Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout9/8/1987 - RegularO~ ROANp~.~ ~ h L ~ A Z ~ a 18 ~~ 88 S~SgUICENTENN~P~ A Beauti ful Bcginning C~nunt~ n~~ ~v~trinkr ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION AGENDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1987 Welcome to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors meeting. Regular meetings are held on the second Tuesday of the month at 2:00 p.m., and the fourth Tuesday at 3:00 p.m. 'Public Hearings will be heard at 7:00 p.m on the fourth Tuesday of each month. Deviations from this schedule will be announced. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (2:00 P.M.) 1. Roll Call. 2. Invocation: The Reverend Ronald Eason Green Ridge Baptist Church 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag. B. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS LARRY LOGAN GAVE WATER DAMAGE ASSESSMENT FROM THE RECENT RAINS. HAS RECEIVED NOTIFICATION FROM VDOT THAT BRAMBLETON AVE. CONSTRUCTION IS SCHEDULED FOR COMPLETION BY OCTOBER 15. THEY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE AN OPENING CEREMONY. BOARD CONCURRED WITH THIS. C. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS. NONE D. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS NONE E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Approval of Resolution requesting designation as a drought disaster county. ,. LG/SAM TO APPROVE RESO URC 2. Request for Industrial Development Bonds from Hollins College Corporation. BLJ/AHB TO APPROVE RESO URC 3. Request for resolution endorsing realignment of Starkey Road and Buck Mountain Road intersection. AHB/LG TO APPROVE RESO URC 4. Authorization to declare volunteers for County programs as employees for the purpose of Worker's Compensation coverage. BLJ/AHB TO APPROVE RESO URC 5. Acceptance of a deed establishing common boundary lines at the Old Bent Mountain Fire Station property. LG/HCN TO APPROVE URC 6. Economic Development Strategy for review and comment . WORK SESSION SET FOR SEPT. 22, 1987. F. REQUEST FOR WORK SESSIONS 1. Six Year Plan for Secondary Road System. SET FOR SEPT. 22, 1987 G. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS NONE H. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance acquiring a well lot in Crestwood Park. LG/AHB TO APPROVE 1ST READING 2 2ND READING - 9/22/87 - URC r I. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 5 MINUTE RECESS AT 2:45 P.M. - BACK AT 2:53 P.M. BLJ/HCN EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 3:00 P.M. - URC RETURN FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 3:16 P.M. 1. Ordinance accepting an offer for and authorizing the sale of real estate adjacent to Fort Lewis Fire Station on U. S. Route 11-460. SAM/BLJ MOTION TO ACCEPT BRADS HAW OFFER OF $40,000 FOR 1.6 ACRE AND LEWIS GALE BUILDING CORP. OFFER FOR 7.3 ACRE FOR $70,000 AND 6.58 ACRE OF REAL ESTATE OFF ROUTE 221 AND LEASE OF BALLFIELDS THRU SEPT. 1989. URC J. APPOINTMENTS 1. Community Corrections Resources Board. 2. Court Service Unit Advisory Council/Youth and Family Services Advisory Board 3. Grievance Panel K. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS L. 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. LG/BLJ - URC 1. Minutes of Meeting - August 11, 1987 2. Acceptance of water and sewer facilities serving The Falls, Section 3. 3. Notification from the Virginia Department of Transportation that the following roads have been accepted into the Secondary System. a. 0.35 miles of Coachman Drive 3 r b. 0.19 miles of Coachman Circle c. 0.22 Miles of Forest Oak Drive d. 0.79 miles of Summit Ridge Road 4. Authorization for County Administrator to execute the appropriate documents for continuation of CORTRAN services. M. REPORTS RECEIVED AND FILED 1. Bi-Monthly Economic Development Activity. N. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS NONE O. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to the Code of Virginia 2.1-344 (a).(6) LITIGATION - BOARD AND COMMITTEE FOR CONST. LAW AND (2) REAL ESTATE - MOUNTAIN VIEW TECH. PARK BLJ/HCN - URC P. ADJOURNMENT 4 OF pOANp~~ Z A ~ ~ 2 v a~ 18 ~~ 88 SFSQWCENTENN~P~ A Beauti~ul Beginning C~n~tnt~ of ~n~tnnke ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION AGENDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1987 Welcome to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors meeting. Regular meetings are held on the second Tuesday of the month at 2:00 p.m., and the fourth Tuesday at 3:00 p.m. Public Hearings will be heard at 7:00 p.m on the fourth Tuesday of each month. Deviations from this schedule will be announced. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (2:00 P.M.) 1. Roll Call. 2. Invocation: The Reverend Ronald Eason Green Ridge Baptist Church 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag. B. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS LARRY LOGAN GAVE WATER DAMAGE ASSESSMENT FROM THE RECENT RAINS. HAS RECEIVED NOTIFICATION FROM VDOT THAT BRAMBLETON AVE. CONSTRUCTION IS SCHEDULED FOR COMPLETION BY OCTOBER 15. THEY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE AN OPENING CEREMONY. BOARD CONCURRED WITH THIS. C. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS. NONE D. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS NONE E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Approval of Resolution requesting designation as a drought disaster county. LG/SAM TO APPROVE RESO URC 2• Request for Industrial Development Bonds from Hollins College Corporation. BLJ/AHB TO APPROVE RESO URC 3• Request for resolution endorsing realignment of Starkey Road and Buck Mountain Road intersection. AHB/LG TO APPROVE RESO URC 4• Authorization to declare volunteers for County programs as employees for the purpose of Worker's Compensation coverage. BLJ/AHB TO APPROVE RESO URC 5• Acceptance of a deed establishing common boundary lines at the Old Bent Mountain Fire Station property. LG/HCN TO APPROVE URC 6• Economic Development Strategy for review and comment. WORK SESSION SET FOR SEPT. 22, 1887. F. REQUEST FOR WORK SESSIONS 1. Six Year Plan for Secondary Road System. SET FOR SEPT. 22, 1987 G• REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS NONE H. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1• Ordinance acquiring a well lot in Crestwood Park. LG/AHB TO APPROVE 1ST READING 2 2ND READING - 9/22/87 - URC I. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 5 MINUTE RECESS AT 2:45 P.M. - BACK AT 2:53 P.M. BLJ/HCN EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 3:00 P.M. - URC RETURN FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 3:16 P.M. 1. Ordinance accepting an offer for and authorizing the sale of real estate adjacent to Fort Lewis Fire Station on U. S. Route 11-460. SAM/BLJ MOTION TO ACCEPT BRADSHAW OFFER OF $40,000 FOR 1.6 ACRE AND LEWIS GALE BUILDING CORP. OFFER FOR 7.3 ACRE FOR $70,000 AND 6.58 ACRE OF REAL ESTATE OFF ROUTE 221 AND LEASE OF BALLFIELDS THRU SEPT. 1989. URC J. APPOINTMENTS 1. Community Corrections Resources Board. 2. Court Service Unit Advisory Council/Youth and Family Services Advisory Board 3. Grievance Panel K. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS L. 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. LG/BLJ - URC 1. Minutes of Meeting - August 11, 1987 2. Acceptance of water and sewer facilities serving The Falls, Section 3. 3. Notification from the Virginia Department of Transportation that the following roads have been accepted into the Secondary System. a. 0.35 miles of Coachman Drive 3 b. 0.19 miles of Coachman Circle c. 0.22 Miles of Forest Oak Drive d. 0.79 miles of Summit Ridge Road 4. Authorization for County Administrator to execute the appropriate documents for continuation of CORTRAN services. M. REPORTS RECEIVED AND FILED 1. Bi-Monthly Economic Development Activity. N. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS NONE 0. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to the Code of Virginia 2.1-344 (a).(6) LITIGATION - BOARD AND COMMITTEE FOR CONST. LAW AND (2) REAL ESTATE - MOUNTAIN VIEW TECH. PARK BLJ/HCN - URC P. ADJOURNMENT 4 r , OF ¢OANp~,~ ~ •~ Z A ~ _~ J a 1g Eso 88 SFSGIUICENTENN~P~ A Beauti~ul8egmning C~n~tn~,~ of ~nttnnkr ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1987 Welcome to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors meeting. Regular meetings are held on the second Tuesday of the month at 2:00 p.m., and the fourth Tuesday at 3:00 p.m. Public Hearings will be heard at 7:00 p.m on the fourth Tuesday of each month. Deviations from this schedule will be announced. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (2:00 P.M.) 1. Roll Call. 2. Invocation: The Reverend Ronald Eason Green Ridge Baptist Church 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag. B. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS C. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS. D. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Approval of Resolution requesting designation as a drought disaster county. 2. Request for Industrial Development Bonds from Hollins College Corporation. 3. Request for resolution endorsing realignment of Starkey Road and Buck Mountain Road intersection. 4. Authorization to declare volunteers for County programs as employees for the purpose of Worker's Compensation coverage. 5. Acceptance of a deed establishing common boundary lines at the Old Bent Mountain Fire Station property. 6. Economic Development Strategy for review and comment. F. REQUEST FOR WORK SESSIONS 1. Six Year Plan for Secondary Road System. G. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS H. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance acquiring a well lot in Crestwood Park. I. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance accepting an offer for and authorizing the sale of real estate adjacent to Fort Lewis Fire Station on U. S. Route 11-460. J. APPOINTMENTS 1. Community Corrections Resources Board. 2. Court Service Unit Advisory Council/Youth and Family Services Advisory Board 2 ~• 3• Grievance Panel K• REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOAR D MEMBERS L• CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSIDERED BY THE CONSENT ENACTED BY ONE BOARD TO BE ROUTINE ANDDA ARE BELOW• RESOLUTION IN THE FO WILL BE IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED ~ OR FO REMOVED FROM THE RMS LISTED SEPARATELY• CONSENT AGENDA ~ THAT ITEM WILL BE AND WILL BE CONSIDERED 1• Minutes of Meeting - August 11~ 1987 2• Acceptance of water The Falls, Section Sand sewer facilities serving 3• Notification Trans from the Virginia De portation that the Partment of accepted into the followin a• x.35 Secondar g roads have been b• miles of Y System. x•19 miles of Coachman Drive c' x•22 Miles Coachman Circle d. x•79 of Forest Oak Drive miles of Summit Ridge Road 4• Authorization the appropriateor County Administrator CORTRAN servicesdocuments for to execute continuation of M• REPORTS 1' Bi-Monthly Economic Developme nt Activity• N- CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNI CATIONS O• EXECUTIVE SESSION 2.1-344 (a)• Pursuant to the Code of Virginia P• ADJOURNMENT 3 ITEM NUMBER --^ _ ' AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: September 8, 1987 SUBJECT: Approval of Resolution requesting that Roanoke County be designated a drought disaster county. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Roanoke County farmers are experiencing one of the driest summer growing seasons on record. The following is a comparison of normal versus actual precipitation for the County from May through August as recorded by the National Weather Service. Month Normal Actual May 3.51" 2.66" June 3.34" .71" July 3.45" 3.12" August 3.91" .76" TOTAL: 14.21" 7.25" The crops most severely affected are corn, hay and pasture. While all areas have felt the impact of the dry season, the Catawba Valley is the most severely affected area of the County. Crop losses range from 40 to 90 percent, Cattle are being sold due to the lack of pasture and feed. The first step in securing drought assistance for the County farmers is for the Board of Supervisors to submit a request to the Governor requesting that Roanoke County be declared a drought disaster County. FISCAL IMPACT: The assistance requested is in the form of federal relief programs and no local appropriation is required. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors adopt the attached resolution declaring a state of emergency in Roanoke County and requesting the Governor of Virginia to seek federal assistance for the farmers of Roanoke County. SUBMITTED BY: ~~'`-~--~-~a~'.~~e. /mom Lowell Gobble Extension Agent, Agriculture APPROVED BY: 1 Elmer C. Hodg County Administrator ----------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved ( ) Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred To Brittle Garrett Johnson McGraw Nickens .- .. 1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 1987 RESOLUTION DECLARING A STATE OF EMERGENCY THROUGHOUT ROANOKE COUNTY AND PETITIONING THE GOVERNOR OF THE COMMONWEALTH TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY AND REQUEST THAT THE FEDERAL FARMER EMERGENCY PROGRAMS BE MADE AVAILABLE TO ROANOKE COUNTY WHEREAS, Roanoke County has suffered from severe drought; and WHEREAS, drought conditions in this agricultural area have caused major damage to corn, hay, pasture, vegetables, apples, peaches, and nursery crops; and WHEREAS, crop damages continue to increase daily due to the need for water; and WHEREAS, there is a critical need to assist the farmers as a result of the extreme weather conditions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors that a state of emergency is declared by the Board of Supervisors in Roanoke County on September 8, 1987; the Honorable Gerald L. Baliles, Governor of the Commonwealth is petitioned by the Board of Supervisors to declare that an emergency exists in Roanoke County; and that the Governor is further petitioned to request the President of the United States or the Secretary of Agriculture to recognize the Roanoke County emergency situation and make the federal farmer emergency programs available to those who need them in Roanoke County. 3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 9, 1987 RESOLUTION 9887-1 DECLARING A STATE OF EMERGENCY THROUGHOUT ROANOKE COUNTY AND PETITIONING THE GOVERNOR OF THE COMMONWEALTH TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY AND REQUEST THAT THE FEDERAL FARMER EMERGENCY PROGRAMS BE MADE AVAILABLE TO ROANOKE COUNTY WHEREAS, Roanoke County has suffered from severe drought; and WHEREAS, drought conditions in this agricultural area have caused major damage to corn, hay, pasture, vegetables, apples, peaches, and nursery crops; and WHEREAS, crop damages continue to increase daily due to the need for water; and WHEREAS, there is a critical need to assist the farmers as a result of the extreme weather conditions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors that a state of emergency is declared by the Board of Supervisors in Roanoke County on September 8, 1987; the Honorable Gerald L. Baliles, Governor of the Commonwealth is petitioned by the Board of Supervisors to declare that an emergency exists in Roanoke County; and that the Governor is further petitioned to request the President of the United States or the Secretary of Agriculture to recognize the Roanoke County emergency situation and make the federal farmer emergency programs available to those who need them in Roanoke County. On motion of Supervisor Garrett, seconded by Supervisor McGraw, and upon the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A COPY - TESTE: Mary H. Allen, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors 9/9/87 cc: File The Honorable Gerald Baliles, Governor of Virginia S. Mason Carbaugh, Commissioner of Agriculture Mahlon Rudy, Executive Director , State ASCS Lowell Gobble, VPI & SU Extension Agent Item -- . '_`',, AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER IN ROANOKE, VA., ON TUESDAY, MEETING DATE: September 8, 1987 SUBJECT: Industrial Development Authority - Issuance of Revenue Bonds COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~ ~~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Industrial Development Authority is requesting that the Board of Supervisors agree to the issuance of revenue bonds in the amount of $3,500,000 to assist Hollins College in the construction of a gymnasium. The Tax Reform Act of 1986 repealed the use of tax exempt financing for recreational purposes including sport facilities. However, organizations with 501-C-3 status can still apply for tax exempt status. Hollins College has 501-C-3 status. Although the project has no direct impact on the creation of manufacturing or basic industrial jobs, the project will have a short term positive impact by generating fifty (50) construction jobs and will have long term positive effects on the area's quality of life. The Board should note that Roanoke County no longer has a specified allocation of revenue bonds as the allocations are being administered by the state. Because of certain timing problems when obtaining formal approval of tax exempt financing, Hollins College may require the initial use of conventional financing as a bridge loan. Because of certain legal requirements which prohibit the use of tax exempt financing to "refinance" conventional loans, a method of weighted averages of the loans along with the mechanism of inducement resolutions will be used in the event that Hollins College applies for tax exempt financing. This action is necessary to verify Hollins' intentions to use a conventional bridge loan prior to tax exempt financing rather than to use a conventional loan and request "refinancing" through tax exempt funds. In other words, action is requested by the Board to place the means for Hollins College to apply for possible tax exempt financing. ~T ~ ~~~, FISCAL IMPACT: ~-s" Direct: None. Indirect: Tax revenue estimated at $5,000-$15,000 based on monies circulated locally through temporary construction employment. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval. APPROVED: C~°~~ Elmer C. Hodge, Jr. County Administrator ------------------------------ VOTE No Yes Abs Denied ( ) Brittle Received ( ) Garrett Referred Johnson To McGraw Nickens SUBMITTED BY: Brent D. Sheffl , Economic Development Specialist ------------------------------- ACTION Approved ( ) Motion by: 2 ,_.. - ,,.,1 REPORT OF PUBLIC HEARING A public hearing was conducted by the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, Virginia (the Authority) at 9:00 a.m. on August 26, 1987 on the application of Hollins College Corporation (the College) requesting the Authority to issue up to $3,500,000 of its revenue bonds or notes (the Bonds) to assist the College in the construction of a gymnasium (the Project). Notice of such hearing was published on August 12, 1987 and August 19, 1987 in the Roanoke Times & World-News. The Project will be located on the College's campus, adjacent to and con- necting with the College's present indoor swimming facility, in Roanoke County, Virginia. The public hearing was held in the Community Room, Roanoke County Administration Building, 3738 Brambleton Avenue, S.W., Roanoke, Virginia. At the meeting those persons interested in the issuance of the Bonds or the location and nature of the Project were given the opportunity to present their views. The public comments, if any, received at the meeting are sum- marized in Exhibit A attached hereto. After such hearing, the Authority voted to recommend the approval of the Bonds to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia (the Board). Accordingly, the Authority hereby recommends to the Board that it approve the issuance of the Bonds, as required by Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. Dated August 26, 1987. INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA ,,. ,: ~ :~ j ~; B .. ,~.. y ~.> ~. , , "~ airman Exhibit A to Report of Public Hearing The following public comments were received: None 4..~ FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT Date: August 26, 1987 Applicant: Hollins College Corporation Facility: A gymnasium located on the Applicant's campus in Roanoke County, Virginia. 1. Maximum amount of financing sought $3,500,000 2. Estimated taxable value of the facility's real property to be constructed in the municipality $ p 3. Estimated real property tax per year using present tax rates $ 0 4. Estimated personal property tax per year using present tax rates $ - 5. Estimated merchants' capital tax per year using present tax rates $ - 6. Estimated dollar value per year of goods and services that will be purchased locally 7. Estimated number of regular employees on year round basis 8. Average annual salary per employee Signature: $ 0 No Additional $ - uthority Chairman Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, Virginia If one or more of the above questions do not apply to the facil- ity, indicate by writing "N/A" on the appropriate line. 5 f-- ~% RESOLUTION OF THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF ROANOKE COUNTY. VIRGINIA WHEREAS, there have been described to the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, Virginia (the Authority) the plans of Hollins College Corporation (the College) to construct a gymnasium (the Project) in Roanoke County, Virginia (the County); and WHEREAS, the College, both in its application submitted to and in its appearance before the Authority, has described the benefits to the County and has requested the Authority to agree to issue its revenue bonds or notes, under the Virginia Industrial Development and Revenue Bond Act (the Act), in such amounts as may be necessary to finance the cost of the Project; BE IT RESOLVED BY THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA: 1. It is hereby found and determined that the location of the Project in the County will promote the welfare of the resi- dents of the County and surrounding areas, will enhance educa- tional opportunities for residents of the County and the Commonwealth of Virginia, will be in the public interest and will be consistent with the purposes of the Act. 2. To induce the College to locate the Project in the County, the Authority hereby agrees, subject to required approv- als and the compliance of the proposed issue with applicable law, to assist the College in every reasonable way to finance the 6 Project and, in particular, to undertake the issuance of one or more of its revenue bonds or notes (the Bonds) therefor in amounts now estimated not to exceed $3,500,000 upon terms and conditions to be mutually agreed upon between the Authority and the College. The Project or portions thereof shall be leased or sold by the Authority to the College pursuant to a lease or leases or an installment sale agreement or agreements which will provide payments to the Authority sufficient to pay the principal of and premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds and to pay all other expenses in connection with the Project. The Bonds shall be issued in form and pursuant to terms to be set by the Authority. 3. It having been represented to the Authority that it is necessary to proceed immediately with the Project, the Authority hereby agrees that the College may proceed with plans for the Project, enter into contracts for construction and take such other steps as it may deem appropriate in connection therewith, provided that nothing herein shall be deemed to authorize the College to obligate the Authority without its consent in each instance to the payment of any monies or the performance of any acts in connection with the Project. The Authority agrees that the College may be reimbursed from the proceeds of the Bonds for all costs so incurred by it. 4. All costs and expenses in connection with the financing of the Project, including the fees and expenses of bond counsel 7 .„.~,.. '~ fP~ and Authority counsel, shall be paid from the proceeds of the Bonds. If for any reason the Bonds are not issued, it is understood that all such expenses shall be paid by the College and that the Authority shall have no responsibility therefor. 5. The Authority intends that the adoption of this resolu- tion be considered as "official action" toward the issuance of the Bonds within the meaning of the regulations issued by the Internal Revenue Service pursuant to Section 103 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended. 6. The Authority shall perform such other acts and adopt such further resolutions as may be required to implement its undertakings as hereinabove set forth, and if requested by the College, it will make application to the Internal Revenue Service for such tax rulings as may be necessary in the opinion of bond counsel. To that end, the Chairman or Vice Chairman of the Authority is hereby authorized to execute an appropriate power of attorney naming counsel selected by the College for such pur- poses. 7. The Authority shall accept from or on behalf of the College conveyance of title to the Project and the land on which the Project is to be located and any other property to be mortgaged, pledged or otherwise provided as security for the Bonds. The officers of the Authority are hereby authorized and directed to accept and have recorded, if appropriate, proper instruments of title with respect to the Project and any other 8 -- - '~`•, personal property and any proper deed or deeds in connection with such conveyance. If for any reason the Bonds are not issued, the Authority shall convey the Project and such land and any such other property to the College or to such other person or persons as the College may request, without cost other than the expense of preparation and recordation of instruments of title and deeds of conveyance. 8. The Authority hereby recommends that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia (the Board) approve the financing of the Project and the issuance of the Bonds. 9. The officers of the Authority are hereby authorized and directed to deliver to the Board (a) a reasonably detailed sum- mart' of the comments expressed at the public hearing held with respect to the issuance of the Bonds, (b) a fiscal impact state- ment concerning the Project in the form specified in Section 15.1-1378.2 of the Code of Virginia, and (c) a copy of this reso- lution, which constitutes the recommendation of the Authority that the Board approve the financing of the Project and the issuance of the Bonds. 10. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. 9 ~, AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1987 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BONDS FOR HOLLINS COLLEGE CORPORATION BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: WHEREAS, the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, Virginia (the Authority) has considered the application of Hollins College Corporation (the College) requesting the issuance of one or more of the Authority's revenue bonds or notes in an amount not to exceed $3,500,000 (the Bonds) to assist in the financing of the construction of a gymnasium of approximately 19,000 square feet (the Project), which will be located on the College's campus, adjacent to and connecting with the College's present indoor swimming facility, in Roanoke County, Virginia, and will be owned and operated by the College, and has held a public hearing thereon; and WHEREAS, it has been requested that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia (the Board) approve the financing of the Project and the issuance of the Bonds, and such approval is required for compliance with Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia: 1. The Board approves the financing of the Project and the issuance of the Bonds by the Authority for the benefit of the 10 College, as required by said Section 147(f), to permit the Authority to assist in the financing of the Project. 2. The approval of the issuance of the Bonds, as required by said Section 147(f) does not constitute an endorsement of the Bonds or the creditworthiness of the College or otherwise indicate that the Project possesses any economic viability. The Bonds shall provide that neither the Commonwealth of Virginia (the Commonwealth) nor any political subdivision thereof, including Roanoke County (the County) and the A uthority shall be obligated to pay the principal of or interest on the Bonds or other costs incident thereto except from the revenues and receipts pledged therefor and that neither the faith or credit nor the taxing power of the Commonwealth or any political subdivision thereof, including the County and the Authority, shall be pledged thereto. 3. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. 11 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1987 RESOLUTION 9887-2 AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BONDS FOR HOLLINS COLLEGE CORPORATION BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: WHEREAS, the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, Virginia (the Authority) has considered the application of Hollins College Corporation (the College) requesting the issuance of one or more of the Authority's revenue bonds or notes in an amount not to exceed $3,500,000 (the Bonds) to assist in the financing of the construction of a gymnasium of approximately 19,000 square feet (the Project), which will be located on the College's campus, adjacent to and connecting with the College's present indoor swimming facility, in Roanoke County, Virginia, and will be owned and operated by the College, and has held a public hearing thereon; and WHEREAS, it has been requested that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia (the Board) approve the financing of the Project and the issuance of the Bonds, and such approval is required for compliance with Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia: 1. The Board approves the financing of the Project and the issuance of the Bonds by the Authority for the benefit of the .r College, as required by said Section 147(f>, to permit the Authority to assist in the financing of the Project. 2. The approval of the issuance of the Bonds, as required by said Section 147(f) does not constitute an endorsement of the Bonds or the creditworthiness of the College or otherwise indicate that the Project possesses any economic viability. The Bonds shall provide that neither the Commonwealth of Virginia (the Commonwealth) nor any political subdivision thereof, including Roanoke County (the County) and the Authority shall be obligated to pay the principal of or interest on the Bonds or other costs incident thereto except from the revenues and receipts pledged therefor and that neither the faith or credit nor the taxing power of the Commonwealth or any political subdivision thereof, including the County and the Authority, shall be pledged thereto. 3. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by Supervisor Brittle, and upon the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A COPY - TESTE: m~~, ~a Mary H. Allen, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors 9/9/87 cc: File Timothy Gubala, Assistant County Administrator Brent Sheffler, Economic Development Specialist Industrial Development Authority ITEM NUMBER ~' -- AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: September 8, 1987 SUBJECT: Starkey Road and Buck Mountain Road Intersection COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: 0 SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: In the 1986-92 Secondary Highway Six Year Construction Plan, the Board included an Incidental Construction Project for the improvement of the Starkey Road (Route 904) and Buck Mountain Road (Route 679) intersection. VDOT proposes to realign the Starkey Road and Buck Mountain Road intersection in such a way that the through traffic will travel from Route 220 to Route 221. Starkey Road from Electric Road (Route 419) will intersect with the through road at a tee intersection (see attached sketch). Since this project is an incidental construction project, VDOT policy requires that the Transportation Department receive approval from the County Board of Supervisors of the project concept prior to bidding. After Board approval, the intersection should be completed within one (1) year. FISCAL IMPACT: This project will be funded from State Secondary Highway Construction Funds. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Board approve the attached Resolution endorsing the concept of a tee intersection at Starkey Road and Buck Mountain Road. 1 ~~~= ~- 3 SUBMITTED BY: ~~ ~~ Phillip T. Hen y, P.E. Director of Engineering APPROVED: ~f%""~ Elmer C. od County Administrator ----------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved ( ) Motion by:_ No Yes Abs Denied t ) Received ( ) Referred to 2 Brittle Garrett Johnson McGraw Nickens J AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1987 RESOLUTION REQUESTING REALIGNMENT OF THE ROUTE 904 AND ROUTE 687 INTERSECTION WHEREAS, Starkey Road (Route 904) and Buck Mountain Road (Route 687) provide an important highway link to commercial, industrial and residential property in Roanoke County; and the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors desires to improve this commercial, industrial and residential link; and WHEREAS, Route 904 was placed on the Secondary Highway Six-Year Construction Plan by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors; and WHEREAS, Virginia Department of Transportation Policy requires the approval of the local Board of Supervisors, prior to realigning any highways; and WHEREAS, the Virginia Department of Transportation has determined that the realignment of the Starkey Road and Buck Mountain Road is in the best interest of the citizens of Roanoke County. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors approves the realignment of the Route 904 and Route 687 Intersection. 3 AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1987 RESOLUTION 9887-3 REQUESTING REALIGNMENT OF THE ROUTE 904 AND ROUTE 687 INTERSECTION WHEREAS, Starkey Road (Route 904) and Buck Mountain Road (Route 687) provide an important highway link to commercial, industrial and residential property in Roanoke County; and the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors desires to improve this commercial, industrial and residential link; and WHEREAS, Route 904 was placed on the Secondary Highway Six-Year Construction Plan by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors; and WHEREAS, Virginia Department of Transportation Policy requires the approval of the local Board of Supervisors, prior to realigning any highways; and WHEREAS, the Virginia Department of Transportation has determined that the realignment of the Starkey Road and Buck Mountain Road is in the best interest of the citizens of Roanoke County. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors approves the realignment of the Route 904 and Route 687 Intersection. On motion of Supervisor Brittle, seconded by Supervisor Garrett, and upon the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A COPY - TESTS: 9/9/87 7-,-'~~ ~- ~., Mary H. Allen, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Fred Altizer, Resident Engineer, VDOT Phillip Henry, Director of Engineering John Peters, Assistant Director of Engineering r ITEM N UMBER ~ ~- ~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER IN ROANOKE, VIRGINIA ON SEPTEMBER $, 1987 MEETING DATE: September 8, 1987 SUBJECT: Resolution declaring volunteers for County programs as employees of Roanoke County for the purpose of Worker's Compensation Insurance. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~~~~~~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: In the past, volunteer firefighters, volunteer rescue squad personnel, and auxiliary policemen have been designated as employees of Roanoke County for the sole and exclusive purpose of being included in the County's Worker's Compensation Program. This allows these volunteer employees the same compensation coverages as our regular employees, based upon the Worker's Compensation laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. This coverage also provides rehabilitation services when required and has served to increase the morale of this class of employees. The County also has an exposure with volunteers who act on behalf of the County for other programs including, but not limited to, Youth Haven II, interns and volunteers in the various departments of the County, Parks & Recreation, etc. In order to minimize the County's exposure in its general liability insurance program, it is suggested that the Board of Supervisors adopt the attached resolution declaring the volunteers of these programs to be employees of the County of Roanoke for the sole and exclusive purpose of being included in the Worker's Compensation program. In order to qualify for such benefit, these volunteers must be designated, in advance of their service, by the appropriate department, and an employment/volunteer form placed on file in the Department of Human Resources. Since the County of Roanoke participates in a self-funded insurance program for Worker's Compensation Insurance, there will be no increased premium paid to an outside insurance company, however, our exposure may be expanded to cover any incidental losses incurred by this class of employees. FISCAL IMPACT: Since the County operates under a self-funded insurance program for Worker's Compensation Insurance, there is no increased premium to be expended for the inclusion of these ,. r AT A REGULAR MEETING COUNTY, VIRGINIA OF THE BOARD OF SUpE . HELD AT THE ROANOKE RVISORS CENTER ON TUESDAY COUNTY ADMIN STRATIOON . SEPTEMBER $, 1987. RESOLUTION NO• 9887_ VOLUNTEER EMPLOYEES 4 DESIGNATING THE ROANOKE AS EMPLOYEES OF THE COUNTY OF FOR THE PURPOSE OF OF ROANOKE COUNTY WORKER' COVERAGE UNDER THE S COMPENSATION INSURANCE PROGRAM BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Ro County, Virginia, as follows: anoke 1• That Resolution No. 3195 1982 --' adOPted on Tuesday, July 27 . designating the Roanoke Count ' Roanoke Y Volunteer Firefighters County Rescue Squad Personnel the Auxiliar and the ' Y Policemen as Roanoke County employees of Roanoke of Worker's Com County for pensation Insurance pure°ses volunteer be amended to include all employees who have been Department prOPerly registered with the of Human Resources Count as volunteer Y of Roanoke for t emplOYees of the he sole and exclusive purpose of included in the County of Roanok being Program; and e ~s Worker's Compensation 2• That an attested forwarded copy °f this resolution be forthwith to Yeager and administrator f Company, Inc • (third or the Count Party Y of Roanoke' Program) and to the s Worker's Compensation Industrial Commission of the Commonwea Virginia , lth of On motion of Supervisor Brittle Johnson, seconded by Supervisor and upon the followin AYES: 9 recorded vote: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw NAYS: None ~ Nickens, Johnson A COPY - TESTE: .~ Mary H. Allen, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors 9/9/87 cc: File John Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator D. Keith Cook, Director of Human Resources Bev Waldo, Director of Youth Haven II Yeager and Company Industrial Commission of Virginia A-9887-5 ITEM NUMBER ~- _. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER IN ROANOKE, VA., ON TUESDAY, MEETING DATE: September 8, 1987 SUBJECT: Establishing common boundary lines Old Bent Mountain Fire Station Property COUNTY ADMINIS/T//RIATOR'S COMMENTS: ~~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Shirley M. Wimmer is purchasing property from the heirs of Clinton Dewey Brown, which is adjacent to the Bent Mountain Fire Station property owned by the Board of Supervisors. In the course of a property title search conducted on behalf of Wimmer, conflicting boundary lines were found involving the subject par- cel and adjoining property owners. The adjoining property owners, which are the Board and George A. Stone and Ruby E. Stone, should agree by deed to establish new boundary lines to clear up any prior inconsistencies. John Hubbard has reviewed the attached plats and recommends approval of this action. FISCAL IMPACT:Q~R,, None. ~`~~ RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board authorize the County Administrator to execute such documents as may be necessary to establish the common boundary line. Respectfully submitted, ~~ V ~ Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney ----------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved (x) Motion by: Lee Garrett/Harry C. No Yes Abs Denied ( ) _Nickens to ap rove Brittle x -~'_ Received ( ) Referred To cc: Paul Mahoney John Hubbard John Willey File Garrett x Johnson x McGraw x Nickens x 2 i ~_~ ~~ 2 PROPERTY OF ~,~, JAMES W, FAUN ,yo y ~`'• ao p• '`' y ~ 5 ~Op dp, 'O. /y dl's Opp ~` 0.443 q~. f '~~ 3 M N Qj M O / N s~ ms z F• dp, PROPERTY OF ~ N 57• DD' E PROPERTY OF CLINTON D. BROWN ioa.s'to~ol 98.35' ____ GEORGE `---------- ~'~! STONE NEW DIVISION LINE BENT MOON T AIN FIRE STATI ON LEGAL REFERENCE DEED BOOKS 632 PAGEt 246 T,4)( MAPS 949 57'528 253 ZONING CLASS: A-I UTILITY SERVICESt WATERS NOT AVAILABLE SEWERt GASH NOT AVAILABLE NOT AVAILABLE ELECTRIC AVAILABLE SPECIAL FE,gTURES~ BUILDING ON LOT ROQNOKE COUNTY BOq scgLE ~ I" ~~ ~ SUPERVISORS I t em ~.:_. - n AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER IN ROANOKE, VA., ON TUESDAY, MEETING DATE: September 8, 1987 SUBJECT: Economic Development Strategy for review and comments COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The economic development strategy outlines two major programs. The first is existing business expansion and retention. The second is new business attraction. The programs are established to assist in meeting the County goal of 75/25 residential/commer- cial-industrial (the tax base revenue balance) from the present ratio of 84/16. This strategy describes how the County facilitates action and provides assistance to enhance economic stability within the community. It also explains the County's interworking relations with regional, state and international economic development organizations. Finally, the strategy points out considerations and concerns when attracting companies to the area. Its overall goal is to attract, establish, and retain companies which positively develop the economic stability of the locality for the creation of wealth and a higher standard of living. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends review, comments and eventual adoption of the economic development strategy. SUBMITTED BY: Brent D. Sheffl r Economic Development Strategy APPROVED: ~` Elmer C. Hodge, r`. County Administrator ~-- Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred To Motion by: ACTION Brittle Garrett Johnson McGraw Nickens VOTE No Yes Abs Attachment ITEM NUMBER 1r"~- AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: September 8, 1987 SUBJECT: Request for Work Session - Secondary Highway Six Year Plan. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: ~~ Staff requests a work session with the Board of Supervisors for the September 22, 1987 meeting to present information and receive input on the update of the Six Year Plan for Secondary Roads. This update will primarily address the additional funding for secondary roads that will be available from VDOT in the coming years. The existing plan will be submitted to the Board prior to this date. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: SUBMITTED BY: /~I~fa~~ ~/ ~ f , Phillip T. Henry, P E. Director of Enginee ing APPROVED: Elmer C. Hod County Administrator ------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved ( ) Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred To Brittle Garrett Johnson McGraw Nickens ITEM NUMBER ~~~ ~- ,> AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER IN ROANOKE, VA., ON TUESDAY, MEETING DATE: September 8, 1987 SUBJECT: Ordinance authorizing the acquisition of real estate - Lot in Crestwood Park COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~~0~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: In order to expand existing parking facilities in anticipa- tion of the enlargement of the 419 library, staff has negotiated to buy an adjacent well lot from Donald J. Plybon and Teresa B. Plybon. Section 18.04 of the County Charter requires that the acquisition of real estate or any interest therein be accomp- lished only by ordinance. The proposed ordinance authorizes the County Administrator to execute such documents and take such actions as may be neces- sary to accomplish this transaction. The first reading of the proposed ordinance was held on September 8, 1987; the second read- ing is scheduled for September 22, 1987. FISCAL IMPACT : Ps~ $3,000 to be paid from library budget funds. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board favorably consider this acquisition by the adoption of the attached ordinance. Respectfully submitted, Approved by, C%~~~ George rretson Elmer C. Ho ge Library Director County Administrator r ITEM NUMBER AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER IN ROANOKE, VA., ON TUESDAY, MEETING DATE: September 8, 1987 SUBJECT: Ordinance accepting an offer for and authorizing the sale of real estate adjacent to Fort Lewis Fire Station on U.S. Route 11-460 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The County has received an offer to purchase a portion of a 28.48 acre tract of real estate adjacent to the Fort Lewis Fire Station along U. S. Route 11-460, more particularly designated as Roanoke County Tax Map #55.13-1-2. The tract has not yet been surveyed. The County utilizes a portion of this larger tract of real estate for public recreation. Numerous athletic fields are lo- cated on this property. Any disposition of this property should reserve these facilities until alternate facilities are avail- able. Section 18.04 of the County Charter requires that any sale or disposition of public property be accomplished by ordinance. The first reading of this proposed ordinance was held on August 25, 1987; the second reading and public hearing is scheduled for September 8, 1987. The Board's policy for the sale of real estate provides that any person may submit an offer in writing for the purchase of property. Any written offer should be received by the County on or before September 7, 1987. FISCAL IMPACT: ~~ Consideration to be determined from the best offer. RECOMMENDATION: Staff makes the following recommendations: 1. That the Board of Supervisors reaffirm that this parcel of land is surplus and available for sale by the County. r 2. That the Board of Supervisors favorably consider the adoption of the proposed ordinance. 3. That the net proceeds from the sale of this property be allocated to the Capital Improvements Funds as a reserve for capital improvements, specifically to replace these recreational facilities (ballfields). Respectfully submitted, rY\~ 'V\ Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney ------------------------------------------------------------------ ACTION VOTE Approved ( ) Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied ( ) Brittle Received ( ) Garrett Referred Johnson To McGraw Nickens 2 AT A REGULAR MEETING 1 - I COUNTY, VIRGINIA, OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY CENTER, ADMINISTRA ION ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1887 ORDINANCE ACCEPTING AUTHORIZING THE `~N OFFER FOR AND ADJACENT TO FORTSALE OF REAL ESTATE ON U. S. ROUTE 11L460S FIRE STATION WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions the Charter of of Section 16.01 of Roanoke County, the subject propert clared to be surplus; and Y has been de- WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions the Charter of of Section 18.04 of Roanoke Count sale and Y~ a first reading concernin disposition of the hereinafter g the held on Au described real estate was gust 25, 1987. A second readin held on September 8, 1987• g and Public hearing was . and WHEREAS, this real estate consists ---~_ acres adjacent °f aPProximately to Fort Lewis Fire Station on U. 11-460; and S. Route WHEREAS, an offer has been received from for this and the prOPerty consideration is as follows and so hereby accepted. All other offe hereby rejected; and rs are WHEREAS, all proceeds from to be allocated sale of this to the real estate are capital reserves of the County to re la these recreational facilities (ballfie P ce lds). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED that t trator is authorized he Count to execute Y Adminis- actions such documents on behalf of Roanoke and take such lish County as are the conve necessary to accomp_ yance of said aPProved f which form by the Count property, all o shall be u on Y Attorney, P 3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOROANOKESCOUNTYSADMINISTRATION COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE 1987 CENTER, ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, ORDINANCE 9887-6 ACCEPTING AN OFFER FOR AND AUTHORIZING SALE OF REAL ESTATE ADJACENT TO FORT LEWIS FIRE STATION ON U. S. ROUTE 11-460 BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1, That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Charter of Roanoke County, the subject property has been de- clared to be surplus; and 2, That pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of and public hearing the Charter of Roanoke County, a first reading ncerning the sale a nd disposition of the hereinafter described co real estate was held on August 25, 1987. A second reading was held on September 8, 1987; and 3. That this real estate consists of approximately 8.976 acres adjacent to Fort Lewis Fire Station on U. S. Route 11-460; and ortion of 4. That an offer has been received for a p Corporation. In this property from Lewis-Gale Building consideration for acquiring approximately 7.3 acres of this real estate, Lewis- Gale Building Corporation offered $70,000 and 6.58 acres of real estate located off of State Route 221 across from No. 95.01-1-4) (less and except that Back Creek School (Tax Map tic portion of this real estate containing the clinic and SeFort drainfield) and the lease of existing ballfields a t the Lewis site through September 1989 for $1.00. This offer is hereby accepted. 5. That an offer has been received for a portion of this property from Keith A. and Dianne H. Bradshaw. In considera- tion for acquiring approximately 1.6 acres of this real estate, Keith A, and Dianne H. Bradshaw offered $40,000. This offer is hereby accepted. 6. That all other offers are hereby rejected. 7. That all proceeds from sale of this real estate are to be allocated to the capital reserves of the County to acquire, construct, maintain, or replace capital facilities, including these recreational facilities (ballfields). 8. That the County Administrator is authorized to nego- tiate the terms and conditions of these transactions and to exe- cute such documents and take such actions on behalf of Roanoke County as are necessary to accomplish the conveyance of said pro- perty, all of which shall be upon form approved by the County Attorney. On motion of Supervisor McGraw, seconded by Supervisor Johnson, and upon the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A COPY - TESTE: Mary H. Allen, Deputy Clerk 9/9/87 Roanoke County Board of Supervisors r ITEM NUMBER ~=~T. ~ °' AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATIONNOENT ER MEETING DATE: September 9, 1987 SUB- Jam- Appointments to Committees COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: 1 • Communi t orrections Resources Board The one-year term of Joseph Cronin expired August 13, 1987. Cronin is relocating in Lynchburg Virginia and will be unable serve another term. Mr. to 2• Court Servi Advisory Board ~e Unit Advisor Council/Youth and Famil Services Unexpired two-year term of Mr. term will expire on March 22, 1989eph D• Cronin. Mr. Cronin's .resignation. See attached letter of 3• Grievance Panel Three-year term of Charles L. Jennings' term expires Septembern10ng1987lternate member. Mr. Please see the attached for further information on th committees. ese Submitted By; Approved by: Mary H. Allen Deputy Clerk Elmer C. Hod e -------------------------------------------County-Administrator APProved ( ) ACTION ------------------------- Motion by: VOTE Denied ( ) Received ( ) NO yes Abs Brittle Referred Garrett To Johnson McGraw Nickens .T= i ,, ; . i t,~ t~t .., .. ~ . . f Wiley & W:~~on Arch~tc~cts Engineers Planners June 17, 1987 County of Roanoke Board of Supervisors P. 0. Box 3800 I~tSanoke, Virginia 24015 Attn: Mr. Alan H. Brittle Cave Spring District ', Dear Alan: 23t0 Langhorne Road P.O. Box 877 Lynchburg, Virginia 24505.0877 (804) 528-1901 As you know, I have recently changed my place of employment and am now working for Wiley & Wilson, Architects, Engineers and Planners in Lynchburg, Virginia. I will continue to reside in Roanoke County, .for the immediate future, but will eventually relocate to the Lynchburg area. With the commuting time between home and work being substantial, I will aot be able to continue to serve as an alternate delegate on the Community Corrections Resources Board or Court Service Unit Advisory Council/Youth and Family Services. Advisory Board. ,. - '~ . Thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to serve the County of Roanoke. I'm particularly pleased to have had the opportunity to work with and see the excellent work done by Mr. James Phipps and Mrs. Kathryn Van Patten. Both were of immeasurable help to me. Very/truly, ,/ '// 1 f .~` l Joseph%~D. Cronin, ~" ~ Senior Vice Pres~,d~ent `'; .. JDC-lg cc: Mike Lazzuri, Director of Court Services Kathryn Van Patten, Court Community Corrections Program Robert Johnson, Chairman of the Board of Supervisors. 2 ...K :. _. - t r r COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS . RESOURCES BOAR '~' COMPOSITION: To consist (From Bylaws and Section member from °f Seven members a 53.1-183) members Roanoke County; one PP°inted as follows: from the judges in t member from Salem Cit one from the Department he 23rd Judicial Districty~ three determined b of Corrections. one member year.) Y the aPP°inting authority h(Roanokefc:ountCesshall be Y is one B• DUTIES: Roanoke Ci felon. y referrals from the diversion y' Roanoke County and the.Cit Circuit Courts of from state penal system_ and localf Salem for jails, P°ssible C• MEETINGS: ~. Third Tuesda f Y of each month at 4:00 p•m• l.. ~. .., 3 v - ~`'~ r r COURT SERVICES FAMILY UNIT ADVISORY SERVICES COUNCIL YOUTH AND A. ADVISORY BOARD COMPOSITION districtard t° consist of bodies of and one youth rnembermfromrs from each count each each magisteria.i appoint one or more emberslty served b high school. Governing Y a court service unit may 8, ° a citizen advisory council. <,~ DU-_ affectin vises and cooperates children g the working of this with the court u • their care and law and other Pon all matters Consults Protection and laws relating to . court service and'confer with t t° domestic unit relative he court and relations; the court service to the develo mentlrector of the' Encoura prOgr`~% P and extension of •" •'•the central ge the members selected convenientl advisory council to by the council to children Y can, institutions andslt as•often as the serve, on and s under this law and to i'e associations• memberR urroundings of t Port to the receiving. ~ ` • such persons he children court the • institutions received by or in conditions The Council or associations. charge of any of the court;- should make th ,: partici Makes an annual r selves familiar with the patinq governing bodies on the to the work court and the,. As the Youth ~ work of the council.` • and Famil Services Establish Advisor Board: services; assistgoals and priorities for youth In coordination and County-wide services within the youth capacity and to Private Planning fOr~COmprehensive establish otherwise assist tsector. Serve in an advisory Standards goals and objectives he 8°ard of Su of 1979" °f the Delin in compliance pervisors to • Assist quency prevention with alI "minimum youth ever In conductin and Youth Development Act Delinquency five years and to g an assessment of the Y Prevention plan assist in develo needs of the implementation further to ping an annual Board of Su of the plan and makinparticipate in about pervisors. Provide g a report thereonluating raise youth may be expressed a Public forum where concerns the concerns of public and and to advisory board private receive recommendations and legislative meeting upon organizations at an develo amendments tO i Proper notice. Advocates necessaryar both public and tO support mPr°ve communit and private the developmenty conditions for youth for youth of needed services C' MEETING in the c°mmunity- SCBEDULE: One a quarter, the t and place determined at meetings uesday, beginnin g January; time 4 J..--, r r GRIEVANCE PANEL A. COMPOSITION '~, To consist of three (3) members a Supervisors; for terms of two years.•~ ppointed by the Board of B. DUTIES f The panel shall adopt such rules and procedures as it deems necessary and desirable. The panel has the responsibility to rule on.the interpretation, application, and meaning of the .County's' personnel policies, rules and regulations. The panel shall select for each hearing a panel chairman, set a time.for the hearing which shall be held as soon as practical, but no later than fifteen (15) full working days after the grievant appeal,. ~ C- MEETING SCHEDULE The County Administrator shall arrange a hearing with the panel members to hear the grievance. 5 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1987 RESOLUTION NO. 9887-10 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTA EMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM L - CONSENT AGENDA BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1 • That that certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for September 8, 1987, designated as Item L 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. Minutes of Meeting - August 11, 1987 2• Acceptance of water and sewer facilities serving The Falls, Section 3. 3• Notification from the Virginia Department of Transportation that the following roads have been accepted into the Secondary System. a• 0.35 miles of Coachman Drive b• 0.19 miles of Coachman Circle c. 0.22 Miles of Forest Oak Drive d• 0.79 miles of Summit Ridge Road 4• Authorization for County Administrator to execute the appropriate documents for continuation of CORTRAN services. 2. That the Clerk to the Board is hereby authorized and directed where required by law to set forth upon any of said items the separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant to this resolution. On motion of Supervisor Garrett, seconded by Supervisor Johnson, and upon the following recorded vote: ~- ~ ~ ~~~ (~~J~ r August 11, 1987 _ ___ _ n _ _ _ _. Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Roanoke County Administration Center 3738 Brambleton Avenue, SW Roanoke, Virginia 24018 August 11, 1987 The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors of Roanoke Virginia, met this day at the Roanoke Count County, and th Administration Center, this being the first Tuesday, ust, 1987. _ . ___.., "-i ~~ Gcheduled meeting of the month of Aug IN RE: CALL TO ORDER hairman Johnson called the meeting to order at 2:0 C p,m, The roll call was taken. Chairman Bob L. Johnson, Vice Chairman Lee Supervisors Alan H. Brittle, MEMBERS PRESENT: Garrett, Harry C. Nickens NT• Supervisor Steven A.McGraw (arrived at 2:10 MEMBERS ARSE p.m.) Administrator; John ~ Elmer C. Hodge , County C o u n t y STAFF PRESENT : M C h a m b l i s s, A s s i s t a n t John Administrator for Management Services; Assistant County Administrator R. Hubbard, Timothy W. Gubala, of Public Facilities; for Assistant County Administrator -.._ __- _.__ - - j -_ ----- --- --_ - - - - - - August 11. 1987 1I -- __ _ _ -- --_______ -- ___ _ __ -- -- ~ ..... !~ l r k' IN RE: NEW BUSINESS 1' A royal of Fundin Or anizat' for Cultural Ions: Enri Supervisor Brittle chment involvement announced that in the A ctin9 Company, he will a due to hi. this matter. - bstain from a vote it Mr. Hodge noted that $20,000 budget to fund cultural has been included programs. This in th requested fundin Year, three a g• Center gencies ha v. Roanoke in the Valle Square, the Arts Council of Y, and the Roanoke S present from all Ymphony, Representatives three organizations, were Speaking on behalf of these Cole, Executive °rganizations Director of were Susan the A its Council Margarita Fourcroy, General Mana °f ROanoke Valley William S, gar of the Roanoke Hubard, General Mana SYmPh°n gar ° f Y, an described the Center in the S activities and events quare. The planned by their Supervisor Nickens gr°ups, Center moved that in t $15 he Square ,000 be allocated to . and $2500 each Roanoke Symphon to the Arts Y• The motion w Council and the and carried as seconded by the followin by Supervisor McGra AYES: 9 recorded vote, Supervisors Garrett, McGraw NAYS; ~ Nickens, Johnson None ABSTAIN; Supervisor Brittle ~? e, August 11, 1987 - -- -_ I _ - - __ _._ --- _ -- --. - ----- - --- -- If ii 2• A royal to rovide off-site water facilities to !I IA palachian Power Compan Supervisor McGraw announced hisll +intention to abstain from this vote. I, ,I Director of Utilities Clifford Craig re Appalachian Power Company is developing their servic ported that e center site II north of the 419-Loch Haven Road inters ~ ection. drilled a test well for water and found there is n They have ~j of sufficient;; .quality or quantity for their p Therefore pur oses. requestin they are II g county water. The estimated cost of facilities is the water ~~ $310,000. Appalachian Power Company has requested that Roanoke County participating in the funding of the Line. Staff has water proposed the use of water revenue bonds and the ;ounty's share would be $115,540. It is anticipated that within :he next five years the County will collect over ff-site $500,000 in facilities fees in this section, and the costs will be ecovered. Ii Supervisor Johnson moved to approve the staff i recommendation. The motion was seconded by Su er sand carried b P visor Nickens I y the following recorded vote: i ` AYES: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, Nickens Johnson ;NAYS : None ;ABSTAIN: Supervisor McGraw I II 3. Re nest for allocation o f funds for storm sewer construction on 0 den Road (Route ' 867).. Mr. Hodge advised that 064 August 11, 1987 until recently, the Highway Department covered the cost of roa expansion and curb and guttering, if .necessary. This polic has changed, and they now require local participation for suc things as curb and guttering. VDOT is requesting that the Count ..fund their share of the curb and guttering at a cost of $10,200 Supervisor Nickens expressed concern at a procedur that calls for the County to install curb and guttering unles absolutely necessary. Mr. Hodge responded that hopefully, othe road projects will be handle3d differently, but it will b~ necessary to pay a share for the Odden Road project because of lack of shoulder. Supervisor Nickens moved to appropriate $10,200 for the curb and guttering for the Ogden Road project. The motion wa: seconded by Supervisor Brittle and carried by the followinc recorded vote: RESOLUTION 81187-3 REQUESTING APPROPRIATION FOR ROANOKE COUNTY SHARE OF STORM SEWER CONSTRUCTION, OGDEN ROAD (ROUTE 867) PROJECT WHEREAS, Ogden Road (Route 867) provides an important urban highway link to cormnercial property in Roanoke County; and the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors desires to improve this commercial link; and WHEREAS, Route 867 was placed on the Secondary Highway Six-Year Construction Plan by the Roanoke County Board of _ ~. --- o s August 11, 19$7 1. The Board joins with the Town of Blacksburg an Virginia Tech in requesting that the Commonwealth Transporta d o Board and the Virginia Department of Transportation accept th corridor solution the Town of Blacksburg has identified as th best answer to the needs of the Commonwealth, and provide th funds necessary for timely completion of the project; and 2. The Clerk to the Board is directed to mail copie of this resolution to members of the Commonwealth Transportatio Board. On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by Supervisor Garrett, and upon the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None IN RE: FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance authorizing the transfer of Hollins Water System to Hollins Community Development Corporation: Assistant County Attorney Linda Lehe reported thi ordinance is to facilitate the completion of the Hollins Projec by turning over to the Development Corporation that water system This is necessary in order to receive the grant from the Farmer Home Administration. /j~ ~`.-- ti 1 Ogg August 11, 1987 _. _. - - ----- _f = - -- i -- i~ _. __ _ _ ,; i% ~~ Supervisor Johnson moved to approve the first reading ofi~l I (the ordinance. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Nickens and i!carried by the following recorded vote: ~~ Nickens, Johnson IIAYES' Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, IINAYS : None ~i Ia ~~ ~~~ 2. Ordinance authorizin ratif in and confirmin the c uisition and execution of leases for the Enhanced Emer enc ,' Ill Communication S stem: Ms. Lehe stated this ordinance, Y and aoproval to obtain sites to locate 911! _equests bo :ommunications equipment. The staff has negotiated with the property owners and the sites are suitable for this purpose. Supervisor Brittle moved to approve first reading of the ordinance. Supervisor Garrett seconded the motion. Supervisor Nickens was concerned that the report did not specify the costs involved with the acquisitions and leases, such as the cost of the electric bill for the Poor Mountain site and acreage. Mr. (amount of the lease agreement for the Windy Gap Hodge responded that the electric bill will cover the blinking I y . lion (lights on the tower and lights for the storage facilit Edwards, Fire and Rescue Department, stated that the lease -or the Windy Gap site will be approximately $150 a month, for five years with an automatic renewal. Supervisor Johnson advised that he would prefer a longer lease because of the potential cost in the future. August 11, 198 Ms . Lehe s toted lease one is a title dispute bet of the problems with the Win wee dY Gap the dispute has prevented t n two adjacent property owners The he staff from and two property owners finalizing the 'dis are in the terms. pute, Mr. Edwards Process of sett added that one ling this not be willin g to settle °f the property owners ma with the but the other Y County, owner is willing to work questi Supervisor Garrett was cone ons cone erned about erning these the unanswered alternatives leases and if these asked if there did not wer they are work out, e investigatin Mr. Edwards 9 other options, responded The motion carried by the fol AYES lowin NAYS; Super~lsors Brittle, Garrett g recorded vote; None ~ McGraw, Nickens . Johnson 3' ~rdi nance acce the sale of tin an offer real estat for and authori Tech e, the remai zir, _ polo ical nder °f Mountai Park : Ms , Lehe n View Farm offer to reported that purchase the remainder the the Count The of Y has an land is currentl land available Y zoned M_l, for sale, for recreational purposes Eight acres I • will be reserved John Wille Y. Director of ! i Present and reaffi Real I I rmed that the propert Estate Assessments was, Y is surplus. I I 0 '7 1 . ~~ ~~ i August 11, 1987 --- ---- -~- --- __ ____ - ____ __ ___-- -- -- ___ ---- _ --- i _- II ~ ~; Supervisor Johnson moved to a i~ ~~ ordinance. PProve first reading of the The motion was seconded by Supervisor Gar carried by the followin rett and g recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett McGraw, Nickens j NAYS ~ None ~ Johnson I it I 4• Ordinance ame i ndin Cha ter 7 ~ ~~ of the Roanoke Count "Buildin Re ulations" ~~ Code to ado t a new 1 Numbers"• Ms. Article V, "Buildin I~ Lehe advised that this ordinanc '' to the 911 e is essentialll project, It establishes the requirement homeowners and business to s for( place in a conspicuous location the numbers of their buildings to assist vehicles calls, in responding to Enforcement of the ordinance is the responsibility of the Chief Building Official, and James Nini i respond to nger was present to questions. Supervisor Brittle was concerned that the be aware of the requirements Public will not of this ordinance, and since the effective date is September 8th, he wante full - d the issue discussed y before proceeding to second reading. He assurance that the re also requested quirement be advertised so the public will be aware of the ordinanro p `7 1 ~~ ~ ~ August 11, 1987 _. --- - __ __ II l I !i jj Supervisor Johnson moved to approve first reading of the ~~ ~~ ordinance. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Garrett and carried by the following recorded vote: ,AYES: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Nickens, Johnson ;: I~ NAYS : None ~ i ~ 4 Ordinance amending Chapter 7 "Building Regulations" I~ Numbers": Ms. Lehe advised that this ordinance is essential to the 911 project. It establishes the requirements for homeowners and business to place in a conspicuous location the numbers of their buildings to assist vehicles in responding to calls. Enforcement of the ordinance is the responsibility of the ~ Chief Building Official, and James Nininger was present t respond to questions. Supervisor Brittle was concerned that the public will no be aware of the requirements of this ordinance, and since th effective date is September 8th, he wanted the issue discussed fully before proceeding to second reading. He also requested assurance that the requirement be advertised so the public will 'be aware of the ordinance. Supervisor McGraw asked Ms. Lehe what the liability to er si n and it the County was if a homeowner installed the prop g jfell off and the fire department could not find the house. Ms. i (Lehe responded that she felt that by requiring the homeowner to ,~ . ':_ - ~~ 1 ~~ ~"~~ August 11, 198`7 ---r --.. _--_ . _.. - -- - - affix the number to the house, the County was actually removin themselves from liability. Supervisor Johnson inquired what the fine was. Ms. Leh advised that this ordinance will be part of the County Building Code and this would be a Class 1 misdemeanor with a fine up t. $1,000. ' In response to a question from Supervisor Garrett concerning whether these numbers could be on mailboxes, Chief Tommy Fuqua stated that in some areas mailboxes are grouped together on one side of the street. He also pointed out that putting the number on the curb would not suffice because snow, leaves or parked automobiles could obstruct the view. Supervisor Johnson moved to approve first reading of they ordinance. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Nickens. Supervisor Brittle stated he was still concerned about whether the public will understand, and requested that the' effective date be changed to allow ample opportunity to inform; the citizens. Supervisor McGraw made a substitute motion to continue the first reading until the next meeting so that these concerns. may be addressed. Mr. Hodge reminded the board that there will be two weeks until the next meeting which will give the staff1 time to answer the board's questions. He also pointed out that information had already been sent to the citizens telling them of o~~ August 11, 1987 ,, ---- -. -- -- ;; __ _ - - -- u , the importance of putting numbers on their buildings. The ,effective date could also be changed to give the ci ' understand the ordinance, tizens time to Don Reid from C&P Tele hone was .i ~' p present and advised the li ~~oard that they will be sending inserts w' ~ ith bills throu h i'tnonth o.f September and 9 the I October. reminding their customers of 911. He will check with C&P and see if the i I. y could also include ~~ ;information about the building number ordinance. ~i l Supervisor Johnson directed the staff to make the iecessary changes prior to the second readin trittle also directed the staff to advertise these g. Supervisor requirements. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: YES: Supervisors Brittle Garrett, McGraw, Nickens, Johnson ~YS: None 5• Ordinance acce tin an offer for and authorizin he sale of real estate ad 'a cent to Fort Lewis Fire Station . Route 11-460: - on U. Ms. Lehe announced that the eceived an offer concernin C ounty has g property adjacent to Fort Lewis Fire 3ta tion. The tract is 3-1 3 acres and is zoned B-1 ,' ias received too late to include in the p This offer pre ared agenda. ' Supervisor Nickens stated this was across from Shamrock ark and is used in conjunction with the park. He unde hat the rstood County had made a commitment to the residents in the r ' t. ., ~ - . ~ '7 August 11, 1987 area not to sell ,the property until other recreational facilitie would be available for them. He also questioned bringing this u without having proper notice in the public agenda. Mr. Hodg suggested that this item be continued for two weeks to allow fo proper public notice. Supervisor Nickens moved to table this issue until th next meeting. The motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw an carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None IN RE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance a rovin a reement between the Cit of~'~, Salem and the Count of Roanoke re ardin annexation of certain territories of Roanoke County: ,j Supervisor Nickens stated that since this was discusso at the last board meeting and there is no opposition, he moved i approval of the second reading. The motion was seconded b. Supervisor Johnson and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None ORDINANCE 81187-6 APPROVING THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF SALEM AND THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE REGARDING p ~7 5 August 11, 1987 -._ ._. _ _ _- ~~_. II -- _ _ ~~ I ~. ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORIES OF ,I ROANOKE COUNTY WHEREAS, the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors of ,i ''Roanoke County, Virginia, has executed an Agreement dated March 3, 1987, by and between the City of Salem and the County of '!; Roanoke; and '; WHEREAS, the Agreement has been reviewed and approved' by the Commission on Local Government; and II ~'~ WHEREAS, the County of Roanoke has advertised its inten- j' tion to approve this Agreement on July 14, 1987, and July 21, 1987, in the Roanoke Times & World News, a newspaper of general circulation in this jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, the first reading and public hearing on this ordinance was held on July 28, 1987, and the second reading on this ordinance was held on August 11, 1987; and WHEREAS, the respective localities are desirous of re- olving these issues. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the Board of Super- isors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that the Memorandum of Agree- ent dated March 3, 1987, a true copy of which is attached hereto nd incorporated herein, is hereby adopted and app:roved. The County Attorney is hereby directed to petition the ircuit Court for an order establishing the rights of the respec- tive local governments as set forth under the terms of this Agree- R ., ment, and to take such other action as may be necessary to accomp lish these purposes. On motion of Supervisor Nickens, seconded by Superviso Johnson, and upon the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None 2. Ordinance authorizing the acquisition of certain water systems: Ms. Lehe stated this ordinance will authorize the acquisition of five water systems and establishes the fundinc sources to acquire the systems. Supervisor Garrett moved to approve the second reading of the ordinance. The motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw an< carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Johnson NAYS: Supervisor Nickens ORDINANCE 81187-7 AUTHORIZING 'PHE ACQUISITION OF CERTAIN WATER SYSTEMS WHEREAS, Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter requires that the acquisition of real estate or any interest therein be accomplished by ordinance, and that the Eirst reading on this ordinance was held on July 28, 1987, and the second read-I ing on this ordinance was held on August 11, 1987; and WHEREAS, Roanoke County can provide a better, more com- plete water system by owning and operating all water systems in u ~ '~ August 11, 1987 - _ _ - _ _- _. I; the County, and can better satisfy public health, safety and wel-I I ,fare standards and requirements; and WHEREAS, the citizens of Roanoke County have expressed I .their support for the acquisition of water systems and wells.. ;; ~ i 'through their positive votes for the 1985 and 1986 bond referen- I I,~ da . ~' ;~ NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Super-,', ;~ , visors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the acquisition of the following water systems within the funds and funding sources indicated is hereby approved land authorized: (Water System Cost Funding Source 'Cherokee Hills $ 67,000 1986 Bonds Forest Edge 131,000 1986 Bonds Carriage Hills/Parker 35,000 1986 Bonds Crescent Heights 60,000 1985 Bonds Sherry Court 6,300 Utility Fund 2. That an additional ten percent (10$) contingency (account for legal, engineering, and miscellaneous expenses is thereby authorized. 3. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized 'to take such actions and execute such documents, all upon a form) (,approved by the County Attorney, as may be necessary to accomp-~ lish the purposes and intent of this ordinance. On motion of Supervisor Garrett, seconded by Supervisor McGraw, and upon the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Johnson ~_~ ,_. - 07'g August 11, 1987 NAYS: Nickens 3. Ordinance vacating the Plat of the Rams ate Court Subdivision: Supervisor Nickens advised that since this is th second reading and no one is present to speak in opposition h I'moved to approve the second reading of the ordinance. The motio. was seconded by Supervisor McGraw. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisor Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None ORDINANCE 81187-8 VACATING THE PLAT OF RAMSGATE COURT SUBDIVISION WHEREAS, Jerry W, and Janat L. Bush have petitioned the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, to vacate the plat of the Ramsgate Court Subdivision; and WHEREAS, the petitioners are the owners of the property constituting this subdivision, except for three (3) lots therein; and WHEREAS, a public hearing and first reading on this ordinance was held on July 28, 1987, and the second reading on this ordinance was held on August 11, 1987. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia as follows: 1 That the plat of the Ramsgate Courtly Subdivisionrecorded on March 3, 1973, and found in Plat Book 8, o ~' ~ August 11, 1987 page 38, among the records of the Clerk of the Circuit Court forll I the County of Roanoke, Virginia is hereby vacated. i II 2. That the Clerk of the Circuit Court is authorized to take such action as may be necessary to accomplish the purpose and intent of this ordinance. On motion of Supervisor Nickens, seconded by Supervisor. McGraw, and upon the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Nickens, Johnson it NAYS: None 4. Ordinance amending Chapter 22 of the 1985 Roanoke n n County Code Water establishing requirements for the ; construction and testing of wells for public water supplies: No one was present to speak to this ordinance and there was no discussion as this was previously discussed on July 28, 1987. Supervisor Nickens moved to approve second reading of the ordinance. The motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None ORDINANCE N0. 81187-9 AMENDING C~'APTER 22 OF THE 1985 ROANOKE COUNTY CODE, "WATER" ESTABLISHING CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS FUR THE CONSTRUCTING AND TESTING OF WELLS FO F. PUB- LIC WATER SUPPLIES WHEREAS, the Board finds that the improper ;construction of wells can adversely affect aquifers as ' ~_ ~ l August 11, 1987 groundwater resources in Roanoke County. Consistent with th duty to protect these groundwater resources and to safeguard th public welfare, safety, and health, it is declared to be th policy of Roanoke County to require that the construction an location of wells conform to reasonable requirements; and WHEREAS, the establishment of these requirements ar authorized by Section 15.1-292.2, Section 15.1-299 and Section 15.1-341, et seq. of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended; and WHEREAS, the first reading on this ordinance was hel on July 28, 1987, and the second reading on this ordinance wa held on August 11, 1987. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanok~ County, Virginia as follows: 1. That Chapter 22 of the 1985 Roanoke County Code "Water" (Chapter 20.1 of the 1971 Roanoke County Code) is hereb~ amended and reenacted as follows: Section 20.1-9 of the 1971 Roanoke County Code is here- by repealed: We}ls si~a}} meet state ~ee~t~latiens e~lsting as e the elate of eenstrc~etlen- P~11 wells shall be a}ass ~ e~ II we}}s Baeatlen e€ a}} we}}s s~ia}1 be sHewn en a p}an e€ tine spstext Eael~ we}1 sl~a}} h~~*e m}n}xtttt~t ene-€et~rtl~ lnei~ alr 1}ne set to tl~ eleptl~ e€ tl~e pttxtp- A }aw water le~rel eent~el sl~a}} lie p~e~aleleel ~0~~ '~ Pst~gnst 11; 19$~ - - _ _._ _. _. it A fe~tp-eie~ht hes~ pt~xtp test shall be ~ee~ni~ed en all wells.- f6~d- AIe- 151-~ i ii and amended and reenacted: i ', ~i Section 20.1-9. Wells. , Wells shall meet state and American Waterworks Associa- tion (AWWA A-100-84) regulations/standards existing as of the date of well construction. In addition to the State regulations, ;; the following shall also be required: Location of all wells shall be shown on a plan of the water system. A minimum of two wells must be constructed and placed in service for all public water supply systems. Performance testing of wells shall be in accordance with AWWA A-100-84 Standard for water wells, Section 10. The step-drawdown and constant-rate test shall be used to determine the maximum safe vield for 30 days of continuous use. The 48 hour pump test required by the state shall be performed after the AWWA test. The actual well capacity used to determine the maximum equivalent residential connections shall be the lesser of quantity determined by the AWWA step-drawdown/constant rate test or the 48 hour state requirement test. All well pump tests shall be scheduled v~~ith and ob- served b the Utilit Director or his desi nated re rE:sentative. Y Y 9 P 2. This Ordinance shall be effective immediately upon adoption. -; f .~ t O V August 11, 198'7 On motion of Supervisor Nickens, seconded by Supervisor McGraw, and upon the following recorded vote: APES: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Nickens, Johnson Ni~YS : None 5. Ordinance amending and reenacting the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance to revise the Floodplain Ordinance• Phillip Henry was present to address this ordinance. Supervisor Johnson inquired if this had been discussed with the Homebuilders Association. Mr. Henry responded that amendment was discussed at the Homebuilders meeting and had been heard under the first reading of ordinance on July 28, 1987. Mr. Hodge responded that Mr. Jamison of the Homebuilders Association called to state he had not had an opportunity to review the ordinance. ' Supervisor Brittle moved to table this issue until it has been discussed with the Homebuilders Association. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Nickens and carried by the following recorded vote: ~ i AYES: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None County Zoning Ordinance and the Roanoke County Subdivision Ordinance to adopt the Virginia De partment of Transportation Drainage Manual anA Rnar3 a.,a Rr;a„o c+-,..,a~,.a.. ,..,a V (7 tJ August 11, 1987 - ff - - _ II - - --- _ _ ___ 'Specifications: This ordinance had been previous discussed on I~July 28, 1987. Supervisor Nic:Kens moved to approve the second reading of~' ,the ordinance. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Garrett and; ,, j~carried by the following recorded vote: I ;AYES: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Nickens, Johnson ;; ~ ~i (NAYS : None i; ORDINANCE 81187-10 AMENDING AND REENACTING THE ROANOKE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE AND THE ROANOKE COUNTY SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE TO ADOPT THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DRAINAGE MANUAL AND ROAD AND BRIDGE STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS WHEREAS, a first reading and public hearing concerning this amendment was held on July 28, 1987; the second reading was held on August 11, 1987; and WHEREAS, the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of Roanoke County require the adoption of standards and regulations to minimize adverse environmental impacts resulting ifrom the dangers of flooding and the drainage of surface and storm waters; and WHEREAS, Section 15.1-292, 15.1-466, and 15..i-489 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, authorize the county to adopt ordinances and to exercise such general powers to prevent) the pollution of water; to make, erect, and construct drains, sewers, and public ducts; to establish reasonable standards for __ '; ~~ '~ ' ~ ~ ' August 11, 1987 drainage regulations of subdivisions or developments; and to pro- vide safety from flood, flood protection, and to protect against tt~e loss of life, health, or property from flood and other simi- lar dangers; and WHEREAS, Roanoke County and its citizens have suffered and continue to suffer the harmful effects of flooding and inade- quate drainage of surface waters, and from the volume and velo- city of storm water runoff; and WHEREAS, these hazards and dangers to public health, safety, and welfare are caused in part by climate, topography and the development of land. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Super- visors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that the Roanoke County Code is amended and reenacted as follows: 1. Amend Appendix A, the Roanoke County Zoning Ordin- ance, Section 21-104, "Site Plan Review," by revising sub-section C, "Site Plan Preparation," to sub-section (u) to read as fol- lows: (u) i'~bl~e storm drainage system, designed in accordance with the current edition of the Virginia Department ~~ of Transportation Drainage Manual. 2. Amend Appendix A, the Roanoke County Zoning Ordin- ance, Section 21-104, "Site Plan Review," to add a new sub- section (z> to read as follows: os~ --- --- - (2) inia D August 11, 1987 __ _ _ ,I 1 Compliance with the current edition of the Vir- ~artment of Transportation Road and Bridge Standards and Specifications. 3. Amend Appendix B, the Roanoke County Subdivision ; Ordinance, Article IV, "Improvements," Section 18, "Plans and ~' ;specifications generally," by revising sub-section (d) as fol- I~ flows (1) All storm drainage facilities including on-tract nd off-tract drainage and other drainage structures necessary or the proper use and drainage of slopes, streets, highways, and edestrian ways and for the public safety, shall be designed to onvey the flow of surface waters without damage to persons and roperty. The system shall insure drainage away from buildings nd on-site waste disposal sites and septic tank facilities with ubsurface disposal fields. The County of Roanoke will require a rimarily underground system to accommodate frequent floods and a econdary surface system to accommodate larger less frequent loods. Drainage plans shall be consistent with local rE~gional torm drainage plans or be designed in accordance with the cur- ent edition of the Virginia Department of Transportation Drain- qe Manual. The facilities shall be designed to prevent the dis- barge of excess runoff onto the adjacent properties. L_ - ~ 0~ August 11, 198'7 (2) Erosion and sediment control measure s. including p7.anting . (3) Compliance with the current edition of the Vir-~ ~inia Department of Transportation Road and Bridge Standards and ~~ecifications. 4. The effective date of this ordinance shall bel August 12, 1987. On motion of Supervisor Nickens, seconded by Supervisor (Garrett, and upon the following recorded vote: (AYES: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Nickens, Johnson ~ NAYS : None 7. Ordinance amending Chapter 21 of the 1971 Roanoke County Code, "Zoning" and A endix A of the 1985 County Code by adding certain provision mandated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency; and requirement that the Zoning Administrator obtain information regarding elevation and. other flood-related factors before issuing a zoning permit- This ordinance was!; I discussed at first reading on July 28, 1987. No citizens were present to speak on this ordinance. Supervisor McGraw moved to approves second reading of the. ordinance. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Nickens andl carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None p 8 "~ August 11, 1987 ti ORDINANCE 81187-11 AMENDING CHAPTER 21 OF THE 1971 ROANOKE COUNTY CODE, "ZONING," AND APPENDIX A OF THE 1985 ROANOKE COUNTY i~ CODE BY ADDING CERTAIN PROVISIONS '~ MANDA'T'ED BY THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMEN'T' AGENCY TO WIT: DEFINITIONS OF ~~ " LOWES'.P FLOOR, " "MANUFACTURED HOME, " i ,~ "MANUFACTURED HOME PARK SUBDIVISION," AND '.~ "START OF CONSTRUCTION"; AND REQUIREMENT ~;~ THAT THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR OBTAIN '~ INFORMATION REGARDING ELEVATION AND OTHER !,~~ FLOOD- RELATED FACTORS BEFORE ISSUING A ~~~I ZONING PERMIT WHEREAS, the first reading and public hearing on this ordi- Hance was held on July 28, 1987, and the second reading on this ordinance was held on August 11, 1987; and WHEREAS, the health, safety, and general welfare of the citizens of Roanoke County require the adoption of standards and regulations to minimize adverse environmental impacts resulting from the dangers of flooding and the drainage of surface ands storm waters; and L --~ WHEREAS, Section 15.1-292, 15.1-466, 15.1-486, 15.1- X489, and 15.1-490 of the of Virginia; 1950, as amended authorize' the county to adopt ordinances and. to exercise such general powers to prevent the pollution of water; to make, erect, and (construct drains, sewers, and public ducts; to establish reason- ble standards for drainage regulations of subdivisions or devel- Iopments; and to provide safety from flood, flood protection, and I, ito protect against the loss of life, health, or property rom Ilflood and other similar dangers; and L ~ ~ ~ S August 11, 198 WHEREAS, Roanoke County and its citizens have suffered) and continue to suffer the harmful effects of flooding and ina de-I ~quate drainage of surface waters, and from the volume and velo- city of: storm water runoff; and WHEREAS, these hazards and dangers to public health, (safety, and welfare are caused in part by climate, topography and) (the development of land. WHEREAS, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has mandated that the County follow the procedures contained within these amendments in order to insure continuation of federal flood insurance for certain residents of Roanoke County. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervi-I sors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that the Roanoke County Code is hereby amended and re-enacted as follows: 1. Amend and re-enact Appendix A of the 1985 Roanoke County Code, Zoning Ordinance, Article V, "Special Public Inter-~ est Regulations", as follows: ARTICLE V. SPECIAL PUBLIC INTEREST REGULATIONS ~ 21-61. Floodplains. The purpose of these provisions is to prevent the following hazards: the loss of life and property, the creation of health end safety hazards, the disruption of commerce and governmental services, the extraordinary and unnecessary expenditure of public funds for flood protection and relief, and the impairment of the tax base by the means provided here: os~ August 11, 1987 ,.- II !j ~(a) it '(b) i'; (c) I'. (d) I A. __ _ _ . -- !'~ i Regulating uses, activities, and development which, acting alone or in combination with other existing or future uses, activities, and development, will cause unacceptable increases in flood heights, velocities, and frequencies. Restricting or prohibiting certain uses, activities, and development from locating within areas subject to flood-, ing . Requiring all those uses, activities, and developmentslj that do occur in flood-prone areas to be protected and/or flood-proofed against flooding and flood damage. ~ Protecting individuals from buying lands and structures which are unsuited for intended purposes because of flood hazards . Applicability. hese provisions shall apply to all lands within the jurisdiction f Roanoke County and identified as being flood-prone as stipu- ated in this section. Compliance. (a) No land shall hereafter be developed and no structure shall be located, relocated, constructed, reconstructed, enlarged, or structurally altered except in full compli- ance with the terms and provisions of this section and any other applicable ordinances and regulations which apply to uses within the jurisdiction of this section. (b) This ordinance supersedes any regulations currently in, effect in flood-prone areas. However, any underlying regu- lations shall remain in full force and effect t:o the ex- tent that those provisions are more restrictive. Definitions. For the purpose of the Floodplain Section of this ordinance, these terms are defined as follows: (a) Development - any man-made change to improved or unim- proved real estate including but not limited to buildings or other structures, the placement of mobile homes, 1 ~__~ .~. f V August 11 , 198'7 streets and other paving, utilities, filling, grading excavation, mining, dredging, or drilling operations. (b) Flood - a general and temporary inundation of normally dr land areas. (c) F'loodplain - (1) a relatively flat or low land area adjoin ing a river, stream, or watercourse which is subject t partial or complete inundation; (2) an area subject to th II (d) I (e) (f) (g) (h) q (i) ____-~~~ ~.,,,, ~Q~,lu Q~;`~,«uldLlon or runoff of surface waters from any source. Floodway - the designated area of the floodplain required to carry and discharge flood waters of a given magnitude. Lowest floor - the lowest floor includes the lowest en- closed area (includin basement) of an structure. An unfinished or flood resistant enclosure usable solel for arkin of vehicles, buildin access, or stora e, in an area other than a basement area, is not considered a build- in 's lowest floor, rovided that such enclosure is not built so as to render the structure in violation of the applicable non-elevation desi n requirements of this ordi- nance. Manufactured home - a structure, trans ortable in one or more sections, which is built on a ermanent chassis and is-desi ned for use with or without a ermanent foundation when connected to the required utilities The term "manu- factured home" also includes ark trailers, travel trail- ers, and other similar vehicles laced on a site for greater than 180 consecutive days Manufactured home park or subdivision - a parcel (or con- tiguous parcels) of land divided into two or more manufac- tured home lots for rent or sale. One hundred Year Flood - a flood that, on the average, isli likely to occur once ever 100 y years (i.e., that has a one'! percent chance of occurring each year, although the flood' may occur in any year). Start of construction - "start of construction" includes "substantial im rovement" and means the date the buildin ermit was issued, provided the actual start of construc- tion, repair, reconstruction, placement, or other improve- ment was within 180 da s of the ermit date. The "actual start" means either the first lacement of ermanent con- 09~ August 11, 1987 L_ I I struction of a structure on a site, such as the ourin of slab or footin s, the installation of piles, the construc-) tion of columns, or an work be and the sta e of excava- tion; or the placement of a manufactured home on a foundation. Permanent construction does not include land preparation, such as clearing, grading and fillin does it include the installation of streets and/or~walk-; ways; nor does it include excavation for a basement, footings, piers, or foundations or the erection of tem o- rar forms, nor does it include the installation on the I; property of accessory buildings, such as garages or sheds I~ not occupied as dwelling units or not art of the main ~I structure. i ~D. Floodplain area. I'The various floodplain areas shall include areas subject to inundation by waters of the one hundred (100) year flood. The primary basis for the delineation of these areas shall be the Flood Insurance Study for Roanoke County prepared by the H-S- Bepa~tx~er~t of Het~sing artd Hrban Ber~elapx~ent; Federal Emergency Management Agency, Federal Insurance Administration, dated 6ete3~e~ 17; }9~8December 4, 1985 and subse went amendments. (a) The Floodway is delineated for purposes of this section using the criteria that a certain area within the flood- plain must be capable of carrying the waters of the one hundred (100) year flood without increasing the water surface elevation of that flood more than one (1) foot at any point. These Floodways are specifically defined in Table 2 of the above referenced Flood Insurance Study and shown on the Flood Boundary and Floodway Map accompanying that study. (b) The Flood-Fringe shall be that area of the 100-year flood- plain not included in the Floodway. The basis for the outermost boundary of the Flood-Fringe shall be the one hundred (100) year flood elevations contained in the flood profiles of the .above referenced Flood Insurance Study and as shown on the Flood Boundary and Floodway Map accompany- ing the study. (c) The Approximated Floodplain shall be that floodplain area for which no detailed flood profiles or elevations are provided, but where a one hundred (100) year floodplain boundary has been approximated. Such areas are shown on the Flood Boundary and Floodway Map and Flood Insurance ~° •~ ~ ~ ~ August 11, 1987 __ _ _ ____ _ - -- -- T~ _ _ Rate Map. Where the specific 100-year flood elevation cannot be determined for this area using other sources of da to such as the U . S . Army Corps of Engineers, Floodplain Inl:ormation Reports, U.S. Geological Survey Flood Prone Quadrangles, etc., then the applicant for the proposed us~~, development and/or activity shall determine this ele- vation in accordance with hydrologic and hydraulic engi- neering techniques. Hydrologic and hydraulic analyses shall be undertaken only by professional engineers or others of demonstrated qualifications, who shall certify that the technical methods used correctly reflect current- ly accepted technical concepts. Calculations for the design flood shall be related to existing land use and potential development under existing zoning. Studies, analyses, computations, etc., shall be submitted in suffi- cient detail to allow a thorough review by the County Engi- neer. E. Overlay concept. (a) The Floodplain Areas described above shall be overlays t the existing underlying Zoning Districts as shown on th Official Zoning Map, and as such, the provisions for th floodplain areas shall serve as a supplement to the under lying Zoning District provisions. (b) Where there happens to be any conflict between the provi sions or requirements of any of the Floodplain Areas an those of any underlying Zoning District, the more restric tive provisions shall apply. (c) In the event any provision concerning a Floodplain Area is declared inapplicable as a result of any legislative o administrative actions or judicial discretion, the basi underlying Zoning District provisions shall remain appli-~ cable . I! F. Flood boundary and floodway map. j,I The boundaries of the Floodplain Areas are established as shows on the Flood Boundary and Floodway Map and Flood Insurance Rate Ma~which are declared to be a part of this chapter and whist shall be kept on file in the office of the Zoning Administrator. G. Floodplain boundary changes and interpretation. 093 August 11, 1987 .~ ~i jk a ) ij The delineation of any of the floodplain areas may be revised by the Board of Supervisors where natural or man- made changes have occurred and/or made detailed studies conducted or undertaken by the U.S. Army Corps of Engi- neers or other qualified agency, or an individual docu- ments the need for such change. However, prior to any such change, approval must be obtained from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Federal Insurance Admini tion . '(b) Initial interpretations of the boundaries of the Flood- I plain Areas shall be made by the Zoning Administrator. ~ Should a dispute arise concerning the boundaries of any of ~ the floodplain areas, the Board of Zoning Appeals shall make the necessary determination. The person questioning or contesting the location of the floodplain area boundary shall be given an opportunity to present his case to the Board of Zoning Appeals and to submit technical evidence. Floodplain area provisions. '~11 uses, activities, and development occurring within any flood- ~lain area shall be undertaken only upon the issuance of a zoning permit. Such development shall be undertaken only in strict com- ~liance with the provisions of this section and with all other applicable codes and ordinances such as the Virginia Uniform statewide Building Code and the Roanoke County Subdivision Ordi- iance. Prior to the issuance of any such permit, the Zoning .dministrator shall require all applications to include compli- nce with all applicable state and federal laws. nder no circumstances shall any use, activity, and/or develop- ent adversely affect the capacity of the channels or floodways, f any watercourse, drainage ditch, or any other drainage facil- ty or system. prior to any proposed alteration or relocation of any charnels or ~loodways of any watercourse, stream, etc., within I~.oanoke 'ounty, approval shall be obtained from the State Water Control ~oard. Further notification of the proposal shall be given to 11 affected adjacent jurisdictions. Copies of such notification hall be forwarded to the State Water Control Board, the State epartment of Intergovernmental Affairs, and the Federal Emer- ency Management Agency, Federal Insurance Administration. a> All Floodplain Districts (1)~ (2) (3) Required Information Fcr all ermits the Zonin Administrator shall (i) obtain tt:e elevation ( in relation to mean sea level ) of the lowest floor (including basement) of all new or substan tially improved structures, and whether or not such struc tures contain a basement, (ii) obtain, if the structure has been flood roofed, the elevation (in relation to mean sea level) to which the structure was flood roofed, and (iii) maintain a record of all such information. Where a non-residential structure is intended to be made water tight below the base flood level, (i) a registered prof es sional en sneer or architect shall develo and/or review structural design, specifications, and Tans for the con struction, and shall certif that the desi n and methods of construction are in accordance with acce ted standards of ra ctice for meetin the a licable revisions of the Vir inia Uniform Statewide Buildin Code, and (ii) a record of such certificates which includes the s ecific elevation (in relation to mean sea level) to which such structures are flood- roofed shall be maintained b the Zoning Administrator. Zone A The Zoning Administrator shall obtain, review and reason abl utilize an base flood elevation and floodwa data available from a Federal, State, or other source, as cri teria for re uirin that new construction, substantial im rovements, or other develo ment in Zone A meets alli standards noted in the Floodplain section of this ordi nance. Service Facilities ~ Electrical heatin ventilation, lumbin and air-!; conditionin e ui ment and other service facilities shall I' be designed and/or located so as t~ nravPnt watA,- ~,-l,.., entering or accumulating within the components during con-« ditions of flooding. (4) Manufactured Homes All manufactured homes to be laced or substantiall im roved within an flood lain district shall be elevated on a ermanent foundation such that the lowest floor of the manufactured home is at or above the base f l enc3 a7 a~~a O9~ ., ! August 11, 1987 (5> (b) (1) -- - ----- _ --- - ~i _-_ _ _. ,, -- _ _ ~ i~ tion and shall be securely anchored to an adequately I~ anchored foundation system in accordance with the prove sions of the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code This rovision shall a 1 to existin manufactured home arks, subdivisions and lots where an existing manufac-' tured home is replaced, any expansion to an existing park or subdivision, and to new arks, subdivisions and instal lations constructed after the effective date of this ordi-'' nance. i~ I~ Area Below Lowest Floor it For all new construction and substantial improvements, full enclosed areas below the lowest floor that are subject to flooding shall be designed to automatically e ualize hydrostatic flood forces on exterior walls by allowing for the entry and exit of floodwaters. Designs for meeting this requirement must either be certified by a re istered rofessional en sneer or architect or must meet or exceed the followin minimum criteria: a minimum of two o enin s haven a total net area of not less than one s uare inch for every square foot of enclosed area subject to flooding shall be rovided The bottom of all o enings_ may be no higher than one foot above grade. Openings may be equipped with screens, louvers, or other coverings or devices provided that they permit the automatic entry and exit of floodwaters. Floodway In the Floodway no development shall be permitted except where the effect of such development on flood heights is fully offset by a ccompanying improvements which have been approved by all appropriate authorities as required above. The placement of any mebl}emanufactured home, except in an existing x~eb~}emanufactured home park or subdivi- sion, within the Floodway is specifically prohibited. Permitted Uses In the Floodway the following uses and activities are permitted provided that they are in compliance with the provisions of the underlying Zoning District and are not prohibited by any other ordinance and provided that they do not require structures, fill, or storage of materials and equipment: II • r 1 1 ( ~ ' '_ ~ ~ ~' V August 11, 1987 -- -- (i) Agricultural-uses such as general farming, pasture, grazing, outdoor plant nurseries, horticulture, truck farming, forestry, sod farming, and wild crop harvesting. (ii) Public and private recreational uses and activities such asparks, day camps, picnic grounds, golf courses, boat launching and swimming areas, hiking, and horseback riding trails, wildlife and nature preserves, game farms, fish hatcheries, trap and skeet game ranges, and hunting and fishing areas. (iii) Accessory residential uses such as yard areas, gardens, play areas, and loading areas. (iv) Accessory industrial and commercial uses such as yard areas, parking and loading areas, airport land- ing strips, etc. (2) Uses Permitted by Special Exception The following uses and activities may be permitted by Special Exception of the governing body following a public hearing provided that they are in compliance with the provisions of the underlying Zoning District and are not prohibited by this or any other ordinance: (i) Structures (except for mobile manufactured homes) accessory to the uses and activities in (1) above. (ii) Certain utilities and public facilities and improve- ments such as pipe lines, water and sewage treatment plants, and other similar or related uses. (iii) Water-related uses and activities such as marinas, docks, wharves, piers, etc. (iv) Extraction of sand, gravel, and other materials (where no increase in level of flooding or velocity is caused thereby). (v) Storage of materials and equipment provided that they are not flammable or explosive, and are not subject to major damage by flooding, or provided that such material and equipment is firmly anchored to prevent flotation or movement, and/or can be read- ily removed from the area within the time available after flood warning. O9"~ j I~ ~c) ~I ~~~ i II li I~ ii August 11, 1987 (vi) Other similar uses and activities provided they cause no increase in flood heights and/or velocities. All uses, activities, and structural development, shall be undertaken in strict compliance with the flood-proofing provisions contained in all appli- cable codes and ordinances. Flood-Fringe and Approximated Floodplain In the Flood-Fringe and Approximated Floodplain the devel- opment and/or use of land shall be permitted in accordance with the regulations of the underlying Zoning District provided that all such uses, activities, and/or develop- ment shall be undertaken in strict compliance with the floodproofing and related provisions contained in the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code and all other applicable codes and ordinances. -- However, in Approximated Floodplain areas the applicant and/or developer shall evaluate the effects of the pro- posed development and/or use of land on the floodplain with current hydrologic and hydraulic engineering tech- niques. The applicant and/or developer shall submit studies, analysis, computations, etc. to show the delinea- tion of a floodway based on the requirement that all exist- ing and future development not increase the 100- year flood elevation more than one (1) foot at any point. The engineering principle, equal reduction of conveyance, shall be used to make the determination of increased flood height. Procedures for Special Exception i-n Floodways. > Any use listed as permitted with a Special Exception in a floodway shall be allowed only after application to the County Board of Supervisors. Such application shall include the following: (1) Plans in triplicate drawn to scale not less tan 1" to 100' horizontally showing the location, dimensions, and contours (at 5 foot intervals) of the lot, existing and proposed structures, fill, storage areas, water supply, sanitary facilities, and relationship of the floodway to the proposal. . ~ _ ~, ~ ~9~ August 11, 1987r (2) A typical valley cross-section as necessary to adequately show the channel of the stream, elevation of land areas adjoining each side of the channel, cross-sectional areas to be occupied by the proposed development, and 100-year flood elevation. (3) A profile showing the slope of the bottom of the channel or flow line of the stream. (4) A summary report, prepared by professional engineers or others of demonstrated qualifications, evaluating the pro- posed project in relation to flood heights and velocities; the seriousness of flood damage to the use; and other per- tinent technical matters. (5) A list of names and addresses of adjoining property owners. (b) The Board shall refer the complete application including technical evaluation to the Planning Commission. The Plan- ning Commission shall conduct such investigations as it deems necessary and shall conduct a public hearing under Section 15.1-431 of the Code of Virginia, as amended. (c) In acting upon such applications, the Planning Commission and the County Board of Supervisors shall consider all relevant factors specified in other sections of this chapter and: (1) The danger to life and property due to increased flood heights or velocities caused by encroachments. No special exception shall be granted for any proposed use, develop- ment, or activity within the Floodway that will cause any increase in flood levels during the one hundred (100) year flood. (2> The danger that materials may be swept on to other lands or downstream to the injury of others. (3) The proposed water supply and sanitation systems and the 'i' ability of these systems to prevent disease, contamina- !' tion, and unsanitary conditions. ~~ (4) The susceptibility of the proposed facility and its con- tents to flood damage and the effect of such damage on the individual owners. d ~ ~ (5) i (6) August 11, 1987 The importance of the services provided by the proposed facility to the County. ~. j The requirements of the facility for a waterfront loca- tion. (7) The availability of alternative locations not subject to flooding for the proposed use. (8) The compatibility of the proposed use with existing devel- II opment and development anticipated in the foreseeable ~ ~~ future . ii (9) The relationship of the proposed use to the Comprehensive ii~; Plan and floodplain management program for the County. I' (10) The safety of access to the property in times of flood for ordinary and emergency vehicles. (11) Such other factors which are relevant to the purpose of this section. d) The Board shall conduct a public hearing after receipt of a recommendation from the Planning Commission and render a decision. r. Variances. ariances may be granted for the reconstruction, rehabilitation, r restoration of structures listed on the National Register of istoric Places or a State Inventory of Historic Places without egard to the procedures set forth in this section. ariances may not be considered within any Floodway if any in- rease in flood levels during the 100-year flood would result. 'ariances may be considered for new construction and substantial mprovements to be erected on a lot contiguous to anc~ surrounded ,y lots with existing structures constructed below the 100-year Blood level using the guidelines set forth in Part I (c) of this section above. he Board of Zoning Appeals may refer any application and accompa- ying documentation pertaining to any request for a variance to ny engineer or other qualified person or agency for technical ssistance in evaluating the proposed project in relation to r . L-l ~ ~ ~ () August 11, 198'7 flood heights and velocities, and the adequacy of the plans for protection and other related matters. Variances shall only be issued after the Board of Zoning Appeals has d<~termined that the granting of such will not result in (a) unacc~~pta ble or prohibited increases in flood heights, (b) addi- tional threats to public safety, (c) extraordinary public expense, (d) creation of nuisances (e) fraud or victimization of "the public, or (f) conflict with local laws or ordinances. Variances shall only be issued after the Board of Zoning Appeals has determined that the variance will be the minimum relief to any hardship. !The Board of Zoning Appeals shall notify the applicant for a vari- ance, in writing, that the issuance of a variance to construct a structure below the one hundred (100) year flood elevation (a) increases the risks to life and property, and (b) will result in increased premium rates for flood insurance. A record of the above notification as well as all variance actions, including justification for their issuance, shall be maintained and any variances which are issued shall be noted in the annual report submitted to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Federal Insurance Administration. K. Existing structures in floodplain areas. A structure or use of a structure or premises which lawfully existed before the enactment of these provisions, but which is not in conformity with these provisions may be continued subject to the following conditions: (1) Existing structures and/or uses located in the floodway shall not be expanded or enlarged (unless the effect of the proposed expansion or enlargernent on flood heights is fully offset by accompanying impr.ovements). (2) Any modification, alteration, repair, reconstruction, or improvement of any kind to a structure and/or use located in any floodplain to an extent or amount of less than fifty (50) percent of its market value, shall be evaluated and/or floodproofed in accordance with the Virginia Uni- form Statewide Building Code. (3) The modification, alteration, repair, reconstruction, or improvement of any kind to a structure and/or use regard- f, .S. August 11, 1987 __ --- _1_ less of its location in a floodplain district to an extent or amount of fifty (50) percent or more of its market ~~ value shall be undertaken only in full compliance with the provisions of the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building ~~ Code . Liability. ~ihe degree of flood protection sought by the provisions of this ection is considered reasonable for regulatory purposes and is based on acceptable engineering methods of study. Larger floods t~iay occur on rare occasions. Flood heights may be increased by man-made or natural causes, such as ice jams and bridge openings ~!estricted by debris. This section does not imply that areas dutside floodplain areas, or that land uses permitted within such areas, will be free from flooding or flood damages. his ordinance shall not create liability on the part of Roanoke ounty or any officer or employee thereof for any flood damages hat result from reliance on this ordinance or any administrative ecision lawfully made thereunder. 2. The effective date of this ordinance shall be ugust 12, 1987. On motion of Supervisor McGraw, seconded by Supervisor ickens, and upon the following recorded vote: S: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Nickens, Johnson YS: None RE: APPOINTMENTS 1. Grievance Panel: Supervisor Brittle nominated chard Robers to another two-year term. Mr. Robers' term will pire September 27, 1989. RE: REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS .. ~' ~ / .~ ~:: ,~ p ~~ August 11, 198 _. II - _ --- ____ Sup ervisor McGraw announced he had submitted a report on his activities at the National Association of Counties (conference. Chairman Johnson directed that a copy of the report .be included in the agenda packet. Supervisor Johnson commended Director of Utilities Clifford Craig for the pamphlet on the North Lakes Interconnection Project. Supervisor Johnson also advised he has received phone calls concerning the " cruising" on Williamson Road. Since part of Williamson Road is in Roanoke City and a portion in the County, he asked board concurrence for County Attorney Paul Mahoney to discuss with Sheriff Foster, and for Roanoke City and the county to proceed on a solution to this problem together. Supervisor Brittle suggested that the Department of Parks and ecreation and Social Services also become involved, because the roblems go beyond that of law enforcement. N RE: CONSENT AGENDA Supervisor Johnson moved to approve the Consent Agenda. he motion was seconded by Supervisor Garrett and carried by the ollowing recorded vote: 103 August 11, 1987 --- - __~ _ __ I~ It ~~ RESOLUTION NO. 81187-12 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM L - CONSENT AGENDA ,~~ ! BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke unty, Virginia, as follows: 1. That that certain section of the agenda of the ~i and of Supervisors Eor August 11, 1987, designated as Item L - nsent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to ch item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 i ough 6, inclusive, as follows: 1. Minutes of Meeting - July 14, 1987 2. Confirmation of Appointment to the Community Corrections Resources Board 3. Acceptance of a donation of a 25' x 20' lot to construct a booster pump station. 4. Approval of a Resolution of Support to bring the World Cup Soccer Matches to the United States 5. Request for increase in Youth Haven II Petty Cash Account. 6. Request for Acceptance into the Secondary System of the following roads: a. Huntridge Road, Springer Road, Britaney Road, Setter Road b. 0.03 miles of Burnham Road c. Summerset Drive, Summerset Circle and Branderwood Drive. d. 0.12 miles of Fernway Drive e. 0.06 miles of Sutherland Circle 2. That the Clerk to the Board is hereby directed and ~d directed where required by law to set forth upon any of said ~- ~ _. • ~- ~} ~-~ August 11, 1987' items the separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant to this resolution. On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by Supervisor arrett, and upon the following recorded vote: YES: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Nickens, Johnson AYS: None it RESOLUTION 81187-12.c OF SUPPORT TO BRING THE 1994 WORLD CUP SOCCER GAMES TO THE UNITED STATES BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke ounty, Virginia, as follows: WHEREAS, Soccer is one of the world's most popular ports, and is the fastest growing team sport in the United tates; and WHEREAS, The United States Soccer Federation is an >rganization supporting and promoting soccer at all levels; and WHEREAS, Soccer provides an excellent opportunity for cur youth to develop team and individual athletic skills; and WHEREAS, the 1994 World Cup will be a major sporting nd tourism event; and WHEREAS, World-wide interest in the 1994 World Ctzn will ocus world attention and interest in our nation, and would reatly encourage the continued growth of soccer in the United tates . 105 August 11, 1987 ---- ---- __ _ __ - 1 _ - _ __.. i it NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of !Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia declares its full support L -- of the efforts of the United States Soccer Federation in bringing ~; the 1994 World Cup to the United States, and offers it :, !' ienthusiastic support to the United States Soccer Federation in ~I all its actions before the Federation Internationale de Football i. ~, ,Association, with the goal of bringing the 1994 World Cup to our j; ation; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of oanoke County that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to The irginia General Assembly and the Virginia Association of ounties requesting their support for this effort. On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by Supervisor rrett, and upon the following recorded vote: YES: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Nickens, Johnson YS: None RESOLUTION 81187-12.i REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF SUTHERLAND CIRCLE INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF, TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY ROAD SYSTEM BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke ounty, Virginia, as follows: 1. That this matter came this day to be heard upon the 5roceedings herein, and upon the application of Sutherland Circle ~ ~ ~ to be accepted and made a part of the Secondary System of State Highways under Section 33.1-229 of the Virginia State Code. 2. That it appears to the Board that drainage easements and a fifty (50) foot right-of-way for said road have heretofore deed dedicated by virtue of a certain map/maps known as Campbell Hills, Section 3 Subdivision which map was recorded in Plat Book 9, Page 179, of the records of the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, on November 18, 1980 and that by reason of .the recordation of said map no report from a Board of Viewers, nor consent or donation of right-of-way from the abutting property owners is necessary. The Board hereby guarantees said right-of-way for drainage. 3. That said road known as Sutherland Circle and which isl shown on a certain sketch accompanying this Resolution, be, and the same is hereby established as public road to become a part of the State Secondary System of Highways in Roanoke County, only from and after notification of official acceptance of said street or highway by the Virginia Department of Transportation. On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by Supervisor Garrett, and upon the following recorded vote• III AYES: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Nickens, Johnson it NAYS: None RESOLUTION 81187-12.f REQUESTING ACCEP'PANCE OF BURNHAM ROAD INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMEN`T' OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY ROAD SYSTEM -. 1 U '7 ~. - I BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That this matter came this day to be heard upon the proceedings herein, and upon the application of Burnham Road to ~i k~'~e accepted and made a part of the Secondary System of State ~i Fi~ighways under Section 33.1-229 of the Virginia State Code. 2. That it appears to the Board that drainage easements a,nd a f i f ty ( 50 ) foot right-of-way for said road have heretofore eed dedicated by virtue of a certain map/maps known as astle Rock West, Section 3 Subdivision which map was recorded in lat Book 9, Page 319, of the records of the Clerk's Office of he Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, on April 15, 1985 nd that by reason of the recordation of said map no report from Board of Viewers, nor consent or donation of right-of-way from e abutting property owners is necessary. The Board hereby grantees said right-of-way for drainage. 3. That said road known as Burnham Road and which is shown a certain sketch accompanying this Resolution, be, and the me is hereby established as public road to become a part of the ate Secondary System of Highways in Roanoke County, only from d after notification of official acceptance of said street or ighway by the Virginia Department of Transportation. r- L~ ~ 1 ~ ~3 August 11, 1987 __ ._ __ ___ __ _ __ __ _ __ __-..-,t-- On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by Supervisor ~Garr_ett, and upon the following recorded vote: ~AYE~3: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Nickens, Johnson (NAYS: None RESOLUTION 81187-12.e REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF HUNTRIDGE ROAD, SPRINGER ROAD, BRITANEY ROAD AND SETTER ROAD INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY ROAD SYSTEM BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That this matter came this day to be heard upon the proceedings herein, and upon the application of Huntridge Road, Springer Road, Britaney Road and Setter Road to be accepted and (made a part of the Secondary System of State Highways under Section 33.1-229 of the Virginia State Code. 2. That it appears to the Board that drainage easements. and a fifty (50) foot right-of-way for said road have heretofore deed dedicated by virtue of a certain map/maps known as Huntridge Subdivision which map was recorded in Plat Book 9, Page 200, of the records of the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, on August 17, 1981 and that by reason of the recordation of said map no report from a Board of Viewers, nor consent or donation of right-of-way from the abutting property owners is necessary. The Board hereby guarantees said right-of-way for drainage. 1 oy August 11, 1987 °~ 3. That said road known as Huntridge Road, Springer Road, sritaney Road and Setter Road and which is shown on a certain sketch accompanying this Resolution, be, and the same is hereby established as public road to become a part of the State econdary System of Highways in Roanoke County, only from and fter notification of official acceptance of said street or ighway by the Virginia Department of Transportation. On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by Supervisor rrett, and upon the following recorded vote: YES: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Nickens, Johnson ~YS : None RESOLUTION 81187-12.h REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF FERNWAY DRIVE INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY ROAD SYSTEM BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke ounty, Virginia, as follows: 1. That this matter came this day to be heard upon the roceedings herein, and upon the application of Fernway Drive to, e accepted and made a part of the Secondary System of State ighways under Section 33.1-229 of the Virginia State Code. 2. That it appears to the Board that drainage easements d a fifty (50) foot right-of-way for said road have heretofore eed dedicated by virtue of a certain map/maps known as rriage Hills, Section 3 Subdivision which map was recorded in (~ ~I ` ' % - / - ~- A~~.- '~~~ August 11, 1987; lat Book 10, Page 1, of the records of the Clerk's Office of the ircuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, on March 6, 1986 and that by reason of the recordation of said map no report from a Board of Viewers, nor consent or donation of right-of-way from the abutting property owners is necessary. The Board hereby guarantees said right-of-way for drainage. 3. That said road known as Fernway Drive and which is hown on a certain sketch accompanying this Resolution, be, and he same is hereby established as public road to become a part of he State Secondary System of Highways in Roanoke County, only Tom and after notification of official acceptance of said treet or highway by the Virginia Department of Transportation. On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by Supervisor 3rrett, and upon the following recorded vote: YES: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Nickens, Johnson ?~YS : None RESOLUTION 81187-12.g REQUES'T'ING ACCEPTANCE OF SUMMERSET CIRCLE AND BRANDERWOOD DRIVE INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF 'TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY ROAD SYSTEM BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke ounty, Virginia, as follows: 1. That this matter came this day to be heard upon the roceedings herein, and upon the application of Summerset Drive, ummerset Circle and Branderwood Drive to be accepted and made a ,., 1 11 August 11, 1987 L- l art of the Secondary System of State Highways under Section 3.1-229 of the Virginia State Code. 2. That it appears to the Board that drainage easements nd a fifty (50) foot right-of-way for said road have heretofore eed dedicated by virtue of a certain map/maps known as randerwood, Sections 1, 2 and 3 Subdivision which map was ecorded in Plat Books 9 and 10, Pages 351, 5 and 19, of the ecords of the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke unty, Virginia, on December 4, 1985, May 7, 1986 and July 31, 86 and that by reason of the recordation of said map no report om a Board of Viewers, nor consent or donation of right-of -way om the abutting property owners is necessary. The Board hereby arantees said right-of-way for drainage. 3. That said road known as Summerset Drive, Summerset ircle and Branderwood Drive and which is shown on a certain ketch accompanying this Resolution, be, and the same is hereby stablished as public road to become a part of the State econdary System of Highways in Roanoke County, only from and fter notification of official acceptance of said street or ghway by the Virginia Department of Transportation. On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by Supervisor rrett, and upon the following recorded vote: S: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Nickens, Johnson YS: None SIN RE: REPORTS The following reports were received and filed: 1. Statement of Treasurer's Accountability per Ynvestments and Portfolio Policy as of June 30, 1987. 2. Youth Haven II Status Report. 3. Report on 911 Public Awareness Campaign. IN RE: EXECUTIVE SESSION At 3:50 Supervisor Brittle moved to go into Executive ession pursuant to the Code of Virginia 2.1-344 (a) (1) ersonnel, and (4) location of a perspective business or industry. he motion was seconded by Supervisor Garrett and carried by the ollowing recorded vote: YES: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Nickens, Johnson ~YS: None N RE: OPEN SESSION At 5:00 p.m., Supervisor Johnson moved to return to pen Session. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Brittle and arried by the following recorded vote: YES: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Nickens, Johnson AYS: None ~ -~ 3 ~ -- ~ ' August 11, 1987 _ -- - N RE: ADJOURNMENT At 5:01 p.m., Chairman Johnson adjourned the meeting. Bob L. Johnson, Chairman .- '; A-9887-7 ITEM NUMBER ~-- AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: September 8, 1987 SUBJECT: Acceptance of water and sewer facilities serving The Falls, Section 3 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The developer of the Falls, Section 3, Strauss Construction Co., Inc. has requested that Roanoke County accept the deed conveying the water and sewer lines serving the subdivision along with all necessary easements. The water and sewer engineering plans re lines are installed as shown on p pared entitled Development Plans by Buford for Section Lumsden & 3 Th F ll Associates, 12, 1986, which are on file i Th n the Public , e a s Facilities dated August Department e water and sewer line construction and the plans a . meets the specifications pproved by the county. FISCAL IMPACT:~ The values of the water and sewer construction are $8,610.00 and $9,036.00 respectively. RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors accept the water and sewer facilities serving the subdivision along with all necessary easements, and authorize the County Administrator to execute a Deed for the transfer of these facilities. SUBMITTED BY: ~' Y Phillip T. Henry Director of Engineering APPROVED: v" Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator 1 .Y ACTION Approved (x) Motion by: Lee Garrett/Bob L. Denied ( ) Johnson to approve Received ( ) Referred To cc: File Phillip Henry Clifford Craig VOTE No Yes Abs Brittle x Garrett x Johnson x McGraw x Nickens x 4 A-9887-9 ITEM NUMBER L ~ -~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: September 9, 1987 SUBJECT: Addition of Roads into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: On June 9, 1986, the Board of Supervisors adopted a resolution requesting that the Department of Transportation accept the following roads into the Secondary System. a. 0.35 miles of b. 0.19 miles of c. 0.22 miles of d. 0.79 miles of Coachman Drive Coachman Circle Forest Oak Drive Summit Ridge Road Oscar K. Mabry, Deputy Commissioner of the Department of Transportation has now informed us that these additions are approved, effective August 14, 1987. SUBMITTED BY: `7 Y~o~, Mary H. Allen Deputy Clerk APPROVED BY: ~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator -------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved (x) Motion by: .Lee Garrett/Bob ~ No Yes Abs Denied ( ) Johnson to approve Received ( ) Brittle _.x Referred Garrett ~ To Johnson x McGraw -~ Nickens x cc: File Phillip Henry John Peters { cC®N~1~]I®l~'~~~4]L'~']~-3C ®~' ~~~~~~T~~ DEPARTMENT OE TRANSPORTATION 1401 EAST BROAD STREET RAY D. PETHTEL RICHMOND, 23219 COMMISSIONER August 14, 1987 --~ OSCAR K. MABRY DEPUTY COMMISSIONER Secondary System Additions Roanoke County Board of Supervisors County of Roanoke P. 0. Box 3800 Roanoke, VA 24015 Members of the Board: As requested in your resolution dated June 9, 1987, the follow- ing additions to the Secondary System of Roanoke County are hereby approved, effective August 14, 1987. ADDITIONS LENGTH LABELLEVUE SUBDIVISION Route 610 (Coachman Drive) - From Route 1051 to a west cul-de-sac 0.35 Mi. Route 1055 (Coachman Circle) - From Route 1056 to Route 1060 0.19 Mi. Route 1059 (Forest Oak Drive) - From Route 1055 to a northeast cul-de-sac 0.22 Mi. Route 1060 (Summit Ridge Road) - From Route 1055 to a southwest cul-de-sac 0.79 Mi. Sincerely, Oscar K.Mabry Deputy Commissioner 2 TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY A-9887-8 ITEM NUMBER ~'"°i AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE ANOKE OCOUNTYEADMINISTRATIONNOCENTER COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE RVA. ON TUESDAY, IN ROANOKE, MEETING DATE: September 8, 1987 SUB_ J__ Agreement for Continuation of CORTRAN Service :~ f ~f COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS : ~ ~ ~.~ t~ N = ~; -' ~~ ~ J zt~ . y c2~3 - /- -fi / J ~JL~ C1 v/ .EE<'- ~L`tvA C, ~ _..-C-.. u.. ~L ,U o'rtn.,~l n.f t ./~-~.~ ~d _,t"- ~ t~z~ r 1 V .~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: the Board approved funding of $60,000 from On June 9, 1987, the increased county decal fee toSe v d e wasinc ntinuedfba~edRon service. During July and Au east s contract while an '87-88 con- monthly extensions of last Y The cost of July service was tract was being negotiated. $4,556.50; August service cost $4,906.00. ortation Negotiations on an '87U88fied tHuman Services Tr anspon uc with Mr. Curtis Andrews of rovider. Anew agree- Systems, Inc. (UHSTS), the CORTRAN service p ro osed which would permit continuation of service ment has been P p 1987 to June 30, 1988, for a maximum cost of from September 1, 45 265.00. (This figure represents the 2ovehi~leshein ouseYfor they service is used at full capacity: seven hours per day. The cost will be les erlveh hcle maximum ) service is less than the seven hour per day/p his fi ure, combined with the funds already spent for July and T g the total contract cost to $54,727.50, within August, will bring the $60,000 budget. (This does not include administrative costs.) The agreement provides that the County `Mier vehscleWO These cles to UHSTS for a fee of $200.00 per month p vehicles will be used solely to 1lnbeh cred Rt d stow the tCountyts residents. The monthly fee wi the monthly bill by monthly bill for service, thus reducing 400.00 . Another reduction in tresmonshbil bties to thel Co d tyy shifting certain administrative p ear's rate. The thereby reducing the fixed costs from last y County will assume costs associatadSWe~hngdpublSCranquir~esticThe sales and collections as well as service provided by UHSTS will be maintained at the 1986-87 level. ted FISCAL IMPACT: ~, The shifting of administrative responsibilities will have an impact on the budget of Parks and Recreation. Total costs asso- ciated with administration will be reported in a separate report in October. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board authorize the County Admin- istrator to execute the appropriate documents to continue CORTRAN service. Respectfully submitted, John R. Hubbard in a S. Lehe Assistant County Administrator Assistant County Attorney Approved (x) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred To ---------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Motion by: Lee Garrett/Bob L. No Yes Abs Johnson to approve Brittle x Garrett x Johnson x McGraw x Nickens x cc: File Debbie Pitts John Hubbard Stephen Carpenter Paul Mahoney a ~`rr~ During the months of July and August, 1987, the following economic development activities took place: 1. Activities coordinated with the Regional Partnership included participation in the following prospect visits and hosting activities: A. British prospect (auto parts) seeking 10 acres or 50,000 sq. ft. bldg. State Intl. Dept. Referral. B. Blue Chip auto parts manufacturer seeking 10 acres for new facility (150-200 employees). State Referral. C. Out of state service company seeking 14,000 sq.ft. of high profile office space. Local Referral. D. Joined Partnership during meeting with State International Director of European Office Mr. Dennis Rufin. E. Visited with Virginia Economic Development Director Hugh Keogh; Regional Manager, Bob Will; and Director of Community and Business Services; Dave Dickson at Partnership's office. 2. The following local companies were visited: A. Lancerlot Family Fitness B. Research Communications International C. Solar Control D. Dragon Chemical 3. The following local companies and individuals received a certificate of appreciation: A. Roanoke Valley Eye Center B. Mark S. Reinhart - Dentistry C. Sho Gun Japanese Restaurant D. Cave Spring Veterinary Clinic E. Metro Paints F. McCarty's Hardware G. Robert A. Craighead 4. The Economic Development Specialist completed Year II of III Year program with the Economic Development Institute at Norman, Oklahoma. Year II program objectives featured promotional aspects of community economic development. 5. As part of an annual survey of members of the Virginia Economic Development Association (VEDA), the Economic Development Division is asked to complete a survey of its program. A completed copy of the questionnaire is attached for your review. If there are questions or comments, please advise the Economic Development Division. VEDA ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM QUESTIONNAIRE Name of Organization _ _ Roanoke County Government Contact Person Brent D. Sheffler Organization 1. How is your agency funded? 100% Publicly Privately Combination (at least 5~ of each) 2. What is your 1987 budget for industrial and business development? 100,000 3. What is your 1987 advertising budget? 4,000 ~1. How many full-time professional staff members work in your agency? 2 a. Of this number, how many are 4wsiness/industrial developers? 2 b. How many are tourism development professionals? 5. How many jurisdictions are served by your organiza- tion? 1 6. What are the primary functions of your organization (please rate from 1 to 10 with 1 being "not involved" and 10 being "heavily involved")? 9 Business and Industry Retention 8 Business and Industry Recruitment ~L Industrial Park Development 7 Marketing 1 Tourist/Convention Development 1 Downtown Development 3 Financial Packaging 5 Small Business Assistance 6 Other (please describe) Export development International Trade 7. What is the population of the area served by your organization? 73,000 8. Has your organization officially adopted economic development goals, measurable objectives, and pro6rams to implement the goals and objectives? x yes no a. If no, do you plan to do so? yes no 9. Is your jurisdiction participating in the Virginia Community Certification Program? yes X no has been Certified Program The purpose of the following questions is to better understand the process of prospect inquiries becoming visits and visits becoming locations. A secondary purpose is to look at the relationship between the source of the prospect and the decision to locate. A prospect inquiry is defined as a business or industry which has definite plans to relocate or expand to an area. 10. How many prospect inquiries did you receive between 7/1/86 and 6/30/87? 76 11. What was the source of the inquiry (total should equal number in question 10)? 37 Company contacted your agency 6 You contacted the company 5 Referral from local industry 23 Magazine ad inquiry ~- VA Dept. of Econ. Dev. - VA Chamber of Commerce - Utilities Railroads 3 Other 12. How many prospects were interested in (total should equal number in question 10)? 25 Existing buildings 1 Shell buildings ~ Improved sites 5 Unimproved sites 24 Industrial or business park A prospect visit is defined as the initial visit from a business or industry representative having definite plans to relocate or to expand to an area. 13. 14. 15. How many prospects visited your area between 7/1/86 and 6/30/87? 27 What was the source of the prospect visit (total should equal number in question 13)? 16 Company contacted your agency ~_You contacted the company 3 Referral from local industry 1 Magazine ad inquiry 1 'JA Dept. of Econ. Dev. VA Chamber of Commerce Utilities Railroads ,Other RBA;o.,~.i ~w.+„~.zk;,, How many prospects were interested in (total should equal number in question 13)? 9 Existing buildings Shell buildings 9 Improved sites 2 Unimproved sites 7 Industrial or business park An active prospect is defined as a prospect who visits your area once and has a continued interest in your area. 16. 17• 18. How many active prospects did your organization work with between 7/1/86 and 6/30/87? 21 What was the source of the active prospect (total should equal number in question 16)? 11 Company contacted your agency 3 You contacted the company 3 Referral from local industry ~_Magazine ad inquiry 1 VA Dept. of Econ. Dev. VA Chamber of Commerce Utilities Railroads 2 Other Regional Partnershi p How many prospects were interested in (total should equal number in question 16)? 9 Existing buildings 0 Shell buildings £3 Improved sites ~_Unimproved sites __3__Industrial or business park 19• How many active prospects decided to locate in your community between 7/1/86 and 6/30/87? 10 20. What was the source of the prospect location (total should equal number in question 19)? _~Company contacted your agency _]`You contacted the company 2 Referral from local industry Magazine ad inquiry VA Dept. of Econ. Dev. VA Chamber of Commerce Utilities Railroads Other Regi onal Partnershi p 21. On average, how long did it take prospects to make the decision to locate in your area? 7 - 10 weeks 22. How many prospects chose: 6 Existing buildings Shell buildings ~_Improved sites Unimproved sites ~_Industrial or business park 23. How many times per year do you or a member of your staff participate in a prospect sales trip outside of your area? 2 x 4 Sites and Buildings 2a. How many industrial sites in your inventory are either publicly owned or controlled? 3 Publicly owned 31.08 Total acres Publicly controlled Total acres 2.5. How important are or could publicly owned or controlled sites be in your marketing program? Very important 26. How many publicly-owned or controlled speculative build- ings are in your area? 0 27, How important are or could publicly-owned speculative buildings be to your marketing effort? Somewhat important. Neighboring jurisdictions have spec buildings 28.. Is there a publicly owned full-service incubator building for new industry in your area? Yes x No Under Consideration Results ~~ 29. Who measures the success of your marketing efforts? x Board of Directors City Manager x County Administrator No one Other (please describe) 30. How is your success measured? x Number of new or expanded industries locating in area Number of jobs saved or created ~_ Amount of commercial/industrial capital invest- ment x Increase in the tax base due to commercial/ industrial investment Other (please describe) 5 ~' `~ ROANOKE COUNTY , ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND, AND PURPOSE .................. 1 II. ISSUES AFFECTING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN ROANOKE COUNTY 3 III. COUNTY POLICY FOR 75/25 RATIO .......................... 6 IV. TAX EQUILIBRIUM STRATEGY ............................... 9 V. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES TO IMPLEMENT 75/25 POLICY .......... 12 A. REFINE THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM ............. 13 1. Refine the Annual Work Program ......... ......... 13 2. Organizational Development of the Economic ....... 13 Development Division B. EXISTING BUSINESS EXPANSION/RETENTION ............... 14 1. Business Development ............................. 14 a. Existing Industry Visitation Program .......... 15 b. Awards and Recognition Program ................ 17 c. Industrial Assistance Program ................. 17 d. Newsletter - Economic Quarterly ............... 18 e. Signs ......................................... 18 f. Data Base I and II ............................ 19 1. Company Files .............................. 19 2. Site and Building Inventory ................ 19 3. General Community Information .............. 20 g. Export Trade Assistance ....................... 21 1. International Trade Assoc. of Westrn. Va. .. 22 2. Trade Shows ................................ 22 3. Direct Assistance ... ...................... 23 4. Discussions/Travels with Reg. & State Reps.. 23 5. Sister County Program ...................... 24 2. Nurture Small Business ........................... 25 C. BUSINESS ATTRACTION ................................. 26 1. New Business/Industry Development ................ 26 a. New Business Development Program .............. 27 b. Prospect Handling ............................. 28 c. Regional Partnership Cooperation .............. 30 1. Marketing Committee ........................ 30 2. Sites Committee ............................ 30 D. INTERNAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL ......................... 31 1. Recognition and Awareness Strategy ............... 31 a. New Signs ... ................................ 32 b. Development of~75/25 Logo ..................... 32 c. Recognition of Business in Newsletter ......... 32 2. Project Planning Review and Coordination ......... 33 a. 75/25 Comm. for Review of Maj. Proj. & Prog. .. 33 b. 75/25 Statmt. on Relevant Staff & Board Repts.. 33 i ~ i 7 b. Development of 75/25 Logo .. ............... 32 c. Recognition of Business in Newsletter ......... 32 2. Project Planning Review and Coordination ......... 33 a. 75/25 Comm. for Review of Maj. Proj. & Prog. .. 33 b. 75/25 Statmt. on Relevant Staff & Board Repts.. 34 c. Provision of Limited County Resources ......... 34 3. 75/25 Incentive Programs ......................... 30 a. Joint Ventures with Bus., Industry, & Dev. .... 35 b. County Improvements Become Matching Ingredient in Development ................................ 36 c. Intergovernmental Cooperation ................. 37 d. State & Federal Funding Programs .............. 37 Highlights of Roanoke County's Economic Development Objectives ............................................. 39 Executive Summary ...................................... 40 TABLES AND FIGURES Tables 1. Estimated Average Family Tax on Roanoke County Family of Four ...................................... 43 2. Comparison of Real Estate Valuations by Segment (Residential & Industrial Parcels - 1985) ........... 44 3. Comparison of Real Estate Valuations by Segment (Residential & Industrial Parcels - 1986 ............ 45 4. Roanoke County Tax Base Data Tax Base Changes for Constant Growth Rates .......... 46 5. Comparison of Real Estate Valuations based on Total Taxed (1986) .................................. 47 6. Comparison of Real Estate Valuations based on Total Taxed (1982) .................................. 47 7. Existing Land Use - Roanoke County .................. 48 8. Export Activity in Virginia by Industry ............. 49 9. Export Activity in Virginia by Region ............... 49 Figures 1. Four Year Development Trend ......................... 42 L- l:7 r APPENDICES Appendix A ............................................. 50 Appendix B ............................................. 51 Appendix C ............................................. 52 Appendix D ............................................. 53 Appendix E ............................................. 54 Appendix F ............................................. 55 Appendix G ............................................. 55 Appendix H ............................................. 56 L---~ r ROANOKE COUNTY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY I. INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND, AND PURPOSE Economic development is defined as the creation of wealth through the mobilization of people, money and materials to produce products or services for which a profit is made. An emerging function of local government is to influence the economic development process for the benefit of the community. Historically and traditionally, economic development was assumed to be carried out by chambers of commerce, state industrial development groups, and job training programs. Economic benefits were envisioned as being indirect results of federal urban renewal, community development, and antipoverty programs. This resulted in the lack of a direct, specific economic development strategy. Much of the same pattern existed in Roanoke County until the reorganization of the County government in 1982. There was no economic development emphasis, and staff was not assigned to carry out the functions of economic development. After reorganization, the Department of Development was tasked with carrying out economic development functions. The initial direction of the staff was aimed at visiting and inventorying the existing business and industry, identifying potential sites, and coordinating with existing economic development programs and personnel in the area. A parallel effort by the Planning, Zoning, and Grants Division in preparing an update to the County's Comprehensive Plan resulted in the 1 -b creation of a detailed information data base on land use, facilities, and public services. This information is an essential ingredient for futher economic development program formation since the economic development product is the community, and the customers are the expanding and newly based businesses. Since the basis of the economic development formation is coordinated with the ongoing planning process, it is logical to continue the coordination efforts concurrently with the Comprehensive Plan implementation, as well as with the state and federal plans and programs. Therefore, traditional planning implementation tools, i.e., zoning and capital improvement programming, can be used to implement Roanoke County's approved Economic Development Strategy. The strategy will be a plan of action for the direction of Roanoke County's economic development program. It will have long and short range implications and be oriented to performance evaluation by the County Administrator, Board of Supervisors, and citizens. This economic development strategy outlines the major thrust of existing business and business attraction activities which affect the present and future economic status of Roanoke County, Virginia. The County Government and Board of Supervisors are committed to long range planning and the development of infrastructure that will enable the County to attract economic investment and grow sensibly. A coordinated effort of planning, fiscal responsibility, and sound business principles can improve 2 L- - (, Roanoke County's financial well being in order to earn the highest credit rating possible from both Moody's and Standard & Poor's. As the County moves forward, we are increasingly aware of the need to recognize the requirements of companies already located here. When nurtured in the proper environment, these firms can prosper and expand, further contributing to the economic health of the County. II. ISSUES AFFECTING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN ROANOKE COUNTY The "issues" affecting economic development in Roanoke County are reflective of both national trends and the local economic environment. These issues include: 1. The growth of the service or non-manufacturing sector of the economy and the decline of manufacturing employment. It should be noted that historically Roanoke County benefited most from investment in the "wealth generating" industries such as manufacturing and processing because of the beneficial and indirect impact on employment in the service sector. This is still a very important factor for sound growth in Roanoke County. However, it is important to track national trends. Research shows that most new employment on a national basis will be provided by the service sectors - particularly business and professional services. Nationally, over the last fifteen years, the manufacturing sector has actually dropped in employment each year while the service sector has increased in employment. Roanoke County should expect this trend toward service sector growth to occur locally. The County has a strong manufacturing base employing almost 200 of its total work force, yet it faces declines in the numbers of those employed in the manufacturing sector. There are a number of reasons for this decline in the manufacturing work force. One reason is that companies will find new ways to automate their processes at lower costs, particularly as robotics and the computer industry becomes more refined, and will then let less efficient, more costly labor go. Another reason is due to general productivity improvements of the labor force retained. 2. The existing tax base of Roanoke County has the majority of property tax revenues from the residential property owner. (See Section IV and V for more information). Roanoke 3 L -~ County's tax base is essentially residential in nature although commercial/industrial assessed values are increasing. 3. The interrelated regional nature of the local economy in the Roanoke Valley due to location of employers/employee residence is complex. Many employers within Roanoke County employ a number of people who reside outside Roanoke County's jurisdiction and vice versa. For instance, in 1980, 60.30 of the workers residing in the Roanoke Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), (Roanoke County, City of Roanoke, City of Salem, and Botetourt County) worked in the City of Roanoke. In many cases the effects of employment and unemployment are balanced. However, Roanoke County presently benefits from the immigration of employees as other surrounding regions have higher unemployment rates providing a labor pool from which to tap (a necessary factor to attract prospects from outside the region). 4. The global networking of business and trade with the U.S. has increased dramatically during the last 30 years. Local industry can help to increase the general wealth of the community through exports of manufactured goods and professional/business services. This is because exportable products and services import money into the local economies. Furthermore, the export of services in the Roanoke economy can offset a loss in manufacturing jobs as described in item one above. Finally, Roanoke County is well located as a distribution hub for easy access to international markets through Virginia's ports and international airports. 5. The variety of "actors" that have come into the "stage" of economic development has increased in number. The Roanoke Valley has its share of economic development parties which participate in the attraction of new business and the retention of existing business and industry. 6. The competitiveness of localities and states for new industrial locations, regional offices, and other activities affecting economic development has increased. Presently, there are over 30,000 economic development entities nationally competing with one another to generate new business and retain existing business for their area. 7. There is a limited supply of available and developable land in the Roanoke Valley area to serve the needs of expanding businesses presently located in the area as well as to meet the requirements of businesses seeking to relocate in the area. This is developed further in the remaining sections of this strategy. 8. The estimated total number of persons in the Roanoke Valley Labor Force is approximately 120,000. Approximately 50,000 of these are employed in the wholesale, retail, and services sectors while approximately 20,000 are employed in 4 C"-~ the manufacturing sector. In 1982, 70.7 of Roanoke County'rs reported employment was employed in the service sector. The goods-producing sector accounted for 29.3 percent of which 18.9 percent was engaged in manufacturing. This was a higher percentage than that found in the MSA as a whole - where 75.9 was in services and 24.1°s in the goods-producing sector. Population demographics for the Roanoke Valley indicate that for the age group 19-54, females outnumber males 56,719 to 52,130 (based on the 1980 census). This factor alone may be directly responsible for attracting companies which require an employment base with finger dexterity skills. Based on a population of 72,000 with an estimated labor force of 38,880 and an unemployment rate of 4.5 percent (about 36 percent below the national average of 7.0 percent), Roanoke County, by itself, has an estimated 1,750 people available for work. The Valley's present commercial/industrial ratio suggests that the County could have 735 new wholesale, retail and service jobs and 330 new manufacturing jobs to be consistent with the area's present employment mix while significantly reducing its estimated unemployment population. 9. The general business climate in the Roanoke Valley is pro-development. However, citizens of the Roanoke Valley are often concerned about new development because of the additional burden greater numbers of people in a community place on the present infrastructure. 10. National deregulation of transportation, communications, and financial services has influenced and will continue to influence the economic climate of the Roanoke Valley. For instance, deregulation in the financial services sector has led to major banking acquisitions across the state and, in many cases, interstate. These events have resulted in a number of locally headquartered banks to become branches of more powerful banks headquartered elsewhere upon acquisition or merger. This action is good in that it offers regional services to banking customers, but it lessens the local bank's commitment to local economic development - particularly for the entrepreneur and the small business enterprise. However, small firms with some computer hardware will be able to have access to banking services offered to very large firms as electronic banking services are expanded. Deregulation also has spin-off effects. Recently there has been an increase in banking in the County economy due to locations of offices, branches, and automatic teller machines. Expansion of these banking services are expected as electronic banking, tax planning, personal property appraisals, discount brokerage, equity loans and other services become more common among branch banks. 11. Deregulation on an international scale also affects the local economy. Japan has recently deregulated their airline 5 ~-.-~ industry, the action of which is bringing new business to Virginia. On July 26, 1986, All Nippon Airways (ANA) became the only airline to provide nonstop service between Washington (Dulles) and Tokyo (Narita). The flight time for this route is a little over 13 hours. This type of service availability will enhance Roanoke County business as the County is ideally suited as a distribution hub with its network of and access to rail, highway, and air transportation. 12. The application of new technologies and continuing advances in computers, telecommunications, and medical sciences will greatly affect the success or failure for many Roanoke County businesses and industries. Technological advances in computers and telecommunications will reduce the traditional need for companies to locate at the center of their customer base. Similarly, advances in the medical sciences will have spin-off effects for many industrial processes and products, not to mention health care benefits and the resulting increases in labor productivity. These issues provide the overall scope around which Roanoke County's Economic Development Strategy (EDS) will be targeted. Specific strategies for addressing these issues will be recommended . III. COUNTY POLICY FOR 75/25 RATIO This year (1987) it became obvious that the quality of life for our residents is facing a decline. With the boom in residential construction increasing the number of parcels from 27,003 to 28,753 since 1982, and a slower pace of commercial- industrial parcels increasing from 1225 to 1349 for the same period (see Figure 1), the County is faced with three alterna- tives, only one of which is acceptable: first, alter the quantity and delivery of our services to residents, or second, increase residential property taxes to a level that would pay for these services, or third (the only acceptable alternative), increase the commercial and industrial sector to 250 of the County's taxable base. 6 -~ In terms of the cost of essential public facilities and services, residential development seldom pays its share in tax and fee revenues. For instance, a family of four living in a $65,000 home and owning two late model automobiles will pay about $955 in County taxes each year ($208 personal property; $747 real estate). By comparison, the cost to educate the family's two children will be over $3000 even after state and federal education contributions are deducted (see Table 1). In addition to education, the family will receive police and fire protection, refuse and leaf collection, access to parks and many other services. The deficit between the cost of services rendered to a family of four and the revenue received by the same family, is made up primarily by the tax revenue from commercial and industrial properties which typically produce a net gain to local government. In other words, the problem is that residential services are very costly. For every dollar paid in residential real estate taxes, the County returns substantially more in services. It is worthwhile to note that the development of townhouse and multifamily units often afford a greater cost efficiency than single family residential in terms of service delivery; specifically sewer, water and roads. Commercial and industrial property, on the other hand, costs less than single family or multifamily to the County in service dollars for every real estate tax dollar paid. The present residential/commercial-industrial ratio of 83.31$/16.69$ reflects an imbalance in the tax base ratio (see Table 3). The ratio of 75/25 would more appropriately support 7 L~'-~ the public services rendered to the respective benefactors while lessening the tax load on both residential and commercial-indus- trial parties. This is explained in more detail in section IV. The additional tax revenues generated under this ratio will help pay for the services the County offers to residents and businesses alike. The fringe benefits of this ratio are equally important. While residential growth brings new jobs in the construction, retail, local government and service sectors of the local economy, employment growth of basic industries is the essential stabalizing factor. New and expanding firms, enticed by policies consistent with achieving the 75/25 ratio, would generate new jobs for County residents, present and future, and thereby influence the leveraging balance of mixed employment. Although local industries have significantly improved the County's tax base, their perpetual support is not guaranteed. In other words, companies located in Roanoke County could make a decision to relocate outside of the area and abandon their entire operation. Similarly, unless an industry changes with the times, its eventual decline is almost certain. With the uncertainty of future revenue generation, the future development of business and industry will be a major factor in the financial stability of the County. Encouraging the development of business and industries which are consistent with Roanoke County's objectives can achieve two major goals: provide employment opportunities for the County's work force, and create a larger tax base, producing revenues which can pay for required services and potentially offsetting 8 L -~ . the tax load on residential property owners. When the County is faced with industrial and commercial growth accompanied by residential growth, the level of government services rendered are required to increase correspondingly. The level of these services is determined by the number of new residents, the relative size of new industrial and commercial valuations, the level and quality of government and public services provided and many other factors. In general, property owners share the costs of servi.~es. The Board has adopted the 75/25 ratio as a target goal. Roanoke County's policy is to significantly approach a target ratio of 80/20 by 1990 and 75/25 by the year 2000. Since the recognition of the need to build upon the commercial/industrial tax base in 1985, the County has made a small step toward approaching 75/25. In 1985, the residential to commercial/industrial ratio was 83.41/16.59. The present ratio, as mentioned earlier, is 83.31/16.69. (Compare Tables 2 and 3). This information suggests that the County is moving in the proper direction, but at the present rate, the County will not achieve 75/25 until the middle of the twenty-first century. In order to approach 75/25 by the year 2000 the commercial/industrial growth must be 2.5 to 3.0 times the present rate (see Table 4). The Board has established a working committee to coordinate the Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Plan, Zoning Map (and other official maps) to get the language and material coordinated. IV. TAX EQUILIBRIUM STRATEGY Presently, 1,349 commercial and industrial parcels of Roanoke County's 31,276 taxable parcels provide only 15.930 of 9 .._ -b the total assessed value (see Table 5). 1~reviously, in 1982, only 12.798 of the total assessed value was obtained from the commercial and industrial tax base (see Table 6). This substantial increase indicates that the goal to raise the commercial/industrial mix by 1990 to 20 percent of the total assessed value is approachable. Thus, there is a need to obtain more commercial and industrial parcels to reach approximately nine percent of the total parcels from the present five percent, or increase the assessed value,~or a mixture of both. In order to increase the number of commercial and industrial parcels from the present five percent to the objective nine or ten percent, it is important to recognize that the bulk of the new commercial and industrial parcels will likely arise from the infilling of vacant parcels where services are available and from the conversion of residential land to commercial or industrial use where price and market demand forces are in effect (i.e. along major transportation corridors) etc. Approximately 80 percent, or 126,943 acres, of Roanoke County's total area of 158,900 acres is either vacant or used for agricultural purposes. Approximately 64,870 acres, or 51% of total vacant or agricultural land in Roanoke County, are topographically feasible (0 - 20% slope) for development (for purposes of clarification, please note that developers prefer a slope of 0 - 10$). The remaining 62,073 acres (49°s) are located in either flood hazard areas or in regions with slopes greater than 20 percent. Table 7 designates the amounts of vacant land or agricultural land according to slope classification. 10 It is important to note that vacant or agricultural land, ~ which is topographically feasible for development, may not always be suitable for development. Ownership, land values, existing public infrastructure, and natural environmental characteristics play key roles in enhancing or detracting from the development of a property. In addition, since agricultural land represents a significant portion of the County's total area, and since the region's employment base consists of those whose livelihood depend upon agriculturally based activities, it is recommended that a study be done to identify the approximate number of acres used for agricultural purposes. This information can suggest the need for the retention of agriculturally based land and may suggest the economical impact of the retention of agriculturally based jobs. Given that the present amount of developable vacant or agricultural land within Roanoke County is approximately 65,000 acres, we can make future projections. In the five year period ending in 1983, Roanoke County has experienced growth which consumed approximately 4920 acres of forest or agricultural land. Assuming a repetition of this growth for every subsequent five year period, Roanoke County will have no developable forest or agricultural land within 65 - 70 years. These figures indicate a need for long range planning through the comprehensive plan in areas which address economic development issues. The major thrust of a coordinated program between economic development and long range comprehensive planning is two-fold. One is to determine the projected growth distribution between residential and commercial/industrial parcels. The other is to 11 ~~b develop tools to ensure that a balanced mix between residential and commercial/industrial parcels is generated. One method to determime a proper residential to commercial mix is through a fiscal impact analysis. A formal fiscal impact analysis would evaluate the projection of the public costs and revenues associated with residential or nonresidential growth. The objective is to determine periods when public costs may approach expected revenues. The costs of services to residences and the cost of services to business and industry should be broken down to their respective sectors. There is a need to determine what overall effect 75/25 may have if achieved; will taxes decrease and how much of a decrease could be expected assuming that service levels remain constant, or will services increase while the present tax rate remains stable, and if so, how much of a service increase could be expected? This information reveals the need for continual analysis, survey and implementation of the proper taxable parcel mix in order to attract new industry with a very favorable tax structure, retain existing industry by not overburdening them with increasing taxes, and simultaneously lighten the load on residents without creating industrial congestion. A significant staff effort will be devoted to accomplishing this goal during 1988 (as described in Section V). V. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES TO IMPLEMENT THE 75/25 POLICY The establishment of goals and the development of objectives will focus Roanoke County's economic development efforts for 1987. This section comprises the "heart" of the Economic 12 Development Strategy. r The following are suggested goals and objectives: A. REFINE THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM Roanoke County's economic development program began in 1981. A number of activities have occured since that time. The assignment of economic development functions to the Department of Development, and the resulting program development have been positive steps in establishing Roanoke County's efforts. Objective 1 = Refine the Annual Work Program: The annual work program for Economic Development is being refined on an ongoing basis. Projects relating to the retention of the County's existing business and industry, the identification of industrial sites, and business development efforts through a newsletter have been accomplished. The continuance of these activities and the preparation of other work elements will be designed as part of the budget process and the implementation of the Economic Development Strategy. Objective 2 _ Organizational Development of the Economic Development Division: September, 1985 marked the first assignment of a full time Economic Development Specialist in the Economic Development Division. This person carries out present economic development programs under the Assistant County Administrator of Community Development and implements new programs as needed. The Assistant County Administrator of Community Development will continue to work on economic development programs and projects as required. Further L -to 13 L"-~ training of the staff through state-Sponsored seminars and formal education at the Economic Development Institute at the University of Oklahoma is recommended. In addition to the direct staff functions, there are correlative staff functions that serve to supplement the economic development activities of this division. Examples include the Assistant County Administrator for Public Facilities and the Community Development Review Coordinator who both work with the development of sewer, water, roads and community facilities. B. EXISTING BUSINESS EXPANSION/RETENTION Objective 1 - Business Development: Under our existing program, business development is our priority activity as we recognize the importance of developed and consistent interaction with the business community. As the County moves forward, we are increasingly aware of the need to recognize the requirements of companies already located here. The basic philosophy of business development is to meet and get to know the local business people and to develop good rapport. Its mission is to stimulate action in the working community by gaining their confidence to work with the government while allowing for the mutual exchange of information of general needs, concerns and attitudes. Its goal is to maximize the number of business expansions in Roanoke County, and to minimize closures, failures or transfers of businesses presently located in the County. 14 c -~% Activities are designed to help local firms with expansions, to develop new ways of dealing with problems of mutual concern, and to adapt to changing conditions. These activities are outlined in the following discussion. The fruit of Roanoke County's labors in business development are multiplied many times. Research has shown that retention of local business and industry is vital to the health of the community. Not only are jobs retained, but satisfied business representatives are a community's best spokesmen when attracting outside investors and business. Similarly, when prospects visit the Roanoke Valley, they often request a confidential meeting with other local businessmen. Local business and industry which have had positive relations with Roanoke County Government are likely to communicate an attitude attractive to business and industry. Business development is also geared to recognizing professional development activities through an awards and recognition program for "Building A Better Roanoke County" as well as "Our Thanks" signs placed at developing sites. a. Existing Industry Visitation Program: In late 1983, the economic development staff initiated a visitation program with the County's existing business and industry. This program was multipurposed: it sought to develop a "face-to-face" dialogue between local government and business, create an understanding of the local economy, and determine issues and problems for resolution. In some instances, expansion plans were discovered and assistance 15 ~~ given to the company to enable theserplans to become a reality. Because of the large number of individual business and industry in Roanoke County, business and industry will be visited on a priority basis. The purpose of establishing a priority system is to visit those companies which are theoretically the most influential in contributing to or taking from the economic well being of the community. The following is the suggested order of priority for visitation purposes: 1. Those companies indicating expansion or relocation intentions. Since these companies represent the most critical element for local expansion and retention these companies are given priority. In order to assist in meeting the goal of increasing the County's commercial/industrial base, it is imperative to retain our present industry and assist in their expansion plans. The prospects which come to the County often do not tell their hometown community that they plan expansion or relocation. For this reason if the County becomes aware of any local company planning an expansion or relocation it is in the County's interest to respond as quickly as possible. 2. Manufacturers, as listed in the Virginia Industrial Directory. These companies are often major employers and consist of basic industry. The companies represent diversified products and provide for a stable local economy by promoting a diversified manufacturing base where no one industry dominates the community. 3. Large service companies (employing over 100 people) and other manufacturers. These companies represent a growing sector of the U.S. economy and further provide for the County's economic well being. 4. Small businesses showing development potential. These businesses represent the most significant job generating sectors of the economy {Researchers at MIT's Brookins Institution found that slightly more than 50 percent of all new jobs between 1969 and 1980 were created by independent small entrepreneurs. They also discovered that 264 percent of net employment change between the years 1980-82 occurred through small independent 16 (~ -(~ concerns). r 5. Other companies, such as new businesses, retail establishments, professional businesses and general business and industry will be visited as the opportunities presents themselves. b. Awards and Recognition Program: A framed Economic Development Certificate of Appreciation, signed by the Board of Supervisors' Chairman, is awarded to businesses and industries which make significant contributions to local economic development. Significant contributions to economic development are often in the form of major improvements to existing facilities or operations, expanding business or industry, and new business or industry. Following the completion of new business or industry, the County staff will assist a company with its dedication or opening-day activities, and will arrange to have a Board member formally present the Certificate of Appreciation. Another form of recognition being developed at this time is recognition of firms having been in Roanoke County for 10 to 25, 50 or 75 years. This program suggests that one company's continued service represents a signifigant contribution to economic development in Roanoke County. c. Industrial Assistance Program: When an industry needs assistance, the economic development staff should be ready to provide that assistance. Many small firms and a few large ones, for example, are unfamiliar with the complicated process of zoning, industrial development bonds, and local, state, and 17 r--~ federal regulations. r This assistance is multi-faceted. Assistance will be provided to expedite the investigation and solution of prob- lems under Roanoke County's control which reduce the ability of businesses to operate as efficiently as they would other- wise. The Economic Development Specialist also facilitates the exchange of information. Often the staff provides in- formation on special services available to local business. d. Newsletter = Economic Quarterly: Public awareness of Roanoke County's economic develop- ment program has been enhanced through the publication of a quarterly newsletter since 1984. This effort resulted in the distribution of over 5000 newsletters to local citizens, businesses, and industrial representatives. The newsletter focuses on program efforts and accomplishments, and creates a forum for the delivery of information and resources that aid in the development of the local economy. It is one visible- aspect of the County's business development program. Due to budget constraints, the Economic Quarterly newsletter was temporarily discontinued after the Autumn 1986 edition, and will resume publication and distribution at the earliest possibility. In the meantime, press releases will be issued to local media concerns as the opportunity arises to recognize the accomplishments of the County's business and industrial community. e. Signs: The existing business expansion program was further developed as the Board of Supervisors established a 18 ~~~ L._ 1 recognition program for new or expanding business and industry. Under this program, a four-foot by four-foot (4' x 4') "Thank You" sign is placed on the construction site for a period of 60 to 90 days while new construction is taking place. f. Data Base I and II: The preparation of the Comprehensive Plan and the increased activity of the Economic Development Division have generated information that is useful in the formation of a data base to aid development activities. Daily, various offices in the County receive inquiries pertaining to land availability, zoning, and utility locations. The existence of a central data base available to different offices, the economic development staff, and other economic developers will enhance future development opportunities by providing accurate, timely information. 1. Company Files: An inventory of many active companies in Roanoke County is kept and updated as news articles, company profiles, product information, and other pertinent data are obtained. 2. Site and Building Inventory: In order to aid professionals seeking timely and accurate information on future development areas, an inventory of site and building information is maintained. This information is available to different economic development offices, regional and state representatives, and other development agencies such as the Fantus Company. 19 y. L- Recently, the Virginia Department ofrEconomic Development established a computer data base to enable them to inventory sites and buildings across Virginia. Roanoke's Dominion Bank has also set up a data base for inventorying sites and buildings in their regional area. Roanoke County has been requested to submit only our best and most ready sites and buildings to both entities for their files. The Fifth Planning District Commission and the County Planning Department are jointly preparing a data base called the Geographic Information System (GIS) which can act as an aid for immediate retrieval of information. The data base will consist of approximately 35 items of information on each parcel of land in Roanoke County including zoning, water and sewer availability, and acreage. The completion and implementation of this (GIS) system will greatly enhance the economic development efforts of the County. 3. General Community Information: The economic development division also maintains a data base of general community information, demographics and statistics of local economic factors. One brochure, prepared by the staff, serves a general yet very important function for information distribution. This brochure is the "Community Data Profile," often reviewed by prospective individuals and companies. Publication of this brochure for 1986 was 2000 copies. It is recommended that the general data base for community information be updated annually and include a comprehensive summary of relevant economic development data. 20 6 . ~~ ~ Export Trade Assistance: r This program is established to provide export trade assistance to growing companies either presently exporting or looking into the possibilities of exporting. According to a 1986 business survey conducted by Price Waterhouse, 8,000 firms in Virginia indicated that 17 percent of the firms were interested in exporting their products or services and an additional 6 percent are now exporting. Table 8 shows a breakdown of the industries responding to the survey and their respective interest in export activity. Manufacturers and wholesalers showed the highest interest in developing an export market, yet the service sector, while showing less interest as a percent of the service sector group, was the largest group to respond. This information suggests that a there are a number of manufacturers, wholesalers and service companies in the Roanoke Valley looking to export their goods and services. However, one indicator of economic weakness is the lack of interest of a region to export as compared with other regions. Table 9 shows the regional breakdown of export activity and interest of Virginia small businesses. Only 5 percent of the businesses in the Southwest region of Virginia export their products and only an additional 10 percent of the businesses are interested in exporting. In other words, the Southwest region, of which Roanoke County is part, trails the other regions of Virginia for export activity as well as interest for future exporting. This 21 ;a C~ suggests the need to encourage export opportunities and to develop a community awareness of foreign markets. The goal of the export assistance program is to develop stable export activity locally for the balance of overall financial growth and wealth generation. This foreign investment can be an important source of economic development for Roanoke County and can act as a balancing lever during economic fluctuations. 1. International Trade Association of Western Virginia: Formerly the Roanoke Valley World Trade Club, the International Trade Association of Western Virginia is a local resource to foster the development of world trade in western Virginia. Frequent meetings of its active members take place locally and regionally for the effective exchange of international trade ideas and understanding. Roanoke County has a corporate membership (renewed annually) which allows any County representative to participate. The County economic development division strongly encourages local business representatives to become members and to participate in the association's activities. 2. Trade Shows: In order to take advantage of emerging trends in trade and investment abroad, an in-depth understanding of opportunities involved should be developed. Trade shows assist in gaining understanding of opportunities abroad and can act as a mechanism to display goods and services from the Roanoke Valley. During 1985, Roanoke County participated in the 37th 22 ~~ Annual Virginia Conference on World Trade in Williamsburg, Virginia. The economic development staff participated in the event to help promote the Roanoke Valley as one area which has many fine companies with exportable products. An equally recognized purpose of the County's participation was to promote the Valley's capability of exporting goods through its distribution, transportation, and economic environment. The conference resulted in a positive mutual exchange of information which will ultimately provide added incentives to do business with local companies. The economic development staff also participated in the 38th Annual Virginia Conference on World Trade in Richmond, Virginia and plans to participate in future conferences. 3. Direct Assistance: Direct assistance is provided to firms seeking guidance in the export process. Firms indicating an interest in trade are asked to complete a questionnaire which requests the company to describe their present international exposure and effort. The company is then forwarded trade leads for possible product market expansion. Firms which have products or services to export are provided with information and references to launch an export campaign. 4. Discussions/Travels with Regional and State Representatives: Specific assistance is provided by state officials when the need arises. Companies can request this assistance and every effort will be made to arrange for a meeting or meetings to take place between a state representative and 23 .. >Z'a ~! the local company. Occasionally, regional and state officials visit international trade shows and market local companies and products abroad. This effort is further enhanced when local corporate managers jointly participate with the regional and state representatives. 5. Sister County Program: April, 1986 marked the initial staff request to develop a sister relationship for economic development purposes. The basic concept of this relationship is to develop local economic trade and public relations with a community of another country which has like interests, population, economies, or other characteristics where there can be mutual benefits for both communities. The objective of a sister relationship from an economic standpoint is to encourage local businesses and industries to grow beyond the scope of the immediate region in order to bring in financial and capital strength from other states and abroad. From a public standpoint, a sister relationship can assist in the promotion of world peace through intercultural exchanges and cross-communications. An active search for a sister community is in progress. It is recommended that during the fiscal year 1987-1988, Roanoke County become part of the Sister Cities International for active assistance in locating a compatible sister community. Furthermore it is recommended that during Roanoke County's sesquicentennial (1988), efforts be made to 24 increase public awareness of the County's search for a C~~ Sister Community. Objective 2 _ Nurture Small Business: During 1981 and 1982, small business created all of the 984,000 net new jobs generated in the American economy. Roanoke County followed this trend in 1984 and made siginificant efforts to make it easier and simpler for small businesses to get started. Clarifications in zoning permitting policies, and certificates of occupancy in the development review area spearheaded the County's efforts. A file of vacant, existing buildings, and available commercial sites was created and utilized for inquiries about locating in the County. Small businesses have many needs for management assistance, financing, and access to new markets. The economic development staffs of Roanoke County, Roanoke City, and the Regional Partnership have co-sponsored local seminars since November 1984 to provide information on the process of export trade and the programs available through the Virginia Division of Economic Development and the Virginia Port Authority at Hampton Roads. Additionally, increased coordination with local colleges and universities is needed to increase educational involvemant in resolving some of the private sector's management and technical training needs. The staff will seek to identify public financing available through the Virginia Small Business Financing Authority and the local Western Development Company. These 25 ..,.~ ~_~ ,~^ sources combined with local lending institutions are valuable financial resources for any small businessman. C. BUSINESS ATTRACTION Objective 1 _ New Business/Industry Development: This objective for new business or new industry marshals the public resources of Roanoke County to adequately market the area for further development. Of . paramount importance is the identification of available sites for business and industry that possess the following characteristics: a. Available, marketable sites at a known price per acre. b. Adequate water and sewer service at the site. c. Sufficient access to road and rail (as needed) transportation modes. d. Properly zoned land. During 1981, the Salem-Roanoke County Chamber of Commerce identified 61 potential industrial sites in Roanoke County. Currently, less than 20 of these sites meet the above four criteria. The challenge for the future is to further refine this industrial site list and expand the number of "ready-to-go" sites. This action will place Roanoke County in a better position to respond to prospect inquiries and further meet the goal of creating a healthy, viable, and diverse economy. The following actions should be taken to prepare sites for development: 1. Identify certain sites which offer the most promising develpment potential for particular targeted businesses and industries. 2. Clarify ownership of property and clarify options on property if any. Often there are vague options on 26 a property which can hold up the development process. If the property is County owned, obtain survey and plat of the property in its entirety. If the property is not County owned, request that a survey be done. 3. Obtain engineering services to have utility plans ready to go. Often a prospect who shows interest in a site desires that the property have utilities within six months in order to meet his objectives. By requesting the bid for and obtaining the plans for water, sewer and road infrastructure, the time factor is greatly reduced. If facilities have to be designed regardless of the type of user, this should be initiated. This process can easily take two to four months on its own. 4. Identify technical questions of the industrial user. For instance, identify the quality (including chemical content), capacity, and flow of domestic water. Determine who pays for what prior to option agreement or sales agreement. For instance, if a private property is avaialable for industrial use and is for sale at a certain price per acre, will commissions be paid to real estate agents out of sale proceeds? Does the owner anticipate this? Is a finder's fee to be paid? Verify zoning, site size and grading requirements. 5. Assure that telephone, electrical and gas utilities are available or can be installed. 6. Although our present administration is not geared to unique situations, the County should make provisions to allow for grading permits to be issued prior to building permit issuance in order to prepare a site for development. 7. Soil tests should be done to describe specific site characteristics. a. New Business Development Program The economic development staff assists individuals and businesses as a broker of information in the development process. The staff assists companies in the planning, zoning, and permit process in order to minimize the complexity of the development process and avoid any undue delay. This assistance includes brochure distribution on "Community Data Profiles", "Opening a Business", and "Site Plan Procedures", as well as distribution of guides to financial resources. Ongoing assistance is provided to companies relocating to Roanoke County to make the transition as smooth as possible. 27 -~ r b. Prospect Handling: Companies seeking to locate or relocate in Roanoke County are provided assistance and information. The purpose of this program is to help companies make an informed decision to come to the Roanoke Valley while presenting Roanoke County's strengths as an ideal place to do business. Its goal is to attract and establish companies which positively develop the economic stability of the locality for the creation of wealth and a higher standard of living. The process of assistance given to companies seeking to locate or relocate in Roanoke County often occurs in the following order: 1. Initial Inquiry 2. Site Location and Building Location Assistance 3. Zoning Change Assistance 4. Finance Assistance 5. Follow-up Initial inquiries generally occur through state, regional and local referrals, advertising leads, corporate cold calls and letters of introduction. When the inquiry is through the state, regional or local economic development representatives, it is often in the form of a phone call. The request of these inquiries generally requires a meeting with the prospect within a few days at the site or building of interest. When the inquiry is through an advertising lead, a corporate call, or a letter of introduction, the need for information is immediate, but there is often at least a week notice for making site and building inspections with the prospect. 28 >. ;~ - ~ .~ . Although not normally provided }~y prospective business and industry, the following points should be considered when establishing new business and industry in Roanoke County to enhance economic stability with commercial/industrial growth: 1. The amount of business services required by the industry. Services required by the industry could spur new growth for local businesses and often bring in more industry from outside. 2. The capital investment (i.e. the industry's facilities and equipment) in proportion to the number of employees required. For example, an oil refinery would have few employees and high capital investment. Companies which have high capital investment are desireable in that they increase the tax base, are generally quality oriented in their building standards, and locate with intentions of permanency. 3. The nature of the labor force employed (skilled or unskilled). The compatability of the industry's labor requirements with Roanoke County's labor supply could make the difference between a satisfied industry with high productivity, and a disappointed industry recruiting from outside the area with continued unemployment for some residents. 4. Is the industry traffic intensive? Companies which generate heavy traffic may overburden the present highway infrastructure. It is important to consider peak hours of operation and how that would affect the community's present traffic conditions. 5. What is the wage structure? Companies which have high pay scales will allow for more local retail purchases and upper scale products to be purchased by their employees than if the company pays minimum wage. By the same standard, it is important to note if the company generally hires full- time employees versus part-time employees, and whether the company provides full benefits versus no benefits. 6. Is the prospective company leaving a community because of other competitors in that community? It may be that the prospect may locate in Roanoke County only to leave soon thereafter because a competitor makes the same decision. When we ask ourselves what do we want to be 25 years from now, these types of questions must be asked. An active 29 L- -~~ pursuit of companies and industries which meet the target match of the County's present and desireable mix should be initiated and maintained. c. Regional Partnershi Cooperation: The economic development staff participates in both the marketing committee and the sites committee to coordinate Roanoke County's activities with the Regional Partnership's activities in the respective areas of marketing and site information. Cooperation in these areas provides for the fostering of new business development through team efforts of promotion with similar goals and objectives. Our joint efforts provide for added strength in the overall framework of information processing and prospect handling. 1. Marketing Committee: Participation in the Regional Partnership's Marketing Committee includes image survey development and implementation, promotional program development and strategy, and advertising coordination. Promotional efforts include evaluating the most cost effective advertising program using the profession's most visible tools such as FIXED INCOME JOURNAL, BUSINESS FACILITIES, and PLANTS, SITES & PARKS magazines. Often, participation is extended to include planning for local business meetings as well as for visits of foreign prospects. 2. Sites Committee: Participation in the Regional Partnership's Sites Committee includes evaluation of the Valley's preparedness in site availability. One topic recently addressed is the 30 C~~ ~~ Valley-wide problem of requiring industry to commit to buying a particular site before certain utilities are extended. It was shown that areas which have maintained an ample supply of marketable sites, with certain amenities such as sewer and water, have historically been the most successful in attracting new business. The Regional Partnership Executive Committee then ' resolved to encourage the local governments of the Roanoke Valley to work to develop utility extension policies and to promote a program to evaluate and rank potential industrial sites while considering the annual capital budget for ongoing site improvements. A second resolution was made to encourage local governments to further investigate and establish a shell building program thereby adding competitive advantages to attract and keep prospects. Participation in the Sites Committee of the Regional Partnership is consistent with and complementary to Objective 1 - New Business/Industry Development of the Business Attraction goal. D. INTERNAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL Objective 1 _ Recognition and Awareness Strategy: As Roanoke County seeks to implement the economic development programs, it is necessary to ensure that Roanoke County Department Heads and County Staff realize that 75/25 is a goal and requires coordination of our efforts. In addition, the citizens of Roanoke County should be aware of the objectives of 75/25 policy as a function of economic 31 ~~ -t stability for the County. The following forms of information distribution will be used: a. New Signs: New Signs suggesting "OUR THANKS FOR MEETING THE NEEDS OF 75/25" should be made for use at construction sites of new industrial or commercial development. This statement will help promote the concept of 75/25 by showing that the need is for more commercial and industrial growth and will generate interest among those unfamiliar with 75/25. The present signs displaying "OUR THANKS FOR BUILDING A BETTER ROANOKE COUNTY" are also good positive statements to promote growth in the County and should continue to be used upon short supply of the new signs. b. Development of 75/25 Logo: A logo should be developed to visually represent the concept of 75/25. This logo should graphically display residential and commercial/industrial structures or composition using 75/25 as an ideal situation or as a balance for stability. c. Recognition of Business in Newsletter: In order to build interest and a sense of achievement for local business growth and expansion, companies are recognized in the Economic Quarterly for their contributions to economic development. This recognition should now include statements about the significance that a new or expanding business or industry has on contributing to making the goal of 75/25 a reality. Not only will this give companies a sense of achievement and acceptance in Roanoke 32 L County, but it will also encourage community support to achieve community goals. Objective 2 = Project Planning Review and Coordination: Of particular importance for the success of any economic development project is for interdepartmental review and coordination. This objective calls for consistent efforts on behalf of various departments in Roanoke County for project planning review and coordination in order to ensure the success of economic development projects. a. Use of the 75/25 Committee for Review of Major Projects and Programs: The 75/25 Committee was established by the Board of Supervisors upon the adoption of the 75/25 policy. Its members include the Chairman of the Planning Commission, the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors, the County Administrator, the Assistant County Administrator of Community Development, the Planning Director and the Economic Development Specialist. The purpose of the committee is to coordinate the Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Plan, Zoning Map (and other maps) to get the language and material coordinated. This committee should also address issues of joint concern such as the following: 1. Industrial park development and the Comprehensive Plan 2. Short term requirements for meeting needs of local business and industry such as rezoning for an expanding industry or for an industry which has just had a fire. 3. Long term planning for meeting tomorrow's development projects. b. 75/25 Statement on Relevant Staff and Board Reports: Staff and Board reports which are consistent with or 33 'ti I~ which consider issues related to ther75/25 concept should include statements about the matter. This will allow for immediate recognition of how a program or project will assist with meeting the goal of 75/25, and may, in some cases, show how a project is inconsistent with meeting the 75/25 objectives. Care must be taken with respect to rezoning staff reports to not give the implication of "fiscal zoning." c. Provision of Limited County Services: Roanoke County should make every effort to make economic growth occur by effectively using the services available. Future extensions of water and sewer services should consider the short and long term economic impact prior to providing the service. Similarly, since Roanoke County's transportation network greatly affects the industrial base, the six year road plan should consider where growth is likely to occur, and should also anticipate how our industrial/commercial base can be strengthened, further leading to the achievement of 75/25. Finally, efforts of the planning division should include coordinating the Capital Improvements Program, the Comprehensive Plan and zoning. Efforts should be made by each division to use the tools of their division to achieve a 75/25 environment in the County. Objective 3 = 75/25 Incentive Programs: The incentives offered commercial and industrial businesses will help in bringing about a balance in the County's economic base. These incentives are visible tools 34 L --[~ for growth and are intended to accom~date expansions of existing industries as well as to attract new business from outside the area. a. Joint Ventures with Business, Industry, and Developers: Joint Ventures between Roanoke County Government and local business, industry and development firms can make the difference between a project's becoming a reality and whether or not a good project gets beyond the conceptualization stage. Roanoke County entered into a quasi-joint venture with a local company for the first time during 1986 in an effort to promote economic development. This project consists of approximately fifteen acres of vacant, level land adjacent to the Corrugated Container Corporation in Southwest Roanoke County. The company had first discussed development of the site during 1984, but because of cost constraints to privately develop the property by extending water and sewer and providing industrial access, the project lingered. When two local companies seeking to expand showed strong interest in the site, Roanoke County felt that development of the site should take place and considered taking the risk of that development. Through negotiation with the landowners, the County entered into a contractual agreement to make water, sewer and road improvements to the site. At the time of this writing, it is under development. Roanoke County should continue to explore joint venture possibilities and should expect to participate in projects 35 ~'V of a larger scale in the future. The County will evaluate each proposed project individually toydetermine how it may assist in building the commercial-industrial base of the community while maintaining quality control standards to enhance the quality of life in the area. In other words, the decision of the County to participate on a project will be based upon a number of factors including, but not limited to, the tax base generated, the number of new employees expected, the skill level of the employees to be hired, the number of employees and companies retained, the quality of and the aesthetics of the project, and the overall need of the project. b. Count Improvements Become Matching Ingredient in Development• In all development cases, the provision of water and sewer utilities as well as industrial road access are the necessary ingredients for providing a buildable site. Often, companies looking at Roanoke County as a place to locate-their business do not have the time nor the patience to purchase a site and hope that during the following year or two, utilities will be extended to the site. One development alternative is to work with the company and determine their requirements as well as evaluate what they have to offer Roanoke County such as their anticipated capital investment, the number of employees expected to be employed full time, and the quality or image of their company. It may be that improving a distant site in order to entice a large quality oriented company to locate in 36 -~o Roanoke County is a wise decision. Not only could this action encourage the company to locate in the County, but it could also serve as a catalyst for growth along the route of extended improvements. c. Intergovernmental Cooperation:- Intergovernmental cooperation plays an important function in Valley-wide economic development. Ir. general, each jurisdiction of the Roanoke Valley affects each other as employees, businesses, and services of each draw upon and contribute to one another. For example, an industrial project in one jurisdiction will affect the retail sales of another jurisdiction. Presently, Roanoke County is evaluating the costs and the benefits of joining the Town of Vinton in their efforts to develop a 100+ acre tract in Southeast County for industrial purposes. Similarly, Roanoke County is actively pursuing the establishment of a 70 acre industrial tract which falls in both Roanoke County and Botetourt County in the Hollins area. Finally, one area of potential intergovernmental cooperation for the future concerns the Community Certification Program and the ability to effectively meet the requirements of the program for the benefit of those involved. These intergovernmental efforts should be continued and additional efforts should be encouraged. d. State and Federal Funding Programs: In the past, state and federal funding programs have been an important resource for financing industrial 37 L ~~ development projects. During 1986, these programs were required to make many changes - particularly to cut back the available resources thus making it more difficult to obtain the necessary financing. These limited resources are still a vital tool in providing incentives for expansions, new business, and other capital improvements. However as the federal dollar continues to shrink, the County must: become more participative rather than facilitative in real estate development projects. Small companies usually seek debt and equity financing to develop their business while large companies usually borrow from banks with which they have good relationships. In order to assist with future financial needs of small to medium companies, the County should determine new sources for borrowed funds and venture capital, and should document sources of and certain performance characteristics of debt and equity financing. 38 ~~ Highlights of Roanoke County's Economic Development Objectives 1. Promote the economic health and expansiron of existing local businesses and industries. 2. Attract businesses and industries that provide job opportunities for the County's work force. 3. Encourage the development of businesses and industries which add economic stability and broaden the County's tax base. 4. Encourage and promote the development of industries which do not significantly contribute to environmental degradation. 5. Develop utility extension policies for increaing the supply of available, developable, and marketable sites. 6. Conduct a formal fiscal impact analysis and evaluate the projection of the public costs and revenues associated with residential and nonresidential growth. 7. Conduct an analysis and survey of the proper taxable parcel mix in order to attract new industry with a favorable tax structure, retain existing industry by not overburdening them with increasing taxes, while simultaneously lightening the tax load on residents without creating industrial congestion. 8. Promote the orderly growth and development of Roanoke County through a continuous process of comprehensive physical, economic and fiscal planning. 9. Determine the community's strengths and build on competitive advantages that support business investment and create wealth. 10. Encourage and promote the development of industrial parks including but not limited to public/private joint ventures and partnership agreements. 11. Encourage County staff to include statements of impact on 75/25 within relevant staff and board reports. 12. Assist with the development of a specific regional business and industry targeting strategy. 13. Encourage the retention of farmland and the expansion of agricultural production and service interprises. 39 ~'~o EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The economic development strategy has two major programs. One program concerns existing business expansion and retention while the other concerns business attraction. The program::; are established to assist in meeting the County goal of 75/25 residential/commercial-industrial (tax base revenue balance) from the present ratio of 84/16. This strategy suggests that this should take place through a continuous process of comprehensive physical, economic and fiscal planning. Under our economic development strategy, existing business expansion and retention is our priority activity as we recognize the importance of developed and consistent interaction with the business community. The basic philosophy of business expansion and retention is to meet and get to know local business people and develop good rapport. Its goal is to stimulate action in the working community by gaining their confidence to work with the government while allowing for the mutual exchange of information of general needs, concerns and attitudes. Business expansion and retention is geared to recognizing professional development activities through an awards and recognition program. Included in this program is export trade assistance and small business development. Following business expansion and retention is business attraction where those companies seeking to locate or relocate in Roanoke County are provided assitance and information. Its purpose is :to help companies make the "right" decision to come to the Roanoke Valley while presenting Roanoke County's strengths as an ideal place to do business. Its goal is to attract and establish companies which positively develop the economic stability of the locality for the creation of wealth and a higher standard of living. The following actions will be taken during FY 87-88: ACTION l: Achieve the improvements to and the development of at least one property consisting of a minimum of 25 acres for commercial/industrial purposes as outlined in the economic development strategy. ACTION 2: Recognize local business and industry as follows: a. Send 50 "Welcome" letters to qualifying new businesses including retail establishments. b. Award Certificates of Appreciation to: - 15 industries which are new, expanding, or observing a 10th, 25th, or 50th anniversary. 40 L- -~ ACTION 2b continued: r - 10 individuals assisting or promoting the economic development efforts of Roanoke County. - 50 new businesses including retail establishments. c. Visit 50 local businesses and industries. ACTION 3: Produce Brochures, Newsletters and Advertisements as follows: a. Create a marketing brochure of the Southwest Industrial Park. b. Create a marketing brochure for new industrial park. c. Update and publish 2000 copies of Community Data Profile d. Publish two page "mailer" as a revised format of the Economic Quarterly newsletter. e. Advertise in magazines which cater to business and industry relocation decision makers. ACTION 4: Update site information on the 10 most ready-to-go sites, the information of which will be forwarded to appropriate state and regional economic development groups. ACTION 5: Summarize quarterly development activity and format semi-monthly economic development reports. ACTION 6: Encourage and assist 10 local businesses to actively pursue international trade (export). This action will be suplemented by participation in the Annual Virginia World Trade Conference as well as participation in the Western Virginia International Trade Association. ACTION 7: Contact area commercial realtors and obtain building and site information on available properties in the County. ACTION 8: Create committee for Sister County Program and locate compatible sister community. ACTION 9: Produce four "Thank-You" signs which include 75/25 logo for use as a promotional tool. ACTION 10: Participate in Year II Economic Development Institute at Norman, Oklahoma August, 1987 41 L- -.~ FIGURE 1 FOUR YEAR DEVELOPMENT TREND ~ ~ ~ , , ~ i ~ ~ 28,800_ ~ i i ~ ~ ~ ' i ~ ~ ~ i ~ 28,600_i i i ~ ! ~ i i ~ ~ i , ~ i ~ i ~ ~ ~ , i i 28,400_i , i i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i 28,200_i ~ i i ~ i ~ i i i i i , i i 28,000_i , i i i ~ ~ ~ i i ~ ~ i i ~ 27;800_i i i i i ~ ' ~ i i ~ ~ i i ~ _ t ~ 27,600_i i i ~ i ~ ~ i i ~ ~ ' i 27,400_i i i i i , ' ' i i ~ - ~ ~ i i 27, 200_i i ' ~ ~ i i ~ ~ , ~ i i i i 27,000_ ~ i i ~ ~ i i i ~ ~ ~ , i i ~ ~ i i i ~ ~ i i t i i ~ ~ ~ ~ i i i i ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ i i ~ ~ ~ , i i ~ ~ ~ 1, 400_, , ~ ~ ~ ~ , i i i ~ i ~ i i i ~ , , i 1,200_i i i i ~ ~ ~ ~ 1,000_i i1 i ~ i i ~ ~ ~ , ~ i ~ ~ i i i i i - i i ------------------------------------------------ 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 Residential -~ Commercial-Industrial 42 L-""-~ TABLE 1 Estimated Average Family Tax on Roanoke County Family of Four Personal Property (Autos) Approximate Average Value (Auto #1) .••••••••• $2975.00 (Auto #2) .......... + $2975.00 Total ............. _ $5950.00 Tax Rate .......... x 0.035 Total Tax ......... = 208.25 Real Estate Based on House & Land Value ................. Tax Rate ........ Total Tax ....... Total Personal Property and Real Estate Taxes Expenditures $65,000.00 x 0.0115 _ $747.50 _ $955.75 Cost to Ed. 1 Child in Roanoke County/Yr... $3715.17 2nd Child ..................... + 3715.17 Total Cost of Education for Two Children/Yr . ..................... _ $7430.34 Contributions to Education 1 Child 2 Children State Funds ................... $1480.12 $2960.24 Federal Contribution .......... 0.74 1.48 Sales Tax Contribution......... 367.43 734.86 Local Funds ................... 1795.91 3591.82 Other ......................... + 70.97 141.94 Total ......................... _ $3715.17 $7430.34 Total County Expenditure to Educate 2 Children/Yr.. _ $3591.82 43 ~~ TABLE 2 Comparison of Real Estate Valuatibns by Segment (Residential & Industrial Parcels) (1985) Parcel Percent Current Assessed Percent of Current Count of Count Value Assessed Value ------------------------------------------------ Roanoke Count Residential 28,201 95.48 $1,355,675,600 83.41 Commercial/ Industrial 1,334 4.52 269,646,940 16.59 Total 29 535 100 00 ~ $1,625,322,540 100.00 Roanoke City Residential 35,751 81.55 $1,052,599,012 61.59 Commercial/ Industrial 8,091 19.45 656,359,407 38.41 Total 43 842 100 00 $1,708,958 419 100.00 Salem Residential 7,859 89.99 $329,435,900 66.35 Commercial/ Industrial 874 10.01 167,040,000 33.56 ---------------------------------------------------- Total 8,733 100.00 $496,761,300 100.00 44 C '~ TABLE 3 Comparison of Real Estate Valuations by Segment (Residential and Industrial Parcels) (1986) Percent Current Assessed Percent of Current Count of Count Value Assessed Value Roanoke Count Residential 28,753 95.51 $1,394,669,700 83.31 Commercial/ Industrial 1,349 4.48 279,392,940 16.69 ------------------------------------------------------- Total 30,102 100.00 ~ $1,674,062,640 100.00 45 c 'f0 TABLE 4* r I;:~!~:!iiC/t::r~ (.:~!._!i~ii: y rat:: i~r~:~~i=:• ... t)~~t,,:~, r;:!: r.~L~=~~ i::a-;.t; car_~~ ~,,t- i,:_.,, <::.~.:~~ttt; ~~t-~.;~~~t:f-. f::t:E.-t. Ye~i- F:i=':~ C~<<!rrti Iiic' -fit;:. L?_:!;:_.,= i:'c:!rii :I:rtci f;:~::<~~ Cc~irl :f vita r'irlr"i' _..) ! ~ )rir"1' ...: ? ra(;r';' c: j (-''rep"C:i:~tlt: F: c':~;E"? ~•:~+1:r,:. 1. l!~ 1. 71J '"i ~''• i 1. ~ ~J ''+ , ~', 7 :..• .'{!~. :~~ C_Yi' +•. , } ~. r C., / C+ p ~._)i]i:} 1. b t.]~~ 1. i )~~C~ 1 i_i ~-,~~._ !'• r 19c; ;' r~/. f- L" 1 , ~+._,~ , cs:3._, ,f-!~ G" t'. c:. ~'-. , ..jr_? . '_]~i J. C- 1 .:...4• q ,_, +.~ ~' ~ 1 7 . c_ i r ~~!-s C~i 1 r? / L.~ r`.; r 1 ~ 3~j c-~ 1 ~ 47b ~ 1 ~, ~ ~-?~~( .3i_ i . _ / + ' ~?ri / r G~:~.=( 1 1 ~: ~~. E~ 1 . !_?28c3 1. (?': C~ 1. '!_~,~ 1 . `',1.8 ~ b7i_'~_ 34. (+ , i r 'i. 1 .8b1=' . 8b1 1 E:S . =t 8 1 .Oi_'..`3f.-f 1 . ~ ?'%~::' .. 1. ~:•'-:' :. ~i? ~ .~ i) i. _; 52 f 1 . - ~~ .b;3, 73 1,9.31.383 "? 1.x.1! r? 1.. _ 288 ; 1.. c-?,_,, :r... ~ 1 `~`~ 1 1 f, r_ '7 4.r'i•-, _tc,r_ ~ '-, c;• :, rjf"?'~ 9=i•f_- 1 ~r' . 7 ~ 1 .1?~uE~ :, 1 . ~ ?'7' 1.`~!~i~ 1,b5.j,7r_)i 4~~+t~?1~~ i~.!_?77,'71 S' ,='r_?.41. i.i??8~-1 i.r.?~7~' 1', , .s 1 ~ 7~ ? 1 .:3c''i C•E J4 a `a4 r 2. 1.J.J , 87~+ ;?~ _. - ~ 77° ~ 237 b~ )~) r__' 1 .78 1 . t?i/8~i 1. , r ?%? 1 f~!'_~~.J 1 `7 r.?r..? n ~'- G` y .' .~ ..., C'~,•~ 1C`'(j J i__ L_ , .:] . , L7 1 Jl._~ ~ (1Q G. y ~ .'s J C-~ C_. L.. 4• ~ (1 ~~ 1 - f'~ C 1 ~ ~? / 19'='b 1 , 852 a ~9b 559.9b3 2.412. f_,-+ 23 .21 ].. C?233 1 • r._17L; Cir 1 ~? r~ - c ~ c 19 ~?~f •• )~.i1 r" , <- f7 _)r_'~C~L-i ~ ~'r'~ o .., r7 L~J•_b}L~. 23.95 1 . ~?c"-_88 1 C?7c. ~_ ° ~ ~_i,., 2 , b! ?(+ , 349 24.7 ]. 1 . r:?223 1 . c:?';~~; 1S'c.-,, c;; i~ r)17a31[,. be 9.c'..~39 2,?r?7, 1`i;1 ti`,.4t3 1. =?233 1 ,r,-~'7? , 2~ ?t )1 2 . 1.:s5 , 135 ?92.75? ~ . 9~ / , 9~'7 27 . r_?t~ 1 . ~ ?288 1 . r?72 2~~~?2 b78i 19b 2 849.83!=? 3.~?4b.5~?8 2 7.9r! 1 ,t?28£3 1 .r.?72 ~i?!? ~ , , ,~/, X4.3 2,G : i i ,r,i~ 3. 1 /r_) _? ~..(3.:.J - , F~r.-?t_?4 .~ r/ , _~c:.'.'.J ~ ! ?G'i' 97b . b 1 1. 3 .3r ~ 1 . b4U c.?S' . 58 1.. t?288 1 . {_? I2 2r?r~?5 2.3~'15`?9~? 1,~)4b,S'2" 3,438,917 3r"?.44 1.~?288 1.~??~' *Figures obtained from Wayland Winstead 46 ~, l-- -~r TABLE 5 Comparison of Real Estate Valuations (figures based on total taxed) (1986)* Parcel Percent Current Assessed Percent of Current Count of Count Value Assessed Value -------------------------------------------------- Roanoke Count Residential 28,753 91.93 $1,394,669,700 79.52 Commercial/ Industrial 1,349 4.31 279,392,940 15.93 Agricultural/ Undeveloped 1,174 3.75 79,448,500 4.53 Total 31 276 100 00 $1,753,511 140 100.00 *see Appendix D for comparison to 1985 figures. TABLE 6 Comparison of Real Estate Valuations (figures based on total taxed) (1982) ,z Parcel Percent Current Assessed Percent of Current Count of Count Value Assessed Value ------------------------------------------------- Roanoke Count Residential 27,003 91.76 $1,097,185,411 81.78 Commercial/ Industrial 1,248 4.24 171,654,770 12.79 Agricultural/ Undeveloped 1,177 4.00 72,821,850 5.43 ----------------------------------------------------- Total 29,428 100.00 $1,341,662,031 100.00 47 L -~ TABLE 7 Existing Land Use - RoanokefCount y (1985) °s o f Total area 0 of Remaining ---------- Acreage --------- Total Area ------------- For Develop. --------- ----------- Total Area (248.28 square miles) 158,900 100.00 100.00 Total Developed Area 31,957 20.11 79.89 Total Avail. for Dev. 126.943 79.89 79.89 Topo. Slope 0-200 - 64,870 --------- 40.82 ------------- 40.82 --------- ----- Total --------------- Remaining Dev. 64,870 40.82 40.82 48 `to TABLE 8 Export Activity in Virginia by Industry Retail ------- Construction -------------- Manufacturing --------------- Service --------- Wholesale -- ---------- of Total Responding 18% ll0 70 27~ ~ 100 Presently Exporting 1~ 2a 25~ 5g 40 Interested 11% i 150 24$ 16~ 260 n Exporting No Interest o 88 0 83 0 510 79g 70% 0 in _ Exporting ----------------- -------------- --------------- -------- - Source: Virginia Small Business Survey - June 30, 1986 Price Waterhouse, Richmond, Virginia. TABLE 9 Export Activity in Virginia by Region Central Northern Southwest Tidewater Presently Exporting 70 ll0 50 50 Interested in 200 250 170 170 Exporting No interest in 73% 640 850 780 Exporting ----------------------------------------------------------- Source: Virginia Small Business Survey - June 30, 1986 Price Waterhouse, Richmond, Virginia. 49 -~ APPENDIX A r FIVE YEAR DEVELOPMENT TREND Roanoke Count 1982 1983 1984 1985 Taxable ~ Change 1986 '82-'86 SF-Urb 280 19 19,457 19,683 20,020 20,376 5.68 SF-Sub , 7,408 7,487 7,591 7,779 7,980 406 7.72 27 MF 315 314 401 402 ---------- -- ----- . --------- ------------ Subtotal -------- 27,003 ---------- 27,258 ---------- 27,675 28,201 334 28,753 349 1 6.48 12 10 Com/Ind 1,225 1,275 1,303 1, , . Ag-Und 20-99 971 968 998 982 980 0.93 Ag-Und ~~> 99+ 206 199 196 - 195 ---------- ----194 - . ---------- ------------ Total Taxed -------- 29,428 ---------- 29,700 --------- 30,174 30,712 31,276 6.28 Tax Exem t Federal 30 36 43 48 53 76.67 State 26 23 22 27 45 73.07 Regional 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 Local Govt. 190 213 218 227 232 22.10 Multiple Govt. 2 0 0 204 0 215 0 220 n.a. 22.90 Religious 179 200 23 13 14 17 (35.53) Charitable 23 8 8 8 (75.00) Educational 14 15 52 53 53 53 6.00 Other Unknown 50 40 45 17 11 n.a. scC 38 53 52 --------- 53 -------- n.a. -------------- Tot Tx Exmpt ------ 514 ---------- 640 ---------- 659 - 661 692 34.63 Tot AlDist 29 ,942 30,340 30 833 31 373 31 968 6.76 50 'gay . :,, ,• ww~ W APPENDIX B Five Year DevelopmentrTrend Vinton 1981 1982 1983 1984 Taxable o Change 1985 '82-'85 SF-Urb 2,306 2,309 2,316 2,321 0.65 SF-Sub 34 543 34 544 35 545 35 546 2.94 0.55 MF --- ---- ------- Subtotal --------------- 2,883 ------- 2,887 2,896 2,902 0.66 Corp/Ind 538 540 543 543 0.93 Ag-Und 2 2 2 2 0.00 20-99 Ag-Und 0 0 0 0 0.00 99+ Total 3 423 3,429 3 441 3,447 0 70 Tax Exempt Federal 0 0 0 0 0.00 State 2 4 4 2 0.00 Regional 1 1 1 1 0.00 Local Govt. 31 36 35 40 29.03 Multiple Govt. 0 0 0 0 0.00 Religious 27 27 27 28 3.70 Charitable - 2 2 2 2 0.00 Educational 6 1 1 1 (83.33) Other 4 4 4 4 0.00 Unknown 5 5 4 n.a. SCC 0 0 - 0 ---------- 0 ------- 0.00 --------------------- Total ---------- 73 --------- 80 79 82 12.33 Total All Districts 3,496 3 509 3 520 3,529 3.70 51 ~~ APPENDIX C New Construction Trends Roanoke Count (by permits issued) Total 1 982 1983 1984 1985 ------ 1986 -------- '82-'86 --- ----------------- Single Family ------ 248 --------- 557 --------- 597 --- 601 682 2,685 Duplex 4 3 6 7 3 23 Multi-Family 3 0 12 8 6 29 Commerc (New Bus) 6 28 12 20 16 82 Office/Bank/Prof. 2 1 9 14 7 33 Industrial 1 0 1 4 4 10 ----------------- Total ----------------- ----------------- ----- 264 ----- ----- ---------- 589 --------- --------- -------- 637 --------- --------- --------- 654 --------- --------- --------- 718 --------- --------- ----- 2,862 ----- ------ 52 L - ~i APPENDIX D Comparison of Real Estate Valuations by Segment (figures based on total taxed, 1985) Percent Current Assessed Percent of Current Count of Count Value Assessed Value Roanoke Count Residential 28,201 91.82 $1,355,675,600 79.52 Commercial/ Industrial 1,334 4.34 269,646,940 15.82 Agricultural/ Undeveloped 1,177 3.83 ~ 79,415,400 4.66 Total 30,712 100.00 $1,704,737,940 100.00 Roanoke City Residential 35,751 81.47 $1,052,599,012 61.25 Commercial/ Industrial 8,091 18.44 656,359,407 38.19 Agricultural/ Undeveloped 39 0.09 9,507,000 0.55 Total 43,881 100.00 $1,718,465,419 100.00 Salem Residential 7,859 89.50 329,435,900 66.18 Commercial/ Industrial 874 9.95 167,040,000 33.56 Agricultural/ Undeveloped 48 0.55 1,285,400 0.26 ----------------------------------------------------------- Total 8,781 100.00 497,761,300 100.00 53 L _~ APPENDIX E Salem Percent Current Assessed Percent of Current Count of Count Value Assessed Value Taxable SF-Sub 7,625 86.84 $294,461,900 59.16 MF 234 2.66 34,947,000 ------------- 7.02 ------ ------------- Subtotal(Res) -------- 7,859 --------- 89..50 ---- 329,435,900 66.18 Com/Improved 505 5.75 109,157,600 21.93 Service Stat. 18 0.20 2,113,300 0.42 WaYehouse 42 0.48 12,538,000 2.52 Com/Vacant 260 2.96 6,094,500 1.22 Ind/Improved 48 0.55 ~ 37,113,900 7.46 Ind/Vac 1 0.01 - 22,700 ----------------- 0.005 ------- ------------- Sub(Com/Ind) -------- 874 -------- 9.95 167,040,000 33.56 Ag-Und 48 0.55 --- 1,285,400 ----------------- 0.26 ------- ------------- Total -------- 8,781 ------ 100.00 $497,761,300 100.00 Tax Exem t Federal 5 $25,771,300 State 7 2,054,100 Regional 5 7,601,100 Local Govt. 100 13,466,900 Multiple Govt . 1 5,637,100 Religious 73 16,027,900 Charitable 26 6,096,700 Educational 27 38,135,200 Other 5 435,900 Unknown 0 0 SCC 0 ----- 0 ----------------- ------------ ------------- Total ------- 249 ----- $107,625,100 Total All Districts $605,386,400 54 M ~~~o APPENDIX F Comparison of Real Estate Valuations by Segment (1985) Percent Current Assessed Percent of Current Count of Count Value Assessed Value Salem Residential Commercial/ Industrial Agricultural/ Undeveloped Tax Exempt 7,859 87.03 874 9.68 48 0.53 249 2.76 329,435,900 54.42 167,040,000 27.59 1,285,400 0.21 107,625,100 17.78 Total 9 030 100.00 605,386,400 100.00 Salem Residential Commercial/ Industrial Agricultural/ Undeveloped 7,859 89.50 874 9.95 48 0.55 329,435,900 66.18 167,040,000 33.56 1,285,400 0.26 ------------------------------------------------- Total 8,781 100.00 497,761,300 100.00 APPENDIX G Slope Characteristics of Vacant or Agricultural Land Slope Classification Acreage Percent ------------------------------------- Flood Hazard Area 3,314 2.61 0 - loo Slope 32,054 25.25 10 - 20~ Slope 32,816 25.85 Exceeding 200 58,759 46.29 -------------------------------------------------- Total Vacant or Agricultural 126,943 100.00 --------------------------------------------------- 55 APPENDIX H Existing Land Use - Roanoke County 0 of Amount of Total area 0 of Acreage Remaining Acreage Total Area Remaining For Develop. ------------------------------------------ Total Area (248.28 square miles) 158,900 100.00 158,900 100.00 Commercial/Industrial 2,455 1.54 156,445 98.46 Residential 7,304 4.60 149,141 93.86 Street Right of Way 4,712 2.97 144,429 90.89 Railroad Right of Way 356 0.22 144,073 90.67 Park and Open Space 17,130 10.78 126,943 79.89 ------- Tot. Agri. & Vacant - 126,943 ---------- 79.89 ------ 126,943 79.89 Agricultural 9,550 6.01 117,393 73.88 Vacant Land 117,393 73.88 ------ ----- -------- Tot. Agri. & Vacant ---------- 126,943 ---- 79.89 126,943 79.89 Flood Hazard Area 3,314 2.09 123,629 77.80 Slope > 20°s 58,759 36.98 ---- 64,870 ----- 40.82 --------------------- --------------------- --------------------- ---------- ---------- ---------- ---- -- ---------- ---------- 64,870 -- -- 40.82 It is important to note that vacant or agricultural land, which is topographically feasible for development, may not always be suitable for development. Ownership, land values, existing public infrastructure, and natural environmental characteristics play key roles in enhancing or detracting from the development of a property. 56 O~ ROANp,~~ ~ ~~ A Z Z v ,• ..a 18 E50 $$ SFSQUICENTENN~P~' A Beauti~ul Beginning COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE _~. C~vixn~~ of ~n~tnnke S~3_~sos May 20, 1987 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS BOB JOHNSON. CHAIRMAN HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT LEE GARRETT. VICE-CHAIRMAN WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT ALAN H. BRITTLE CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT STEVEN A. MCGRAW CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT The Reverend 1 ~~~ ` 7 ~, , ~ :_ ` ~; ~ . ~ ~~ -~, Green Ridge Baptist Church ~ 5521 Green Ridge Road, NW /(~.~ef~ Roanoke, Virginia 24019 ,V/ U LI J ~~ rl i `{-~ Dear Reverend Wall: On behalf of the Board of Supervisors, I would like to thank you for giving the invocation at the Board of Supervisors' meeting in the past. We would again like to call on you to present the invocation on Tuesday, September 8, 1987 at 2:00 p.m. If you are unable to do this, please call me at 772-2005. Someone from this office will be calling you soon to see if this time is acceptable to you, or if you would prefer another date. The Board members are aware of how busy your schedule is, and they appreciate your volunteering the time to offer God's blessing at their meetings. Sincerely, Mary H. Allen Deputy Clerk .- P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 2 4018-07 98 (703) 772-2004 r _.. ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1987 Welcome to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors meeting. Regular meetings are held on the second Tuesday of the month at 2:00 p.m., and the fourth Tuesday at 3:00 p.m. Public Hearings will be heard at 7:00 p.m on the fourth Tuesday of each month. Deviations from this schedule will be announced. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (2:00 P.M.) 1. Roll Call. It~~ C ~- 2. Invocation: The Reverend I( C~-s4o`n Green Ridge Baptist Church 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag. B. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS C. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS. D. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Approval of Resolution requesting designation as a drought disaster county. -2. Request from the Roanoke Coalition for support of ~ _~~'~, increased state funding for human services. 3. Request for Industrial Development Bonds from Hollins College Corporation. 4. Request for resolution endorsing realignment of Starkey Road and Buck Mountain Road intersection. 5. Authorization to declare volunteers for County ~ programs as employees for the purpose of Workers Compensation coverage. 6. Acceptance of a deed establishing common boundary lines at~Old Bent Mountain Fire Station property. 7. Economic Development Strategy for review and comment. F. REQUEST FOR WORK SESSIONS 1. Six Year Plan for Secondary Road System. G. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS H. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance acquiring a well lot in Crestwood,P~ar~k~.D ~e`V - - _ I . SECOND READ] ~ ~~- '~ (~'"~" the sal ~; ~ ~~ a Fire St ~~!,~"' J. APPOINTMENTS 1. Communi 2. Court Service Unit Advisory Council/Youth and Family Services Advisory Board 3. Grievance Panel K. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS L. 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. Minutes of Meeting - August 11, 1987 2. Acceptance of water and sewer facilities serving The Falls, Section 3. 3. Notification from the Virginia Department of Transportation that the following roads have been accepted into the Secondary System. a. 0.35 miles of Coachman Drive b. 0.19 miles of Coachman Circle c. 0.22 Miles of Forest Oak Drive d. 0.79 miles of Summit Ridge Road 4. Authorization for County Administrator to execute _,,, the appropriate documents for continuation of ` CORTRAN services. M. RE ORTS ~~ 1. ~.-M nthly Economic Development Activity. N. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS 0. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to the Code of Virginia 2.1-344 (a>. P. ADJOURNMENT -3- -- .%' _ '7 ~~.. ~ , ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA SEPTEMBER 8, 1987 l l 2. Invocation: The Reverend Ronnie Gason Green Ridge Baptist Church 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS ~,.~ _~ \ OPENING CEREMONIES (2:00 P.M.) 1. Roll Call. C. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS. D. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS Welcome to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors meeting. Regular meetings are held on the second Tuesday of the month at 2:00 p.m., and the fourth Tuesday at 3:00 p.m. Public Hearings will be heard at 7:00 p.m on the fourth Tuesday of each month. Deviations from this schedule will be announced. WORK SESSION ~~--.. ,• =~,, nomic velopme t tegy~ ~_ `-~ ~~~~" `~~~~~-' E. NEW BUSINESS .~ - 1. Approval of Resolution requesting designation as a drought disaster county. 2. Request from the Roanoke Coalition for support of ~~~ ~ ~ increased state funding for human services. ~S 3. Request for Industrial Development Bonds from Hollins College Corporation. 4. Request for resolution endorsing realignment of `~ ~ ~ Starkey Road and Buck Mountain Road intersection. 5. Authorization to declare volunteers for County programs as employees for the purpose of Workers Compensation coverage. ~~ F. REQUEST FOR WORK SESSIONS ~ G. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS H. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES' 1. Ordinance a well lot in Crestwood Park. C ~-' I. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance accepting an offer for the sale of real estate adjacent Fire Station on U. S. Route 11-4 __ _ ._ ~,r-- ~--- z;~_ _ ,. ~ "; f ~= j ~ , ~,__ J. APPOINTMENTS and authorizing to Fort Lewis 60. =~~ c_1 ::~ ( t. _. r 1,! p r 1~ ~^~- 1. Community Corrections Resources Board. 2. Court Service Unit Advisory Council/Youth and Family Services Advisory Board 2 f 3. Grievance Panel K. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS L. 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. Minutes of Meeting - August 11, 1987 2. Acceptance of water and sewer facilities serving The Falls, Section 3. 3. Notification from the Virginia Department of Transportation that the following roads have been accepted into the Secondary System. a. 0.35 miles of Coachman Drive b. 0.19 miles of Coachman Circle c. 0.22 Miles of Forest Oak Drive d. 0.79 miles of Summit Ridge Road 1'l~~r..~~ - 4. Acceptance of a deed establishing common boundary ~~~ e.~.~r~~=`'-' ~ lines at Bent Mountain Fire Station property. 5. Authorization for County Administrator to execute the appropriate documents for continuation of CORTRAN services. M. REPORTS N. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS O. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to the Code of Virginia 2.1-344 (a). P. ADJOURNMENT 4 •.V!'1Lj L YVY\ ~ V~1 1~1L1r -AL.L it iVIJ~"'~,~~L,~V CITIZENS OF VIRGINIA 6 North Sixth Street Richmond, Virginia 23219 QBJECTIQEB: EDUCATIONAL EFFORT 112TH LOCAL ELECTED OFFICIALS CITY COUNCILS/COUNTY SUPERVISORS TO PASS RESOLUTIONS AND SEND TO GOVERNOR AND THEIR REPRESENTATIVES IN GENERAL ASSEMBLY Endorsing need for, and their support of, a major funding initiative beginning in FY89 that would raise the Commonwealth baseline budget for Virginia's Mentally Disabled to make a start at: (1) Systematically reducing the Unmet Community Housing and Associated Service needs of Virginia's Mentally Disabled Citizens (2) Reducing the gaps in com.:~ur.ity services for Mentally Disable Citizens (3) Raising the quality of cc:nmunity and _nstitutional prograr.,s to nationally recognized standards by 1992 ATTACHED: Sample Resolution COALITION FOR MENTALLY DISABLED CITIZENS OF VIRGINIA 6 North Sixth Street Richmond. Virginia 23219 OBJECTIVE: EDIICATZONAL EFFORT KITH LEGISLATORS ACTIONS DESIRED OF LEGISLATORS 1. LETTER TO GOVERNOR (Members of Appropriations/Finance Committees) o ENDORSE NEED FOR AND THEIR SUPPORT OF a major funding initiative by the commonwealth starting in FY89 that would raise baseline funding by $64 Million in FY89 for DMHMRSAS to: (1) Begin a systematic planned reduction of the unmet community housing and associated service needs of Virginia's Mentally Disabled Citizens (HJR 287) (2) Make a start at reducing the documented gaps in community services (3) Permit raising the quality of care in community and institutional programs to nationally recognized standards by 1992 (HJR 301) 2. LETTER TO GOVERNOR AND MEMBERS OF APPROPRIATIONS/FINAPICE/CONFERENCE COMMITTEES - by Senators/Delegates NOT members of the money committees Indicate their support and urge action by money committees and governor on the actions outlined in para 1. ATTACHED: Sample Letter r 8. Request for approval for a Raffle Permit for the Cave Spring High School PTSA. K. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS NONE L. REPORTS RECEIVED AND FILED 1. Accounts Paid for the month of July 1987 2. Board Contingency Fund 3. Unappropriated Balance M. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to the Code of Virginia 2.1-344 (a).(1) Personnel, (2) acquisition and disposition of real estate. BLJ/LG AT 3:50PM AYES: LG,SAM,HCN,BLJ ABSENT: AHB EVENING SESSION (7:00 P.M.) N. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance accepting an offer for and authorizing the sale of real estate adjacent to Fort Lewis Fire Station on U. S. Route 11-460. (CONTINUED FROM AUGUST 11, 1987.) SAM/HCN MOTION TO APPROVE WITH AMENDMENT THAT PROCEEDS IN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND WILL BE EARMARKED FOR BALLFIELDS TO REPLACE THOSE ON PROPERTY. - URC 2ND READING - -~" `- /'~~'~`'` ,f, O. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance amending and reenacting the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance to revise the Floodplain Ordinance. (CONTINUED FROM AUGUST 11, 1987) HCN/BLJ TO APPROVE - URC 2. Ordinance authorizing, ratifying and confirming the acquisition and execution of leases for the Enhanced Emergency 911 Communication System. 4 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA WHEREAS, the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, Virginia (the Authority) has considered the application of Hollins College Corporation (the College) requesting the issuance of one or more of the Authority's revenue bonds or notes in an amount not to exceed $3,500,000 (the Bonds) to assist in the financing of the construction of a gymnasium of approximately 19,000 square feet (the Project), which will be located on the College's campus, adjacent to and connecting with the College's present indoor swimming facility, in Roanoke County, Virginia and will be owned and operated by the College, and has held a public hearing thereon; and WHEREAS, it has been requested that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia (the Board) approve the financing of the Project and the issuance of the Bonds, and such approval is required for compliance with Section 147(f) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA: 1. The Board approves the financing of the Project and the issuance of the Bonds by the Authority for the benefit of the College, as required by said Section 147(f), to permit the Authority to assist in the financing of the Project. 2. The approval of the issuance of the Bonds, as required by said Section 147(f), does not constitute an endorsement of the Bonds or the creditworthiness of the College or otherwise indi- cate that the Project possesses any economic viability. The Bonds shall provide that neither the Commonwealth of Virginia (the Commonwealth) nor any political subdivision thereof, including Roanoke County (the County) and the Authority, shall be obligated to pay the principal of or interest on the Bonds or other costs incident thereto except from the revenues and receipts pledged therefor and that neither the faith or credit nor the taxing power of the Commonwealth or any political sub- division thereof, including the County and the Authority, shall be pledged thereto. 3. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.