Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout8/26/2008 - Regular/OAN~ /~ z -o 1838 r I Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Agenda August 26, 2008 Good afternoon and welcome to our meeting for August 26, 2008. Regular meetings are held on the second Tuesday and the fourth Tuesday at 3:00 p.m. Public hearings are held at 7:00 p.m. on the fourth Tuesday of each month. Deviations from this schedule will be announced. The meetings are broadcast live on RVTV, Channel 3, and will be rebroadcast on Thursday at 7:00 p.m. and on Saturday at 4:00 p.m. Our meetings are now closed-captioned, so it is important that anyone addressing the Board speak directly into the microphones at the podium. Individuals who require assistance or special arrangements to participate in or attend Board of Supervisors meetings should contact the Clerk to the Board at (540) 772-2005 at least 48 hours in advance. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 p.m.) 1. Roll Call 2. Invocation: Father Dean Nastos Holy Trinity Greek Orthodox Church 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD T0, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND AUUARDS 1. Proclamation declaring Friday, September 5, 2008, as the ninth annual Virginia Tech Hokie Pride Day in the County of Roanoke D. BRIEFINGS 1 E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Request to appropriate $11,100 for the second year of the Regional Water Supply Plan. (Diane Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer) 2. Request to adopt a resolution affirming the authorization to "pick-up" the employee's contribution to the Virginia Retirement System. (Diane Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer) F. REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS AND FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCES -CONSENT AGENDA: Approval of these items does not indicate support for, or judge the merits of, the requested zoning actions but satisfies procedural requirements and schedules the Public Hearings which will be held after recommendation by the Planning Commission. 1. First reading of an ordinance upon the petition of Starkey Medical, PC to modify existing proffered conditions in a C-1 C, Office District with Conditions, on 1.241 acres located at 5681 Starkey Road, Cave Spring Magisterial District 2. First reading of an ordinance upon the petition of Kroger Limited Partnership to obtain a Special Use Permit in a C-2, General Commercial District, to operate adrive-in and fast food restaurant on 18.02 acres located at 3940 Valley Gateway Boulevard, Vinton Magisterial District G. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES H. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES APPOINTMENTS 1. Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Review Committee (appointed by district) 2. Economic Development Authority 3. Grievance Panel 4. Social Services Advisory Board (appointed by district) 2 J. CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO BE ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. 1. Approval of minutes -June 10, 2008, and August 12, 2008 2. Request from the schools to accept and appropriate funds in the amount of $83,728.05 for Fiscal Year 2008-2009 3. Request to accept and appropriate a Local Government Challenge Grant in the amount of $5,000 from the Virginia Commission for the Arts 4. Confirmation of committee appointment K. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS L. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS M. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS N. REPORTS 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Reserves 3. Reserve for Board Contingency 4. Accounts Paid -July 2008 5. Statement of expenditures and estimated and actual revenues for the month ended July 31, 2008 6. Statement of the Treasurer's Accountability per Investment and Portfolio Policy as of July 31, 2008 O. CLOSED MEETING 3 P. WORK SESSIONS 1. Work session to discuss Community Development Authorities (CDA). (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney; Bonnie France, County's Bond Counsel; Jim Johnson and Kevin Rotty, Morgan Keegan & Company, County's Financial Advisors) 2. Work session to review the issue of parking recreational vehicles on corner lots. (Philip Thompson, Deputy Director of Planning) 3. Work session to discuss the preliminary financial results for year ended June 30, 2008. (Diane Hyatt, Chief Financial Officer; Rebecca Owens, Director, Finance; Brent Robertson, Director, Management and Budget) EVENING SESSION O. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION R. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS 1. Resolution of appreciation to the Bent Mountain Volunteer Fire Company for service and dedication upon its 50t" anniversary 2. Resolution of appreciation to the Bent Mountain Volunteer First Aid and Rescue Crew for service and dedication upon its 45t" anniversary S. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND SECOND READINGS OF ORDINANCES 1. (WITHDRAWN AT THE REQUEST OF THE PETITIONER) Second reading of an ordinance upon the petition of Joe Lambert to obtain a Special Use Permit in a C-2, General Commercial District, to operate adrive-in and fast food restaurant on 0.5 acre, located at 3115 Brambleton Avenue, Windsor Hills Magisterial District. (Philip Thompson, Deputy Director of Planning) 4 2. Second reading of an ordinance upon the petition of George Kemp to obtain a special use permit in a C-2, General Commercial District, to operate adrive-in and fast food restaurant on 1.56 acres located at 3100-B Peters Creek Road, Catawba Magisterial District. (Philip Thompson, Deputy Director of Planning) 3. Second reading of an ordinance upon the petition of Bill Hinton to obtain a special use permit in a C-2, General Commercial District, to operate a car wash on 1.11 acres located at 4035 Challenger Avenue, Vinton Magisterial District. (Philip Thompson, Deputy Director of Planning) T. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS U. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS 1. Charlotte A. Moore 2. Joseph B. "Butch" Church 3. Michael W. Altizer 4. Joseph P. McNamara 5. Richard C. Flora V. ADJOURNMENT 5 AC~I"ION NO. ITEM NO. ~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRAI"ION CENTER MEETING DATE: August 26, 2008 AGENDA ITEM: Proclamation declaring Friday, September 5, 2008, as the ninth annual Hokie Pride Day in the County of Roanoke APPROVED BY: John M. Chambliss, Jr. 9,,~1_ , County Administrator (~"'~~" COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~e~(7-'))I~Q~ ~1rdUa SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Roanoke Valley Hokie Club has requested that the County issue a proclamation declaring Friday, September 5, 2008, as the ninth annual Hokie Pride Day. Roanoke County is pleased to issue this proclamation and commends Virginia Tech, its alumni, friends and supporters for their continued spirit and determination while moving forward from the tragic events of April 76, 2007. Brian Wilson, President, Roanoke Valley Hokie Club, will be present to accept the proclamation. AT A REGULAR MEEI~ING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 26, 2008 PROCLAMATION DECLARING FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 2008, AS THE NINTH ANNUAL HOKIE PRIDE DAY IN THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE WHEREAS, the Roanoke Valley has had a long and mutually beneficial relationship with Virginia Tech, its alumni, and supporters; and is home to many thousands of Virginia Tech alumni and friends of the University; and WHEREAS, Virginia Tech has brought great positive attention to Southwestern Virginia in academics, research, and athletics; and the supporters of Virginia Tech feel great pride in the accomplishments of the University; and WHEREAS, the Virginia Tech Hokie Club, which extends membership to any and all supporters of Virginia Tech, is promoting Friday, September 5, 2008, as the ninth annual Virginia Tech Hokie Pride Day; and WHEREAS, the County of Roanoke wishes to recognize the positive impact of Virginia Tech on its community and to encourage all supporters of Virginia Tech, both individuals and businesses, to demonstrate their Hokie pride. NOW THEREFORE, WE, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, do hereby proclaim Friday, September 5, 2008, as the nineth annual HOKIE PRIDE DAY in the County of Roanoke, and call its significance to the attention of all of our citizens; and FI,IRTHER, we extend our best wishes to Virginia Tech, its alumni, friends, and supporters for continued success in future endeavors. ACTION NO. ITEM NO. ~. _ ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: August 26, 2008 Request to appropriate $11,100 for the second year of the Regional Water Supply Plan Diane D. Hyatt Chief Financial Officer John M. Chambliss, Jr. ~~~ County Administrator ` COUNTY ADM/IN~IJSTRATOR'S COMMENTS: / r~ /`/r/~~.'~c~:-~. //7~J St'Cs,.ae~/Js•~.~s~e~,...7'E G~c»'+~~t.C"P,/ Ocr•- ~jhct-t B G c~ initi t'.v BACKGROUND: -fhe Greater Roanoke Regional Water Supply Plan is being developed to comply with the State Water Control Board's regulation 9 VAC 25-780, Local and Regional Water Supply Plaririing, which mandates that "All counties, cities and towns in the Commonwealth of Virginia shall submit a local water supply plan or shall participate in a regional planning unit in the submittal of a regional water supply plan to the board in accordance with this chapter." Thirteen local governments are participating in the regional water supply plan and include the Counties of Bedford, Botetourt, Franklin, and Roanoke; the Cities of Bedford, Roanoke, and Salem; and •the Towns of Boones Mill, Buchanan, Fincastle, Rocky Mo~.int, Troutville, and Vinton. The Bedford County Public Service Authority and the Western Virginia Water Authority are also participating. The Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission is coordinating this planning effort and Draper Aden Associates (DAA) is the project consultant. The Greater Roanoke Regional Water Supply Plan is being developed using a phased, multi-year planning process. Phase I (FY 2007) was funded, in part, by a $30,000 grant from the Virginia Department o•F Environmental Quality (VDEQ) Local and Regional Water Supply Planning Competitive Grants Program. Phase II (FY 2008-2009) is being funded by an additional $20,000 in grant funding from DEQ and $200,000 is cash and in-kind contributions From the participating local governments, public service/water authorities, and the Regional Commission. The Greater Roanoke Regional Water Supply Plan is scheduled for completion in late 2008. A public information meeting was held on May 21, 2008 and additional meetings will be scheduled in the fall. Once completed, each local government will be required to adopt the plan as outlined in regulation 9 VAC 25-780. Additional information is available at http://www. rvarc.orq/water/home. htm. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: On March 27, 2007, the County approved Roanoke County's participation in this regional plan and appropriated $21,469 towards the project, which represents the first year allocation for Roanoke County. As shown on Attachment A, this is a two year project. The second year allocation for Roanoke County is $11,100. FISCAL IMPACT: The second year allocation of $11,100 needs to be appropriated. Funds are available in the Board contingency account. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends appropriating $11,100 from the Board contingency account to pay the second year allocation for Roanoke County's portion of the development of a regional water supply plan. ATTACHMENT A C id 2 Q Q .7 L Q1 t{i C 0 .~ A C 07 Q ~ ~ o ea o > ~ Y G O Q C ~ ~ O ~v ~~~ L, ' N d' LA tfl {~ o'7 r N 'd' ~- i`- Cp O <Y' ti O d' O f~ r to 1~ h- r CO tA O Q `~- Z CO h Of ; ' O„ - SC; ~ p, t6 f~i W ER ~ lA O t.g O O 64 r Sfi ~} ~ (fl @T r t0 r EF! 64 EA ER ~"' fA d' } w. O; ~~ ~}t~' ~' <~ t~ N eY M M ~ ~ d ~ N ~ ~' ~ N ~ fA; ~ r o0 tp CO CU cS' EA M fA r r r d' N ~ 6~? Ef3 d} ER EA ~': r ;;~. Q; M}~;lVl. ' 3~ + "i 'O `s` "' O M M C~ tt e7 0 C0 0 r (A N CS> CD CA r tp r O l!') CX7 6> 0 CO 0 ~ Q ~^ to O ~" ~ ` CO CO M GO N CA ~ 4n r EA Ln EA r tf! CD r fA N Z r ~'~ £ ~ M ~ e- N -- • M EA ~ R o< ~ , < ~4 ~:.. , .C d'y ,.~+ , . , i31, p; C p ~ ~ N N a ~ O t4 ` W O r N a h ~ - N Q ~ O ~'''4-~~-Q r tV ~ O ~ ~ N O O O ~- O (V (j a-; ~• a° b ~ ~ m C = +' O' ~N: ~ r r O n tl' ti N h ~!' ~- ti M ~ M ZA Cfl O) ~ ~ CiO M d 7 to C OO N ry oN0 Q . ~ ~ w N t o 7 ~ N N [+7 p C Ct h, ,, Z v+ ~ ~` 0 . ~ 3; V ~' c0 ~ O et N a N C CO N ~ f f' r .~' ~ '. a : d° • ~ 3 :0 fA:~ rn 03 r 61 v r- rn V' i M o N ~ t1 ~ M M ~ m CO M N 00 Q ~' 1 V V ~ V V V ~ ~ ~ o ~ V w a ` o~; a v ~ ~ ~ ~ O Y ~ w a O ~ Y Y , c w ep ~ c O a . ' a ~ ~ w iY ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~° o~ :: d U3 0 c 0 0 0 O M H tU C N ~. L w Q C V ~ O Q- Y Q O ~ ~' N L r ^' V N U ~ O .~ ~~ y ~ j O ~ C O U ~ L Q ~O U N N Ll. t ~ ~ ~ G ro o d1 N w ~ ~ 4S N C N y rn ~ U 0 0 ~ ~ d} Q o ~~ c o m m Q. 0 N (6 ~' ~ '" LL s N y„ U O ~ m ~ ~ o o:8,sz o ~ a~ ~ .~ ~ '~ ~ ~~ ACTION NO. ITEM NO. ~ ~'~~°' AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRAI-ION CENTER MEETING DATE: August 26, 2008 AGENDA ITEM: Request to adopt a resolution affirming the authorization to "pick-up"the employee's contribution to the Virginia Retirement System SUBMITTED BY: Diane D. Hyatt Chief Financial Officer APPROVED BY: John M. Chambliss County Administrator ~~ COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~L !~ f!C-O in.n eyys ~/ ~~r.a r<../'. "7~,'•.! i ~~ ~a ~k . .~.r -~o.- ,~ %~ • S • fo r' ~ < va ., : ~ ~- f~~ L.c~uir shy ! P~:y~ r., >' U t' 't/~ c. (~ P~ .5 C Syr, f%':.~i t.7~~ ~'il . ~i~ ~'r~ ~ ir_T C. ~J n n~f N_ S Lt.i ~T " r /SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: In July 1980, the County of Roanoke began paying the employee share (5 percent) of the VRS contribution rate. Throughout the Commonwealth, all but about 31 of the more than 700 VRS covered employers offer this benefit. Recently, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) issued Revenue Ruling 2006-43 giving governmental employers until January 1, 2009, to demonstrate "formal authorization" of their pick-up plans. A pick-up plan allows the Virginia Retirement System (VRS) member contribution (5 percent) to be treated on a pre-tax basis. This ruling requires VRS to conduct a full audit of pick-up plan resolutions and obtain a formal resolution from each VRS employer offering this benefit. VRS has provided us with the attached resolution which will meet this iRS requirement. "this resolution does not change anything the County is currently doing. It merely documents the process in an acceptable manner for the new IRS ruling. FISCAL IMPACT: As a VRS employer who has previously chosen to "pick-up" the employee's contribution, we are already required by state law to continue to do so, whether or not we submit a proper resolution. However, failure to submit a resolution could reverse the favorable tax treatment of our employees' member contributions, which could impose significant additional multi-year reporting and recordkeeping burdens on the County and subject our employees to additional tax liabilities. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adopting the attached resolution affirming the authorization to "pick-up" the employee's contribution to VRS. AT A REGULAR MEE"PING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 26, 2008 RESOLUTION Affirmation of Authorization to Pick-up the Employee's Contribution to VRS for ROANOKE COUNTY, 55180 Under § 414(h) of the Internal Revenue Code WHEREAS, ROANOKE COUNTY provides its employees with tax deferral pursuant to § 414(h) of the Internal Revenue Code with respect to their member contributions to the Virginia Retirement System (referred to as VRS) by picking up member contributions to VRS; and WHEREAS, VRS keeps track of such picked up member contributions, and treats such contributions as employee contributions for all purposes of VRS; and WHEREAS, the Internal Revenue Service in Notice 2006-43 has provided transition relief for existing pick up arrangements provided that an authorized person takes formal action to evidence the establishment of the pick-up arrangement no later than January 1, 2009; and WHEREAS, in order to avail itself of the protection given under Notice 2006-43, ROANOKE COUNTY desires to affirm its intention to establish and maintain spick-up arrangement through formal action by its governing body. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED that the existing member contribution pick-up arrangement is hereby affirmed as it relates to salary reduction elections in effect prior to the date of this Resolution, and it is further RESOLVED that effective the first pay day on or after August 26, 2008, ROANOKE COUNTY shall pick up member contributions of its employees to VRS, and such contributions shall be treated as employer contributions in determining tax treatment under the Internal Revenue Code of the United States; and it is further RESOLVED that such contributions, although designated as member contributians, are to be made by ROANOKE COUNTY in lieu of member contributions; and it is further RESOLVED that pick up member contributions shall be paid from the same source of funds as used in paying the wages to affected employees; and it is further RESOLVED that member contributions made by ROANOKE COUNTY under the pick up arrangement shall be treated for all purposes other than income taxation, including but not limited to VRS benefits, in the same manner and to the same extent as member contributions made prior to the pick up arrangement; and it is further RESOLVED that nothing herein shall be construed so as to permit or extend an option to VRS members to receive the pick up contributions made by ROANOKE COUNTY directly instead of having them paid to VRS; and it is further RESOLVED that notwithstanding any contractual or other provisions, the contributions of each member of VRS who is an employee of ROANOKE COUNTY shall be picked up either through a reduction in the current salary of such employee or as an offset against future salary increases of such employee or as a combination of both at the option of the employer by ROANOKE COUNTY on behalf of such employee pursuant to the foregoing resolutions. Adopted in ROANOKE COUNTY, Virginia this 26t" day of August, 2008. Name & Title Printed Authorized Signature- Title 1715639 2 8/2006 ACTION NO. -; ITEM NO. ~ ~ ~-- AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: August 26, 2008 AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: Requests for public hearing and first reading for rezoning ordinances; consent agenda Philip Thompson Deputy Director of Planning APPROVED BY: John Chambliss County Administrator j•~ COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROIIND: The first reading on these ordinances is accomplished by adoption of these ordinances in the manner of consent agenda items. The adoption of these items does not imply approval of the substantive content of the requested zoning actions; rather, approval satisfies the procedural requirements of the County Charter and schedules the required public hearing and second reading of these ordinances. The second reading and public hearing on these ordinances is scheduled for September 23, 2008. The titles of these ordinances are as follows: 1. The petition of Starkey Medical, PC to modify existing proffered conditions in a C- 1 C, Office District with Conditions, on 1.241 acres located at 5681 Starkey Road, Cave Spring Magisterial District 2. The petition of Kroger Limited Partnership to obtain a Special Use Permit in a C-2, General Commercial District, to operate a drive-in and fast food restaurant on 18.02 acres located at 3940 Valley Gateway Boulevard, Vinton Magisterial District Maps are attached. More detailed information is available in the Clerk's Office. Page 1 of 2 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends as follows: 1. "that the Board approve and adopt the first reading of these rezoning ordinances forthe purpose of scheduling the second reading and public hearing for September 23 2008. 2. That this section of the agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth as Item(s) 112, and that the Clerk is 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 action. Page 2 of 2 „~ i.. v ~Z.- ~~~ County of Roanoke F aff Use Only Q ~ ~ --, Community Dev menr._ ;2Dp8 Planning & Zon ~~ r~/~'~NTp;: rcived: -3-0 8 tzcceivtxtby: ,:COp,1~f,'tr 5244 Bernard Driv r lication Cec: ~~ ~tQ~{(`- ~ ~IS'S PC/BZA date: ~- -d~ P O BOX 29$UU Roanoke, VA 240 ] 8-0798 rlacards issued: DOS date: .-7 C~, ~ ~ ~ (540) 772-2068 FAX (540) 776-7155 Case Numf~cr ! ~- 7 c7 l~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r; r, l i ALL APPLICANTS Check type of application filed {check all that apply) Rezoning ^ Special Use 0 Variance ^ Waiver ^ Administrative Appeal 0 Comp Plan (IS.2-2232) Review Applicants name/address w/zip Phone: ~G -Z7 ~' S3Q(~ PA`{ Gn/l-1:~N'EA~ Gl~-1C~N EA~7 c'~ A~4 Work: ~`j 2 f ~jRl~1tA.P2L~Tr%~J A~1 i~.. Cell ff: 2. t 4 ' ' • ~ J • ~ T ? ' 12$ 6 j >t.3 ~ ~~/~ 2~-a ! 5 Fax No.: Qwner's name/address w/zip Phone #: ST~12~.r~Y N1~R1G~S.L. work: 54a -- '17C~ -?~v3C7 ~~- j ~i'A~4 iFl~~f )s~A~ Fax No. #: A, ~ CALL.. I Property L.ocalion Magisterial District: G,~vF ~?~~•I~LXv ~~~ ~ Community Planning area: S 1~ p~i1;Y Q2D2Q Tax Map No.: $~ ` S ...OI"'~,~` ~(j p Existing Zoning: C ~ t ~~ GDS Q t-r1 yi,S~j Size ofparccl(s): Acres: 1 • ~'j Existing Land Use: OFF-jG~ . ~~ t}.i>~S~j REZONING, SPECIAL, USE PERMIT, {i~AIYER AND COMP PLAN (IS.?-3a3?) REl'IEf!' APPLICANTS (R/S/W/CP) Proposed Zoning: G ' 1 1-~~T1-~ G~7~-1171Tt~~j C~-'lbt~t }F1~ Proposed Land Use: rYL -~ a' y~ x,g~"~, ZSt~'Tte~ Does the parcel meet the minimum lot arcs, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? Yes No IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIR Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for the requested Use Typc? es No IF NO, A VARIANCE 1S REQUIRED FIRST if rezoning request, are conditions being proiTered with this request? Yes No YARIriNCE, 1i''AII~ER AND ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAI..APPLICANTS {I//N'/AA) Variancc/Waivcr of Section(s) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in order to: Appeal of Zoning Administrator's decision to Appeal of Interpretation of Section(s): of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance Appea} of Interpretation of Zoning Map to Is the aonlicaiion complete? Please check ifenclosed. APPC,ICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IFANY OF THESE ITC ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. .MS tvsnvicr viaa tvsnvicr viaa ttrsnvrcr vim Consultation 8 112" x I t" concept plan Application fee A licat}on ~.__ .~~ pp ~; Metes and bounds descriptio ~`~'~ ProfTers. if app{icable Justification X~~ Water and sewer applic. io Adjoining property ortimers I hereby certify that I am either the owner ofthe property or the er's l trac purchaser and am acting with the knowledge and consent of the owner Owner's Signature JUSTIFICATION FOR REZONING, SPECIAL USE PERMIT WAIVER OR COMP PLAN tt~z-2zazl REVIEW REQUEST'S Applicant The Planning Commission will study rezoning, special use permit waiver or community plan (15?-2232) review requests to determine the need and justification for the change in terms of public health, safety, and general welfare. Please answer the following questions as thoroughly as possible, Use additional space if necessary_ Please explain how the request furthers the purposes of the Roanoke County Ordinance as well as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning dislricE classification in the Zoning Ordinance, Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Community Plan. Please describe the impact(s) of the request on the property itself, the adjoining properties, and the surrounding area, as well as the impacts on public services and facilities, inc}uding waEedsewer, roads, schools, parks/recreation and fire and rescue. 3 CONCEPT PLAN CHECKLfST A concept plan of the proposed project must be submitted with the application. The concept plan shalt ~phically depict the land use change, development or variance that is to be considered- CuRher, the plan shall address any potential land use or design issues arising from the request. In such cases involving rczonings, the applicant may proffer conditions to limitthc future use and development of'the property and by so doing, correct any deficiencies that may not be manageable by County permitting regulations. The concept plan should not be confused with the site plan or plot plan that is required priarto the issuance of a building permit.. Site plan and building permit procedures ensure compliance with State and County development regulations and may require changes to the initial concept plan. Unless limiting conditions are proffered and accepted in a rezoning or imposed on a special use permit or variance, the concept plan may be altered to the extent permitted by the zoning district and other regulations.. A concept plan is required with all rezoning, special use permit, waiver, community plan (15.,2-2232) review and variance applications, The plan should be prepared by a professional site planner.. The level of detail may vary, depending on the nature of the request. The County Planning Division staff may exempt same of the items or suggest the addition of extra items, but the following are considered minimum: AGL PLICANTS a. Applicant name and name of development / b. Date, scale and north arrow /' a L.ot size in acres or square feet and dimensions ,L d_ Location, names of owners and Roanoke County tax map numbers of adjoining properties ~ e. Physical features such as ground cover, natural watercourses, floodplain, etc. ~ f. The zoning and land use of ap adjacent properties ~g. All property lines and easements _/ h. All buildings, existing and proposed, and dimensions, floor area and heights /^ i. Location, widths and names of all existing or platted streets or other public ways within or adjacent to the development `~ j. Dimensions and locations of all driveways, Barking spaces and loading spaces Additional inforn-ation regr~ired for REZONING acrd SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICANTS ~ k. L-xisting utilities (water, sewer, storm drains) and connections at the site ~ 1 Any driveways, entrances/exits, curb openings and crossovers _~ m. Topography map in a suitable scale and contour intervals ~n. Approximate street grades and site distances at intersections o. Locations of a[l adjacent fire hydrants / p. Any profTered conditions at the site and how they are addressed q [f project is to be phased, please show phase schedule I ce ' ' at all items r quir d in the checklist above are complete., Signature o licant ~ ~~+"` ~- ~ •~~ Date Community Development Planning & Zoning Division NOTICE TO APPLICANTS FOR REZONING, SUBDIVISION WAIVER, PUBLIC STREET WAIVER, OR SPECIAL USE PERMIT PETITION PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION ACCEPTANCE PROCEDURE The Roanoke County Planning Commission reserves the right to continue a Rezoning, Subdivision Waiver, Public Street Waiver or Special Use Permit petition if new or additiona! information is presented at the public hearing. if it is the opinion of the majority of the Planning Commissioners present at the scheduled public hearing that sufficient time was not available for planning staff and/or an outside referral agency to adequately evaluate and provide written comments and suggestions on the new or additional information prior to the scheduled public hearing then the Planning Gammission may vote to continue the petition, This continuance shall allow sufficient time for all necessary reviewing parties to evaluate the new or additional information and provide written comments and suggestions to be included in a written memorandum by planning staff to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission shall consult with planning staff to determine if a continuance may be warranted, POTENTIAL OF NEED FOR TRAFFIC ANALYSES AND/OR TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY The Roanoke County Planning Commission reserves the right to continue a Rezoning, Subdivision Waiver, Public Street Waiver, or Special Use Permit petition if the County Transportation Engineering Manager or staff from the Virginia Department of Transportation requests further traffic analyses and/or a traffic impact study that would be beneficial in making a land use decision (Note.• a list of potential land uses and situations that would necessitate, further study is provided as part of this application package). This continuance shall allow sufficient time for all necessary reviewing parties to evaluate the required traffic analyses and/or traffic impact study and to provide written comments and/or suggestions to the planning staff and the Planning Commission, If a continuance is wairanted, the applicant will be notified of the continuance and the newly scheduled public hearing date. Efi'eetive Daie: April 19, 2005 Name of Potitlon ~- ~f,~-~ Itione s Sigaat ~~ ~~6~ Date ~ ry0Ary0k a. ~ ti Z ~ ~, z v ~" a 1838 ~;r,;- Community Development - - ~-i Planning & Zoning Division ;,~ POTENTIAL OF NEED FOR TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AND/OR TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY The following is a list of potentially high traffic-generating land uses and road network situations that could elicit a more detailed analysis of the existing and proposed traffic pertinent to your rezoning, subdivision waiver, public street waiver, or special use permit request. If your request involves one of the items on the ensuing list, we recommend that you meet with a County planner, the County 7ransportat[on Engineering Manager, and/or Virginia Department of Transportation staff to discuss the potential additional traffic related information that may need to be submitted with the application in order to expedite your application process. (Note this list is not inclusive and the t~'ounty staff and I/DOT reserve the right to request a traffic study at any time, as deemed necessary.) High Traffic-Generating Land Uses: • Single-family residential subdivisions, Multi-family residential units, or Apartments with mare than 75 dwelling units • Restaurant (with or without drive-through windows} • Gas station/Convenience store/Car wash • Retail shop/Shopping center • Offices (including: fnancial institutions, general, medical, etc.) • Regional public facilities • Educational/Recreational facilities • Religious assemblies • Hotel/Motes • Golf course • Hospital/Nursing home/Clinic • Industrial site/Factory • Day care center • Bank • Non-specific use requests Road Network Situations: • Development adjacent to/with access onto/within 500-ft of intersection of a roadway classified as an arterial road (e.g., Rte 11, 24, 115, 117, 460, 11/460, 220, 221, 419, etc) • For new phases or changes to a development where a previously submitted traffic study is more than two (2) years old and/or roadway conditions have changed significantly • When required to evaluate access issues • Development with ingress/egress on roads planned or scheduled for expansion, widening, improvements, etc. {i.e. on Long Range Transportation Plan, Slx-Yr Road Plan, etc.) • Development in an area where there is a known existing traffic and/or safety problem • Development would potentially negatively impact existing/planned traffic signal(s) • Substantial departure from the Community Plan • Any site that is expected to generate over one hundred (i0Q) trips during the peak hour of the traffic generator or the peak hour on the adjacent streets, or over seven hundred fifty {750) trips in an average day C~AIGHEAD A550CIAT~S Architects, Designers, Construction Managers Rezoning with the deletion of Existing Proffered Conditions with new Proffered Conditions Starkey Road 5681 Starkey Road Roanoke, VA. Prepared by; Craighead and Associates, Architects July 3, 2aas RAY CRAIGHEAD. ARCHITECT • 2721 BRAMBGETON AVENUE. S W. • P.O SOX 46fi2 . ROANOKE. VA. 24015 . ~540~ 774-5326 Narrative Stateanent Purpose The owner requests an amendment to the existing proffers of the parcel located at 5681 Starkey Road in order to construct a new building with associated site work per the attached Concept Site plan as Prepared by Craighead and Associates, Architects, dated 3uly 3, 2008, with proffers in order to allow for the expansion of an existing medical practice on site. Introduction The current property is being used for an existing medical practice, instructional facility. The current zoning of C-1 (with proffers }will be maintained through the expansion of the existing facility. The proposed site plan and building plan is in conformance to the planned Commercial Development for this property. The proposed building will set directly behind the existing facility and will be constructed to compliment and maintain the existing style and character of the original building. Materials will be consistent with the neighborhood buildings and characters. The proposed building will consist of approximately 4750 square feet on the first floor with approximately 1850 sf on the upper level. Final layouts may adjust the actual final size. The proposed building will be approximately 34 feet tall. The proposed site plan will keep the parking located approximately in line with the front of the existing building, thus maintaining the current street scope along Starkey Road. The additional parking and layout have been presented to the Roanoke County Engineering Department in regard to the construction of the building being located within the flood plain of the stream located on the south side of the property and the parking area proposed within the flood way of the stream. A new and updated flood certificate with field data elevations has been performed. Preliminary approval subject to f nal engineering review and comments has been given. The proposed additional building will share the existing water meter and sewer lines for the facility. No additional meter is contemplated. The existing facility is used predominately after 5:00 in the evening and the new building will be used during the conventional workday of 8-5 Monday thru Friday. The proffered conditions currently in place are attached as Attachment A, The proposed amendments to replace the existing is attached as Attachment B. The proposed site changes are in agreement to the development master plan for the azea. it will allow for the existing usage to grow and provide for the owner to meet their expansion growth plans. Area and Adjacent Users The property located directly to the north and south of the subject property is currently zoned G- 1.The property to the north is being occupied as a residence and has design characteristics of a residential building. The property to the south is being used as office space and it to has design characteristics of a residential building. The property located at the west rear area is also currently zoned C-1 which is a vacant property. The property located in the northwest corner of the property (accessed by a I S' easement noted on the site plan) is currently zoned R-1 and is being used as a single family residence. Conclusions The Owners seeks the vacation of the existing proffered conditions for the property located at 5681 Starkey Road (Tax Map Parcel # 87.18-01-40.00, consisting of l .241 acres }with proposed proffered conditions as attached to the request. The owner believes the changes requested will be in conformance with the current zoning and development plan for the area, and will greatly enrich and improve the area. I,egai Description BEGINNING at a point on the westerly side of Starkey Road, Virginia Secondary Rt. 904 at the Southeasterly corner of the property now or formerly known as the Baptist Parsonage; thence with the westerly side of Starkey Road South 24 16' West I54 feet to a point in the center of a dry branch; thence leaving Starkey Road North 73 30' West 310.6 feet to a point; thence north 21 37' East 191.75 feet to a point; thence South 66 33' East 316,6 feet to the point and place of beginning. LIST ®F ADJA.CEN'I' I'I~®P]EIZTY ®~VNEIaS Parcel Owner Tax Number 5695 Starkey Road Thomas E. Scarce Living Trust Tax # 87.18-01-41.00 Current Zoning: C-1 PO Box 462 Roanoke, VA. 24015 5669 Starkey Road Warren S, & Ilona Coburn Tax # $7.18-01-39A0 Current Zoning: Gl 5669 Starkey Road Empty Lot Roanoke, VA. 24018 5669 Starkey Raad Warren S. & Ilona Coburn Tax # 87.18-01-54.00 Current Zoning: R-1 5669 Starkey Road Roanoke, VA_ 24018 5665 Starkey Road Anthony J & Tina L. Musama Tax # 87.18-01-38.00 Current Zoning: G-1 5665 Starkey Road Raanoke, VA. 24018 A~'`T~c~ivc ~T ` '~' CORRECTED - 9128101 (SEE 1TALICSI AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 4F ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, AUGUST 28, 2001 ORDINANCE 082801-13 TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A 1.13-ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED AT 5681 STARKEY ROAD, (TAX MAP NO. 87.18-1~0) IN THE CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C-t OFFICE DISTRICT WITH CONDITIONS TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C-f WITH GONDITIONS UPON THE APPLICATION OF RA-DE DIV., LTD., TIA PERFECT TOUCH. WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on July 24, 2001, and the second reading and public hearing were held August 28, 2001; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on August 7, 2009; and WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law. BE !T ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as fOIIOWS: That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing 1.13 acres, as described herein, and Located at 5681 Starkey Road (Tax Map Number 87.18-'{- 40) in the Cave Spring Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of C-I Office District with conditions, to the zoning classification of C-l, Office District wifh conditions, 2. That this action is taken upon the application of RA-DE Div,., Ltd., TIA Perfect Touch. 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. G:~BQARD\2QOi\Aug28\8-28R.A-DE Div#13.doc (1) That the existing residence on the property would be used for the office use ~~e ~• (2) "that there will be no printing in connection with the business operation. (3) The existing house structure is limited to future enlargement not to exceed 100 square feet and shall be built behind the front line of the existing house. (4) . Signage s1~alTbe limifed to 24 square feet, 5 feet in height. Monument style sign shall be required. (5) The cinder block garage to the rear of the existing dwelling will be used only in connection with the operation of the business on the property and will not be teased to outside businesses. (6) All on-site parking shall occur to the rear of the front line of the existing dwelling. If petitioners choose to construct additional parking, that parking shall be of a pervious surface. (7) Landscaping is to be planted to provide a visual buffer between the existing parking lot and Starkey Road, Landscaping shall include at a minimum, 9-2 Leyland Cyprus or other evergreen type tree, not to include white pine, and 3-4 deciduous or evergreen bushes planted along the eastern side of the parking lof. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the westerly side of Starkey Road, Virginia Secondary Rt. 904 at the Southeasterly comer of the property naw or formerly known as the Baptist Parsonage; thence with the westerly side of Starkey Road South 24 ° 16' West 154 feet to a paint in the center of a dry branch; thence leav ing Starkey Road North 73 30' West 310.6 feet to a point; thence North 21 37' East 191.75 feet to a point; thence South 66° 33' East 316.6 feet to the point and place of beginning 5. That this ordinance shall be in hall 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 G:\HOARD\2661\Ang28\8-28RA-DE Div#13.doc to amend fhe zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McNamara, Church, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: .~ - ~~GG.c.w Mary H. AI-en, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Amold Covey, Director, Community Development Janet Scheid, Senior Planner John W. Birckhead, Director, Real Estate Valuation Paul M, Mahoney, County Attorney G:\BOARD\2002\Aug28\8-28RA-DE Div#13 doc ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ Proffered Conditions 1. The existing building is to remain with minor improvements. 2. Total Signage shall be limited to 24 square feet. 3. Landscaping shall be added to provide a visual barrier of the parking area from Starkey Road. 4. That the proposed improvements will be in substantial conformance with the concept plan, as prepared by Craighead and Associates, Architects dated July 3, 2008, subject to final building and site engineering. ~G~~ .~ t ~- QP °~ a a ?~IGar° t~6Et~1GL. ~ ~ . 0 A.~ ~~ ~s 0 o- ``' ~J °S, N (74 Y~ C ~} C ~ J ~~ ,~ Y ~ ii ; Q ~~ ~ ~_ , ~~ ~~~ r ~~~`~ ~~ ~„ ~ v ,y~ u Zvi U 11 ~~. ~1 V ~,. 1 ~~ ~~ N ~ v d s ~ ~_ ~~ ~,~ ~,~~ r q ~ ,~ 'L , Q 4 s~ 'i` ~='~: e Site 1-- Land Use _ Conservation Rural Preserve - Rural Vllage Village Center Development Neighborhood Conservation Transition _ Core - Principal Industrial N Applicants Name: Craighead & Associates -Starkey Medical Roanoke County Existing Zoning: C1C Department of ~ Proposed Zoning.' C1C Tax Map Number: 087.18-01-40.00-0000 Community Development Magisterial District.' Cave Spring Area: 1.241 Acres 8 July, 2008 Scale: 1" = 200' I I / \ / \ ISitel Zoning - AG3 _ EP - AG1 AR - AV C1 C2 C2CVOD 11 12 PCD PRD ® PTD R1 R2 R3 R4 RB GB ~, CB M1 _ M2 Applicants Name: Craighead & Associates - Starkey Medical Roanoke County Existing Zoning: C1C Department of ~ Proposed Zoning: C1C Tax Map Number: 087.18-01-40.00-0000 Community Development Magisterial District: Cave Spring Area: 1.241 Acres 8 July, 2008 Scale: 1" = 200' J County of Roanoke ,~,~n~~~~~`~?~ Community De prt~~lit,'t'TO Planning & Zo p~`'~~ ~ 5204 Bernard Drive P O Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 240]8-0798 (540) 772-2068 FAX (540) 776-7 i 55 Staff Use Onl ate received: r7-3-0 6 9 00 Application fce: ~~ fin! ~ !:.~a:-' ~I f t'I Piacardsissued: Case Number ~~~ - ~~ Received by. PC/BZA dale: a-~~ B05 d e: ~-0 0 ~'/~~~r~ -.. ,~,r~c" r_. -.ter .~~. - .:. _ - _ _tlsLfr~P~L;tI~4 Check type of application filed (check all that apply) ^ Rezoning ~ Special Use 0 Variance U Waiver ~ Administrative Appeal O Comp Plan tts.z-ztsz) Review Applicants name/address w/zip Ms . Annette Morqan Phone: Kroger Limited Partnership IVi'ork: ~4()~Sht!3341i 3631 Peters Creek Road Cell #: Roanoke VA 24036 FaxNo,: Owner's name/address w/zip nits . Annette Morqan Phone #: Kroger Limited Partnership I Work: 5Qt} f Sh t _ 3 "~4R 3631 Peters Creek Road FaxNo_#: X40 f 5ti~~ti,EiZ Property Location Magisterial District: Vinton Challenger Avenue {Route 460) Community Planning area: Vinton Tax Map No.: _01-01-05.08- Existing Zoning: C 2 Size of parcel(s): Acres: Existing Land Use: Comm e r i c a 1- V a e an t - ~ -~ h ew : ,y ~ ~ ~ 'n .~U~' Proposed Zoning: _,C2 Proposed Land Use-:_ Restaurant Drive=in and.- Fast Food the parcel meet the minimum loi area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? Yes No IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FI es the parcel meet the minimt.rm criteria for the requested Use Type? es No IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? Yes No 1 -~.,` ~ 'dig= ' j~~ ~ tF .i~ l ~*?'x Variance/Waiver of Sections} of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in order to: Appeal of Zoning Administrator's decision to Appeal of Interpretation of Section(s): of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance Appeal of Interpretation of Zoning Map to Is the application complete? Please check ifenclosed. APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. tilS/WJCP V/AA Pt/S/VVICP v/AA x Consultation X 8 1/2" x l I" concept plan Application Metes and bounds description Justification Water and sewer application l hereby certify that I am either the owner of the property or the owner's agent or contr of Ehe owner. ! i ~~ ~/ ~ /~ 1 R/SIVV/CP V/AA X Application fee Proffers, if applicable Adjoining property owners act purchaser and am acting with the knowledge and consent ~, . Owner's Signature 2 ... .. _., JUSTI)[rICAfiION FOR REZONING, SPECIAL USiE:PERiVIIT W~iIVER(?lt t^U1Vi'P-PI.AN:psa~z3i~ REV)(EW .... ,.. - REQUES'I`5 . Applicant ~rnQPr T,im;ted ~artr.~.Q~ship T The Planning Commission will study rezoning, special use permit waiver or community plan (IS.Z-2232) review requests to determine the need and justification for the change in terms of public health, safety, and general welfare Please answer the following questions as thoroughly as possible, Use additional space if necessary Please explain how the request furthers the purposes of the Roanoke County Ordinance as well as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning district classification in the Zoning Ordinance. The Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance for C2 Zoning designates this area for a variety of retail and services related issues. C2 Zoning allows restaurants with fast food delivery require a special use permit. A Drive-thru is not being requested. Pian. explain haw the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Community Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan designates this area within a core land use area locted along the Route 460 corridor. The core land'use area designation permits a variety of retail and commerical uses. Section 30-19 permits a restaurant, drivelin .and fast food. Please describe the impact(s) ofthe request on the property itself, the adjoining properties, and the surrounding area, as well as the impacts on public services and facilities, including water/sewer, roads, schools, parks/recreation and fire and rescue. The proposed Domino's Restaurant will be located in shops >~uilding "B".within the Kroger Shopping Center. The restaurant will offer both carryout anc? delivery. This location will not provide an area for dine-in eating. Vehicular access will be internal from the Shopping Center. A traffic impact study for the entire Kroger Shopping Center was submitted and approved by Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). The results of the study were incorporated into the design of the Shopping Center. 3 AD30IN1NG PROPERTY OWNER LISTING Address of Subject Property: Tax Mats No: Present Zoning: Special Use Pern~it: Owner: Challenger Avenue {Route 460) 050.01-01-05.12-0000 CZ C2, with special use permit for Fast Food Kruger Limited Parhiership I Applicant: Annette Morgan Kroger Limited Partnership I 3631 Peters Creek Road Roanoke, Virginia 240.3$ AD.IOINING PROPERTY OWNERS This list as follows are those property owners who own property beside, behind or across the street from the subject property noted above: COUNTY OF ROANOKE Official Tax Number Owner's Name and Mailing: Address 040.17-02-13.00-0000 Frances W.. Tluasher Life Estates 4053 Challenger Avenue 3614 Aquia Drive Stafford, Virginia 22554 040.17-02-12.00-0000 Michael 1. and Mary Lynn Malone 4065 Challenger Avenue .3614 Aquia Drive Stafford, Virginia 22554 050.0 ] -0l -OS.OI -0000 F & W Propet~ties Il, lnc,. Challenger Avenue P. O. Box 20069 Roanoke, Virginia 24018 05.01-01-05.08-0000 Kroger Limited Partnership 1 3970 Challenger Avenue .36.31 Peters Creek Road Roanoke, Virginia 24038 OSO.OI-O1-05.07-0000 Roanoke Gateway, LLC 4022 Integrity Drive .3381 Southwood Village Ct Roanoke, Virginia 2401.4 CONCT~PT PLE1N CIiECKLIST A concept plan of the proposed project must be submitted with the application. The concept plan shall graphically depict the land use change, development or variance that is to be considered. Further, the plan shall address any potential land use or design issues arising from the request. In such cases involving rezonings, the applicant may proffer conditions to limit Ehe future use and development of the property and by so doing, correct any deficiencies that may not be manageable by County permitting regulations. The concept plan should not be confused with the site plan or plot plan that is required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Site plan and building permit procedures ensure compliance with State and County development regulations and may require changes to the initial concept plan. Unless limiting conditions are proffered and accepted in a rezoning or imposed on a specia( use permit or variance, the concept plan may be altered to the extent permitted by the zoning district and other regulations. A concept plan is required with all rezoning, special use permit, waiver, community plan (15.2-2232) review and variance applications. The plan should be prepared by a professional site planner The level of'detaiI may vary, depending on the nature of the request. The County Planning Division staff may exempt some of the items or suggest the addition of extra items, but the I following are considered minimum: ALL APPLICANTS _. a. Applicant name and name of development u b. Date, scale and north arrow _ c. L of size in acres or square feet and dimensions d. Location, names of owners and Roanoke County tax map numbers of adjoining properties e Physical features such as ground cover, natural watercourses, floodplain, etc f. The zoning and land use of all adjacent properties g. All property lines and easements _____ h. All buildings, existing and proposed, and dimensions, floor area and heights ,___ i. Location, widths and names of all existing or platted streets or other public ways within or adjacent to the development j. Dimensions and locations of all driveways, parking spaces and loading spaces .Additional iafor~na7ion required far REZONING and SPECIAL. USB PERMIT APPLICANTS k. Existing utilities (water, sewer, storm drains) and connections at the site 1. Any driveways, entranceslexits, curb openings and crossovers _ m. Topography map in a suitable scale and contour intervals n Approximate street grades and site distances at intersections ,_ o Locations of all adjacent fire hydrants i p Any proffered conditions at the site and how they are addressed _ q. If project is to be phased, please show phase schedule I certify that all items required in the checklist above ase complete- Signature of applicant Date Community Development Planning & Zoning Division P AN ,y, F t - a T 38 NOTICE TO APPLICANTS FOR REZONING, SUBDIVISION WAIVER, PUBLIC STREET WAIVER, OR SPECIAL USE PERMIT PETITION PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION ACCEPTANCE PROCEDURE The Roanoke County Planning Commission reserves the right to continue a Rezoning, Subdivision Waiver, Public Stieet Waiver or Special Use Permit petition if new or additional information is presented at the public hearing. If it is the opinion of the majority of the Planning Commissioners present at the scheduled public hearing that sufficient time was not available for planning staff and/or an outside referral agency to adequately evaluate and provide written comments and suggestions on the new or additional information prior to the scheduled public hearing then the Planning Commission may vote to continue the petition. This continuance shall allow sufficient time for all necessary reviewing parties to evaluate the new or additional information and provide written comments and suggestions to be included in a written memorandum by planning staff to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission shall consult with planning staff to determine if a continuance may be warranted. POTENTIAL OF NEED FOR TRAFFIC ANALYSES AND/OR TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY The Roanoke County Planning Commission reserves the right to continue a Rezoning, Subdivision Waiver, Public Street Waiver, or Special Use Permit petition if the County Transportation Engineering Manager or staff from the Virginia Department of Transportation requests further traffic analyses and/or a traffic impact study that would be beneftcial in making a land use decision (Note: a list of potential land uses and situations that would ~tecessitate f ~rther study is provided as part of this application package). This continuance shall allow sufficient time for all necessary reviewing parties to evaluate the required traffic analyses and/or traffic impact study and to provide written comments and/or suggestions to the planning staff and the Planning Commission.. If a continuance is warranted, the applicant will be notified of the continuance and the newly scheduled public hearing date. Effective Date: Apri! 19, 2005 .n e _ ~~~ a ~ ~j Name of Petition Petitioner'sJ Sr~gn ure ~~ L.iL.J Da*.. Community Development - Planning & Zoning Division POTENTIAL. OF NEED FOR TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AND/OR TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY The following is a Gst of potentially high traffic-generating land uses and road network situations that could elicit a more detailed analysis of the existing and proposed traffic pertinent to your rezoning, subdivision waiver, public street waiver, or special use permit request. If your request involves one of the items on the ensuing list, we recommend that you meet with a County planner, the County Transportation Engineering Manager, and/or Virginia Department of Transportation staff fio discuss the potential additional traffic related information that may need to be submitted with the application in order to expedite your application process. (Note this /ist is not inclusive and the County staff and l/DOT reserve the right to request a traffic study at any time, as deemed necessary.) High Traffic-Generating Land Uses: • Single-family residential subdivisions, Multi-family residential units, or Apartments with more than 75 dwelling units • Restaurant (with or without drive-through windows) • Gas station/Convenience store/Car wash • Retail shop/Shopping center • Offices (including: financial institutions, general, medical, etc.) • Regional public facilities • Educational/Recreational facilities • Religious assemblies • Hotel/Motel • Galf course • Hospital/Nursing home/Clinic • Industrial site/Factory • Day care center • Bank • Nan-specific use requests Road Network Situations: • Development adjacent to/with access onto/within 500-ft of intersection of a roadway classified as an arterial road (e.g., Rte 11, 24, 115, 117, 460, 11/460, 220, 221, 419, etc) • For new phases or changes to a development where a previously submitted traffic study is more than two (2) years old and/or roadway conditions have changed significantly • When required to evaluate access issues • Development with ingress/egress on roads planned or scheduled for expansion, widening, improvements, etc. (i.e. on Long Range Transportation Plan, Six-Yr Road Plan, etc.) • Development in an area where there is a known existing traffic and/or safety problem Development would potentially negatively impact existing/planned traffic slgna I (s) • Substantial departure from the Community Plan • Any site that is expected to generate over one hundred (100) trips during the peak hour of the traffic generator or the peak hour on the adjaceht streets, or over seven hundred fifty {750) trips in an average day 20' r ~. Enpineadne A1GhitaClU/A Survayinp Landacepe oaelpn -PROPOSED DOMINOS SIGN ~ 13•-4" i^~I ~ L~ __._._~__~~.-f----------1--------^----1 ~-- 15'-8" --~ 702 Albomarla Avo pDDlgnal ~Y Ftoenoke. Ylrplnla zao~s P C ~ Dmwn9Y • ~ www.lmwpc eom .. -.. CDmmhabn ND. ph: 540.345..0975 D+DwM4 iHat: 540.362..4469 Da1D lmwonpY~tmw.roacoxmeil.com Smb w PROPOSED DOMINOS SINAGE 'SZ' VALLEY GATEWAY KROGER 7i2T D~~a~, ROANOKE, VIRGINIA NO SCALE %~ ~ i ~ -. _.~--- ~~~~: """--' 702 fVbamaris Ave F; Roanoke. Virglnle Deebnuf By Ll4W ~ ~. 24°13 ~ DmwnBy ~,~,~, PROPOSED DOMINOS ~ f ! " '"""'""''~'""°`~°°m `°m""~'°""` "55" VALLEY GATEWAY KROGER EnQlnooAnO ph: 540.346.0676 OmMrq ~f55AD0M A~nl:a~~ surveyln0 *~=~'°~~~-~6B Dale Byo~ ROANOKE, VIRGINIA L.ondecapn Daalpn lmwanB~lmw..toaoaxmall.,oor~ Smb Yd0 vtrll~aln'~lorrooa dvw ulrrl~ln a3~ornl ~vM31v~ ~-IVn SONIWOO a3SOdOad .~/ \ \ \ \~~ ~ --\ w ~, \ \\\ ~ ~~f~Q `\ ,, ~ ~~ ;~ ~' •' v O ~ ~. ~ ~~v30^/ / VP Oh If ~~O/ P O~ ~OhO ~, m° ~~ ~ ~~~ i ~ . t i'~ ~-~ ,/". ~i f ~~ '~~ f ~. /,, / /,, ~d Ad ~ 'I --'~ , ~ ~~ itj ~1 I ~~ ~~ I i ., a %~ / ~n i----------------- ~ ~ o d +J i i /r ~ ~ (..~ u ~ '/ i ~ l.~l I~ I ~ ~ ; ,l: t.. + I ~~ 1 I(IIl .. ~ I ~ r if if -_-_< R --~- - - -a-- .. 0 ~ '~ I I 0 ~ --------------~ ,, I ~j ~, t= I N ~ ~ \. ..1 ~ I ~~ i ~ ~ f~ 0 ~~ 0 t~~ j ~ ~ '~, '~ ~, ~\ I ~ 1 1~I II. II.II !! ff~...~~ - ~',-~--------------- '~-i ~~ rTl i ITI 1011 ~~ ' ~ _ ~------------~,r4-1 f ~J~~T~1~fTI1T~T~~~Tf1TTTl-U ( , I .I ~IIIfIIIIIIIQ~Ilfilllil-I fl I ~~` i ~~ ~1 ~, I' I ~i f ~~~~~~~~ I ~ ~ / i f I I ICI I ~ i i i t~i i i i i l l l l l I V I I I i i i i i <~ N N O d N 0 0 w o ``' o m o w ~z~ ~ n u' x i ~~o 4 I W ~ J Q O ~ O _~ r o w z °o 0 N ~ w o0 ~z~ J X I ~ 6 O I cn m z o z ~ wo 0 O O za ~~ om ~~ a u~i O i ,? o° % o o° ~ % ~ ~~2 ^o ~ ,~ v % ~ ~~ .; % O ~ ~ % i o %' .~ 0 1 ~ ~0~7 /G~'~ ~~ ti' / P~~ ~p o /F~ ~ , °~ ' ~'- -- o /~" a ----~ w o ~~ Z ~ I O ~ -~ ~ Q o N d _ EZI I \ - \ - - J X p a ra- i i \ - x n -~ ~ ~ o ~ o ~ ~ Z -~ j 3w ,~ ~~ w ~ w a ~~ fr\' a `LS' I 8 [p, --~ v £,' - \ NNE ~ 21~~1 8~ Ob0'oN,%~ -~~ d'3ydo1s/~N~ /~ 1 ' x 0 ~« O '1~ a7C'^ K ~ s r~ /+ Eye'. ~ .~~ ~ _ k _ k 'r } Y s~' ~. ~~ ~' ~' ~ ~`i. ,h ~. fig; R '- ~ ~~C >. r!r e~ t ,~j + r •~ ~ ~ v> ^ ! ' r f ~~'-ir• ~ ~ / 2 ,~ to 3 ,, ~ M .r ,.r ~. u ~~ ~ ~ ~ `~ N'R / j Q' ,!.- *r ~ .+~ y,' '90/x"/ ~ ~ ~~ ,~ - .s r ~' yl . r si', •~ ~ - w . ; t.~# b~t.~ at, ~. ~x. ~ye',vQ~~ . r'. ~~ a ~s .--~', .~,.+• ~ 1~ ~ ~ '~ ~~ .rte 4;r •~~ 1 '~~ 1 ~N~,i' 1 ~,' ~ ~,..~~~ __ - - .1 - - - .. - III ,~r, _ ; - _ ~~,;..,. ~. ; ! M1 X111' J ~t ~ ~ - ~ / ~ x ` i i ~_y~,; +.~' ~ ~~ r~_ a k'`f t;_ ~t~ ' psi- ,`' R ~O/ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~~ 1r, / ~ c ~.} ~ ~ o . ~' '~ ~',,. j.' 5Qf3£eg ~~et~ a t~1 ,,~ g t ~ ~ I~ £ -: ~4.. ~ 9"1 b 855 ~fr~ ]. ~ J 4g. si ~ ~ z.r k ~'~. -~ - \. ~ at$g~ r€'4 ~fs ~ 0 ~ ~,~; J ,,,,t ~ _ g r R ~, x .I~ j~ ti.`~' is 1Ft ~'~. ~ ~~ ~ ~ 0 Roanoke County Department of Community Development ~/ Applicants Name: Kroger Limited Partnership Existing Zoning.' C2 Proposed Zoning: C2S Tax Map Number: 050.01-01-05.08-0000 Magisterial District: Vinton Area: 18.02 Acres 8 July, 2008 Scale: 1" = 400' l/ - AG3 - EP AG1 AR _ AV C1 _, C2 ~ C2CVOD / 11 ® 12 PCD PRD _ PTD R1 R2 ~ R3 R4 RB GB Y~ CB M1 - M2 ~'' N Applicants Name: Kroger Limited Partnership Roanoke County Existing Zoning: C2 Department of Proposed Zoning: C2S Tax Map Number: 050.01-01-05.08-0000 Community Development Magisterial District: Vinton Area: 18.02 Acres 8 July, 2008 Scale: 1" = 400' ACTION NO. ITEM NO. ~ I --~~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEE"I"ING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: August 26, 2008 Appointments to Committees, Commissions, and Boards Wanda G. Riley, CPS Clerk to the Board John M. Chambliss, Jr. ~~ County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: 1. Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Review Committee (Appointed by District) The following one-year terms will expire on August 31, 2008. Mike Jeffrey is completing his first term and Steve Campbell is completing his second term. a) Mike Jeffrey, Cave Spring District b) Steve Campbell, Hollins District Supervisor Moore has advised that Mr. Jeffrey has indicated his willingness to serve an additional one-year term. Confirmation of this appointment has been placed on the Consent Agenda. 2. Economic Development Authority The four-year term of Linwood Windley, who lives in the Windsor Hills District, will expire on September 26, 2008. 3. Grievance Panel The thiree-year term of King Harvey will expire on September 24, 2008. 4. Social Services Advisory Board (appointed by district) The four-year term of Douglas C. Forbes, Vinton Magisterial District, expired on July 31, 2008. Mr. Forbes is not eligible for reappointment as he has served two consecutive terms. "the representative from the Catawba Magisterial District has resigned. "this four-year term expired on July 31, 2009. 2 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 26, 2008 RESOLUTION 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: That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for August 26, 2008 designated as Item J -Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 4 inclusive, as follows: 1. Approval of minutes -June 10, 2008, and August 12, 2008 2. Request from the schools to accept and appropriate funds in the amount of $83,728.05 for Fiscal Year 2008-2009 3. Request to accept and appropriate a Local Government Challenge Grant in the amount of $5,000 from the Virginia Commission for the Arts 4. Confirmation of committee appointment That the Clerk to the Board is hereby authorized and directed where required bylaw to set forth upon any of said items the separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant to this resolution. ACTION NO. ITEM NO. ~ -~ L AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: APPROVED BY: August 26, 2008 Request from the schools to accept and appropriate funds in the amount of $83,728.05 for Fiscal Year 2008-2009. John M. Charribliss, Jr. ~~ County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~i ~ C` L />7 i/~ ty..n c~ //~j/J u" G ~l C. J SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Roanoke County Schools requests that the Board accept and appropriate the following: The Virginia General Assembly provides a small Career and Technical Education equipment allotment for each school division in the biennial budget each year. For the 2008-2009 school year, the actual appropriation exceeded what the school division anticipated when the local budget was developed. The allocation for Roanoke County Schools was increased by $11,293.05. 2. The Virginia General Assembly approved special funding for the purpose of expanding the capacity of current General Education Diploma (GED) testing centers in Virginia. Each testing center had the opportunity to apply for a portion of those funds. A total of $7,164.00 has been approved to allow the testing center to increase the number of hours for which testing is available and to provide financial assistance to Roanoke County citizens who wish to take the GED test, but lack financial resources. 3. The Virginia Department of Education provides Roanoke County Public Schools with an annual entitlement for General Adult Education. The entitlement is used to supplement the adult GED and English as a Second Language (ESL) programs. Roanoke County Schools has been notified they will receive an increase in the 2008-2009 fiscal year entitlement in the amount of $3,748.00. 4. The Virginia General Assembly approved special funding for the purpose of increasing the number of adults taking and passing the GED exam in Virginia. Each Local Education Agency (LEA) had the opportunity to apply for a portion of the funds. A total of $61,523.00 has been approved to continue and expand Roanoke County's GED testing center, and to add additional adult GED and ESL programs for Roanoke County citizens. FISCAL IMPACT: 1. Increases the Career and Tecririical Education budget by $11,293.05 2. Increases the GED budget by $7,164.00 3. Increases the Adult GED and ESL budget by $3,748.00 4. Increases the Adult GED and ESL budget by $61,523.00 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the acceptance and appropriation of funds in the amount of $83,728.05 for 2008-09. ACTION NO. ITEM NO. ~- ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: August 26, 2008 AGENDA ITEM: Request to accept and appropriate a Local Government Challenge Grant in the amount of $5,000 from the Virginia Commission for the Arts. SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: W. Brent Robertson Director of Management and Budget John M. Chambliss, Jr.~~ County Adrriiriistrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Roanoke County applied for a Local Government Challenge Grant from the Virginia Commission for the Arts. The Commission will match up to $5,000 (if full funding is approved) of any donation the County makes to qualified art organizations in the valley. In the FY2008-09 budget, the Board of Supervisors approved an appropriation of $2,700 for the Arts Council of the Blue Ridge; $1,300 for the Harrison Museum of African American Culture; $6,900 for Mill Mountain Theatre; and $6,100 for the Roanoke Symphony Orchestra. Staff, therefore, applied for the maximum grant allocation of $5,000. Roanoke County was awarded $5,000 for FY2008-09. FISCAL IMPACT: Staff recommends dividing the $5,000 grant evenly between the Arts Council of the Blue Ridge, the Harrison Museum of African American Culture, Mill Mountain Theatre, and the Roanoke Symphony Orchestra. Combined with the County's appropriation, the following amounts would be available to the organizations referred to above: County VCA Organization Appropriation Grant Total Arts Council of the Bli.ae Ridge $ 2,700 $1,250 $ 3,950 Harrison Museum 1,300 1,250 2,550 Mill Mountain Theatre 6,900 1,250 8,150 Roanoke Symphony 6,100 1,250 7,350 17 000 5 000 22 000 ALTERNATIVES: There are no alternatives to this agenda item. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends acceptance of the Local Government Challenge Grant from the Virginia Corrm~~ission for the Arts in 'the amount of $5,000 to be distributed as indicated above. ACTION NO. ITEM NO. ~-- '+ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: August 26, 2008 Con~Firmation of corrin-iittee appointment Wanda G. Riley, CPS Clerk to the Board John Chambliss County Administrator `'`''~ COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMA"PION: 1. Capital Improvement Program ~I~ Review Committee It was the consensus of the Board to add confirmation of the reappointment of Mike Jeffrey, Cave Spring Magisterial District, to serve an additional one-year term effective September 1, 2008, to the Consent Agenda. ' `~ ` l GENERAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Amount Unaudited balance at June 30, 2008 $ 16,743,199 Balance at August 26, 2008 of General Fund Revenue 9.51 $ 16,743,199 8.90% ** Note: On December 21, 2004, the Board of Supervisors adopted a policy to increase the General Fund Unappropriated Balance incrementally over several years. * 2007-08 a range of 8.5%-9.5% of General Fund Revenues 2007-2008 General Fund RevenuE $176,033,678 8.5% of General Fund Revenues $14,962,863 9.5% of General Fund Revenues $16,723,199 *'` 2008-09 a range of 9.0%-10.0% of General Fund Revenues 2008-2009 General Fund RevenuE $188,178,858 9.0% of General Fund Revenues $16,936,097 10.0% of General Fund Revenues $18,817,886 The Unappropriated Fund Balance of the County is currently maintained at 9.51 % which met our goal for 2007-2008. The balance will be increased over time to the following ranges: 2008-2009 9.0%-10.0% 2009-2010 9.5%-10.5% 2010-2011 10.0%-11.0% Submitted By Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance Approved By John M. Chambliss, Jr. County Administrator COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA ~~`~ ~ CAPITAL RESERVES Minor County Capital Reserve (Projects not in the CIP, architectural/engineering services, and other one-time expenditures.) Unaudited balance at June 30, 2008 Balance at August 26, 2008 Major County Capital Reserve Amount $1,540,757.20 $1,540,757.20 (Projects in the CIP, debt payments to expedite projects identified in CIP, and land purchase opportunities.) Unaudited balance at June 30, 2008 Submitted By Approved By Balance at August 26, 2008 Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance John M. Chambliss, Jr. ~~ County Administrator $2,339,030.00 $2,339,030.00 l~ 1 ~r~ RESERVE FOR BOARD CONTINGENCY COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Amount From 2008-2009 Original Budget $ 300,000.00 June 24, 2008 Allocation to Art Museum of Western Virginia and Roanoke County (200,000.00) Public Schools for Education July 8, 2008 Appropriation for Legislative Liaison ($24,000.00) Balance at August 26, 2008 $ 76,000.00 Submitted By Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance Approved By John M. Chambliss, Jr. County Administrator ~~ ACTION NO. ITEM NO. ~-~~ AT A REGULAR NIEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: August 26, 2008 Accounts Paid-July 2008 Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance John M. Chambliss, Jr. ~~ County Administrator ` COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Payments to Vendors Payroll 07/11 /08 Payroll 07/25/08 Manual Checks Voids Grand Total Direct Deposit $ - 1,053,713.49 1,016,984.79 Checks $ - 133,693.43 136,042.77 1,779.84 Total $ 5,460,758.51 1,187,406.92 1,153,027.56 1,779.84 $ 7,802,972.83 A detailed listing of the payments is on file with the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors. ~ ~'~- } _~ 0 0 N ^, M O o0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 h o0 ~D h M O ~n p~ ~--~ ~D o0 ~D o0 M oo O 00 M ~n R O h ~ u y„ oo ~° O oo O O O M O 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~n h vi O M O N .-. 00 `O h M ~n o0 D\ ~ a\ N~ O h is u O Ca 7 ^ p ,-. M h ~n Q\ .--~ ~~ N O oo M 7 N o0 N [~ ~ ~ « b0 y e -O O ~ . N V N .M-i ~n ~ . - L Y ~ _ °~ u ~n v1 [~ O h^^ M N '~t M O o0 O O O^ O h O C O O O N ~n M M ~O O Vl ~ Vi N a\ ,n _ _ O ~ ~ h ~ ~ = °' n .--~ .-. .-. ^ ~ M 7 N O h N~ ~O Q, O~ ~ M O Vl 0 0 0 0 D\ O O O O O Vl M 0 0 7 ' u M aA OA O o0 ri v'~ 7 Q, O O M ~ V ~Y O N N v'i O vi ~ OA O vi O O vi 00 00 vi N GO O ~ C O~ ^ O V1 h ~ ^ [~ N D\ ~ ~ O O h N ^ ^ 7 7 O vi O ~ ~ D\ h ^ ~ ~ ~ u y ca 00 h ^ v1 V W h vl -r O h ~O ~O o0 [~ Vl 00 h V N ~D N o0 v1 N ~ ~ C e0 V) 00 N ^ M Vl .•• .•+ •-• M ^ 7 7 ~ V ^ ~O M ~-• `O ,7 m oo N ~-. h ~ vl ~ N ~ D\ a\ h 00 --~ N ~ ~ O M ~ °~ ^ ~ V ~n ~n h O~ h O~ M ~ ~ ~ M ea O O O ~ ~ N M p ^ M 7 ~ ~ N ~ a\ v1 ~ N O ^ o A y h [~ h 'ct 7 V~ N ~ ~--~ p h .-. 7 O~ Vl 7 00 O~ O~ O~ 09 ~ y 7 ~ h M^ vl M ~~ N y O ~ `O ~ ^ .-. ~ M V' N 7 V'l 7 S u ~ ...w ~ a 7 ~ ~ h M N D\ M a\ ~n h h N v1 ~ vl v1 N ~n O~ O~ h 00 ^ cV - . ~ O ' d .r u ~~ h ~ .-. h h O~ ^ Vl 7 h N h N N o0 O N h D\ V' O~ M ~ d eq ~ p M 7 ~ ~ N ~D QA h Vl N M 0 0 0 ~° ~° N M^ O pp hL„ O [~ h [~ ~ V v'i N Q\ .-. O ~n ~--~ ~' ~ vi 7 00 Q\ a\ D\ m a\ ~ ~ O p ~ ~ h ~O h M ^ ~n M ~--~ ~° 00 `O M O ~n O N a\ _ . ~ O u ~" GG ~ ~ ^ ~O ~Y N 7 in ~• .-. M ~ _ ,.., u > d ~ = w o R ~ C ^O o R a> 'C ~° ~ a ~,,, E s ` ~o ~° 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 o h h o 0 0 0 00 00 0, o h N ~ i+. W y c ~., ~ ~O ~° 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 O O O O O N o0 M O N N N ~O ~° O O O O O O O O O ~ O O O O ~° ~ O ~O M O O~ 7 N O V' Q~ ~/1 O ^~ O Vl M O~ M = y,,, 7 ^^ O O N ~n O O ~n O O V1 O O ~n M c~ 00 N O O Vl ~ M OA ~O CO O~~ O ^ M M p ~ _ a, D\ O N h 'ct ^ Vl N O vl ~O O O h M n N Vl ~ ^ O M M [~- h N ~° O ~° V^ V' ^ 0 ~ ^ O r+ C 00 00 N M M 1 ^ N Vl ~° --+ O h h ~O O~ ~ M DD [ ~ N ~ N ~ N M ^ V ~ ' V r. ~n 7 ~--~ ~O M .--i ~O `O ~ N N M V1 .-• ,-r •-• M ^ V y 00 N ~', u d ~+ L ~ y O ~ w ° n- . -' a~', v °: is N o y ~ 3 ~ o a ~~ ~ b '.° h ~ a ~ w ~ ~ ~, ~ a . v ti ~ ~ ~ L H w ~' ~ O O y ,n N y N y bA O i. F" F" ~' " `n `n ¢ ca d v O Y v ca ~ o w °' on °' ~ ~ ~ .~ ° ~ ~ cn ° v ., a~ ~, cr, ~ w ~ ~ U i [-~ a: a ~ : • ~ ;~ w ~ ~ ~ N = ~ : ° . v cn ~ a a a ti ~a o • ;, o C7 ~ ..~ ~""' ~ ~ ~ E-~ ° ~ ~-' a U ° o o cn a ~ a U ~ ~ ~ U ~ o ~ o e a . . y ~ o ~ ~, ~.., ~«. ~ x ~3 o - ~ N ~ U . „ ~, ~c ~ ~ v ~, ~ cs o o a a. ~ U .o aj R v~ c.. a~ a~ v~ °d ,. W ~. ~ ~ O `~ o ° o ° m a a ; ; ~ v .b °: ~ ;: U w w i U' E ; :n ~ H ~ ~ ~ a '~ c : O _ .. o W N p ~ R ti.~ C O N:~ ~ N y y ~ ~ ~' U O V ~~ O N ~ b ~ N N N ~ ~" x ^O ,,, _, N , s. a + o o ~ ~ ° ~ ~ ° ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ v ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ •~ ~ o .~ 3 0 3 0 o H ~ ~ ~ x E- O Q .a a w U a u. C4 c4 U U u; ~ a' z ~ u: a, a. a a .a U C1 w ~ F- m w O ~O _O ^_ N_ _M ~ O ^ N M 7 ~ ~ h o0 ~ O ~--i N C' h o0 4\ O ^ N o0 O -- ~° O ^ V M O ~D N M `D O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N ~ O O N \ u N °° A u p r 7 ~ v y e ro° > R O a. Q ~ v pa „ a ~o 0 v ~ N y .u G ~ L R R e ~ vi ~ ~ y 7 C ,yd CC w ~~ CC ~p0 .7 r V Q C7 ~ ~ _ O ~ C ^O R C~ O +" R a ~ w . o ~: W C. W ~ O O ~.+ U ,~, 8 d a O ti M n O ~ a 'O C W 'O 0 ~L 0. .r O s L 0 W R A h '' r ~ L ~ R ~ ~" 6i ~ d 7 L C ... y C O d u bD 9 7 CO a N O M .-y R N O Vi M .r N O O N .--i O~ y W Q FI 9 C R ,Lh V a o+ o w `O O '' kl L 0 0 'O G 0 W 00 O M ~ _ O N O O ON N v d a9i t3 (3 C G C n- r {S1 {l~ {S~ C ~ c 0 O Q ~ v ~ t W ~ v v w c4 ~; m a ~ ~ '° E .' ° i C i ~ e -~ ° .p ti ~ W ~ N ~ m V~ y q~j R W 'C L ;; v ° ' A E u u cfla v ~ O ~ R ._ .~ L d O C R O O C ", O V a N .~ ~ o ~. `° v C n y L ~ ~p E E A 'fl u ate. C a W W °a ~" O O N ti M n O 'O G W O O •L LL t G O O d Z L w° v u bD R C L e E V 7 [~ 0 d T a ~'e C a W b0 0 m a 7 w t d C V 0 0 9 C O Gz. O M oD ~ ~ N M '~ ~^ 7 \D M l~ 0 7 N M O O M [~ l~ O O ~p 00 .-• ~n ..i M vi R Q. Vi N M N O .-. n 7 O~ O N O O^~ O~ oo O V c~i o; rr a o0 00 00 0o vi ~o o, r o ~ o .0 0 0o r ri of ~--~ .~ .-+ ~--~ N ^ O M ~--~ [~ .~r ~ r ~--~ ~ 7 M 7 t~ ~~ M~ O N M O ~--~ V ~--~ O O M l~ M N ~ -~ V i h V ~--~ O ~--~ H M V oD 7 N ~ ~--~ O N E ~--~ N O 7 1~ a M O O O O N 01 n V'1 ~1' M ~O O O 7 ~ M ~' N M ~t o0 ~ r ~O ^~ ~ N O N ~~ O M ~ [~ M ~--~ ~ M ~-+ O pp N O~ M O o0 N O 'C ~D ~"~ O~ N ^~ [~ O o0 v1 r+ ~O ~O ~O O~ ~--~ ~"~ N l~ M O Q+ p~ O~ r O ~ M M M ~O ~ N O~ O~ c0 N N ~ ~ O rn ~n O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O l~ 00 N vi .-. b M ~ N O ~ M O N l~ .-. p~ rl ~ ~ ~ 7 ~D O~ M O ~n ~ ~O cn ^ M ~ N .N~ .-~ N ~~~ M V M N -, ~ V l~ N .Y.i l~ 01 M ~ O~ ~ M O 7 ~O l~ r M O~ V1 [~ ~ O ~ M O O~ ~D O~ O O ~ 00 N ~O r vi a0 ? M vl 00 O~ b M ~ v1 .-• ~ 00 O .-. O t~ ~n o0 N O v M ~O Vl ~ o 00 ~ v1 7 N ^ ~ 00 ~O Q~ ~ M Q~ M M o O 00 Vi N O O M N O~ ~+ ^ O '^ ~O M o0 ~O ~ V1 l~ O ~--~ O ~D ~+ 00 O ^ `O l~ d' O N M ~ O~ 00 r DD O ~--~ n ~ O 7 V M l~ -~ "'~ N ~--~ ~n V1 N ~ ~O v1 ~ ~ [~ 00 ~ l~ Vl O N ~ O~ ^ ~--~ O~ N o0 N O M M l~ ~ vl .-. ~--~ ~ O o0 ~ 00 vl l~ ~ ~ V O DD ~ R N ~ vi M ^ N N N N ^ "" N ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~--~ ~--~ ~--~ ""~ M M r O o0 O 00 O~ O O~ vl O O O Vi O O O O~ O O O~ O N O N O~ O O: O~ O ~n O 7 O ~n O~ B O O ~ O --+ O ~--~ M~ O~ ~O O l~ O 'V' .~ O M ~O ~O O r O O o0 M .~-i M ~ r"i ~O l~ [~ O~ N N ~D vi N M l~ ^~ ^ M N ~O 7 N N 01 M M 00~ 00 l~ 00 00 O 7 Vi V' G~ ~ .-. N N .-. 7 ~-. ~ .-. ~ b c'J N N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O [~ ^ M ~ O ~O ~ ~ O 7 ~ DO t7 ~ vl 7 ~O 1~ M M M ~ N N M ~ V1 O ~ O M ... ~ V1 Vl 00 O~ O M O O~ ~D O~ O O ~--~ O n V1 m N O 1~ M v1 Vi 7 ~O N ~ 00 7 V1 ^ O n ~ V1 00 l~ Q. V: M O O CO V1 N O O M N O~ v N~ ~ N M O~ M Q~ O M ..r o0 `O ~"'+ DO O --~ ~O l~ 7 O O M '7 N N ~ ~/1 00 ~ l~ ~ 00 ~--~ ~O N ^ N N ~ M Vl N r ~O M ~h M o0 vi M O~ vi .-~ N ~ O M ~ 7 [~ 00 ~ O M M l~ ~ vi N ~--~ O~ 00 00 l~ vl ~n vi C O M O~ ^ et o0 N O~ vi M ~--~ N N O O ^'c O ~p ~ N ~--~ M ~--~ ~--i 00 M M r .--~ .-. N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .-. o 0 0 00 0 0 0 '. 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~O O~ `D .--~ O~ O [~ V' O l~ O N M O [~ 7 'cY O O 7 M N O ~' ~n GO 7 vi O O M O ~ O M O~ O~ N M N vi M o0 7 N O GO O I~ 00 ~ _ VO O ~ DD O o0 ~ 01 ~ N 00 [~ r+ O N W N N [~ 7 V1 V1 N O~ ~O N `R N ^ N M o0 N M O~ '~ ^ ~--~ ~--~ CO 'ct O r ~ O ~ O ~ O M O .--i ~-. M O~ ~ M 7 7 00 ~n M i!1 00 [~ 00 O~ 'V N _ M ~!1 N O~ ~ ~ M M O N O M 7 00 .-. ~t ~ ~ 00 ~ 7 ^ O ~"~ O O~ .-+ ~O •-• Vi L+ L h .C .~ .0 L `~ C rn a+ C 'U L ~' a~ is O O v qj ~ 'C G ~~' ~ u ~ ~ U' ~~o '~ U U ~ ^= O .a C7 W c ~-- N M O_ O_ O_ O O O O II. 7 cd u U "0 ti -~ u, a~ U O ^~ 0 ^ N O O O O C U U w E"i ~ N W N `4 7 Q O v U U y °`~ C L c~ ~ O U py ~~~~ W cad ~ O C M .a w U d o ~--~ N M d' O O O O M M M rn O O O O b C O C7 ~ °.~ O x C 3 _ O. 0 ~_ P.:'O bA ~ E L ~ N `" C C N • ¢ ~~ ++ ~ r ~ 5 C7Ki r~ {~ C7 O ~ 0 ^ N M ~ Vi ~O O O O O O O 7 ~' V 7 7 7 O O O O O O ~i ~ y v C ~ tYC, Q L rn ti cd '~, U ~ . C V ~ ~ 'O y s.. 9 Q ~ U IU, O R ,Y ~ ai > cCd (~ v U 'N U t ^ a~i '~ . s~~. ~ ~ N ~ ~ u ~. '. ~ o°, c~ U a ~ ~ c ^~ M ~ Vl l0 l~ 00 O O O O O O O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O O O O O O O ;: a ~. ~0 v E ° u N 40 A y ~ C ~ ~' x W w N u W ~ m vi 00 o?f 9 v op .d. L d °' 0 ~ s u N C ~p O ~ .`. ca C wo L d o ' C O O Y C 7 O U a. N o u. `~ d C A «d. ~ ~ w 8 E A '~ u .~+ C a ~ W ~ ~' W O O N 0 W a O .` t O O 0 u L L f. v u C C V ;9 a ~ 7 u r O O w u L a, ~ a e G fr7 b0 'e 01 C ', w L O 0 0 9 C W 00 00 O In O O~ M~ ^i ~ N~ O O O ~ N h ~ h a\ ~ h b h h M OO OO vl ~--~ N O O O V i M~ ~ h h [~ 00 Q~ .Ny r~ r. M ~ ~ N ~ 00 b b M M ti N C O ~O a\ O o0 O h ~+ 7 ~O O O O ~"+ ~n ~O h H M O h ~--~ O N O 7 OO h OO O O O 7 N 7 ~ v? O~ ~O h N O [~ ~O V1 OO OO N O O O M .--~ OO 01 M ~~ h O [~ N --~ ^ ~ Vl O O O O ~ 00 '~ N O N M N OO O OO vl OO ~ O O~ ~--~ O v~ O ~O ~O o0 ~ ~ OO O Q\ [~ 00 7 ~n O O~ N ~ OO O ~ ~D N O~ Q~ O~ V7 N h h h .r O~ .-~ O N vl M h v1 O h 01 O V~ ~D ^ OO ~O N r D\ O .--~ h ~ v1 h ~O b O -- O^ M M N ~ "" 7 7 ~ O~ N r h O O ^ OO ~O O ~ ~- O N O M p~ X 7 0 0 0 v ~ v'i ~o O ~"~ oo O h o ~? -- N ~--~ O O O ~ M N 01 7 0 ~ 00 v~ 0 0 T 7 N O O~ M ~ 0o a M ^ ~n h h .... -~ v ~o c ~ h a Vi ~O ~ 7 ~ h h Vl M ~ V1 M O C M h N M O~ ~ h N ~!1 h . r OO ~ . -~ M N h N N N M M ~ ~ v'i ~ ~ ~D O O ~O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O vl O O ~ O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O N O O N O O N O N O O O O O O O O O O N N O O OO 00 ^ .-. .r h N W r 7 n N ~O O 00 ~--~ O N O M Q~ ~O 7 0 0 0 O~ vl D\ ~' h O ~O O ~O 00 O h o ~ ^ N ~-+ O O O ~ [~ ~n M O~ a\ Q~ O 00 O~ N M O ~ h ~D O O O R .--~ D\ ^ O~ ~ ~ O ~ 00 V1 [~ O ^ V' N ~ O N M ~O \p Q\ M 00 ~ h ~ .-~ ^ ~ ~ O ~ ~-. h N M ~ ~ ~ ~ M [~ b V1 M O~ M M 00 b h ~~ M N . . M . M N ~ h . -. N N N rr1 ~p O ~ ~ N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ^ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 00 ~O h 7 O O~ N Vl ~O ~ O O~ O O O O M o0 ^ ^ 01 O ~--~ ^ D\ N M ~ M O ~--~ O O O h OO h ~ O .--i M M O h O N O M 7 0 OO O Vl O h N 01 N VO O ~G Vl N N vl O [~ b h vi .-+ O .--• ~D •-i M~ ~ OD O ~O OO v1 O vi 01 r. 7 O [~ M M v~ O h h N 'V' ~ N ^ O ~ ~ O [~ .--~ O ~ W h ~p T ~--~ vi ~ ^ ~ N n •-• N 7 ~ ~ ~ V 00 00 '.I R L ~ b + U ~ v °°' ~ a a a ~ O~ ~ 'j Q ~ U C O O y 'b ° i g p ~ ~ U c c e i ^ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -' x b '~ ° ~ " ~ ~ ~ O O ~ C C o d ' e o~ ~' c~ w~ N N ~ `~ Y ~ L c ,~ w L aX W ~ ~ ~~tib?a, d A ~ti d Q ~ ~ ~ N Y.n ~i W ~ ~^ o~ .~ ~ ~ ~ V ~ ~' ~ ` a m ~ ... ~ ~ U v cd ~ '- U on z ~ a ~ cC ? G fl O Yr ~' •~ ^O ~ y L W ~ ~ O O ~ O U O O X ~ X y ca N O O ~ O P, .-a U c 0. U W U c W Ca ~ H C~ U c ~~ c N M N cn ~n N M 7 `O h N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ~D ~O ~O h [~ h h OO OO o0 00 00 OO Q, O~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O R O E^ G R w ~° ~ E v M CO ~ b e ~ L '~ W ~ r y La R CI. ~ r 9 v L cD Y a. o E d U R L W d L u C a¢ y L ~ W E E A `fl ~ .°. G a w d {j aS H O O ~ y u , ~ ~ L L ~ L ~ ~ C ~ R 7 '~ L3. C. d N .~ rf C ~ W O ~? e '9 = 0 •~ ea w d u C am d o y , ~ ~ ~ W T E Li ~ O _ u ~ ~ Z 7 G o a LY" w = w L C4 '~ W O ~ d t C L' ~ p ~ e O U = w o a k w r ~~ O `o ~ e e o d ~ a d s V '9 C w n L d C d V + O ~ a `O ~ c o ~ ~ ~ w O O N M ~ O O N d d cC (G G G ~ W W L u 0 G ~ O [~ N ~ C ~y 6 {i O N {Ia '~ W r k. ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER I ~ '~O AT A REGIILAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER. MEETING DATE: August 26, 2008 AGENDA ITEMS: Statement of the Treasurer's Accountability per Investment and Portfolio Policy, as of July 31, 2008. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: GOVERNMENT: SUNTRUST/ALEXANDER KEY 64,676,581.26 SUNTRUST/ALEXANDER KEY CONTRA 472,792.89 SUNTRUST SECURITIES 6,005,655.46 SUNTRUST SECURITIES CONTRA 47,558.43 71,202,588.04 LOCAL GOVT INVESTMENT POOL: GENERAL OPERATION 6,906,378.30 6,906,378.30 MONEY MARKET: BRANCH BANKING & TRUST 2,263,366.28 SALEM BANK & TRUST 1,229,045.56 SUNTRUST/ALEXANDER KEY 18,009,807.02 SUNTRUST SECURITIES 4,981,438.86 SUNTRUST SWEEP 23,778,557.09 WACHOVIA 2,634,981.78 52,897,196.59 TOTAL 131,006,162.93 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. ~-~- I AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: August 26, 2008 AGENDA ITEM: Work session to discuss Community Development Authorities (CDA) SUBMITTED BY: Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: On June 10, 2008, the Board of Supervisors held a work session on the creation of Community Development Authorities (CDA) and the economic development benefits to local governments of CDAs. Jim Johnson and Kevin Rotty from Morgan Keegan & Company (Roanoke County's financial advisors) described the process of creating CDAs, the benefits, and several examples of existing CDAs around the Commonwealth. After this work session, the Board directed staff to perform further research on CDAs and report back to them. Staff has prepared for your review and discussion at this work session draft guidelines to be followed for the creation of the CDA in Roanoke County and a draft ordinance that would allow the County to elect to assume the power to consider petitions for the creation of a CDA. Mr. Johnson, Mr. Rotty, and Bonnie France, Esq. (Roanoke County's bond counsel) will attend this work session to answer your questions. CDA Guidelines - Attachment A is draft guidelines for the approval of the creation of 'the CDA. These guidelines would require a person seeking to create a CDA to work with County staff to develop a petition, a draft ordinance, and memorandum of understanding in advance of the formal notice and public hearing procedures required by State Code. It also requires specific detailed information with respect to the public improvements that are to be constructed within the CDA, a business plan for this project, pro-forma financial projections, preliminary bond issuance information, and anticipated assessments and revenues to pay for these bonds. "these guidelines also require the payment of a $20,000 initial submission fee to cover the County's costs in reviewing a CDA petition. Initial Ordinance - Attachment B is a draft initial ordinance which allows the County to elect to assume the power to consider petitions for the creation of CDAs. This initial ordinance is required by Section 15.2-5152 of the State Code. If the Board of Supervisors desires to create a CDA for a specific project, then a second more detailed ordinance is required under Section 15.2-5155. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that if the Board wants to proceed with considering petitions to create CDAs, then the first reading of this initial ordinance could be scheduled for September 9, 2008, and the public hearing and second reading on this ordinance could be scheduled for September 23, 2008. The Board of Supervisors could also adopt by resolution the guidelines on September 23, 2008. 2 Attachment A ROANOKE COUNTY POLICY GUIDELINES FOR APPROVAL OF THE CREATION OF A COMMLTNITY DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County (the "Board") has determined that, under certain circumstances, the creation of a Community Development Authority ("CDA") can further the community and/or economic development goals of Roanoke County (the "County") through the financing and/or provision of various services, facilities and improvements (a "Project"); WHEREAS, in order to make informed decisions as to the proposed creation of a CDA, and subsequent issuance of revenue bonds or other debt obligations by such CDA, if any (the "Bonds'), the Board needs to receive, and have an opportunity to review and discuss, certain background, financial, and structural information with respect to the CDA, the Project and the Bonds; WHEREAS, the Board has determined that in order to facilitate petitions for, and the creation of, a CDA which will further the community and/or economic development goals of the County, the Petitioners requesting the creation of a CDA (the "Petitioners") should be provided an opportunity to submit to the Board over a scheduled period of time the information required to evaluate the petition, and that not all information which will be required by the Board prior to approving the issuance of the Bonds must be provided prior to the Board's consideration of an ordinance regarding the creation of the CDA itself; NOW, THEREFORE, the following Guidelines are designed to ensure that the Board and the County staff, and the County's consultants and advisors, if any, receive and have an opportunity to review information necessary to make informed decisions as to both the creation of a CDA and the subsequent issuance of the Bonds, if any, while providing the Petitioners with an opportunity to provide such information over a period of time. I. Submission of Draft Petition. a. Submit a Draft Petition: the Petitioners must submit a petition for County staff review which is in accordance with Section 15.2-5154 VA Code Ann. The review of the draft Petition shall be conducted by the County Administrator, County Attorney, Directors of Economic Development, Finance and Community Development, or their designees, and such outside consultants and advisors as they deem necessary. In particular, and in addition to any other information required thereby, such petition must contain the following information: (i) The name and boundaries of the proposed district, including an affidavit certifying that the Petitioners are the owners of at least 51 % of the assessed value or land area of the real property contained within the jurisdictional boundaries of the proposed CDA (the "CDA District"), a 1 Attachment A listing of the properties by tax map parcel number(s), and a map showing all of the properties and tax parcels within the CDA District. (ii) A general description of the services and facilities proposed to be undertaken by the CDA within the CDA District; (iii) A general description of the proposed plan for providing and financing such services and facilities within the CDA District; (iv) A general description of the benefits that can be expected from the provision of such services and facilities by the CDA and specifically in what manner the creation of the CDA would be in furtherance of the Comprehensive Plan and the community and/or economic development goals of Roanoke County; (v) The names, addresses, email addresses and phone numbers of those individuals recommended by the Petitioners to serve as the initial board members of the CDA; (vi) A request that the Board of Supervisors establish the proposed CDA for the purposes set forth in the petition; (vii) Any bonds issued by the CDA shall be a debt of the CDA and not of the County. The County shall not retire any part of the bonds or pay any debt service of the CDA out of revenues or funds derived from sources other than the special tax or assessment authorized in Section 15.2-5158 VA Code Ann., except as may be specifically provided in the ordinance creating the CDA; (viii) A provision stating that no amendment to an ordinance creating a CDA shall impose any financial obligation on the County that did not exist under the original ordinance; (ix) A provision stating that the Petitioners commit to cover all costs for staff time in reviewing and evaluating the documents required to create a CDA, advertising for public hearing, retaining financial, legal, engineering, and other consultants, printing, and other direct and indirect costs incurred in creating the CDA and obtaining the financing for the improvements sought, whether or not the Bonds are issued; (x) A provision stating that the CDA Board shall be comprised of five members who are appointed by the Board of Supervisors; the term of office shall be for four (4) years with each member subject to reappointment. One or more members of the Board of Supervisors and, County staff, as well as the Petitioners or their representatives may be appointed CDA Board members; no person residing outside Roanoke County may serve on the Board; 2 Attachment A (xi) The rate and method of the apportionment of assessments shall be fully disclosed to potential purchasers of property subject to a special assessment, and such assessment may be fully paid at any time and the obligation to make any annual payments thereunder may be permanently satisfied by payment of an amount computed in accordance with the assessment methodology. (xii) The CDA and/or Petitioner will reimburse the County for any costs incurred in levying and collecting the special tax or assessments, if any, and any other ongoing administrative costs of the County in connection with levying and collecting any such special tax or assessments and oversight of the CDA. b. Provide Funds Sufficient to Cover County Expenditures and Staff Time Incurred Creating the CDA and Reviewing Financing: At the time of submitting the petition, the Petitioners must provide: (i) A cashier's check in the amount of $20,000 (the "Initial Submission Fee") or a letter of credit or other surety acceptable to the County to cover the anticipated costs of the County. If the County's costs exceed the Initial Submission Fee, the County may require the Petitioners to provide additional money, letter of credit or surety. (ii) Such surety will be called upon if the Petitioners fail to reimburse the County for the additional expenditures within 45 days of receipt of the invoice. c. Demonstrate Potential Community and Economic Development Benefits. (i) The initial information required to be provided with the draft petition must indicate that the proposed project or purpose for establishing the CDA has the potential for advancing the County's community and/ or economic development goals in conformity with the County's comprehensive plan, zoning ordinance and capital improvements plan. (ii) A financial and land use assessment performed by the County or its agents must demonstrate that the CDA's proposed development and business plan is sound, and the proposed project or purpose for establishing a CDA is economically feasible and has a high likelihood of success. The analysis must confirm why establishing a CDA is superior to other financing mechanisms from a public interest perspective. d. Work with County Staff to Develop the Petition and the Ordinance creating the CDA: 3 Attachment A (i) The Petitioners will respond to and incorporate changes to the draft petition as requested by County staff prior to any notice of public hearing being published with respect to the proposed creation of the CDA. Failure to incorporate such changes will result in a staff recommendation to the Board against the creation of the CDA. (ii) The Petitioners will work with and cooperate with County staff to draft a proposed ordinance with respect to the creation of the CDA which will be available for public inspection at the time of publication of the notice. In addition to such other information as may be required by County Staff and the Board, the proposed ordinance shall contain a statement substantially to the effect that the adoption by the Board of an ordinance approving the creation of a CDA does not constitute approval of the issuance of any bonds or similar debt obligations by the CDA. e. The County will require the Petitioners to enter into a memorandum of understanding with the County setting forth, as a minimum, the following items. At the option of the County, such agreement will be entered into by the County and the Petitioners before any Petition is considered by the Board of Supervisors or at a later date. If such agreement will be entered into at a later date, a draft agreement will be provided to the County before consideration of any Petition. (i) The business plan of the CDA. (ii) The level, quality and type of public facilities and/or infrastructure to be financed by the CDA with such degree of specificity as may be required by the County, including a statement identifying the anticipated public owner or owners of such public facilities and/or infrastructure. (iii) Protections for the benefit of the County with respect to repayment of debt, (iv) Protections for the benefit of individual lot owners within the CDA's boundaries with respect to foreclosure and other collection actions should their respective assessment be paid or is current (v) That, if the CDA requests the County to levy a special tax on its property owners, the CDA will pay the County for the costs to levy and collect the special tax and any other ongoing administrative costs of the County. II. Prior to the Posting of a Notice of a_Public Hearing The Petitioners shall submit the following items prior to the notice of public hearing being published with respect to the proposed ordinance providing for the creation of the CDA. a. Detailed Information Regarding the CDA. The following information and/or descriptions must be provided: 4 Attachment A (i) A general description of the Project itself, including background and other information with respect to the Petitioners and/or developers of the Project, and the boundaries of the proposed CDA District; (ii) The improvements, services and facilities anticipated to be financed by the Bonds, including preliminary cost estimates, project phasing, and projected land absorption within the CDA District; (iii) A detailed summary of the CDA's proposed financing structure, including a schedule of the proposed CDA financing and debt service; (iv) A discussion of the security for, and means by which, debt service on the Bonds will be paid, including a discussion of any applicable debt service reserve fund, capitalized interest financing, and estimated lien-to-value ratios at both the time the Bonds will be issued and once the development is expected to be complete. (v) A detailed summary of the assessment methodology to be used in determining the apportionment of benefits and special assessments within the CDA District, including a description of the anticipated assessment liens and the means of imposing, collecting and terminating installment payments payable pursuant to such assessment liens. (vi) Initial Pro-Forma Projected Financial Information with respect to the Bonds. (vii) Delivery of Pro-Forma Financial projections which indicate sufficient debt service coverage and lien-to-value ratios to successfully market the Bonds, with such projections being prepared by an organization or consultant with recognized experience and reputation in such matters. (viii) A business plan relating to the projected development of the property within the proposed CDA District and an appraisal with respect to commercial property or other property which is expected to provide additional funds for debt service coverage on the Bonds or which will be included as additional security for the Bonds, unless otherwise directed by the Board. (ix) A preliminary estimate of the aggregate face amount, interest rate and amortization period for the Bonds based on current market conditions. b. A certification that the proposed community development authority will not provide services which are provided by, or obligated to be provided by any authority already in existence unless the existing authority certifies that the proposed community development authority will not have a negative impact upon any existing authority's operational or financial condition. 5 Attachment A c. The Petition, Ordinance and Supporting Documents. The Petitioners shall provide the County with fifteen (15) copies of the Petition, the Ordinance, and all supporting documents which will be distributed to the Board and made available to the public for inspection. III. Prior to the Issuance of Bonds. a. Consent of Board. The adoption of the Board of an ordinance approving the creation of a CDA does not constitute approval of the issuance of any bonds or similar debt obligations by the CDA. Accordingly, the CDA may not issue any bonds or similar debt obligations without the prior consent of the Board. The final assessment methodology must be submitted to the Board of Supervisors for its consent prior to the issuance of the bonds; such submittal must be within a reasonable time prior to the Board's consideration. b. Additional Information May be Requested. Subsequent to the adoption of an Ordinance creating a CDA, but prior to the issuance of the Bonds, the Board may request such additional information from the Petitioner and/or developer of the Project as it may reasonably deem necessary, including but not limited to, evidence that the Petitioners and/or developers have provided such information and satisfied such conditions to the issuance of the Bonds as the_County may reasonably impose, precedent to the issuance of the Bonds required by the commitment letter referred to above. c. Statement in Financing Documents. The principal financing documents prepared with respect to the issuance of the Bonds and the Project shall reflect the fact that the County has no financial liability for present or future improvements connected with the Project, d. Executed Commitment Letter. A copy of an executed commitment letter from a reputable buyer or underwriter to finance, purchase, or otherwise place an offering of the Bonds, which shall be in form and substance acceptable to the Board of Supervisors must be submitted which shall include, among other things, the following conditions that must be satisfied prior to the issuance of the Bonds: (i) Receipt of the unqualified opinion of Bond Counsel, in form and substance acceptable to the Underwriter, that the Bonds will be the legal, valid and limited obligations of the CDA. (ii) Delivery of Pro-Forma Financial projections which indicate sufficient debt service coverage and lien-to-value ratios to successfully market the Bonds, with such projections being prepared by an organization or consultant with recognized experience and reputation in such matters. (iii) A feasibility study relating to the projected development of the property within the proposed CDA District and an appraisal with respect to 6 Attachment A property which is expected to provide additional funds for debt service coverage on the Bonds or which will be included as additional security for the Bonds, unless otherwise directed by the Board of Supervisors. (iv) A preliminary estimate of the aggregate face amount, interest rate and amortization period for the Bonds based on current market conditions. These guidelines shall be subject to review, waiver and/or modification by the Board at any time. August 26, 2008 Draft 7 Attachment B August 26, 2008 Draft AT A REGULAR MEE-PING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, ORDINANCE ELECTING TO ASSUME THE POWER TO CONSIDER PETITIONS FOR THE CREATION OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITIES WHEREAS, the Virginia Water and Waste Authorities Act (Sections 15.2-5100 et seq. of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended) was amended in 2005 to require any county that wishes to consider petitions for the creation of community development authorities to elect to do so by ordinance and to hold a public hearing on the ordinance; and WHEREAS, having had a duly advertised public hearing on this subject, the County of Roanoke, Virginia (the "County") wishes to assume the power to consider such petitions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the County elects to assume the power to consider petitions for the creation of community development authorities in accordance with the provisions of Section 15.2-5152 of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended. 2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage. ACTION NO. ITEM NO. ~- ~--~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: August 26, 2008 Work session to review the issue of parking recreational vehicles on corner lots Philip Thompson Deputy Director of Planning John M. Charribliss, Jr. ~~-~. County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: On April 22, 2008, the Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution 042208-5, initiating an amendment of Zoning Ordinance Section 30-91-2, General Regulations for Parking, related to the parking of recreational vehicles, boats, RVs and utility trailers on corner lots. On May 20, 2008, and June 17, 2008, the Planning Commission conducted work sessions with planning and zoning staff to review this ordinance and to review and discuss alternatives to the existing ordinance. At the June 17, 2008, work session the Planning Commission also invited the Board of Zoning Appeals to participate in the discussion, due to a past variance case related to the parking of a recreational vehicle on a corner lot. After extensive discussion involving the Planning Commission, Board of Zoning Appeals and planning and zoning staff the consensus of l:he Plarir~ing Corrirnission was to recommend to the Board of Supervisors that the existing ordinance remain unchanged. The Commissioners felt that the existing ordinance was similar to the other localities surveyed, it was enforceable and it addressed the safety issue of sight distance on corner lots as well as the aesthetics of the parking of the subject vehicles. In addition, there was an existing process to address hardship issues through the Board of Zoning Appeals on a case by case basis if necessary. Staff will review the alternatives presented to the Planning Con-emission with the Board. OF ROANp~~ 2 A ~ o ~.~~~~ ~~ ~"~~~.~Z..~ v a DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR, ARNOLD COVEY DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, TAREK MONEIR DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PLANNING, PHILIP THOMPSON COUNTY ENGINEER, GEORGE W. SIMPSON, III, P.E. BUILDING COMMISSIONER, JOEL S. BAKER, CBO MEMORANDUM To: Board of Supervisors From: Rodney McNeil, Chairman Planning Commission Date: July 17, 2008 Subject: Work Sessions Discussing Boat/RV Parking BUILDING PERMITS DEVELOPMENT REVIEW ENGINEERING INSPECTIONS MAPPING/GIS STORMWATER MANAGEMENT TRANSPORTATION On Apri122, 2008, the Board of Supervisors adopted Resolution 042208-5, initiating an amendment of Zoning Ordinance Section 30-91-2, General Regulations for Parking, related to the parking of recreational vehicles, boats, RVs and utility trailers on corner lots. On May 20, 2008, and June 17, 2008, the Planning Commission conducted work sessions with planning and zoning staff to review this ordinance and to review and discuss alternatives to the existing ordinance. At the June 17, 2008, work session the Planning Commission also invited the Board of Zoning Appeals to participate in the discussion, due to a past variance case related to the parking of a recreational vehicle on a corner lot. Currently Section 30-91-2 states: In the AR district and in all Residential districts: 1. Except for vehicles parked within multi-family developments all recreational vehicles, boats, and utility trailers shall be parked in a side or rear yard behind the front building line, unless space is provided in a completely enclosed garage or other building. In the instance of a corner lot that fronts on two (2) streets, each yard that fronts a street sha116e considered a front yard. Zoning staff provided visual examples of numerous actual enforcement cases describing violations of the existing ordinance on corner lots. In addition, staff researched 12 other cities and counties within the Commonwealth of Virginia and described similarities and differences between these ordinances. The localities surveyed included the cities of: Alexandria, Chesapeake, Fairfax, Newport News, Norfolk, Poquoson, Roanoke, Virginia Beach, and the Town of Farmville. The following counties were also reviewed: Chesterfield, Henrico and Prince George County. In addition to comparing and contrasting other localities zoning staff developed several potential alternatives to the existing ordinance. Some of those alternatives were: P.O. BOX 29800 • ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018 • PHONE (540) 772-2080 • FAX (540) 772-2108 ®Recycled Paper • Modifying the existing recreational vehicle definition to exclude small utility trailers. This would allow the parking of a small utility trailer (similar to a residential lawn- mower hauling trailer) to remain in front of the building line however, boats and RVs would still need to be parked behind the building line. • Allowing recreational vehicle parking on corner lots behind the 30' setback line (if the primary structure was farther back than the minimum setback distance allowing the parking). • Allowing parking in front of the building line but off-set from the edge of pavement (or back of curb if the street had curb and gutter) by 10', or 20' or 30', if the vehicle was located out of the right of way and not creating a sight distance issue. • Allow the parking of recreational vehicles on corner lots, in front of the building line, but provide landscape screening to partially screen the view from several angles. After extensive discussion involving the Planning Commission, Board of Zoning Appeals and planning and zoning staff the consensus of the Planning Commission is to recommend to the Board of Supervisors that the existing ordinance remain unchanged. The Commissioners felt that the existing ordinance was similar to the other localities surveyed, it was enforceable and it addressed the safety issue of sight distance on corner lots as well as the aesthetics of the parking of the subject vehicles. In addition, there was an existing process to address hardship issues through the Board of Zoning Appeals on a case by case basis if necessary. .. 1+ " ,; __~ ~' - ~~ x~A .~~ ~ -~ ~ ~ d .1 ' r~ ~~, ~~'~.! ~. L. I~_~r't Irv.. Sr_~a_~. T.~~,~. r n ti~ ~~ ^^® ~ ' •-"` E ~" , ' ~fR ti r ~t~s 4~. - _ ~ ~ __ , i ~'~. ., r +1 } ~. k- ~ -~ v _~= I ti Y: ~~ 7 +Y 17 N~~~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ .~ ~~ ~ 4 i F. R ~• f ~. ~ .e. ~.~' rig ~ ~ r ~ 3 ~ ~: r ~ 4 ~ ~ ~ 9 ~ e ~ *: ~ h ~ ~ w ~ s• h'~ h ~~ ~ 1 * ~ . .'~ ~ - ,~ ~ ~ i F i 7 R d '~ ~ ,a {~ .7 } ' , ~.I ~1 r ti ~. ~r Tti ~ r ~~ ' ~ ~~ ! - ~~ r '--- ~ Y' 1~ . ~ ~ .~ ' ~ ~ ~ R ^ ~ r ~~ a ~7~RL } r L ~4 . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ .~d ~ ~ ~ R~ ly ~ J r :~ ~~ ~ •~y- 4 l 'P ' ~ti~ 1 ~ S ~~ ~~ i ~ 31 ~- ~ ~ti-i~ r } aj ~ a ~* • '~~ ' ~ * ~. 1 ~.1 7 ^ a ~ r ~ti ~Y ~.~ Y -' L ~ ~ R' ~ J~~ ~r L r ~' ti i 4 _ n , I 1 'L f t .-a ~~~ t _ = 1 "' C- ~f r . f r 4~ ~ ~ ..~ ~~ ~ •~~ ti~ ~~~ ^ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . J ~ i ~' ~ . • Y ~~ ff[~ ~ - ~' ~~ ~~M ~ ti z~ ~ j F ri ~ ti r . ~ ... ~~ r . r }a r ,~ ~ { :~i r tit rub ~ SwF' v ._~ 3~'' tYr !:~'el~ ~'8v * ~ .~ ~ ~ '' Q G ~ -.i } err. S Ir ~ a ^ ,~~ .~ ~ ~ ~ u •r ~~ w i ~ ~e ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~y r ~ WM' 7t ~F '. Y 7 ~. ~ ~ ~,'~, r. ~, ~~_ i ~ ~ + -_ ~ ~, - a ,~ r ~ r ~ ~r ~ ~~ ~ r ~ ~ v s ~ nr ~ r ~. 7(~s ~ ~ ~ r r ~"~~ _ - ., r ~. ~~' ~K { ~, J ~~ ~. . ~ S~ I~ ~~~~ '~ , ,~ ~ ~ ' ~ i p ~ r "~,i. fem.;, ~~'1 k ~ ~ _ ti_ _ ~ ~h r11i f. ~~ ~~~~ V ~ ~ .SY' __ ti _~ ~ ;j - _ _ ___ _ J 7 - . _ r Y~ . ~~- ~ - y Y - '- i . 'r' - - L~ a r 1 i~ __ _ _ ;* . _:~ r~.~' _~ .. ~ - - - ~ r i i' -Yrl _-_ .1 - f - ~. t_r~-.r ~_ ~ _{- ~, ~ r~ ,~`_ ,~ ~r ~ ~ _ _ _ - t~ 1~ .r. n i 3 _ - ,_ .~ ~. i~. _: „y - n.. ~.. 08 ~-. _,,\_ ~_ ' ~ J \~~~ i ~ ~ ~ •~ ~ , s .99 ~+ ~\ / 39 ~ . 3 /^. .\~ \ ~.. . \ ~ ~ / 6~J ~~ \ ~ ~ /~ i ~ ~ rod ~/ 1~ . ~ ~ 77 ~, ~`~o :-::F z.K c.~ u~~3_ . ~~ i ~ i ' o~ 12 ~~ ~ r. ~ i 1. 2 -~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~~ ~' ~ ~~ . .- ~ ~~ ,i / '~ ~~ ~ _, ~,, ~~ ~ ~ ~ \ 1 ~._~ ~- AR': ~; ~, .. 9~S ' ' f r ~~'~ ~~~\ 27.03 r ~. ~ ~. .~ ,1 '~h ~' ~o .~i :: / ~ /' 0 . ~' !~ / i~~\ ~l 27.,5 r '~ I ' ~I 1 ors` .. ~~ i ~\ '~l, ~ = r \~,\ ; - ,~' ,,_ ~ _ ~ i~/'' z / O / ~' // i // PREPAREDBY.'ROANOKE000NTY CO~~/~+JO~ ~~ DEPARTA9ENTOFCOMMUNITYDEVELOPMENT (( DATE: 6- ~ 6-2008 ~' ,- -, --~f ~ i `39~ ~, R3 '~:.. ~ ~ .-~ \ / / ~. \~\ ~; s~~ . _. ~ ~ i A ~~~ 1 ~ I ~ 1 ~ ~h ~~~ i ~ ~ i~ '\ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~1 ~ ~ ~ ~`99 i ~~ .~ ~ ~.~ ~ `, ~~ ~._.._~ (~~ 1 ~ \~ t \~ ~~ f.. . ~~. ~. o I~~ 1~ ;,_ --. i~ ~~ ~y / ~ l ^ ~ ~ 1 \~\ ~~~~ r~ ~, ;' ~ ~ ~J / /~ ~~ / ~- ,_ -- `~ -~~ .~ ' jam, i ~ -. ~~. ~~ ~ ~. ~{~ - < ~ >> ` ~ / ~S ~~'"~~~ ~ _ I 27.~~5 \ -II 1 ./~'1 ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~-~.~' ~~ '~ _ - ~ ~ ~ ,t ,- _.. ~~~ O ~0 DEPARTMENT FCOMMUN/TY DEVELOPMENT l o~ ` ~~+ ^ ~ ~~ ~/ ~'~ - ~ o ~ _ /f DATE: 6-16-2008 . ~ i ~~ .Q ,a .~ I 6~ O ,_ 8 ~ ' ~ ~ ~ j ~~~ ` ,, ~~ ~.=~ r '- ~ 1 \ ~ ~ - 99 ~ \~ i r 3y r ' A3 .... -- ~. ~ •~~ ~ ~~~ \ \ i .~. ~ r ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ \\\ `~ --- ~ ~ ~ f ~ ~~~~:•- - . -.. • 7s i 0 f h `O ' ~` ~~. ~l ~ 1 7 7 ' l \~~ ^~ i; ' ~ ' .\ ~` 27.03 ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ j ~` ~ r j ~~ ~ ~~• ~ ~~ ~~ ,~ ~ ~ ~ . __,~ ~~~ . ~~ .• o ~~,. . ~ • '` 2 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~,~ ~ ~ ~~ ,, o , _ . ~ _ ~ . ~ ~ ~~s~ - ~, ~ . , • •, ~~ _- ~ ~ _,__ -' . y _ ~ ~ ~ •. .r-- \> ~' i ~ /• Q i ,~ L ~ , ~ _ , ,, _ ~ _ _ _ PREPARED BY.' ROANOKE COUNTY /O~"'~'J~ R ] ~~ DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITYDEVELOPMENT t (j /Y DATE: 6-~6-208 08 ~~ 3 ! 39 4 .~ O _~ j-... , .. ,~~ ~~~ ~~ O ~2 i ~ h '~~ ro i ~ i /1 1 7~ i -. o 6'~ ~`99 ~ ~ ~~~ ~~~ ~::. ' \ ~. s~ \~\ ~~~ \ ~~ `l~ i ~ ~~ h~~ \ \\ t i 4 . '~~ 1 .~ ~ -~ ~~: -~-~ 1 ~, 9, / ® ®S /~ f,,. - - ~~<. 1 '` ~ ~,j. ~~ ~~ ~~ ~) ~. I ' . / ~/ `' ~/ ~~ .. , - ~- ~~ ~./ ~. ~ / ~. J .~ .. ~J ~~ ,~ ~ ~. ,~ roh / T-. J / ~. --- . ---i O ~` ,~~ O 1~ ,;. '~~ i O~\\ ~'~ ~ g5 ~~'~ `~~~ 27.03 i i 1 ~` 27. -I- ~". X ~. 1 ~,r' ~~1 l1 O (\ ~~ ` ~, 10 . , O~ l) S~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~` 1 O~ =~' =~ J ~,~ ~~ `\~~__-~~ ~ ~ Doh ~~ `~O o ,. ,~ ,~ PREPARED BY.• ROANOKECOUNTY lOP l ION ~A, DATE: 6- ~ 6-ZOOB DEPARTMENT OF COMMON/TY DEVELOPMENT i __ ---~~ i /'' 3 - f ' ~ ~; i ~ ,~ ~ h ~ ~' ~ ~ / ~ b L. _ /~ ~ \~ ,~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~2 ,~.~~ ~• ~~ /r ~~` 1 20 ' 1 ,~ _. o ,,: -- (~,, ~ "J ~ ~ i. '~~~ ~2 ~'~~ ~ ~ ' ~ . ,, ,~~~ ~~%. ~ ~~ . f~;\ ,,~\ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~ ` ~ 1 _ ~, ~8 i .~~ ~~ t ,~ 's ~ I g~ 6 ti~ ~~`' ~~ ~> r ~, 27 1 ,. /,/ `~ ..~ ~ti ~`, .~~~ '~ ~. , ~~ ~ ~ ~- % o0 ~~ ~ ~ ~/ " ~ J ~ ~/ i /i ~ ~ ~ ~i i h '. i ~ ~ ~ / ~'• ` ~ O >, / ~. ~~ / ~ /' \ ._ ;~' ~ - - _ ~,, . V ~ ~' S2 1 ~~~_ i ~ ;~ ~~\ O ~o DEPARTMENT OF COMMON/TY DEVELOPMENT COP "TION ~B~ ~~ 0 ~~ G _/ DATE: 6-16-2008 - ----- 60 /~ II \ ~ 14 ~.. \ \ _:, _ J, ~Uj~ ~ \\ ~ 67 [~ ~ •`~~ ``~ ~ \ ~ ~ _ i 43 9 a ~ ~ ~ .-. ` _ - ,~ ~ 8 \ ~ ~ 6~ ~~ .~ ;, _ ~ ~ _`: 1 , . . ~ ~2 ~ _ ,~„~ \\ ~ [~ ~ ~~ `'~~S ~, = 4 1 6g ~ ~~ I ~~ i \\ ` ~ / ~:.' / ~ ~ 1 -~` \ `~ ~ ~,~~ 27.03 ~;. ~' `~4~ \'_ ' L _ ~~~ \ ~~ ~~ ~~. f \ ~ _ - / i ~- i 7~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ /'~ O ~ ~ / -~ r/ - ~ o ~ ~~ I /\ \. ~ 1 27• _ ~ 1 1 c -/~ Y ~Y ~. i / ~ 1 ~ ~ ti 1 1 ~ 1 I i . ~ / _ ~Z ~ ~ - ,~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~~~ ~ ~iJ -,ar s - ~ ~ ,~ ~ )~s2 ~ ~ ~ . - , :: ' ~ _=~~ 1 ff .~ ~-: O O ` '~ / \ l' / J / J ~ / ~ ~~!' ~• , ~ ~ ;~ ,. L ~ ~- ~ . ~ ~ . 1 i ~~ -- PREPARED BY.' ROANOKE COUNTY /O~~/O~ ~~~ DEPARTMENT OFCOM/NUN/TYDEYELOPMENT ( ` DATE: 6-~6-2OOB e~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ` ` J i 1. i - ~ ~ ~ '9 ~ .:. ;.. __ ~ 3 ~ 9 ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ -' . ...^.: - _ ~., ~ y ~. 6 ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~~= 1 g~ ~a r ` ~ ' ~ `~ `27.03 ~ ~ ~' . ~ f <.y;~~;~... - ,~ ~1 ;, (~ _ _ _. ; _ . t ~~ 12 ~ ~ ,~' ` .~ ~ ~ ~ ~_; _ , 27.5 ` ~ .~ ~~ ` f,, l ~` !~ ~ ~ S~ ~ ~ ~~ - ~ ~ • ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ "~ 1 ./ ~ ,/ -10 ~ 1 ~ ~rr \ ~SP.ai ~~ Ga6`P. ~ ~ ~~,c~. ~/ V~ ~ .'~ ~ t/ ~O ~~ ~~ ~~~. ~ ~ ~' z -~`- ' ~ ~0 PREPARED BY.' ROANOKE COUNTY /O~~/"'JO~ ~~ DEPARTMENT OFCOMMUN/TYDEVELOPMENT ( / [ DATE: 6~~6-20©8 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. I'" AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: August 26, 2008 Work session to discuss the preliminary financial results for year ended June 30, 2008 Rebecca E. Owens Director of Finance John M. Chambliss, Jr. County Administrator COIINTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This time has been set aside for a summary review of the preliminary financial results for fiscal year 2007-2008. Handouts will be distributed at the work session. AT A REGI.ILAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 26, 2008 RESOLUTION CERTIFYING THE CLOSED MEETING WAS HELD IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CODE OF VIRGINIA WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia has convened a closed meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provisions of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and WHEREAS, Section 2.2-3712 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that such closed meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby certifies that, to the best of each member's knowledge: 1. Only public business matters lawfi.illy 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. ACTION NO. I"fEIVI NO. AT A REGULAR MEET"ING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CEN"fER MEETING DATE: August 26, 2008 AGENDA ITEM: Resolution of appreciation to the Bent Mountain Volunteer Fire Company for service and dedication upon its 50th anniversary APPROVED BY: John M. Chambliss, Jr. ~~ County Administrator COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ./ ~~=f F L/ !~ ~cs ~s 7~c C-r J L)j~~ c.i," sl~e_ Ti~f/it L:f~ fi .s~ ci:+ - !`/ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Bent IVlountain Volunteer Fire Company which is celebrating its 50th anniversary during 2008 began at a meeting on February 23, 1958, with more than thirty-one volunteer firefighters willing to serve their community. Today, the Bent Mountain Volunteer Fire Company has fifteen firefighters serving their community and responding to calls during weeknights, weekends, and holidays. In 1960, the Bent Mountain Volunteer Fire Company responded to approximately 14 calls and currently runs approximately 85 fire-related calls per year. The following persons will attend the meeting for the recognition: • Chief Rick Burch, Fire and Rescue Department; • Division Chief Dustin Campbell, Fire and Rescue Department; • Chief Roger Vest, Bent Mountain Volunteer Fire Company; • Chief Sonja Stump, Bent Mountain Volunteer First Aid and Rescue Crew; and • Rebecca Dameron, Volunteer Member with the Bent Mountain Volunteer Fire Company and First Aid and Rescue Crew. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SI,IPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINIS"fRATION CENTER ON l"UESDAY, AUGUST 26, 2008 RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO BENT MOUNTAIN VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANY FOR SERVICE AND DEDICATION UPON ITS 50T" ANNIVERSARY WHEREAS, the Bent Mountain Volunteer Fire Department was formed at a meeting on February 23, 1958, with more than thirty-one volunteer firefighters willing to serve their community; and WHEREAS, in March 1958, property was bought next to the current post office for the first Bent Moi~intain Fire Station with donations from the owner of the land and the volunteers with additional funds being raised at a Firemen's Festival; and WHEREAS, the original "first-run" fire apparatus was used equipment wl-~ich was up- fitted with larger, more powerful engines and equipment provided by the charter members and members of the community, and the brush truck came from Army surplus; and WHEREAS, in 1960, the Bent Mountain Volunteer Fire Company responded to approximately 14 calls; and today the station runs approximately 85 fire-related calls per year; and WHEREAS, the Bent Mountain Volunteer Fire Company currently has fifteen firefighters serving their community and responding to calls during weeknights, weekends and holidays. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, on its own behalf and on behalf of its citizens, does hereby extend its gratitude and appreciation to the volunteers of the BENT MOUNTAIN VOLUNTEER FIRE COMPANY for their service and dedication to public safety in Roanoke County; and FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors extends its congratulations to the Bent Mountain Volunteer Fire Company on the occasion of its 50tH anniversary. ACTION NO. "fEM NO. ~~ - ~~ AT A REGULAR MEET"ING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT "fHE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CEN"fER MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: APPROVED BY: August 26, 2008 Resolution of appreciation to the Bent Mountain Volunteer First Aid and Rescue Crew for service and dedication upon its 45tH anniversary John M. Chambliss, Jr. ~~ County Administrator ~ COU~(7NTY ADMIN>IST~//RATOR'S COMMENTS: J / i f:- G~ U /YI i~7 1~i7 c.r ' / p fJ r• G, ~-rr.,,~ !s n t~ t~ C4 it ! ~ J SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: c'G~ m.r~ uir • ~`j'. The Bent Mountain Volunteer First Aid and Rescue Crew which is celebrating its 45th anniversary during 2008 began at a meeting on May 13, 1963, with seventeen volunteer members willing to serve their community. Today, the Bent Mountain Volunteer First Aid and Rescue Crew has nine members who respond to calls for emergency situations during weeknights, weekends, and holidays. In 1964, it was reported that the Rescue Crew ran four calls; in 1967, they ran 130 calls; in 1969, they ran 150 calls; and currently, they respond to approximately 176 emergency medical services (EMS) calls per year. The following persons will attend the meeting for the recognition: • Chief Rick Burch, Fire and Rescue Department; • Division Chief Dustin Campbell, Fire and Rescue Department; • Chief Roger Vest, Bent Mountain Volunteer Fire Company; • Chief Sonja Stump, Bent Mountain Volunteer First Aid and Rescue Crew; and • Rebecca Dameron, Volunteer Member with the Bent Mountain Volunteer Fire Company and First Aid and Rescue Crew. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT "fHE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 26, 2008 RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO BENT MOUNTAIN VOLUNTEER FIRST AID AND RESCUE CREW FOR SERVICE AND DEDICATION UPON ITS 45T" ANNIVERSARY WHEREAS, the Bent Mountain Volunteer FirstAid and Rescue Crewwas formed on May 13, 1963, with seventeen volunteer members willing to serve their community; and WHEREAS, the Bent Mountain Volunteer Fire Department made a donation to start the program, each member of the Rescue Crew contributed equipment for the first aid kit, and the Roanoke Life Saving Crew provided oxygen; and WHEREAS, in 1964, the Rescue Crew bought a Ford Wagon to use as an arbulance and a car as a utility vehicle, and utilized an International vehicle as another ambulance; and WHEREAS, in 1964, the Rescue Crew ran approximately four calls, and in 1967, they responded to 130 calls From as far away as Catawba, Rocky Mount, and Copper Hill; and in the early years, the Rescue Crew often provided assistance for races at Pilot Raceway; and WHEREAS, the Rescue Crew often ran calls for transport, picking people up at the hospital and brir~girrg them home; and when theytransported someone to the hospital, they would wait for the patient to be treated and bring them back home; and WHEREAS, in 1969, the Rescue Crew ran approximately 150 calls, and today the Bent Mountain Station answers approximately 176 emergency medical services (EMS) calls per year; and WHEREAS, the Rescue Crew currently has nine volunteer members serving their community and responding to calls during weeknights, weekends, and holidays. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, on its own behalf and on behalf of its citizens, does hereby extend its gratitude and appreciation to the members of the BENT MOUNTAIN VOLUNTEER FIRST AID AND RESCUE CREW for their service and dedication to public safety in Roanoke County; and FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors extends its congratulations tothe Bent Mountain Volunteer First Aid and Rescue Crew on the occasion of its 45th anniversary. ~~ PE"fITIONER: Joe Lambert CASE NUMBER: 16-7/2008 Board of Supervisors Consent 1St Reading Date: June 24, 2008 Planning Commission Hearing Date: August 5, 2008 Board of Supervisors Hearing & 2"d Reading Date: August 26, 2008 A. REQUEST To obtain a Special Use Permit in a C-2, General Commercial District, to operate adrive-in and fast food restaurant on 0.5 acre, located at 3115 Brambleton Avenue, Windsor Hills Magisterial District (Withdrawn at the request of the Petitioner) B. C. D. E. F. CITIZEN COMMENTS SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION CONDI"PIONS COMMISSION ACTION DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE G. ATTACHMENTS: Concept Plan Vicinity Map Staff Report Other Philip Thompson, Secretary Roanoke County Planning Commission July 25, 2008 Rebecca Mahoney Roanoke County Department of Community Development P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 Re: Location: Brambleton Avenue, Roanoke County, VA Tax Map Number: 077.10-OS-02.0000 Dear Ms. Mahoney: Please allow this letter to confirm Joseph Lambert's Use Permit before the Planning Commission's m~ef his petition for a Special t 5, 2,l~08~, Appliant ,a PETITIONER: George Kemp CASE NUMBER: 17-8/2008 Board of Supervisors Consent 15t Reading Date: July 22, 2008 Planning Commission Public Hearing Date: August 5, 2008 Board of Supervisors Hearing S~ 2"d Reading Date: August 26, 2008 A. REQUEST The petition of George Kemp to obtain a Special Use Permit in a C-2, General Commercial District, to operate adrive-in and fast food restai.arant on 1.56 acres located at 3100-B Peters Creek Road, Catawba Magisterial District B. CITIZEN COMMENTS No citizens spoke. C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION Bill Richardson presented the staff report. Mr. George Kemp spoke regarding his petition. He plans on having one (1) delivery driver to begin, possibly two (2) if business should dictate. He will be offering lunchtime delivery of deli foods. Commissioners did not have any questions regarding the petition and expressed their support. D. CONDITIONS The Special Use Permit shall only pertain to the existing leased area of the current business (approximately 800 square feet) located at 3100-B Peters Creek Road. 2. No drive-through window shall be constructed or utilized; only delivery service shall be permitted. E. COMMISSION ACTION Ms. Hooker made a motion to recommend approval of the Special Use Permit with two conditions. The motion passed 4-0. F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. G. ATTACHMENTS: X Concept Plan X Vicinity Map X Staff Report X Other Philip Thompson, Secretary Roanoke County Planning Commission STAFF REPORT Petitioner: George Kemp Request: To obtain a Special Use Permit in a C-2 General Commercial District to operate a drive-in or fast food restaurant (delivery only) Location: 3100-B Peters Creek Rd Magisterial District: Catawba Suggested 1. The Special Use Permit shall only pertain to the existing leased area of the Conditions: current business (approximately 800 square feet) located at 3100-B Peters Creek Road. 2. Nodrive-through window shall be constructed or utilized; only delivery service shall be permitted. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: George Kemp is requesting a Special Use Permit to operate a di°ive-in or fast food restaurant in an existing building located at 3100-B Peters Creek Rd, The owner of the parcel is Susan Waters, 3531 Peters Creek Rd, # 206. The parcel is 1.5 acres in size and is located in the Catawba Magisterial District and the Peters Creek Community Planning Area. The parcel is zoned General Commercial (C-2) which provides for a variety of commercial and service related activities within the urban service area serving a community of several neighborhoods or large areas of the County. The 2005 Comprehensive Plan indicates that the Future Land Use Designation of this parcel is Transition, which encourages the orderly development of highway frontage parcels and discourages intense highway oriented commercial uses. The proposed restaurant will be engaged in the preparation of food and beverages for takeout or delivery. The applicant does not propose a drive through facility or table service to patrons. All food will be prepared on site. -fhe applicant anticipates the hours of operation (for the delivery service) to be: 10:30 a.m, to 11:30 a.m. and 1:30 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS The Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance defines adrive-in or fast food restaurant as an establishment primarily engaged in the preparation of food and beverages, for either take out, delivery, or table service, served in disposable containers at a counter, a drive up, or a drive through service facility or offers curb service. The proposed restaurant does not propose a drive up or a drive through facility; nor does the applicant propose curb service or table service. The current layout of the existing shopping center and the applicant's specific restaurant facilities does not lend itself to a drive through service window nor is it set up for a curb-side service area. This application is for the purpose of approving delivery service from this restaurant only. The subject parcel is zoned C-2, General Commercial District. Per Section 30-54-2 (B)(2) of the zoning ordinance, a drive-in or fast food restaurant is allowed with a Special Use Perrriit in a C-2 district. A commercial entrance permit and/or land use permit will not be required because the site is within an existing shopping center. ANALYSIS OF EXIS"PING CONDITIONS Background -Per Roanoke County Real Estate Records, the existing building was built in 1975 and it was purchased by the current owner in June of 2006. The applicant's restaurant is located in the western most building and it is approximately 35 feet north of Peters Creek Road. Topography/Vegetation =fhe applicant's restaurant is in an existing building on a developed site on level grade. There is no definitive landscape strip or vegetation at any point on the property. Surrounding Neighborhood -The applicant's restaurant is located in an existing shopping center and is adjacent on both sides to similar commercial development. The applicant's restaurant is adjacent to North Lakes Subdivision to the rear. The surrounding zoning is C-2 (General Commercial) to the east and west; and R-1 (Low Density Residential) to the north. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Site Layout/Architecture -The applicant's restaurant is located in an existing shopping center and will occupy a total of approximately 800 square feet of building space in the western most building on the property. Access/Traffic Circulation - -fhe findings of Roanoke County Transportation's review of the submitted application are as follows: a fast food restaurant, approximately 800 sq ff will generate (based on ITE Trip Generation) a high for peak hour of 44 trips and the Average Dailey Traffc (ADF) of 573 vehicles per day (VPD). Therefore, Roanoke County Transportation does not anticipate this business use triggering the Chapter 527 threshold review requirements. Additionally, the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) does not feel that this business use will impact VDOT right-of-way other than a minor increase in use and it therefore has no comments on this applicant's request for an SUP. Fire & Rescue/Utilities -Roanoke County Fire and Rescue Department does not feel that this business use will impact their department's activities. It has no comments on this request for an SUP other than a standard comment to consider building access. Building Safety -Roanoke County Building Safety Department noted that this business use shows no planned modifications to the existing building, therefore, it has no comments on this request for a Special Use Permit. Economic Development - Roanoke County Department of Economic Development noted that tr~is business use shows no activity that their office would object to, therefore it has no comments on this request for an SUP. CONFORMANCE WITH ROANOKE COUNTY COMMUNITY PLAN According to the Roanoke County 2005 Comprehensive Plan, the future land use designation of the property is Transition. The Transition designation encourages the orderly development of Highway frontage parcels with a high degree of architecturally and environmentally sensitive site design for office, institutional, higher density residential, park, and small-scale retail uses while serving as a buffer between hjghways and adjacent lower intensity land uses. Adjacent properties located on both sides of this property are designated Transition as well. These properties serve as a buffer between the residential properties to the rear of the shopping center location and the traffic flow on Peters Creek Road. The residential properties to the rear of this site are designated as Neighborhood Conservation. 2 STAFF CONCLUSIONS The proposed project is in general conformance with the goals and objectives of the future land use designation (Transition) applicable to the property, as well as the economic development goals and objectives of the Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan. The proposed use is consistent with neighboring uses along Peters Creek Road and has no increased impact on adjacent, less intensive, residential uses adjacent to the rear of the subject property. The proposed use does not increase the parking load to a measureable amount and staff recommends no changes to the existing parking spaces and drive aisles. The proposed use does not warrant any additional vegetative and/or landscaping features to n-~it~gate the impact of this new feature and staff recommends no changes to the existing parking spaces and drive aisles. CASE NUMBER: 17-812008 PREPARED BY: Bill Richardson HEARING DATES: PC: 8/5/2008 BOS: 8/25/2008 ATTACHMENTS: Application Site Map Site Photos ~'~, County of Roanoke Fo ff Use Onl Piannin t& Zoni ent~pgN~q? g Cp 9~ Op8 Dat ived: O 8 Rr~eiv db ~> O F~c ~ pF A tion e ~ 3 F I'C/BZA date: ~pU ~ r 5204 Bernard Driv r v 9~ r ?~ S a 8 l P ~ BOX 29800 acards issued: BOS date; Roanoke, VA 24018-07 ~? z.- L ~~S (540) 772-2068 FAX (540} 776-7155 Case Number ~ 7 - ~f ~~ r ..: ~ , ALL APPLICANTS '• ' ~ ' ~ ~ ' Check type of application filed (check all that apply) D Rezoning ~ Special Use ^ Variance D Waiver ^ Administrative Appeal ^ Comp Plan (15.2-2232} Review Applicants name/address w/zip Phone: 3'`~'~ ~" OaS3 GGO~:G kt~ (vt ~ Work: ~~J 3q~ - J ~ 5' 570c1 QA R,~`j R~IE Cell #: i2l~C tr'R ~4Q/~ FaxNo.: Owner's name/address w/zip Phone #: CJ4o~ 3~- ~9,~9 SL.SF~ ~~R i ~R3 Work: ~,`z,3 t QtTGRj t;'~k fLO s(.~o~ Fax No~ #: RIB UR ~qor Property Locations 3t~0 0 PE I ~2s C~(2: ~ RD Magisterial District: ~~~~, ~~ , . ~QAr`}Ok` , U~ ~ 1 Community Planning area: Tax Map No.: - ~ - Existing Zoning: C - a, Size of parcel(s): Acres: ~ - S6 Existing Land Use: (~1r~"Gc. i t ~ , ,,~ ~ , ; - -, REZONING, SPECL4L USE PERMIT, if AIYER AND CO~V1P PLAN !S 2 2232 REVIEW APPLICANTS RISJW/CP ~ . ; G Z s Proposed Zoning: '- Proposed Land Use: s JG•Gt ~ (JS ,? ~ °i' `- ' `' ' ~ ~/ 7` ~ '~ ~ t. st.. ~ ~ s d ! s 7 ~i ac~,7 7~ur 1 l i ~~' Doe the parcel meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? No IF No, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for the requested Use Type? Yes No IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST if rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? Yes No I!ARIAIVC~; Ii'AIIrER AND 4DMINISTRATIVE APPEAII APPLI~i/VTS (V/W/AA) ~ ' ' _ , , ~ _ . - , ., . Variance/Waiver ofSection(s) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in order to: Appeal of 2.oning Administrator's decision to Appeal of Interpretation of Section(s): of the Roanpke County Zoning Ordinance Appeal of Interpretation of Zoning Map to Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITE ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. YIS R/511V! V/AA R/S/W/CP V/AA R/S/~V/ P V1AA Consultation ~ 8 1!2" x 11" concept plan Application fee Applicaton Metes and bounds description N . Proffers, if applicable 3ustificaGon Water and sewer application Adjoining property owners I hereby certify that I am either the owner of the property or the owner's agent or contract purchaser and am acting with the knowledge and consent of the owner Owner's Signature _~~~,~~~ .. :,., :: .. ,.. . ;JUSTIFICATION FOR REZONING, SPECIAI. USC PERMIT WAVER OR COMP PLAN {15 z 2z3z) REVIEW; ~rt _+ ,, ~- ~; REQUESTS • ,, _ , - - ,:,. Applicant ~~~~1~ 1~CrinP ~ )= ~ ~ it l~~l•1 vh ~ i The Planning Commission will study rezoning, special use permit waiver or community plan (15.2-2232) review requests to determine the need and justification for• the change in terms of public health, safety, and general welfare. Please answer the following questions as thoroughly as possible. Use additional space if necessary. Please explain how the request furthers the purposes of the Roanoke County Ordinance as well as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning district classification in the Zoning Ordinance. Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Community Plan. Please describe the impact(s) of the request on the property itself, the adjoining properties, and the surrounding area, as well as the impacts on public services and facilities, including water/sewer, roads, schools, parks/recreation and fire and rescue- ... ~_...~ { i i r is ' ,. ,,. .. ... ,... 9 i ~~ " r ' y ~. ~• .., ~'' j~N `~ f r JI•~ ;~i.w ~~;~ J :'~~. is .ift~"~j:v~. ~j ,~ sf~J%,;e 'sL-f }y i'~'t ;f Y ~f :h ! ~~~tl_i~'~'S : I-~.;L ~ '4i ~~ !i~:~~ C'^C, fir,..s' ~v; '. r ,,x `.~ 1 +~. t• .._ ... ~. ~',1' , r+ ~^ ~ ~ f !:; '«-.tti~~~ G , ~ - . (r,.3: 1.,~,~,.,'u ~..; '~-<. ~; ~• t. r ~ ~b`1t.: ~ .- _ n ~j.~ r~ u=~{ i'-..r ....•~ ~ p-1~.. ~j~ d If' l,,% ,'.,~ .. _.. _ n : ~ '~. { ~ r ; t.ry~...:,* r,. s f'41 r f ..,~" /' ~'f"~• t, r~ i I rY ~ V ,~ ~',° S E~ j;...Y~ ,~,,,+~~ 1..,, f ; ~ .3. '^,;i.s! iJb6 (1 ~ G-.}~'~ G ~`~ ~~ v P b' h k ~ ~~ r yvs. ( f~.l~~tF'F ~. r ' '" ~ -_-+-,:, ~ ~ s a'te': ,,: .. ~^ `µ:..iC ~ .,°...,r" "i ~s of '..y r. ~ 7~ ~/~ ..~ $ ~ `~tir/`L.!"~•dit.! _.~2.{- ,?,! -/~i~ .._...... E x ~ ~1 =~ _ }} ~ _ e ~~~.(„: vta~. '`t~":t~ _x' ''.Pti3ti~4e..L~ 6f~' S,~ P . ~ C~"at.f~ ~~ n1,~ } ~ ,~rf' r ~ ~ ~f ~ f ~ Zi ' ° i C 1 ~i U •`i f_ /~~s~~{~i ~~ C. ~''±-w.,. ~:. ! !l ~ "~ .+ Ei.1;4~~1~~~4 ~ ~ . ~ . r ~ _ ... .. a _ .. p ,. _. __ _ .,, _ . , _ _ ~ ','~ ~ e 5 r~•1 ~ ti.., L•'~'~] L ~ r 1'w:f-• 7~`'8:~~~ !,(~Ifo.` =Wf.'~ 3'~ ~~~ ~jt ~'-ti~~ ~f' i Q~ ~f ~ a~ p-~ kb'r'/K;~ : ~i-~jZ.rA- e d 1~ ___ .. _._ _.. .. .. _......._ ._.... ._ _ ._ _..... , _ __ ..... ._ .. _ .. .,. _.. ._. ~.. _...__. `. c~ ..~/'+ ' .. '{,~, ~,,, ..~ . ~.fw~ ~ r~ ICE sa/ ' . ~ Gam. Q~ai ~.T" ~ f~°` ~~ ..7 J~rt; ~~If,6' cyt .~~ ~. F _--_ _ _ -- ~ ... __. - -- .. '~'~! , .~.. .. ,. _ (} { .-,.'~ Sri' 7 _ _ - -~ 1 '' ,.. 1 11 '~' i 3-~'~ 1 r ~,M~' l~~~r~ ! 1 ~I __ ___~._~.-- ------ -A~ ~-- t ~E~R~ s,,~k M 4P5r ~k i P.1Pc.L ~~,-s1{ -~ si I ~--- ~ -- I ! S~ n~~ 1 ! 5~t~ ~s PlLr~p T~~~ ~ ~ ____`1 tl ! -_ ~~ ii ~ 1 ~ ~ I Ii ~.,~rn~~ SRrOwrLll !~ H, 3 II f F . --~ _ ~ _-~ _ T _~ _N ! .5'-8`~ ~v' u~ ~2~r>:~z.. l.,o C(L11..~, ~+° OPDJ ~/1rrrL' ,.. ~-- 20 ~.-~ ~~- ~f = X49 ~ q 7 ~ ~ . 3 ~.oc~ a P~.~ r?2S ~11r~~k Rl~ 2~u=, vr~ as-~~9 -- W0~111J ~(It-~ To D~ L~ n~ r , tYl 0~1lvn2til ~ S~ ~•l~L. ~' j -cr ~ "~a ~=o• ~---- 1 Community Development Planning & Zoning Division POTENTIAL OF NEED FOR TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AND/OR TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY The following is a list of potentially high traffic-generating land uses and road network situations that could elicit a more detailed analysis of the existing and proposed traffic pertinent to your rezoning, subdivision waiver, public street waiver, or special use permit request. Tf your request involves one of the items on the ensuing list, we recommend that you meet with a County planner, the County Transportation Engineering Manager, and/or Virginia Department of Transportation staff to discuss the potential additional traffic related information that may need to be submitted with the application in order to expedite your application process. (Note this list is not inclusive and the County staff and DOT reserve the right to request a trah,c study at any time, as deemed necessary.) High Traffic-Generating Land Uses: • Single-family residential subdivisions, Multi-family residential units, or Apartments with more than 75 dwelling units • Restaurant (with or without drive-through windows) • Gas station/Convenience store/C:ar wash • Retail shop/Shopping center • Offices (including: financial institutions, general, medical, etc.) • Regional public facilities • Educational/Recreational facilities • Religious assemblies • Hotel/Mote! • Golf course • Hospital/Nursing home/Clinic • Industrial site/Factory • Day care center • Bank • Non-specific use requests Road Network Situations: • Development adjacent to/with access onto/within S00-ft of intersection of a roadway classified as an arterial road (e.g., Rte 11, 24, 115, 117, 460, 11/460, 220, 221, 419, etc} • For new phases or changes to a development where a previously submitted traffic study is more than two (2) years old and/or roadway conditions have changed significantly • When required to evaluate access issues • Development with ingress/egress on roads planned or scheduled for expansion, widening, improvements, etc. (i.e. on Lang Range Transportation Plan, Six-Yr Road Plan, etc.) • Development in an area where there is a known existing traffic and/or safety problem • Development would potentially negatively impact existing/planned traffic signal(s) • Substantial departure from the Community Plan • Any site that is expected to generate over one hundred (100) trips during the peak hour of the traffic generator or the peak hour on the adjacent streets, or over seven hundred fifty (750) trips in an average day .: CONCEPT; PLAN: CI~CKLIST - . ~ ~ . `: A concept plan of the proposed project must be submitted with the application. The concept plan shall graphically depict the land use change, development or variance that is to be considered. Further, the plan shall address any potential land use or design issues arising fi om the request. In such cases involving rezonings, the applicant may proffer conditions to limit the future use and development ofthe property and by so doing, correct any deficiencies that may not be manageable by County permitting regulations_ The concept plan should not be confused with the site plan or plot plan that is required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Site plan and bui lding permit procedures ensure compliance with State and County development regulations and may require changes to the initial concept plan. Unless limiting conditions are proffered and accepted in a rezoning or imposed on a special use permit or variance, the concept plan may be altered to the extent permitted by the caning district and other regulations. A concept plan is required with aJl rezoning, special use permit, waiver, community plan (15.2-2232) review and variance applications. The plan should be prepared by a professional site planner. The level of detail may vary, depending on the nature of the request. The County Planning Division staff may exempt some of'the items or suggest the addition ofextra items, but the following are considered minimum: ALL APPLICANTS a. Applicant name and name of development ,_ b. Date, scale and north arrow c. L•ot size in acres or square feet and dimensions d. Location, names of owners and Roanoke County tax map numbers of adjoining properties e. Physical features such as ground cover, natural watercourses, floodplain, etc. f The zoning and land use of all adjacent properties g. All property lines and easements h. All buildings, existing and proposed, and dimensions, floor area and heights i. Location, widths and names ofall existing or platted streets or o4ier public ways within or adjacent to the development _ j. Dimensions and locations of all driveways, parking spaces and loading spaces Additiaral it formation required for lZBZONING and SPECIAL USG PL•RMIT APPLICANTS _ k. Existing utilities (water, sewer, storm drains) and connections at the site 1. Any driveways, entrances/exits, curb openings and crossovers _ m. Topography map in a suitable scale and contour intervals n. Approximate street grades and site distances at intersections o. Locations of all adjacent fire hydrants p. Any proffered conditions at the site and how they are addressed q. If project is to be phased, please show phase schedule I certify th all items quired in the checklist above are complete ~~~lD~ Signature of appiica Date 6 pQA At ~ ':C::^~J :~. Community Development ; ' _ Planning & Zoning Division 183 NOTICE TO .APPLICANTS rOR REZONING, SUBDIVISION WAIVER, PUBLIC STREET WAIVER, OR SPECIAL USE PERMIT PETITION PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION ACCEPTANCE PROCEDURE The Roanoke County Planning Commission reserves the right to continue a Rezoning, Subdivision Waiver, Public Street Waiver or Special tFse Permit petition if new or additional information is presented at the public hearing. If it is the opinion of the majority of the Planning Commissioners present at the scheduled public hearing that sufficient time was not available for planning staff and/or an outside referral agency to adequately evaluate and provide written comments and suggestions on the new or additional information prior to the scheduled public hearing then the Planning Commission may vote to continue the petition. This continuance shall allow sufficient time for all necessary reviewing parties to evaluate the new or additional information and provide written comments and suggestions to be included in a written memorandum by planning staff to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission shall consult with planning staff to determine if a continuance may be warranted. POTENTIAL OF NEED FOR TRAFFIC ANALYSES AND/OR TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY The Roanoke County Planning Commission reserves the right to continue a Rezoning, Subdivision Waiver, Public Street Waiver, or Special Use Permit petition if the County Transportation Engineering Manager or staff from the Virginia Department of Transportation requests further traffic analyses and/or a traffic impact study that would be beneficial in making a land use decision (Note: a list of potential land uses and situations that tivould necessitate, ficr~ther study is provided as pay°t of this applicatioiz package}. This continuance shall allow sufficient time for all necessary reviewing parties to evaluate the required traffic analyses and/or traffic impact study and to provide written comments and/or suggestions to the planning staff and the Planning Commission. If a continuance is wan: anted, the applicant will be notified of the continuance and the newly scheduled public hearing date. Effective Date: April 19, 2005 Cc~!J(~~ fz~~ Name of Petition Petit" ner's Signature ~/ rJa a~ Date ~~ Applicants Name: George Kemp Roanoke County Existing Zoning: C2 Department of ~ Proposed Zoning: C2S Tax Map Number.' 037.14-01-49.00-0000 Community Development Magisterial District: Catawba Area: 1.56 Acres 4 June, 2008 Scale: 1" = 200' Roanoke County Department of Community Development ~ Applicants Name: George Kemp Existing Zoning: C2 Proposed Zoning: C2S Tax Map Number.' 037.14-01-49.00-0000 Magisterial District: Catawba Area: 1.56 Acres 4 June, 2008 Scale: 1" = 200' -- -T --~- • ~- --- ~ ~ ,- ._ ,~~.. ti L .~: ~ ; ~ '~ Y ;r~~f r ~~' ~j ~ ~" - ,. ,~~~~~ f ~ ~~~ w_ r ~*~ ~ x~ '~- ,; ,. • ,~, ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~, .~ ~. _ ,. fir, `~ T - . ~.: ,~ . - . :~ r *~ ., C1 ~~ r ~, ~, ~' ~ ~ ~} +Y~ f ~ ~ ~ _:~'' ~~ ' . ' ~' ~`~. 'gin _'~' ~ ; ~'i ' "' .~ l ~ C 1 1~ iiA ~ ~~ 7 Lr ~ ~•4 s~ r~T ~ i ~' ~ ~- ~' ` ~ {7~ ~ ~ ,F '=~ ~~ ~~* v _ ~~ + i ~ 1' a l r --i ~,d, ~ ~ ~ _ of-'r "-~ ~., ,,~-. . ~» ~ ~ ;~ ti / A ~ '. 4-' -- - e _~' ~ _ _ _ '_. -- -. . ~_ ~ _ '~ i ~..~ AT A REGLILAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 26, 2008 ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO OPERATE A DRIVE-IN AND FAST FOOD RESTAURANT ON 1.56 ACRES LOCATED AT 3100-B PETERS CREEK ROAD (TAX MAP NO. 37.14-1-49) CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT, UPON THE PETITION OF GEORGEKEMP WHEREAS, George Kemp has filed a petition for a special use permit to operate a drive-in and fast food restaurant on 1.56 acres to be located at 3100-B Peters Creek Road (Tax Map No. 37.14-1-49) in the Catawba Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on August 5, 2008; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on July 22, 2008; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on August 26, 2008. 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 George Kemp to operate adrive-in and fast food restaurant to be located at 3100-B Peters Creek Road in the Catawba Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 2005 Community Plan, as amended, pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.2-2232 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and that it shall have a minimum adverse impact on the surrounding neighborhood or community, and said special use permit is hereby approved with the following conditions: (1) "I-he special use permit shall only pertain to the existing leased area of the current business (approximately 800 square feet) located at 3100- 6 Peters Creek Road. (2) No drive-through window shall be constructed or utilized; only delivery service shall be permitted. 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. 2 ,~-~ PEl"ITIONER: Bill Hinton CASE NUMBER: 18-8/2008 Board of Supervisors Consent 1St Reading Date: July 22, 2008 Planning Commission Public Hearing Date: August 5, 2008 Board of Supervisors Hearing & 2"d Reading Date: August 26, 2008 A. REQUEST The petition of Bill Hinton to obtain a Special Use Permit in a C-2, General Commercial District, to operate a car wash on 1.11 acres located at 4035 Challenger Avenue, Vinton Magisterial District B. CITIZEN COMMENTS No citizens spoke. C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION Chris Patriarca presented the staff report with both the petitioner and representatives from Balzer and Associates available for questions. Mr. Azar initiated a discussion regarding signage and facade treatments. After discussion, Mr. Azar proposed conditions for the signage limiting its size and the use of temporary signs. Regarding facade treatments, Mr. Hinton stated he did want to conform to the Kroger building, with a little difference. Mr. Jarrell then began the discussion specific to lighting, and both staff and the petitioner acknowledged that those types of issues would be resolved as part of the comprehensive site plan review process. Mr. Radford followed with concerns about the overall aesthetic of the landscaping, with staff stating that the proposed plan is consistent with that of the neighboring Arby's development. Ms. Hooker then proceeded to lead the discussion on signage within the corridor in general. D. CONDITIONS 1. The site shall be developed in substantial conformance with the "Car Wash at Kroger Square -Development Plan," prepared by Balzer and Associates, Inc. dated June 6, 2008. 2. The building shall be constructed in general conformance with the "Car Wash at Kroger Square Elevation" drawings prepared by Balzer and Associates, Inc. dated June 6, 2008. 3. A monument sign, not to exceed twenty (20) feet in height, shall be constructed with materials to match the building. No LED or digital message boards shall be permitted. Additionally, no temporary signs or banners shall be permitted. 4. The sides and rear of the dumpster enclosure shall be constructed of materials to match the building facade. The dumpster enclosure shall be screened by tree and shrub plantings. 5. Additional trees shall be planted in the parking lot and a perimeter planting bed shall be designed in front of the stacking lane facing Challenger Avenue. E. COMMISSION ACTION Ms. Hooker moved to approve the petition with condition numbers 1, 2, and 5 as stated in the staff report, and conditions 3 and 4 as revised per discussions between the applicant and the planning commission at the hearing. The motion passed 3-1 with Mr. Azar voting against and Mr. McNeil absent. F. G. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE Mr. Azar voiced his opinion that the site may have been better suited for a commercial/retail use. He felt a car wash was more seasonal. ATTACHMENTS: X Concept Plan X Vicinity Map X Staff Report X Other Philip Thompson, Secretary Roanoke County Planning Commission 2 STAFF REPORT Petitioner: Bill Hinton Request: To obtain a Special Use Permit in a C•2, General Commercial District, to operate a car wash on 1.11 acres Location: 4035 Challenger Avenue, Valley Gateway Park Magisterial District: Vinton Suggested 1. The site shall be developed insubstantial conformance with the "Car Wash At Conditions: Kroger Square -Development Plan," prepared by Balzer and Associates, Inc. dated June 6, 2008. 2. The building shall be constructed in general conformance with the "Car Wash Kroger Square Elevation drawings prepared by Balzer and Associates, Inc. dated June 6, 2008. 3. A monument-style sign shall be constructed with materials to match the building elevations. No LED or digital faces shall be allowed. 4. The sides and rear of the dumpster enclosure shall be brick construction to match the building facade. The dumpster enclosure shall be screened by tree and shrub plantings. 5. Additional trees shall be planted in the parking lot and a perimeter planting bed shall be designed in front of the stacking lane facing Challenger Avenue. EXECIITIVE SUMMARY: Bill Hinton proposes to construct an automatic single bay car wash on outparcel 2 of the Kroger Square development project, located on Challenger Avenue. The proposed facility is one story and 5,200 square feet in size. The property is currently zoned C-2, General Commercial District. This site is designated as Core on the future land use map in the 2005 Comprehensive Plan. The Core designation area encourages high intensity i.irban development. Core areas may also be appropriate for lager-scale highway- -oriented retail uses and regionally-based shopping facilities. These areas are locations where commercial uses have been developed or will likely be developed, where commercial zoning exists and are served by an arterial street system. Additionally, the locations are within close proximity to the projected popi.ilation concentrations. This request is in conformance with the County's Comprehensive Plan. 1. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS The Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance defines a "Car Wash" as washing and cleaning of vehicles. Typical uses include automatic conveyor machines and self service car washes. A Car Wash is allowed in C-2 zoned districts with a Special Use Permit per. Use and Design Standards are as follows: 1. All new car wash facilities, whether conveyor operated or self services, shall be equipped with a water recycling system for eighty-five (85) percent of the water used. Roanoke County site development review will be required. 2. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS Background -This vacant site is one of four vacant outparcels located on the corner of Challenger Avenue and Valley Gateway Boulevard located in front of the new Kroger shopping center development that has recently been constructed. This development consists of an approximately 80,000 square foot Kroger grocery store and two outparcel strip buildings. On May 27, 2008, a Special Use Permit was issued on outparcel 3 for an Arby's Drive-In and Fast Food Restaurant (adjacent to this site on the southwest side). Topography/Vegetation -The site is a graded, flat parcel. There is a steep slope in front of the site facing Challenger Avenue. There are no natural buffer areas or vegetation on the site. The rear of the shopping center development is visible from the Blue Ridge Parkway. Surrounding Neghborhood =fhe surrounding adjoining properties are zoned C-2, General Commercial District. The properties across the street are zoned C-1, Office District, R-3, Medium Density Multifamily Residential District, and R-1, Low Density Residential District. 3. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Site Layout/Architecture -The proposed car wash is approximately 5,200 square feet. The one-bay automatic car wash facility is located toward the east of the property. Required parking is located on the remainder of the site. In addition, 5 stacking spaces are required and shown on the Development Plan. The design of the building is attached and shown on sheet A2.1, "Car Wash Kroger Square, Elevations - EX. `B'."Building materials include a light brown/tare brick with an olive metal green roof. The proposed signage includes one freestanding twenty-five (25) foot pole sign and four attached wall signs. Details were not provided, however all proposed signage is required to meet Section 30-93-13(E), C- 2 Signage Regulations of the Roanoke County Code. Development plan, building elevations, and site location map have been submitted with the application. Access/Traffic Circulation -The parcel will be accessed internally from the shopping center. There will be no access directly to or from Challenger Avenue. Virginia Department of Transportation has no comments at this time due to the addition of a car wash will not significantly change the results of the Traffic Impact Analysis for the Kroger Development submitted on June 27, 2007. Roanoke County Transportation Division has concerns with the close proximity of the car wash driveway to the Kroger shopping center driveway. To reduce the number of conflicts points, a recommendation has been made to locate the proposed entrance as far east as feasible and to be clearly marked as entrance only. This proposed change will deter exiting vehicles to utilize the entrance driveway. Fire & Rescue/Utilities -Impacts include an annual fire inspection and access for fire apparatus needs to be considered to and around structure. Econorr~ic Development - No objections to this request. 2 4. CONFORMANCE WITH ROANOKE COUNTY COMMUNITY PLAN This site is in conformance with the Core area Future Land Use Map from the 2005 Community Plan. The Core designation encourages high intensity urban development, highway-oriented uses. Commercial zoning currently exists, the location is served by an arterial street, and it also is currently served by urban services. 5. STAFF CONCLUSIONS This is a request by Bill Hinton to obtain a Special Use Permit to operate a car wash on an out parcel of the Kroger Square development project located at the corner of Challenger Avenue and Valley Gateway Boulevard. The 1.11-acre site is currently zoned C-2, General Commercial District. The property is designated as Core on the 2005 Future Lantl Use map. The Core designation encourages dense commercial use along major highways. "fhe proposed use of a car wash is consistent the uses in the designation. If the Planning Commission chooses to recommend approval of this petition, staff suggests the following conditions: 1. The site shall be developed in si.ibstantial conformance with the "Car Wash At Kroger Square - Development Plan," prepared by Balzer and Associates, Inc. dated June 6, 2008. 2. The building shall be constructed in general conformance with the "Car Wash Kroger Square Elevation drawings prepared by Balzer and Associates, Inc. dated June 6, 2008. 3. A monument-style sign shall be constructed with materials to match the bi.iilding elevations. No LED or digital faces shall be allowed. 4. The sides and rear of the dumpster enclosure shall be brick construction to match the building facade. The dumpster enclosure shall be screened by tree and shrub plantings. 5. Additional trees shall be planted in the parking lot and a perimeter planting bed shall be designed in front of the stacking lane facing Challenger Avenue. CASE NUMBER: PREPARED BY: HEARING DATES: ATTACHEMENTS: 18.812008 Rebecca M. Mahoney PC: 8/512008 Application Vicinity Map Land Use Zoning Map C2, General Commercial District Standards Photos BOS: 8/26/2008 3 ~~. ~- c~~o ~ ~s County of Roarrolce r° St sc Ottly CommunityDevclop 6 ~r.c~ Rccc;vedby: Planning & Zoning EeA~M ~ -}-(:t.U t;0 r ~~: ~ t~crr3zn aat~: 5204 Bernard Drive p~ °0 q ZSq- ~~5 U 5' . P ~ Box 29800 rds ;5,~~a: aos ~ arc: Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 S ~ 2f~ ~ U ~ {S40} 772-2068 FAX (S40} 776-7ISS ]~j._ g/~U~ Cas<: Number 10 AL.I. APPL,/CANTS Check type of application filed (check all that apply) ^ Rezoning L~Special Use ^ Variance ^ Waiver 0 Administrative Appeal ^ Comp Pian (t5.2-2z3?) Review Applicants name/address w/zip Phone: 5 4 0- 5 2 0- 6 4 0 5 Car.tr2ra.C.r t~U)2C}-+t,,st~ ~,ork: Mr. Bill Hinton 1 60 Sunny Cove brive Ce11 tt: Moneta VA 241 21 fax No Owner's name/address +v/zip Phone #: 5 4 0- 5 6 3- 3 5 0 0 Kroger Limited Partnership I work: 3631 Peters Creek Road Fax No #: ~(}_5K~_~F,~ Property Location 0~~~~~,- Magisterial L~istricr Hinton challenger Ave. Community Planning area: Vinton Tax Map No.: 50.01-01-05.11 Existin Zonin g g~ C-2 Size of parcel(s): Acres: 1 . 1 1 aC. Existing Land Use; Commercial - Vacant REZONING, SPECIAL, USE PERMIT, lJ'RIVER AND COMP PLiIN ps_1-I23I) REI~IEIf' APPLICriNTS (RlS/WJCP) Proposed Zoning: C-2 w/a special use permit Proposed Land Use: Car Wash Does the parcel meet the minimum ]ot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? Yes X No + ~ IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. Does llte parcel meet the minimum criteria for the requested Use Type? Yes X No IF NO, A VARIANCE 1S REQUIRED FIRST' [f rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? Yes ;=i No X VARIANCE, fVAIJ~ER.rIND,-1 DAfINISTR~1TtYEAPPl•~ILAPP1,tC~iNTS(Y11i'/A1i} Variance/Waiver of Section(s) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in order to: Appeal of Zoning Administrator's decision to Appeal of Interpretation of Sections}: of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance Appeal of~lnterpretation of Zoning Map to is the application complete? Please check ifenclosed APPLICATION Wl LL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE rtrsnvtcr vrnn rtrsnvtcr v~nn tvsnvrcr wnA X ~ Consultation X / 8 1!2" x l l"concept plan Application fee / Application Metes and bounds description Proffers, if applicable / Justification Water an se+ver appl' lion X / Adjoining property owners I hereby certify that 1 am either the owner of the pr riy or lh o+ ne s g t r contr. purchaser and am acting with the knowledge and consent of the owner. ~ O+vner's Signature ~CosJ rtz~~cr tau ec+IASf a~ JUSTIFICATION FOR REZONING, SPECIAL USG [ ERN11T WAIVER OR COMP PLAN (ts ± ?z3al REVIEtiV REQUESTS Applicant Mr. B11I HlntOri The Planning Gommissian will study rezoning, special use permit waiver or commwtity plan (1~.2-2232) review requests to determine the need and justification for the change in Terms of public health, safety, and gene<<~} welfare Please answer the following questions as thoroughly as possible Use additional space if necessary Please explain how the request furthers the parposes of the Roanoke County Ordinance as well as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning district classification in the Zoning Ordinance See Attached Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Community Plan Sae Attached Please describe tltie impact(s) ofthe request on the property itself, the adjoining properties, and the surrounding area, as well as the impacts on public services and facilities, including water/sewer, roads, schools, parks/recreation and fire and rescue. See Attached Jristification for Special Use Permit: 1. This special use request is being made far the construction of an automatic single bay car' wash facility to be located on outparcel 2 of the ltroger Square development project cun-entiy under construction. Tlzis project wil l further the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance by maintaining the commercial nature of parcels along Route 460 while emphasizing the architectural character of the building and quality site design characteristics. z, This project is located within an area containing transitional and core areas of tl~e Bonsactc Area Guidelines in the future land use map. The core designation permits a variety of commercial businesses such as a Gar wash facility. The proposed developtnetzt emphasizes architectural character of the building, extensive greenspace and landscaping, and high quality signage for the commercial parcel. 3. This special use permit will have no greater impact than any other adjoining commercial propetties in this area. Existing utilities are located on the pad ready site with existing entrances in place to serve the outparcel.. The parcel will be served internally from the shopping center. The proposed development was incorporated into the traffic impact study which was submitted and approved by VDOT for the Kroger Square shopping center. Balzer & Associates Inc. CONCEPT PLAN Cl-lECKLiST A concept plan of the proposed project must be submitted with the application The concept plan shall graphically depict the land use change, development or variance that is to be considered Further, the plan shall address any potential land use or design issues arising from die request to such cases involving rezonings, the applicant may profferconditions tolimit the future use and development of the properly and Isy so doing, correct any deficietrcies that tnay not be manageable by County permitting regulations. The concept plan should not be confused +vith the site plan or plot plan that is required prior to the issuance of a building permit. Site plan and building permit procedures ensure compliance with State and County development regulations and may require changes to the initial concept plan Unless limiting conditions are proffered and accepted in a rezoning or imposed on a special use permit or variance, the concept plan rtray be altered to the extent permitted by the zoning district and other regulations A concept plan is required with all rezoning, special use permit, waiver, community plan (IS 2-2232) review and variance applications. The plan should be prepared by a professional site planner The level of detail may vary, depending on the nature of the request The County Planning Division staff may exempt same of the items or suggest the addition of extra items, but the following are considered minimum: ALL APPLICANTS ~_ a Applicant name and name of development .~_ b Date, scale and north arrow _~ c Lot size in acres or• square feet and dimensions X d. C ocation, names of owners and Roanoke County tax map numbers of adjoining properties X e Physical features such as ground cover, natural watercourses, floodplain, etc. X f: The zoning and land use of all adjacent properties X g All property lines and easements X h. All buildings, existing and proposed, and dimensions, floor area and heights X i. Location, widths and names of all existing or platted streets or other public +vays within or adjacent to the development X j Dimensions and locations of all driveways, parking spaces and loading spaces Arfditiorral information requirer! for REZONING mrrt SPECIAL. USE PL•R~L11T APPLICANTS X k Existing utilities (water, sewer, storm drains) and connections at the site _~ I. Any driveways, entrances/exits, curb openings and crossovers X m Topography map in a suitable scale and contour intervals X n Approximate street grades and site distances at intersections X o Locations of all adjacent fire hydrants ~ p Any proffered conditions at the site and ho~v they are addressed X q If project is to be phased, please show phase schedule ce that ail 'terns requir 'n the checklist above are complete ~. ~ L n~ Signature of a lican D to Community Development Planning 8t Zoning Division NOTICE TO APPLICANTS FOR REZONING, SUBDIVISION WAIVER, PUBLIC STREET WAIVER, OR SPECIAL USE PERMIT PETITION PLANNING COMMISSION APPLICATION ACCEPTANCE PROCEDURE The Roanoke County Planning Commission reserves the riglrt to continue a Rezoning, Subdivision Waiver, Public Street Waiver or Special Use Permit petition if new or additional information is presented at the public hearing. If it is the opinion of the majority of the Planning Commissioners present at the scheduled public hearing that sufficient time was not available for planning staff and/or an outside referral agency to adequately evaluate and provide written comments and suggestions on the new or additional information prior to the scheduled public hearing then the Planning Commission may vote to continue the petition. This continuance shall allow sufficient time for all necessary reviewing parties to evaluate the new or additional information and provide written comments and suggestions to be included in a written memorandum by planning staff to the Planning Commission- The Planning Commission shall consult with planning staff to determine if a continuance may be warranted POTENTIAL OF NEED FOR TRAFFIC ANALYSES AND/OR TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY The Roanoke County Planning Commission reserves the right to continue a Rezoning, Subdivision Waiver, Public Street Waiver, or Special Use Permit petition if the County Transportation Engineering Manager or staff from the Virginia Department of Transportation requests further traffic analyses and/or a traffic impact study that would be beneficial in making a land use decision (Note: a list of potential land uses acrd situations that would necessitate fin titer study is provided as part of this application package). 'i'bis continuance shall allow sufficient time for atl necessary reviewing parties to evaluate the required traffic analyses and/or traffic impact study and to provide written comments and/or suggestions to the planning staff and the Planning Commission. If a continuance is warranted, the applicant will be notified of the continuance and the newly scheduled public hearing date.. Effective Date: April 19, 2005 4 4tOAA! ,~, ti z ;~ n o,.r~ a` Id38 B~I,~~ rND i~~~OCIt.TC~. 1l•lG .~ 11~1~ r<rnccrrvlc To+.w~pow Adlacent Property Owners Of SnUiect Parcel: Tax Map #: 050.01-01-05.11 Kroger Limited Partnership I Property Address: 0 Challenger Avenue 050.01-01-05.12 Zoning: C2 Kroger Limited Parhiezship 1 Property Address: 3970 Challenger Avenue 050.41-01-05..0$ Zoning: C2 with conditions Kroger Limited Partnership I Property Address: 0 Challenger Avenue 050.01-01-05.10 Zoning: C2 Balzer & Associates Inc, AND ASSOCIATES INC ~~ ~~~ I?EFLECTIhIC TO bIOR-RUW Legal Description of Out Parcel 2 Beginning at a Point on the southeasterly Right-of--Way line of Challenger Avenue {U.S. Route 460) at the northeasterly comer of Out Parcel 3 as shown on "Plat of Survey Showing Subdivision of 22,86 Ac. -Property of Kroger Limited Partnership I" (Instrument #2007-16968); thence continuing along the southeasterly Right-of-Way line of Challenger Avenue N33°04'25"E, 212.26 feet to a point on the riorthwesterly line of the "Remaining Property of Kroger Limited Partnership I" shown on said uPlat of Survey' ;thence leaving the Right-of--Way line of Challenger Avenue and continuing along the line of said "Remaining Property" the following: S49°59'24"E, 204-42 feet to a point; thence along a curve to the right being 61.26 feet in length, with a radius of 39.00 feet and a chord bearing of N04°59'24"W, 55.15 feet to a point; thence S40°00'36"V11, 171.71 feet to a point at the southeasterly corner of said Out Parcel 3; thence leaving the line of the "Remaining Property" and continuing along the line of said Out Parcel 3 S49°59'24"E, 217.79 feet to the Paint of Beginning, containing 1,11 acres and being OUT PARCEL 2 as shown on "Plat of Survey Showing Subdivision of 22.86 Ac. - Property of Kroger Limited Partnership I" recorded in the clerk's office of the circuit court of Roanoke County, Virginia in Instrument #2007-16968. PLANNERS • ARCHITECTS • ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS ROANOKE • RICHMOND • NEW RIVER VALLEY • SHENANDOAH VALLEY 1208 Corporate Circle • Roanoke. V"uginia 24018 •(540( 772-9580 • FAX (540J 772-8050 W W W bC712er.CC - - ~ ~ ;o~ ~ a i MNIOtlI/~'ALN(lOCl 3NONb'Otl ~ p ~, y_~e j )Q m ~ H @n° " ass j:~ f Ea5 i{~~ j ';ffl Nt+'td 1N3WdOZ3h30 C o m m o W X o0 .~, ~ ~3 ~eaa E~jj {4t~1 ~€~S ~:~¢y ; ~ G W gOm ~~~~ xa? oft sSFEB itfa aS~fi 3db'(lOS Fi3JONN ld HSb'M dd o w < ~ N s _ _ m"" _._ _.........___ °_~ f oQiau PRNATE ENTRANCE DRIVE TO KROGER SQUARE '"'~ j ~~~~~~~~--- o~um.°=, :;i~o ~ .____....._ .......- ~w~ z° m ~ r~. ~~ -W ~ -- 1 ~~ Ng E 1 I ~--- ~- 11 o- ~- ~ 1 i ' _. z i 3 ° -® -~ ~ w 1 0o i i > N ~ ^ \ 9 SPACES` ° ,. 111 a o (FOR VACUUMS) ' I `~ I ' I W ° I ~ ' 10 SPACES ^ ( 1 '~'~ I J 1 ~I a ~I N ° - (FOR VACUUMS) ' I ~ I Q F - v ~ i w o w ~ ~ >. o = I 1 0l ~ o~NZ~~ 6 Z n U 1 > ~ ®-- o ~ w -_ ONE-WAY ~ -I O 1 °w~~~o - ~ ~ °rnu I _ 1 1 ~ ~ SPAS / I- I 1 (FOR VACUVMS) W rl ~ ~ I I ~ ~~ >~_ ~ . w I I~ =m~3~ y, ~ ~~ I ~ ~~ ~°~ t 30.00' ~ u i ~ , 1 I I l ~ !........_.. - 1 ~ o~< -- _ w`~~ ~oWn`; o.~~N o~~ ~w~ ~_ - w °~ 5 0 -'^ i~ g3g a _ a _ ~g VN e ? - a~ ~W - ' Q~u __ _ o$ ~o ~Jo = c - u ~~ ~! ooc 5r ge °~ m- - ~ ~ ~~ <~ a c vow ~, ~ o .,~ n2O ew>a z 0 a W J rWr 2~ K~ LL 7 z O a w J W W N h~ 2 ~ _~~ ~~ :l? r s W ~ ~~~ 3 =~ Z O a w J W W O LL W~ J ~~ °~ l~~~1a F~j'~~ij~`~~giE ~ e E j~~ pG_'~~f4~6~f'~ ~ R~ x i ~ :' 7 N,~~7 f~, _ .9. "X3 - SNOIl`dA3~3 ;- 11,, aavnos aa~oaH ~vd HSYM ado 3 an~eaon mnvmos or enizeR au~ma p a y~ q°q ~ ~ n ~~7y' N 'J" ~ g z~ ~d ,~ h ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ o `~ r i, 221 ~\ O~U- ~~ ~ Doff ~' ~ r~~ ~ r Z ow \ / r / ~~zm i ,~ 6~ / I ~ " ~~,9g ~ ~ ~/f r J r / ~' i '~ / `~~~r /~ ~ \ SrS\ b W8<~ ~ ~ cj a ~ dj .. ' 4 ~ q na~ \ ~r~~ p N N r o /~M ~ ~z r / 1 / r g ~ °a „~ a a \ ~<zN ~I m ~~~ ~ z ~ ^ ~ A ~o =z ~O~ ~S Z W V ~ ~ m NFt=n SN m~w~~~ O ~?~~Fa zQ~=gra ~o>aa~ a ~~~~~~ ~~a Fpro ~W°a~m~ >o~~cdia {° z ~a O W -° 4 ps~°dW VJ ~~°~~~ o =a~'1'i o~~~~~ ~~ ~¢aa'r- 2 ~~g~~= ~~ ~ °o o ° ~-° Y p„ I ~xQ m Wow ~QO~ N aao4 a~~co C7 Z ~ O cL ~ d~ a W ~' .f~ '~f /ry%~ ° 9~0\~i\~ / o~~,y0 0l o_ ~\4~ U~U~J° C <OUO t n.gNa~`a~ a <.=~a ~ O N tk N # 'O, p~ as /~N a i ~~F}c~ Oryp/j ^ k~9ry/u`y Ste. ~ . h rL ho+ n~`. m~ ~6 ~ ~3 ~~ ~o w8 a~ ~g W 6 Jm W 6 <.N.v ~+w y .77~ ~z2 a' ~n^~ dv. m /7p~oyea~ ~ a_~oag ~ ro M < ]NtOVa~ ~j?~~/~~J o ° c~ ~r? ~j ~6• .lg. ~d ~, F9 ° WS<oa `~ ~~~J'7 < OQNQWO (7 ~~ ~ 2 ~ pidoc~iw~ m m m a <o \W `- `-~1 W ~ m W} S S wJJw ~•4+r'0.J• r N»o v") ~ 7wzi 7~n ?o~~d~ i o O O W p w W ~ S 3 o O 3 N ~~ ~ ~ < C 4 F Jm cc Oa U ~ Qap~ N s°s ~~~~ ~I~ ~~ z~~ ~ ~~ m c~n ~a wmWz ,x?, ao aaY~¢ dGLLO ''o aso~zp ~"~7'~ ~ 1- wm~~w~"7 ~~~ I aOLS ~~ I ~ ~6 azZ°5zd~ o~~ _~ z x~~Jgrzo«CCSSSS mC ~ zd0 ~~m LL p <z c~+('~~~ r-i3 LJ N w ~~ OI- 07 t~0 yUj 4 ~ ~C. Q q w ~"o~Ez~~ ~o^ W~°w ~oK ~ ~ ~~~~ 9 zv~ caw ao~ ~c~~ tr~a"~~oo `~.3`zd° o~< ~w~~~o:~0~0.~ ao W ~~ }ZN ~ ~~Oh~~~ ~~+~ ~4. O~jw~R ~0~~7d m~. o ZZ ` ~r+ '=zF ~~~o w~vg °Z8~ O v ~N l ~~~~ W~°~~ ~ 'J h-~~°~~~~z ~D~m<w~ g~~i 0~~ ~ 3~1~~7~~Up ~7d'N rp Q v ~~ao~~~ ~ y°. ~_m 5 ~~~ rrm°~Ei w Z C~~sl~z(Q $~ UTZO ~_~ ~wm WZ~ m ~NOO ~~waF W~ L.IS ~a 1n ZGOO#O ~~~ ° N ~N S<Z ~~ ~=F-C T~4 Sj X~ s~UO ~QT O~C ~d~~41n ~~~r ~~ zV1J p F- OF ZZzz ryryK(~~~ 'r s ~ 3 - ~~OOw~V~~ p~~(~n~~ O~d jUQ °ya~~Z ~y~~~~~~ ~Z ~~Wa~~~°o u~q~S~p~ vdl hhs~~ v~o~WY~3~'FF,4~r,d-rcr~i~o~ ~°o Y ~`O~a~~~& iF~dZF~z~ ~FT~ mx'~~ ~~~~v=i~~w~~i~ ?°a Q ~ ~ I i~ m I k,r ~ ~ 1 Ss, fff Ftg ~ '~<'Si ~` ~ f ,~~ /~~ ~ ^h / ~ ~ / ~~ ~~,. ~ v / J / N ~ ~ C U $ ~ ~ x ?u € a, o ~ ~~ N O S ~i a ~` ~ ° O U m ~7 r' m fSC ° 7 N O a~ Y1 Y ~~ W ~p U w ~. m ~~ xo W zpw '~~ o~ o ~ p°p~~~~ ~wp z~ Z ~ m w ~`' ~ ~ m N O^ ~ d' d ~ H ~ ~G W a ~ a ~ m~ z z<' 8 ~Na ~ ~~ z ma ~aA m-N pEp aZZC Sa~ " ~ _~- ~ ~ 4 °oi~ of!Nf!!~WLFjFZZ s°D5~ p~ n~ 5 2 m m Z ~ W W Q ~ i 4 W4~. NZ 4`~Y °~w w ~ 2 a~F7~ q+~N~U~~mW ~Y p~ E .~ 1r~B ~C rQ~/ P ~LrS o ~ p~~N w~0 o~d~7a '~ ~' ,~,~ ~~' ~ 7m O.K r9 ~ ,~ ~~ oQO~ ~`~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~v~i~ m pN wzze' E m 6CO ~Np ~~ zr ~+y+~~~p03~ (aO ~'a Uz{'x~~~i~~U rca?1 0 W m,~~jjj`O of ¢wEN~~DS N 6JJ ~JJW~~U' -~'~c~~il 0 4 ~~IWTilZb~T3.~ U wNF-~~lr.N~aOLL(<9m~FOOa`3'c~Ei 8~`~ I-~a~7~~~FO~z~~°ilz~a•t<~a ~ z ~•° P a o~ ~ ~ o ~~ ~a~~9 Z ~ ~ r? a ai rri ~ 05 ~•l ~ ZI 4r FQ ~c ~o <8 ~" ~~ ~~ O c~3 ~~m} inma3 rS m ~ 1 \'d `~. N \~ c ~ N X O ~:~ <zao aJ6]D memo Q3in .~ f p0 `` ~QON 4O, }A c9 O J~ S m (~ Y a ~ ~ N `~ y W ~ L O ~ 9 ~` d~ z ~-r J ~ ~_ Y gp I R/W ------ ~\ i ~~~~ \~ o d ai~io~OO ~~ ~Mt~OU° / h ~o obi: P~ .Q./ 6 ° ~ g `ory~ry~ N o ° o ~ ~~y~ ~~~soo m~ f o ~~\r / ry ~odowo UM °'flta / F, a cn Cif m ~rf, x •m a •o~ r_ ~ .a Site ~~ Land Use - Conservation r Rural Preserve - Rural Village ?ri' ~/illage Center Development ~~ Neighborhood Conservation Transition ~aF' Core - Prinapal Industrial N Applicants Name: Bill Hinton Roanoke County Existing Zoning: C2 Department of ~ Proposed Zoning: C2S Tax Map Number. 050.01-01-05.11 Community Development Magisterial District: Vinton Area: 1.11 Acres 9 June, 2008 Scale: 1" = 200' / ,; I Site l Zoning ZONING - AG3 \ ® EP AG1 AR - AV C1 C2 / ® C2CVOD ® 11 _ 12 PCD PRD _ PTD R1 R2 R3 R4 RB GB CB Mt / - M2 Roanoke County Department of Community Development 1 N Applicants Name: Bill Hinton Existing Zoning: C2 Proposed Zoning: C2S Tax Map Number.' 050.01-01-05.11 Magisterial District: Vinton Area: 1.11 Acres 9 June, 2008 Scale: 1" = 200' ARTICLE III. DISTRICT REGULATIONS Page 1 of 5 SEC. 30-54. C-2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. Sec. 30-54-1. Purpose. (A) The purpose of this district is to provide locations for a variety of commercial and service related activities within the urban service area serving a community of several neighborhoods or large areas of the county. 'this district is intended for general application throughout the county. General commercial districts are most appropriately found along major arterial thoroughfares which serve large segments of the county's population. The C-2 district permits a wide variety of retail and service related uses. Land uses permitted in this district are generally consistent with the recommendations set forth in the transition and core land use categories of the comprehensive plan. Site development regulations are designed to ensure compatibility with adjoining land uses. (Ord. No. 042208-16, § 1, 4-22-08) Sec. 30-54-2. Permitted Uses. (A) The following uses are permitted by right subject to all other applicable requirements contained in this ordinance. An asterisk (*) indicates additional, modified or more stringent standards as listed in article IV, use and design standards, for those specific uses. 1. Residential Uses Accessory Apartment * Home Beauty/Barber Salon Home Occupation, Type I * Multi-Family Dwelling Two-Family Dwelling * 2. Civic Uses Administrative Services Clubs Cultural Services Day Care Center Educational Facilities, College/University Educational Facilities, Primary/Secondary * Family Day Care Home * Guidance Services Park and Ride Facility Post Office Public Assembly Public Parks and Recreational Areas * http://library4.municode.com/default/DocView/12222/1/120/123 7/31/2008 ARTICLE III. DISTRICT REGULATIONS Safety Services Utility Services, Minor 3. Office Uses Financial Institutions * General Office Medical Office Laboratories 4. Commercial Uses Agricultural Services * Antique Shops Automobile Dealership, New * Automobile Repair Services, Minor Automobile Rental/Leasing Automobile Parts/Supply, Retail * Bed and Breakfast * Boarding House Business Support Services Business or Trade Schools Commercial Indoor Entertainment Commercial Indoor Sports and Recreation Commercial Outdoor Entertainment Commercial Outdoor Sports and Recreation Communications Services Construction Sales and Services * Consumer Repair Services Funeral Services Garden Center * Gasoline Station * Hospital Hotel/Motel/Motor Lodge Kennel, Commercial * Pawn Shop Personal Improvement Services Personal Services Restaurant, General Page 2 of 5 http://library4.municode.com/default/DocView/12222/1 /120!123 7/31/2008 ARTICLE III. DISTRICT REGULATIONS Retail Sales Studio, Fine Arts Veterinary Hospital/Clinic 5. Industrial Uses Recycling Centers and Stations 6. Miscellaneous Uses Amateur Radio Tower * Parking Facility * Page 3 of 5 (B) The following uses are allowed only by special use permit pursuant to section 30-19. An asterisk (*) indicates additional, modified or more stringent standards as listed in article IV, use and design standards, for those specific uses. 1. Civic Uses Adult Care Residences Halfway House Life Care Facility Nursing Home Religious Assembly Utility Services, Major * 2. Commercial Uses Adult Business * Automobile Dealership, Used * Automobile Repair Services, Major Car Wash * Commercial Indoor Amusement Convenience Store * Dance Hall Equipment Sales and Rental Manufactured Home Sales * Mini-warehouse Outpatient Mental Health and Substance Abuse Center Recreational Vehicle Sales and Service * Restaurant, Drive-in and Fast Food * Surplus Sales Truck Stop 3. Industrial Uses Custom Manufacturing http://library4.municode.com/defaultlDocV iew/ 12222/ 1 / 120/ 123 7/31 /200$ ARTICLE III. DISTRICT REGULATIONS Page 4 of 5 Landfill, Rubble Transportation Terminal 4. Miscellaneous Uses Broadcasting Tower Outdoor Gatherings (Ord. No. 82493-8, § 2, 8-24-93; Ord. No. 022796-14, § 1, 2-27-96; 042297-14, § 1, 4-22-97; Ord. No. 042799-11, § 2, 4-27-99; Ord. No. 102803-15, § 2, 10-28-03; Ord. No. 102505-7, § 2, 10-25-05; Ord. No. 042208-16, § 1, 4-22-08) Sec. 30-54-3. Site Development Regulations. General Standards. For additional, modified, or more stringent standards for specific uses, see Article IV, Use and Design Standards. (A)Minimum lot requirements. 1. Lots served by private well and sewage disposal system; a. Area: 1 acre (43,560 square feet). b. Frontage: 100 feet on a publicly owned and maintained street. 2. Lots served by either public sewer or water, or both: a. Area: 15,000 square feet. b. Frontage: 75 feet on a publicly owned and maintained street. (B)Minimum setback requirements. 1. Front yard: a. Principal structures: 30 feet, or 20 feet when all parking is located behind the front building line. b. Accessory structures: Behind the front building line. 2. Side yard: None. 3. Rear yard: a. Principal structures: 15 feet. b. Accessory structures: 3 feet. 4. Where a lot fronts on more than one street, front yard setbacks shall apply to all streets. (C)Maximum height of structures. 1. Height limitations: a. Principal structures: When adjoining property zoned R-1 or R-2, 45 feet, including rooftop mechanical equipment. The maximum height may be increased, provided each required side and rear yard adjoining the R-1 or R-2 district is increased two feet for each foot in height over 45 feet. In all locations the height is unlimited unless otherwise restricted by this ordinance. b. Accessory structures: actual height of principal structure. :l/library4.municode.com/default/DocView/1222211/120/123 7/31 ARTICLE III. DISTRICT REGULATIONS Page 5 of 5 (D)Maximum coverage. 1. Building coverage; 50 percent of the total lot area. 2. Lot coverage: 90 percent of the total lot area. (Ord. No. 62293-12, § 10, 6-22-93) http://library4.municode.com/default/DocView/12222/1/120/123 7/31/2008 ~ .(~h '{~ ! F s'1 L AR ~.' .a ~ ~~. ~ 3tyy~. ar~pf~ y~:' '' ~r~ v -.-~r_.i ...~. .. AT A REGULAR MEE-I-ING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 26, 2008 ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO OPERATE A CAR WASH ON 1.11 ACRES LOCATED AT 4035 CHALLENGER DRIVE (TAX MAP NO. 50.01-1-5.11) VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT, UPON THE PEl"ITION OF BILL HINTON WHEREAS, Bilf Hinton has riled a petition for a special use permit to operate a car wash on 1.11 acres to be located at 4035 Challenger Drive (Tax Map No. 50.01-1- 5.11) in the Vinton Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on August 5, 2008; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on July 22, 2008; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on August 26, 2008. 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 Bill Hinton to operate a car wash to be located at 4035 Challenger Avenue in the Vinton Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 2005 Community Plan, as amended, pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.2-2232 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and that it shall have a minimum adverse impact on the surrounding neighborhood or community, and said special use permit is hereby approved with the following conditions: (1) The site shall be developed in substantial conformance with the "Car Wash at Kroger Square -Development Plan," prepared by Balzer and Associates, Inc. dated June 6, 2008. (2) The building shall be constructed in general conformance with the "Car Wash at Kroger Square Elevation" drawings prepared by Balzer and Associates, Inc. dated June 6, 2008. (3) A monument sign, not to exceed twenty (20) feet in height, shall be constructed with materials to match the building. No LED or digital message boards shall be permitted. Additionally, no temporary signs or banners shall be permitted. (4) The sides and rear of the dumpster enclosure shall be constructed of materials to match the building fagade. The dumpster enclosure shall be screened by tree and shrub plantings. (5) Additional trees shall be planted planting bed shall be designed Challenger Avenue. in the parking lot and a perimeter ~ front of the stacking lane facing 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. 2