The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About9/22/1987 - RegularO~ POANp~,F z p ~ ~ v a= ~ 8 ~E50 88 S~SQUICENTENN,P~ A Beauti~u/ Beginning COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE C~Lt1~nfL,J A~ ~t~~riA~2P September 23, 1987 Reverend Charles R. Doyle Hollins Road Baptist Road 3502 Old Mountain Road, NE Roanoke, Virginia 24019 Dear Rev. Doyle: BOARD OF SUPERVISOR: BOB JOHNSON. CHAIRMA HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRIC LEE GARRETT. VICE-CHAIR MA WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRIC ALAN H. BRITTL CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRIC STEVEN A. MCGRA~ CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRIC HARRY C. NICKEN: VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRIC On behalf of the Board of Supervisors, I would like to take this opportunity to let you know of our appreciation for your attending the meeting on Tuesday, September 22, 1987, to offer the invocation. We feel it is most important to ask God's blessing on these meetings so that all is done according to His will and for the good of all citizens. Thank you again for sharing your time with us. Very truly ou s, Bob L. nson, Chairman Roanoke unty Board of Supervisors mha P.O. BOX 29800 ~ ROANOKE. VIRC~IfVIA ~anic~_r»oa _ i~no~ ~-~-, -,..... of a°ANO~"F ti ~ p 2 ~ z °v a~ 18 ~~ 88 SFSQUICENTENN~P~ A Beautiful8eginning (nn~tn~~ of ~~rttn~ke ROANORE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION AGENDA SEPTEMBER 22, 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. AFTERNOON SESSION A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 P.M.) 1. Roll Call. 2. Invocation: The Reverend Charles R. Doyle Hollins Road Baptist Church 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag. B. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS NONE C. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS. ADDITION OF ITEM D-2 PROCLAMATION DECLARING SEPTEMBER 23, 1987 AS CLEAN AIR DAY. D. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS 1. Resolution of Appreciation upon the retirement of Lawrence Boitnott BLJ/LG - URC 2. Proclamation Declaring September 23, 1987 as Clean Air Day. BLJ/HCN - UW E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Request for support for the 1987/88 United Way Campaign. BLJ/HCN - UW 2. Authorization for the Regional Airport Commission to execute FAA and Virginia DOA grants and capital expenditures. LG/SAM TO AUTHORIZE- URC 3. Authorization for the Regional Airport Commission to execute contracts and agreements for the Taxiway Guidance Signs and the Runway Extension. LG/SAM TO AUTHORIZE - URC 4. (Deleted) 5. Request for approval to proceed with replacement of Fort Lewis property ballfields. SAM/AHB TO APPROVE WITH THE COMMUNITY INVOLVED WITH THE DECISIONS - URC 6. Approval of Consent Agreement and Order for Dixie Caverns Landfill SAM/AHB TO APPROVE - URC F. REQUEST FOR WORK SESSIONS 1. Request to reschedule work session on Secondary Highway Six Year Plan to October 13, 1987. G. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Request for public hearing on October 13, 1987 at 3:00 p.m, for condemnation of easement: for the ' Hollins Community Development Project. BLJ/HCN - UVV H. APPOINTMENTS NONE 1. Community Corrections Resources Board. 2• Court Service Unit Advisory Council/Youth and Family Services Advisory Board 3. Grievance Panel I. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS NICKENS: (1) COMMENDED THE NEW EMPLOYEE NEWSLETTER AND THANKED MARY ALLEN AND EDITORIAL BOARD FOR THEIR WORK. (2) REQUESTED ASSISTANCE ADDRESSING SERIOUS PROBLEMS WITH STORM DRAINAGE PROBLEMS IN THE FALLING CREEK SUBDIVISION. STAFF TO PRESENT A RESPONSE IN 30 DAYS TO THISQPROBLEMECH AND JOHNSON: (1) CONGRATULATED STAFF ON EMPLOYEE NEWSLETTER. DIRECTED THAT A WORK SESSION BE SET ON OCTOBER 27 ON DRAINAGE, (3) REMINDED EVERYONE OF DEDICATION AND RIBBON CUTTING ON 9/23 AT SOUTHVIEW SCHOOL. J• CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO BE ROUTINE-AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. BLJ/LG TO APPROVE URC 1• Request for approval for a Raffle Permit from the Green Valley Elementary School PTA. 2. Authority to settle pending litigation: Roanoke County v. Reynolds et al 3- Request for approval for a Raffle Permit from the Glenvar Youth Boosters. 4. Authorization to accept or acquire easements for drainage improvements in the Palm Valley and Willowlawn Rd./South Park Circle areas. 5• Request for funding of second phase improvements at the Public Safety Center. K. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS NONE L. REPORTS 1. Accounts Paid for the month of August 1987. 2. Statement of Revenues and Expenditures of the Fifth Planning District Commission. M. WORK SESSIONS 1. Work Session and adoption of the Economic Development Strategy ECH AND STAFF WILL PRESENT SPECIFIC ITEMS TO INCREASE VISIBILITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SUCH AS 75/25 LOGO, MEMENTOES, PINS, ETC. TO PRESENT TO PEOPLE, INCREASE IN PROJECTS AND USE OF COUNTY FACILITIES, AT 10/13 BOARD MEETING FOR STRATEGY AND SPECIFIC METHODS WILL BE ADOPTED. N. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to the Code of Virginia 2.1-344 (a) (6) LEGAL MATTER AND (2) REAL ESTATE MATTER. BLJ/LG - URC EVENING SESSION (7:00 P.M.) BLJ ANNOUNCED SUPERVISORS MCGRAW AND BRITTLE WERE ABSENT FROM EVENING SESSION O. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. First Reading and public hearing on ordinance amending Chapter 20.1 of the 1971 Roanoke County Code, "Water" and Ordinance No. 84-108i, by adding subsection (e) "Deposits", establishing a schedule of deposits for initial institution, and reinstitution of sewer and water service. LG/HCN TO APPROVE 1ST READING 2ND READING -10/13/87 - URC WITH AHB,SAM ABSENT 2. Ordinance accepting an offer for and authorizing the conveyance of surplus real estate on Washington Avenue in the Town of Vinton to the Commonwealth of Virginia . HCN/BLJ TO APPROVE 1ST READING 2ND READING - 10/13/87 - URC WITH AHB, SAM ABSENT 3. First Reading and public hearing on Ordinance amending and reenacting the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, to allow certain office and commercial 4 r uses within an M-1 District upon special exception. BLJ/HCN TO APPROVE 1ST READING 2ND READING - 10/13/87 - URC WITH AHB, SAM ABSENT P. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance authorizing the acquisition of real estate - lot in Crestwood Park. HCN/LG TO APPROVE - URC WITH AHB, SAM ABSENT Q. PUBLIC HEARINGS 987-1 Petition of J. F. DAVIS AND W. E. CUNDIFF to rezone an approximate 19.4 acre tract from M-2, Industrial to RE Residential Estates to construct single family homes located on the east side of Route 758 in the Hollins Magisterial District. CONTINUED UNTIL 10/27/87 AT REQUEST OF THE PETITIONER 987-2 Petition of JOHN LEE DAVENPORT to rezone from A-1 Agricultural to B-2 Business, a tract containing 0.30 acre and located at 5318 Fallowater Lane in the Cave Spring Magisterial District. BLJ/LG TO APPROVE - URC WITH AHB, SAM ABSENT 987-3 Ordinance amending Chapter 20.1 of the 1971 Roanoke County Code "Water", and Ordinance No. 84-108i by adding subsection (e) "Deposits" establishing a schedule of deposits for initial institution, and reinstitution of sewer and water service. (WILL BE HEARD UNDER FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES, ITEM 0-l.) HEARD UNDER ITEM O-1 987-4 Petition of the Secretary of the ROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO AMEND THE Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, M-1 Industrial zoning district, to include nursery schools, day care centers, and permitted uses in the B-2, Business zoning district provided a special exception has been granted by the Board of Supervisors. (WILL BE HEARD UNDER FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES, ITEM O-3.) HEARD UNDER ITEM O-3 R. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS 5 THE FOLLOWING RESIDENTS SPOKE CONCERNING DRAINAGE AND SEWAGE BACKUP 1. Al Bertolacci, 2709 Tanglewood Dr. S. W. 2. Bill Mims, 910 Fenwick Drive N. W. 3. William E. Pollins, 902 Fenwick Drive N.W. 4. Stephen C. Hampton, 925 Fenwick Drive N. W. ECH ANNOUNCED THERE WILL BE A PUBLIC HEARING FOR CITIZEN COMMENTS AND CONCERNS ON DRAINAGE IN THE COUNTY ON 10/13/87 AT 7:00 P.M. 1. Brenda Tilley, 5815 Sierra Drive spoke concerning sink hole on her street. BLJ DIRECTED ECH, JH, AND TOMMY FUQUA TO INSURE THAT THE SINK HOLE DOES NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE RESIDENTS, AND DIRECTED THAT A PUMPER SHOULD BE SENT OUT WHENEVER THERE IS A HEAVY RAIN TO PUMP OUT SINR HOLE. S. ANNUAL AWARDS PROGRAM AND RECEPTION FOR ROANOKE COUNTY FIRE AND RESCUE PERSONNEL. 1. Resolutions of Congratulations BLJ/HCN TO APPROVE - URC BLJ/LG TO APPROVE - URC 2. Proclamation declaring the week of October 5-11, 1987 as Fire Prevention Week. BLJ/HCN TO APPROVE - UVV 3. Reception T. ADJOURNMENT AT 8:20 P.M. 6 ' OF ROANp~.~ ~ ,~ A .~~ a C~u~trt~ ~~ ~~~.rt~~.~ 18 .E.a 88 SFSOUICEN7ENN~P~ A Bcauti~ulBeginning ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA SEPTEMBER 22, 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. AFTERNOON SESSION A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 P.M.) 1. Roll Call. 2. Invocation: The Reverend Charles R. Doyle Hollins Road 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 1. Resolution of Appreciation upon the retirement of Lawrence Boitnott E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Request for support for the 1987/88 United Way Campaign. 2. Authorization for the Regional Airport Commission to execute FAA and Virginia DOA grants and capital expenditures. 3. Authorization for the Regional Airport Commission to execute contracts and agreements for the Taxiway Guidance Signs and the Runway Extension. 4. (Deleted) 5. Request for approval to proceed with replacement of Fort Lewis property ballfields. 6. Approval of Consent Agreement and Order for Dixie Caverns Landfill F. REQUEST FOR WORK SESSIONS 1. Request to reschedule work session on Secondary Highway Six Year Plan to October 13, 1987. G. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Request for public hearing on October 13, 1987 at 3:00 p.m. for condemnation of easement for the Hollins Community Development Project. H. APPOINTMENTS 1. Community Corrections Resources Board. 2. Court Service Unit Advisory Council/Youth and Family Services Advisory Board 3. Grievance Panel I. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS J. CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO BE ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. 1. Request for approval for a Raffle Permit from the Green Valley Elementary School PTA. 2. Authority to settle pending litigation: Roanoke County v. Reynolds, et al. 3. Request for approval for a Raffle Permit from the Glenvar Youth Boosters. .r 4. Authorization to accept or acquire easements for drainage improvements in the Palm Valley and Willowlawn Rd./South Park Circle areas. 5. Request for funding of second phase improvements at the Public Service Center. K. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS L. REPORTS 1. Accounts Paid for the month of August 1987. 2. Statement of Revenues and Expenditures of the Fifth Planning District Commission. M. WORK SESSIONS 1. Work Session and adoption of the Economic Development Strategy N. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to the Code of Virginia 2.1-344 (a). EVENING SESSION (7:00 P.M.) 0. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. First Reading and public hearing on ordinance amending Chapter 20.1 of the 1971 Roanoke County Code, "Water" and Ordinance No. 84-108i, by adding subsection (e) "Deposits", establishing a schedule of deposits for initial institution, and reinstitution of sewer and water service. 2. Ordinance accepting an offer for and authorizing the conveyance of surplus real estate on Washington Avenue in the Town of Vinton to the Commonwealth of Virginia . 3. First Reading and public hearing on Ordinance amending and reenacting the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, to allow certain office and commercial uses within an M-1 District upon special exception. P. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance authorizing the acquisition of real estate - lot in Crestwood Park. Q. PUBLIC HEARINGS 987-1 Petition of J. F. DAMS AND W. E. CUNDIFF to rezone an approximate 19.4 acre tract from M-2, Industrial to RE Residential Estates t:~ construct single-family homes located on the east side of Route 758 in the Hollins Magisterial District. 987-2 Petition of JOHN LEE DAVENPORT to rezone from A-1 Agricultural to B-2 Business, a tract containing. 0.30 acre and located at 5318 Fallowater Lane in the Cave Spring Magisterial District. 987-3 Ordinance amending Chapter 20.1 of the 1971 Roanoke County Code "Water", and Ordinance No. 84-108i by adding subsection (e) "Deposits" establishing a schedule of deposits for initial institution, and reinstitution of sewer and water service. (WILL BE HEARD UNDER FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES, ITEM 0-1.) 987-4 Petition of the Secretary of the ROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TO AMEND THE Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, M-1 Industrial zoning district, to include nursery schools, day care centers, and permitted uses in the B-2, Business zoning district provided a special exception has been granted by the Board of Supervisors. (WILL BE HEARD UNDER FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES, ITEM 0-3.) R. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS 1. Residents from Fenwick Drive to speak concerning sewage backup problems. S. ANNUAL AWARDS PROGRAM AND RECEPTION FOR ROANOKE COUNTY FIRE AND RESCUE PERSONNEL. 1. Resolutions of Congratulations 2. Proclamation declaring the week of October 5-11, 1987 as Fire Prevention Week. 3. Reception T. ADJOURNMENT 4 e~ _ ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 1987 RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO LAWRENCE W. BOITNOTT UPON HIS RETIREMENT BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: WHEREAS, Lawrence W. Boitnott was first employed in June, 1971, as Horticultural Extension Agent in Roanoke County; and has served with distinction for over sixteen years; and WHEREAS, he has over thirty years of experience in this field, having also served as Horticultural Extension Agent for Fairfax County, and Assistant County Agent in Botetourt County; and WHEREAS, he is recognized throughout the state for his horticultural expertise, and has been the recipient of the National Association of County Agricultural Agents Distinguished Service Award, Epsilon Sigma Phi's Outstanding Extension Agent Award; and "Search for Excellent" winner at state and national levels, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County expresses its deepest appreciation and the appreciation of the citizens of Roanoke County to Lawrence W. Boitnott for 16 years of capable, loyal and dedicated service to Roanoke County. FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors does express its best wishes for a happy, restful, and productive retirement. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 1987 RESOLUTION 92287-1 OF APPRECIATION TO LAWRENCE W. BOITNOTT UPON HIS RETIREMENT BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: WHEREAS, Lawrence W. Boitnott was first employed in June, 1971, as Horticultural Extension Agent in Roanoke County; and has served with distinction for over sixteen years; and WHEREAS, he has over thirty years of experience in this field, having also served as Horticultural Extension Agent for Fairfax County, and Assistant County Agent in Botetourt County; and WHEREAS, he is recognized throughout the state for his horticultural expertise, and has been the recipient of the National Association of County Agricultural Agents Distinguished Service Award, Epsilon Sigma Phi's Outstanding Extension Agent Award; and "Search for Excellent" winner at state and national levels, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County expresses its deepest appreciation and the appreciation of the citizens of Roanoke County to Lawrence W. Boitnott for 16 years of capable, loyal and dedicated service to Roanoke County. FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors does express its best wishes for a happy, restful, and productive retirement. r On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by Supervisor Garrett, and upon the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A COPY - TESTE: ~.J°v' . Mary H. Allen, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors 9/24/87 cc: File Resolutions of Appreciation File A-92287-2 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OFTROANOKEER ~~-"'"'°~ COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: September 22, 1987 SUBJECT: Request for Support for the United Way Campaign. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~Zjgyn~ U~~y"'~~, SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This year, the United Way will celebrate its 100th anniversary nationally and its 64th birthday in the Roanoke Valley. The campaign goal for 1987-88 is $3,945,601 which is a nine percent increase over 1986. Thirty-seven health and human services organizations throughout the valley are supported with these contributions. Roanoke County is about to begin it's campaign and our goal is $15,000. Sherry Martin, a secretary in the Finance Department, has agreed to serve as Campaign Coordinator. She will be working with a committee of employees and Loaned Executive Judith Francisco to reach the goal established for the County. RECOMMENDA"I`ION The Board is asked to support the United Way of Roanoke Valley, by authorizing the County's participation in the campaign and encouraging that County employees be generous with their pledges. PREPARED BY: APPROVED BY: yn~'`~ Mary H. Allen Elmer C.. Hodge Deputy Clerk County Administrator -------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved (x) Motion by: Bob L. Johnson/Harry C. Denied ( ) Nickens to support United Way Brittle ~?o Yes Abs Received ( ) x Referred Garrett x To Johnson x ~- McGraw x Nickens x cc: File Sherry Martin A-92287-3 _ 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 22, 1987 SUBJECT: Request from the Regional Airport Commission for approval to execute necessary grant agreements with the FAA and Virginia DOA COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~~u~n~ a '~~~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Roanoke Regional Airport Commission is ready to proceed with execution of the grant applications from the Federal Aviation Administration and the State Department of Aviation for funding of the airport terminal development project. The Commission contract requires approval by both Roanoke City Council and the Board of Supervisors for any proposed capital expenditures related to this project which exceed $100,000 and benefit five or more future accounting periods. The Commission is therefore requesting approval from the Board to approve execution of all grant agreements made by the FAA and the Virginia DOA and the accompanying capital expenditures. Attached is a report from W. Robert Herbert, Chairman of the Regional Airport Commission, outlining this request. FISCAL IMPACT 1~(~ None. This is part of the overall airport construction project, and authorizes the execution of the grant agreements for funding purposes. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board authorize the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission to execute the necessary grant agreement and accompanying expenditures for the airport terminal project. PREPARED BY: yYJa~,-Y~ 3t/ . Cc_c.c.c,~~ Mary H. Allen Deputy Clerk APPROVED BY: n~~/ ~/ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator t_~~. _ .~".., ---------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved (X) Motion by: Lee Garrett/Steven A. No Yes Abs Denied ( ) McGraw o approve s a Brittle ~_ Received ( ) recommen a ion Garrett ~_ h n Referred To Jo n s o _x._ McGraw ~_ Nickens _~_ cc: W. Robert Herbert, Airport Commission Chairman Lee Garrett, Airport Commission Vice-Chairman File ~~ Roanoke, Virginia September 14, 1987 Honorable Mayor and Members Roanoke City Council Dear Members of Council: Subject: Federal and State Grants Roanoke Regional Airport I. Background: Honorable Chairman and Members Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Dear Members of the Board: A. City Council authorized a contract with Delta Associates, P.E., in the amount of 146 000 for conceptual engineering and archi- tectural services for the terminal building, January 7, 1985. Actual cost incurred was $143,583.37. B. Amendment No. 1 to the contract with Delta was approved May 27, 1986, in the amount of 941 300 for design of the new terminal building and related facilities. C. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Virginia Department of Aviation (DOA) grants have been received in the amount of $1,902,006 (FAA) and 114 500 from the Virginia Aviation Special Fund for terminal development and facilities, engineering and design, land acquisition and site preparation. D. FAA funding status for air carrier terminal development to date is: 1. Grant of $1.9 million has been approved. 2. Tentative allocation of $2,198,733 has been approved. 3. Approximately $4.8 million in grants to be requested during terminal development. E. Virginia State Aviation Board has approved Commonwealth Airport funds in the amount of $6,093,571 over two bienniums for air carrier terminal development. The status of this funding is: 1. 1987-88 tentative allocation of $2,539,770 has been approved. 2. 1988-89 allocation of $2,343,571 subject to general assembly appropriation. 3. 1989-90 allocation of $1,210,230 subject to general assembly appropriation. Page 2 ~.~ .. / ~. F. Roanoke City Council authorized the City Manager on June 9, 1986 to execute State and Federal grant applications, documents and agreements relating to the airport terminal development project per Ordinance No. 28173. G. Roanoke Regional Airport Commission, on April 15, 1987, authorized the Chairman of the Commission to execute necessary Federal and State documents in support of the airport terminal development project. H. Tentative allocation of $2,198,733 has been received from FAA. These funds must be accepted by the execution of a formal grant agreement by September 30, 1987. II. Current situation is City Council and Roanoke County Board of Super- visors need to approve the above described proposed capital expenditures related to the terminal development project which exceed $100,000 and which will benefit five or more future accounting periods under Section 17 (b) of the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission contract. III. Issues in order of consideration: A. Funding B. Timin C. Grant reimbursement IV. Alternatives: A. City Council and Roanoke County Board of Supervisors approve execution by the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission of FAA and Virginia DOA grants and capital expenditures related to the terminal development project. 1. Fundin will be available as funds are allocated and project proceeds. 2. Timin for being under grant by September 30, 1987, for Phase II FAA grant would be insured. 3. Grant reimbursement, site preparation and related cost will be eligible for reimbursement when grant is executed. B. City Council and Roanoke County Board of Supervisors not approve execution by the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission of FAA and Virginia DOA grants and capital expenditures related to the ter- minal development project. 1. Funding from FAA and Virginia DOA may not be available for terminal development project. - Page 3 ~. r- 2. Timing of terminal development project would be delayed. 3. Grant reimbursement may not be available. V. Recommendation is that City Council and the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors accept alternative "A" approving execution by the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission of all grant agreements made by the FAA and Virginia DOA and accompanying capital expenditures related to the terminal development project in accordance with the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission contract. Respectfully submitted, ~./~ W. Robert Herbert, Chairman Roanoke Regional Airport Commission WRH :RCP : of m cc: Members, Roanoke Regional Airport Commission Legal Counsel E-92287-3 ITEM NUMBER - AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: September 22, 1987 SUBJECT: Request from the Regional Airport Commission for authorization to execute contracts and agreements concerning the Taxiway Guidance Signs and the Runway Extension. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'/S COMMENTS: %C2~'ncn..c/ GC~~~c SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: At its September 16, 1987 meeting, the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission approved the installation of the 'Taxiway Guidance Signs and Rehabilitation of the Airport Electrical Vault. This contract was awarded to Fischer Electrical Construction Company who presented the low bid of $165,610.00 for the project. The Commission also approved the execution of Amendment No. 6 to the contract for the Runway Extension with Delta Associates, P.E., Inc. in the amount of $27,100.00. Attached is a report from the members of the Regional Airport Commission with additional information. Approval is required by both Roanoke City Council and the Board of Supervisors for any proposed capital expenditures which exceed $100,000. FISCAL IMPACT: None. Funding is available in the Runway Extension Account. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board authorize the Regional Airport Commission to execute the contract with Fischer Electrical Construction and Amendment No. 6 to the contract for the Runway Extension with Delta Associates, P.E., Inc. PREPARED BY: APPROVED BY: y'Y~cz~~ „~. Mary H. Allen Deputy Clerk ~' ~~ Elmer C. o ge County Administrator ~~`` ~~ 4--~- . .,.~.~.~ Roanoke, Virginia Chairman and Members Roanoke Regional Airport Commission Dear Members of the Commission: Subject: Bids to Install Taxiway Guidance Signs, Rehabilitate Airport Electrical Vault and Engineering Services Agreement Amendment No. 6 Runway Extension. I. Background• A. Airport Commission received bids at its August 13, 1987, meeting, to install Taxiway Guidance Signs and Rehabilitate Airport Electrical Vault. Three (3) bids were received and referred to the Bid Committee for review and report back to the Commission. B. Low bid, in the amount of $165,610.00 was submitted by Fischer Electrical Construction, Inc. C. FAA Tower requested the installation of new taxiway guidance sign system. D. Funds remained in the Runway Extension Grant to accomplish the project. E. City Council authorzied by Ordinance No. 25384, dated November 24, 1980, the design of the Runway Extension. F. Contract for design of Runway Extension was entered into with Delta Associates P.E., Inc. in the amount of $139,000.00. G. Five amendments have been authorized by City Council: 1. Amendment No. 1 in the amount of $48,400.00 for the detailed design of the Route 118 Underpass. 2. Amendment No. 2 in the amount of $170,300.00: i. Additional Design for Phase II in the amount of $32,100.00. Phase II was broken into four (4) bidding alternates to allow maximum use of antici- pated funding. ~~ .. Page 2 ii. Administration of construction - a lump sum amount of $58,200.00 for Phase I. (Underpass) iii. Resident inspection - a not-to-exceed amount of $80,000.00 for Phase I. (Underpass) 3. Amendment No. 3 in the amount of $356,000.00: i. Administration of construction - a lump sum amount of $136,000.00 for Phase II. ii. Resident inspection - a not-to-exceed amount of $220,000.00 for Phase II. 4, Amendment No. 4 in the amount of $11,988.00: i. Engineering services for the development of new NEF noise contours for a lump sum amount of $5,9_ 88.0• ii. Design services for the design and administration of construction for security chain-link fencing for a lump sum amount of $6,000.00. 5. Amendment No. 5 in the amount of $45_ 300.00_: i. Noise monitoring of up to sixteen (16) sites for a not-to-exceed amount of $36,600.00. ii. Engineering services for the design and administra- tion of construction for taxiway guidance signs for a lump sum amount of $83700.00. g. Taxiway Guidance Sign Project was envisioned to replace signs at present location. I. FAA requested during design of the taxiway guidance sign pro- ject that the project be expanded to locate signs in accor- dance with new revised standards and add additional new signs. The adding °[husethewElegtricalsVault hadrtoabeorehae electrical service, bilitated. II. Current situation is that the Airport Commission needs to: A. Auth~ e the execution of a contract with Fischer Electrical Construction, Inc. in the amount of $165,610.00. B. Authorize the execution of Amendment No. 6 to the contract for the Runway Extension with Delta Associates, P.E., Inc. in the amount of $27,100.00 ($11,100.00 for additional design required by the FAA and $16,000.00 for resident inspection of Taxiway Signs and Airport Electrical Vault Rehabilitation). ~!.~ .. -. Page 3 III. Issues: A. Compliance of the bidders with requirements of the Contract Documents. B. Amount of Iow bid. C. Fundin . D. FAA & FAA Tower requirements. IV. Alternatives: A. Authorize the Chairman of the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission to execute the following in a form acceptable to Legal Counsel and subject to approval of Roanoke City Council, Roanoke County Board of Supervisors and the FAA: - Award the contract to Fischer Electrical Construction, Inc. in the amount of $165,610.00. - Amendment No. 6 to the Contract with Delta Associates, P.E., Inc. in the amount of $27,100.00 ($11,100.00 for additional design required by the FAA and $16,000.00 for resident inspection for the Taxiway Signs and Airport Electrical Vault Rehabilitation. 1. Compliance of the bidder with the requirements of the Contract Documents was met. 2. Amount of the low bid is acceptable. 3. Funding for the proposed contract and Amendment No. 6 is available in the Runway Extension Account AIP-O1 ~ 02, Account Number 004-056-8551-9003. 4. FAA and FAA Tower requirements would be met. B. Do not authorize the Chairman of the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission to execute the contract with Fischer Electrical Construction, Inc., and Amendment No. 6. 1. Compliance of the bidders with the requirements of the contract documents would not be an issue. 2. Amount of the low bid may be higher if readvertised. ~: ~; Page 4 3, Fundino would remain in the Runway Extension Account but the 9U/ Federal share may be lost if project is delayed too long. 4, FAA and FAA Tower requirements would not be met. p, Recommendation is that the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission take the following action: A, Ap rove Alternative "A" and award a contract to Fisc610.00. Electrical Construction, Inc. in the amount of $165, r 100.00 for g, A rove the execution olncmeinmthe amounttoft$27~=ct wit Delta Associates P.E•~ additional design and resident inspection. C, R~ect the other bids received. Respectfully submitted, Kit B. Kiser, Chairman ~~~~.. Lee Garrett ~~ Robert A. Garla / „~~~ v JZ ` obert C. Poole Diane Hyatt KBK/JGB/mm Attachments: Tabulation of Bids Amendment No. 6 cc: Legal Counsel Finance Engineer `i__ AI~BNDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT ~ _ `-` BETWEEN OWNER AND ENGINEER FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Delta Project No. VA 8228-C This AMENDMENT No. Six (6) , dated August 27, 1987 is made to the December 2, 1980 Engineering Agreement between the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission (formerly the City of Roanoke, Virginia), the OWNER and Delta Associates P.E. ENGINEER for work at the Roanoke Regional Airport. Inc., the This AMENDMENT is required as described below: 1. To compensate the ENGINEER for an increased scope of work for the basic services for the Taxiway Guidance Signs. After coordination with the FAA and the Roanoke Regional Airport Staff, the project increased from 22-25 signs to 42 new and/or relocated signs and panel replacement on 26 existing signs. Electrical vault rehabilitation was also added to the project to properly power the new signs on existing circuits. The engineering estimate with Amendment No. Five (5) estimated three (3) plan sheets would be required. The As-Bid plans for this project required twelve (12) plan sheets. Therefore, additional basic services compensation is requested by the ENGINEER. 2. As requested by the OWNER, the ENGINEER has provided herein the rates, fees and charges for a resident project representative for the Taxiway Guidance Sign project. VIII - ADDITIONAL SERVICES Add the following paragraph: E. The ENGINEER shall provide Resident Project Representative services for the installation of the Taxiway Guidance Signs at the Roanoke Regional Airport to be accomplished under subject project. SECTION V Change paragraph I to read I. Payment to the ENGINEER for engineering services for the design and administration of construction for the Taxiway Guidance Signs shall be a lump sum of $19,800. This is an increase of $11,100 from previously approved Amendment No. Five (5). VA 8228-C Page 1 of 5 08-24-87 J. Payment to the ENGINEER for a Resident Project Representative for the Taxiway Guidance Sign project shall be on an hourly cost basis plus mileage and direct costs with a Not-to-Exceed amount of $16,000 without prior approval of the OWNER. The unit costs ale listed below: Resident Project Representative $30.00/hour Vehicle Mileage @ $0.205/mile Printing, Film, etc. @ Direct Cost VA 8228-C Page 2 of 5 08-24-87 ~. 1 All other provisions of the original Agreement and subsequent Amendments remain unchanged. OWNER: ENGINEER: Roanoke Regional Airport Commission Roanoke Regional Airport Woodrum Field 1635 Aviation Drive, NW Roanoke, Virginia 24012 Chairman ATTEST: Delta Associates P.E., Inc. 7734 Whitepine Road Richmond, Virginia 23237 and L. Beale, P.E. sident ATTEST: i~~~ Margare, Jane G ss My Comm. Expires 12-26-88 VA 8228-C Page 3 of 5 08-24-87 ROANORB REGIONAL AIRPORT ROANOlCE, VIRGINIA TABIWAY GIIIDANCE 8IGN8 DESIGN AND BIDDING (Actual Hours) Principal Project Engineer Engineering Technician Electrical Subconsultant Travel Printing Plans & Specs 46 hrs x $56 = $ 2,576.00 117 hrs x $38 = $ 4,446.00 106.5 hrs x $23 = $ 2,449.50 _ $ 3,005.68 _ $ 440.00 _ ~ ~~7 ~n $ 13,534.78 CONSTROCTION PR PE ET Preconstruction Conference (1) 0 8 0 Shop Drawings 2 g 0 Construction Inspection (4) 0 32 0 Final Inspection (1) 0 8 0 Construction Correspondence 4 16 0 FAA Pay Requests 2 12 0 Record Drawings 2 8 16 10 92 16 Principal Project Engineer Engineering Technician Travel 6 Trips @ $110 Printing Electrical Subconsultant TOTAL BASIC SERVICES FEE: Design and Bidding Construction 10 hrs x $56 = $ 560 92 hrs x $38 = $ 3,496 16 hrs x $23 = $ 368 $ 4,424 $ 660 $ 200 $ 1,000 $ 6,284 $ 13,534.78 $ 6,284.00 $ 19,818.78 USE $ 19,800 VA 8228-C Page 4 of 5 08-24-87 ROANOICE REGIONAL AIRPORT ~;- "~ ROANORE, VIRGINIA TABIWAY GIIIDANCS SIGNS t RESIDENT PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE (Estimated 60 Calendar Days) Use 10 Weeks Preconstruction Conference 8 hours 10 Weeks @ 50 hours/week 500 hours 508 hours 508 hours x $30/hr = $15,240 MILEAGE 100 miles/week x 10 weeks = 1,000 miles 1,000 miles x $0.205 = USE $ 205 TOTAL $15,445 USE NOT-TO-EXCEED $16,000 VA 8228-C Paqe 5 of 5 08-24-87 S 8~~spp~y8p~~p8p 88888mp88 888p8~Np8~8p 888~8p N8p88 s 8888888888 8 8 = N M 11'7 e~ ~ ~ ~ aD O fL m ~ O O ~f ~'~1 ~ ~ ~ Y7 O+ m _~ ~ ~ m y ~ _ N N _ ~ 2i ~~~~A ~ ~ t lil d T ... 7 II'7 0 .. N n M ~ N ap (~J (~ 11~~ ~~pp (N~/ N 1fJ N N N M M M M N M M M M (ZJ N M M M M M M M N N N M M N .~. M O MM M M ~~ yp7 sN,~~1mm8~8mm88$ 88888s888S88ss8$88888888 s _ •+ U 1~ M N O t0 M n d~^ t m pp~~ mm m LL N M r n ~ O~ ~ + d ~ O~ ~~dmCppp O+O~}} O ~ C*~ Od+ r~ ~~~Nppp (y~~ ~j V7 ~ ~ G O' m M N M N N M O m (~J .r ~ ~ M W O M M IA 4"7 ~~ M M T fU ~^ .~.. QQ 6 M M ~ M M M M N M N~ N N M M M M N .. M M~ C ~ N M N ... ~ M N g°ogsssgsss 8888s8238835$8$8888888888 8 8 ~~~~~~s~~~ ~g$~~g~~~c~~~sg~~~~~~~g~~ ~ ~ ~ N pp 1y(77 ~~J,1 M M N M M~ M M M~ N ~ o .-. "." d d .-' ._ M N N ~ M .. ~ N N M N M M M M M M N M N M N N~ M N M Q p p W ~ 8 0 ~ Ifl O s s s O s g S S O s S s O O s p O ~ O O O O s s O O O s s d~ .. '~~ ' o o ~ ~~ ~ O M N M M M _^ M N M N M M M M N N N M N M N N O M x N p N C.7 p pp p pp pp pp o Q p p pp M p p 8 `-' s s O s s g g s 8 g 8 g s s p O p s~ p~ O~~ p `-' s s 0 0 0 0 O 8 g 1f1 pd O p p ~ aD N aA N N ~G ~ ^ N r+7 ~ N aG N O~ 1! ~ < d d ~ M m r~•7 ~e~ B N N r ~j ~ U M M M N N .r.. M M M M M N d O~ ~ .-. ..-. h] M .-. ... _. M .. N ~ r ~ N ~ Z M N N M N N N N M M N M N M M M N M « li] Z 4M0 r .w ~~ y pspm~p~g~ss~s~(s~~ sys7ssps~Nsspss~y/s~7~~sssg~sgsl~lsp)1Qs7~spsoss ~s7 {yQ +' {{U.. O M N M~ M N M M M ~ /~ ~~ Oi O f~~. M M M ~j ~ M~ N~ N~ M M~ O_ M~ m G `~pD MM .- ~ (~1 ~ ~ M M ~ N M M K N N N N M r ~ o 0o 0 0 0 o M 8 S 8 8 8 8 8 8 s s 8 8 8 8 8 Q s 8 ~ 8 s 8 V 8 8 8 s 8 8 8 8 S 8 8 8 8 N~~ N d~Ng~~y1~1~'77n,~~_~M~~~S~~'~~~g~g~g~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ M N M M N M M M ~ N m N fat ~"1 1h ..-. N N M M M M M M ~ N W N M M N M ~IfC N N M M N~ M M M "~ N H M Q ~~ _~ yy pss~po~~QssQQsss88s 88ssss8s8s8g8sppssl.Qs~ssss8s8ssssssss g W V ~ a" u $ M M M O M 117 M~ O a~ ~~~ U"7 aG M eL M M d ~ ~ M M 11((''ll ~M ~diiM ~ 1((A~7 ~ ~88~53°~_ W ~~ » » M M _!' -^ N~ N M M M M M M M M M N N N N F xx ~ -. w {1~~ ¢¢ {{~~ ~~yy ¢¢ ¢¢ ¢ ¢¢ QQ ¢¢ ¢¢ QQ QQ 11yy ¢¢ Q ~. Y J J ~J J J J W J J (V W W W W W W J J W W W W W W W W W W W W W W UI W lajj O w ~ ~ .r Q ,~. •~ '" ~5 8 8 " S2 f~7 Q (~ t~ M N Q~ O e~ .-. ~ C~ d N r+7 fU hY .-. d ~p ~.. M N ~O O .-. 1/~ ,m0 Ifs IYj [Yj c1! 'r o ^ ~g D n 1m~ Vm] O O _ Y1 y C ~ Yy ~ m m ^ r~1. ..yp-.1 .p-~• •-y-n cc N ry ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ Y1 O~ n 7~ f_ a. oa C. ~ ~~~~ C C C C O O O~~ rn w Y y1 ~ M ~/ r •' y ~ N to u7 ~ n n n n A ~ A ~ ~ m a o. " 3 wy ~~p .~ O ~ G V ~ ... L Ii YI7 ~ ~ a 10 w U w N N 1 ~rn o. o. o. ~ ~ ~ ~ F fn to 7E n c ~ FU T 5' m u c, o ~i +.. .r ~ ~ tL ta. LL ~ ~ 7 ~ a,p o ~ ~ ~l1 ~ H ~ ~ ~ ~ U (+'„1 ~ G f a0 „0,,. C.1 U L.7 N fn 4l N N7 4 lLL 1LL ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ~ N ~ U ! y ry U L^ O C1 ~ asp ! Gi ~ Ci ~ .ti (L~ d aC m O ~ ~ N C ~ Y 'r ~ H > W ffYY O tl Y1 y ~ •C YC7 iw M a~ i0 O aG O ~ a W Y- a[ F- L W W$ C M ~ ~ 01 G C ~! W ~O d fn Q ~1 G 1-~- ./ J+ 1y1 `i' fJ~ y d ~i W V d 01 G .O 9 n ., ~ ¢ ac ac ¢ oc V t= V ~> ~~ saaa~ooooo ~cx~~ex~~ex~~ex~~x~~e~zc~_e~_x_~zc~czc~co_a_mo o sJ J J J J J J J J 1 1 J J J J J J J J J J J J 1 1 1 1 J J J 7~ 1C N 7 1 J J J J J J J J n pJ e a G ~~ w A! M .f Y7 ~ f~ m D1 .Q•. w ~~..+-~ .fir ~.. ~... m .~-1 N N N N N N N N N N O M N M A-92287-5 ITEM NOMBER ~-~- ` ~'' AT A REGOLAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COONTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: September 22, 1987 SUBJECT: Request for Approval to Proceed with Replacement of Fort Lewis Property Ballfields COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: rw~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: On Tuesday, September 8, 1987, the Board approved Ordinance 9887-6, accepting an offer for the sale of approximately 8.96 acres adjacent to the Fort Lewis Fire Station and for the sale proceeds ($110,000) to be allocated in part or in total to replace the two (2) existing Ballfields located on the sale property. To meet the deadline of September 1989 for the removal of the Ballfields from Fort Lewis, design and construction must begin by April 1988. The staff is currently preparing design and bidding documents for improvements in Green Hill Park which will be constructed this Fall and completed in the Spring of 1988. If the Green Hill Park plans are modified to include the replacement fields and associated parking, the County can realize a savings of $10,000-$15,000 over a separate contract in April of 1988. The replacement fields and the associated parking is estimated to cost $100,000 if constructed at this time. FISCAL IMPACT: Project recommendation will require an appropriation of $110,000 from the Fort Lewis real estate sale proceeds in the capital reserve account for the replacement of two (2) Ballfields and associated parking. RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends the appropriation of $110,000 of proceeds from the real estate sale of the property adjacent to the Fort Lewis Fire Station for the replacement of two (2) Ball- fields and the associated parking at Green Hill Park. It is anticipated that this amount of money will be required to con- struct the fields. In the event there are any f unds remaining, staff recommends that these funds be used to upgrade the quality of the fields or add another field to Green Hill Park. APPROVED : -- '~ SUBMITTED BY : ~' `~~ V~/ , ~` Ste hen H. Carpenter Director of Parks & Recreation ~~r1~Y' Elmer C. 0 9 County Administrator ---- VOTE - ACTION No YeS Abs Motion by: Steven A. McGraw/ x Approved ( ~ Brittle _~ Denied ( ) Alan H. Brittle to approve Garrett staff recommendation witri ---x Received ( ) Johnson Referred communit involved in McGraw _~ decision -~ to Nickens cc: File Stephen Carpenter John Hubbard John Chambliss Gary Huff 2 ~~ PROJECT DESCRIPTION GREEN HILL PARK Green Hill_ Park is a 225 acre park located on Diuguids Lane in western Roanoke County. The park will feature athletic fields, tennis courts, basketball crourts, interpretive center., amphitheater, picnicking, and a horse center. Green Hill Park is anticipated to provide needed facilities through the year 2000. T'ne park will be developed in phases with the Phase I work being basica_tly funded by the 19$5 Bond Issue. The total projected costs upon completion is expected to be approxi- mately $5.5 million. NORTH ,, r A-92287-6 r AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF S ITEM NUMBER ~.~ -- COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTYEADMINISTRATROANOKE IN ROANOKE, VA., ON TUESDAY ICV CENTER MEETING DATE: September 22, 1987 SUB-~T: Dixie Caverns Landfill Consent Agreement and Order COUNTY~p+,'JADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS ' w-c-o-rw„'i,~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Over the past sixteen months, ing with the United the County staff has been work- States Environmental Protection Agency to resolve an environmental qualit landfill. This landfill site was lusedlforawaste Dixie 1961 to 1976. Caverns and other industrial wastes were disposed disposal from scrap metal, fly ash, sludge, of in this landfill. EPA has determined that certain removal actions must b formed at this site. EPA has concluded that the health threat at this site due to the threatened rel e per- tain substances. re exists a ease of cer- Staff has negotiated a requires the Count Proposed Consent approved work plan for the y to retain a consulting engineer to developlan disposal areas of the site. slag Pile, disposal or coverin This work Pit and drum basins g~ testing, sam lin Plan would include removal and a P 9, construction of sedimentation be completed PP h Pr 180 days ofa theleffect ssar Agreement. Y• This work must Ive date of the Consent FIS~IMPACT: No monies have been included in the 1987-88 budget to this expense. cover When the consulting engineer completes his proposed work, a more accurate cost estimate will be ava'' you. portion of the fable to A portion of these expenses may be shared b ly responsible parties, the industries that Y other o~! wastes in this landfill. P ential- disposed of these 1 RECOMMENDATION: ._ (~, It is recommended that the Board: 1) authorize the County Administrator to execute the proposed Consent Agreement with EPA, and 2) authorize the County Administrator to take such actions as may be necessary to accomplish the purposes of the Consent Agreement, including retaining a consulting engineer and negotiating the financial participation of potentially responsible parties. When the cost estimates have been established, staff will recommend to the Board of Supervisors the means of financing these corrective actions. Respectfully submitted, Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney Approved Denied Received Referred To ACTION (x) Motion by: Steven A. McGraw/ ( ) Alan H. Bri e o approve ( ) sta recommen a ion cc: File Paul Mahoney Brittle Garrett Johnson McGraw Nickens V0~1'E No Yes Abs x x x x x 2 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF ITEM NUMBER f-y---~ COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTYEADMINIS OF ROANOKE STRATION CENTER MEETING DATE; September 22, 1987 SU-~ T~ Request to Reschedule Secondary Highwa S' Work Session Y ix Year Plan COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: J i~/ C`17c~.. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The staff needs additional the Highway Department and other data f or this work session from requested that the work session betheldmonbOctober 13 Therefore, it is FISCAL IMPACT: ~ 1987. N/A RECOMMENDATION: Staff requests that Highway Six Year Plan the Work Session for the meeting. be rescheduled for Secondary October 13, 1987, SUBMITTED BY; APPROVED: Phillip T. enr ~-- Director of EngineerEng Elmer C. odge ------------------------------------County Administrator APProved ( ) Motion b ACTION -------------------------- Denied ( ) y~ VOTE Received ( ) No Yes Abs Referred Brittle To Garrett Johnson McGraw Nickens r ITEM NUMBER L~..-fir --- l 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 22, 1987 SUBJECT: Request for Public Hearing Condemnation of easement for Hollins Community Develop- ment Project COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~~ U~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Staff requests that the Board approve a public hearing con- cerning a resolution to authorize immediate right-of-entry and condemnation of an easement across the real estate of Mattie Moore Johnson. This action is necessary in order to proceed with road improvements for the Hollins Community Development Project. The property owner lives in New Jersey. Both the Hollins Community Development Coordinator and the County Attorney's Office have attempted to contact the owner and her attorney to resolve this issue; however, these efforts have been unsuccess- ful. The Board's customary practice has been to schedulf~ public hearings for the evening meeting. Because of the urgency of this matter, staff is requested that the Board schedule this public hearing for the afternoon meeting of October 13, 1987. If the Board approves this request, legal notice for this public hearing will be published on September 29 and October 6, 1987. Also, certified letters providing notice of this public hearing will be mailed to the owner and her attorney. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board authorize and approve the holding of a public hearing on this matter on October 13, 1987. . _ ,9 Respectfully submitted, ~~~ Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney ________ ---------------------------- VOTE ---------- ACTION No Yes Abs Approved ( ) Motion by: Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred T o ___-- Brittle Garrett Johnson McGraw Nickens AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROA1vOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINTSI'RATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 1987 RESOLUTION NO. APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGEiVDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM J - CONSENT AGENDA BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That that certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for September 22, 1987, designated as Item J - Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 5, inclusive, as follows; 1. Request for approval for a Raffle Permit from the Green Valley Elementary School PTA. 2. Authority to settle pending litigation: Roanoke County v. Reynolds, et al -- 3. Request for approval for a Raffle Permit from the Glenvar Youth Boosters. 4. Authorization to accept or acquire easements for drainage improvements in the Palm Valley and Willowlawn Rd./South Park Circle areas. 5. Request for funding for the second phase improvements at the Public Service Center. 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. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 1987 RESOLUTION N0. 92287-7 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM J - CONSENT AGENDA BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That that certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for September 22, 1987, designated as Item J - Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 5, inclusive, as follows: 1. Request for approval for a Raffle Permit from the Green Valley Elementary School PTA. 2. Authority to settle pending litigation: Roanoke County v. Reynolds, et al 3. Request for approval for a Raffle Permit from the Glenvar Youth Boosters. 4. Authorization to accept or acquire easements for drainage improvements in the Palm Valley and Willowlawn Rd./South Park Circle areas. 5. Request for funding for the second phase improvements at the Public Safety Center. 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 Johnson, seconded by Supervisor Garrett, and upon the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Brittle, Garrett, McGraw, Nickens, Johnson NAYS : None A COPY - TESTE: 9/24/87 ~mcz~~ .~ Mary H. Allen, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney Phillip Henry, Director of Engineering John Hubbard, Assistant County Administrator John M. Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator Diane Hyatt, Finance Director A-92287-7.a AT A REGULAR MEETING ITEM NUMBER COUNTY OF THE BOARD ~` . VIRGINIA HELD AT THE OF' SUPERVISORS ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTOF ROANOKE RATION CENTER MEETING DATE: September 22, 1987 SUBJECT: ---~_ Request for approval for Valley Elementar a Raffle Permit Y School pTA from the Green COUNTY ADMINISTRATORS COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION; The Green Valle Permit. This a y Elementary School pTA of Revenue and helrecommends sthat i reviewedab requested a y the Raffle t be a Commissioner The organization has PProved. paid the $25.00 fee RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the application aPP~roved . for a Raffle Permit be SUBMITTED By; APPROVED By; y~ ~ ..~ Q_~ Mary H Allen Deputy Clerk ~ ,~ /~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator APAroved (x) ACTION ---------------------------- ______ Denied ( ~ M Ga ° e by: Bob L.Johnson/Lee VOTE Received ( ~ No Referred Brittl Yes Abs To ---~_ cc: File Bingo File e x Garrett x Johnson -" x McGraw - x Nickens - x - ,~' - / ~~~ Roanoke County meeting place?~3 ~' ~ :~ ~ u~'u' c~`GZ~~- ~~~~ Has organization been inexistence in Roanoke County for two con- tinuous years? YES ~1// NO Is the organization non-profit? YES `~ NO Indicate Federal Identification Number # ''~ Attach copy of IRS Tax Exemption letter. Officers of the Organization: President: 1~=_~rL~L ~,-~1~-~~'C__~~,.~ Vice-President Address : _~ 7~2 ~:~ ~T~)v/n!-?S~1r~ ~~``~ Address -> Secretary : ,~ ~ /~ L~LI ~~ ~'~~' ~ `~"~ Treasurer : ~-~ (~ ~- ~~ ~~ ~~'-~' Address: `f 5L!l lac-'_~ f %,i~'i~ ~'---- Address: ~ ~~'> ~ t~~l~c~i~r Member authorized to be responsible for Raffle or Bingo opera- tions: Name ~ ~ ~~. ~~ l rC~_. ~ ~ Home Address ~~rl ~~-- i~C"~CLI 1"~ ~-T y~~~~'_,, ~Oltf7~%~~Y~'- ~ ~'~ ~~`~~ / Phone C~~~~' ~-:~~~~ Bus. Phone -.SCE-~~~-- A COMPLETE LIST OF THE NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF CURRENT MEMBER- SHIP MUST BE FURNISHED WITH THIS APPLICATION. Specific location where Raffle or Bingo Game is to be conducted. C~l'L f--~ 62 ~,~~~.~~F l~ L_ ~E e~?~~t`C ~ C;c t~~ ,~<~ ~ 4~c RAFFLES: Date of Drawing / U ~,.~/ ly'~ Time of Drawing Cc, :~ ~iC,( ~i7~'cf~ ~y~ ~ ' Q ~ ~~x" BINGO: Days of Week & Hours of Activity: Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday From To From To From To From To From To From To From To 2 COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO CONDUCT RAFFLES OR BINGO O~ ROAWO~F' ~, , I~ G ~ ~ G'f 2 a 1838 `~ Application is hereby made for a bingo game or raffle permit. This application is made subject to all County and State laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations now in force, or that may be enacted hereafter and which are hereby agreed to by the under- signed applicant and which shall be deemed a condition under which this permit is issued. All applicants should exercise extreme care to ensure the accura- cy of their responses to the following questions. Bingo games and raffles are strictly regulated by Title 18.2-340.1 et. sec. of the criminal statutes of the Virginia Code, and by Section 4-86 et. se~C. of the Roanoke County Code. These laws authorize the County Board of Supervisors to conduct a reasonable investiga- tion prior to granting a bingo or raffle permit. The Board has sixty days from the filing of an application to grant or deny the permit. The Board may deny, suspend, or revoke the permit of any organization found not to be in strict compliance with county and state law. Any person violating county or state regulations concerning these permits shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. Any person who uses any part of the gross receipts from bingo or raffles for any purpose other than the lawful religious, charitable, community, or educational purposes for which the organization is specifi- cally organized, except for reasonable operating expenses, shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony. THIS APPLICATION IS FOR: (check one) RAFFLE PERMIT v' BINGO GAMES ~ ) Name of Organization `~"T SC'I' ~~_~~~" ~ ,~~~'i~' ="/Z~dl-~~- ~. ~• ,~_ Street Address ~j ~ j ~~ ~.,~~~~~' 1~ ~~Ci--~~ _ /~ OCR ~~- Mailing Address - ~S«i~7='_ /~ City, State, Zip Code /~C%C~-l~~ ,~~C% ~~II ~/ ~_ ~ ~ ,~ ~ Purpose and Type of Organization ~L~~. ~ ~%~~~ ~~l~E`-/~~' ~~~~~~ ~ ; _ j w~ f~; ; ~ l GZ~I ~1 ~t/ ~.~l~ C~'~C~' bL~%~. ~ S _ C~-/ C ~ C~ f .SC's - ~ ~ ~~ 1~ When was the organization founded? ~•'~;-~ 1 J_ _ ~ State specifically how the proceeds from the Bingo/Raffle will be used. List in detail the use of the planned or intended use of the proceeds. Use estimated amounts if necessary. f // ~f ~/ - , L C- '. J; j/ ~~ ~ ~ f-" : ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~~I~ ~ C ~ r C? ~ ~ It ~ I"3'l ~"~ ~:.~~-, C~~.~.~. ti ~~ BINGO: Complete the following: Legal owner(s) of the building where BINGO is to be conducted: Name: Address: County State Zip Is the building owned by a 501-C non-profit organization? Seating capacity for each location: Parking spaces for each location: ALL RAFFLE AND BINGO APPLICANTS MUST ANSWER QUESTIONS 1 - 19 1. Gross receipts from all sources related to the operation of Bingo games or Instant Bingo by calendar quarter for prior calen- dar year period. BINGO INSTANT BINGO lst Quarter 2nd, Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter Total lst Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter Total 2. Does your organization understand that it is a violation of law to enter into a contract with any person or firm, associa- tion, organization, partnership, or corporation of any classifica- tion whatsoever, for the purpose of organizing, managing, or con- ducting Bingo Games or Raffles? r~C:~; 3. Does your organization understand that it must maintain and file complete records of receipts and disbursements pertaining to Bingo games and Raffles, and that such records are subject to audit by the Commissioner of the Revenue? '~~ 4. Does your organization understand that the Commissioner of the Revenue or his designee has the right to go upon the premises on which any organization is conducting a Bingo game or raffle, to perform unannounced audits, and to secure for audit all re- cords required to be maintained for Bingo games or raffles? c 3 t ~.G- 5. Does your organization understand that a Financial Report must be filed with the Commissioner of the Revenue on or before the first day of November of each calendar year for which a per- mit has been issued? C~ F~_, 6. Does your organization understand that if gross receipts ex- ceed fifty thousand dollars during any calendar quarter, an addi- tional Financial Report must be filed for such quarter no later than sixty days following the last day of such quarter? ~> 7. Does your organization understand that the failure to file financial reports when due shall cause automatic revocation of the permit, and no such organization shall conduct any Bingo game or raffle thereafter until such report is properly filed and a new permit is obtained? ~_<< _. 8. Does your organization understand that each Financial Report must be accompanied by a Certificate, verified under oath by the Board of Directors, that the proceeds of any Bingo game or raffle have been used for these lawful, religious, charitable, commu- nity, or educations-1 purposes for which the organization is spe- cifically chartered or organized, and that the operation of Bingo games or raffles have been in accordance with the provisions of Article 1.1 of Chapter 8, Title 18.2 of the Code of Virginia?~ 9. Does your organization understand that a one percent audit fee of the gross receipts must be paid to the County of Roanoke upon submission of the annual financial report due on or before the first of November? 10. Does your organization understand that this permit is valid only in the County of Roanoke and only at such locations, and for such dates, as are designated in the permit application? ;~~~_ 11. Does your organization understand that no person, except a bona fide member of any such organization who shall have been a member of such organization for at least ninety days prior to such participation, shall participate in the management, opera- tion, or conduct of any bingo game or raffle, and no person shall receive any remuneration for participating in management, operation, or conduct of any such game or raffle? ~~~:. 12. Has your organization attached a check for the annual permit fee in the amount of $25.00 payable to the County of Roanoke, ~~~ Virginia? .< 13. Does your organization understand that any organization found in violation of the County Bingo and Raffle Ordinance or X18.2- 340.10 of the Code of Virginia authorizing this permit is subject to having such permit revoked and any person, shareholder, agent, member or employee of such organization who violates the above to having such permit revoked and any person, shareholder, agent, member or employee of such organization who violates the above referenced Codes may be guilty of a felony? ~<~. 4 a 14. Has your organization attached a complete list of it ship to this application form? s member- 1"~ -,, 15. Has your organization attached a co application form? ~„, py of its bylaws to this 16. Has the organization been declared exempt from ro tion under the Virginia Constitution or statutes? ~i/~~-' If Yes, state whether exem tion is for real p ~erty taxa- or-both and identify exem P Personal P property.- Property, 17. State the specific type ,.and ~~ ~ ~ ~~ p ~rpose of the o~gani.zati~on. lK C"L f 18. Is this organization incorporated in Virginia? ~, If Yes, name and address of Registered Agent: `~`~ 19. Is the organization registered with the Vir ini of Agriculture and Consumer Solicitations Act, Affairs pursuant to theaCharit ble (If so Section 57-48 of the Virginia Code? ;~`Y attach copy of registration.) ~~~ Has the organization been by the Vir inia De granted an exemption from registration ~-~ g (If sopartment of Agriculture and Consumer Affairs? attach copy of exemption.) ALL RAFFLE APPLICANTS DESCRIBE THE ARTICLES TO BE VALUE OF SUCH ARTICLES, AND PROCEED TO NOTARIZATION. RAFFLED, Article Description Fair Market Value %.j f ~?~ ..~ 2e. ,~ .:~ m,~ ~.-~ ; _~ r r~t C t: 1. ,~- / ALL BINGO APPLICANTS MUST ANSWER QUESTIONS 20 - 27 BEFORE NOTARIZATION RAFFLE APPLICANTS, GO TO NOTARIZATION. 20. Does your organization understand that the-bingo games shall not be conducted more frequently than two calendar days in any calendar week? 21. Does your organization understand that it is required to keep complete records of the bingo game. These records based on §18.2- 340.6 of the Code of Virginia and §4.98 of Roanoke County Code must include the following: a. A record of the date, quantity, and card value of instant bingo supplies purchased, as well as the name and address of the supplier of such instant bingo supplies, and written invoice or receipt is also required for each purchase of in- stant bingo supplies? b. A record in writing of the dates on which Bingo is played, the number of people in attendance on each date, and the amount of receipts and prizes on each day? (These records must be retained for three years.) c. A record of the name and address of each individual to whom a .door prize, regular or special Bingo game prize or jackpot from the playing of Bingo is awarded? d. A complete and itemized record of all receipts and disburse- ments which support, and that agree with, the quarterly and annual reports required to be filed, and that these records must be maintained in reasonable order to permit audit? 22. Does your organization understand that instant Bingo may only be conducted at such time as regular Bin o and only at such locations and at such timesa as arelspe ifiedsin this application? 23. Does your organization understand that the gross receipts in the course of a reporting year from the playing of instant Bingo may not exceed 33 1/3$ of the gross receipts of an organization's Bingo operation? 24. Does your organization understand it may not sell an instant Bingo card to an individual below sixteen years of age? 25. Does your organization understand that an organization whose gross receipts from all bingo operations that exceed or are ex- pected to exceed $75,000 in any calendar year shall have been granted tax-exempt status pursuant to Section 501 C of the United States Internal Revenue Service? (Certificate must be attached.) 6 I 26. Does your organization understand that a Certificate pancy must be obtained or be on file which authorizes this u ~e cu- the proposed location? at 27. Does your organization understand that awards or r' or merchandise valued in excess of the followin illegal? P ize money g amounts are a• No door prize shall exceed twenty-five dollars. b• No regular Bingo or special Bingo game shall exceed red dollars. One Hund- c• No jackpot of an y nature whatsoever shall exceed One Thousand Dollars, nor shall the total amount of in any one calendar day exceed One ThousandpDollarse$ awarded * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * NOTARIZATION; T8E FOLLOWING OATfi MUST BE TAKEN BY APPLICANTS ALL I hereby swear or affirm under the forth in X18,2 of the Penalties of perjury as set statements are true to theebest of minis, that all of the above beliefs, y knowledge, information, and All questions have been answered. Signed by; r ~';ef c ~ ~; rr_ ~_ C~' . ~- I ~ ,~ .. t~-- Title P~ ~' ~ ~~ ~. Subscribed and sworn before me, thisc~~, da H°me Address ~~~ My commission expires: y o ~ t~~~ / 19 ~~ C cvotary i~ub7-lc RETURN THIS COMPLETED APPLICATION TO: COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE P.O. Box 3900 Roanoke, VA 24015 y R NOT VALID UNLESS COUNTERSIGNED The above application, having been found in due form, is approved and issued to the applicant to have effect until December 31st of this calendar year. :~ -- - ~~ "7 ~/ J / l Date ~ / < '"~-s'~ Com issio er of the evenue The above application is not approved. Date Commissioner of the Revenue 8 A-92287-7b ITEM NUMBER ~" AT A REGULAR MEETING C)F THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER IN ROANOKE, VA., ON TUESDAY, MEETING DATE: September 22, 1987 SUBJECT: Authorization to settle pending litigation Roanoke County v. Reynolds, et al. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS: A,~~~1~~M~=~k'~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This litigation concerns the proposed condemnation of 157.89 acres of real estate for the West County Reservoir, and was autho- rized by Resolution No. 84-229 duly adopted on December 18, 1984, after a public hearing. The parties continued to negotiate the issues, and several offers and counter-offers have been made. On September 8, 1987, the Board, in executive session, con- sidered an offer from the owners/defendants. This offer would resolve the pending litigation. This offer requests the payment of $105,000.00 (compensation for the value of the real estate taken, compensation for any damages to the residue or remainder. of the owners' property, and compensation for any damages previ- ously caused) and the provision of reasonable and appropriate access to the residue or remainder of the owners' property. Upon the commencement of this litigation, the County depo- sited with the Clerk of the Circuit Court the sum of $86,000.00. Therefore, an additional $19,000.00 must be paid to the owners. FISCAL IMPACT : ~"~~' The balance of $19,000.00 necessary to resolve this litiga- tion is from the funds reserved and carried over for this purpose from FY 1986-87. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board approve and authorize the proposed settlement of this litigation, and authorize the County Attorney to execute such documents and take such actions as may be necessary to accomplish the purposes of this settlement. Respectfully submitted, ~~TN`~ Y V\~ Y V l Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney ---------- Approved (x ACTION ------------------- Motion by: Bob L. Johnson/Lee VOTE Denied ( ) Garrett No Yes Abs Received ( ) Brittle ~ Referred _ __ Garrett x To Johnson x -- McGraw - x Nickens x cc: File Paul Mahoney John Hubbard A-92287-7.c ITEM NUMBER ~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE AMORE COUNTYEADMINISTRATIONNCENTER COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE RO MEETING DATE: September 22, 1987 SUBJECT• Request for approval for a Raffle Permit from the ~- Glenvar Youth Boosters COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: he Glenvar Youth Boosters have reQ~ommissionerlofP Revenue Tand T application has been reviewedobedthe he recommends that it be app The organization has paid the $25.00 fee RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the application for a Raffle Permit be approved. SUBMITTED BY: .~,~~_ Mary H. Allen Deputy Clerk APPROVED BY: ~'~' ,~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator VOTE ----- -------- --------------- ACTION No Yes Abs Motion by: Bob L. Johnson/Lee Brittle x roved ( ~ x Depied ( > Garrett to approve Garrett x Received ( ) Johnson x Referred McGraw x To _,_ Nickens -- cc: File Bingo File t COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO CONDUCT RAFFLES OR BINGO Application is hereby made for a bingo game or raffle permit. This application is made subject to all County and State laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations now in force, or that may be enacted hereafter and which are hereby agreed to by the under- signed applicant and which shall be deemed a condition under which this permit is issued. All applicants should exercise extreme care to ensure the accura- cy of their responses to the following questions. Bingo games and raffles are strictly regulated by Title 18.2-340.1 et. seq, of the criminal statutes of the Virginia Code, and by Section 4-86 et. s_e~c. of the Roanoke County Code. These laws authorize the County Board of Supervisors to conduct a reasonable investiga- tion prior to granting a bingo or raffle permit. The Board has sixty days from the filing of an application to grant or deny the permit. The Board may deny, suspend, or revoke the permit of any organization found not to be in strict compliance with county and state law. Any person violating county or state regulations concerning these permits shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. Any person who uses any part of the gross receipts from bingo or raffles for any purpose other than the lawful religious, charitable, community, or educational purposes for which the organization is specifi- cally organized, except for reasonable operating expenses, shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony, THIS APPLICATION IS FOR: (check one) RAFFLE PERMIT ti''" Name of Organization Street Address Mailing Address City, State, Zip Code BINGO GAMES ~.. , Purpose and Type of Organization f When was the organization founded? OF ~OAN~~F 1. , ~` L_ ti p Z ~ J a 1838 ...J Roanoke County meeting glace. ~~ ~,Z_C~~' Cdr C- Has organization been in existence in Roanoke County for two con- tinuous years? YES~_ NO Is the organization non-profit? YES /'~ NO Indicate Federal Identification Number # S~ -~~~ /~-<S~ Attach copy of IRS Tax Exemption letter. Officers of the Organization: ' President • >~~ i ~ ~-, ~ ~ i --,~. rn~r~S_- Vice-President ~ ... ~^n v~ ~ ~r'i I y~ S © ~ l' ~ G Address: J~~9 ~~1~~1Cayn~ ~r Address: o~b~q Tioe~i1~'_ ~)C~ck Kholo'~ SIVinYY1C~1~S Treasurer: ~a /'n~ tf ~, ~'s Secretary : ~~, ~pr -Cs.. , - ~~OCi ~1~11UyrS ~r ~ Address: ~~,~ ~~ 'f'-ncmol~_~f'~. Address: S~l~' ~G , o~ ~~J3 SGt~~'yh ~ ~~1_±~~1~ Member authorized to be responsible for Raffle or Bingo opera- tions: Name c~ 0~ ~ r c~ ~-.. S i ~. ~C'~ r S Home Address I QC)C~ ~A 11 I I\Cr tmS ~ -^ Phone 3 k~ u ~5 ~ Bus . Phone A COMPLETE LIST OF THE NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF CURRENT MEMBER- SHIP MUST BE FURNISHED WITH THIS APPLICATION. Specific location where Raffle or Bingo Game is to be conducted. S ~a v~r~ roc k ~a. r K - `G~ ~ E r.1 ~'Q- ~^ - V a- RAFFLES: Date of Drawing 'i' , Time of Drawing o~ ~()(~ ;~, vn 1 BINGO: Days of Week & Hours of Activity: Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday From To From To From To From To From To From To From To 2 ~~ f ~ BINGO: Complete the following: Legal owner(s) of the building where BINGO is to be conducted: Name. Address: County State_Zip_ Is the building owned b y a 501-C non-profit organization?_ Seating capacity for each location: Parking spaces for each location: ALL RAFFLE AND BINGO APPLICANTS MUST ANSWER QUESTIONS 1 - l. Gross receipts from all sources related to the o era 19 Bingo games or Instant Bingo by calendar P tlon of dar year period, quarter for prior calen- BINGO lst Quarter--~~- 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter Total INSTANT BINGO lst Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter Total 2• Does your organization understand that it is a violation law to enter into a contract with tion, organization anY person or firm of tion whatsoever, forpthenership, or corporation of an associa- ducting Bin o Purpose of organizin Y classifica- g Games or Raffles?~ g~ managing, or con- 3• Does -- your organization understand that it must maintain and file complete records of receipts and disbursements pertain' Bingo games and Raffles, and that such records are sub'eng to audit by the Commissioner of the Revenue? ~/,~%.S' ~ c t t o 4• Does your organization understand that the Commissio the Revenue or his designee has the right to on which an ner of Y organization is conductin g° upon the premises to perform unannounced audits g a Bingo game or raffle, cords required to be maintained ford Bin o ecure for audit all re- S g games or raffles? r i, 5 • Doe s ~~ ~ --,-. your organization understand that a Financial Report must be filed with the Commissioner of the Revenue on or befor the first day of November of each calendar mit has been issued?~~.-5- e year for which a per- t 6• Does your organization understand that if ceed fifty thousand dollars Burin gross receipts ex- tional Financial Report must be filedafordsuchuauarter Y y than sixt da s followin the last da of such ~ an addi- g Y no later quarter? ~/ r f- ~• Does your organization understand that the failure financial reports when due shall cause automatic revoc to file the permit, and no such organization shall conduct an B1ntlon of or raffle thereafter until such re ort is new permit is obtained? Y 9o game ~/r f P properly filed and a 8• Does your organization understand that each Financia must be accompanied by a Certificate, verified under oath b Board of Directors, that the 1 Report have been used for these lawfpl Cereligiousy B ha~itable Y the g game or raffle cific~ally chart red or orrposes for which the organization .commu- ganlzed 1s spe_ games or raffles have been in accordancetwithPthetlon of Bingo provisions of Article 1.1 of Chapter 8, Title 18.2 of the Code of Vir ini ~ g a.~~ 9. Does your organization understand that a one fee of the gross receipts must be percent audit upon submission of the annual financial repo to due yon o r befoke the f first of November? ~/E-~ ore 10. Does your organization understand that this only in the County of Roanoke and onl such dates, as are designated in the Y at such locaPionst is valid permit application?~ and for 11. Does `~~`-s your organization understand that no bona fide member of any such organization who person, except a member of such organization for shall have been a such participation, shall at least ninety da s tion, or conduct of Participate in the mana ementPrior to shall receive an any bingo game or raffle g °Pera- operation Y remuneration for and no Person or conduct of an Participating in management, y such game or raffle?_1/G 1 12. Has your organization attached a check for the annu fee in the amount of al permit Vir lnia? $25.00 pa g• ~/~-S yable to the County of Roanoke, 13. Does your organization understand that an in violation of the County Bin o y organization found 340.10 of the Code of Virginia a thorizinq thisd permit ~r to having such §18.2- member or employeelofrsucheorganization who 1s subject Y person, shareholder, agent, having such permit revoked and an violates the above to member or employee of such organizationnwhohviolates t agent, referenced Codes may be guilty of a felony? he above L-`S 5 ~~ 14. Has your organization attached a complete list of its member- ship to this application form? ,~'d 15. Has your organization attached a copy of its bylaws to this application form? i/). 16. Has the organization been declared exempt from property taxa- tion under the Virginia Constitution or statutes?~/~ s If yes, state whether exemption is for real, per~Sonal property, or both and identify exempt property. /°~u Y /1/YC 17. State the specific type and purpose of the organization. /I ~ P /~~ .~ ~, ®.w /' /~.~f~ fah [°au~s~Y /I~ t' ~ (~. .~ • To v~ ~ v~ :b ~ .Sba.t s 18. Is this organization incorporated in Virginia? ~S If yes, name and address of Registered Agent: 31~ ~a..sas/~/ i/~ f° ~°/.tom s~ S~/F~ l/.0 ,may/s'3 19. Is the organization registered with the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Affairs pursuant to the Charitable Solicitations Act, Section 57-48 of the Virginia Code? ,vQ (If so, attach copy of registration.) Has the organization been granted an exemption from registration by the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Affairs? N~ (If so, attach copy of exemption.) ALL RAFFLE APPLICANTS DESCRIBE THE ARTICLES TO BE-RAFFLED, VALUE OF SUCH ARTICLES, AND PROCEED TO NOTARIZATION. Article Description c a P~~.~~ 1~1,~~er -~o r c~ ~j01c~Ev~ ~v~a-~ (~ a, Y1'~ Gc r v~ ~ o~ ~ r r, 1-~)h-'1C'r ~or Fair Market Value ~~bo ,~a ~+~5 , coo 3ha j~ce _ ~I5'~av ~ ~Is~~o 6 J 26. Does your organization understand that a Certificate of Occu- pancy must be obtained or be on file which authorizes this use at the proposed location? 27. Does your organization understand that awards or prize money or merchandise valued in excess of the following amounts are illegal? a. No door prize shall exceed twenty-five dollars. b. No regular Bingo or special Bingo game shall exceed One Hund- red dollars. c. No jackpot of any nature whatsoever shall exceed One Thousand Dollars, nor shall the total amount of jackpot prizes awarded in any one calendar day exceed One Thousand Dollars. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * NOTARIZATION: THE FOLLOWING OATH MUST BE TAKEN BY ALL APPLICANTS I hereby swear or affirm under the penalties of perjury as set forth in §18.2 of the Code of Virginia, that all of the above statements are true to the best of my knowledge, information, and beliefs. All questions have been answered. Signed by: Name Title Home Address Subscribed and sworn before me, this day of My commission expires: 19 wy_, ~~a RETIIRNa~THIS°ICOMPLETED=A;APPL,I~~F~!GS ~ ~ k. ~~ a,:r ~-. -mot ;, r 3~ c __~~ ,~?~,~,~~ r ~~, ~~"ys COMMISS~O~~ :y ~ d ~' ~ . P ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~'~ ~ Roanoke ~ r, ~; r 19 Notary Public 4 ~ ~~ d ~ T0.•~.i ,~ ~, a' ~ ~ ;~{ .~~ F ~,7pp~~~ /~j ~F.,~~LR'~f~~I:J Y 1:lNUE F o- .. ~, o- ~," * ~.~^f~J ...~ a~ ~..', << _ Sxa„20409„ ,~~,'fi~'~ ~ 24.018 .;0513 '" ~~ ~ f .~ ~~ ~.':;~. h ~.: ~ ~ . 8 NOT VALID UNLESS COUNTERSIGNED ~~~ ~ The above application, havin and issued to the applicant to have effeatlunail December a this calendar pproved year. 31st of C Date ~~ Commissioi r of the R ~ The above a enue pplication is not approved. Date Commissioner of the Revenue 9 A-92287-7.d 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 22, 1987 SUBJECT: Authorization to accept or acquire easements for drainage improvements in the Palm Valley and Willowlawn Rd/South Park Circle areas. COUNTY A/D'MINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS : ,~j~ f~ 0~ Win, ~ ~~` SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Proposed drainage improvements in the Palm Valley and Willowlawn Rd/South Park Circle areas have been a Supervisors and funding for improvementsves bncludedoindthe current FY 87-88 Budget. The plans for these improvements are presently being designed for the start of construction in October 1987. The improvements in the Palm Valley area include reconstruction of a portion of concrete channel and storm sewer construction from Carvins Creek to the sink hole adjacent to Return Road. These facilities will require the acquisition of approximately 13 easements. The improvements on Willowlawn Rd/South Park Circle include the replacement of a substandard storm drain crossing Willowlawn Road and construction of a proposed storm drain adjacent to South Park Circle. These improvements will require the acquisition of approximately six (6) easements. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 6987-9 adopted on June 9, 1987, the Board authorized the County Administrator to accept donations or dedications of uncontroversial real estate matters. FISCAL IMPACT: ~'.~' It is anticipated that the majority of these easements can be acquired at little or no cost, but an acquisition of easements will be coveredsbyaFYo87 88 Budget funding for drainage improvements. RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors authorize the County Administrator to accept and/or acquire easements necessary to complete proposed drainage improvements in the Palm Valley area and Willowlawn Rd/South Park Circle area. Staff also recommends that the Board of Supervisors authorize the County Attorney's Office to search legal title to the properties and prepare all necessary legal documents to accomplish the acquisition of said easements. SUBMITTED BY: Phillip Henry Director of Engineering Approved ~ ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred To Motion by: Garrett APPROVED: ~~~ ~, Elmer C. Hod e County Administrator ACTION Bob L. Johnson/Lee VOTE No Yes Abs Brittle x Garrett x Johnson x McGraw x Nickens x cc: File Phillip Henry John Hubbard 1, ~ _ ,, 0 ~ , _ ~ ~ v.~ J ~ ,~ Verndole Dr. ~~ eq7 g r, S 22911 1? 30 9 ~~, ra .o i~ ~ \ T 3~ ` ? ,O ,o ' \\~ r 3? , b`` ~0 21 \\J ~ ~ 33 ~~o ' ` , \\~I \ ^ - 3q~,, ~P J 35O ` it 6S S•~S ~ I to a~ L 6g .J : J ). 9a.s 7p ..~ ... , ~0 6 7 ~ .~~z's r ~ s. ~~Orlando~~ s el •B s :65 ~ ~ _ 2 3 9, J )2 ~z ~ ~~ sa ~,o T 4 ~ ` ve I p + I - q _ 5 ,e z ~p r J J866 60 C ~ Y ~ - _ I .i ~ _ 60 $ 58 r. ~ . sz o. ms's so ' ~ ~.)e ss 3q s as sO v. ~~ I ~ r o I - .57 1i u o iJ0 ~3 - Zl 0609 ~ J . s z o. 9 ~ --- - or ~ O ~ _ 32 r a ~)o I 8 ! .31 Sg ~,. ~ o 6 ~ ~ 7 _ 3 .~ 3g 3~ J , ~ ~~ I 55 ~ 3j 30 // I ~6 J . - 5 q r, . !2 ~S J I ~ 29 J p ~ . o g ~3 ~ - , /3 O ~ ~4 J - 39 ° 28 s sz ,9 ~c - /q I T3 9 .)~b• Q!~ ~ ~ _ i 4 pt0 ~ 685 \ \ 4 ~ .. ~~~~ 877 BBS ~ ~. 692 323 92S 3 p~~ Ur 6 73 0 ~ ~ g .Q uti e!2 pq oor ~^ p. 2.. 1 ~ ~~~ v ~q )i3 ~ ~~ 3 83~ o +~ !S ~ o'o . p a o. d '~ 32i o ~ yl • /~ _ "NSB~r~~7~?~f~~VICINITY MAP NORTH 5 DEPARTMENT OF SOUTH PARK C I R. & PUBLIC FACILITIES WILLOWLAWN ST_ A-92287-7•e ITEM NUMBER ~~~~'" ETING OF THE BOARD OF STyEpVDMINISTRATIONNOCENTER AT A REGULAR ME THE ROANOKEONCOUESDAY, COUNTY, VIRGINIA HINDROANOKE, VA., September 22, 1987 MEETING DATE: Second Phase Improvements for Funding for the SUB~T. Request Center at the Public Safety COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: new Public ear when work began on the In February of this Y Department estimated the cost of the Engineering upgrading of the heating and Safety building, telephones, facilities to be and improvement to the parking interior modifications, from air conditioning, e it was determined tnuestrece v d could $500,000. At that tim fished in phases to coincide with reve be accomp ital facilities or other sources. the sale of other cap in the second is now both timely and cost effectiThis Weg 1 allow the It this f aci 1 i ty . be completed in the phase of renovations of , Department to Among the ied by the Sheriff s the Fire Department. area occup o ed by ied areas same manner as that enj Y It is arking area. ments are the removal nt~sbosthe p om the °CS will cost improve and improveme f renovation of the building this second phase o anticipated that $124,000. FISCAL IMPACT: riated from 000 be reappropto finance recommends that the $124, Staff public Safety Center account sale of Fund to the the next payment from the to the Debt Once will be refunded II improvements. •ved this money Phase the Old Courthouse is recei the Debt Fund. .T- s RECOMMENDATION: riated to the Staf f recommends that the monies bII a mpropements may and Center account so that Phase Fire, Rescue, Public Safety ersonnel from the as scheduled. completed and so that thmopP into the facility Sheriff's departments may ppPROVED SUBMITTED BY: r M ~~ .. ~ f'~ Chambli - Jr John 1"I. Administrator- "~ Assistant County, es Elmer C. Hodg County Administrator Management Servlc _______________________ ---------------------- VOTE -------------------~- ACTION No Yes Abs Bob L• Approved ( ~ Motion by:~- Garrett Denied ( ~ Received ( ~ Referred To - cc: File John Chambliss Diane Hyatt Reta Busher Johnson/Lee x Brittle x Garrett x Johnson x McGraw x Nickens 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 22, 1987 SUBJECT: Appointments to Committees COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: 1. Community Corrections Resources Board The one-year term of Joseph Cronin expired August 13, 1987. Mr. Cronin is relocating in Lynchburg Virginia and will be unable to serve another term. 2. Court Service Unit Advisory Council/Youth and Family Services Advisory Board Unexpired two-year term of Mr. Joseph D. Cronin. Mr. Cronin's term will expire on March 22, 1989. See attached letter of resignation. 3. Grievance Panel Three-year term of Charles L. Jennings, alternate member. Mr. Jennings' term expires September 10, 1987. Please see the attached for further information on these committees. Submitted By: Mary H. Allen Deputy Clerk Approved by: ~'G~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved ( ) Motion by: No Yes Al Denied ( ) Brittle _ Received ( ) Garrett _ Referred Johnson _ To McGraw _ Nickens a• '' ii .~ ~ ./ U lit ... ._ • ~ . . . June 17, 1987 . County of Roanoke `~. Board of Supervisors P. 0. Box 3800 . •t~banoke, 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 not 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 tfrs. Kathryn Van Patten. -Both were of immeasurable help to me. Very`.~truly, _I / ' - ~~ _ / v r • , /~ `~~ Josept~y%D. Cronin, ~ Senior Vice Pres~.~ent l.•' JDC-lg cc: Pfike Lazzuri, Director of Court Services Kathryn Van Patten, Court Community Corrections Program Robert Johnson, Chairman of the Board of Supervisors. ~~~ r r /~`( r Wiley & W;;;on • ArchrtcCts Engm~rs Planners .F '. 2 .:.;, `... .~:.. ~: -.t =- , rr r COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS RESOURCES BOARD A' COMPOSITION: To consist of seven mYlaws and Section 53.1-183) member from Roanoke Count embers appointed as follows: members from the y% one member from Salem Cit one from the De Judges in the 23rd Judicial Districty~ three determined b rtment of Corrections. The term of officeoshallmber year.) y the appointing authority (Roanoke Lounty's is one B • DU~Eg : Review felony referrals from the Circuit Courts of Roanoke City, Roanoke Count diversion from state y and the•City of Salem for penal system and local jails. p°ssible C • MEETINGS : ~. Third Tuesda y of each month at 4:00 p,m, 3 'r COURT SERVICES UNIT ADVISORY COUNCIL YOUTH AND FAMILY SERVICES ADVISORY BOARD `~• COMPOSITION Board to consist of two members from each ma is district, and one youth member from each hi bodies of each count g teria.t aPPoint one or more membe city served b gh school. Governing rs to a Y a court service unit may B- citizen advisory council. ,. DQ~TIE-S' - Advises and cooperates with the court u affecting the workin ' children g of this law and other laws relatingeto Consults randreonferpwithction and to domestic relati - court service unit relative to the de urt and director of these the court service velopment and extension- program; of centrairadvisor members selected b '--.the y the council to serve:. ~~~ convenieatl Y council to visit as often as the member`t~~ + Y can, institutions and associations-receivin .~~, children under this law and to report to and surroundin s '` ' such g of the children received b e court the conditions persons, institutions Y or in charge of any . ' The Council should make themselvesnfamiliar of the court• patin with the work "' - .,,;,~, ; partici Ma7ces an annual report to the court and t g governing bodies on the work of the coup he, ,. As the Youth ~ cil.:` ~ r~ . and Famil Services Advisor Board: Establish services- g°als and Priorities for Count assist in coordination and Y'wide Youth youth services within the Planning for ,comprehensive capacity and to otherwise assistethecBoard of Su establish Serve in an advisory Standards ogEals and objectives in compliance with alls minimum of 1g7g~ the Delinquency Prevention and Youth Development A • Assist in conductin youth every five g an assessment of the needs of ct Delinquency Prevention plantO assist in develo in the implementation of the ~ further to participate ain aevaluating Board of Supervisors, Plan and making a report thereon to the about youth ma provide a public forum where concerns raise Y be expressed and to receive recommendations and concerns of public and advisory board meetin Private organizations at any regular proper notice- Advocates necessary legislative amendments tooimprove communit development and to su ` both pport the Y conditions for youth public and private for development of needed services youth in the community. C• MEETING SCHEDULE: One a quarter, the third Tuesda and place determined at meetings- Y~ beginning Januar y; time 4 ~~ rr r GRIEVANCE PANEL A. COMPOSITION ''~, To consist of three (3) members, appointed by the Board of Supervisors; for terms of two years.' B• DUTIES • 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 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 TUESllAY, MEETING DATE: September 22, 1987 SUBJECT: Accounts Paid - August 1987 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Payments to Vendors: $2,980,600.37 Payroll: 08/07/87 Bi-weekly $361,708.96 08/21/87 Bi-weekly 354,991.38 716,700.34 716,700.34 53.697.300.71 A detailed listing of the payments is on file with the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors. SUBMITTED BY: ~,LCk.~rz~., ~ • ~c_xc.4~~ Diane D. Hyatt Director, Department of Finance ------------------------------------------------------------------ ACTION VOTE Approved ( ) M tion b No Yes Abs Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred To APPROVED: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator o y. Brittle Garrett Johnson McGraw Nickens Item ~ ~. ,~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THEHROANOKE OF SUPERVISORS OF IN ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATIpNNOKE ~ VA., ON TUESDAY, CENTER MEETING DATE: September 22, 1987 SUBJECT: -~ Statement of Revenues Planning District and Expenditures of Fifth Commission COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Attached for and ex the Board's information penditures of the Fifth is a statement the period July 1, 1986 throu h Planning District °f revenues 9 June 30 Commission for 1987. FISCAL IMPACT: None RECOMMENDATION: No action necessary. SUBMITTED By; Cl -~- APPROVED: ~~~ ~,~ T i mo t ~~ ~~~"~~-~-` ~~ t ' ~' hY W. G ba 1 a ~ G ~- (~` Assistant Count Elmer Communit y Administrator C• Hodge, Jr. and y Development County Administrator Member of 5th PDC Executive Committee APProved ( ~ ACTION ------------------------------- Denied ( ~ Motion by; --- VOTE Received ( ~ No Yes Abs Referred B To Attachment tittle Garrett Johnson McGraw - Nickens -- ~ ~~ ~. -- YOUNG ~ pRICKITT, P. C. Certified Public Ac United Virginia Bank Building Suite 1225 countants Roanoke, Virginia 24011 703/982-3852 The Board of Directors Fifth Planning District Commission: We have ex amined the statement of revenues and e Planning District Commission for the xpenditures of the Fifth June 30, 1987. Our examination was madeli~n accordancelwith86~ through auditing standards, "Standards for Audit of Governmental Organizatons accepted Programs, Activities, and Functions," and Old the United States Governmental Accounti Circular A-128, prescribed by such tests of the accounting records and s~ffice, and accordingly included considered necessary in the circumstances, ch other auditin g procedures as we In our opinion, the aforementioned statement of reven presents fairly the revenues earned and a ues and expenditures Planning District Commission during the xpenditures incurred June 30, 1987. Period July 1, 1986 ~ the Fifth through oc August 5, 1987 J YOUNG 8~ PRICKITT, P. C. FIFTH PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION Statement of Revenues and Expenditures For the Period from July 1, 1986 to June 30, 1987 Revenues: Local cities, towns and counties $ 50,466 Department of Housing and Community Development 63,245 Federal Highway Administration - PL 68,028 Urban Mass Transit Authority 32,505 Appalachian Regional Commission 34,796 Virginia Department of Transportation - Transit 4,063 Virginia Department of Transportation - PL 6,002 Economic Development Administration 31,013 Interest income 28'697 Fee income 310 Miscellaneous 1,604 Total revenues 320,729 Expenditures: 193,266 Salaries 42,745 Fringe benefits 294 2 Dues and subscriptions ' 2,034 Supplies :2,933 Postage 3,527 Printing 29,700 Rent 8,704 Telephone 8'959 Travel 6,925 Auditing fees 471 6 Furniture and equipment , 250 Legal fees 1,262 Library and maps 26,244 Consultants 4,869 Pass thru Valley Metro 6,810 Miscellaneous 10,566 Computer services Total expenditures 357,559 Excess of expenditures over revenues 36,830 Fund balance at July 1, 1986 (Note 1) 476,285 Adjustment to balance _(13,035) Fund balance at June 30, 1987 (Note 1) $426,420 __ 2 YQUNG ~ PRICKITT, P. C. L _ ~°°"' FIE"PH PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION Note to Statement of Revenues and Expenditures June 30, 1987 1. Fund Balance: Fund balance at June 30, 1987 is summarized as follows: Reserve for working capital Reserve for capital equipment acquisitions Reserve for regional planning projects Reserve for building fund Reserve for litigation $101,158 25,000 100,262 150,000 50,000 $426,420 3 /v`3 _ / Travel and Tourism in the Roanoke Va11eY Research for the River taken in September 1986 by Martin A study Foundation summarized 600ofeva~aaion travelerssto visittthsed examined the willingness is u proposed explore project. Information from the stu y in the area. here to suggest tourist activity e Parkway, 31.6 percent Of those interviewed on the Blue Ridg inia (14.8$ ercent reside in stated that their hometownAnsadditionala47,4fpVirg being Western Virginia). inia. the eastern U.S. but outside of the State of Virg Of the respondents interviewed on Interstate 81, 21.5 percent stated that their hometown is in the State of Virginia (12.9$ An additional 45.6 percent reside in being Western Virginia). inia. the eastern U.S. but outside the State of Virg The demography of the travelers interviewed shows the following highlights. ~e 52.9$ 38.3 ~ 30-40 53.2$ 50+ 36.8$ Occupation Professional and 53.6 43.5 Admin/management Annual Income 22.7$ 19.8$ 25,0001-34,999 26.3$ 22.8 .35,000-49,995 'The study did not attempt to interlers.thFurthereinvestigationuis '.rather vacation and pleasure trave 'required to gather additional tourism statistics for the Roano e area. to research conducted by the U.S. Travel Data Center According and for the Virginia Division of Tourism, travel expenditures in t e Roanoke County, ::i tY of Salem, Roanoke Valley (Roanoke City, Botetourt County) totaled $18g~5198000 in 1986- This represen s an increase of $13,440,000 0 Other figures also show increases. compared with 1985 data: Following are 1586 data 1986 1985 pll Roanoke All Roanoke Count pros ~ County -__ ~s - l enerated payroll $47,025,000 $9,583 185 1 $38,278,000 4,134 $8,431;128 ave Tr g to nt Travel generated emp Y~ 4,839 3 200,000 , 647,000 2,878,00^ 564,000 Local tax receipts , Comparison of Real Estate Valuations by Sec~nent (Residential and Industrial Parcels) Roanoke County - 1982 Parcel Pe_ rce-?t Count of_ cou?~t Residential 27,003 95.58 CoMnercial/ 4 , 42 Residential_ 1__-_248 - Tcital 28, 251. 100.00 1985 Residential 28,201 95.48 Commercial/ Residential 4.52 _1,_334 ___ Total 29x535 L00.00 1986 28~7e~; 95.51 Residential Commercial/ ~ 349 4.48 Residential __. ___. Total 30,102 100.00 Percent of Avq assessed_ Current assessed _----- val_ ue/ps-rcel value cur- rent asses ~ value 86 47 $40,631.98 $1,097,185,411 6 1_ 3.53 137,543.89 171, 54,770 100.00 $44,913.11. $1,268,840,202 83.41 $48,071.90 $1,355,675,600 16.59 202,134.14 269,646,940 100.00 $55,030.39 $1,625,322,540 83.31 $48,505.19 $1,394,669,700 16 69 207,111.15 279,392,940 0 100.00 $55,613.Ot~ $1,674, 62,640 ~' I c~1J}Z}: 1 pU(]R YEAR llI~VELOPMENT •I'REND q° Growth I ~ _' --' _--__-' _-- I _' ~ _--"__.-_-' 6.48% 2 8, 8 0 0_ i _----' --------- i -____ i i 2- 8' 7 5 3 ii _-____- I I 1~-- I _~-- , I I -~- ~ I __~ I I ~- 1 ~--- I t I -~-. 1 I I I 2 8, 6 0 0_ i ._----- ~ ---- i -~- I i 1 ----- i -- I I I 1_------ 1 _.'T--__-_- I I I~-- ~ _ ~ .-_--- 1 I ~~ 2 8, 4 0 0_ i~-' ----'_ i ----- I i I -_-- li -----_' I I _~- 1 I _~_- 1 I I ~----- I ~~~ I I 1 ~~~- I 1 2 8, 2 0 0_ i_--~--- ~--- i ---___ i 1 __---'I ----- i---- -_---1 -----' i __- I i _-----1 -~- i __-1 2 8, 0 0 0_ i _----- ~---- ~ ---__ i i _----_ i------' i~-'I -_---1 ----- i _----- I i __-~ I --'_- i ----- t 2 7 , 8 0 0 _ i ~- i ----- i -_ i ~ ------ , ---'-' ~ _-----_ --_-' I i 1 ~--- i -----" i ~- i _---- 2 7, 6 0 0_ 1-__-___ i ---- , i ._~ 1 _---- i -----' _----- I i 1 i-_-----1-----'" i~-1 I I I ~~ , I 1 I ~ 1 ---' I 1 ._._-------- 1 I 1 2 7, 0 0 0_ 1 , 1 1 ______-1 _..__.___..._. ~-__.---- , I I ____--------' • 1 ~ 1 ~-----' t i ~~- f I I i I I I I I , I 1 I , 1 1 I 1 1 , I , ' ~ 1 i ------1--~_+~'~+-~ i _------- ~ 8.09% I ._--- I _ I ___.1.~4~i-- I ----- , I`. , 1 ~_._._ I _ _..____ 1 ~ ~,_.- -_ _ ~ I l , 0 0 0 ____._.~. ! _._ .. _..__._ I , 1 , __ I ~ ; i I ' 1----~--~_________________ I I _--"---'-__-"----- -_r_w_1982 --~1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 " = 1 Residenti.a. ------ Commercial-Industrial FIGURE 2 FOUR YEAR DEVELOPMENT TREND I ' I __~~' ~--~--- I I 1 ._---' ------ i ~-' _ i ~---' ----- i ---- I 10 0 _ i _--- ~ ---- i ~-' i -_- I ---~ i ~- I _ i ~_ I _---- i------- I I _~_ 1~ 9 5_ i __----- I--~- I ~- I i ~--- ~ 9~ 1 i ~- I ~ 95.53 1 _-- i ----- I i __-- I ----- ~ I~~I I I_~-1~~1 I 1 _~-1 _--- i --'-- I i ~---- I --'-- i ~~ I I = 1 I-----'_ I __~ _~- I ~-- 8 5_ ~ ~-- i ~-~-1---~ i ~- I i 8- 3--31 -1 _--_-_- I ~---- I 1 1 ~-~ I ~--- I I I 8 0_ i ~--- I ---- , -~'- I i _--,- I--'--_' i------' I I I ~~ I 1 -1------ i ~- I i ~---- I --~'_ i ~- I I 1 ~-- I I 7 5_ i ___- I--- i ~- I i _----' --.__ i-------' ------1------ i ~- I i _---' ------ i --___- I I 1 ~~ I i 7 0 _. I _~- I ~~ I 1 1 --~- 1-~---~- I ~- I I I ~~ I 1 +~ 1 ~- I I I ~---- I"-_~---- I I 1 ~ 6 5_ i ~--- I----------- i------" I i_----1-------'_ i _----- I V I 1 ~--~ I '~----- 1 -- I I ~- i ~_~_~-- 1 1 I ~--~- I I 5 5_ i_-____.- I ---'- i----' i _._-- I ------ i __'~--1 I I ~- I 1 I 1 ___-~ I 1 .___-- I----- i ---- I i 1 i ' I ' I ' I I 1 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 I 1 I I I I i I i_-----1-----'_"' i -~- I 2 0 ; ~ -------- i ~- i _~-' ----- I ~_ i _------ 15 ____' ----- I -----'-' ' i -----1-____- i ------' I ___._.--- ------" i ~- I i _--- i---"_'_ i ~----- 1I r 1 1 1 I ~---- 5, ~ _._-- I I ._._---~- 1.-__ 1 5 ~ __---- I a_11Z 1 ~--' '~__~ I I I I ~ 1 ' I --i-------!---------------- 1 I --------------- 1987 ----- 1982 ---1983 1984 1985 1986 -~ Residential L~J Commercial-Industrial ~~ % of count ~~~ ,o of current assessed value FIGURE 3 FOUR YEAR DEVELOPMENT TREND °~°of I I 'Growth I -' --~-- i ~-' i _~-' ~ - i -__-- i 2 7.11 I I I ~----' I I ___~ ' ~~ ' I -- I ._~-- I I I~ I - - I ~_ ~I I 1~-~---' I I_-~ I ~ ~ ---- "_--- i ' 1 ' --~"~ I -- I _-- 1. 2B_ i ~ I -_'_' - ~ - i __---- ---' ---'- I I i -~_ I --- 1 ~-~~I~-~ ' --- i --- I - ~ 1~- - I I ~ 1.1B_ i _- ._- .~- - i I i _~ --' i -~-' ~ ----' I ._- ~-- I 1 ~~9_ 7 •185 ~ ------- i --~- i _----- ~ ----" ' ' ~~ -_ i ------' I _._- i ~------ ~ _ 1 ~ I 1.OB_ I __- I I ~--- - 1 - i -----'- I i _---' ----- i ~ - ; -~ - i ~~- ~ ~ -- -- i --'~ I i ~-' -~ ~ 1 - I I 1 -' ~ I---- ~ I --' i~-1 i ~---' --"- i - 1 ~---- I 1 ~- N 8 0 0 M_ i .__- --- i----'-- i ~ ~_--____. i------' i --- -- ~ ~ Q I ------- 7 0 OM_ i _-- I ----- i --_'_'_ ~ i _._----1 ~--- ~ -_' --- ~------ i ~- i ______-- i--------- i ~ - i ~~ l I 1 ~- ~- I ~ - i -- -~ I~---~-' I ~ X I---- 6 0 0 M____ i ._._....- I -~_" I 1 1 --~-~- I "~-~---- 1 ----- i------- i ~- ~ __--- i------- i _'_ I I ---- i-----'_' ---- ~ -__ --"_'- i ~- i i I __-- _-- ~ _ 4 0 0M_ i _.. -.. --- i _-~--- ------' -------- i~-' i ~---' ---- I I~~ I --- i ~~' I --'"' i------- -- i---- i -'_ I ____ ~-- ------ i--- I ____-_______ I I 100M_; _ ~_ i 17~- 1 6 , i ---------- ~ -~"_~ i ---- ~ ----- ' -" __._-- I. 1 --- ~ ~- t ' ------ I _..- ' ' --- ~ ---- -- I _ ' I ------------- ~ --------------- --1983 1984 1985 1986 --- ------- 1987 1982 C~ Res~dentia' ~~~ Commercial-Industrial !~ - ~ 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 b. Development of 75/25 Logo . c. Recognition of Business in Newsletter~.•~~••" ' 32 2. Project Planning Review and Coordination .~~~~~" • 32 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 . 3. 75/25 Incentive Programs '••••••• 34 a. Joint Ventures with Bus••• ~~y~~•" " " •••• 30 b. County Improvements BecomelMatching InDredi•~" 35 in Development g ent c. Intergovernmental•Cooperation~~~•~•~~••" " " •• 36 d. State & Federal Fundin ••••••~•••~" '••' 37 g 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 APPENDICES Appendix A .., APPendix B ............... ..... .............................. 50 Appendix C ... ....... ..... .............................. 51 APPendix D ... ... .............................. 52 APPendix E .. ' ......... .... .............................. 53 APPendix F . .......... .... .............................. 54 Appendix G . ' ......... ... .............................. 55 APPendix H .. .. ... .............................. 55 .......... . .............................. 56 ROANOKE COUNTY ECO~NO_M_IC DEVELOPMENT ST_ RA~GY I. INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND, AND PURPOSE Economic development is defined as the creation of wea through the mobilization of lth 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 commun' Historicall ity. Y and traditionally, economic development was assumed to be carried out by chambers of commerce, state industrial development groups, and job training pro ram Economic benefits were envisioned as being indirect g s. federal urban renewal communit develo ment results of Y p and antipoverty prOgr~s• This resulted in the lack of a direct, s economic development strategy, Pecific Much of the same pattern existed in Roanoke County unt' reorganization of the Count it the Y government in 1982. There was no economic development emphasis, and staff was not assigned carry out the functions of economic development. to After reorganization, the Department of Development was - ..tasked with carrying out economic development funct-ion initial direction of the staff was aimed at visitin an. The inventor in g d Y g the existing business and industry, identifying potential sites, and coordinating with existing economi development c programs and personnel in the area. effort b A Parallel Y the Planning, Zoning, and Grants Division in pre ari an update to the Count p ng Y's Comprehensive Plan resulted in the 1 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 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 20a 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 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 the manufacturing sector. In 1982, 70.7s of Roanoke County's 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% 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 gove"rnment. 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 83.310/16.690 reflects an imbalance in the tax base ratio (see Table 3). The ratio of 75/25 would more appropriately support 7 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 the tax load on residential property owners. When the County is faced with industrial and commercial growth accompanied by residential growth, the level of governmen services rendered are required to increase corresponding) T t level of these services is determined b y he y 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 services. The Board has adopted the 75/25 ratio as a target goal. Roanoke County~s policy is to significantly approach a tar e ratio of 80/20 b g t Y 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 approachin 75 25. g / 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 direction, but at the Proper present rate, the County will not achieve 75/25 until the middle of the twenty-first century, In aPProach 75/25 b order to Y the year 2000 the commercial/industrial must be 2.5 to 3.O times the growth present rate (see Table 4).- The Board has established a working committee to coordinate the Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Plan, Zoning Map (and of official ma s her P ) to get the language and material coordinated. Iv. TAX EQUILIBRIUM STRATEGY Presently, 1,349 commercial and industrial Roanoke Count Parcels of Y's 31,276 taxable parcels provide only 15.93% of 9 the total assessed value (see Table 5). Previously, in 1982 only 12.790 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 510 of total vacant or agricultural land in Roanoke County, are topographically feasible (0 - 20o slope) for development (for purposes of clarification, please note that developers prefer a slope of 0 - l00). The remaining 62,073 acres (490) are locate in either flood hazard areas or in regions with slo es d than 20 P greater 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 develop tools to ensure that a balanced mix between residential and commercial/industrial parcels is generated. One method to determine 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. 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 13 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 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 these plans 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). 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 federal regulations. 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 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 Recently, the Virginia Department of Economic 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 ~ Ex ort Trade Assistance: 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 s 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 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 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 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 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 by 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 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 Partnership 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 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 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 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 which consider issues related to the 75/25 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 Count 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 for growth and are intended to accomodate 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 of a larger scale in the future. The County will evaluate each proposed project individually to determine 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. County 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 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. In 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 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 expansion 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 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 programs 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 ACTION 2b continued: - 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 inoca~ionndecision makersto business and industry rel ACTION 4: Update site information on the 10 most ready-to-go sites, the lstateaandnregionalheconombc developmento appropriate groups. ACTION 5: Summarize quarterly development activity and format semi-monthly economic development reports. ACTION 6: Encourage andational tOradec(export~essThisoactionewill pursue intern 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 foue ashankromotionalstoolch include 75/25 logo for us P ACTION 10: ParticipateOklahoma Augustno1987Development Institute at Norman, 41 FIGURE 1 FOUR YEAR DEVELOPMENT TREND 28,800_~~-i---I I ~-- ~ ---~_ I _.-__ 2 8, 6 0 0 I ----- i -~-- I --____- ~ -~_ i ~- 2 8, 4 0 0 I ~__. i ~- I ---_- ~ ~_ i '_-- 2 8, 2 0 0 1 -~'-- i------- I 2 8, 0 0 0 1 ~- i ------ 1 ---_ ~ ~- i -- 2 7, 8 0 0 1 ~- i---~--- I ---.__ 2 7, 6 0 0_ 1_ 1--' ----_ 1 2 7, 4 0 0 ~---- i ----- ~ -~- i -~_ 27,200 i__~i----I -;~~I I 27,000 !~-i !-----_i. 1, 400 i i ~ i i I ~ _- I ---'~ 1 ---~~ 1 1 1 1 1 I I ~~_I 1 I 1, 2 0 0 ~ _'_ I ---- ~ I ' ------ I I ~~_ I I I __ I ~~-- ---~_ I I -----_ 1 -~_ 1 1 I 1 ---~_ I 1 1 I I 1, 0 0 0 i ---- ~ ---_ ~ ----__ i - i ------ ; ------_ ~ 1982 1983 1984 --_1985----1986--__1987 ~] Residential U Commercial-Industrial 42 TABLE 1 Estimated Average Family Tax on Roanoke County Family of Four Personal Pro_ petty (Au___ tosj Approximate Average Value (Auto #1) „ •,,, (Auto #2) ,..•. " " $2975.00 ••••• + $2975.00 Total ............ _ $5950.00 Tax Rate .......... x 0.035 Total Tax ..,,,,,., = 208.25 ---------- Real Estee Based on House & Land Value Tax•Rate••••~~" • $65,000.00 '••••••• x 0.0115 Total Tax ....... _ $747,50 Total Personal Property and Real Estate Taxes _ $955.75 ----------- Expenditures Cost to Ed. 1 Child in Roanoke County/Yr,,, 2nd Child ....... $3715.17 .............. + 3715.17 Total Cost of Education --------- for Two Children/Yr. ,,,, ................. _ $7430.34 Contributions to Education State Funds 1 Child 2 Children Federal Contributi ~•~~••~•" ' $1480.12 - $29-60 42 Sales on Tax Contribution ~~•~~•' 0'74 1.48 Local .. Funds " " " ' ~~~ 367.43 734.86 Other ~~•" " " " " •• ..... 1795.91 3591 82 .................... + 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 Valuations by Segment (Residential & Industrial Parcels) (1985) Parcel Percent Current Assessed Percent of Current Count of Count Value Assessed Value Roanoke County 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 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 County Residential Commercial/ 28,753 95.51 $1,394,669,700 83.31 Industrial 1,349 4.48 279,392,940 16.69 ------------- Total --------- 30,102 --------- 100.00 -------------------- $1,674,062,640 ------------------ 100.00 45 TABLE 4* .. :: ~ ii ;l iC' l .1 t i i:a i:: ,. is i .., , i ~ ". ~:, 1 i t. ~.~ :' i.! 4V i; r-i t ) c:. ,..., r t..r.•- ........ ,_ ~ „C(l; 1 i i\... .... ~ ~ c ;.. l-?r-\ .:_ ' 1.... ,,l. 1 ,ia ,. .. , . _:...- r , ~Cl: i ~ .C; ,,t_ .. 7 \..f \:1 { ..,... , , 1. 4 ~::1 '1 r..1. Y l.)'~1 ~-)~ - - - 1.~ . : 9 ._{':: _- - [ 1 L. ~ i ) ~ r.:l J ~-1 ~... _ ~: 1 ~7 :i ~/' 1 ' 4.-i/+ !! (.:: •.-%:j 4 c:Ji-., r, ~ -v`~ •-~ i c- ~ ~) ((,' 1 ~.},.. _ 1 , ~.) \.J 1 i ~'+ ~/ V ;. j..., t.: ~ ... i=~ 1 9 ! _I'? ~~i' j ~~ l-1'; % :J ~_ •] ~ - .. ,.~ (. 1 _ _ t_ / rY { ' i i~. L~ 1J' ri ~ -' t-)~,:.. 1 f" .'~1'(.~ j. . !_~1_ .~~7 _ _ > ... j.. _:uc' , /t ]. ,_I , ; <. (-, (:) , :, 1 , i'::f 1 , - ~';.=5 1'~ . 1 J j.. 1c'.cS' . t.. ,'~'. :~ 1 1 9 L! ._I 4 ', _ , .±' ._1 ti ._1 ~.! . 1..~ ~ ~~_~ ~ l i:_ 4 .J. _ _ ~.J 1._ - - 1. / i_.. 1 4 l:}...i ~.j 1 /!.? .L 4c~/+ c i_I j. l.~ IJ R i 1'%' (, i r/ ~ C)I L.~ ~ . '•+ j. ! . i Il_lJ ~::~ j. . r.. ~'J 1. `.t 1 ~:~ %.:~ 1 t ']!_I 1 ~ .'~C~ / /'~ Jt+ 5 `:14 ~.~ ccr rte, L 9 1 JJ r t_'j /'-1 f... 1 C_1i~ i (_I f_'J ~Ji ~ i 1. . !_I r/ C.~ i ra `T °'1' 1 4 Jf l .-3 =)r_ / r• ~ -Y r?r_ '> 7 L,j"1 (_~ ' ~ '~,'~ 1 i Iii; 1 . Ir-. ri r~l r° er ~ - 4 _, ., ',' ;:~ `:~ ..) r__ c._ , ,:~ ._) ~ c. y a c_ .~ , ..i C_. L. w 4 , 1 : i._ \_ , ~' : ,_.. 4C Ci . %~ b r\r_'r- tt~ 1. ~ (7.J f~ a JCi\J [ JJ~ a "T J\S ~ J ~_! L_ ~ ~-F ~ t } ._/\J `+ iC :7 G.~ . a_ 1 `1 i-'"i f:}r:f j. _l i= a 1 .llf?'~i _ (__ 4 ~ L7 , r•~ j. 7 C'. i.:i ! 1 s ~'?/C'?f j ~ C~'+~_ ~J4 i ~ ~_7 ~~••)'~.~ G f~ a ~.~ 1/~' ~ ~~i '•~--1 `+ . ^,1 j. _ [~ 1 . ! } aC.,(a.) j. . '_I''?~_ i f.~ t: j !t'r ''_i i-1 7 ~ i L~. .._ ~ ._ 1 5 ._, [~ ~ ~ C, r..- ~, C]4J .. o ~ cc~ r- c"'. 4 '7r')7 . 1._),:1 ~ c __.J . 4?~ - 1 w ~_!c_'8ri _ i „ i 1']~' c... 7!^I f-1(1 ~ 5 !-1 r]...! } !-I' j. ..~ ?.37 r Jf_I '7 ~ \ 1i) ~ } 814 ~ ~: . '_7: ^ra ~ ~ / ,•, •-, ,r• ~ 1 ~~ j i",'-i ~- i=lk I(_) 1 C.'_ 4 j. ..~c 9 1 ~ J ,~'aL ~ ?r1~ ~ ! _ _ ~ q 4L ! a C J % " . _ C_! i_~i] ~ _ . ~~ 1 r 1C~~ ~ _ ; ~__ 1 . l )~::J L. ~'f. t! )~ L"/ 9 1 4%J ~ i~~~::! ~~ff ~~ C~G'R ~ `l .:l!_) !-~ 3 a l I~l~ ~ J~ 18 ~ / ~!_I ~ i ~ ~ le'_`I t~ _ 1 i.l r•, .-.~ ~ ~.. c_vr_...1 5 ..~ 11,E?1 1 J.1 /C1nS'u~_> ~t3. ;~ 1 w~1lJ(~~ I%'c' 1 ! {Ji )~ )LL C~ !1 ~J i~.J S f ~I=~~•'~ 7 / V 4 C7 1. j. J 9 vS~ I 1 ~ L}4l_I l~~ ....: 1_) t. w ~ ~C~l~1 t:J . _ .L ! Ir/ t~ r..' L ~_1 (_I ,_1 a J(' 1 ~:~ ~(.1 L~ 1 } f '4C7) !.-~C'i'- ~) 3 } 4.~0 a G 1 .~ ,j[ 1 ~ C~. is 1 ~ (1L'iV i~ 1 f '~,7 i__ *Figures obtained from Wayland Winstead 46 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 County ------------------ --------------------- 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) Parcel Percent Current Assessed Percent of Current Count of Count Value Assessed Value --------------------------------------------------------------------- Roanoke County 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 $1,341,662,031 100.00 --------------------------------------------------------------------- 47 TABLE 7 Existing Land Use - Roanoke County (1985) 0 of Total area 0 of Remaining Acreage Total Area For Develop. ----------------------------------------------------------- Total Area (248.28 square miles) 158,900 100.00 100.00 Total Developed Area 31,957 20.11 79.89 Total Avail. for Dev. 126.943 79.89 79.89 Topo. Slope 0-200 64,870 40.82 40.82 ----------------------------------------------------------- Total Remaining Dev. 64,870 40.82 40.82 48 TABLE 8 Export Activity in Virginia by Industry Retail Construction Manufacturing Service Wholesale ---------------------------------------------------------------- of Total Responding 18 0 11 0 7 0 27 0 10 0 Presently Exporting 10 40 20 250 5o s Interested in 11% 150 240 16% 260 Exporting No Interest in 88% 83s 510 790 700 Exporting -------------------- -------------------------------------------- Source: Virginia Small Business Survey - June 30, 1986 Price Waterhouse, Richmond, Virginia. TABLE 9 Export Activity in Virginia by Region Central Northern Southwest Tidewater Presently Exporting 7°s 11$ 5 0 5 0 Interested in 20% 250 170 170 Exporting No interest in 73 0 64 0 85 0 78 0 Exporting Source: Virginia Small Business Survey - June 30, 1986 Price Waterhouse, Richmond, Virginia. 49 APPENDIX A FIVE YEAR DEVELOPMENT TREND Roanoke Count o Change 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 '82-'86 Taxable SF-Urb 19,280 19,457 19,683 20,020 20,376 5.68 SF-Sub 7,408 7,487 7,591 7,779 7,980 7.72 MF 315 314 401 402 ----- 406 ---------- 27.88 --------- ---------- Subtotal ---------- 27,003 ---------- 27,258 ---------- 27,675 ----- 28,201 28,753 6.48 Com/Ind 1,225 1,275 1,303 1,334 1,349 10.12 Ag-Und 20-99 971 968 998 982 980 0.93 Ag-Und 99+ 206 199 196 195 194 (6.18) Total Taxed 29,428 29,700 30,174 30,712 31,276 6.28 ------------------------------------------------------------------ Tax Exempt 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 0 0 n.a. Religious 179 200 204 215 220 22.90 Charitable 23 23 13 14 17 (35.53) Educational 14 15 8 8 8 (75.00) Other 50 52 53 53 53 6.00 Unknown 40 45 17 11 n.a. SCC 38 53 52 ------- 53 --------- n.a. ---------- --------------- Tot Tx Exmpt ----- 514 ---------- 640 ---------- 659 --- 661 ----- 692 --------- 34.63 ---------- --------------- Tot A1Dist 29, --------------- ----- 942 ----- ---------- 30,340 ---------- ---------- 30,833 ---------- ----- ,31,373 ---------- 31,968 --------- 6.76 ---------- 50 APPENDIX B Five Year Development Trend Vinton 1981 1982 1983 Taxable o Change 1984 1985 '82-'85 SF-Urb 2,306 2,309 2,316 2,321 0.65 SF-Sub 34 34 544 35 545 35 546 2.94 0.55 MF 543 -- ------ ---------------- Subtotal -- -------2,883 -------- 2,887 2,896 2,902 0.66 Com/Ind 538 540 543 543 0.93 Ag-Und 20-99 2 2 2 2 0.00 Ag-Und 99+ 0 0 0 0 0.00 _- --- Total 3,423 3,429 3,441 3,447 0 Tax Exem t Federal 0 0 0 0 0.00 State 2 4 4 1 2 1 0.00 0.00 Regional 1 31 1 36 35 40 29.03 Local Govt. 0 0 0 0.00 Multiple Govt. 0 27 27 27 28 3.70 Religious 2 2 2 0.00 Charitable 2 1 1 1 (83.33) Educational 6 4 4 0.00 Other 4 4 5 5 4 n.a. Unknown 0 0 0 0 0. SCC - ---------- -- ------ --------- --------------------- 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 APPENDIX D Comparison of Real Estate Valuations by Segment (figures based on total taxed, 1985) Roanoke Count Percent Current Assessed Percent of Current Count of Count Value Assessed Value Residential 28,201 91.82 $1,355,675,600 79.52 Commercial/ Industrial 1,334 4.34 269,646,940 15.82 Agricultural/ 79,415,400 4.66 Undeveloped 1,177 3.83 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/ 8,507,000 0.55 Undeveloped 39 0.09 -------43~--------~----------------- -------- Total 881 100 00 $1,718,465,419 100.0 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 53 APPENDIX E Salem Percent Current Assessed PeAssessed Valuent Count of Count Va= ----' Taxable SF-Sub 7,625 86.84 $294,461,900 947,000 34 59.16 7,02 __ 234 2.66 - , --- __ -- ---- - Subtotal(Res) - -- 7,859 ---89.50 329,435,900 66.18 Com/Improved 505 5,75 109,157,600 300 2 113 21.93 0.42 Service Stat. 18 42 0.20 0.48 , , 12,538,000 2.52 1 22 Warehouse 260 2.96 6,094,500 , 46 7 Com/Vacant Ind/Improved 48 0.55 37,113,900 22700 . 0,005 - Ind/Vac 1 0.01 - --------------- _ -------- - ----------- ---- --- Sub(Com/Ind) --- - 874 -------- - 9.95 167,040,000 33.56 48 0.55 1,285,400 .26 --- --------- Ag-Und --- - ------- ------ ---- - ------------ Total------- ------ 8,781 ------ -------- 100.00 ---------- 497,761,300 $ - --------------- 100.00 ---- --------------------- Tax Exem t 5 $25, 771,300 Federal 2 054,100 State 7 5 , 7, 601,100 Regional 13, 466,900 Local Govt. 100 5, 637,100 Multiple Govt. 3 16 027,900 Religious 7 , 6 096,700 Charitable 26 , 38 135,200 Educational 27 , 435,900 Other 5 0 Unknown 0 0 0 ------------------- SCC - ---------- 249 ~ 107 ~ 625,10 -------------------- ~ Total - -- --- ------ -- ---------- -- --------------------- Total All Districts 605 386,400 ______ ----------- 54 APPENDIX F Comparison of Real Estate Valuations by Segment (1985) Percent Count of Count Salem Residential 7,859 87.03 Commercial/ Industrial 874 9.68 Agricultural/ Undeveloped 48 0.53 Tax Exempt 249 2.76 Current Assessed Value 329,435,900 167,040,000 1,285,400 107,625,100 Percent of Current Assessed Value 54.42 27.59 0.21 17.78 --------------- Total 9,030 100.00 605,386,400 100.00 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 ------------- 497,761,300 100.0 APPENDIX G Slope Characteristics of Vacant or Agricultural Land Slope Classification Acreage ---------------------- -- Flood Hazard Area 3,314 0 - 10% Slope 32,054 10 - 20o Slope 32,816 Exceeding 200 58,759 ---------------------------------- Total Vacant or Agricultural 126,943 Percent 2.61 25.25 25.85 46.29 100.00 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 > 20a ----- 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 infrastructureT and natural environmental characteristics play key roles in enhancing or detracting from the development of a property. 56 ITEM NUMBEF: __~ -- 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 22, 1987 SUBJECT: Ordinance amending Chapter 20.1 of the 1971 Roanoke County Code, "Water," and Ordinance No. 84-108, qy add- ing subsection (e) "Deposits," establishing a schedule of deposits for initial institution, and reinstitution of sewer and water service COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ,~ ~ ~~ ~N ~-'~C`t~-2.~~ -cif ..~riLC.t ..~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Delinquent water and sewer accounts represent a major loss of county revenue. Two years ago, the County wrote off $74,299.80 in uncollectable water and sewer accounts. At the present time there is on record $106,000 for stopped accounts. The staff is beginning vigorous collection efforts to reduce this balance. The usual collection remedy of r_~ecording a lien on the sec- ' ffective. We are able to collect on the liens only when the proper y i ,~~,~, ;{ the proceeds are not allotted to higher-ranking creditors. In- creased deposits would provide an increased measure of security against future delinquencies and save staff the time and effort of recording and monitoring a lien. The County presently has on hand $130,029.00 in deposits. The following information compares our current practice with that of the cities of Roanoke and Salem. City of Roanoke - $9.00 initial start-up charge. $15.00 turn off/on fee for non-payment. Deposits then required upon discontinuance for non-payment. Deposit. of one-quarters average bill plus 60. City of Salem - $10.00 deposit on water on rental proper- ty. No deposit required if owner requests service. $4.00 service charge. $1.0.00 for turn off/on due to non-payment (This covers water, gas and electric.) 1 ~- In addition to the County's water and sewer deposit, a new resident moving into the County may be required to make deposits or service charges to other utility service providers. APCO re- quires a deposit based on the average usage of the home or apart- ment's previous occupant. If the service is a new connection (to a newly built residence, for example), the deposit is based on square footage and the home's heating, cooling, and lighting systems. C & P Telephone does not require a deposit unless the applicant has an unpaid bill outstanding from previous service. However, C & P imposes a service charge of $38.50 for regular service and $62.50 for one additional jack; the more jacks the higher the service charge. Roanoke Gas Company requires deposits only for leased property. These deposits are $30.00 for hot water only, and $90.00 for heat and hot water. Shown below are the deposit fees now in effect, the proposed deposits and the additional deposits required for non-payment: Proposed Additional Connection In Effect Proposed Initial Deposit* Deposit for Reinsti- tution of Service Sewer only $ 0.00 $ 5/8" connection 15.00 50.00 3/4" connection 22.50 75.00 1" connection 30.00 75.00 1.5" connection 45.00 100.00 2" connection 75.00 150.0 3" connection 150.00 200.00 4" connection 225.00 300.00 6" connection 300.00 400.00 500.00 *Proposed Initial Deposit (size of connection not significant) Sewer Cnly - $50.00 Residential water, water & sewer - $25.00 Commercial water, water & sewer - $100.00 As the above information indicates, neither the City of Roanoke nor the City of Salem has chosen to protect itself against uncollectable accounts by means of a sizable water depo- sit. In the case of Salem, one reason is that Salem provides electricity as well as water and sewer, and requires an electric service deposit of between $50 and $125. They use this deposit as security against delinquency on any account, including water and sewer. The City of Roanoke attempts to minimize the size of its uncollectable accounts by discontinuing service very soon after an account becomes delinquent. The first reading and public hearing of the ordinance are scheduled for September 22, 1987; the second reading is scheduled for October 6, 1987. 2 FISCAL IMPACT: ~~~'" ~'~ ~ Increased deposits would result in less revenues being writ- ten off as bad debts. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board of Supervisors adopt this proposed amendment to the County Code. Respectfully submitted, ~~ ~ . ~/~. Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney ---------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved ( ) Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred To Brittle Garrett Johnson McGraw Nickens 3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 1987 ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20.1, OF THE 1971 ROANOKE COUNTY CODE, "WATER," AND ORDINANCE N0. 84-1081, BY ADDING SUB- SECTION (e) "DEPOSITS," ESTABLISHING A SCHEDULE OF DEPOSITS FOR INITIAL INSTI- TUTION, AND REINSTITUTION OF SEWER AND WATER SERVICE WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Charter of Roanoke County, a first reading and public hearing concerning this amendment was held on September 22, 1987; a sec- ond reading was held on October 13, 1987; and WHEREAS, nonpayment of sewer and water charges has been a significant burden on county utility revenues; and WHEREAS, the recording of liens on the property re- ceiving the uncompensated service does not provide a prompt reme- dy for the delinquent charges; and WHEREAS, the present deposit rates do not provide suffi- cient funds to offset the amount of delinquent accounts. IT IS HEREBY ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that Chapter 20.1, "Water," of the 1971 Roanoke County Code (now Chapter 22 of the 1985 Roanoke County Code) is hereby amended as follows: CHAPTER 20.1 WATER ARTICLE II. WATER SYSTEMS DIVISION 2. COUNTY WATER SYSTEM (e) Deposits 1 (1) The following charges shall be imposed as security deposits when request for service is made Sewer Only - $50 00 ~ " Residential Water Water and Sewer - $25.00 Commercial Water Water and Sewer - $100.00 (2) If any utility customer at any time failed to keep his account current resultin in discontinuance of service that customer shall a an additional de osit accordin to the following schedule for reinstitution of service This deposit shall be required in addition to that required by subsection (a) and the turn-on charge required by Section 20 1 31 Additional Connection Deposit Sewer Only $ 50.00 5/8" Connection 75.00 3/4" Connection 75.00 1" Connection 100.00 1 1/2" Connection 150.00 2" Connection 200.00 3" Connection 300.00 4" Connection 400.00 6" Connection 500.00 (3) The deposits required by subsections (a) and (b) will be refunded without interest within sixt (60) da s of discontinuance of service rovided that all char es have been paid in full. (4) The effective date of this amendment shall be January 1, 1988. 2 ITEM NUMBER O - ~' 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 22, 1987 SUBJECT: Ordinance accepting an offer for and authorizing the conveyance of surplus real estate on Washington Avenue in the Town of Vinton COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: i/ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Department of Transportation is in the process of acquir- ing a right-of-way needed for the widening of Washington Avenue in front of the library in the Town of Vinton. The right- of-way needed includes 3,550 square feet of land in permanent easement and 1,820 square feet of land in temporary easement. The offer to cover this transaction and all related damages is $7,750.00. Section 18.04 of the County Charter requires that any sale of public property be accomplished by ordinance. The first read- ing of this proposed ordinance is scheduled for September 22, 1987; the second reading is scheduled for October 13, 1987. FISCAL IMPACT : ~~~ The state has offered $7,750.00 for the acquisition of land easements, relocation of a sign, landscaping, concrete walk, brick retaining wall, and any and all damages. 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. 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 Improvement Fund as a reserve for capi- tal improvements. © - .~ 4. That the County Administrator be authorized to execute such documents and take such actions on behalf of Roanoke County as are necessary to accomplish the conveyance of said property. Respectfully submitted, Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney ------------------------------------------------------------------ ACTION VOTE Approved ( ) Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied ( ) Brittle Received ( ) Garrett Referred Johnson To McGraw Nickens AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 1987 ORDINANCE ACCEPTING AN OFFER FOR AND `~-~' -~"" AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYANCE OF SURPLUS REAL ESTATE ON WASHINGTON AVENUE IN THE TOWN OF VINTON 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 keen de- clared to be surplus; and 2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Charter of Roanoke County, a first reading concerning the sale and disposition of the hereinafter-described real estate was held on September 22, 1987; a second reading was held on October 13, 1987; and 3. That this real estate is located on Washington Avenue and consists of 3,550 square feet in permanent easement and 1,820 square feet in temporary easement; and 4. That the offer of the Virginia Department of Transportation in the amount of $7,750.00 is hereby accepted and all other offers are rejected; and 5. That all proceeds from the sale of this real estate are to be allocated to the capital reserves of the County. 6. That the County Administrator is authorized to exe- cute such documents and take such actions on behalf of Roanoke County as are necessary to accomplish the conveyance of said pro- perty, all of which shall be upon form approved by the County Attorney r i 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 22, 1987 SUBJECT: Zoning Ordinance Amendment: In the M-1 Industrial District. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Office and Commercial Uses Currently none of the manufacturing districts within the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance permit any type of office or commercial development. The Roanoke County Land Use Plan has a specific policy within the Principal Industrial land use category that encourages retail and office development in industrial areas if the retail and office uses support the needs of the industrial area. The proposed amendment reflects this adopted policy state- ment by allowing selected office and commercial uses permitted within the B-2 zoning district to locate within the M-1 district if the Board of Supervisors grants a Special Exception. The primary benefit of this proposed amendment is that mixed office, commercial and industrial development will be permitted within the context of the policies contained within the land use plan. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Planning Commission recommends approval of this amendment. Staff recommends approval of this amendment. SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED: t ~'~ ~-,r„ ~' ~ ~' Rob Stalzer Elmer C. Hodge, Jr. Director of Planning County Administrator -------------- __ ------------ ACTION VOTE Approved ( ) Motion by: Denied ( ) No Yes Abs Received ( ) Brittle Referred ,Garrett To Johnson McGraw Nickens AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 1987 ORDINANCE AMENDING AND REENACTING THE ROANOKE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE, TO ALLOW CERTAIN OFFICE AND COMMERCIAL USES WITHIN AN M-1 DISTRICT UPON SPECIAL EXCEPTION WHEREAS, the first reading and public hearing on this ordinance was held on September 22, 1987, and the second reading on this ordinance was held on October 13, 1987; and WHEREAS, public necessity, convenience, general wel- fare, and good zoning practice requires and supports this amend- ment; and WHEREAS, this amendment conforms with the Roanoke County Land Use Plan, and is consistent with the policies con- tained therein by encouraging retail and office development in industrial areas. Specifically, this amendment allows selected office and commercial uses permitted within the B-2 district to locate within the M-1 district with a special exception; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this amendment on September 1, 1987, and it recommended approval; and WHEREAS, Section 15.1-491 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and Chapter 9 of the Charter of the County of Roanoke authorizes this amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Super- visors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that the Roanoke County Code is amended and reeancted as follows: .' 1. Amend Appendix A, the Roanoke County Zoning Ordin- ance, Section 21-24-1 by revising sub-section A by the addition of a new sub-sub-section (15) to read and provide as follows: Sec. 21-24 INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS ~ - 21-24-1 M-1 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT A. Permitted uses enumerated. (15) An use ermitted in the B-2 General Commercial District as well as nurser schools and da -care centers that are directl supportive of area industrial facilities, provided a special ex- ception has been granted by the Board of Supervisors 2• The effective date of this ordinance shall be October 14, 1987. .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 22, 1987 SUBJECT: Ordinance authorizing the acquisition of real estate - Lot in Crestwood Park COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: 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 and public hearing was held on September 22, 1987. FISCAL $3,000 to be paid from library budget funds. IMPACT : ~~~~ RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board favorably consider this acquisition by the adoption of the attached ordinance. Respectfully submitted, George Garretson Library Director Approved by, ~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator .,• Approved Denied Received Referred To Motion by: ACTION Brittle Garrett Johnson McGraw Nickens --- ".:~ VOTE No Yes Abs AT A REGULAR MEETING OF' THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, ON ~l'UESDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 1987 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION ~~- OF REAL ESTATE - LOT IN CRESTWOOD PARK BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Charter of Roanoke County, a first reading on the acquisition of the hereinafter-described real estate was held on September 8, 1987. A second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on September 22, 1987. This real estate is a 100' x 100' well lot located in Crestwood Park adjacent to the Main Branch Library (Tax Map No. 76.16-2-7); and 2. That the acquisition of said lot is hereby autho- rized and approved; and 3. That the County Administrator is authorized to exe- cute such documents and take such actions on behalf of Roanoke County as are necessary to accomplish the acquisition of this property, all of which shall be upon form approved by the County Attorney. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 1987 ORDINANCE 92287-8 AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF REAL ES'T'ATE - LOT IN CREST4VOOD PARK BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. Tha t pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Charter of Roanoke County, a first reading on the acquisition of the hereinafter-described real estate was held on September 8, 1987. A second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on September 22, 1987. This real estate is a 100' x 100' well lot located in Crestwood Park adjacent to the Main Branch Library (Tax Map No. 76.16-2-7); and 2. That the acquisition of said lot is hereby autho- rized and approved; and 3. That the County Administrator is authorized to exe- cute such documents and take such actions on behalf of Roanoke County as are necessary to accomplish the acquisition of this property, all of which shall be upon form approved by the County Attorney. On motion of Supervisor Nickens, seconded by Supervisor Garrett, and upon the following recorded vote: ._ ~ AYES: Supervisors Garrett, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisors Brittle, McGraw A COPY - TESTE: Mary H. Allen, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors 9/24/87 cc: File George Garretson, Library Director Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney Real Estate Assessor PETITIONER: J.F. DAMS AND W.E. CUNDIFF Cj~ ,.~ ~ / CASE NCA~4BER: 40-9/87 // Planning Commission Hearing Date: August 4 and September 1, 1987 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: August 25 and September 22, 1987 1. REQUEST Petition of J.F. Davis and W.E. Cundiff to rezone an approximate 19.4 acre tract from M-2, Industrial to R-E, Residential Estates to construct single family homes, located on the east side of Route 758 approximately one mile south of its intersection with Route 460 in the Hollins Magisterial District. 2. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION No one in opposition was present at the Planning Carnnission Public Hearing. 3. SIGNIFICANT IMPACT FACTORS a. Street Capacities: Route 758 is 14 feet wide and currently carries 146 vehicles per day. Development will generate approximately 750 to 800 vehicles per day. Street service guideline contained within Roanoke County Transportation Plan states that within the Development land use category a proposed residential development served by a local street should not generate more than 30 trips per net acre. The petitioner's proposal will produce approximately 30 trips per net acre. VDOT Road and Bridge Standards Manual states that for average daily traffic in the range of f rom 400 to 999 vehicles per day, a street with a width of 18 feet is necessary. Policy D-9 states that where a residential project has a significant increase in density from a surrounding neighborhood, the project should provide direct access to a collector or arterial street, rather than share the local street network of an adjoining neighborhood. Petitioner's concept plan shows that 18 feet is being reserved to provide for additional right-of -way to accommodate future road widening. b. Fire Protection: Outside of established travel time service standard. c. Rescue: Outside of established travel time service standard. 4. PROFFERED CONDITIONS a. The conceptual plans submitted with the amended petition will be substantial- ly followed in the development of the residential lots on the property. 5. CODM'IISSIONER'S MOTION, VOTE AND REASON Mrs. Flippen moved to approve the petition with the proffered condition. The motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Witt, Jones, Flippen, Winstead NAYS: Gordon ABSENT: None 6. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE a. Mr. Gordon stated that a development that large should have same amenities such as parks or playgrounds. He questioned whether Route 758 could handle the additional traffic. 7. ATrACHNiENTS ~/ Concept Plan (8~" x 11") 7 Vicinity Map (8~" x 11") ;/ Staff Report / Other: IVle~~c~an;iuvv~ ~Pdc.i~nc~ 5}a~ Y~po s } ~~..- Robert Stalzer, Planning Ca~nission Secretary ~D.~, ~. A..- 1 DORM N R06lRT~ON . TAK N4 60.01- 1-20f 21 /~ / / / 1 / i 11 l / i i t i ~ ~ ~.d~? .. as, i~ 1 / ~ 111 ~ \ ate ~ 11 / " / 1 r l s _. 1 / / \` ~_//. '~ ~, ~ `~ 0 QI o OC f Q~I V ii I 1 r 1 ~~~ 1 1 iKo ao~1_c~ z 6 i~looF ~~=aa ~~~~~ .a r =/ N ~, i ~/~ -~~/¢ Ohl ~~)[TMy' ~ ~~~~`' ~~~l i%~~i ~~l 1 I 1 ~_?14~fj'~~ ~~///~Lr// ,y~~ 11/l~I~l?! ~~~~~/jj11~~~//l~~ / I ~ ` ///~/iii / '/i ~ Flalill 11 'ti~f!,i %.'/~i/riil/~•~, / / /~~~ i 4 / ///(/ 1 / III b~,.(%~ i~i,~,~///i~/1~i i /, r/ ~//~/~/ ''3~ ~ ~/Y / / ' / I orl 11 jj1 P~fi' /~~ ~~•r /~''y' ~~'/~ i / ~ ~ /- / i 1 t ' N ~ / ' ~/ 1///~/11 IZ ~M/~,/i/~//~~~ iii i / I Y 1 ~ ~~I" _/ ~ .. / / y ~+'; ~ ~ '~~~lj~ ~ ;~% ~~~/, iii'/i ~ .~(//)1 PROVF3RTf, OP' 1 ~~Ij~~11`~_. i,, // DORp~ y, f WAND APPROXIMATE LOCATIO/.l A NLLW 100 YEAR r1000 rlA1N ~% N43O.d_ 1-16 ~--ZONED (~ T ZONED M-2 -+ rlrovExrr or 80 LC7T°.S PRO PO`.SED ~~r,.IZnaeTN M•KNIOMT-~ T-x No.6no~-1-~ AV ERSlag LOT FRONTA6c 1~ ed ~TBO L. P. OR ROgp COI.ICEPTUAI. pWN POR v _J, F DAVIS C W. C CUIJDIFF or A w.T AG TfUCT ecIN4 A PIORTIO-.1 Corr t ~[~ Or A 11.,6 AC. TRACT GITUAT! N ur ~nww CARBON ROAD (VA.aEC. RTC. T66~ ~~ ~ ~ VIAITON MA(iISTEQIAI„ DIbT. ~ W ~ ROAUOKE COUAITY~ VIt05fK1A T. P. PARKER f dO/J •NalNeexs 1 cucveVoRb,LTn SCAI.E• I~•200' ALJEI. 101196T W.O. 6T- 1011 2 s- r 90 . _ ~~\ \ ~ ~ ~~ \ _ _ PO ~'• T4n ra ~ `~~ ~. ~K rp.~ ~t TNI~! !N Q 'at ti;~ ~ rY£ i.. ~'~ 7 ~sp~Q~ ~~z``` ~// J~ 'ANNEXAT/O// j~ ~ j 0~ ~SP~2INGTREE ~' / 1 p~ 'J +' ef' 1Atr y.~ ~ VICINITY Mea D un~ru AN 4 ~. L a~ ~< ~~ ROANOKE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT J.F. Davis and W.E. Cundiff 3 ~~12 to RE M E M O R A N D U M T0: Roanoke County Planning Commission FROM: Rob Stalzer DATE: August 27, 1987 SUBJECT: Davis and Cundiff Rezoning The Davis and Cundiff petition for rezoning has been refiled. The petitioner is requesting a rezoning to an R-E, Residential Estates classification. The previous rezoning request that was heard by the Planning Commission last month and denied was for an R-1, Residential designation. Although the same property is involved, legally the requests are different. The Commission's reconsideration of the zoning of this property is in accordance with the Planning Commission bylaws and the County Code. The primary areas of concern that you should focus on are as follows: (1) The concept plan has been changed and proffered. (2) Individual driveway access onto Route 758 should not occur. (3) The floodplain area has been identified on the concept plan. (4> The existing house on the property will continue to be used as a residence and some of the land surrounding it will continue to be used for grazing. ajb a STAFF REPORT CASE NUMBER: 40-9/87 PETITIONER: J.F. DAVIS & W.E. CUNDIFF REVIEWED BY: ROB STALZER DATE: AUGUST 26, 1987 Petition of J.F. Davis and W.E. Cundiff to rezone an approximate 19.4 acre tract from M-2, Industrial to R-E, Residential Estates to construct single family homes, located on the east side of Route 758 approximately one mile south of its intersection with Route 460 in the Hollins Magisterial District. 1. NATURE OF REQUEST a. Conditional request to rezone approximately 20 acres to R-E, Residential Estates to allow for the construction of 80 single family dweling units on a parcel of 47 total acres. Submitted concept plan indicates that 10 units would be constructed on the 20 acre portion included within the rezoning petition. The remaining acreage is to be used for grazing. The existing house will be occupied and, if the rezoning is approved, will no longer be nonconforming. The overall density of the project is approximately 1.6 units per acre. The density of the portion to be developed is approximately 3 units per acre. It should be noted that the front 27 acres is already zoned R-E, Residential Estates and may be developed for the proposed use without rezoning the rear portion of the parcel to R-E. b. Attached concept plan and zoning vicinity map describe project more fully. 2. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS a. R-E zoning permits single family development where public sewer and water are provided at a maximum density of approximately 6 units per acre. Conditions limit density of development in general accordance with submitted concept plan. b. Site plan review required to insure compliance with County regulations. c. VDOT entrance permit required for subdivision streets. 3. SITE CHARACTERISTICS a. Topography: Front portion of property is flat. Rear 20 acres slopes towards Glade Creek and is situated in floodplain. b. Ground Cover: Low growing grass with some tree cover. 4. AREA CHARACTERISTICS a. Future Growth Priority: Situated within the Bonsack Community Planning area. Designated as a high growth area. Sewer services are provided. Water service will be provided when the new US 460 water line is completed. b. General area is developed with rural residential. 5. LAND USE IMPACT ASSESSMENT Rating: Rate each factor according to the impact of the proposed action. Use a scale of 1 through 5. 1 = positive impact, 2 = negligible impact, 3 = manageable impact, 4 = disruptive impact, 5 = severe impact, and N/A = not applicable. RATING FACTOR COMMENTS LAND USE COMPATIBILITY 3 a. Comprehensive Plan: 1985 Comprehensive Development Plan has placed the area petitioned for rezoning primarily within a surface water and flood hazard land use category. A small portion of the property is designated as Development and is not within a flood hazard area. Residential development is encourag- ed within the Development land use category especially where clustering and open space preservation are included as design elements. Open space is shown on the proffered concept plan. Petitioner has indicated that no residential units will be placed within the flood hazard area. The Resource Protection Guide of the Roanoke County Land Use Plan discourages unsuitable development of floodplains and natural drainage corridors. Policy D-1 states that the rate, location and amount of new residential growth should be managed according to the capacity and availability of public services and facilities, particularly water, sewer, streets and schools. With respect to street capacity see comments below, item (i). 3 b. Surrounding Land: Sparsely developed rural residential. Proposed development is of significantly higher density. 3 c. Neighboring Area: See above. 2 d. Site Layout: Petitioner has made significant changes to the site layout that was submitted for review in August. All lots within the subdivision will have frontage onto local streets and will not require access onto Route 758. The previous concept plan showed driveway access from 16 lots onto Route 758. Petitioner has left the flood hazard area open and has defined the bounds of the flood fringe. 3 e. Architecture: Petitioner has stated that approximately one half of the 80 homes would be of brick construction while the remaining units would be some type of frame exterior. Not specified by way of proffer. 2 f. Screening and Landscape: As per ordinance. 3 g. Amenities: Open space shown on proffered concept plan. Policy D-7 encourages the provision of activity centers such as parks and recreational facilities that benefit new community residents. Open space will be privately owned and will be used for grazing and will not be available for general community use. 3 h. Natural Features: Proposal indicates that flood hazard area is not to be developed. u TRAFFIC 4 i. Street Capacities: Route 758 is 14 feet wide and currently carries 146 vehicles per day. Development will generate approximately 750 to 800 vehicles per day. Street service guideline contained within Roanoke County Transportation Plan states that within the Development land use category a proposed residential development served by a local street should not generate more than 30 trips per net acre. The petitioner's proposal will produce approximately 30 trips per net acre. VDOT Road and Bridge Standards Manual states that for average daily traffic in the range of from 400 to 999 vehicles per day, a street with a width of 18 feet is necessary. Policy D-9 states that where a residential project has a significant increase in density from a surrounding neighborhood, the project should provide direct access to a collector or arterial street, rather than share the local street network of an adjoining neighborhood. Petitioner's concept plan shows that 18 feet is being reserved to provide for additional right-of-way to accommodate future road widening. 3 j. Circulation: Individual driveway access onto Route 758 is no longer being proposed. VDOT would prefer fewer street entrances. UTILITIES 3 k. Water: New Route 460 water line will be installed within the general area by the early part of 1988. 2 1. Sewer: Glade Creek interceptor adjacent to the property. Adequate treatment and transmission available. DRAINAGE 3 m. Basin: 2 n. Floodplain: Portion of the property is within a FEMA designated floodplain area. Residential use is not proposed for flood hazard area. PUBLIC SERVICES 4 0. Fire Protection: Outside of established travel time service standard. 4 p. Rescue: Outside of established travel time service standard. 3 q. Parks and Recreation: No on site amenities indicated. 3 r. School: Space: If 80 homes are constructed, it can be anticipated there will be 52 school age residents. Herman L. Horn Elementary School and William Byrd Jr, and William Byrd high schools have adequate capacity. Cost: Estimated cost of educating one schoolchild per year is $3,715. Of this amount $1,796 is local funds. Total local cost to educate 52 students is $93,392 per year. The difference between total cost and total revenue is -$3,152. 7 TAX BASE 3 s. - Land and Improvement Value: - Taxable Gross Sales Year: $6.4 million. - Total Employees: None None Total revenue to the County/year: (includes $16,640 of personal property tax Approximately $90,240 ENVIRONMENT ? t• Air: ? u• Water: ? v. Soils: ? w• Noise: ? x. Signage: Although not specified, signage in resident' is already limited by ordinance. ial areas 6. PLAN CONSISTENCY The area to be rezoned is designated flood hazard and primarily as surface water and the p p y partially as Development. The remainin ro ert that is not subject to rezonin g portion of the construction will take place is designat edu asnDevelomost of Petitioner's proposal that focuses on the Development land use is consistent with the land use ma pment. policies D-1 and D-9 both of wh P h deal with cthe lade uacw th available services such as streets. 4 y of 7• STAFF EVALUATION a. Strengths: (1) Development is proposed in an area desi nated for future residential land use. g M-2 is not desirable for most t (2) Property currently zoned (3) Concept plan has been YPes of industrial development. Individual driveway accessoontoeRoutes7 8s hastbeenael ord. (5) Future right-of-way reserved for eventual road widenin (4) urinated. b• Weaknesses: g' (1) Although not desirable for most t industrial use, the property is one of a few sites. in the Count zoned M- YPes of 2 that is also served by rail. (2) Route 758 is a local street 14 feet wide and is unsuited for additional major amounts of traffic. (3) Outside of established fire and rescue servic areas. e c. Other observations: future East CircumferentpaltHilhwaocated adjacent to should be given to the t g Y corridor. Proposed served by this highway. Ype of land use most desirablertolbe 8 PETITIONER: JOHN LEE DA~pORT CASE N[Il~isggZ: 38-9/87 Planning Cannission Hearing Date: Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: September 1, 1987 September 22. 1987 9~~-2 1• g~UEST ven rt to rezone a 0.30 acre tract frarn A-1, Agricultural Petition of John Lee professional office located at 5318 Falla~ater Lane in the to B-2, Business for a p Cave Spring Magisterial District. 2, CITIZEN PARTICIPATION ssion Public Hearing. No one in opposition was present at the Planning Cc~c-i 3, SIGNIFICANT IP~ACT FACTORS a, None. 4. PROFFERED CONDITIONS substantially the same size as the sign on a. The sign to be constructed ~~ lobe aae~1 the adjoining property- REASON 5 , Cpry,,2ISSI0NER' S MCII'ION, VOTE AND tion tition with the proffered condition. The mo Mr. Witt moved to approve the pe carried with the follawing roll call vote: Ate; Witt, Gordon, Jones, Flippen- Winstead NAYS: None p~gS~ ; None (, DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE a, None. 7, ATTACHMENTS Concept Plan (8~" x 11") Vicinity Map (8~" x 11") Staff Report Other: ~ A Planning Caim-ission Secretary Robert Stalzer, `D~ C..ON~~ DNS Q~cC c~ ~ ~i4 it f ~-~ /~o wa~eR To%N ~ee- g.S, 0 6 . M ~~~~o~~lE,~ 3~ ~~'~~~ . 3o A- c -ee //SD s~. ~F~. /'~e ZdN %NJ r :~ . ,~: ~,,. it/ S O ~ 3 2 f_- G 9. ¢ J ' V v ~ ~N o o Q ~~ ~~ ~ u ~ ~ ~- o,e~o L oJ-i ~ r. r \ SSG . ,=; ~_- - - -" `~, ~a ~ ~i - - ~, :~ i ~~~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ,~ ~i Q~Q~~ ~. ~; _~ ~"Cafes- Ii 4,S~vo,+¢o, ``r- 1 ' ~_ tf.0 e Oft ~.` - ~36 ~ W -"ot4 ~/i/ `,9~t/~" ;~~: , ~~~ r/.a~w. ~ c '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Ao C o,,." y~ ~ YO MYIUOM 419 / W / ~~ ~' _; 706 ' .r ~;~R ~: ;" i'~ ~ 1541 1Gl~a~; :o- ~_hUNT~NC gr~ r 4 ~G J •' J ~ \f~ VICINITY MAP - -~~~- ~r ~I Y '_c nURln 10.23 Ac .~.Z e °c Zoe •, Zi 's 1.03 Ac v ur o : 22$ "~-Z ¢ ~ / °\\ I • ® \ ' ~' 111 Jt ` / J~J 6.I / JJ 1 i • ,u ~ ~ eiJ ~ eJ~Ji \i 7`~z 1.08 Ac r~ od / 7 ~ ~ ! / rry 3 ~ IZ.I s'n ~J Z s -,. 11.1 _ I I 10 ` ~9r 9r ~ b.,~\ e 9 ti _ `moo r ? 4 ~~~ ~: '. 7 z! ~ ~0 8 b~~• ~. 60.56 ~,~ Cd~M~0~VpO/l ery I T ~ 'ri ae.T - ~' R t. 4 19 --- ~ ~ _ _ ~ -~~ - ~ - _.,., H I / B - 3 2.96 Ac ,01 ~ / 2.09 Ac lG 4 AN ~ `. ~_ P ROANOKE COUNTY ~~}< ~ DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT John Lee Davenport A-1 to B-2 STAFF REPORT BER: 38-9/87 PETITIONER: JOHN LEE DAVENPORT ~ _ ~ CASE NUM 1987 ;~ .f ~`°." ROB STALZER ~ DATE: AUGUST 26, REVIEWED BY: acre tract from A-1, Petition of John Lee Davenport to rezone a 0.30 -2 Business for a professional office located at 5318 Agricultural to B Ma isterial District. Fallowater Lane in the Cave Spring 9 1, NATURE OF REQUEST ermit the petitioner to use an le family dwelling consisting of a. Uncondi n io Vaa c a nques i n ghat will p exist i g ft, for professional offices. approximately 900 sq- describe purpose b, Attached concept plan and zoning vicinity map more fully. not secured by conditions will allow 2, APPLICABLE REGULATIONS and office uses. a. g_2, General Comm of retail, commercial, for a wide variety fiance with b, Site plan review will be required to insure comp County regulations. c, VDOT commercial entrance permit required. 3, SITE CHAoRAaThRISTLevel. a. ToP g P y' structure. Ground Cover: Cleared with the exception of existing b. Situated within the Cave Spring 4, AREA CHARACTERISTICS rowth. a, Future Growth Pr a eaty Area is designated for stable g Community Planning ment is encouraged. Urban services Commercia available develop currently commercial, ed with high density ment. Situated b, General area is develop residential, institutional and office develop within 200 feet of Route 419. act of the proposed 5, LAND USE RateCeach factor according to the imp Rating: manageable impact, action. Use a scale 2f-lnegl°gg ble impact, 3 licable. 1 positive impact, act, and N/A = not app 4 disruptive impact, 5 = severe imp COMMENTS RATING FACTOR ment Plan has LAND USE COMPATIBILITY 1985 .Comprehensive Develop Proposed Comprehensive Plan: ory. 2 a• fan map and the - placed this area iblehwith both thedland useeP usage is compat ro riate in the 419 defined policies. A-1 rural uses are inapp P corridor. 4 2 2 3 3 2 3 2 3 3 traveled primary highway and Land: Adjoins heavily b. Surroundined b densely developed residential and commercia is surround Y ~,~ struc tures . ~ ~ - ..~. Dense urban development. c, Neighboring Area: arking to the out: Existing structure to be used with p access d, Site Lay and width for required driveway rear. Inadequate side y to rear parking area. e, Architecture: No change proposed by petitioner. er ordinance. f, Screening and Landscape: As p arking shown. Petitioner has not Amenities: Adequate area for P raveled or paved. g- specified whether surface will e g h, Natural Features: No impact. i. j• 3 k. 2 1. TRAFFIC Local street with direct access thowevoeTe Street Capacities: uate width; 419. Fallowater Lane is of inadeq businesses that use petitioner's proposal is one of many for access. If professional °pf,DTcof approx mately 18 Fallowater building is used, an and the existing ected. This traffic generation is equivalent be exp units per acre. vehicles male family residences or 6 dwelling to 1.8 sing ion: Intersection of Route erateddfBomnpeaiDioner's Circulat very congested. Additional traffic act on this interse htl of- proposal will have minimal imP a 60 foot rig Fallowater Lane is scheduled to be widened; ri ht-of-way from re ui.red. Petitioner should feet eof es ged to consider way is q offering as a proffer an additional 1 his property for future widening. UTILITIES ro erty is served by 2 inch line located in laced with a Water: Currently p P roblem Fallowater Lane. ThisandnEmergencydServicesbrepoPt no p 12 inch pipe• Flrrotection. providing adequate p Sewer: Adequate transmission and treatment. DRAINAGE 2 m, Basin: N/A n. Floodplain: PUBLIC SERVICES 2 0, Fire Protection: Within established service area. 2 p, Rescue: Within established service area. N/A q. Parks and Recreation: N/A r. School: 5 3 TAX BASE ~ ~..~ r/ ~-'" s, - Land and Improvement Value: $58,000 Taxable Gross Sales/Year: Unknown - Total Employees: Estimated to be between 2 and 10 - Total revenue to the County/Year: Approximately $700. Does not include sales tax revenue. ENVIRONMENT 2 t, Air: 2 u. Water: 2 v. Soils: 2 w. Noise: 4 x. Signage: Location shown but type not specified. 6, PLAN CONSISTENCY This area is designated as a Core area. The proposal is consistent with both the land use plan map and policies. 7. STAFF EVALUATION a. Strengths: (1) Compatible with Core land use designation. (2) Compatible with surrounding and neighboring useg. (3) Accreos riate by way of primary highway. (4) Current zonin is inapp p for urban highway corridor. b, Weaknesses: (1) Intersection of Bernard Drive and VA Roffered is already heavily traveled. (2) Petitioner has not p the type of specific B-2 use although officeseCafecally proposed. (3) Modifications to the structure, sp removal of the carport, will be required to meet minimum driveway entrance standards . ( 4 ) FWaurof wa dp offeroextend ~ g the Lane should be accounted for by y right-of-way 15 feet onto the petitioner's property. (5) Signage should be specified. 6 VIRGINIA: BEFORE THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF Page 1 of 2 ROANOKE COUNTY A •-''~ acre parcel of land, generall ) ~" ~~ y located o_ff c~. ~ ~ ) ,~ ~. ,~;,.~ Behind .dominion sank within the C'a"P S~rinQ ) Magisterial District FINAL' ORDER . and ) recorded as parcel # ~~ s o_ ~_~~ ) in the Roanoke County Tax Records.) TO THE HONORABLE SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE CO c~ UNTY : WHEREAS, your petitioner J T, ohn ee J~aven ort Q did petition the Board ~ of County Supervisors to referenced rezone the above- parcel of land from ~°riculturai ~ ~ z R-. `" District to z ~ Business '?,_~~ ° District for the purpose of °otent.ial lase as commercial. off.i P 0 ~„ WHEREAS, after due le Q gal notice, the Plannin a ublic g Commission did hol"d P hearing of the petition on Sept. 1 ° ~ 19 R?, at which time, a ~ all parties in interest were given an opportunity to ~ be heard• WHEREAS, after ~ and full consideration Supervisors ~ the Board of County determined that the rezoning be approved with conditions on September 22 Proffered 1987. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDERED that the aforemention land, which is contained ed Parcel of in the Roanoke County Tax Maps as Parcel 77.19_ 1-?3 _ and recorded in Deed Book 376 pa e 29 and legall below, be rezoned from Y described A-1 A ricultural B-2 Business Distric t to District with conditions. 7 l Page 2 of 2 Legal Description of Property: Roano!<e County .~ B~GTNf~iT1~IG at a point on the norherl side o~ ~' easterly from the intersection of ger and -~ri~ a.Ilorva.ter Lane f;S,~R feet extended; thence j~1, 34 dea, t}7' ~r~, lRR,r~7 r ie and ~' ~ ~32'F_, X9,47 feet to a a.l.o~va.ter [.ane both dev, ,point; thence S, Q34 to a Mont; thence !~'. 5(1 a point on raslowater r ane; thence ~l~ith r desk, f7 ~. 7.85.44 70 ~.eet to the ;??_AC~ r, ~ x allo~va.ter d,a , feet to O.~ R,__G..Nl~iil`~iG: and ne S. i7 de¢ ~e~ ~r~ ~~~NC'T Lit ?, Section T according to a re, . I~eula.h i-'ei;;hts of recarc~ in Plat ~ool< ~ subdivision of Section 5 of of the Circuit Coi.!rt of ~?c;ano!<e Counfi~~ p~ae I ~, in the C(er!<'s ~`fficP resuhdivision made h . C,13. ,~ . ~ ~rgini.a, a. ma.p pf which said record .in the aforesaid Cter! s~Qfm'eSi.n ~i~eedaBo !<!"~7~mb°r 18 19t~7 of ~ pa¢e ?~; anc~ 81~ T~.iC; the same property conve Pd to the Grantors herin by deed dated ^~u~ustf 4,19RF from I--oward lYlayne Carter and T~ia.ry .tune Carter, husband and wi ~e, and recorded cotpmporaneous.l.y heret~~ith, ~'~r~_ BE IT FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this order be transmitted to the Secretary of the Planning Commission and that he be direct reflect that change on the official zoning map of Roanoke Count ed to ADOPTED on motion of Supervisor Johnson y• and upon the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Garrett, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None CC: ABSENT: Supervisors Brittle, McGraw `1YZc~~ ~/ c., ~ ~,ou t y Roanoke County Board,of Supervisors Clerk Real Estate Assessor Development Review Coordinator Director of Planning 8 ~ ry ~ • t ~ VIRGINIA: BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY SUPER ~~ ~~ VISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY A --~•--~_ acre parcel of land, ~ generally located 5318 Fallowater Lane ~ ~ PR__ ~FFER ~ OF within the Cave Spring ~ CONDITIONS Magisterial District, and recorded as parcel # 77.19-1-23 in the Roanoke County Tax Records. TO THE HONORABLE SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY: Being in accord with Sec. 15.1-491.1 et seq. of the Code of Virginia and Sec. 21-1O5E. of the Roanoke Count Ordinance, the Petitioner Y Zoning John Lee Daven ort hereby voluntaril Y proffers to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia the followin of the g conditions to the rezoning above-referenced parcel of land• a• The sign to be constructed will be the adjoining propert s~stantially the Y• same size as the sign on 9 Page 1 of 2 VIRGINIA: BEFORE THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY ~,0 acre parcel of land, ) A generally located off Rt. 419 ) behinc! Dominion Bank ) PETIT ION within the Cave S ring Magisterial District, and ) recorded as parcel # 77.19-1-23 ) in the Roanoke County Tax Records.) TO THE HONORABLE SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY: WHEREAS , your Petitioner Zohn i..Pe Davenaort 's etition pursuant to Section 21-105 of the respectfully files thi P t Zoning Ordinance and in accordance with the Code of Roanoke Coun y show the Vir inia of 1950, as amended, and would respectfully g following: arcel of 1) The Petitioner is the owner of the above-referenced p land. is presently zoned under they provisions of the 2) The property Ordinance as A~,ricul.tural, A-1 Roanoke County Zoning District. na ted Core 3) The property is desig C o u n t y in the Future Land Use Guide of the Roanoke Comprehensive Development Plan. nro erty rezoned as A have this ~ P 4) Your Petitioner now desir~s to ur ose of District for the p P B-2 (Business) pt~tential use as commercial office s ace Page 2 of 2 requests that the Zoning ectfully WHEREFORE, your Petitioner resp oanoke County be amended and that the above-referenced Ordinance of R parcel of land be rezoned as set out in number 4. etition be referred FURTHER, your Petitioner requests that this p ar to the Roanoke County Planning Commission for its by the Secret y consideration and recommendation. Respectfully s bmitted ~_, ~ ~~i `: ~! U~.,~'_ Petitioner ~ohr~ Lee 1~avenport VIRGINIA: Page l of 2 BEFORE THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY A •30 acre parcel of land, generally located off Rt. 419 ) behind Dominion Rank ) . within the Cave Sprin¢ ) RECOMMENDATION Magisterial District, and ) recorded as parcel # 7°.1 °-1-2~ ) in the Roanoke County Tax Records.) TO THE HONORABLE SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY: WHEREAS, your Petitioner Sohn ?..ee Raven ort has filed with the Secretary to the Planning Commission a petition to rezone the above-referenced parcel of land from AQricultura.l A-1 District to Business B-;? District for the purpose of Potential use as commercial office space WHEREAS, the petition was referred to the Planning Commission which, after due legal notice ~s required by Section 15.1-431 of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended, did hold a public hearing on September 1 19 R7 ; and WHEREAS, at that public hearing all parties in interest were afforded an opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after due consideration has recommended to the Board of County Supervisors that the rezoning be rezoned to g-?.. District with proffered conditions Page 2 of 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommends to the Board of County Supervisors that the above- referenced parcel of land be zoned 6-2, Business with conditions District. The above action was adopted on ~1r. !Jitt ~-~-~ca~d-by motion of -------,- and upon the following recorded vote: AYES : ~Ji tt, Gordon , Jones , F1 i peen , Uai nstead NAYS : Plone ABSENT : None Respectfully submitted, (~ A ~ Secretary Roanoke County Planning Commission THIS ITEM WILL BE HEARD ITE=1 UNDER FIRS T ~ `~ '~ ~} READING OF ORDINANCES ~ PUBLIC NC7TICE Please be advised that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke Count meet~.ng on September 22, 1987, at the Roanoke County Administration ~ at its Center, 3738 Brambleton Avenue, Roanoke, Virginia, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, will hold a public hearing and first reading on the following matter, to-wit: ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 20.1 OF THE 1971 ROANOKE "WATER,~~ AND ORDINANCE N0. 84-108i BY ADD ~'~ CODE, SITS," ESTABLISHING A ' IrIG SUBSECTION (e) "DEPO- AND REINSTITUTION, OF S S AND WATER SERVICE ~IT~ ~STITUrION, The proposed ordinance will increase deposit fees in the following amounts: Connection In_ t Proposed Initial Deposit Sewer only 5/8" connection $ 0.00 15 00 $ 50.00 3/4" connection . 22 50 25.00 1" connection . 30 00 25.00 1.5" connection . 45 00 100.00 2" connection . 75 00 100.00 3" connection . 150 00 100.00 4" connection . 225 00 100.00 6" connection . 300 00 100.00 . 100.00 Proposed Additional Deposit for Reinsti- tution of Service This increase is authorized by Virginia Code Section 15.1-292. The complete ordinance and information concerning the justification for the proposed increase are available for examination b the Off ice of the County Attorney, 3738 Brambleton Avenue, Roanoke 1 Virginiae 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. All members of the public interested in the matter set forth above may appear and be heard at the time and place aforesaid. YVI, Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney of Roanoke County, Virginia 50.00 75.00 75.00 100.00 150.00 200.00 300.00 400.00 500.00 ~...m." Board of Supervisors P. 0. Box 3800 Roanoke, Virginia 24015 ~.GA'vukE T'`A~S L WQ4~L~-"~F'»vS A-) NUMBER - 9t)41~873 PURL I5HER' S s`Et - ~255.3b itGANCKE CQUNTY BOARD OF SUl~ERVI SOBS 3738 FsRA~1BLETON SW P G BQX 2~ 8D~ RQANUKE VA 24U18 STATE QF VIR.G IN IA v I T Y OF fZ~ANt~KE AFFI(~AVIT Q1F PU3LICATION i, {THE UfJDERSIti~dEO) A.N OFFICER t3F T DIES-'~JGRLD C~3Rr'L~R.ATION, !HIGH CCFc- PGRATIt7i'V IS PUE3LISiiER t3F THE ROANOKE T IMES E; ~GRLD-MEWS, A DA,i.LY NEWSPAPER ~U[iLIS"riED If~l RvAtI(3KE, I3V THE STATE OF Ji~GIt°dIA, DL CERTIFY THAT THE ANN EXEfl VOT ICE YEAS PU~3L iSHED Ifd SAID NEI~SPAPERS aN THE FCL,LO~lING ~:3ATES D~/t?8I87 MC~F<NINQ c)9I15I87 '~I~RfdING r1ITNESS, THIS ibTti DAY GF ScPTEM~iLR'~987 ... ~1'3.z.-~~_~d - ~ -..~_.__-_-._ OFFIC.EF'S SI~'iV,4TUR.E 'I~IIBLIC NOTICE Please be advised that the Board of Supeirvisors of Roendke Comity, at its m~atlrlp ~ September 22, 1987, at the Roanoke County Administration Center, 37'38 Brembbt+ Avenue, Roanoke, Virginia, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter mey be heal will hold a public heta'tMQ ahd' flret r9atlklg on th0 fdlowing matter, to-wiR: ORDINANCE AMENDING CMAPT~1~ 401 OF TNE•rf0>ti ROAlIt1KE COUNTY CODE "WTAgTEEp~"TAND ORDINANCE N0.84~10lt BY ADDING:NBSECTION ej TUTIPO~N, AND REINSTITtITINON, OFHSE EN wA~R sERY1C ~` 1~ The proposed ordinance will increase deposk fees in the following amounts: Proposed Additkxta) Proposed De k for Reinsd- Connectlon In Effect Infidel l>aDOSR' tudon of Service Sewer only SOT) -~ 5S 5/8" tx>nnection 15.00 75.E 3/4" connection .22.50 75.E 1 "connection ,30.00 100! 1.5" connection 45.00 150! 2" connection 75.00 200.E 3" connection 150.00 300! 4" connecton 225.00 400.E 8" connection 300.00 500! 'Pro sedylnitial De osit (size of connection not significant) Residential wat5er, water & sewer -625.00 Commercial water, water 8 sewer - 5100.00 This increase is' autMM~rized'by Virginia Code Section 15.1-292. The complete ordinance and information concerning the. ustification for the propost;'c increase are available for examination byy the public at the of the County Attome 3738 Brambleton Avenue, Roanoke,,. Virginia, 8:00 a.m: - b:00 p,m., Monday throw Friday. - All members of the public interested in'the mattersetforth-above may appear anc be heard at the time and place aforesaid. Paul M. Mahoney _ Coumy Attorney of Roanoke County, Virginia. , ; (16873) suaxozN ME.I~~Iid . Oy uosuuor pa~~a~ag ~~.a.z~~~ ( ) paniaoag aT~~?~S_ ( ) PaiuaQ sq~ sad oN : ~iq uoi~oY1 ( ) pano~dd~ syon NOIyo~' ------------------------------------------------------------------ ~o~~~~siuiuip~ ~~uno0 • .zr ' abpoH • O aau~TH ~~~ buiuu~Ta ~o .zo~oaaiQ Paz a~S ao2i J~ ~~ a~noxaa~r gag asyylwgns • ~uau~pua~u~ s iq~ ~o T~noadd~ spuaunuooa.z ~~~~5 •~uaiupuaui~ stq~ ~o T~noadd~ spuaunuooa~ uoissiu~uzo0 buiuu~Td = NOIytiQ1~ISWWO0S2i •auoN y0`ddWI 'ItiOS I3 •uLTd asn pu~T auk uTi~~TM pauTL~uoo saiozTod aq~ ~o ~xa~uoo aLj~ u-rq~TM pa~~iluaad aC{ TjzM ~uatudoTanap TLZa~.snpuT puE T~TO~aunuoo 'aoi~~o paxiui ~~q~ si ~uauzpuaws pasodo.zd siu~ ~o ~i~auaq ~.z~~ut.zd auy • uo-r~daoxS T~ioadS E s~u~.zb szosin.zadng 3o p~sog auk. IT ~oi~~siP T-W auk uzy~iM a~~ooT o~ ~.oi~~sip buiuoz Z-S auk uiu~tM pa~~iuz~ad sash T~ioaamu~oo pug aoi~~o pa~oaTas buiMOTT~ ~q ~uaiu -a~~~s ~oTTod pa~dop~ siu~ s~oaT~a~ ~uatupuaui~ pasodozd auy •~a~~ T~ia~.snpui auk ~o spaau auk ~.zoddns sash aoi~~o pua Ti~~a~ auk 3z s~aas T~i.z~snpu-r ui ~uau~doTanap aoi~~o pug Tz~~az sab~~nooua ~~u~ ~~oba~~o asn pu~T T~i~~snpul T~diouiaa auk uiq~iM ~ioiTod oi~toads ~ sou u~Ta asn pusZ ~~uno0 axou~og aqy •~uau~doTanap Tato.zauuu~oo ao aoi~~o ~o ad~i~ qua ~iuzaad aou~uipa0 buiuoZ ~~uno0 axouLOg auk uiu~iM s~oi~~sip bui.zn~oE~nuau~ aq~ ~o auou ~T~ua.z.zn0 =NOly~wxo3Nl 30 ~x~zwwns £-o w~yl SHONKN.IQ2i0 30 9NIQrd'32i yS2II3 x~aNn QZird'3H HS 'I'IIM wHSI SIHy Sy1~ISWW00 S ~ 2i0yK2iyS I1~IIWQrd ~yNnoo •~oz~~siQ T~-r~~snPul T-W auk ui sash T~-ro~a~uuzo0 pug aoi~~0 :~uatupuatu~ aou~uzpa0 buiuoZ :yOSrHnB L86T 'ZZ ~agtua~daS :Sy~iQ 9NIyS~W ' a~rQSxny No ' • ~zn 'sxoN~zox DII HSyNSO NOIyK2TySINIWQ6' ~yN1100 sxONti02~ SHy yF1 QZSH KII~IIJ2iIn 'ayNnoo sxoN~rox 3o s~osln~sans ao a~~rog sHy ao oNlys~w x~r~nos~ ~ y~ ~y ,...,~~, ,~ xsgwnN way I -- C VIRGINIA: "`" r- ~ BEFORE THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY ~,m,.." IN RE: AMENDMENT ~ THE ZONING ORDINANCE ) APPENDIX A OF THE CODE OF THE ) COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA, TO ) PETITION ADD PERMITTED USES TO THE ) M-1, INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICT ) `DO THE HONORABLE SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY WHEREAS, your Petitioner the Secretary to the Roanoke County Planning Commission respectfully files this petition pursuant to Section 21-105 of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance and in accordance with the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended, and would respectfully show the following: 1) There are many future economic and industrial development possibilities within Roanoke County. 2) Currently, the manufacturing districts within the County Zoning Ordinance do not permit any type of office or commercial development. 3) The Roanoke County Land Use Plan has a specific policy within the Principal Industrial land use category that states that retail development in Principal Industrial areas should be discouraged unless it supports the needs of the surrounding industrial area. 4) Your Petitioner now desires to amend the M-1, Industrial zoning district by adding Sect. 21-24-1A(15): "Any use permitted in the B-2 General Ccxt~nercial District as well as nursery schools and day care centers that are directly supportive of area industrial facilities, provided a special exception has been granted by the Board of Supervisors." WHEREFORE, your Petitioner respectfully requests that the Zoning Ordinance of Roanoke County be amended as set out in rnunber 4. FURTHER, your Petitioner requests that this petition be referred by the Secretary to the Roanoke County Planning Commission for its consideration and recommendation. Respectfully suismitted, ~ G4' .. Rob Stalzer, Secretary Roanoke County Planning Commission 2 VIRGINIA: BE~RE THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOIZE COUNTY IN RE: ~ rKK~ ~... ~° _. ~~`3 AMEND~r ~ THE ZONING ORDINANCE ) APPENDIX A OF THE CODE OF TFIE ) COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA, TO ) RECQNIlKENDATION ADD PERMITTED USES TO THE M-1 ) INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICT ) TO THE HONORABLE SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY: WHEREAS, your Petitioner, the Secretary to the Roanoke County Planning Commission has filed with the Planning Commission a petition to amend the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, M-1 Industrial district for the purpose of allowing nursery schools, day care centers, and any use permitted in the B-2 General Calmercial District that are directly supportive of area industrial facilities, provided a special exception has been granted by the Board of Supervisors. WHEREAS, the petition was referred to the Planning Commission which, after due legal notice as required by Section 15.1-431 of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended, did hold a public hearing on Sept~nber 1, 1987; and WHEREAS, at that public hearing all parties in interest were afforded an opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, after due consideration has recommended to the Board of County Supervisors that the amendment be approved. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Ccnanission recarmends to the Board of County Supervisors that the M-1, Industrial zoning district be amended as described above. The above action was adopted on motion of Donald Witt, and upon the following recorded vote: AYES: Witt, Gordon, Jones, Flippen, Winstead NAYS: None ABSENT: None Rob Stalzer, Secretary Roanoke County Planning Commission 3 ~ VIRGINIA: BEFORE THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY IN RE: !c AMEIVDMEI~FI' TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE ) APPENDIX A OF THE CODE OF THE ) COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA, TO ) FINAL ORDER ADD PERMITTED USES TO THE M-1, ) INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICT ) 'In THE HONORABLE SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY: H z w H 2 O U O H Q w 0 a a a WHEREAS, your Petitioner, the Secretary to the Roanoke County Planning Commission did petition the Board of County Supervisors to amend the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, M-1, Industrial zoning district for the purpose of allowing nursery schools, day care centers, and any use permitted in the B-2 General Commercial District that are directly supportive of area industrial facilities, provided a special exception has been granted by the Board of Supervisors. WHEREAS, after due legal notice, the Planning Commission did hold a public hearing on September 1, 1987, at which time, all parties in interest were given an opportunity to be heard; and the Planning Commission ~ recamnended that the petition be approved; and WHEREAS, after full consideration, the Board of County Supervisors determined that the amendment be . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDERID that the M-1, Industrial zoning district be amended by adding Sec. 21-24-1A(15): "Any use permitted in the B-2 General Commercial District as well as nursery schools and day care centers that are directly supportive of area industrial facilities, provided a special exception has been granted by the Board of Supervisors." BE IT FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this order be transmitted to the Secretary of the Planning Commission and that he be directed to reflect the change in the Zoning Ordinance of Roanoke County. ADOPTED on motion of Supervisor following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Mary H. Allen, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Department of Planning and Zoning County Attorney Ccirmonwealth Attorney Magistrate Main Library Roanoke Law Library n and upon the VIRGINIA: ~.. . BEFORE THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKr, COUNTY IN RE: ANIEIVDNIENT Z'0 THE ZONING ORDINANCE ) APPENDIX A OF THE CODE OF THE ) COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA, TO ) PETITION ADD PERMITTED USES TO THE ) Nf-1, INDUS~IAL ZONING DISTRICT ) TO THE HONORABLE SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY WHEREAS, your Petitioner the Secretary to the Roanoke County Planning Commission respectfully files this petition pursuant to Section 21-105 of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance and in accordance with the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended, and would respectfully show the following: 1) There are many future economic and industrial development possibilities within Roanoke County. 2) Currently, the manufacturing districts within the County Zoning Ordinance do not permit any type of office or commercial development. 3) The Roanoke County Land Use Plan has a specific policy within the Principal Industrial land use category that states that retail development in Principal Industrial areas should be discouraged unless it supports the needs of the surrounding industrial area. 4) Your Petitioner now desires to amend the M-1, Industrial zoning district by adding Sect. 21-24-1A(15): "Any use permitted in the B-2 General Commercial District and nursery schools and day care centers that are directly supportive of area industrial facilities, provided a special exception has been granted by the Board of Supervisors." WHEREFORE, your Petitioner respectfully requests that the Zoning Ordinance of Roanoke County be amended as set out in number 4. FURTHER, your Petitioner requests that this petition be referred by the Secretary to the Roanoke County Planning Commission for its consideration and recommendation. Respectfully sukxnitted, Rob Stalzer, Secretary Roanoke County Planning Commission ITEM NUMBER AT A REGULAR MEELDNATOTgEHROANOKE OCOUNTYEADMINISTRATIONNCENTER COUNTY, VIRGINIA H MEETING DATE: September 22, 1987 SUBJECT: Recognition of Fire and Rescue Personnel Proclamation declaring Fire Prevention Week COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Attached is a copy of a Resolution of Congratulations to their fire and rescue volunteers who have been recognized by company or rescue squandaWalli.sl Buchanan ,pPresidenthof Roanoke honored. The Revere County Fire Departteers awath eindiv Sdua 1 resolutions s wMr . present these volun Buchanan is also ch n1Committee,the Fire and Rescue Squad Recruitment and Retentio Also attached is a copy of a Resolution of Congratulations to those employees of the Fire and Rescue Department who are receiving recognition for their contributions, and a list of those being honored. Chief Tommy Fuqua will present individual resolutions to these employees. Following this presentation, Chairman Johnson will present to Chief Fuqua a Proclamation declaring the Week of October 5 - 10, 1987 as Fire Prevention Week and a short reception will follow. PREPARED BY: ~• Mary H. Allen Deputy Clerk APPROVED BY,: ~r Elmer C. Ho e County Administrator ----- ------------------------------- -- VOTE ACTION No Yes Ab: Approved ( ) Motion by: Brittle .- Denied ( ) Garrett - Received ( ) Johnson - Referred McGraw _ To Nickens - AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 1987 RESOLUTION OF CONGRATULATIONS TO CERTAIN ROANOKE COUNTY VOLUNTEER FIRE AND RESCUE PERSONNEL FOR THEIR OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: WHEREAS, Roanoke County is fortunate to have excellent paid and volunteer fire and rescue personnel; and WHEREAS, in the past, the County volunteer fire and rescue personnel have recognized their fellow members for outstanding contributions and significant accomplishments; and WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, the County Administrator, and the Fire and Rescue Chief felt that the contributions of these individuals were deserving of further recognition; and WHEREAS, these volunteer fire and rescue members devoted much of their personal time to ensure the quality of life and safety of our citizens. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County wishes to express its deepest appreciation to these volunteers for their excellent performance and their capable, loyal, and dedicated service to the citizens of Roanoke County; and FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County offers its congratulations to these volunteers for being selected by their peers for their outstanding contributions. o'RpANp~F ~ L ~ i 2 ~ ~ ~n.~n~ ~ ~ ~~e 18 E50 88 SFSQUICENTENN~P~ FIRE AND RESCUE DEPARTMENT A BeautifulBeginning THESE AWARDS ARE FOR 1986 T C~FUQUA CHIEF VOLUNTEER FIRE AND RESCUE PERSONNEL CO 2 - A. WALLACE RICHARDS - FIREFIGHTER OF THE YEAR CO 2 - CHRISTOPHER E. STULL - MOST TRAINING HOURS CO 3 - JAMES T. STASKO, JR. - FIREFIGHTER OF THE YEAR CO 3 - CRAIG S. SELLERS - FIRE OFFICER OF THE YEAR CO 4 - NONE CO 5 - KEITH WHITLOW - FIREFIGHTER OF THE YEAR CO 6 - MICHAEL G. GEE - FIREFIGHTER OF THE YEAR CO 7 - CO 8 - JOEY T. STUMP - FIREFIGHTER OF THE YEAR CO 9 - MICHAEL I. NORFLEET - FIREFIGHTER OF THE YEAR CO 10 - NONE RES 2 - FRANK D. STANCIL - MOST OUTSTANDING CREW MEMBER RES 2 - JESSE H. MERRIMAN - BEST ALL AROUND CREW MEMBER RES 2 - TODD BAILEY - MOST OUTSTANDING JUNIOR MEMBER RES 2 - 0. WAYNE GUFFEY - BEST ALL AROUND JUNIOR MEMBER RES 3 - N. ROBERT COX - OUTSTANDING CREW MEMBER OF THE YEAR - PATSY WINGFIELD - OUTSTANDING LADIES AUXILIARY MEMBER OF THE YEAR RES 4 - RES 5 - JANICE AND RICKY SWEET - CREW MEMBERS OF THE YEAR RES 6 - BOYD E. LOOMIS - CREW MEMBER OF THE YEAR - WAYNE SUMMERS - CREW MEMBER OF THE YEAR RES 7 - LEE BIBBS - CREW MEMBER OF THE YEAR RES 7 - RITA ROUPAS - OFFICER OF THE YEAR RES 8 - JEFFERY S. STUMP - CREW MEMBER OF THE YEAR RES 8 - MARLENE D. WORRELL - CREW MEMBER OF THE YEAR RES 9 - CREW MEMBER OF THE YEAR - KAREN ROBINSON 3568 PETERS CREEK ROAD. NW. • R[~oninKr vw ., ...... AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 1987 RESOLUTION OF CONGRATULATIONS TO CERTAIN EMPLOYEES IN THE FIRE AND RESCUE DEPARTMENT FOR THEIR OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: WHEREAS, Roanoke County is fortunate to have excellent paid and volunteer fire and rescue personnel; and WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, the County Administrator, and the Fire and Rescue Chief felt tha t the contributions of these employees are deserving of special recognition; and WHEREAS, these employees have displayed outstanding devotion to the safety and wellbeing of the citizens of Roanoke County. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County wishes to express its deepest appreciation to these employees of the Fire and Rescue Department for their excellent performance and their capable, loyal, and dedicated service to the citizens of Roanoke County; and FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County offers its congratulations to these employee for being selected for recognition for their outstanding contributions. .. FIRE AND RESCUE EMPLOYEES WHO WILL RECEIVE SPECIAL RECOGNITION Mark Liqht - Recognized for being department Employee of the Year. Larry Logan - Recognized by ttie Transportation Safety Commission for his work with hazardous m,iterials. Darrell Sexton and Randy Spence - Recognized for their work coordinating the Fire Prevention Week display and activities at Tanglewood Mall. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 1987 RESOLUTION 92287-9 OF CONGRATULATIONS TO CERTAIN ROANOKE COUNTY VOLUNTEER FIRE AND RESCUE PERSONNEL FOR THEIR OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: WHEREAS, Roanoke County is fortunate to have excellent paid and volunteer fire and rescue personnel; and WHEREAS, in the past, the County volunteer fire and rescue personnel have recognized their fellow members for outstanding contributions and significant accomplishments; and WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, the County Administrator, and the Fire and Rescue Chief felt that the contributions of these individuals were deserving of further recognition; and WHEREAS, these volunteer fire and rescue members devoted much of their personal time to ensure the quality of life and safety of our citizens. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County wishes to express its deepest appreciation to these volunteers for their excellent performance and their capable, loyal, and dedicated service to the citizens of Roanoke County; and FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County offers its congratulations to these volunteers for being selected by their peers for their outstanding contributions. On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by Supervisor Nickens, and upon the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Garrett, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisors Brittle, McGraw A COPY - TESTE: ~ / ~~ e~ 7~ Mary H. Allen, Deputy Clerk 9/23/87 Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Tommy Fuqua, Fire Chief Resolutions of Congratulations File AT A REGULAR MEETING OF 'rHE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 22, 1987 RESOLUTION 92287-10 OF CONGRATULATIONS TO CERTAIN EMPLOYEES IN THE FIRE AND RESCUE DEPARTMENT FOR THEIR OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: WHEREAS, Roanoke County is fortunate to have excellent paid and volunteer fire and rescue personnel; and WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, the County Administrator, and the Fire and Rescue Chief felt that the contributions of these employees are deserving of special recognition; and WHEREAS, these employees have displayed outstanding devotion to the safety and wellbeing of the citizens of Roanoke County. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County wishes to express its deepest appreciation to these employees of the Fire and Rescue Department for their excellent performance and their capable, loyal, and dedicated service to the citizens of Roanoke County; and FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County offers its congratulations to these employee for being selected for recognition for their outstanding contributions. On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by Supervisor Garrett, and upon the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Garrett, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisors Brittle, McGraw A COPY - TESTS: ~. Mary H. Allen, Deputy Clerk 9/24/87 Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Resolutions of Congratulations File Tommy Fuqua, Fire and Rescue Chief ITEM NUMBER S- AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: September 22, 1987 SUBJECT: Annual Awards Program and Reception for Roanoke County Fire and Rescue Personnel COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: In the past, the Fire and Rescue personnel in Roanoke County have recognized their own outstanding members within each company or rescue squad. Chief Fuqua would like to publicly recognize the accomplishments of both volunteers and paid staff associated with the Fire and Rescue Department. Therefore, this presentation will be the first annual awards program to recognize these individuals. Resolutions of Congratulations will be presented to the volunteers who were chosen by their company or rescue squad as worthy of special honor, and to paid staff who also displayed the same outstanding characteristics. A Proclamation declaring the week of October 5 thru 11, 1987 as Fire Prevention Week will also be presented. Following this ceremony, the Board will adjourn to a short reception in honor of these individuals. RECOMMENDATION• It is recommended that the Board approve the Resolutions of Congratulations and that Chairman Bob Johnson declare the week of October 5 - 11, 1987 as Fire Prevention Week in Roanoke County. PREPARED BY: 7Y)az-cam ~ . ~ Mary H. Allen Deputy Clerk Approved ( ) Motion by: Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred To ACTION APPROVED BY: ~l6xw / ' Elmer C. H ge County Administrator VOTE No Yes Abs Brittle Garrett Johnson McGraw Nickens A P P E .A_, RJA N C E R E Q U E S T f ~' A.,. ~,.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s't.'1 7~-. PUBLIC HEARING ON `~..i„ ~.c-' I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to r so co nine me during the public hearing on the above matte re g t I may comment. I agree to follow the guidelines liste tha ~„~• WHEN CALLED TO'THE PODIUM, I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND bE.lo ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. Each speaker will have betwasnanhindividualvorminutes t imi 1• Baking available whether sp and representative. The chairman will decideothantissue, based on the number of citizens speaking ority of will enforce the rule unless instructed by the maj the Board to do otherwise. Dint of S Bakers will be limited to a presentation be entertained by 2' p Questions of clarification may view only. the Chairman. All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between 3• Baker and audience members is not allowed. a recognized sp at all Q• Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy times . uested to leave any written statements 5• Speakers are req and/or comments with the clerk. VIDUALS PURPORTING TO SPEAK FO IZATIONG FROMETHERGROUPHALL • INDI FILE WITHTHEEINDIVIDUALTTONREPRESENT THEM. ALLOWING P L E A S E W R I T E L E G I B L Y NAME : __!~ _ ADDRESS : ~~ ©a~s PHONE: ~ ~~ e. rr a-- r-~ ~ ~ ~~ a, ~ ! ~--- out, give to the Deputy PLEASE NOTE: ~Clerk.f1Thank you.) A P P E A R A N C E R E Q U E S T - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PUBLIC HEARING ON I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the public hearing on the above matter so that I may comment. I agree to follow the guidelines listed below. WHEN CALLED TO THE PODIUM, I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. 1. Each speaker will have between three and five minutes available whether speaking as an individual or representative. The chairman will decide the time limit based on the number of citizens speaking on an issue, and will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to do otherwise. 2. Speakers will be limited to a presentation of their point of view only. Questions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. 3. All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between a recognized speaker and audience members is not allowed. 4. Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at all times . 5. Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments with the clerk. 6. INDIVIDUALS PURPORTING TO SPEAK FOR AN ORGANIZED GROUP SHALL FILE WITH THE CLERK WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM THE GROUP ALLOWING THE INDIVIDUAL TO REPRESENT THEM. P L E A S E W R I T E L E G I B L Y - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - NAME : ',L; l ~ ~ / /~ /i"I t ~~ ( C i iti .S ADDRESS : ~~ ~ ~~~~ r° ~~~ ! C/-t IJiZ PHONE : ~ C, ~' .._ ~ Y E• J PLEASE NOTE: (After filling out, give to the Deputy Clerk. Thank you.) , A P P E A R A N C E R E Q U E S T PUBLIC HEARING ON ~ ~~-~y.e--~J ~ ~~~ I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the public hearing on the above matter so that I may comment. I agree to follow the guidelines listed below. WHEN CALLED TO `:CHE PODIUM, I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. 1. Each speaker will have between three and five minutes available whether speaking as an individual or representative. The chairman will decide the time limit based on the number of citizens speaking on an issue, and will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to do otherwise. 2. Speakers will be limited to a presentation of their point of view only. Questions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. 3. All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between a recognized speaker and audience members is not allowed. ~v 7.71.±6..11 bbl CC6I1C1~ C111U ~ alt, L11A41t:. 11VC ~Ylll ACtVi:.i ':... •.. wJ U+. vY w« ...- -~ times . 5. Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments with the clerk. 6. INDIVIDUALS PURPORTING TO SPEAK FOR AN ORGANIZED GROUP SHALL FILE WITH THE CLERK WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM THE GROUP ALLOWING THE INDIVIDUAL TO REPRESENT THEM. P L E A S E W R I T E L E G I B L Y - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - NAME: /mot ~-~ (~~ -~ j> ~ i~-?Z_~~LtZ~--l.f ADDRESS : C -~l~` ~ T~~}~J(,,~ d_,~ ~v~...> c~ ?,x PHONE : ~J~ ~, ~`'l g .~''.`, PLEASE NOTE: (After filling out, give to the Deputy Clerk. Thank you.) A P P E A R A N C E R E Q U E S T - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PUBLIC HEARING ON I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the public hearing on the above matter so that I may comment. I agree to follow the guidelines listed below. WHEN CALLED TO THE PODIUM, I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. 1. Each speaker will have between three and five minutes available whether speaking as an individual or representative. The chairman will decide the time limit based on the number of citizens speaking on an issue, and will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to do otherwise. 2. Speakers will be limited to a presentation of their point of view only. Questions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. 3. All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between a recognized speaker and audience members is not allowed. 4. Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at all times . 5. Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments with the clerk. 6. INDIVIDUALS PURPORTING TO SPEAK FOR AN ORGANIZED GROUP SHALL FILE WITH THE CLERK WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM THE GROUP ALLOWING THE INDIVIDUAL TO REPRESENT THEM. P L E A S E W R I T E L E G I B L Y - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - y NAME: t`''~_ ,A Xf .('~. .~` /~ i`r" , ADDRESS : _~ ' ~ ~" ; - ~/ ~ ~ ,,« ;` ~, ~- ~. '" PHONE : ~--' ~ : - f ~_ PLEASE NOTE: (After filling out, give to the Deputy Clerk. Thank you.) A P P E A R A N C E R E Q U E S T PUBLIC HEARING ON I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the public hearing on the above matter so that I may comment. I agree to follow the guidelines listed below. WHr;N CALLED TO THE PODIUM, I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. 1• Each speaker will have between three and five minutes available whether speaking as an individual or representative. The chairman will decide the time limit based on the number of citizens speaking on an issue, and will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to do otherwise. 2• Speakers will be limited to a view only. Questions of clarificationtmay be entertained by the Chairman. 3• All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between a recognized speaker and audience members is not allowed. 4• Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at all times . 5. Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments with the clerk. 6• INDIVIDUALS PURPORTING TO SPEAR FOR AN ORGANIZED GROUP SHALL FILE WITH THE CLERK WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM THE GROUP ALLOWING THE INDIVIDUAL TO REPRESENT THEM. P L E A S E W R I T E L E G I B L Y NAME: s~P,~~~~~,. ~ /~ ADDRESS : '~~~~ ~P~Vw~~ ~ Ij~11 PHONE: PLEASE NOTE: (After filling out, give to the Deputy Clerk. Thank you.) -~, PCIBLIC N~I~ Please take notice that the Board of Supervisors of Roan ginia, at the Count oke County, Vir- Y Administration Center, Community Room, 3738 Brambleton Avenue, will, on October 13, 1987, at 3:00 p.m. or as matter soon thereafter as the ~Y be heard, hold a public hearing on the question of the P a resolution ursuant to Section 15.1-238 e adOPtior of ( ) of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, concerning ac quisition by Roanoke Count completion of the Hollins Comm Y of certain easements for unity Development project, the same to traverse certain property located in the Hollins Magisterial D' Count lstrict of Roanoke y' ~~g °~~ by Mattie Moore Johnson. ~Y member of the public ma address the Board on the matter afop~ar at the time and place aforesaid and resaid. ~•~, ~` , Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney Please publish in the mornin g and evening editions on: September 29, 1987 October 6, 1987 Please send bill to: Paul M. Mahoney, Esq. County Attorney-Roanoke County P• O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 A ~ ~~ ~~ ~~'~ ~ ~r~~.~ ~o)i3 LDGAL NOTICE OF A R~.AR MEETING OF THE . RQANOFO; OO~JN'i'Y BQiARD _OF SOPIInTISORS Notice. is hereby given to all interested persons that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7:00 P.M. on Tuesday, September 22, 1987, at the Roanoke County Administration Center, 3738 Brambleton Avenue, SW, in Roaroke, Virginia to hear the following requests: 1. Petition of the Secretary of the Roanoke County Planning Camnission to amend •the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance M-1, Industrial zoning district to include nursery schools, day care centers, and permitted uses in the B-2, Business zoning district provided a special exception has been granted by the Board of Supervisors. All plans and ordinances are available for inspection in the Department of Development, Roan 600, 3738 Brambleton Avenue, Roanoke, Virginia. Roanoke County will provide assistance to handicapped persons desiring to attend public hearings. Such individuals are requested to contact the County office of Personnel Services 703/772-2018 if special provisions are needed for attendance. Given under my hand this 2nd day of September, 1987. ~~~~ Mary Allen, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Please publish: Evening Fdition Roanoke Times & World-News September 8, 1987 September 15, 1987 Please bill: County of Roanoke Department of Planning & Zoning P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 L E G A L N O T I C E Notice is hereby given to all interested persons that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7:00 p.m. on Tuesday, September 22, 1987, in the Community Room at the Roanoke County Administration Center, 3738 Brambleton Avenue, S.W., Roanoke, Virginia, on the petition of J. F. Davis and W. E. Cundiff, rE~questing rezoning from M-2 Industrial to R-E Residential Estates of a tract containing 19.4 acres and. located on the east side. of Route 758, approximately one mile south of its intersection with Route 460 in the Hollins Magisterial District. _ Rezoning has been requested to construct single family homes. The County Planning Commission recommends approval with proffered conditions. A copy of the Zoning Ordinance of Roanoke County 'and amendments thereto as well as a copy of the petition, site plan, and other documents related to this request may be examined in the office of the Department of Development, located in Room 600 at the Roanoke County Administration Center. Roanoke County will provide assistance to handicapped persons desiring to attend public hearings. Such individuals are requested to contact the County office of Personnel Services ([703] 772-2018) if special provisions are necessary for attendance. Given under my hand this 2nd day of September, 1987. ~~ ~~ Mary H. Al en, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Please publish in the evening edition of the Roanoke Times and World News on: Tuesday, September 8, 1987 Tuesday, September 15, 1987 Direct the bill for Publication to: W. E. Cundiff Realty 118 S. Pollard Street Vinton, Virginia 24179