Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout9/17/1982 - Regular I I I 9-17-82 1 ") .. H ~ Roanoke County Board of Supervisors County Administration Building 430 E. Clay Street Salem, Virginia September 17, 1982 The Board of Supervisors of ~oanoke County, Virginia met this day in open session in the conference room located in the County Administrator's Office at 430 East Clay Street, Salem, Virginia, this being the continuation of the adjourned meeting of September 14, 1982. MEHBERS PRESENT: Chairman Athena E. Burton and Supervisors May W. Johnson, Gary James Minter, Robert E. Myers, and Harry C. Nickens. MEMBERS ABSENT: None. IN RE: CALL TO ORDER , I I I i i i :1 I I 'I The meeting was called to order by Chairman Burton at 8:15 a.m. Chairman Burton stated the purpose of the meeting was to consider an application for Community Development Block Grants. Supervisor Myers, at this point, stated thCl.t since the meeting on September 14, he had received some questions of concern from citizens about the grant and the intended project and that there were some questions that he could not give the answers to. He then directed his first question to the County Attorney and asked if the grant in question could be used for any other property. The County Attorney stated the form that the grant is presently in is asking for a grant to develop the particular land in question. He also stated, that in the past, state and federal grants had been amended, so that if the grant is approved an amended application could be submitted to make the funds available for some other similar project, and that assuming that this is true of this grant, it is filed and the money allocated and finding that there is a better site I 1 . I I;~ ~ 9-17-82 lRd available for the funds it is entirely possible that the funds could be used for a different site. Supervisor Myers then stated that the request had come up rather suddenly to the Board of Supervisors without much time to know all the ins and outs. He then asked Mr. Flanders how the area in question originated. County Administrator Flan~ers stated that he was called by Mr. Smith and Mr. Saul of the Roanoke Valley Chamber of Commerce and Appalachian Power Company, respectively, as to the possibility of coordination of efforts between the City and the County in industrial development. He stated he met with them and they advised him as to the area that was to be optioned by the City of Roanoke for Industrial Development and that it might be well for the County to determine the feasibility of acquiring the adjoining property immediately east of the City owned property, which is about 53 acres that could be used in coordination of efforts in the industrial development promotion program with the City. He also stated that if the County were to proceed in this area it would assist in giving a united view to the entire promotional efforts of industrial development in the Valley. He then stated that following that meeting and discussions with the planning staff, he took the Chairman of the Board, Mrs. Athena Burton out to the site. Mr. Flanders explained he then proceeded to do further evaluation of the site and the considerations of what the City was proposing relative to the area. He received a call from Fralin and Waldron who had acquired the property by auction and was advised the property would be available to Roanoke County for purchase for land development. He stated he had negotiated an option with a representative with Fralin and \Jaldron and submitted this to the Board for consideration. I I Supervisor Myers asked what price Fralin and Waldron paid for the property. Mr. Flanders stated he was not familiar with it and as far as he was concerned the value on the land is based on the value of the adjoining property that the City optioned. Mr. Flanders stated the County had an option at $6,000 per acre and thought that Fralin and ___ Waldron's price was ~2,300, but he was unsure of this price. Supervisor I ~ ~ 9-17-82 1 8 [) Minter asked why the property was so much more, in that Fralin and Waldron paid $145,000 at auction and a response was made that the property next door sold for $6,000 an acre. Supervisor Minter asked if this I automatically inflated the cost, in that they are making two or three times their money. He also stated it is using tax money that a private developer or speculator would make a fortune on, and this has happened in the past in different places. He reiterated by stating his main question was the fact of the big difference in prices for the land, this being a question which kept corning up time and time again by concerned citizens, and he could not give a good answer. Supervisor Johnson responded saying the fact that the property next door was sold for $6,000 an acre was a good answer, and that land is worth what people wi:l pay for it. Supervisor Minter asked if a private enterprise would pay that amount, and remarked that he doubted they would. Supervisor Nickens remarked that if the group was familiar with I other potential signs of development in Roanoke County a private enterprise is willing to pay $6,000 an acre. Supervisor Minter asked if anyone had offered this kind of money for the land in question, or similar property. Mr. Flanders answered Supervisor Minter's question saying the value on the land, once it is developed as an industrial park setting, would be sold at a much higher price than the $6,000. Supervisor Minter acknow- ledged this fact affirmatively, but remarked that Fralin and Waldron had done nothing to the land. At this point, Chairman Burton stated the land was put at public auction and anybody could have bought it for that price and taken the I chance on its future valuation and that is what land development is all about; buying property and taking a chance on its future value. She also stated that whether or not Fralin and Waldron knew this other property was going to be bought by the City of Roanoke and developed, and someone pay $6,000 or $8,000 an acre, she did not know; but the fact did remain they bought the land with the idea of its future valuation, not to keep if for the County or anyone else or until it was needed by someone --- ....1 r 9=17-82 1 Q ~ else and have that person pay the same price for which it was bought. Supervisor Minter remarked, he felt that from $145,000 to $320,000 was a phenomenal increase. Chairman Burton stated it was certainly not unprecedented in the free enterprise system. Supervisor Minter stated this was different from free enterprise, it was public money being discussed. Chairman Burton questioned whether or not free enterprise was not to be considered when talking about the public sector buying from the private sector. Supervisor Minter said he was discussing the negotiated price, it was not the free market constitution for pricing and he had not seen anyone else in private enterprise offer that kind of money for the land or anywhere near that price, that anyone could have bought the land at any time. I Supervisor Nickens then stated it seemed strange to him this same discussion did not ensue 8 days ago, and that his second question raised at that time was what about the difference in price. He said it seemed a big jump that the public would be concerned about, that the County had the opportunity to buy the property at $150,000 and was now paying $300,000. He remarked that the rules change, the County had that option, the Board knew it, and they had a discussion in that area, and he felt it inappropriate at this time to discuss whether or not the County pay $300,000 for the property, because somebody paid $150,000 for it 3 months ago. Supervisor Myers did not feel the value had increased today. If the property had been bought 5 years ago, and had been built on then the gain on it would be fine, but when you buy in this short a period of time and try to sell it to the people of Roanoke County, with a two-fold profit, then he felt the Board should look at the price very carefully. Supervisor Minter then stated he was not saying there was anything wrong, that it just looked bad when one parcel more than doubles, and that just because the City is paying it, that did not mean the land was worth it. I I Supervisor Johnson commented that either the Board made a big mistake or they are being taken. Supervisor Minter continued by saying ___ governments, especially when talking about Federal grants, will go ahead ~ 9-17-82 187 and buy because it is federal money, adding, that it being tax money would not raise the tax base, but sometimes he felt governments get a little lax when it comes to keeping prices down, and you have a developer I possibly making $150,000 or more, by not doing a thing. He also added he was not expecting the investor to lose money, but it seemed like an exorbitant amount. Supervisor Minter continued saying he was a little bit disappointed and questioned the Board members if they had seen the land. Supervisor Johnson remarked she had been called and she had seen the land and she had described the property to someone. Supervisor Minter, at this point, stated Mr. Davis had requested a copy of the grant. He had been promised one and had not received it yet. Chairman Burton stated it was not an official document until the Board adopted it and it was not the application until the Board decided what went into it and if anyone wanted a copy of the draft copy it was available. I Supervisor Johnson then introduced the subject of 105 acres across the road and questioned if it had been bought. Mr. Gubala stated the land is zoned as residential estates. Supervisor Johnson then asked the County Attorney where in the contract with Roanoke City it stated they provide the County with water, as this seemed to be a concern. County Attorney Buchholtz stated that under the contract the City has agreed to sell so many gallons of water per year to the County and there is a range and within that range they are required by contract to deliver the water upon request by the County. Supervisor Johnson stated she had been asked by citizens what it was going to cost the County to develop the site. The County Administrator I replied that the cost to the County would be basically underwritten by the Federal Grant and by the purchase of the property by users, and anticipated no actual end dollars being involved, but the County would certainly have some upfront dollars involved in the actual development of the property in conjunction with the Federal Grant, but that in the long run, after the development of the property, he could see no net cost I I I I I I to the County at all. He also stated that the matching funds in the I~ "...-- 188 9-17-82 grant application showed only a $70,000 figure, cOl~pared to a total of $700,000 federal funds and that obviously the County's investment would not be sizable at all, and amounted to less than or a little over $1,400 per acre. I Supervisor Johnson then directed her question to Mr. Gubala about a concern she had heard from Mr. Buddy Davis, a citizen, that there would be no way that the County could screen the property from the people living in LaBellvue. Mr. Gubala stated that Mr. Davis was an adjacent owner and it would be difficult to screen his property. She proceeded to ask how many adjacent properties there were and was informed there would be at least 10. The County Administrator remarked he could understand the concern of the residents in the area if they have to drive by the Statesman Industrial Park. He stated he had been involved in industrial development for a long time and he would never take a potential industrial client past the Statesman Park, as it is not a well planned industrial park. He continued by saying the park that the County would develop would be a credit not only to the County Board of Supervisors, but a credit to the residents in the area. He also stated that industrial parks from the inception have changed greatly; the intents changed greatly. Mr. Flanders continued saying a Technology and Development Center such as is being discussed would probably add value to the adjoining property. Supervisor ~1inter asked for an example of things being contemplated and Mr. Flanders indicated engineering firms, and electronic assembly operations; this type industry has a high degree of professional employment and a setting is needed to secure the greatest output from the workers that are contained there. He stated he was working with industrial prospects at this time and the prospects are most impressed with this area for several reasons; one being the fact that the area has excellent higher education facilities that can train people right on site, and also, that the area has the environment which is incomparable and the people with great technological knowledge and a willing work force. Mr. Flanders also stated the County had a "heads up" opportunity to compete in a I I ~ ~ 9-17-82 l89 I I I professional research concept with North Carolina and other parts of the East and South, and as a result of that opportunity to develop and be ready when the economy turns around. He added he is impressed with the concerns and interest of the public and certainly something would be put on the site that would be a credit to the County. Supervisor Minter remarked that one thing that kept coming up is that people realize there is nothing in writing, no maps, no guarantees of what would be on the property and he can understand the citizens being upset. Mr. Flanders stated the property had not been purchased and at the time the property would be purchased detailed covenants would be developed, which would control and citizens could provide assistance in the development of the covenants. He also stated he wanted to emphasize the difference in industry today compared to 10 or 20 years ago, that most industries today were concerned about the asthetics around their facility, and wanted to make sure their neighbors within an industrial park keep the property up, clean, well maintained, and not littered with trash because of the considerable investment in the property. Supervisor Minter stated the Valley had one bad example like Statesman Park, that no one wanted and questioned Mr. Flanders as to an example in the Valley of what would be called a good industry. Supervisors Nickens directed a question to Mr. Flanders asking if with the 53 acres there could be no more than maybe two developments. Mr. Flanders stated what the County is looking at is a technological center that would have maybe 3 to 4 facilities in the park. I i I I I , I I I i I I I i I I Supervisor Myers expressed his opinions by stating he did not approve of the proposed site for industry, that it is in the neighborhood of homes. Mr. Flanders replied Supervisor Minter had asked for an example of an industrial setting. After discussion by the Board it was agreed that settings such as the Allstate or Atlantic buildings are good examples of the landscaping desired. Supervisor Nickens stated another concern of the Board, which should be kept in the forefront, was the fact there are currently about ~ "...- . 9-17-82 1 q () 8,000 unemployed citizens who can not pay taxes nor buy their groceries. Chairman Burton then stated she felt the basic issue was whether or not the County was going to try to find means for providing extra jobs for the development to be in a controlled setting and the I example of Statesman Park is not what the County would want. She continued by saying it is within the poter.tial of the County's control to develop something that would be a credit and have the opportunity for the expansion of the area to provide the means for people to make a living. She stated the County would be faced with this decision time and time again as to whether the County would make available to the citizens greater opportunities economically. Supervisor Minter stated he felt the main problem was that more time was needed and the voting was sudden. Chairman Burton remarked that with time the basic facts were the same, no different information will available for sale, and that once the adjacent property is developed as I be gleaned from the situation; the property is there and going to be industrial that would limit that particular land to no development in its present zoning. Chairman Burton continued by saying with the purchase of the land by the County they would be in a position to prevent a duplication of the eyesore that is now the concern of the citizens of that area. Supervisor Nickens stated to the Board that there were two grants to consider. Chairman Burton responded by stating the Board had passed the grant for the water. Supervisor Johnson stated that a resolution had to be prepared. Supervisor Myers then stated there were citizens in the meeting who wanted to speak and might have something to add to the I discussion. Marilyn Cockfield (2859 Greggin Dr. NE,Roanoke of the LaBellevue subdivision) read a prepared statement relating facts in reference to the Bonsack area. She described the terrain of the area and noted the average - price of the area homes. She also mentioned the proposed Roanoke City ~ .., 9-17-82 19 1 Industrial Park and her opposition to it. She requested assistance from the County to help save the community from the City's industrial sprawl. I I Chairman Burton then recognized Hilda Gibbs (2336 Sourwood St., NE, Roanoke) who stated her question concerned the industrial develop~ent on the 53 acres and she asked if the Board was saying that no one would want houses on the property across the road from the proposed industrial development and industry would have to be built there. Mr. Gubala stated there were no plans to jump Ruritan Road for industrial development and there was vacant land in the area in the same category zoned for residential estates. Supervisor Nickens informed Ms. Gibbs he felt the County was making an attempt to look at some long range planning so that anyone could know where potential development is going to be, and unfortunately the planning sessions in that area had not had good response from the citizens. Ms. Gibbs stated she did not feel this situation was long range planning. Supervisor Nickens replied that the recently scheduled meeting in that area was for citizen input into long range planning. Supervisor Nickens th~l talked about the long range cost of I education and stated that without relief the County could not continue to provide even the services now being provided just in the education area, and increasing the tax base is a reason the County is trying to get industry into the Valley. Supervisor Nickeils continued by commending the citizens for expressing their opinions and said he felt that he and the Board would do everything they could to try to maintain the integrity of the area. He continued by expressing his personal belief that the worst t~ing he could do was to let the emotion of a situation cause him not to vote what he felt was the best for the entire County. Chairman Burton then acknowledged citizen Joyce Johnson (2706 Greggin Dr., NW, Roanoke) who expressed her feeling that this was not a new thought. She said that in LaBellevue there had been discussions regarding the need for schools and a fire station, parks and a library. She stated a petition had been submitted to the School Board in May explaining the needs and these needs are still not planned to be met. i- li~ ,...--- 19 ;~ 9-17-82 Chairman Burton informed Ms. Johnson that the needs mentioned were certainly recognized by the Board and the administration of the County and that they had been looking at properties in the area appropriate for the needs mentioned. After some discussion concerning this matter, I Chairman Burton reminded the group that they were 8etting off the subject and this was not related to the decision that was basically before the Board. Supervisor Johnson informed citizen Joyce Johnson the land had been rejected by the School Board and not by the County Board of Supervisors Chairman Burton stated there were quite different uses for land when you consider the development of a technological park and for a school. After some discussion concerning School Board business Chairman Burton stated the County Board of Supervisors had no authority or jurisdiction over purchase of land for a school and it was the School Board's legal authority. Chairman Burton then reminded those present that the Board was there to consider application for a grant for the development of a tract of land for industrial purposes. I Chairman Burton then recognized Peggy Looney (1945 Ruritan Road, Roanoke) who stated the citizens were requesting, at this time, that the Board vote no and not to apply for the application for the grant. The Board then recognized Kenneth Gibbs (Sourwood St., Roanoke) who said he could understand the County's desire to develop an industrial park, but he felt that rather than the County compete with the City, just as there were a lot of people who do not desire to live in LaBellevue, there were certainly some businesses that would rather develop in another area of the County. lIe added that with the City's plan to develop, it would make more sense for the County to go someplace else to develop. I The Chairman then recognized David Plunkett (4028 Mockingbird Hill) who said the Board had not discussed the 105 acres that had access to a 4 lane highway and rails and would be nice for an industry. -I I ....1 ~ 9-17-82 19~ ------------ Chairman Burton then recognized Mr. Buddy Davis (Homestead Lane, Roanoke) who remarked about the brief time the Board had taken to consider the property acquisition. I Follcwing the discussion, Mr. Minter moved that the application for federal funds for development of an industrial site and the prepared resolution be tabled. The motion was defeated by the following roll call vote: AYES: Supervisors Minter, Myers NAYS: Supervisors Johnson, Nickens, and Burton. Chairman Burton then asked if there was any other motion or action that the Board wished to take in regard to the resolutions before them. Supervisor Nickens stated the Board would have to take action on I the grant proposal as to whether to reject it, and an appropriate resolution to follow that motion. After some discussion regarding the two proposals, Supervisor Minter moved that the Board approve the prepared resolution for the application of the grant for joint water facilities, as follows: RESOLUTION NO. TO BE SUBMITTED AUTHORIZING THE 3255 AUTHORIZING A CERTAIN GRANT APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, AND EXECUTION THEREOF BY THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That a certain grant application identified as a Water Facilities Development Grant made to the Virginia Community Development Block Grant Program in the amount of $700,000.00, be, and hereby is authorized to be I submitted as made and provided by law on behalf of Roanoke County, Virginia; and 2. That Donald R. Flanders, County Administrator of Roanoke County, be, and hereby is authorized and directed to execute and otherwise do all things necessary to submit the aforesaid grant application to the Virginia Community Development Block Grant Program on behalf of Roanoke County, Virginia. Such application to be otherwise upon form approved __, ~ "... lq4 9-17-82 by the County Attorney; and 3. That a duly attested copy of this resolution be affixed to and submitted with the aforesaid grant application to the Virginia Community Development Block Grant Program. Adopted on motion of Supervisor 11inter and the following recorded I vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Myers, 11inter, Nickens, and Burton. NAYS: None Chairman Burton then asked the Board to consider a resolution for application of a grant for the development of an industrial site. Supervisor Nickens addressed the Chairman stating he realized that the motion was not popular, but in light of all the discussion and in light of the possibility of further reviewing other properties, and with the possibility of even modifying the proposed location for this particular development and with the understanding that if the Board did I not in fact apply, the County could lose as much as $700,000. Supervisor Nickens then moved that the grant be submitted, once it is in final draft form and that the prepared resolution be approved as follows: RESOLUTION NO. TO BE SUBHITTED AUTHORIZING THE 3256 AUTHORIZING A CERTAIN GRANT APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, AND EXECUTION THEREOF BY THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That a certain grant application identified as an Industrial Site Development Grant made to the Virginia Community Development Block Grant Program in the amount of $700,000.00, be, and hereby is authorized to be submitted as made and provided by law on behalf of Roanoke County, I Virginia; and 2. That Donald R. Flanders, County Administrator of Roanoke County, be, and hereby is authorized and directed to execute and otherwise do all things necessary to submit the aforesaid grant application to the Virginia Community Development Block Grant Program on behalf of Roanoke County, Virginia. Such application to be otherwise upon form approved - ~i 9-17-82 19 ,..,. ;:) by the County Attorney; and 3. That a duly attested copy of this resolution be affixed to and submitted with the aforesaid grant application to the Virginia Community I Development Block Grant Program. Adopted on motion of Supervisor Nickens and the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Nickens, Burton NAYS: Supervisors Minter and Myers Supervisor Myers preceeded his "Nay" vote with the statement that with the uncertainty of what is to come and with the answer from the County Attorney that he was not positive that the money could be used for some other site, and with the knowledge of not knowing what future Boards would put on the site if it is turned into an Industrial Park, he vote no. I IN RE: VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT MEETING Supervisor Nickens then invited the Board to visit Vinton early on September 30, to look at some of the investments the County has made and is making in the area, such as the water and well systems, Fire and Rescue, and Vinton Recreation Center. IN RE: BOARD COMMENTS Supervisor Johnson stated in reference to Southwest County supposedly having the schools and libraries, that the Cave Spring district does not have a library, that there are citizens in this area and the Windsor Hills area and others who live further, that do not have library I facilities. She felt schools and Fire stations should take precedence over library facilities. Chairman Burton addressed Supervisor Johnson's remarks concerning the schools and related her previous experience in that type service in that there are certain guidelines that are used in determining when it is economically feasible to propose a new school building in an area. She continued by stating that every time a new community develops in a somewhat 1___ j~ "...- 196 9-17-82 remote location, the demand then comes for a school in that immediate area. She stated there has to be a certain school population before the facility can be provided. She also stated that the size of the is a long way from the number of children in the area of LaBellevue. I newer schools being built accommadated from 600 to 900 children and that She added that when the school population justified a new school then the School Board would address the problem in a positive manner, and they also have the prerogative to exercise in that area and for the citizens to expect the Board of Supervisors to make a committment of a school there, by law, could not be done. She also stated it had been brought to her attention that the School Board is considering some properties in that area. Chairman Burton then acknowledged Don Charlton, (Greggin Drive) who asked if the grant was to go out on this date, and could the citizens' petitions or request not to have it, accompany the grant. He then asked for the address of the place to which the grant was to be submitted. He I was given an affirmative answer. Supervisor Myers then requested the County Administrator to in0truct his staff to look for other sites, some having been mentioned at this meeting, and look at other sites in the County, whereby the money, if granted, could be applied. He added that if the money could be used in other industrial sites, he felt it would be better not to use it in the 2rea which ~lad upset so many people. There was some discussion concerning other sites and t1r. Flanders said his department was always looking at alternate sites throughout the County. I llJ RE: SCHEDULE OF BOARD SESSIONS County Administrator Flanders informed the Board that the scheduled Board meeting for October 5 could not be held in the Community ROOTI at the Civic Center. After extensive discussion, Supervisor Myers Iloved that the October 5 meeting be cancelled. The motion was carried - lit..... 9-17-82 197 I I I P' and the following prepared resolution adopted: RESOLUTION NO. 3257 CANCELING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING TO BE HELD ON OCTOBER 5, 1982. BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors scheduled for October 5, 1982 is hereby canceled; and 2. That all public hearings heretofore scheduled and advertised for October 5, 1982, shall be held October 12, 1982, without further advertisement as if same had been duly advertised for October 12, 1982; and 3. That a duly attested copy of this resolution shall be published in the newspaper having general circulation in Roanoke County on September 23, 1982 and September 30, 1982; and further posted on the front door of the Roanoke County Courthouse, the County Administration Building, and the Roanoke County Annex. Adopted on motion of Supervisor Myers and the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Minter, Johnson, and Hyers NAYS: Supervisors Nickens and Burton Chairman Burton then acknowledged an unidentified citizen who asked that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors contact the City of Roanoke and try to get restrictions on the city industrial park to make it a good neighbor to County residents. Supervisor Johnson moved that the Board encourage the City of Roanoke to adopt covenants and restrictions at the proposed City Industrial Park. Her motion was adopted by a unanimous voice vote. IN RE: ADJOURNMENT On motion of Supervisor Johnson, the meeting was adjourned at 9:30 a.m. Motion carried. ~ c(ii~ CHAIRliAN