resolution which is concurrent with the three partner jurisdictions and appointment of the Board’s representatives for the Authority Board. Supervisor Wray inquired if the name of the Authority must be registered. Mr. Chambliss stated that it must be recorded in the resolution and agreement; however, the name can be changed in the future if desired. Any change in the name would require an amendment to the agreement for the establishment of the authority. Supervisor Wray questioned if any components of the agreement have changed since the last meeting. Mr. Chambliss advised that no changes have occurred. He noted that it is the intention to retain the three existing local jails, and advised that the regional facility will be primarily for sentenced inmates and special populations. The agreement provides a guaranteed right of access to a minimum number of beds for each jurisdiction which is important if a jurisdiction withdraws from the Authority. May 24, 2005 603 Supervisor Wray inquired if the Authority has the ability to acquire land. Mr. Chambliss responded in the affirmative. Supervisor Wray requested clarification that the total cost remains $70,993,614. Mr. Chambliss indicated that this is the anticipated construction cost based on the original A&E report which is subject to any modifications made by the DOC and fluctuations in the price of steel and concrete. He advised that this will be a bid project and the estimate is based on average construction costs for this type of facility with cost escalations included. Supervisor Wray inquired if Roanoke County’s share of this cost remains approximately $20 million. Mr. Chambliss responded in the affirmative. Supervisor Wray stated that the facility will be located in Roanoke County, and noted that he had previously inquired about the possibility of our Sheriff running the operation. He questioned what the status was regarding this issue. Mr. Chambliss reported that it has not been resolved at this point. State Code indicates that in a regional jail facility, the Sheriff is to be a member of the Authority Board; however, the superintendent of the facility can not be a member of the Board. This implies that the Superintendent is the manager of the jail; however, discussions are ongoing regarding how this will work. He noted that the Sheriff of each locality will be on the Authority Board and will assist in establishing the operating guidelines, policies, and procedures. They will also be involved in the selection of the Superintendent. Supervisor Wray May 24, 2005 604 advised that he would like to continue pursuing the option of Roanoke County’s Sheriff managing the facility. Supervisor McNamara congratulated Mr. Chambliss for his efforts in moving this project forward. He noted that the name WVRJA mirrors the naming convention used with the Western Virginia Water Authority and he stated that he feels this is a good choice. He requested that Mr. Chambliss briefly discuss the Authority Board meetings and whether they are open to the public. Mr. Chambliss advised that meetings are open to the public and will require public notification as outlined by the Virginia Freedom of Information Act. Supervisor McNamara further inquired if the alternates appointed to the Board would attend all meetings so that in the event the primary representative is absent, they will be knowledgeable regarding current issues. Mr. Chambliss advised that it is at the discretion of the individual localities or members to determine who will attend; however, the alternates are welcome to attend. He noted that during the first year when policies are being formulated and the facility is being designed, he would anticipate that the alternates would try to attend. Following an inquiry from Supervisor Altizer, Mr. Chambliss confirmed that the Authority will have the ability to acquire land but they do not have the right of condemnation. Supervisor Altizer further noted that the Authority will be assuming the debt, and therefore will not be impacting Roanoke County’s borrowing abilities. Mr. Chambliss advised that this is correct, and further stated that it is anticipated that the share of the debt would be a component of the per diem rate so that member May 24, 2005 605 jurisdictions or other localities renting bed space share in the retirement of the debt and pay a proportionate share of the operating expenses. With respect to the bylaws, Supervisor Altizer inquired if this is an issue to be handled by the Authority Board and not the jurisdictions. Mr. Chambliss responded in the affirmative and stated that the service (operating) agreement will be presented to the governing bodies in July for approval and this document addresses operational issues. The agreement requires adoption by both the Authority and the member jurisdictions. This document will include language regarding property value protection programs, additional memberships, etc. Supervisor Church thanked Mr. Chambliss for contacting him regarding the proposed name of the Authority. He questioned if there was a lot of discussion regarding the proposed WVRJA name. Mr. Chambliss stated that in speaking with several groups, there were pros and cons for all names suggested; however, there was a consensus of support for WVRJA. Supervisor McNamara moved to approve the resolution with the following Roanoke County representatives: John M. Chambliss, Jr., Administrative Official; and Diane D. Hyatt, Alternate Administrative Official; Michael A. Wray, Elected Representative; and Joseph B. “Butch” Church, Alternate Elected Official. He noted that there is great value in rotating the elected representative on the Regional Jail Authority since the facility will serve the entire County. He indicated that when all members of the Board of Supervisors have an opportunity to serve, they will each have May 24, 2005 606 a greater appreciation for what occurs and how the Authority operates. He advised that there is logic in selecting the Vice-Chairman as the elected representative because the position rotates annually, and typically the Vice-Chairman is not a first year member of the Board of Supervisors. He stated that a suggestion had been made to appoint the immediate past Chairman as the elected representative; however, the prior year Chairman may no longer be on the Board of Supervisors. He stated that if the goal is to establish a plan of rotation that can be used in future years, it should be noted that there is already tremendous responsibility placed on the Chairman and there is logic in appointing the Vice-Chairman. He noted that he recommended Supervisor Church as the alternate because the facility is located in his district and many of the early decisions will impact his district. Supervisor Church thanked Supervisor McNamara for the recommendation and stated that he has voted no on this project and stood up for the people. He advised that this does not mean that Mr. Chambliss and others have not worked hard on the project; however, after further review and speaking with citizens in the area, he declined the appointment to the Authority Board. He stated that if he is re- elected, he can better utilize his services as Supervisor. He concurred with the appointment of Supervisor Wray as the elected representative. Supervisor Flora stated that the Board needs to select an alternate, and noted that the Vice-Chairman and immediate past Chairman could be selected. This will allow for rotation of the appointments and follow a consistent approach. Supervisor May 24, 2005 607 McNamara voiced concerns regarding the appointment of the past Chairman because this individual may no longer be serving on the Board of Supervisors. He stated that another alternative is to appoint the Vice-Chairman and the incoming Vice-Chairman. He inquired if Supervisor Flora had an interest in serving and stated that if not, he would be willing to serve in this capacity. Supervisor Flora advised that he has no strong interest in serving on the Authority. Supervisor McNamara amended the motion to adopt the resolution with the following Roanoke County representatives: John M. Chambliss, Jr., Administrative Official; Diane D. Hyatt, Alternate Administrative Official; Michael A. Wray, Elected Representative; and Joseph P. McNamara, Alternate Elected Official Supervisor Altizer stated that the appointments to the Authority Board are for a one-year term with the exception of these initial appointments which will expire on December 31, 2005. He stated that at that time, the Board of Supervisors could select a different approach for determining the appointments, if desired. Supervisor Altizer inquired if the adoption of the resolution and appointment of members can be accomplished by a single vote. Mr. Mahoney responded that the resolution approves the agreement establishing the authority, as well as appointing the County’s representatives. He indicated that both actions can be accomplished by adoption of the resolution. Supervisor McNamara’s amended motion to adopt the resolution carried by the following recorded vote: May 24, 2005 608 AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None RESOLUTION 052405-2 APPROVING THE FORMING OF THE “WESTERN VIRGINIA REGIONAL JAIL AUTHORITY,” AND APPOINTING MEMBERS THERETO WHEREAS, Section 53.1-95.2 et seq. of the Code of Virginia allows two or more counties or cities, or a combination thereof, to form a regional jail authority for the purpose of providing for the local correctional needs of the participating jurisdictions; and WHEREAS, the Counties of Roanoke, Franklin, and Montgomery, and the City of Salem have discussed becoming a regional jail authority, to be called the “Western Virginia Regional Jail Authority” (hereinafter “Authority”), which Authority would construct and operate a new regional jail in the County of Roanoke; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County desires to become a member of the Western Virginia Regional Jail Authority and to approve an agreement for creation of the Western Virginia Regional Jail Authority. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County that: The Board hereby approves the agreement for creation of the Western Virginia Regional Jail Authority presented to the Board this date, and authorizes the County Administrator to execute the agreement on behalf of the County. Inasmuch as the Sheriff is a member of the Board of the Authority by law and agreement, the Board also appoints John M. Chambliss, Jr., Administrative Official, and Michael A. Wray, Board Member, to be the County members of the Authority, and Diane D. Hyatt and Joseph P. McNamara as alternate members. On amended motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the resolution as follows: adopt the resolution and appoint the following representatives: John M. Chambliss, Jr., as Administrative Official; Diane D. Hyatt as Alternate Administrative Official; Michael A. Wray, Vice-Chairman, as Elected Representative; and Joseph P. McNamara as Alternate Elected Representative, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None May 24, 2005 609 3. Request to extend the option on the Higginbotham site for the regional jail to April 30, 2006. (John M. Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator) A-052405-3 Mr. Chambliss advised that in January 2005, the Board of Supervisors appropriated $250,000 for the purpose of obtaining the option on the Higginbotham site, conducting the study on the existing jail facility in downtown Salem, and the required environmental and geotechnical testing on the Higginbotham site. He stated that the first option on the property cost $10,000 and was in effect through June 30, 2005. The option agreement allowed for an extension from July 1, 2005 through April 30, 2006 for an additional $20,000. Mr. Chambliss noted that by extending the option until April 30, 2006, this will be following the conclusion of the General Assembly session and information will be available at that time regarding whether funding was secured in the state capital budget. The option will remain in the name of Roanoke County and is assignable, which means that the County could assign the option to the Authority at a later date. He advised that this action does not purchase the property; it only extends the option period. Public hearings will still need to be held for the Section 2232 review, rezoning of the property, and the special use permit. Mr. Chambliss requested approval for extension of the option agreement through April 30, 2006. Supervisor Church inquired if there is anything taking place regarding the acquisition of Ms. Cooper’s property. Mr. Chambliss stated not at this time and advised May 24, 2005 610 that he has spoken with Ms. Cooper who had inquired if the County was interested in purchasing her property. Mr. Chambliss advised that he indicated to Ms. Cooper that the County has not yet made the decision to purchase the Higginbotham site; however if this site is purchased at a future date and she is interested in speaking with the County regarding acquisition of her property, discussions would be held at that point. He advised that the development of the jail facility would not require the acquisition of Ms. Cooper’s property, but she may have an interest in holding further discussions at a later date. Supervisor Wray referenced the $250,000 appropriated by the Board and requested clarification that the $20,000 for the option extension will go through April 30, 2006. Mr. Chambliss advised that this is correct. Supervisor Wray noted that the study for the existing jail facility has been completed and he questioned if there would be any additional costs. Mr. Chambliss stated that the Phase I preliminary environmental testing and some geotechnical information from an earlier study was available and adequate for current use. He indicated that as we get closer to the design of the facility, additional geotechnical, surveying, and topographical work will need to be performed. He advised that all due diligence testing will be completed prior to acquiring the site. Before construction begins, there will be additional testing on the site. Supervisor Altizer noted that Roanoke County has allocated $250,000 for this project. He inquired if the costs incurred, with the exception of the costs related to the study of the current jail site in Salem, will be reimbursed to Roanoke County on a May 24, 2005 611 pro rata basis once the Jail Authority is formed and bonds have been issued. Mr. Chambliss responded that this is the intent. Supervisor Flora moved to approve the staff recommendation (extend the option for the Higginbotham site at a cost of $20,000 as outlined in the option agreement for an additional ten months until April 30, 2006). The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: Supervisor Church Supervisor Church advised that his previous affirmative vote with respect to appointment of members to the Regional Jail Authority may be his only affirmative vote with respect to this project due to his position on this matter from the start. He stated that most votes from this point forward will be “no” votes. IN RE: REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS AND FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCES - CONSENT AGENDA Supervisor Flora moved to approve the first reading and set the second reading and public hearing for June 28, 2005. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None May 24, 2005 612 1. First reading of an ordinance to obtain a special use permit for the operation of a used automobile dealership on .467 acres located at 6717 Williamson Road, Hollins Magisterial District, upon the petition of Daniel W. Doss IN RE: FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. First reading of an ordinance authorizing the conveyance of easements to the Western Virginia Water Authority (WVWA) through property owned by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors to provide for the extension of water service for the benefit of Radford Homes and the Mason’s Crest Subdivision, Cave Spring Magisterial District. (Pete Haislip, Director of Parks, Recreation & Tourism) Mr. Haislip reported that Lumsden and Associates, on behalf of Radford Homes and the Western Virginia Water Authority (WVWA), is requesting conveyance of an easement through Merriman/Starkey Park on Merriman Road for the purpose of extending water service to the Mason’s Crest subdivision. He advised that staff has met on site with Lumsden and Associates representatives and they have agreed to situate the easement in the most appropriate location so as not to disrupt the activities of Roanoke County, as well as to assist the County in the future if water is desired at this site. Mr. Haislip stated that as part of this process, Jack Zambacca, the Real Estate Acquisition Agent for the WVWA, has determined the fair market value of this easement May 24, 2005 613 is $6,441 based on the standard formula utilized by the WVWA and Roanoke County for similar easement transactions. In discussions with representatives from Radford Homes, they have requested that they not be required to pay for the easement; however, staff recommends that the Board authorize granting of the easement as well as payment to Roanoke County for the easement. Supervisor Wray requested information regarding the location of the easement. Mr. Haislip advised that if you are facing the soccer complex from Merriman Road, there is a pump house near Back Creek. The connection will be made at the water line in front of the pump house and it will run along the back of the park to the parking lot without crossing the soccer fields, cut across the parking lot and connect at the bridge before crossing over Back Creek and being fed by a pipe under the bridge up to the Mason’s Crest subdivision. Supervisor Wray inquired if this will be along the river bank. Mr. Haislip stated it is not along the river bank, and it is approximately 60-80 feet from the stream bank. He noted that this is done in an attempt to prevent disruption to the riparian areas on the stream bank. Supervisor Wray inquired if this is non-usable space. Mr. Haislip responded in the negative and advised that at present, the County is creating a master plan which is on top of this space, which is an open area. Staff is working with the Valley AFC Soccer Program to install a children’s playground, picnic pavilion, and parking lot in this area. He stated that if payment for the easement is authorized, the funds will be used to construct the parking lot for this area which contains some of the County’s premier playing fields. He noted that the easement will May 24, 2005 614 be passing through a future development area of the County, and this allows the County the ability to tap into the water line if the need exists in the future. Supervisor Wray questioned if language will be included in the agreement allowing Roanoke County to tap into this line. Mr. Haislip stated that this would be an agreement between Roanoke County and the WVWA, and he noted that the County would be required to pay the customary fees to the WVWA to tap into the line. Supervisor Wray stated that Radford Homes is an entity that is building homes, and he noted that he is looking at the fact that the Radford’s made a sacrifice of 60+ acres to protect the parkway view shed by not developing this property. He stated that this was a tremendous sacrifice and this is certainly something to support consideration of waiving the fee. He stated that it would be a goodwill gesture on the County’s part. Supervisor Flora stated that based on the value determined, he estimates that it would put the value of the property at approximately $42,000 per acre. Mr. Haislip advised that the property is assessed by Real Estate Valuation at $411,000; $403,000 for the land and $8,000 for the building. Supervisor Flora stated that if you apply the value being paid in this instance, it translates to approximately $40,000 per acre. He stated that he assumes this is based on 25% of the fair market value. Mr. Haislip reported that it is based on 40% of the fair market value which Mr. Zambacca has indicated is the customary rate. Supervisor Flora indicated that at 40%, this brings the value of the land down to less than $25,000 an acre for land in South County. He May 24, 2005 615 inquired if the land is in the flood plain. Mr. Haislip advised that a lot of the land is in the floodway. Supervisor Flora advised that this may have some effect on the value of the land but with respect to making a gift to the developer, he feels this would be a bad precedent. He noted that the School Board has to pay to tap into the line for water and sewer connections. He stated that this is a wonderful project but the next project will request the same treatment, and this would be opening a can of worms if the County starts gifting easements to developers. Supervisor McNamara concurred that this is a wonderful project, and stated that the pricing of the easement follows the County’s normal process. He indicated that the value may be too low; however, every developer believes their project is excellent and the County should not get into subjective judgments with respect to granting easements. He stated that it is fair to say that the County is indebted to the Radford’s for the job they are doing, and there has been some consideration from the County with respect to the donated acreage. He advised that he supports the staff recommendation and indicated that the Board needs to remain objective. Supervisor Wray stated that he did not want to get into the game of choosing projects, and indicated that the public decided what type of gift this was to Roanoke County or the Blue Ridge Parkway. He advised that he does not feel that the Board is placing judgment with respect to this project; however, he does not want to see this item not be approved. May 24, 2005 616 Supervisor Wray moved to approve the first reading and set the second reading for June 14, 2005. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None N RE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE AND ADOPTION OF PROPOSED I BUDGET 1Resolution adopting the fiscal year 2005-2006 budget, including . the fiscal year 2006-2010 Capital Improvement Program (CIP), for Roanoke County, Virginia. (Brent Robertson, Director of Management and Budget) R-052405-4 Mr. Hodge stated that the County received a funding request yesterday from the Roanoke Higher Education Center (RHEC) for consideration in the contributions which will be approved today. He advised that the RHEC apologizes for not having submitted a request, and he indicated that staff sent information to agencies by mail and followed these notifications with a subsequent email. At the recent work session to discuss funding requests, the Board directed staff to contact all agencies who had not submitted a request. This was done and the RHEC admit that they overlooked the submission and will be grateful for any consideration they may be given. Mr. Hodge stated that the request is for $10,000 and noted that it was funded in last year’s budget. He noted that the RHEC is an important part of the County’s economic development May 24, 2005 617 recruitment efforts and is used by County staff members. If the Board wishes to consider the request, the budget can be amended prior to adoption; otherwise, the request can be brought back to the Board for consideration at a later date. Supervisor Flora advised that he would prefer to adopt the budget as prepared and consider this matter at a later time. He stated that altering the budget at th the 11 hour is not a good policy. Supervisor McNamara stated that the County has been working on the budget for a number of months and he indicated that the RHEC request can likely be addressed by using available contingency funds or unallocated balances; however, there is a process that needs to be followed to be fair to all parties. He advised that you lose efficiency if you throw the whole process out in order to meet the needs of one group. He stated that the Board should go forward with the budget and work with the RHEC. Mr. Hodge stated that the process is good now, but he assured the Board it will be even better next year. Supervisor Wray questioned what the future process will involve. Mr. Hodge stated that the U. S. Postal Service has the best record in the world given the tremendous volume of mail. He stated that for a variety of reasons many of the organizations funded by the County do not have a large staff. He stated that in the future, the County will notify agencies by mail and this will be done earlier in the year; if there is no response, staff will follow up with emails or telephone calls. He noted that you can check to see if emails are received and opened. He advised that staff will May 24, 2005 618 ensure that we have contacted everyone who submitted a funding request in the previous year. Supervisor Wray requested information regarding the process to be used for consideration of this request after the budget is adopted. Mr. Hodge stated that the request would be brought to the Board following the start of the new fiscal year in July as an additional funding request. Supervisor Wray stated that the process would be cleaner if this request is considered at this time and included in the budget prior to adoption. He voiced support for including this request in the current budget. Supervisor Church questioned what will occur next year. He stated that he knows how important $10,000 is to some of these organizations and the obligation rests with the organizations to request the funding. He stated that staff needs to double and triple check these requests, and noted that in the past six or seven requests fell through the cracks. He recommended that notification be sent to the agencies via a certified mailing with subsequent follow up. He stated that guidelines must be established or else the budget process will be drawn out even longer. He stated that at some point, you have to draw the line; rules are rules. He indicated that he has no problem with granting the request for $10,000; however, this is way past the deadline. He stated that the County should send several notifications and highlight in bold that you will not be on the list if you do not submit a funding request. Supervisor Altizer concurred with Supervisor Church’s comments and stated that there was a consensus on the Board after some late project requests were May 24, 2005 619 funded; however, something needs to be addressed for future years. He questioned when the letters are sent out. Mr. Robertson stated that letters are sent at the end of November or first of December to all organizations that submitted a funding request in the prior year. Supervisor Altizer suggested that contact should be made with all agencies by an appropriate means in September or October notifying them of the Board’s position that in order to be included for any funding in the next year, you must return the requested information by the established deadline. He stated that staff needs to articulate the Board’s position regarding funding requests and as requests are received, a checklist should be developed to track which agencies have submitted requests. He stated that sometimes the Board has to say no, and noted that if an agency is requesting a contribution of $10,000, he would think they would make certain that they had submitted a request. Supervisor McNamara moved to adopt the resolution with the inclusion of $10,000 for the RHEC. He noted that the County can send out a variety of notifications but there will always be organizations who fail to respond. He stated that the problem will not go away and is an issue that occurs most every year. He stated that the County has a reasonable procedure in place and noted that the Board is now making judgments without seeing the materials from the RHEC which are required and were made available by all other agencies that received funding. He stated that if an organization does not submit a request in the future, they will miss out on that round of funding. He May 24, 2005 620 stated that he does not know how far staff should have to go to fund outside agencies. At some point, people must be responsible for their own organizations. At the request of Supervisor Altizer, Supervisor McNamara re-stated the motion to adopt the resolution with the inclusion of $10,000 for the RHEC. Supervisor Wray inquired if there were any changes from the first reading other than the appropriation for social services. Mr. Robertson advised that this was the only change. Supervisor Flora advised that at the last meeting, he had requested information regarding what portion of the 4% salary increase is for merit and what portion is for cost of living. He stated that he did not see this information in the report. Mr. Hodge stated that the increase is broken into 2% base and 2% merit; however if a person is on a provisional basis, there are times when an individual may not get any increase. Supervisor Flora inquired if the entire scale is moving 2% so that the top of the range is moving 2% also. Mr. Hodge responded in the affirmative. Supervisor McNamara’s motion to adopt the resolution with the inclusion of $10,000 for the RHEC carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None May 24, 2005 621 RESOLUTION 052405-4 APPROVING THE FISCAL YEAR 2005-2006 BUDGET FOR ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA WHEREAS, Section 15.2-2503 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, provides that the governing body of the County shall prepare and approve an annual budget; and WHEREAS, said budget shall be prepared and approved for informative and fiscal planning purposes only; and WHEREAS, this budget contains a complete itemized and classified plan of all contemplated expenditures and all estimated revenues and borrowings for the ensuing fiscal year; and WHEREAS, a brief synopsis of said budget was published as required by the provisions of Section 15.2-2506 of the State Code, and the public hearing as required thereon was held on April 26, 2005. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia: 1. That there is hereby approved the annual budget for Fiscal Year 2005- 2006 for Roanoke County, Virginia, as shown on the attached Schedules. 2. That the preparation and approval of this budget is for informative and fiscal planning purposes only. County of Roanoke Budget Adoption FY 2005-2006 Adopted FY 2005-06 Revenue Estimates General Fund General Government General Property Taxes 98,325,000 Other Local Taxes 27,675,000 Permits, Fees & Licenses 667,300 Fines and Forfeitures 676,000 Interest Income 404,900 Charges for Services 3,176,750 Commonwealth 9,327,619 Federal 3,257,469 Other 872,050 Beginning Balance 10,000 Total General Government 144,392,088 May 24, 2005 622 Comprehensive Services 5,476,206 E-911 Maintenance 903,158 Law Library 41,648 S B & T Building 430,063 VJCCCA/Life Skills 282,025 Recreation Fee Class 962,066 Internal Services 3,180,667 County Garage 352,568 Total General Fund 156,020,489 Debt Service Fund - County 4,479,756 Capital Projects Fund 4,853,046 Internal Service Fund 964,505 School Operating Fund 118,007,240 School Nutrition Fund 4,295,000 School Capital Fund 1,126,414 School Debt Fund 9,747,046 Regional Alternative School 424,868 School Laptop Insurance Reserve 433,900 School Grants Fund 4,794,860 School Textbook Fund 925,724 Total School Funds 139,755,052 Total Revenues All Funds 306,072,848 Less: Transfers (81,945,319) Total Net of Transfers 224,127,529 Proposed Expenditures General Fund General Government General Administration 2,829,195 Constitutional Officers 9,266,828 Judicial Administration 1,110,435 Management Services 3,027,192 Public Safety 19,048,789 Community Services 10,858,250 Human Services 14,902,999 Non-Departmental 7,005,093 Transfers to School Operating Fund 57,260,071 Transfers to School Dental Insurance 407,299 Transfers to Capital Fund 3,436,208 Transfers to County Garage 134,951 May 24, 2005 623 Transfers to Debt Service Fund 11,037,273 Other 4,067,505 Total General Government 144,392,088 Comprehensive Services 5,476,206 E-911 Maintenance 903,158 Law Library 41,648 S B & T Building 430,063 VJCCCA/Life Skills 282,025 County Garage 352,568 Recreation Fee Class 962,066 Internal Services 3,180,667 Total General Fund 156,020,489 Debt Service Fund - County 4,479,756 Capital Projects Fund 4,853,046 Internal Service Fund 964,505 School Operating Fund 118,007,240 School Cafeteria Fund 4,295,000 School Capital Fund 1,126,414 School Debt Fund 9,747,046 Regional Alternative School 424,868 School Laptop Insurance Reserve 433,900 School Grants Fund 4,794,860 School Textbook Fund 925,724 Total School Funds 139,755,052 Total Expenditures All Funds 306,072,848 Less: Transfers (81,945,319) Total Net of Transfers 224,127,529 In addition to the above revenues and expenditures, $2,000,000 from the Unappropriated Balance is appropriated to a Reserve for Contingency for unanticipated or emergency expenditures; and funds allocated to the Unappropriated Fund Balance must be appropriated by the Board of Supervisors before such funds may be expended. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the resolution with the addition of a $10,000 appropriation for the Higher Education Center, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None May 24, 2005 624 2.Second reading of an ordinance appropriating the funds for the fiscal year 2005-2006 budget. (Brent Robertson, Director of Management and Budget O-052405-5 Mr. Robertson requested clarification regarding Supervisor McNamara’s motion to amend the resolution adopting the budget and questioned if it was the Board’s wish to increase the total contributions by $10,000; in addition, he stated that these funds can be taken from the Board Contingency Fund or Unallocated Revenues which have a balance of $350,000. Supervisor McNamara recommended that the funds be taken from the Unappropriated Fund Balance and there was a consensus of the Board to handle the request in this manner. Mr. Robertson advised that the total County budget is $306,072,848 and includes all inter- and intra-fund transfers and the School Board budget. The budget net of transfers is $224,127,529. As previously indicated, there is one change from the first reading of the appropriation ordinance. He noted that at the May 10 meeting, the Board approved the addition of $304,969 to the Social Services Department budget for fiscal year 2005-2006 for the implementation of the program improvement plan for child welfare services. This action also increased the classification plan by six positions. The budget presented in the second reading includes these changes. Mr. Robertson advised that staff recommends approval of the second reading of the 2005-2006 fiscal May 24, 2005 625 year budget appropriation ordinance and the classification plan for fiscal year 2005- 2006. Supervisor Flora moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None ORDINANCE 052405-5 APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR THE 2005-06 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET FOR ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA WHEREAS, upon notice duly published in the newspaper, a public hearing was held on April 26, 2005 concerning the adoption of the annual budget for Roanoke County for fiscal year 2005-06; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, approved said budget on May 24, 2005, pursuant to the provisions of Section 13.02 of the Roanoke County Charter and Chapter 25 of Title 15.2 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this appropriation ordinance was held on May 10, 2005, and the second reading of this ordinance was held on May 24, 2005, pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the following appropriations are hereby made from the respective funds for the period beginning July 1, 2005, and ending June 30, 2006, for the functions and purposes indicated: County of Roanoke Adopted FY 2005-2006 Budget May 24, 2005 Revenues: General Fund: General Government $ 144,392,088 Comprehensive Services 5,476,206 May 24, 2005 626 E-911 Maintenance 903,158 Law Library 41,648 Life Skills Mentoring Program 282,025 SB&T-Social Services Building 430,063 Recreation Fee Class 962,066 Internal Services 3,180,667 County Garage 352,568 Total General Fund $ 156,020,489 Debt Service Fund - County $ 4,479,756 Capital Projects Fund Beginning Balance $ 1,416,838 Transfer from General Fund 3,436,208 Total Capital Projects Fund $ 4,853,046 Internal Service Fund - Risk Management $ 964,505 School Funds: Operating $ 118,007,240 Nutrition 4,295,000 Capital 1,126,414 Debt 9,747,046 Regional Alternative School 424,868 Laptop Insurance Reserve 433,900 Grant 4,794,860 Textbook 925,724 Total School Fund $ 139,755,052 Total All Funds $ 306,072,848 Expenditures: General Government: General Administration Board of Supervisors $ 361,764 May 24, 2005 627 County Administrator 262,241 Public Information 216,000 Asst. Co. Administrators 327,241 Human Resources 571,579 County Attorney 463,917 Economic Development 626,453 Total General Administration $ 2,829,195 Constitutional Officers Treasurer $ 744,601 Commonwealth Attorney 692,251 Commissioner of the Revenue 714,563 Clerk of the Circuit Court 900,043 Sheriff's Office 1,435,222 Care & Confinement of Prisoners 4,780,148 Total Constitutional Officers $ 9,266,828 Judicial Administration Circuit Court $ 197,068 General District Court 40,878 Magistrate 1,655 J & DR Court 13,429 Court Service Unit 857,405 Total Judicial Administration $ 1,110,435 Management Services Real Estate Assessments $ 964,134 Finance 1,125,980 Public Transportation 330,476 Management and Budget 233,649 Procurement Services 372,953 Total Management Services $ 3,027,192 May 24, 2005 628 Public Safety Police $ 9,376,871 Fire and Rescue 9,671,918 Total Public Safety $ 19,048,789 Community Services General Services $ 296,267 Solid Waste 4,620,858 Community Development 4,272,011 Building Maintenance 1,669,114 Total Community Services $ 10,858,250 Human Services Grounds Maintenance $ 1,905,251 Parks and Recreation 2,566,833 Public Health 494,668 Social Services 6,726,650 Contributions-Human Service, Cultural, Tourism 467,251 Library 2,375,070 VA Cooperative Extension 94,129 Elections 273,147 Total Human Services $ 14,902,999 Non-Departmental Employee Benefits $ 3,127,348 Miscellaneous 966,500 Internal Service Charges 2,911,245 Total Non-Departmental $ 7,005,093 Transfers to Other Funds Transfer to Debt - General & Schools $ 11,037,273 Transfer to Capital 3,436,208 Transfer to Schools 57,260,071 May 24, 2005 629 Transfer to Schools - Dental Insurance 407,299 Transfer to Internal Services 964,505 Transfer to Comprehensive Services 2,653,000 Transfer to County Garage 134,951 Total Transfers to Other Funds $ 75,893,307 Unappropriated Balance Board Contingency $ 100,000 Unallocated Revenue 350,000 Total General Government $ 144,392,088 Comprehensive Services $ 5,476,206 E-911 Maintenance $ 903,158 Law Library $ 41,648 Life Skills Mentoring Program $ 282,025 SB&T-Social Services Building $ 430,063 Recreation Fee Class $ 962,066 Internal Services Management Information Systems $ 2,679,105 Communications 501,562 County Garage 352,568 Total Internal Services $ 3,533,235 Total General Fund $ 156,020,489 Debt Service Fund - County $ 4,479,756 Capital Projects Fund $ 4,853,046 May 24, 2005 630 Internal Services Fund - Risk Management $ 964,505 School Funds: Operating $ 118,007,240 Nutrition 4,295,000 Capital 1,126,414 Debt 9,747,046 Regional Alternative School 424,868 Laptop Insurance Reserve 433,900 Grant 4,794,860 Text Book 925,724 Total School Funds $ 139,755,052 Total All Funds $ 306,072,848 2. That the County Administrator may authorize or delegate the authorization of the transfer of any unencumbered balance or portion thereof from one department to another within a fund. 3. That all funded outstanding encumbrances, both operating and capital, at June 30, 2005, are re-appropriated to the 2005-06 fiscal year to the same department and account for which they are encumbered in the previous year. 4. That appropriations designated for capital projects will not lapse at the end of the fiscal year but shall remain appropriated until the completion of the project or until the Board of Supervisors, by appropriate action, changes or eliminates the appropriation. Upon completion of a capital project, staff is authorized to close out the project and transfer to the funding source any remaining balances. This section applies to appropriations for Capital Projects at June 30, 2005, and appropriations in the 2005- 06 budget. 5. That all school fund appropriations remaining at the end of the 2004-05 fiscal year not lapse but shall be appropriated to the School Capital Improvements Fund in fiscal year 2005-06. 6. That all General Fund appropriations remaining unexpended at the end of the 2004-05 fiscal year not lapse but shall be re-appropriated as follows: May 24, 2005 631 a) 40% of these unexpended appropriations shall be transferred to the un- appropriated Capital Fund Balance; b) 60% of these unexpended appropriations shall be re-appropriated to the same department for expenditure in fiscal year 2005-06 as provided by Resolution 042396-5. 7. That Two Million Dollars from the Unappropriated Fund Balance is hereby appropriated to a Reserve for Contingency for unanticipated or emergency expenditures that may arise during the 2005-06 fiscal year; and money allocated to the Unappropriated Fund Balance must be appropriated by the Board of Supervisors before such money may be expended. 8. This ordinance shall take effect July 1, 2005. On motion of Supervisor Flora to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None IN RE: APPOINTMENTS 1. Board of Zoning Appeals (Appointed by District) Supervisor Altizer nominated Eric Thomas, Vinton Magisterial District, to serve an additional five-year term which will expire on June 30, 2010. He advised that confirmation of this appointment has been placed on the consent agenda. 2. Clean Valley Council Supervisor Wray nominated Stephen McTigue to fill the unexpired portion of the term of Wes Thompson, who has resigned, and to serve an additional two-year term which will expire on June 30, 2007. There was a consensus of the Board to add this appointment to the consent agenda for confirmation. Mr. McTigue was present at the meeting and the Board expressed appreciation for his willingness to serve in this capacity. May 24, 2005 632 The Board requested that the Clerk contact Dennis Harris to determine if he is willing to serve an additional two-year term. If Mr. Harris wishes to serve an additional term, the Clerk was directed to place confirmation of his re-appointment on the consent agenda at the June 14 meeting. In the event that Mr. Harris does not wish to serve an additional term, the Clerk was directed to notify the Board. 3. Community Policy and Management Team (CPMT) Chairman Altizer advised that staff and CPMT nominated Gary Wilburn to serve an additional three-year term which will expire on June 30, 2008. He advised that confirmation of this appointment is on the consent agenda. 4. Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission (Appointed by District) Supervisor McNamara nominated Jerry Williams, at-large representative, to serve an additional three-year term which will expire on June 30, 2008. He requested that confirmation of this appointment be placed on the June 14 agenda if there are no objections by the Board. Supervisor McNamara further advised that he may have a potential nominee for the Windsor Hills District vacancy and he will make a nomination at a future meeting. Supervisor Wray nominated Ms. Lee Blair, Cave Spring Magisterial District, to serve an additional three-year term which will expire June 30, 2008. He advised that confirmation of this appointment is on the consent agenda. May 24, 2005 633 5. Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission Supervisor McNamara nominated Elmer Hodge, non-elected representative, to serve an additional three-year term which will expire on June 30, 2008. He further advised that he would be willing to serve an additional three-year term as the County’s elected representative on this committee. This term will expire on June 30, 2008. There was a consensus of the Board to add these appointments to the consent agenda for confirmation. IN RE: CONSENT AGENDA R-052405-6 Supervisor Altizer moved to adopt the consent resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None RESOLUTION 052405-6 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 May 24, 2005, 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 5, inclusive, as follows: 1. Approval of minutes – May 10, 2005 2. Confirmation of appointments to the Board of Zoning Appeals; Clean Valley Council; Community Policy and Management Team; Parks and Recreation May 24, 2005 634 Advisory Commission; and the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission 3. Request from schools to accept and appropriate grant funds in the amount of $114,718 to be used under Title II-D (Educational Technology) for the purchase of laptop computers 4. Request from schools to accept and appropriate funds in the amount of $27,790 from the Virginia Department of Education for the benchmark assessment program 5. Request from Fire and Rescue Department to accept and appropriate grant funds in the amount of $2,000 from the Virginia Department of Emergency Management for the purchase of contractual services to complete a Local Capability Assessment for Readiness (LCAR) 2. 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 Altizer to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None IN RE: REPORTS Supervisor Church requested that Item N-10 be removed for discussion Supervisor Church moved to receive and file the following reports with Item N-10 removed. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Reserves 3. Reserve for Board Contingency 4. Future Capital Projects 5. Accounts Paid –April 2005 May 24, 2005 635 6. Statement of expenditures and estimated and actual revenues for the month ended April 31, 2005 7. Statement of Treasurer’s accountability per investment and portfolio policy as of April 30, 2005 8. Public Safety Center Building Project Budget Report 9. Public Safety Center Building Project Change Order Report 10. Jail Study Costs Report IN RE: DISCUSSION OF JAIL STUDY COSTS REPORT, ITEM N-10 Supervisor Church requested that Mr. Chambliss review the jail study costs report. Mr. Chambliss reported that the top section of the report addresses the funds appropriated on October 12, 2004 for three purposes: (1) community based corrections plan ($42,100); (2) jail program plan ($120,000); and (3) study of the mechanical conditions of the existing jail for items to be included in future capital budgets ($28,400). The costs for the community based corrections plan and jail program plan studies are being shared on a population basis by the four participating jurisdictions. Mr. Chambliss reported that the second section of the report reflects the January 11, 2005 appropriation of $250,000. He outlined the following expenditures from this appropriation: (1) first option on the Higginbotham site ($10,000); (2) extension of the option on the Higginbotham site ($20,000); (3) environmental assessment on the Higginbotham site ($13,223). He advised that these expenditures are the only extraneous costs that will be reimbursed by either the partner jurisdictions May 24, 2005 636 or the Authority. The $48,000 cost reflected in the report is for the feasibility study of the existing jail site conducted by HSM&M. He indicated that the total amount committed is $91,223 of the $250,000 appropriation and all expenses other than the $48,000 will be subject to reimbursement. Supervisor Church inquired what the $104,570 figure at the top of the report represents. Mr. Chambliss responded that this is the other localities’ share of the first two studies. Supervisor Wray noted that the report does not reflect any disbursements since the last report on May 6 and he inquired if this is correct. Mr. Chambliss responded in the affirmative. Supervisor Church moved to receive and file Item N-10, Jail Study Costs Report. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None IN RE: CLOSED MEETING At 4:44 p.m., Supervisor Altizer moved to go into closed meeting pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.2-3711 A (7) consultation with legal counsel pertaining to probable litigation, namely Verizon broadcast tower. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None May 24, 2005 637 The closed meeting was held from 5:10 p.m. until 5:25 p.m. IN RE: CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION R-052405-7 At 6:10 p.m., Supervisor Altizer moved to return to open session and adopt the certification resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None RESOLUTION 05245-7 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 Altizer to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None May 24, 2005 638 IN RE: PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS 1. Resolution of congratulations to students at A. R. Burton Technology Center for winning the Virginia SkillsUSA and Family, Career and Community Leaders of America, Inc. (FCCLA) awards R-052405-8 Chairman Altizer presented the resolution to Andy McClung, Principal, A. R. Burton Technology Center; and Joan Farley, SkillsUSA Sponsor. Also present was Dr. Lorraine Lange, Assistant Superintendent of Instruction. Certificates of recognition were presented to the following students who were present at the meeting: Amanda Akers, Nicole Bayse, James Brookover, Judy Buzzo, Hanna Garman, Steven Hutto, Holden Parker, and Alex Seidel. Supervisor Church moved to adopt the resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None RESOLUTION 052405-8 OF CONGRATULATIONS TO STUDENTS AT A. R. BURTON TECHNOLOGY CENTER FOR WINNING THE VIRGINIA SKILLSUSA AND FAMILY, CAREER AND COMMUNITY LEADERS OF AMERICA, INC. (FCCLA) AWARDS WHEREAS, SkillsUSA is the second largest student organization in the nation, serving more than 264,500 high school and college students and professional members who are enrolled in training programs in technical, skilled, and service occupations, including health occupations; and WHEREAS, Family, Career and Community Leaders of America, Inc. (FCCLA) is a national career and technical organization for high school students in family and consumer sciences education; and May 24, 2005 639 WHEREAS, several students from A. R. Burton Technology Center, having achieved first place in local and district level competitions, won gold medals at the Virginia SkillsUSA and FCCLA competitions held in April 2005; and WHEREAS, the following awards were received: ? Community Service: Amanda Akers, Northside High School; Nicole Bayse, Northside High School; and Sarah Hackett, William Byrd High School ? American Spirit Award: James Brookover, Northside High School; and Steven Hutto, Hidden Valley High School ? Job Skill Demonstration: Alex Seidel, Hidden Valley High School ? Masonry: Holden Parker, Northside High School ? Opening & Closing Ceremonies: Jessica Bucaro, Northside High School; Grant Floyd, Hidden Valley High School; Hanna Garman, Glenvar High School; Jeremy Gilbert, Cave Spring High School; Katie Larosa, Cave Spring High School; Cory McCraw, Glenvar High School; and Aubrey Wies, Northside High School ? Outstanding Chapter: Judy Buzzo, William Byrd High School; Stephenie Mills, Glenvar High School; and Summer Gladden, Glenvar High School ? Promotional Bulletin Board: Naomi Musselman and Ronald Robertson, William Byrd High School ? Masonry Technical Exam: Patrick English, William Byrd High School ? Criminal Justice Technical Exam: Hanna Garman, Glenvar High School ? Community Service Project Display: Ammie Frank and Courtney Preston, Northside High School NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, does hereby extend its sincere congratulations to the students at A. R. Burton Technology Center for winning the Virginia SkillsUSA and FCCLA awards; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors extends its best wishes to each of the students in all of their future endeavors. On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None IN RE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE 1. Second reading of an ordinance to rezone .52 acres from R-1, Low Density Residential District, to C-1, Office District with conditions, for the operation of a general office located at 3663 Colonial May 24, 2005 640 Avenue, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Christopher L. Irvine. (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner) O-052405-9 Ms. Scheid advised that this is a request by Christopher L. Irvine, representing Irvine Access Floors, Inc., to rezone a 0.52 acre parcel in order to operate a small office. Mr. Irvine oversees the design and installation of access flooring. She stated that the proposal generally complies with policies and guidelines of the transition future land use designation which encourages careful development avoiding commercial strip creation and buffering neighboring less-intensive land uses. She indicated that Mr. Irvine proposes to use the existing house as a small office which would not involve any retail or showroom activity. Mr. Irvine proposes to have two employees and the traffic estimates would be approximately seven (7) vehicle trips per day, which is less than would be expected with a normal R-1 use. Ms. Scheid advised that storm water has been of concern to the neighbors and the Board as noted during the public hearings held on April 26 by the Board of Supervisors and on April 5 by the Planning Commission. She indicated that storm water is an issue in this neighborhood; however in this case, Mr. Irvine has agreed through proffers not to enlarge the size of the house and to remove pavement from the front, as requested by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). The current property owner has installed a semi-circular paved driveway and VDOT is requesting that this be removed and a straight driveway to remain. She reported that approximately 800 square feet of May 24, 2005 641 pavement will be removed and one handicapped space of approximately 150 square feet will need to be put back in for parking. She noted that more pavement is being removed and it is an impervious surface which exacerbates storm water problems. By removing this, Mr. Irvine will be improving this situation. Ms. Scheid stated that if the rezoning is approved, Mr. Irvine will be required to install screening and buffering in the rear and sides of the property. She advised that there are two combinations of buffer yards which can be selected, and she noted that storm water and landscape issues are addressed in the Roanoke County zoning ordinance and are normally resolved in site plan review. Ms. Scheid reported that a public hearing was held on April 26 and a community meeting was held in March prior to the Planning Commission public hearing. The meeting was well-attended and questions were raised regarding lighting, signage, storm water, and traffic. As a result of the Board of Supervisors’ April 26 public hearing, Supervisor Wray requested that an additional community meeting be held and this occurred on May 9. She indicated that it is her understanding that the meeting was well-attended and issues were discussed regarding the north versus south sides of Colonial Avenue and the comprehensive plan designations of those two sides. Supervisor Wray questioned the size of the buffer area relative to the size of the lot. Ms. Scheid stated that the lot size is approximately 230 feet deep and 100 feet wide. There are two options for the buffer yard, either a 20 or 30 foot buffer yard. She advised that the petitioner can choose which buffer yard to comply with; however, the 20 foot buffer yard has more stringent landscaping requirements and includes a fence. May 24, 2005 642 Supervisor Wray questioned if Ms. Scheid knew what type of fence would be included in the 20 foot buffer yard. Ms. Scheid responded in the negative and in response to a further inquiry from Supervisor Wray, advised that this is handled during site plan review which would occur after approval of the rezoning. The following citizens spoke regarding this item: Tim Largen, 5128 Remington Road, stated that his mother owns the property at 3663 Colonial Avenue. He stated that as the family was proceeding to sell the property, they found out that the house was in a designated transitional area. He stated that he believes this is a transitional area and the property is best suited for commercial use at this time. He noted that the traffic count is 10,000 vehicle trips per day, and stated this is likely to increase with development along Ogden Road. He stated it is increasingly dangerous coming in and out of the driveway, and noted that there are lights and noise coming from the convenience store parking lot until late in the evening which makes it difficult to sleep in the front part of the house. He also advised that there have been numerous accidents in the area. He reported that his mother has discussed this issue with neighbors on both sides of her house and they support the decision to rezone. He requested that the Board not delay making a decision on this request because it is costing Mr. Irvine money and his mother almost lost the contract on the townhouse she is planning to buy. May 24, 2005 643 Bill Gibson, 3737 Colonial Avenue, stated that he lives six doors down and supports Ms. Largen in her efforts to sell her home to Mr. Irvine. He noted that this is a dangerous road. Carol Land, 3671 Colonial Avenue, stated that she lives next to Ms. Largen and she distributed pictures of her home which were taken at 2:00 a.m. to the Board. She stated that there is so much light on her home that it is like daylight. She also voiced the following additional concerns: cars have wrecked and ended up within five feet of her daughter’s bedroom window; lighting problems with the businesses across the street have not been resolved; there are additional businesses in the area including a convenience store, dentist’s office, motorcycle shop, and Garden Club. She noted that the plan designed for this rezoning addresses the neighbors concerns and she wishes she had the same protections when she bought her home. She stated that her quality of life has suffered in the past few years and the other businesses in the area have not been required to jump through the same hoops as Mr. Irvine. She voiced support for the request and stated that she thinks Mr. Irvine would be a good neighbor. Christine Smith, 3304 Woodland Drive, stated that the Colonial Avenue Alliance fully recognizes the challenges of the Board and hopes they appreciate the hard work done by staff. She stated that they are grateful for the open way that Ms. Largen and Mr. Irvine have worked with the Alliance. She advised that Colonial Avenue has been residential for many years; the commercial growth has occurred at the tips of Colonial Avenue. She asked that the Board keep in mind that the majority remains May 24, 2005 644 residential. She noted that the Board members have expressed that change is inevitable; the community should recognize that change will come and this is an excellent opportunity with protective proffers and the best possible alternative; and that it needs to be considered that frontage property could become undesirable residential properties. She stated that all of these issues are recognized and affirmed by the Colonial Avenue Alliance; however, inevitable change should not be the basis to ask the community to accept the change and move on. She stated that if commercial growth is inevitable, the community wants an opportunity to plan and take the existing corridor study guidelines and create design guidelines which will embrace all users. She indicated if the Board is going to change the nature of this section of Colonial Avenue, then it should make it possible for the neighborhood to realistically connect to the commercial development by placing sidewalks along Colonial Avenue. She stated that context sensitive design options should be implemented, and she recommended traffic calming. She indicated that there is too much emphasis on vehicle movement to access commercial and a philosophy change needs to be implemented; she voiced support for installing sidewalks to create a “walkable community”. Supervisor Wray requested that Mr. Irvine elaborate on the plan for the site. Mr. Irvine advised that Tim Beard in the County’s Community Development Department drew the plan and it represents the requirements of Roanoke County with which he has agreed. Supervisor Wray questioned if Mr. Irvine anticipates expanding the business in the future. Mr. Irvine responded in the negative and advised that the business is May 24, 2005 645 headquartered in a 70,000 square foot facility in Maryland where all the accounting, purchasing, work force, and warehouse operations are located. He stated he is a principal in the company and this location is a satellite office which provides the opportunity for him to invest in property rather than paying rent. He indicated that the business is a small operation and there is no intention of expanding. Mr. Irvine further noted that the majority of his business is conducted out of state and the office will consist of file cabinets, computers, and work stations; there is no walk-in business. He indicated that that he will be painting and removing pavement in the front driveway. He noted that the meeting held in March had approximately 25-30 people in attendance, and the May meeting was attended by approximately 20 people. He stated it is obvious that something will happen in this area, and many individuals feel comfortable with his proposal. He encouraged the Board to make a decision tonight. Supervisor Wray questioned why Mr. Irvine chose this particular house rather than commercial office space that was not in a residential area. Mr. Irvine responded that the house was selected based on availability. He indicated that he has worked with 4 or 5 realtors to locate property and had placed a contract on a home on Starkey Road; however, his contract was not the first one offered. He stated that for the next four or five months, there were no other properties available. He stated that he selected the home based on the purchase price and location of the property, and noted that the property had been on the market for some time before it was presented to him. May 24, 2005 646 He made an offer on the home in February and advised that the property had been on the market since October. Supervisor Wray noted the proffer concerning the buffer and fence, and questioned if Mr. Irvine was agreeable to any type of fence that would be required. Mr. Irvine responded that he has not yet looked at design applications, but he has discussed the requirements for trees and shrubbery. He stated that the Board needs to determine if this project is going to move forward and if so, then he will work with the County to determine what type of buffering will be required. Supervisor Church commented that Mr. Irvine mentioned that he would be on the road traveling and that the business is headquartered out of state. He noted that one of the proffers is no weekend hours and stated that if there are no in-house sales occurring, it should not matter if Mr. Irvine is at the business on the weekends. Mr. Irvine stated that this is a satellite sales office and that he might occasionally go into the office on the weekend to work. He stated that the Monday through Friday hours refer to the times when the office will be open. He also stated that it might be necessary to cut grass or maintain the landscaping on the weekend. Supervisor Church further inquired about the reason for the proffer of no weekend hours. Ms. Scheid indicated that it was put in place to minimize the disruption to the neighborhood, and she advised that this was not an issue of concern in the community meeting. Supervisor Wray noted the possible changes that will occur for buffering, tree planting, and land disturbance, and he questioned how the storm water flow will be May 24, 2005 647 affected by these changes. Ms. Scheid responded that there will be no construction in the back yard per the proffer, no new asphalt or impervious surfaces will be constructed behind the rear wall of the existing building, and landscaping will be installed which will actually improve the storm water situation. She stated that she would not expect a significant negative impact on the storm water situation in the back yard. She further noted that as the house is now, the current owner or a future residential owner could construct a building or install pavement in the back yard. She indicated that Mr. Irvine’s proffer is more stringent. Supervisor Wray requested that Ms. Scheid provide an example of what would be required for buffering and fencing. Ms. Scheid advised that the ordinance requires a combination of large and small trees and shrubs, as well as a combination of deciduous and evergreen trees. She stated that it depends on whether Mr. Irvine chooses to go with the 20 foot or 30 foot buffer, and noted that the 30 foot buffer does not require the installation of a fence due to the additional width of the buffer. She further noted that there is existing vegetation in place that will likely qualify to be retained as part of the buffer. Supervisor Wray requested an explanation of the difference in the lots on the north and south sides of Colonial Avenue. Ms. Scheid advised that the lots average approximately 200 feet deep on the north side and approximately 300 feet deep on the south side. The lots on the north side average slightly less than half an acre, and lots on May 24, 2005 648 the south side average approximately 1 acre. She stated that the property being considered is approximately 230 feet deep. Supervisor Wray questioned if the 20 foot buffer was chosen, would fencing be required. Ms. Scheid responded in the affirmative. Supervisor Wray questioned if there would be a problem if the Board requires the 20 foot buffer. Mr. Irvine advised that he has not studied this issue in detail; it was presented to him that if it was required, he may have to comply. In response to an inquiry from Supervisor Wray, Mr. Irvine responded that he is agreeable to this option if it is required. He stated that a fence would change the focus of the lot as opposed to installing additional trees and shrubbery. Supervisor Wray inquired if any changes were made to the Colonial Avenue guidelines in the recent revisions to the Roanoke County Community Plan. Ms. Scheid responded in the negative. Supervisor Wray stated that it has been more than five years since the last review of the guidelines, and it is his understanding from some of the individuals who have spoken that they want to be a part of any decisions being made and what the future will be. He requested that staff meet with the Colonial Avenue Alliance and citizens to determine if any changes are needed and provide a long-range plan. Mr. Hodge advised that staff will proceed as directed. Supervisor Wray moved to adopt the ordinance with the proffers offered by the petitioner and with the direction that staff meets with the Colonial Avenue Alliance and citizens in the area to review the Colonial Avenue Corridor Design Guidelines. May 24, 2005 649 Supervisor McNamara stated that he believes Mr. Irvine will be a great neighbor and that this is an appropriate rezoning. He stated he does not see how there could be a better fit. Supervisor Wray’s motion to adopt the ordinance with the proffers offered by the petitioner and with the direction that staff meets with the Colonial Avenue Alliance and citizens in the area to review the Colonial Avenue Corridor Design Guidelines carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None ORDINANCE 052405-9 TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A 0.52-ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED AT 3663 COLONIAL AVENUE (TAX MAP NO. 77.18-4-7) IN THE CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF R-1 TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C-1 WITH CONDITIONS UPON THE APPLICATION OF CHRISTOPHER L. IRVINE WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on March 22, 2005, and the second reading and public hearing were held April 26, 2005, and continued to May 24, 2005; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on April 5, 2005; and WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing 0.52 acres, as described herein, and located at 3663 Colonial Avenue (Tax Map Number 77.18-4-7) in the Cave Spring Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of R-1, Low Density Residential District, to the zoning classification of C-1, Office District with conditions. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of Christopher L. Irvine. May 24, 2005 650 3. That the owner of the property has voluntarily proffered in writing the following conditions which the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby accepts: (1) Use of the property shall be limited to services offered by Irvine Access Floors, Incorporated, with no showroom, shopping or storage of materials onsite. (2) The existing one-story brick building shall not be enlarged and parking shall not exceed that required by ordinance. (3) Storm water management on the property shall be achieved only by bio-retention methods, including sub surfaces percolation if necessary. (4) No new asphalt or other comparable impervious surfaces shall be constructed behind the rear wall of the existing building. (5) Hours of operation shall be limited to 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, with no weekend operating hours. (6) Applicable Colonial Avenue Corridor Design Guidelines shall be in effect with the word “shall” replacing the word “should” as determined during the site plan review process. 4. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: Beginning at a point on the northerly side of Bent Mountain Road, N. 53° 15’ E. 100 feet from the northeast corner of Bent Mountain Road (Va. Secondary Route 613) and Lanewood Drive, both produced; thence N. 34° 00’ W. 228.6 feet to a point on the line of Lot 3; thence with said lot line N. 53° 15’ E. 100 feet to a point on the line of W. R. Colwell; thence with the Colwell line S. 34° 00’ E. 228.6 feet to a point on the north side of Bent Mountain Road; thence with Bent Mountain Road S. 53° 15’ W. 100 feet to the Place of Beginning and being a part of Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Section 2, Castle Hill Development Map, and being further described as Lot 2-A, as shown on the map of record in Deed Book 460, page 330, in the Roanoke County Circuit Court Clerk’s Office, and EXCEPTING a parcel conveyed by Deed Book 527, page 62. 5. 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 Wray to adopt the ordinance with the proffers offered by the petitioner and with the direction that staff meets with the Colonial Avenue Alliance and citizens in the area to review the Colonial Avenue Corridor Design Guidelines, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None May 24, 2005 651 IN RE: PUBLIC HEARINGS AND SECOND READINGS OF ORDINANCES 1. Continued until June 28 at the request of the petitioner. Second reading of an ordinance to rezone .98 acres from C1, Office District, to C2, General Commercial District, and to obtain a special use permit on 2.22 acres for the operation of a fast food restaurant and drive-thru located at the intersections of Brambleton Avenue, Colonial Avenue, and Merriman Road, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Seaside Heights, LLC (Bojangles). (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner) Chairman Altizer advised that this item has been continued until June 28 at the request of the petitioner. 2. Continued until June 28 at the request of the Planning Commission.Second reading of an ordinance to rezone approximately 50 acres from AG-3, Agriculture/Rural Preserve District, to R-1, Low Density Residential District, for the construction of single family dwellings with a proffered density of approximately 1.3 dwelling units per acre, located northwest of the 5800 block of Crumpacker Drive and 6200 block of Apple Harvest Drive, Hollins Magisterial District, upon the petition of Fralin & Waldron, Inc. (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner) May 24, 2005 652 Chairman Altizer advised that this item has been continued until June 28 at the request of the Planning Commission. 3. Second reading of an ordinance to obtain a special use permit for the construction of mini-warehouses on 5.602 acres located at 1918 Washington Avenue, Vinton Magisterial District, upon the petition of KTP, LLC. (Janet Scheid, Chief Planner) O-052405-10 Ms. Scheid advised that this is a request to obtain a special use permit for the construction of mini-warehouses on 5.602 acres. She stated that eight buildings with a total building area of approximately 82,000 square feet are proposed, and it is located on Washington Avenue in proximity of the East Vinton Plaza Shopping Center. She advised that the petitioner has proffered the following: (1) the site shall be developed in substantial conformance with the plan for KTP, LLC Mini Storage, dated May 2, 2005; (2) maximum building height shall be 16 feet; (3) building exterior colors shall be sand/light tan and dark green; (4) building roof pitch shall be a minimum of 4:12; (5) signage shall be monument style, and per the standards in the C1 zoning district. She advised that the petitioners held a community meeting on April 28, which was not well attended; however as a result of the discussions, the square footage of the buildings was decreased. In addition, discussions were held regarding placement of the monument sign and the color and style of the buildings. Following the meeting, the May 24, 2005 653 Planning Commission was more comfortable with the petition and recommended it for approval following their meeting on May 3. Supervisor Altizer noted that this is a significant change from the original petition with respect to the scope of the project, number of buildings, and the redesign of the detention pond. Ms. Scheid stated that when the petition was first presented to the Planning Commission, there was insufficient information. The additional time and community meeting allowed the petitioner to refine the plans and provide additional information. Supervisor Altizer inquired if this is on a high elevation next to the bowling alley. Ms. Scheid responded that it is adjacent to the roller skating rink. Supervisor Wray inquired if the 16 foot maximum height is normal for storage buildings. Ms. Scheid responded in the affirmative and stated that this is the normal height to the pitch of the roof. Supervisor Church questioned if the 4:12 pitch is four inches up for every 12 inches in length. Ms. Scheid responded in the affirmative. Alex Perkins, petitioner, was present at the meeting and stated that the plan has been refined and includes more buffering; in addition, more stringent sign requirements are being met. He stated that the public meeting was not well-attended; however a slide show was presented by his engineer at that time and the outcome was positive. He stated that a 4:12 pitch is “all about looks” and he stated that they use colored roof panels to enhance the building appearance, as well as wrought iron May 24, 2005 654 fencing, black chain link fencing, and buffering. He noted that a double row of 6 foot trees are being installed for the buffer and a chain link fence will be placed around the storm water detention pond. Supervisor Altizer commended Mr. Perkins for his responsiveness to staff, Planning Commission, and Board member concerns. He stated that he has enhanced the project to make it a good fit for the community. Supervisor Altizer moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None ORDINANCE 052405-10 GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO KTP, LLC FOR CONSTRUCTION OF MINI-WAREHOUSES ON 5.602 ACRES LOCATED IN THE 1900 BLOCK OF WASHINGTON AVENUE (TAX MAP NO. 61.15-1-1.4) VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, KTP, LLC has filed a petition for a special use permit for construction of mini-warehouses on 5.602 acres located in the 1900 block of Washington Avenue (Tax Map No. 61.15-1-1.4) in the Vinton Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on May 3, 2005; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on March 22, 2005; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on April 26, 2005 and continued to May 24, 2005. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED 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 KTP, LLC for the construction of mini-warehouses on 5.602 acres located in the 1900 block of Washington Avenue in the Vinton Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 2000 Community Plan, as amended, pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.2-2232 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and said special use permit is hereby approved with the following conditions: May 24, 2005 655 (1) The site shall be developed in substantial conformance with the plan for KTP, LLC Mini Storage, dated May 2, 2005, by Eden & Associates, P.C. (2) Maximum building height shall be 16 feet. (3) Building exterior colors shall be sand/light tan and dark green. (4) Building roof pitch shall be a minimum of 4:12. (5) Signage shall be monument style, and per the standards in the C1 zoning district. 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 Altizer to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McNamara, Church, Wray, Flora, Altizer NAYS: None IN RE: CITIZENS’ COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS Yvette Hagerman, 3758 Buck Mountain Road, voiced concerns regarding the speed limit on Buck Mountain Road. She cited a recent school bus accident and head-on collision which occurred in the area, and stated that VDOT has conducted a survey regarding the speed limit in the area but at this point nothing has been done. She stated that the speed limit is too fast based on the bank of the road and the angle of the curve, and voiced concerns that both of the accidents occurred within five to ten feet of where her daughter catches the bus. She requested that the County contact VDOT to have a study conducted to reduce the speed limit. She noted that Anthony Ford, Roanoke County Traffic Engineer, advised that he was aware of the problem and had spoken with someone regarding this issue. Supervisor Church stated that somehow the citizens in this area need to make an impression on VDOT. He indicated that the Board should do what it can to May 24, 2005 656 support this effort; but his recommendation is there is strength in numbers. He stated that the sad reality with roads is it will normally get corrected; it is just a question of after how many fatalities. Supervisor Wray stated that he understands the situation and had planned to address this in his Board member comments. He asked Mr. Hodge to check into this matter and noted that traffic in the area will increase when Faith Christian School opens. He stated that the County needs to follow up and do what is necessary. He requested that Chief Lavinder monitor the area to ensure that the 45 mph speed limit is enforced. Mr. Hodge advised that staff will follow up with VDOT. Supervisor McNamara noted that there is an area where the speed limit decreases from 45 to 35 and this creates a speed trap which could be used to attempt to reduce speeding. He suggested that the Chairman send a letter to VDOT on behalf of the Board requesting that VDOT strongly consider reducing speed limit to 35 mph. Staff was directed to prepare the letter to be sent to VDOT. IN RE: REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS Supervisor Church: (1) He extended apologies to Ashley Harless, Glenvar High School. He stated that during his recent office move, he misplaced a letter she had written to him concerning the corner of Fort Lewis Church Road on Route 460. He stated that four serious accidents have occurred in this location, and Ms. Harless was involved in one of these wrecks. He advised that Arnold Covey and Anthony Ford are contacting VDOT and there are plans for a signal light in this area as part of the future May 24, 2005 657 road construction. He noted that there will be increased traffic due to new construction and the speed limit is 45 mph in this area. Supervisor Wray: (1) He requested an update on the issue relating to Raintree Road and speculative interest development. Mr. Hodge advised that the attorney’s office has looked at this issue and he is not aware of anything else that can be done. Supervisor Wray stated that at the last meeting, another proposal was being sent out with a reduction of costs and they were to review this proposal and respond back to the County. Mr. Hodge stated that he will need to obtain this information. (2) He advised that he received the response from Mr. Mahoney defining the term “developer”. He requested that this information be sent to Mr. Lilly or Mr. Davis, and Supervisor Wray indicated that he would provide the contact information to Mr. Mahoney. (3) He requested an update regarding the house on Colony Drive with respect to the spot blight abatement program. Mr. Hodge advised that he would check on the status of this matter. Mr. Mahoney reported that this issue is scheduled to go to the Planning Commission at their June meeting. He stated that the son had submitted a plan of improvements to Joel Baker, Building Commissioner, and an update is to be provided to the Planning Commission at their June meeting. However, approximately two weeks ago the site was inspected by Mr. Baker, and it appears that the son is not eager to implement some of the agreed upon changes. Supervisor Wray instructed staff to do what is necessary to continue moving forward with this process. (4) He requested an update on the mud slides in Steeple Chase and noted that the plans were May 24, 2005 658 being evaluated and the corrections were to be made the week of May 16. (5) He inquired about the dates for scheduling a meeting with the National Park Service (NPS) regarding closing of the parkway access on Route 220. Mr. Hodge advised that staff has spoken with the NPS and Anthony Ford, Traffic Engineer for Roanoke County, has drafted recommended changes to the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA). The proposed changes have been sent to the NPS and it is anticipated that this issue can be resolved without the need to schedule a trip to North Carolina. In response to a further inquiry from Supervisor Wray, Mr. Hodge advised that the changes will include an access point on Route 220 and this will be included as part of the MOA. (6) He requested an update regarding the letter he had given to Mr. Hodge on April 26 regarding rocks falling on Route 220 and requesting that VDOT speed up the process for addressing this concern. Mr. Hodge advised that he spoke with VDOT and requested that they expedite this matter; VDOT advised that they will evaluate this with their other pending road projects. VDOT further advised that they will consider the possible use of nets or screening to address these concerns. (7) He advised that a ribbon cutting will be held for the Habitat for Humanity house in Crescent Heights on June 11 at 10:00 a.m. Supervisor Flora: He stated that a similar situation occurred on Ardmore Drive where a house burned and it is unsecured. He stated that the Community Development Department is aware of the situation, and he requested that someone May 24, 2005 659 from their department contact the next door neighbors. He noted that there is a lot of debris in the yard which creates a dangerous situation. Supervisor McNamara: He noted that the Board has had many discussions relative to the billing practices of the Western Virginia Water Authority (WVWA) in some areas of the County and the City; specifically, citizens receiving more than one bill due per month. He stated that he has been told by an unofficial source that this problem has been resolved and individuals will only have one bill due per month. He requested that Mr. Hodge verify that this is correct. Mr. Hodge advised that he and Supervisor Altizer, who serve on the WVWA Board, have worked with this issue. He stated that the message has been conveyed to the WVWA and they have provided assurances that the issue has been resolved. IN RE: ADJOURNMENT Chairman Altizer adjourned the meeting at 8:47 p.m. until Tuesday, June 7, 2005, at 5:30 p.m. for the purpose of a work session to discuss economic development incentives, Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, th 4 Floor Training Room. Submitted by: Approved by: ________________________ ________________________ Diane S. Childers, CMC Michael W. Altizer Clerk to the Board Chairman May 24, 2005 660 This page intentionally left blank