Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1/24/1989 - Regular -----, " January 24, 1989 ~4 4 ~ Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Roanoke County Administration Center 3738 Brambleton Avenue, SW Roanoke, Virginia 24018 January 24, 1989 The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, met this day at the Roanoke County Administration Center, this being the fourth Tuesday, and the second regularly scheduled meeting of the month of January, 1989. IN RE: CALL TO ORDER Chairman Garrett called the meeting to order at 3: OSz p.m. The roll call was taken. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Lee Garrett, Vice Chairman Richard Robers, Supervisors Bob L. Johnson, Steven A. McGraw, Harry C. Nickens MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; John M. Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator for Human Services; John R. Hubbard, Assistant County Administrator of Community Services and Development; Don M. Myers, Assistant County Administrator for Management Services; Paul M. Mahoney, 44 5 January 24, 1989 - - County At torney, Clerk Mary H. Allen, Deputy IN RE: OPENING CEREMONIES The invocation was given by Assistant County Administrator John Chambliss. The P ledge of Allegiance was recited by all present. IN RE: PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS Assistant County Administrator John Hubbard introduced Terry Harrington, the new Director of Planning and Zoning. County Administrator Elmer Hodge presented to each Board member the new Roanoke County history book, When Past is Proloaue. IN RE: WORK SESSION 1. Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Finance Director Diane Hyatt presented a summary of the annual financial report, showing a net result of $1,656,795 being added to the Fund Balance. She advised that this increase was "" January 24, 1989 44 6 due primarily to prorating of personal property taxes. As of June 30, 1988, the Fund Balance was $3,037,141 or 5.32 percent. Ms. Hyatt presented an analysis of the revenue. IN RE: NEW BUSINESS 1. Request of CBL Management for County Darticipation in extension of water lines. (Continued from Januarv 10, 1989). A-12489-1 Utility Director Clifford Craig advised that this item was cont inued from January 10 so that staff could study the impact that the water line would have on the Utility Fund and General Fund. He advised that the Utility Fund will recover approximately $25,000 within the next five years, assuming development proceeds. The estimated increase to the General Fund is $72,000 in real estate and sales tax. In response to a question from Supervisor Nickens, Mr. Craig reported that this request is consistent with other developers except this developer must invest $40,000 more because the County is only recommending that one-half of the excess funds be reimbursed. Supervisor Nickens moved to approve County participation of one-half the excess cost up to $41,000 and that 44 7 ~ January 24, 1989 the County Administrator be authorized to execute a reimbursement agreement with CBL Management. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Garrett and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None 2. Authorization to approDriate funds to the Arts Festival sponsored by the Arts Council of Roanoke Valley. A-12489-2 Mr. Hodge advised that the Arts Council is planning a major arts festival for October 1991. Approximately $75,000 will be needed to fund an Administrator to handle organization and implementation of the festival. They are requesting contributions from local governments and other agencies. Staff is recommending $1,000 participation from Roanoke County. Susan Cole from the Arts Council was present to respond to questions. She advised that the $75,000 would fund the entire administrative project for the year. Supervisor Johnson moved to allocation. The motion was seconded by carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None approve the $1,000 Supervisor McGraw and '"', January 24, 1989 44 8 3. Authorization to settle pending litigation with John Hall & ComDany for outstandina utility bills. County Attorney Paul Mahoney reported that there are three plaintiffs involved in this litigation. The case involves a dispute regarding the fact that the plaintiffs exchanged free sewer service for a donated sewer easement. When the County acquired the sewer system, the plaintiffs were charged for sewage usage, and filed suit against the County. The County has settled with one litigant. It is recommended that the Board of Supervisors authorize the County Administrator to execute an agreement; that payment of $500 be accepted as settlement of the outstanding utility bill; and that the County install a meter. This settlement is similar to a settlement made with one of the other litigants. In response to a question from Supervisor Nickens, Mr. Mahoney advised that there has been a large amount of time and expense spent on this case, and the chances of success in court are slight. Mr. Hodge explained why a meter was being installed as part of the agreement. Supervisor McGraw moved to approve the staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Garrett. 44 9 January 24, 1989 - Supervisor Johnson suggested that staff bring these issues to the Board before making such agreements. Supervisor Nickens offered a substitute motion to table the issue to allow the staff to compare for consistency with other similar settlements. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Johnson and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: Supervisor McGraw 4. Claim of Leonard Butler A-12489-3 Mr. Mahoney reported that the claim is about alleged damages to Mr. Butler's personal property kept in a house acquired by Roanoke County for the completion of the Hollins Community Development Project. Action on this claim is necessary before the matter can be heard by the Court. Staff recommended denial of the claim. Leonard Butler was present and explained that he did not receive notice from the contractors that the building would be destroyed, and has lost property that has been in his family since 1860. A neighbor, Issac Sweetenberg, was also present and verified that the furniture was kept in the building. Joe Kirby, 5200 Poor Mountain Road, presented the estimated market value of the antiques. " January 24, 1989 45 0 ~ Morgan Griffith, Mr. Butler's attorney was also present and reported that Mr. Butler had not been paid for his property when the County began to destroy the structure. In response to a question from Supervisor Garrett as to why Mr. Butler did not sue the contractor, Mr. Griffith replied that they plan to file suit against both the County and the contractor, but cannot proceed until this hearing is resolved. Supervisor Garrett pointed out that there was an eight week notice sent to the property owners about the project. Supervisor Johnson moved to deny the claim so that the suit may go forward. The motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None IN RE: REQUEST FOR WORK SESSIONS A work session was set for February 14, 1989 on Landfill and Recycling. IN RE: REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Request for Public Hearina on February 14, 1989 to borrow short-term in anticiDation of taxes. 45 1 January 24, 1989 - - Finance Director Diane Hyatt presented the request, reporting that staff is requesting $17,000,000 even though the County is only anticipating borrowing $10,000,000, so that it is not necessary to go through the public hearing and advertising process and which will save time in the borrowing procedure. Supervisor Johnson moved to set the public hearing for only $10,000,000 borrowing. The motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw. Following discussion, Supervisor Nickens made a substi tute motion to set a public hearing to borrow $17,000,000 in anticipation of taxes. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Robers and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None IN RE: APPOINTMENTS 1. Library Board Supervisor Johnson nominated Dr. Normal Jean Peters to serve the unexpired four year term of Richard Kirkwood, Hollins Magisterial District. The term will expire December 31, 1989. 45 2 January 24, 1989 - IN RE: REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS Supervisor Johnson moved that Paul Mahoney bring back to the Board members a draft anti -cruise ordinance. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Robers and carried by the following unanimous recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None Supervisor Johnson also requested the following: (1) That Chairman Garrett appoint Economic Development Director Tim Gubula to the Convention and Visitors Bureau; (2) that a Resolution of Appreciation be prepared to present to Art Whitaker who has been with Piedmont Airlines for 41 years; (3) that copies of the Roanoke County History Book and Sesquicentennial Coins be gi ven to the state legislators, Governor Baliles, Lt. Governor Wilder, Attorney General Mary Sue Terry, and our federal legislators, with funding coming from the Board Contingency Fund. Supervisor Robers reported that the Roanoke Valley Cooperation Committee is working with the Chamber of Commerce to invite business leaders from Northern Virginia to the Roanoke Valley. He also requested that the staff investigate with 45 3 January 24,,1989 - - Northcross School the possibility of a highway marker acknowledging their state championship basketball team. SUDervisor McGraw expressed his appreciation to Roanoke Ci ty Councilman David Bowers for his recent withdrawal from the Consolidation Negotiation Committee which he felt was done in the interest of the Roanoke Valley. Supervisor Garrett directed Mr. Hodge to investigate the handicapped ramp entrance at the headquarters library to see if it is a workable entrance for the handicapped. IN RE: CONSENT AGENDA Supervisor Johnson moved to approve the Consent Agenda. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Nickens and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors JOhnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None RESOLUTION NO. 12489-4 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVI SORS 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 that certain section of the agenda of the January 24, 1989 45 4 - Board of Supervisors for Janury 24, 1989, 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 6, inclusive as follows: " 1. Confirmation of appointment to the Community Corrections Policy Board. 2. Acceptance of water and sewer facilities serving Canterbury Park Section 3. 3. Acceptance of water and sewer facilities serving Canterbury Park Section 4. 4. Request for acceptance of Westbriar Court into the Va. Department of Transportation Secondary System. 5. Request for acceptance of a portion of Cavalier Drive and Cavalier Court into the Va. Dept. of Transportation Secondary System. 6. Acceptance of sewer facilities serving Penn Forest Wesleyan Church. 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. RESOLUTION 12489-4.d REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF WESTBRIAR COURT INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY ROAD SYSTEM BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 45 5 January 24, 1989 = 1. That this matter came this day to be heard upon the proceedings herein, and upon the application of Westbriar Court from its intersection with Cavalier Drive to the terminus at the cul-de-sac for a distance of 0.16 miles, to be accepted and made a part of the Secondary System of State Highways under Section 33.1-229 of the Virginia State Code. 2. That it appears to the Board that drainage easements and a fifty (50) foot right-of-way for said road has been dedicated by virtue of a certain map known as Section No. 4 Canterbury Park Subdivision which map was recorded in Plat Book 10, Page 44, of the records of the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, on February 5, 1987, and that by reason of the recordation of said map no report from a Board of Viewers, nor consent or donation of right-of-way from the abutting property owners is necessary. The Board hereby guarantees said right-of-way for drainage. 3. That said roads known as Westbriar Court and which is on a certain sketch accompanying this Resolution, be, and the same is hereby established as a public road to become a part of the State Secondary System of Highways in Roanoke County, only from and after notification of official acceptance of said street or highway by the Virginia Department of Transportation. On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by Supervisor Nickens and carried by the following recorded vote: " 45 6 January 24, 1989 AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McGraw, Nickens, Robers, Garrett NAYS: None RESOLUTION 12489-4.e REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF A PORTION OF CAVALIER DRIVE AND CAVALIER COURT INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY ROAD SYSTEM BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That this matter came this day to be heard upon the proceedings herein, and upon the application of Cavalier Drive from a point 120' west of its intersection with Gloucester Court to the intersection with Salisbury Drive and 0.05 miles of Cavalier Court from its intersection with Cavalier Drive to the terminus at the cul-de-sac, to be accepted and made a part of the Secondary System of State Highways under Section 33.1-229 of the Virginia State Code. 2. That it appears to the Board that drainage easements and a fifty (50) foot right-of-way for said roads have been dedicated by virtue of a certain map known as Section No. 3 Canterbury Park Subdivision which map was recorded in Plat Book 10, Page 33, of the records of the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, on December 17, 1986, and that by reason of the recordation of said map no report from a Board of Viewers, nor consent or donation of right-of-way from the 45 7 January 24, 1989 - - Following discussion, Supervisor Garrett directed the staff to bring back a report on February 14, 1989 on why the deposit policy was instituted. He also requested that the report include possible methods for utility payments to become due more than every three months. IN RE: REPORTS Item 5 was pulled for discussion and Supervisor Nickens advised there were conflicts with the Landfill Siting Schedules because community meetings had been set up for some of the same dates. He requested other changes to the schedule also. Mr. Hodge advised that the changes would be made to the schedule. Supervisor Garrett moved to receive and file the following reports. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Johnson and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett None 1. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Accounts Paid - December 1988 5. Landfill Siting Schedule 45 8 = ~ January 24, 1989 6. Income Analysis and Statement of Expenditures as of December 31, 1988. IN RE: EXECUTIVE SESSION At 5: 10 p. m., Supervisor Garrett moved to go into Executive Session pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 201- 344 (a) (1) to discuss consolidation; (7) to discuss a legal matter, a drainage request; and (7) to discuss a legal matter, School Board. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Johnson and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor McGraw IN RE; OPEN SESSION At 5: 45 p. m., Supervisor Garrett moved to return to Open Session. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Johnson and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None IN RE: RECESS 45 9 January 24, 1989 - - abutting property owners is necessary. guarantees said right-of-way for drainage. 3. That said roads known as Cavalier Drive and Cavalier The Board hereby Court and which are shown on a certain sketch accompanying this Resolution, be, and the same are hereby established as public roads to become a part of the State Secondary System of Highways in Roanoke County, only from and after notification of official acceptance of said streets or highways by the Virginia Department of Transportation. On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by Supervisor Nickens and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McGraw, Robers, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None IN RE: CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS 1. Richard Evans, 4443 Cordell Drive, S. W. was present to speak in opposition to the penalties attached to a late payment of a utility bill. He advised that the penalties are not returned following a period of timely payment. He felt that the deposit should be returned following a certain length of time. 46 0 January 24, 1989 At 5:45 p.m., Chairman Garrett declared a dinner recess. EVENING SESSION (7:00 P.M.) Chairman Garrett announced that the following petitions were advertised but will not be heard. They have been referred to the Planning Commission for recommendation. Petition of Joe Bandy and Son, Special Use Permit to operate construction debris landfill. Inc. for a a private Petition of Samual R. Carter III Special Use Permit to operate a construction debris landfill. for a private IN RE: PUBLIC HEARINGS 189-1 Public Hearing to receive written or oral comments for items to be included in the budaet for 1989-90 fiscal year. County Administrator Elmer Hodge explained that this public hearing was set for citizen comment and input on the budget before the staff begins to prepare the 1989-90 budget. The following citizens spoke concerned items for the proposed 1989-90 fiscal year budget. 4 Ö 1 -- - January 24, 1989 - 1 . Ke 11 y McD an i e 1, representing the Clean Valley Council, requested funding support for continued recycling. 2. Frank W. Martin, P. O. Box 20073, Roanoke, Virginia 24018, a membe r 0 f the Board of Zoning Appeals requested increased funding for the BZA membership. 3. Linda Bevins, spoke in supported of an expanded recycling program. 4. Mike Ferguson, representing Clean Valley Council, requested funding support for expansion of recycling. 5. Ruth Mosely, 3425 Greencliff Road who spoke in opposition to increased funding for the Board of Zoning Appeals. 189-2 Petition of Robert and Patricia Crouse to rezone a 4.82 acre tract from B-1 Business to M-2, Industrial to operate a trucking terminal, located approximately 0.5 mile east of I-81 exit 39 (Dixie Caverns on the south side of West Main Street (Route 460) in the Catawba Magisterial District. (CONTINUED FROM DECEMBER 13, 1988) Planner Dale Castellow presented the staff report. He advised that the petitioner desires to relocate an existing trucking business to the site. He reported that the staff considered several significant impact factors including that incompatible land use with the Land Use Guidelines, on site circulation was not provided on the site plan, and the potential traffic hazard from the vehicles entering and existing the site. 46 2 January 24, 1989 The Planning Commission recommended denial of the rezoning by a unanimous vote. Doug Brinkman, attorney for the petitioner, was present and requested that the petition be continued for sixty days or referred back to the Planning Commission so that the petitioners could present additional information. The following citizens spoke on this rezoning. 1. Lydia Roberts, 5916 Viewpoint Avenue, Salem, spoke in opposition because of the noise, air pollution, lower property resale value and safety factors. 2. Stan Statzer, 5959 Viewpoint Avenue, was opposed because of the potential noise and dust. 3. Harold Horn, West River Road, opposed because of accidents caused by trucks doing U-turns. 4. Henry Davis, 5921 Dogwood Avenue, opposed because of safety hazards. 5. Edward Aesy, 5767 Edgewood, opposed because of noise, pollution, and lower property value. 6. Rosmond Phelps, 5744 Edgewood, opposed. Mr. Crouse explained how he planned to address the noise concerns of those speaking in opposition. He offered to proffer the conditions of using only certain portions of the land to diminish the noise. Supervisor Johnson pointed out that conditions could not be proffered at this time. 46 J January 24, 1989 - Supervisor McGraw expressed concern about the traffic hazard and the impact of an M-2 zoning to an R-l and B-1 area. Supervisor McGraw moved to deny the petition. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Nickens and carried by the fOllowing recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None 189-3 Peti tion of Jolly Time, Inc. for a Special Exception Permit to operate an amusement and video arcade located at 4394 Electric Road in Tanglewood Mall in the Cave Spring Magisterial District. Dale Castellow presented the staff report. He advised that the staff recommends approval with one condition. Supervisor Nickens moved to grant the Special Exception Permit with one condition that the hours of operation for the arcade should not exceed the operating hours of the mall. The motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None 189-4 Petition of Klas and Eva Guertler requesting a Use Not Provided For Permit to operate a dental laboratory on a tract containing .875 acre and located at 1280 Longview Road in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District. January 24, 1989 46 4 Planner Jon Hartley presented the staff report. The petitioner has proffered certain conditions. The Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval. Supervisor Garrett moved to to approve the Use Not Provided For Permit. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Robers and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None FINAL ORDER NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDERED that the aforementioned parcel of land which is contained in the Roanoke County Tax Maps be issued a Use Not Provided for Permit for the purpose of operating a dental laboratory. BE IT FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this order be transmitted to the Secretary of the Planning Commission and that he be directed to reflect that change on the official zoning map of Roanoke County. PROFFER OF CONDITIONS 1. The number of employees will be limited to the petitioner and one additional employee. 46 5 January 24, 1989 - - 2. The business will not be open to the public. 3. One employee parking space will be provided. 4. The dental lab operation will be limited tot he proposed 24' building only. 189-5 Petition of Wayne Boitnott and RalDh Mabes requesting to amend the future land use map designation from Development to Transition and requesting rezoning from R-2 Residential to B-1 Business to construct an office park on a tract containing 3.20 acres and located on the north side of Ogden Road approximately 300 feet east of its intersection with Colonial Avenue in the Cave Spring Magisterial District. Dale Castellow presented the staff report. The petitioners are requesting an amendment to the Land Use Plan to Transition which includes planned office parks. The significant impact factor concerns traffic. Staff estimates the proposal would generate approximately 544 vehicle trips per day. Several citizens spoke in opposition to the amendment and rezoning at the Planning Commission hearing. The petitioners have proffered conditions and amended those proffers prior to this hearing. The Planning Commission recommended approval of both requests. In response to questions, Mr. Castellow advised under the present zoning, there could be 12 duplexes on the property at 240 trips per day, and the new rezoning would have no impact on the schools. 46 6 January 24, 1989 Don Wetherington, attorney for the petitioners, advised that the petitioners believe that an office part is the best use of the property. The proposed development would consist of not more than 27,050 square feet and no more than five buildings. Mr. Wetherington presented letters of support from citizens surrounding the property. The following citizens spoke concerning the petition. 1. David Courey, 3419 Ashemead, was opposed to a change in the Land Use Plan, but was not opposed to the complex. He also requested improvements to Colonial Avenue because of the increased traffic. 2. Ruth Mosely, 3425 Greencliff, Roanoke, expressed concern about the traffic on Colonial Avenue. 3. Mark Siler, 3471 Old Towne Road, was concerned about the traffic on Colonial Avenue. He requested that Colonial Avenue be placed on the Six Year Plan. Supervisor Robers responded that he was willing to meet with the Virginia Department of Transportation and Roanoke County engineers to see what can be done to improve traffic conditions on Colonial Avenue. Supervisor Robers moved to amend the Land Use Plan designation for the site to Transition. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Johnson and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, Nickens, Garrett 4t67?l January 24, 1989 - NAYS: ABSTAIN: None Supervisor McGraw Supervisor Robers moved to approve the rezoning with proffered conditions. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Johnson and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Supervisor McGraw FINAL ORDER NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDERED that the aforementioned parcel of land which is contained in the Roanoke County Tax Maps as Parcel 77.11-01-58 and recorded in Deed Book 1011 and legally described below, be rezoned from R-2 District to B-1 Business District BE IT FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this order be transmitted to the Secretary of the Planning Commission and that he be directed to reflect that change on the official zoning map of Roanoke County. FINAL ORDER NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDERED that the aforementioned parcel of land, which is contained in the Roanoke County Tax Maps 46 e January ?4, ,QRQ as Parcel 77.11-01-58 and recorded in Deed Book 1011 and legally described below be redesignated from Development Land Use to Transition Land Use. BEGINNING at a point on the northerly ·side of 6gden Road (Virginia Route 681) said point being the southwest corner of the Region Properties, Inc. property; THENCE with the north line of Ogden Road a curved line to the left, whose radius is 597.96', whose chord bearing and distance are N 82°52'30" W, 61.02 feet, an arc of 61.05 feet. THENCE continuing wi th the north line of Ogden Road the following courses (see Virginia Sheet 3): N 85°48'00" W, 251.23 feet; N 85°00'00" W, 145.97 feet; N 80°39'47" W, 145.26 feet; N 72°03'25" W, 65.17 feet; THENCE leaving ogden Road and with the eastern line of the James W. and Peggy A. Wilson property N 33°52'15" E, 143.44 feet to a point on the line of the Ogden Hills Subdivision property; THENCE with the Ogden hills Subdivision property N 84°14'15" E, 697.17 feet to a point; THENCE leaving the Ogden Hi 11s Subdivision property and wi th the wes tern line of the Region Proper ties, Inc. property S 22 ° 22' 30" W,- 293.53 feet to the Point of BEGINNING, containing 3.20 acres. 1. Development of the land will be in substantial confor- mity with the concept plan entitled "Ogden Road Office Park" dated November 21, 1988 prepared by Balzer & Associates, Inc., a copy of which plan has been submitted with Petitioners' appli- cation and petition. 46 9 January 24, 1989 - - 2. The development will contain no more than five buildings of one story each and no more than 27,050 square feet of finished floor area. 3. The height of no building will exceed twenty-five feet. 4. Only one free-standing sign will be erected adjacent to Ogden Road. The sign will not exceed fifteen feet in height and will not exceed a surface area of more than fifty square feet on either of two faces. Other signs that identify build- ings, regulate traffic, designate parking areas and the like that are either not visible or not conspicuous from Ogden Road may be utilized within the project. No billboards will be erected on any part of the land. 5. The development will include screening, buffer yard and plantings of the type described in Section 21-92 of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance either as "Type C-Option 1" or "Type C-Option 2." Landscaping will also be incorporated within parking areas. 6. Dumpsters will be screened by structures made of . materials compatible in composition and color with the materials on the exterior of the bUildings. 7. Petitioners will include within the development a storm- water detention pond sufficient to detain increased surface-water runoff from the development following a "ten-year storm" with a release rate of the increased water no greater than would follow a "two-year storm." January 24, 1989 470· 8. During the anticipated phased construction, areas of the land that have been disturbed by cutting, grading or other site preparation activity and on which construction of improve- ments will be deferred until a later phase of development will be reasonably restored to .a presentable appearance by seeding with grass or other appropriate groundcover. 9. Upon the request of the Director of Public Utilities for Roanoke County within two years from the date as of which the land is rezoned, Petitioners will grant Roanoke County a sewer easement not to exceed twenty feet in width and situated adjacent to the eastern boundary line of the land and extending the entire depth of the land between the northern and southern boundary lines. Installation of pipe and related appliances within the easement will be at no expense to the Petitioners. Any installation will be coordinated in such manner as will not disrupt Petitioners' intended construction, and any improvements that are damaged· or displaced during the initial construction or subsequent maintenance or replacement activity will be re- stored to their former condition-at no expense to Petitioners. The easement will be otherwise in customary form. 10. Freestanding light poles will be no higher than sixteen feet, and the intensity of area lighting will not exceed one foot candle on the ground beneath the lamp. Area lighting will not incorporate metal-halide or halogen lamps. 47 1 January 24, 1989 - 11. The development will include no commercial banking facility which incorporates teller service for drive-through vehicle traffic. 189-6 Petition of Georae vacation of a 15 foot sewer easement in Subdivision in the District. Marshall requesting portion of a sanitary Stonebridge Court Vinton Magisterial There was no discussion of this request and no one spoke concerning the petition. Supervisor Nickens moved to approve the petition. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Robers and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None IN RE: PUBLIC HEARINGS AND FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 189-7 Petition of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors to amend the Roanoke County Subdi vision Ordinance and Zoning Ordinance by January 24, 1989 I 472 adopting the Roanoke County Street and Off- Street Design Standards and SDecifications. Director of Development and Inspections Arnold Covey reported that his department was assigned to develop a manual to assist the public and development community in clarification of rules, regulations and policies which apply to land development. The water design standards component of the manual has been adopted and the second component, Street and Parking Design Standards and Specifications is now ready for adoption. Mr. Covey advised that the standards address areas such as pavement design, curb and gutter, street connections, parking and loading requirements. The Planning Commission made several recommendations at. their meeting on January 3, 1989 and recommended approval following these changes. Mr. Covey addressed several questions the board members had on clarification of the proposed standards. The following people spoke concerning the proposed standards: 1. Ron Boothe, President of the Roanoke Valley Homebuilders Association, advised that the organization was opposed to the standard that requiring curb and guttering be installed and black top paving be used in all subdivisions that falls within the Urban Economic Boundary of the 2005 plan. He advised that homebuilders would pass this additional cost on to 473 January 24, 1989 the property owner. The Homebuilders also felt that the stormwater management ordinance should be adopted at the same time. 2. Alfred Powell, 3440 Franklin Street, expressed concerns with several sections of the proposed standards. He outlined the specific questions that he had with each section. Supervisor McGraw moved to approve first reading of the Ordinance and the street and off-street parking standards and specification as amended by the Roanoke County Planning Commission. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Garrett. Supervisor Nickens offered a substitute motion to continue the item to February 14 to allow the staff time to respond to questions from Mr. Powell. He withdrew the motion when Supervisor Johnson recommended that staff respond to the questions by the second reading at the next meeting. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: Supervisor Robers Supervisor Nickens asked that the questions raised be answered at the next meeting. 189-8 Petition of Fralin and Waldron requesting vacation of a portion of the previously platted subdivision referred to as Thomas H. Beasley property on the south side of Va. Secondary Road 679 (Buck Mountain Road) in the Cave Spring Magisterial District. January 24, 1989 474 There was no discussion and no one spoke to this ordinance. Supervisor Nickens moved to approve first reading of the ordinance. The motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None IN RE: FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1 . Ordinance amendina and reenactinq Chapter 16 of the Roanoke Countv Code. Precious Metals and Gems. County Attorney Paul Mahoney advised that this ordinance updates the county code and brings it into compliance wi th the state code and closes certain loop holes that the Sheriff's Department has discovered. Supervisor Nickens asked if there was a fee to cover the permit renewal and requested that this be included in the second reading. Supervisor Johnson moved to approve first reading of the ordinance. The motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett 475 January 24, 1989 NAYS: None IN RE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance acceDting an offer for and authorizing the convevance of surplus property near the intersection of Huntina Hills Drive and Starkev Road. Mr. Mahoney presented the staff report and advised this property was a surplus well lot. Supervisor Nickens moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Robers and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None ORDINANCE 12489-5 ACCEPTING AN OFFER FOR AND AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYANCE OF SURPLUS PROPERTY NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF HUNTING HILLS DRIVE AND STARKEY ROAD BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Charter of Roanoke County, the subject property has been de- clared to be surplus and is being made available for other public uses, i.e. road improvements; and January 24, 1989 476 2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Charter of Roanoke County, a first reading concerning the sale and disposition of the hereinafter described property was held on January 10, 1989; a second reading was held on Jan- uary 24, 1989; and 3. That this property is an abandoned pumping and valve station located on property owned or formerly owned by the Hunting Hills Land Corporation near the intersection of Hunting Hills Drive and Starkey Drive; and 4. That the offer of the Virginia Department of High- ways in the amount of $1,634.00 is hereby accepted and all other offers are rejected; and 5. That all proceeds from the sale of this property are to be allocated to the capital reserves of the County; and 6. That the County Administrator is authorized to exe- cute such documents and take such actions on behalf of Roanoke County as are necessary to accomplish the conveyance of said pro- perty, all of which shall be upon form approved by the County Attorney. On motion of Supervisor Nickens, seconded by Supervisor Robers and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McGraw, Robers, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None 47 7 January 24, 1989 - - 2. Ordinance amendina and reenactina the Roanoke County Code to provide for a prohibition upon the location of certain tvpes of signs. Mr. Mahoney presented the staff report. Supervisor Garrett asked Mr. Hodge to respond to concerns presented at the first reading. Mr. Hodge advised that staff had met with members of the sign community. The sign committee will be composed of 12 ./ or 13 members with four representatives of the sign community, four who are generally opposed to billboards and the remainder a neutral group. They hope to come back with a workable ordinance that will be agreeable to all segments. Alfred Powell, 3441 Franklin Road spoke and expressed concern about the property and personal rights involved in this ordinance. His primary concern was the use of police power for enforcement rather than the zoning process. Gerry Bijjward, 4802 Brookwood Drive, spoke in support of the proposed ordinance. In response to a question from a citizen who will be serving on the sign committee, Mr. Mahoney advised that this ordinance will remain in effect until the Board of Supervisors revokes or amends it. 47 8 January 24, 1989 Supervisor Johnson moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None ORDINANCE 12489-6 AMENDING AND REENACTING THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE TO PROVIDE FOR A PROHIBITION UPON THE LOCATION OF CERTAIN TYPES OF SIGNS WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, recognizes that "general advertising" signs (bill- boards) are becoming a blight upon the County, and that this is the functional equivalent of a public nuisance, adversely affect- ing the appearance of the community, aesthetics, vitality, the enhancement of property values, as well as the value of the County's commercial and residential areas, and that such signs constitute a traffic hazard adversely affecting the traffic safe- ty in the County; and WHEREAS, Section 15.1-510 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, authorizes any county to adopt such measures as it may deem expedient to secure and promote the health, safety, and general welfare of the inhabitants of the county, and further that the provisions of Chapter 18 of Title 15.1 (Section 15.1-837 et seq.), and that Section 2.01 of the Roanoke County Charter 47 9 January 24, 1989 - (1986 Acts of Assembly, Chapter 617) authorize the adoption of this ordinance; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on January 10, 1989, and the second reading of this ordinance was held on January 24, 1989. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: Sec. 1. Definitions. Sign. Any display of any letters, words, numerals, figures, devices, emblems, pictures, or any parts or combinations thereof, by any means whereby the same are made visible for the purpose of making anything known, whether such display be made on, attached to, or as a part of a structure, surface, or any other thing, including but not limited to the ground, any rock, tree, or other natural object which display is visible beyond the boundaries of the parcel of land on which the same is made. This definition includes the supports, uprights, bracing, and frame- work of any structure, be it single-faced, dOuble-faced, v-type or otherwise, exhibiting a sign. General advertisinq sian. A sign which directs atten- tion to a product, commodity, or service not conducted, sold, or offered upon the same lot or parcel where such sign is located. Sec. 2. Prohibited sians. No general advertising sign shall be located within the county. 48 li January 24, 1989 - Sec. 3. vested riahts. Nothing in this ordinance shall be con- strued to authorize the impairment of any vested right to an existing general advertising sign and that those signs in use at the effective date of this ordinance may be continued. If any change in title or possession or renewal of a lease of any sign or sign structure that is the subject of this ordinance or any lot or parcel upon which a sign or sign struc- ture is located occurs, then the use of that sign or sign struc- ture may be continued. If any sign or sign structure is discon- tinued for a period exceeding two years after the effecti ve date of this ordinance, then it shall conform to the provisions of this ordinance. The construction of a sign or sign structure for which a permit was legally issued according to the provisions of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance prior to the effective date of this ordinance may proceed and continue; provided, that the con- struction of said sign and sign structure is completed within thirty (30) days after the effective date of this ordinance. Any sign or sign structure which would otherwise be prohibited by the provisions of this ordinance may not be ex- tended or enlarged. Any sign or sign structure which is destroyed or damaged in any manner to the extent of the cost of restoration to its condition before the occurrence shall exceed fifty (50) percent of the cost of reconstruction may not be 48 1 January 24, 1989 - repaired or restored unless it is in compliance with the provi- sions of this ordinance. Sec. 4. Violations. Any violation of the provisions of this ordinance shall constitute a Class 1 misdemeanor and be punished as provided in Section 1-10 of this Code. In addition, the County Administrator on behalf of the Board of Supervisors shall have all necessary authority to admin- ister and enforce the provisions of this ordinance, including the bringing of le~al action to insure compliance with the ordinance, including injunction,' abatement or other appropriate action or proceeding. Sec. 5. Severability. In the event that any portion of this ordinance is held to be invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other valid portions of this ordinance. Sec. 6. Effective date. The effective date of this ordinance shall be January 25, 1989. On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by Supervisor McGraw and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McGraw, Robers, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None IN RE: CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS January 24, 1989 482 Chairman Garrett advised that Melvin T. Patrick who had requested time to speak was not present. IN RE: ADJOURNMENT Supervisor Robers moved to adjourn the meeting. The motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw and carried by a unanimous voice vote. ...... gad( - Garrett, Chairman ,/ / /