HomeMy WebLinkAbout9/13/1988 - RegularO~ ~OANp~~
~..r ~
ti A
2 G7
~ 2
a
183'8 E50 88
~__.
SFSQUICENTENN,P
rl Bcnuri~iJ(3c~innin~
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
ELMER C HODGE
September 20, 1988
Mr. Thomas T. Palmer
3758 Verona Trail
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
Dear Mr. Palmer:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
LEE GARRETT. CHAIR MAN
WIN DS<1R HILLS MAGiS~EF'~AI_ D~STf~IC~
RICHARD W. ROBERS. VICE-CHAIRMAN
CAVE SPRING I.AAG IS TE RIAL Dili TRICT
BOB L JOHNSON
HCJ DINS M4G~STE R,AL D!ST~-'iCT
STEVEN A MCGRAw
CATAW AA MAGISTERIAL O:S'. Rn_T
HARRY C.NICKENS
VIN T~JN MFG!STER'IA',_ :']I`>T Vlr'
The Board of Supervisors have asked me to express on
their behalf their sincere appreciation for your previous service
to the Grievance Panel. Citizens so responsive to the needs of
their community and willing to give of themselves and their time
are indeed all too scarce.
This is to advise that at their meeting held on Tuesday,
September 13, 1988, the Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to
reappoint you as a member of Grievance Panel for a two-year term.
Your term will expire on September 10, 1990.
State law provides that any person elected, re-elected,
appointed to any body be furnished a copy of the Freedom of
Information Act; your copy is enclosed. We are also sending you
a copy of the Conflicts of Interest Act. Both of these have been
amended by the 1987 Session of the Virginia General Assembly.
On behalf of the Supervisors and the citizens of Roanoke
County, please accept our sincere thanks and appreciation for
your willingness to accept this appointment.
Very truly yours,
`/ / tGL~/'~ J`/ .
Mary H. Allen, Deputy Clerk
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
bjh
Enclosures
ce: D. Kei~h Cook, Director
Human Resources Department
C~vun~~ of ~uttnvi:e
PO t30X 29800 FZOANOKE--_. VIiZ<~INIA?4018 0798 (7031 712 x_004
ff. PO A Np~~
o
~
~ ~
`' -n
~ ~
v a
rt, t f
~ V' 4-t ~ ~i
t
•~ ~ .r
~ }~t t (~
~i~v~ ~~ N i~ 4~'
150
1838 ,E.as 1 88
S~SQUICENTENN\P~ ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
A (3cnuti~ulBcRinnin~
ACTION AGENDA
SEPTEMBER 13, 1988
Welcome to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors meeting. Regular
meetings are held on the second Tuesday of the month at 3:00 p.m., and
the fourth Tuesday at 3:00 p.m. Public Hearings will be heard at 7:00
p.m on the fourth Tuesday of each month. Deviations from this
schedule will be announced.
A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 P.M.)
1. Roll Call
2. Invocation: John Chambliss
Assistant County Administrator
3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag
B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA
ITEMS
C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS
LG PRESENTED PROCLAMATION DECLARING SEPT. 11-17 AS CONSTITUTION WEEK
TO PMM FOR CONSTITUTIO?"':.CENTENNIAL COMMISSION
LG/HCN TO GO INTO EXEt;UTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO CODE OF VIRGINIA 2.1-
344 (a) (6) TO DISCUSS A LEGAL MATTER CONCERNING AGENDA ITEMS D-1 AND
L-1 - URC AT 3:10 P.M.
3:40 P.M. - LG/BLJ TO RETURN TO OPEN SESSION - URC
D. NEW BUSINESS
1. Authori?ation to proceed with Spring Hollow Reservoir.
A-91388-1
BLJ/RR TO AUTHORIZE STAFF AND HSMM TO PROCEED WITH DESIGN PHASE -
URC
2. Year-end Financial Information.
A-91388-2
HCN/SAM TO ALLOCATE $50,000 FROM FUND BALANCE TO BOARD CONTINGENCY
FUND - URC
3. Approval of Roanoke County Smoking Policy
A-91388-3
HCN/SAM TO APPROVE SMOKING POLICY EXCLUDING FUNDING OF $9,000 FOR
VENTILATION EQUIPMENT - URC
4. Request for additional space and other improvements
at the Administration Center
HCN/BLJ TO TABLE
AYES-RR, BLJ, HCN
NAYS-SAM, LG
5. Authorization to proceed with the location and
construction of the Bonsack Fire Station.
A-91388-4
BLJ/SAM TO AUTHORIZE NEGOTIATIONS AND REPORT TO BOARD WITH RESULTS -
URC
6. Authorization to execute agreement with Roanoke City
concerning pretreatment of industrial waste discharge.
A-91388-5
HCN/SAM TO AUTHORIZE - URC
E. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS
F. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS
G. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES
H. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
2
1. Ordinance authorizing the purchase of 0.518 acres from
Smithsub, Inc. for the relocation of Kenworth Road -
Valleypointe, Phase I.
0-91388-6
HCN/BLJ TO APPROVE ORD.
AYES-BLJ,RR,HCN,LG
ABSTAIN-SAM
2. Ordinance authorizing the acquisition of easements to
facilitate the extension of public sewer service to the
Appalachian Power Company Service Center.
0-91388-7
HCN/BLJ TO APPROVE ORD
AYES-BLJ, RR, HCN, LG
ABSTAIN-SAM
I. APPOINTMENTS
1. Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals.
2. Community Corrections Resources Board
3. Court Service Unit Advisory Council/Youth and
Family Services Advisory Board
4. Grievance Panel
S. Mental Health Services of the Roanoke Valley,
Community Services Board.
J. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS
MCGRAW ADVISED THAT HE WILL NOT MAKE ANY DECISION ON A LANDFILL
SITE NOR LOBBY TO KEEP A SITE FROM ANY AREA UNTIL ALL FACTS ARE
AVAILABLE.
JOHNSON ASKED THAT PUBLIC BE INFORMED THAT FORMAL ACTION WILL BE
TAKEN TO BE RIGHT OF ENTRY TO PROPOSED LANDFILL SITES AT SEPT.
27TH MEETING.
NICKENS ADVISED HE WILL NOT VOTE UNTIL ALL THREE CONDITIONS OF
THE LANDFILL BOARD ARE MET.
K. 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
3
BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE
REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED
SEPARATELY.
R-91388-8
BLJ/HCN TO APPROVE - URC
1. Confirmation of committee appointment to the
Grievance Panel.
A-91388-8.a
2. Approval of minutes of meetings - May 10, 1988,
May 24, 1988, June 14, 1988
3. Approval of reimbursement for water line extension
on Tyler Road.
A-91388-8.b
4. Authorization for County participation in
extending a water and sewer line adjacent to
Barrens Road.
A-91388-8.c
5. Request for acceptance of Stonebridge Circle into
the Va. Department of Transportation Secondary
System.
R-91388-8.d
6. Acceptance of water and sewer facilities serving
Winterberry Pointe.
A-91388-8.e
7. Acknowledgment from Va. Department of
Transportation of the acceptance of 0.30 miles of
Hill Drive into the Secondary System.
A-91388-8.f
8. Acceptance of an assignment of a sanitary sewer
easement being donated by Dominion Builders.
A-91388-9.g
L. REPORTS
HCN/BLJ TO RECEIVE & FILE
URC - SAM ABSENT
4
1. Information Report on removal action at Dixie
Caverns Landfill.
CLIFF CRAIG PRESENTED UPDATE - WILL BRING BACK REPORT ON
ADDITIONAL COSTS TO FINISH REMOVAL ACTION
2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance
3. General Fund Unappropriated Balance
4. Board Contingency Fund
5. Accounts Paid for July 1988
6. Accounts Paid for August 1988
M. CITIZEN COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
1. David A. Steger requesting an increase in the
minimum lot size in the Catawba Valley.
HCN DIRECTED PLANNING STAFF AND COMMISSION TO REVIEW CHANGING
CATAWBA VALLEY TO "RURAL PRESERVE" AND INCREASE MINIMUM LOT SIZE.
4:20 PM - 5 MINUTE RECESS
N. WORK SESSIONS
1. Street and off-street parking design standards and
specifications.
MEMBERS OF HOMEBUILDERS ASSOCIATION PRESENT
STAFF DIRECTED TO BRING BACK TO BOARD FOR APPROVAL ON 10/11/88
WITH CHANGES REQUESTED BY THE BOARD
2. Proposed legislative package
BLJ REQUESTED RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT AT 9/27 MEETING FOR HOUSE
JOINT RESOLUTION 63 THAT JOINT SUBCOMMITTEE STUDY WAYS TO PROVIDE
LOW COST HEALTH CARE COVERAGE FOR SCHOOL EMPLOYEES
SEVERAL ITEMS ADDED - PMM TO ADD REQUESTS AND BRING BACK ON
9/27
0. EXECUTIVE `'°~SION pursuant to the Code of Virginia
Section 2., '~4 (a)
NONE
P. ADJOURNMENT - BLJ/SAM - UW AT 7:03 P.M.
5
ROANp~
O~ F
~. I~ %
~~~~~
o ~
1838 Espy 88
SFSQUICENTENN~P~ ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
n t~~~u~~~„ir~eRrn„r„g AGENDA
SEPTEMBER 13, 1988
Welcome to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors meeting. Regular
meetings are held on the second Tuesday of the month at 3:00 p.m., and
the fourth Tuesday at 3:00 p.m. Public Hearings will be heard at 7:00
p.m on the fourth Tuesday of each month. Deviations from this
schedule will be announced.
A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 P.M.)
1. Roll Call
2. Invocation: The Reverend Larry E. Sprouse
Melrose Baptist Church
3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag
B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA
ITEMS
C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS
D. NEW BUSINESS
1. Authorization to proceed with Spring Hollow Reservoir.
2. Year-end Financial Information.
3. Approval of Roanoke County Smoking Policy
4. Request for additional space and other improvements
at the Administration Center
5. Authoriza~ion to proceed with the location and
construction of the Bonsack Fire Station.
6. Authorization to execute agreement with Roanoke City
concerning pretreatment of industrial waste discharge.
E_ REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS
F. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS
G. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES
H. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
1. Ordinance authorizing the purchase of 0.518 acres from
Smithsub, Inc. for the relocation of Kenworth Road -
Valleypointe, Phase I.
2. Ordinance authorizing the acquisition of easements to
facilitate the extension of public sewer service to the
Appalachian Power Company Service Center.
I _ APPOINTMENTS
1. Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals.
2. Community Corrections Resources Board
3. Court Service Unit Advisory Council/Youth and
Family Services Advisory Board
4. Grievance Panel
5. Mental Health Services of the Roanoke Valley,
Community Services Board.
J_ REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS
K. CONSENT AGENDA
2
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. Confirmation of committee appointment to the
Grievance Panel.
2. Approval of minutes of meetings - May 10, 1988,
May 24, 1988, June 14, 1988
3, Approval of reimbursement for water line extension
on Tyler Road.
4. Authorization for County participation in
extending a water and sewer line adjacent to
Barrens Road.
5. Request for acceptance of Stonebridge Circle into
the Va. Department of Transportation Secondary
System.
6. Acceptance of water and sewer facilities serving
Winterberry Pointe.
7. Acknowledgment from Va. Department of
Transportation of the acceptance of 0.30 miles of
Hill Drive into the Secondary System.
8. Acceptance of an assignment of a sanitary sewer
easement being donated by Dominion Builders.
I,. REPORTS
1. Information Report on removal action at Dixie
Caverns Landfill.
2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance
3. General Fund Unappropriated Balance
4. Board Contingency Fund
5. Accounts Paid for July 1988
6. Accounts Paid for August 1988
M. CITIZEN CONII~~NTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
3
1. David A. Steger requesting an increase in the
minimum lot size.
DI. WORK SESSIONS
1. Street and off-street parking design standards and
specifications.
2. Proposed legislative package
O. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to the Code of Virginia
Section 2.1-344 (a)
p . ADJOURNMENT
4
OF ROANp'YF
ti ,I, A ~
~~~~~ ~
~ $~ E50 8$
SFSQUICENTENN~P~ ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
A Beauti~ul6eRinning AGENDA
SEPTEMBER 13, 1988
Welcome to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors meeting. Regular
meetings are held on the second Tuesday of the month at 3:00 p.m., and
the fourth Tuesday at 3:00 p.m. Public Hearings will be heard at 7:00
p.m on the fourth Tuesday of each month. Deviations from this
schedule will be announced.
A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 P.M.)
1. Roll Call
2. Invocation: The Reverend Larry E. Sprouse
Melrose Baptist Church
3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag
B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA
ITEMS
C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS
D, NEW BUSINESS
1. Authorization to proceed with Spring Hollow Reservoir.
2. Year-end Financial Information.
3. Approval of Roanoke County Smoking Policy
4. Request for additional space and other improvements
at the Administration Center
5. Authoriza~~ion to proceed with the location and
construction of the Bonsack Fire Station.
6. Authorization to execute agreement with Roanoke City
concerning pretreatment of industrial waste discharge.
E. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS
F. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS
G. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES
H, SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
1. Ordinance authorizing the purchase of 0.518 acres from
Smithsub, Inc. for the relocation of Kenworth Road -
Valleypointe, Phase I.
2, Ordinance authorizing the acquisition of easements to
facilitate the extension of public sewer service to the
Appalachian Power Company Service Center.
I. APPOINTMENTS
1. Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals.
2. Community Corrections Resources Board
3. Court Service Unit Advisory Council/Youth and
Family Services Advisory Board
4. Grievance Panel
5. Mental Health Services of the Roanoke Valley,
Community Services Board.
J. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS
K. CONSENT AGENDA
2
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. Confirmation of committee appointment to the
Grievance Panel.
2. Approval of minutes of meetings - May 10, 1988,
May 24, 1988, June 14, 1988
3, Approval of reimbursement for water line extension
on Tyler Road.
4. Authorization for County participation in
extending a water and sewer line adjacent to
Barrens Road.
5. Request for acceptance of Stonebridge Circle into
the Va. Department of Transportation Secondary
System.
6. Acceptance of water and sewer facilities serving
Winterberry Pointe.
7. Acknowledgment from Va. Department of
Transportation of the acceptance of 0.30 miles of
Hill Drive into the Secondary System.
g. Acceptance of an assignment of a sanitary sewer
easement being donated by Dominion Builders.
L. REPORTS
1. Information Report on removal action at Dixie
Caverns Landfill.
2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance
3. General Fund Unappropriated Balance
4. Board Contingency Fund
5. Accounts Paid for July 1988
6. Accounts Paid for August 1988
M. CITIZEN COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
3
1. David A. Steger requesting an increase in the
minimum lot size.
N. WORK SESSIONS
1. Street and off-street parking design standards and
specifications.
2. Proposed legislative package
O. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to the Code of Virginia
Section 2.1-344 (a}
p . ADJOURNMENT
4
ACTION # 91388-1
ITEM NUMBER
AT A VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTYSADMINI TRATION CENTERE
COUNTY,
MEETING DATE: September 13, 1988
AGENDA ITEM: Request to proceed with the design of Spring
Hollow Reservoir
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS : r ZG„~t~" ~' '~~~~r ~~f
~ ~ ~ ~
BACKGROUND:
The need for additional water supplies for the Roanoke
Valley has been well-known since 1967. Numerous studies have
been conducted over the past 20 years to determine alternatives
and which would be pursued. (See Attached). In November of 1981,
the local governing bodies established aneeds and recommend tthe
and address the valley's water supp Y On September 14, 1983,
best option for a regional water supply.
a joint meeting was held at the Salem-Roanoke County Civic Center
of all the valley governments to receive and act on the water
committee'serene ds to ethet year 2040oand chose totpursue pring
future wat
Hollow as the next valley water supply.
Roanoke County was selected to pursue the preliminary
design, acquire the land and the necessary permits. The county
has accomplished all three tasks.
If today the cities of Roanoke and Salem have determined
their long-term needs have changed since 1983 and they no longer
need additional supplies, Roanoke County should pursue the
project for their needs only.
The selection of Spring Hollow over other alternatives has
been supported by recent studies by Hayes, Seay, Mattern and
Mattern and by Lewis Guy, a Salem and Roanoke City consultant
reviewing the project.
-~
COSTS:
In recent months, Spring Hollow opponents have provided a
considerable amount of inaccurate information regarding costs.
They have mislead many to believe costs have risen to $70 million
dollars for dam construction. The $70 million figure represents
costs that include treatment and transmission mains.
Cost estimates have changed with inflation and as prelimi-
nary estimates have progressed to engineering estimates. Costs
will continue to change as final designs, schedules, bids, con-
struction, and the economy change. Below is a progression of the
cost estimates for the full-sized dam and reservoir since 1983:
$35,000,000 Oct. 1983 by Corps of Engineers and Roanoke County
$36,000,000 Feb. 1984 by Corps of Engineers and Roanoke County
$36,000,000 April 1984 Permit Application
$34,000,000 June 1986 - Hayes, Seay, Mattern & Mattern:
Concept Report
$36,400,000 September 1988 - Hayes, Seay, Mattern & Mattern
* Delays alone have caused costs to rise nearly 10 per cent since
1984, amounting to over $3,000,000.
Schedules for final designs and construction have changed
with project delays. Today, we anticipate progress to follow the
schedule below:
Final Design: October 1988 - October 1990
Bid and Award: November 1990 - February 1991
Construction: March 1991 - March 1995
Final Design is the next c.riticalystep in the dev P °poxit
process. It will consume the next two ears and cost a p
mately $700,000.
ALTERNATIVES:
It is imperative that Roanoke County proceed immediately
with Spring Hollow to meet its existing and future water needs.
With Roanoke and Salem not indicating their commitment to partici-
pate, the County has several options in constructing a reservoir
to meet its needs of 17 MGD by year 2040.
(1) Design and construct a dam and reservoir to provide
17 MGD.
(2) Design and construct a dam and reservoir in phases to
provide a total of 23 MGD which would maximize the use
2
~.
of the site and provide additional water for use by
others. Should either City choose to participate at a
later date, the reservoir design could be changed, at
City expense, to be constructed for the full 23 MGD
yield.
With each option, a water treatment plant would be required.
Funds for the treatment plant are available within the Utility
Fund.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The Final Design Phase is the next major step which will
require funding. It is anticipated that $175,000 will be
required within this fiscal year and a total of $700,000 through
October 1990.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The staff recommends that Hayes, Seay, Mattern and Mattern
be authorized to proceed with the Final Design of a dam and
reservoir to supply the County with a 17 MGD water source.
SUBMITTED BY:
s 1
ohn R. ubbard, P.E.
Assistant County Administrator
Community Services & Development
APPROVED:
Elmer C. Hodge
County Administrator
------------- --------- ACTION VOTE
No
Yes Abs
Approved (x) Motion by. Bob L. Johnson/
Garrett
x
Denied ( ) Richard W. Robers to autho-
- Johnson x
Received ( ) rize staff and HSMM to pro
r
f McGraw x
Referred o
ceed with desicin phase Nickens x
to 23 MGD Robers x
cc: File
John Hubbard
Cliff Craig
3
PAST WATER SUPPLY S`iUDIES ~ - I
° Roanoke Valley Regional Water Reservoir Plan - HIJT'B, 1967
° ~pre~nsive Water. ~'r and Storm Drainage Facilities Plan - HSi~i, 1971
° Regional Water System for Vinton - W&W, 1972
° potential High Yield Well Site in Roanoke County - NAE, 1974
° Caciprehensive Water Supply Plan -5th PDC, 1974
Roanoke County Groundwater - SWCB, 1976 -
° Geohydrology for the Upper Roanoke River Basin, Virginia - J. A. Waller, SWCB,
1976
° Feasibility Report - BCM - Vinton, 1978
° Roanoke River Upper Basin-'vlater Resources ~~Y - CQE- 1979
° Upper Roanoke Valley Water Supply Plan - SWCB, COE, 1980
° Back Creek Water Supply - ABH - Roanoke City, 1981
° Carvins Cove/Roanoke River Interconnection - HSNM, 1983
° Spring Hollaw Reservoir - HSNIl~1 - Roanoke County, 1986
• Roanoke Basin Water Supply Plan - SWCB, 1987
~-/
4~iTER $UP'PLY OPTIONS
° Carvins Creek
° Roanoke River South
° Johns Creek
° James River
° Roanoke River Mainstream
° Roanoke River North
° Smith Mountain
° New River
° Cary ins Cove
° Back Creek
° Glade Creek
° Beaverdam Creek
° Falling Creek
° Ellett Creek
° Bottom Creek
° Groundwater
° Conservation
° Cl.aytor Iake
° Spring Hollow
Y
„~ - /
Water supply Committee study Results
A. Projected water supply needs through the year 2040 indicating a
deficit of 30 MGD.
WATBR DEMAND IN MILLION GALLONS PBR DAY
1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040
5.6 6.8 8.2 10.0 12.1 14.5
Salem
9
15 16.7 18.7 21.3 24.6 28.8
Roanoke City .
0
5 10.18 12.51 14.71 16.64 17.58
Roanoke County .
1.5 2.3 2.5 3.8 4.2 4.7
Vinton
Total Demand
il
D 28.0 35.98 41.91 49.81 57.54 65.58
y
a
Average
Capacity of existing facilities:
Carvins Cove Filter Plant 20.0 mgd
Salem's Glenvar Filter Plant and 5
0 m d
Salem's Old Filter Plant .
3.5 mgd
Crystal Spring
Falling Creek Filter Plant 1.5 mgd
Vinton Wells 3.0
3.5 mgd
mgd
Roanoke County Wells - -
36.5 mgd
B. Review of alternatives:
- New River
- Smith Mountain
- Back Creek
- Groundwater
- Dry Branch
- North Fork Roanoke River
- Bradshaw Creek
- Water Conservation
- West County
C. Coordination and development of
d
St Roanoke
Hayes
b River/Carvins Cove
Seay, Mattern and
y
u
Interconnection Feasibility y .
Mattern.
•. •
~a~r s -~~$`7
~~s
_~s
~~~~~~~~
~'~ ~', _ l
Cvriservationists ~°
~OARDJIhG r1~4
~- Virginia's
~-
4602-D West Grove Court • Virginia Beach, VA 23455
R E S O L U T I O N
D~
FHB ~~
LG
THE ROANOKE RIVER .g~~
WHEREAS, Roanoke County
which will reduce the flow
average annual flow, and
SAM
proposes to build a county reservo"ir
of the Roanoke River to a low of ]~~~f
WHEREAS, this reduced flow will have a mayor destructive.
impact on the Roanoke River ecosystem, and
WHEREAS, this ecosystem is especially unique in that it
contains more fish species and a greater number of endemic species
~. than any other drainage on the Atlantic slope,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the
Virginia Wildlife Federation's Board of Directors, assembled at
their quarterly meeting in Millboro, Virginia, on April 26, 1987,
voted to su ort the minimal flow requirements of 20~ on the
Roanoke River, and is oppose o reques s y oano e oun y or
reducing those minimal flow requirements for the county reservoir,
an d
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia Wildlife Federation
supports further research into alternatives other th an a county
reservoir, including research and testing for groundwater options.
ADOPTED
j Millboro, Virginia
April 26, 1987
"An A(llllate of the Natlona/ Wlldllfe Federatbn"
fr.i' . • r ~ - ~ '
-~ LLEGE
O~,NOKE
March 5, 1987
n(r , Bob Hume
Norfolk District
Army Corps of Engineers
803 Front Street
Norfolk, VA 23510
Dear Bob:
Regarding the proposed West County Reservoir Project, I support the 30-20
Z MAF Roanoke River minimuetfnowbn COC monise initiall su ested b the o s
an aeain suvvor~Pd by a DanP1_ of
in the 17 Novem er me g
iolo ists in the 25 Februar lsolid comnromiseichmoaeed,Ithey compromiset be
wbv limits represent a very
too severe biologically when cons er ng t e vlLtuaeciestaiitwish toebrieflye
logperch being listed as a nationally Threatened sp
review the pertinent biological facts.
1) Data base for listing. - The distributional data supporting the upper
o ulation as being clearly the largest remaining population of the
Roanoke River p p
Roanoke logperch is certainly one documentethedneedsfor listingae Theidataebaset e
U.S. Fish and Wild life Service to Vir inia.
represents over 2000 COOnsewerenspecificallyeaimedoat capturerofnthe~logperch.
Many of these collecti
etch is
2) Putative historical and present distribution. - The Roanoke loge
endemic to the Roanoke drainage in then ulation~occursn in theoupperiRoanoketRiver,
in Virginia. The largest remaining p p o ulation of
in and above Roanoke, Roanoke and Montgomery counties. A small p p
Percina rex occurs in the Pigg River tributary of toeulationeinythemSmith RiveDan
system, P. rex is restricted to a small relulations strongly suggest P. rex was
system. The Pigg River and Smith River pop ulation in
formerly widespread in the upper Roanoke drainage. The Fall Line pop
reatl disjunct from the upper Roanoke drainage and is
the Nottoway system is g y etch o ulated much of the Piedmont.
considered strong evidence that the Roanokattern of dramatic range contraction.
Thus its pres~r~e~distribution portrays a p
The principal^~eading to declinet CountalResegviore would berlocatediin themheart
and siltation. The proposed Wes y
of the best population.
g. ~pF~ 9 ~g~7
~~,,8
i i031 3~9•'_ 3il
~-J
Mr . Bob Hume
Page Two
March S, 1987
3) Flowby considerations. - The Virginia State Water Control Board permitted
7Q 10 flowby (=27 cfs) for the West County Reservoir. Under contract to Roanoke
County, Burkhead (1986a,b) concluded thlacehtheQRoanokeblogperchatheiriverinerely
dewater the Roanoke River and clearly p
biota under extreme stress. The Corps compromise minimum flowby of 20X MAF
(=50.1 cfs) in a very strong biological compromise, and frankly, one that I am
not entirely comfortable with. Leonard et al. (1986) developed an equation based
discharge which reflects optimum overall fish habitat in the upper James:
0.746
Qopt 1.441 MAF
The upper James and upper Roanoke
using the above equation, Qopt for the
recommendation that 20X MAF be adhered
proposed West County Reservoir.
are certainly roughly comparable: and
Roanoke 88.7 cfs! It is my strong
to as the absolute minimum flowby for the
4) The Roanoke River resource. - Consideration should also be given to the
upper Roanoke River as a valuable natural resource. The Roanoke drainage harbors
the richest fish fauna of all the Atlantic slope drainages. The drainage has
experienced extensive modification by human activity, and the upper Roanoke above
Niagara Dam remains as the best free flowing example of this rich natural heritage.
It contains the largest indigenous population of the rare organgefin madtom as well
as healthy populations of other drainage endemics, e.g., the Roanoke hogsucker,
the bigeye jumprock and the riverweed darter. This valuable resource merits
judicious management.
In summary, the Roanoke logperch merits listing a nationally Threatened
species, and its largest population survives in the upper Roanoke River, particu-
larly in and above West Salem. The flowby reductions proposed by the Roanoke
County Administration for the West County Reservoir project would adversely impact
the Roanoke logperch in the roeosed Cor secompromiselofian30XsMAFltargettflowbyota
of the Roanoke River. The p p P
20Z MAF minimum flowby represents a rational balance of the water needs of the
valley and the responsibility to conserve a unique natural resource. It is my
opinion that the projected water demands greatly exceed sustenance needs plus
reasonable growth. Roanoke County is simply trying to acquire all the water
possible through the West County Reservoir without reasonable consideration of
environmental cost.
Sincerely,
,Q~, /
U y~
Noel M. Burkhead
Research Associate, Biology
NB:st
l
cc: David K. Whitehurst
Andrew Moser
A 1 Z~1 J ~.l.~ Vl .1.~ ~1G 1~t V U.11~V.-~ ~V. V ~1
- P.O. f3ox 1750 ~ ~ /
Ro.uwkc, VirSinia 2•'1008
Tcl. (703) 3'13 3(i~JB
In addition, Friends of the Roanoke River takes the following
positions regarding the reservoir/river controversy:
1. We support the current recommended minimum flow requirements,
proposed by the Corps of Engineers.
Our position is that the Corps limitation on damage to the
river is minimal. Less than the Corps recommended 20$
minimal flow would seriously jeopardize the quality of the
river, and thereby the quality of life in the Roanoke Valley.
The Roanoke (liver is part of the appeal of the Roanoke Valley,
part of the attraction for Valley growth and part of our quality
of 11 fe.
This includes consideration of aesthetic values recreational ,
values for boating, fishing, swimming, wading, bicycling and
jogging, as well as its economic value for tourism.
' In addition, the Roanoke River is an officially stocked trout
stream, one of an ever diminishing number. The county's proposal
could affect a fall trout stocking, or possibly prohibit it.
2. There are other alternatives, despite the statements of county
officials.
The Spring Hollow County Reservoir was chosen from a list of
nine (9) alternatives, many of which are still quite feasible.
Some may be more expensive, but some could be less expensive.
Some may have been discarded without sufficient study. Some
may have been rejected for political considerations that are
not justifiable.
.. The extensive 1976 State Water Control Board study that recom-
mended ground water was not given a fair trial. Accurate cost
analyses were not done on this option. Test wells were not
conducted, even though recent wells have been drilled success-
fully.
• Other alternatives do exist.
~~~,~er~~~ a~ rile t~oa,~~a~ze ~tiver
~.o. ~ox , 7~ ~ ~ ~
Roanoke, Virginia 2•'1008
Tel. (703J 3~~3-3(i08
3. Friends of the Roanoke River are not anti-development. We are
for development; but careful, considered development. Water
for future development does not mean simply drying up one
asset to provide another.
Alternative sources have not been fully explored, as some
county officials have openly admitted.
While protection of an endangered species may be the focal point for
some river protectionists, we feel preserving ,the log perch is only one
part of a larger issue. The Roanoke River is much more. than the habitat
of a rare species.
There are many perspectives on the reservoir/river controversy, and
ultimately, compromises may have to be made. But if we'a.~-r, ~e should „
err on the side of our quality of life, not the quantity of our valley
population.
We urge all those who would like~to know more about the reservoir
vs. t•he river controversy to contact Friends of the Roanoke River.
And we hope all individuals and groups who would like to see the
Roanoke River protected would join us in forming a coalition of friends
of the river.
~~
William H. Tanger, I11, Chairman
Friends of the Roanoke River
~~ r~~~
c/b ~ ( ( ~ its P'Y
~~c
~
~~ ~
~~~
15~~ ~
7 ~~ ~ .
L`~r. c~~
~~~~
~.
• i, ~ J
'~,'.• 1•.. '
~~;c,
O~ ROANp~.~
~~ z ~~~t~u~~ .~
o ~~n~ ~~ ~
`''a
J
1$ E50 $8
SFSQUICENTENN~P~
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
ABeauti~ulBeginning LEE GARRETT. CHAIRMAN
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
SPRING HOLLOW RESERVOIR RICHARD W. ROBERS. VICE-CHAIRMAN
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR SEPTEMBER 13, 1988 CAVE SPRINGMAGISTERiALDISTRICT
ELMER C. HODGE BOB L. JOHNSON
HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
STEVEN A. MCGRAW
CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
HARRY C. NICKENS
VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
The decision to construct the Spring Hollow Reservoir may very
well be one of the most important decisions for the Roanoke
Valley in recent history. Roanoke County must have additlacel
water for the growth and development iha add tional nwater and
Roanoke City and Salem are unable to supp y
may need new supplies for their own purposes. It is a difficult
decision because of the cost, the risks involved, and the length
of time it takes to construct such a facility. And yet, this is
the same decision that our predecessors hThere maustw have a been
Cove was built some years ago.
uncertainties and criticism at that time as there are now, but
decisions were made with a vision of what the future could be.
There is always a greater degree of risk with a new project of
this magnitude than with the expansion of one that is already in
place. Such projects must be studied carefully and alternatives
should be evaluated. There must be an established need. All
aspects of the project must be planned for - the technical
aspects to be certain, but the aesthetic qualities as well. I
believe this has been done with the Spring Hollow Reservoir. The
County has employed an excellent engineering firm and the project
has been approved by all federal and state agencies. There have
been numerous studies over the span of a quarter of a century.
Because of the natural characterist s all the water needsooftthe
will be easy and no source will supp y rocess to
Valley. Concessions have been made in the permitting p
protect the Roanoke River. Perhaps Bob Hume of the Arm~he o County
engineers said it best, "with the changes made by
during the permit process, this is a very nice project."
Based on the need for an additional water supply and the
exhaustive engineering studies of the alternatives, I must now
urge the Board to go forward with the design of a 17 mgd
reservoir that will serve the County and the Valley well into the
next century. During the design, additional geological work will
be done to assure the viability of the project. If, during the
process, problems are encountered, then the project can be re-
evaluated and a decision can be made to resume the search for
another alternative. Safeguards must be included to minimize any
P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE. VIRGINIA 2 4018-07 9 8 (703) 772-2004
~-i
impact on the river aid with sandoaddl to the naturalpbeauty of othe
be designed to blend
area.
It i s uncertain at this time whether eibte e that their lneeds wfor
participate in the project. It may
additional water have not been as great as projected five years
ago. It is my hope that they will choose to particg at hase.whIf
should be a regional projecro ect lcant beo construcdted inp phases or
they elect to do so, the p 7 Final decisions to proceed
built to its full 23 mgd capacity.
can be made after the design is complete and construction bids
are received.
Therefore, I am requesting permHollow
with the design of the Spring
John Hubbard and the staff. There
future need. The analysis has been
responsibility to move forward with
this valley, a ne if necessary.
Elmer C. Hodge
County Administrator
of the Board to go forward
Reservoir as recommended by
is a present as well as a
done and it now becomes our
the future water supply of
2
ACTION # 91388-2
ITEM NUMBER ~ "
AT A REGULAR MEETINGTO~HEHROANOKE OCOUNTYEADMINISTRATIONNCENTER
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD A
MEETING DATE: September 13, 1988
AGENDA ITEM: Request for Transfer of Funds Based on Preliminary
Year-End Information
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
.5 u;
BACKGROUND:
The June 30, 1988 aenses,sandafund balancesocananowebelmades
of year-end revenues, exp
Actual operations were very much as anti Spa 000 ( compared rto
Fund balance can be increased to $ reliminar fund balance is
Y
$2,063,493 at June 30, 1987). This p
3.9 percent of the total rcental Fund budget, which is still less
than the recommended 5 pe
The net .result of theltefr1om $1,380~3461toa$2,287300054 An
fund balance increasing
analysis of the year's operation shows significant changes in t e
following areas:
1. Actual revenues were approximately $56,786,000 compared
to a budgeted amouatf°om$the2p6o0ra0tionMoftpersonal
increase resulte
property.
2, A c t u a l e x p e 2d i970, 000 ompared t o aebudgeted damount
approximately $ ~
of $24,829,000. Much of this savings resultedoffthe
efforts to curtail expenditures for the clean-up
Dixie Caverns Landfill.
3, Other transfer33a099,000 rcomparedhtoGa budgeted amunt
approximately $ ital
of $34,653,000. Thug hasesctoeredbcedpayments ip the
purchases and lease/p
initial year.
To balance this year's dd tion,$$4000000 has alreadyebeen
unexpended 1987-88 funds. In a
allocated from the Generalitema havenalready beenhtakenasinto
Dixie Caverns. These two
consideration in the estimated fund balance of $2,287,000.
-...~.
While the year-end financial position is encouraging, there
are still several contingencies facing the County. First is the
construction of Spring Hollow Reservoir which will require debt
service and additional capital costs. The Dixie Caverns project
will likely require additional funds because of greater volumes
of contaminated soils.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board Contingency account be
increased by $50,000 at this time by transferring this amount
from the General Fund balain Octo'oerther action will be required
when the audit is completed
Respectfully submitted,
Diane D. Hyatt
Director of Finance
Approved by,
~~~
Li'.,~-~
Elmer C. Hodge
County Administrator
_____-- ------------------
VOTE
ACTION No Yes Abs
Approved ( x) Motion by: -- ^''^'`°n~~
to allocate
Garrett
x
Denied ( > Steven A. McGraw
000 from Fund Balance to Johnson x
Received
Referred ( ) 50
Board Contin enc Fund McGraw
Nickens x
x
To Robers x
cc: File
Don Myers
Diane Hyatt
Reta Busher
91488-3
ITEM NUMBER
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE
OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE: September 13, 1988
AGENDA ITEM• Approval of Roanoke County Smoking Policy
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
d `~'~~
BACKGROUND
The Department of Human Resources was requested by the
Board of Supervisors to develop a smoking policy
Roanoke County
for county buildings and facilities.
The Department of Human Resources was assisted by a Smoking
Policy Committee composed of smokers and re nresentationrfromt the
all county buildings and including p Health Depart-
Employee Advisory Committee. The Roanoke County
ment, the American Lung Associdedntechaical assistance forlthe
and Well Coalition also prow The proposed policy was
development of a county-wide policy.
also reviewed by the County Attorney's Office for legal compli-
ance.
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION
Attached is the proposed Roanoke County Smoking Policy
Committee. This policy was
developed by the Smoking Policy g 1988. A final
presented to the Board of Supervisors on Au ust 9. ust 17,
review by the Smoking Policy Committee was held on Aug the
1988, with the committee clarifying the policy by adding
County School System to those buildings and facilities not
covered by the policy. The committee also recom~onaed xty aday
the transition period for implementing the policy
period from date of approval, in which to conduct employee
education programs, identifi ate smokdingm~ essationsprogramslfo~
smoking signs, and coord
employees who desire assistance.
The proposed policy establishes guidelines for smoking in
county-owned buildings stem,aCourthouselanduCountyeJaia arec not
The County School Y d olicy, based on the unique
covered by the attache p
characteristics of these buildings.
J -3
rohibits smoking in areas such as
The proposed policy P tion, waiting and counter
rooms, recep Smoking is
conference and meeting t as indicated auditoriums,
areas and individual work areas, excep
Smoking is only
also prohibited in medelevatorslanderestrooms~om ,
lobbies, hallways. areas such as individual work
nated smoking rovided smoke is
P
permitted in desig barriers, distance
lounges, lunchrooms and breakrooms,
areas, h such means as ventilation, ute reso-
minimized throug Methods for disP olicy.
between work areas or other means. ro osed p
lution and enforcement are also covered in the p P
FISCAL IMPACT lementing the
It is anticipated that the fiscal impact of imp
This amount includes
Smoking Policy as proposed will b o$r~a~e0signs and $9,000 for the
$1,000 for the purchase of app P,
of ventilation and air fl tobacconsmokel insthose common
purchase
lunchrooms, or breakrooms identified a
methods to minimize the effects ° ropriation of funds will not
areas in lounges. areas. An app artmental budgets
"designated smoking rovided from dep ns and air
be required, as funds will be p
those buildings and facilities in which the sig
in
filtration devices are installe .
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends
Policy, as amended by the
SUBMITTED BY:
approval of the Roanoke County Smoking
Smoking Policy Committee.
is%<s/~
p, K. Cook
n Resources
APPROVED BY:
~/
Elmer C. Hodge
County Administrator
Director of Huma ________________________
_ ----------------------------- VOTE
----- ACTION No yes Abs
Harry C. Nickens/ x
Approved (x) Motion bY' McGraw to approv~arrett
Steven A. Johnson x
Denied ( ) excludin x
Received ( ) Smokin Policy000 for McGraw
fundin of $9- Nickens x
Referred x
To_~ ventilation e ui ment Robers
_~-
cc: File
Keith Cook
Assistant County Administrators
~-3
ROANOKE COUNTY SMOKING POLICY
1.0 PURPOSE_
This document establishes a policy for County-owned buildings and
facilities, including leased space, that will protect the rights of the
nonsmokers for an environmenovadefthoserwhoschooseato smoke,dtheream
smoke as possible, and to p
opportunity to do so.
The County plans to provide employees and the public with an example of
health-promoting behavior, by maintaining an environment as clean and
healthful as possible and to reduce the discomfort of employees and the
public, whose tolerance for tobacco smoke is limited.
It is believed that a spirit of thoughtfulness and cooperation among
employees and the public in County buildings and facilities is normally
adequate to resolve anbedresolvedWhthe rightsaofsthennonsmokeroforyclean
Where disputes cannot
air shall be given precedence.
2.0 DEFINITIONS:
2.1 Smoking...Carrying or possessing any lighted tobacco product, to
include: cigars, pipes, and cigarettes.
2,2 Designated Smoking Area...Any area within a County facility where
smoking is specifically permitted andortunituato conductonormal
nonsmoking individuals reasonable opp ossible.
activity in an area as smoke free as p
3.0 POLICY:
3.1 Smoking is prohibited in the following areas:
3.1.1 Conference and meeting rooms; reception, waiting, and
counter areas; individual work areas, except as indicated in
3.2.1.
3.1.2 Medical facilities or areas where cots may be set up for ill
employees.
3.1.3 Classrooms and auditoriums.
3.1.4 Lobbies, hallways, elevators, and restrooms.
"~
3.2 Designated Smoking Areas:
3.2.1 Individual work areas may be designated as "smoking areas"
if conditions of the definition "designated smoking area"
are met by ventilation, barriers, distance between work
areas, air filtering devices, (purchased by the employee and
approved by the supervisor) or other methods to minimize
environmental tobacco smoke.
3.2.2 Areas in lounges, lunchrooms, or breakrooms may be
"designated smoking areas" as long as criteria in the
definition and in paragraph 3.2.1 are met. The County will
attempt to provide air filtering devices in those common
areas where employees meet for breaks.
3.3 Based on unique characteristics in structure and authority of the
County School System, Courthouse and County Jail, those buildings
are specifically excluded from this policy. It is expected that a
clean air policy will be developed for these facilities in order to
provide nonsmoking employees, guests, students, inmates, and
visitors with an environment as free from tobacco smoke as
possible.
4.0 RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES AND ENFORCEMENT:
4.1 Smoking will be prohibited in any work area if any employee who is
assigned to that area, or who is a victim of environmental tobacco
smoke emanating from that work area, registers a confidential
complaint to his/her supervisor about smoking, asks that smoking be
prohibited, and the validity of the complaint is confirmed by the
supervisor or department head.
4.2 The supervisor may attempt to resolve the conflict by the methods
reviewed in paragraph 3.2.1.
4.3 If the supervisor and employee are unable to come to an acceptable
solution, the Smoking Policy Committee will be involved as
arbitrator. If those methods are not sufficient to minimize
environmental tobacco smoke, the preferences of the nonsmoker will
prevail.
4.4 Smoking will be prohibited in previously designated smoking areas
in lounges, lunchrooms, or breakrooms if any employee who is a
victim of environmental tobacco smoke emanating from that area
registers a confidential complaint to the smoking committee about
smoking, asks that smoking be prohibited, and the validity of the
complaint is confirmed by the smoking committee.
4.5 The Smoking Policy Committee will be composed of the committee for
the development of a smoking policy.
4.6 Department heads and supervisors are responsible for implementing
and enforcing this policy and decisions of the Smoking Policy
Committee.
-2-
-~
4.7 Suitable signs furnished and installed by the County, will clearly
identify designated "Smoking" and "Nonsmoking" areas.
4.8 This policy will go into effect upon adoption by the Board of
Supervisors as County policy. There will be a sixty-day transition
period during which the following activities will occur:
4.8.1 Supervisors and department heads will educate their
employees on environmental tobacco smoke and the smoking
policy through staff meetings, speakers, and other means.
4.8.2 Designated smoking areas will be determined by personnel
working in a facility or by a committee selected from the
smokers and nonsmokers of the facility. Appropriate signs
and air filtering devices will be installed.
4.8.3 Signs prohibiting smoking in areas specified in paragraph
3.1 will be installed.
4.8.4 Employees who desire assistance with smoking cessation or
reduction will be provided information about available
methods and programs. The specifics of the employee
incentives will be addressed and developed through the
employee wellness program - "Heart at Work" which will
include smoking cessation classes provided by the County.
9-13-88
-3-
ACTION #
ITEM NUMBER ~ " ~'7
ATYA VIRG NIAMHELD ATOTHEHROANOKE
COUN ,
OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE: September 13, 1988
AGENDA ITEM: Request for additional space and other
improvements at the Administration Center
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS: a~~=""""'"' _~c Q^'~~
BACKGROUND:
Office areas at the Administration Building are extremely
in
crowded and in some cases poorly situated for efficiency
dealing with the public and wlteffectiveness, butsalson havena
not only inhibit efficiency and
negative impact on employee morale.
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
° Crowded conditions are mos~hecAssessorhe0verall average
Revenue, the Treasurer, and
space per employee for these areas is much less than the
ersonnel.
recommended amount for office p
° An office is needed for the Director of Development and
Inspections.
° Working conditions in the
tremely cramped.
engineering office area are
ex
° Citizens conducting business with the Utility Billing
office must stand in the hallway and speak through a hole
in a window. This can be embarrassing for the citizen in
~Pnsitive situations and needs to be corrected.
° The hallways in artib ularly
safety hazard, p
installation °earancetofothe
improve the app
are very slick and present a
to the handicapped. The
reduce the safety hazard, and
building.
'". 1 f
" ~ for expansion should broWtheandaincreased
° Some room o ulation g
provide for potential p P
demand for services.
nate entrancio~nd eThe
° Signs should be installed to desig arking
paths for the Administration Center
nce of such markings represents a safety
present abse
hazard.
ALTERI1iATIVES AND IMPACTS:
tive 1: Install three modul Details atbtached)gs °n
Alterna
the grounds of the Administration Cen e area. Ruled
Rent office space in the nearby and confu-
Alternative 2: business,
out because of cost, inefficiencies of d Es 9 mated cost is $42,750
sion and inconvenience to citizens.
annually. ace at Kessler Mill
Alternative 3: Make use of additional sp
Ruled out for same reasons as Alternative 2•
Road facility.
Estimated cost is $180,000. rd School and other
Alternative 4: Make use of William By
, Ruled out for same reaemoval s Alternative 2•
County buildings lus asbestos r
Estimated cost is $180,000 p
STAFF ~tECOMMENDATION:
~Staf f recom ec d vest inn to ms
our needs and obj
effectiveness.
Costs for this alternative are as
follows:
- One-time set up charge for modules
- First year lease/purchase amount for modules
(Subsequent years will be $33,177)
- Cost for carpeting halls and stairways
- Signage and marking for parking lot
re aration (water, sewer, electric,
- Site P P and computer lines)
telephone,
1 , This alternativ ari eSpVerall
of timing, cost,
TOTAL
-2-
$10,500
19,200
5,000
300
15,000
50 000
~-y
for this project would be from the Capital Fund.
Funding
The Unappropriated balance is currently $51,63 .
Offices to be Relocated
ttached)
Move to module B a nd C (see a
Assessor
Risk Management Move to
to module B
module B
Payroll
Human Resources
e Move
Move to
Ex and
P module A
to current
Assessor Office
e
Commissioner of Revenu Expand to current
t AssrollrOffice
Pay
Treasurer
Utility Billing Expand
to to curren
current H uman Resources Area
a
Director of Development Move
Expand to current
Human Resources re
Engineering
our permission to proceed with
The staff would also likerove the utilization of space on
the preparation of a plan to imp Administration Center and
the main floor of the Roanoke County Briefly, the plan would
make other improvements to the property. the space
out the present stage area and using
involve tearing _ 1 atf o rm the 1Board
for a conference room and °fresent stage to be used by
constructed in front of the p rovide more
during meetings. The area from the information desk back to r.
Hodge's conference room would be rearranged o pfirst floor
art of this project, the three Assistant
usable space. As a p
County Administratoarea.ouWe would alsotl ke to pave the lower
administrative office in the Treasurer's
lot and upgrade the air condition we will include this
parking iven to proceed,
Office. If permission is g lan to do the work in the first
in next year's budget and would p ro ect is
fiscal quarter. A gross estimate of the cost of this p j
$100,000.
SUBMITTED BY:
:RJ ~ .
Donnie C. Myer
Assistant County Administrator
ment Services
APPROVED:
~;`~~
E mer C. Ho ge
County Administrator
Manage ----------------------
--------------------------- VOTE
---------------- ACTION No Yes Abs
Approved ( )
Denied ( )
Received ( )
Referred
to
Motion by: Garrett
Johnson
McGraw
Nickens
Robers
-3-
SITE PLAN
-4-
~-~
11 ~1TT ,,
UNIT B
rH
r
~`~ sq ,= r- a 3 85Q F
PAY ROLL
X22 SgrT R AGEMENT
rz,
1
PAY ROLL'
~+ ~2 Sq F~
UNIT C
~a ~~
9 z
9
ASSESSOR
(Y
V
9
~,_ -
y~o s~ FT
~3
IJ
Ali ' ii ~ 11
~i~
_, I III i ,~.-- ..!
__
ACTION # 91388-4 -
ITEM NUMBER ~ "' ~ -
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE E COUNTY ADMINISTRATIONOCENTER OKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOK
MEETING DATE: September 13, 1988
SUBJECT' Bonsack Fire Station
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS : ~ ~ ~~~,,u,,.~" J
-~"'` ~ ~
BACKGROUND:
The 1985 bond issue provides funding in the amount of $300,000 for
the construction of a fire sta~eoresentativesnfrom Botetourt C untye
County. Staff has worked with p
Roanoke City, Botetourt Volunteer Fire Companoint onerationkwouldnbe
Volunteer Fire Companies to determine if a j there seems to be
feasible. Al heuconceptoandtthet st ff will montinue to pursue this
interest in t
avenue.
However, in order to meet the onward wi h theeconstruction of this
funds, it is imperative to move f
facility. otential
Over the past month, the staff has erioritizedelocations would
sites and determined that the following p
be the best to provide emergency service to the Bonsack area.
1, State Route 604 and 60 d aaccesst to SR 1604gand rRte (460
460) to provide rap
decreasing response time.
2, Property turns Botetourt1Roanoke JointhLibrary located
adjacent to the
behind the first location.
went ($300,000), yearly
Additional funding for cstaffing 241 hour coverage ($350,000),
operational costs ($25,000), - 5 p.m. ~ Monday through Friday,
or 10-hour coverage 7 a.m. not included and must
supplemented by volunteer staffing ($120,000),
be addressed in annual budget process.
~~
ALTERNATIVES AND IMPACTS:
Authorize the staff to negotiate with Greater Roament
1.
Valley Development Foundation and Ro~nokeaDeni to the
Corporation to exchange the propert adj
that is currently designated for the fire
joint library ad acent to Challenger Drive.
station with the property j
This location will provide rapid access to Route 604 and
460 and will decrease response time.
spring of
Also authorize COdedrwithnbondb monies withy costs for
1989 to be fun to be addressed in a
equipment and required staffing
future fiscal year budget process.
2, Do not begin construction until volunteers are recruited.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Alternative 1.
Respectfully submitted,
~ ~ '~ /~~
lry
. F qua
Chiefs F're & cue Department
Approved by,
i
r~1
~~G~~
Elmer C. Hodge
County Administrator
- - - - - ACTION
Approved (x) Motion by: Bor r Johnson/Steven
rove staff
Garrett
Denied ( ) A. McGraw to a
ommendations and re ort back n
Received ( ) rec
to Board on ne otiation to McGraw
Nickens
Referred
To relocate. Robers
cc: File
Tommy Fuqua
ps John Willey
Paul Mahoney
Diane Hyatt
VOTE
No Yes
X
x
x
X
Abs
ACTION # 91388-5
ITEM NUMBER
AT A REGULAR MEETINGATOTHEHROp,NOKE COUNTYEADMINISTRATIONCENTER
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD
MEETING DATE: September 13, 1988
AGENDA ITEM: Agreement between Roanoke County and Roanoke City
relative to Pretreatment of certain Industrial
Waste Discharge
BACKGROUND:
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~,~~ 4ts~~~
"- J
the Roanoke Valley that use the
have each adopted Sewage Ordinances
regulating pretreatment of Industrial
system.
The City of Roanoke, as therovide documentationaand
Treatment Plant, is required to p
reporting to EPA on the progress of the pretreatment program.
The municipalities in
Regional Wastewater Treatment
that require permitting and
Waste discharges to the sewer
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
In order for the EPA Pretreatment Program to be administered
by each municipality according to their individual ordiE p A eS'Th e
inter-municipal agreement has been proposed by
agreement requires ram andnreportltt eoresultsstorthe City of
pretreatment prog
Roanoke.
FISCAL IMPACT:
There is no direct fiscal impact related to the proposed
agreement. The fun ~ hinnRoanoke County isaancludede n the
pretreatment program
FY88/89 Utility Budget.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors authorize the
Chairman and/or Cou t f o amadminist~ation an do reporting oft the
municipal agreemen
Pretreatment Program.
SUBMITTED BY:
Cliffor ig
Utility Director
~ "W' ( 3
APPROVED
C~2~ ~
Elmer C. Hodge
County Administrator
------- ------------- ----------------- VOTE
--- ACTION
Nickens/
C No yeS Abs
Approved (X) .
Motion by: Harry
McGraw staff
A
Garrett x
x
Denied ( ) .
Steven Johnson
Received ( ) recommendation McGraw x
Referred Nickens x
to Robers x
cc: File
Cliff Craig
John Hubbard
Paul Mahoney
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOR ANOKESCOUNTYSADMINISTRATOION
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE 1988
CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 13,
ORDINANCE 91388-6 AUTHORIZING THE
PURCHASE 0 ELOCAT ONEOFR KENWORTHUROADC-
FOR THE R
VALLEYPOINTE, PHASE I
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That pursuant to provisions of Section 18.04 of the
Charter of Roanoke County, a first reading concerning the herein =
1988. A sec
after described real estate was held on August 23,
tember 13, 1988. This
and reading on this matter was held on Sep
real estate consists of 0.518 acre, more particularly described
as Roanoke County Tax Map No. 37.07-1-6 and located in the Hol-
lins Magisterial District adjacent to Interstate 581 and Peters
Creek Road; and
2. That the 0.518 acre of real estate from Smithsub
Inc. to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County for $64,500.00
is hereby authorized 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
roperty, all of which shall be upon form approved by the County
p
Attorney.
On motion of Supervisor Nickens, seconded by Supervisor
Johnson and carried by the following recorded vote:
.AYES- Supervisors Johnson, Nickens, Robers, Garrett
ABSTAIN: Supervisor. McGraw
NAYS: None
A COPY TESTE:
Mary H. Allen, Deputy Clerk
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
cc: File
Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney
John D. Willey, Director, Real Estate Assessment
Timothy Gubala, Director, Economic Development
Phillip Henry, Director, Engineering
ACTION #
ITEM NUMBER __ ~"'~~~
MEETING OF THE BOARD OF NTYEADMINISTRATIONNOCENTER
AT A REGULAR
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE CO
MEETING DATE: September 13, 1988
the purchase of 0.518 acres
the relocation of Kenworth
AGENDA ITEM: Ordinance authorizifor
from Smithsub ointe, Phase I
Road - Valleyp
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMME ~~~,~( CJ
~/I~,t~:~-yv~n'rl~
~~
BACKGROUND: ointe Project as a
is involved in the Value n P Inc• of Richmond,
Roanoke County erfelt Develop acent
joint participant with Ling
location of Kenworth Roadlis whichs w llfnecess atat eek
VA. The re ointe, Phase on peters Cr
development of Valleyp
intersection to be constructe
new signalized Kenworth. Road access to Peters Creek Road
d and the road relocated to interconnect with Val eY-
Road. The existing
wlll be close
pointe Parkway. and ARA Ser-
otiating with Smithsub Ilish the reloca-
Staff had been neg t the County's offer of
vices Inc. to acquire the land needed to accom at its
The owners declined to accep
tion. the Board held a public hearing
$61,500.00, therefore, and adopted a resolution to condemn the
June 28, 1988 meeting for the relocation of Kenworth
0.518 acre owned by Smithsub Inc.
Road.
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: ro erty owners and at
Staff continued to negotiate with the p P
the Board agreed to settlarcel f~om
26, 1988, meeting, the 0.518 acre p
the July s by purchasing
demnation proceeding 500.00.
Smithsub Inc. for $64. that
Charter requires
Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County ro osed
'tion of real estate or any interest therein be accom-
uisi The first reading of the pwipl be
the acq b ordinance.
plished only Y ust 23, 1.988; the second reading
ordinance wtemberdl3n 1988•
held on Sep
~-
FISCAL IMPACTS:
Upon the commencement °ountandepos~ted withSthehClerkaoffthe
Cor (Smithsub Inc.), the C y 000.00
Circuit Court the sum of $61,500.00. The baid into the~Court.
necessary to resolve the litigation will be P aid to Smithsub
Pursuant to the settlement, $64,500.00 will be p
Inc. from the $2 million Roanlee o me Development ated towards
Phase I and Phase II of the Val yp
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Authorize the Counts asm may tbet necessary to accomplish
ments and take such action roved by the County Attorney.
this transaction, upon form app
2. Do not authorize actionsnas may belnecessary toeaccome
such documents and take sucon form approved by the County Attor
plish this transaction, up
ney.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1.
Respectfully submitted,
,~C~~
~ , ~~~
J
Paul M. Mahoney
County Attorney
---------------- VOTE
----
------------
ACTION No yes Abs
Approved ( ) Motion by: Garrett
Denied ( ) Johnson
Received ( ) McGraw
Referred Nickens
To Robers
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 1988
ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF ~']~'" /
0.518 ACRE FROM SMITHSUB INC. FOR THE
RELOCATION OF KENWORTH ROAD - VALLEY-
POINTE, PHASE I
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That pursuant to provisions of Section 18.04 of the
Charter of Roanoke County, a first reading concerning the herein-
after described real estate was held on August 23, 1988. A sec-
ond reading on this matter was held on September 13, 1988. This
real estate consists of 0.518 acre, more particularly described
as Roanoke County Tax Map No. 37.07-1-6 and located in the Hol-
lins Magisterial District adjacent to Interstate 581 and Peters
Creek Road; and
2. That the 0.518 acre of real estate from Smithsub
Inc. to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County for $64,500.00
is hereby authorized 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.
t
EGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OKESCOUNTYSADMINISTRATOION
AT A R HELD AT THE ROANO 1988
COUNTY, VIRGINIA. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 13,
CENTER ON
ORDINANCE 91388-7 AUTHORIZING THE
ACQUISITION OF EApUBLICSSEWER SERVICE TO
THE EXTENSION OF
THE APPALACHIAN POWER COMPANY SERVICE
CENTER
IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
BE
County, Virginia, as follows:
That pursuant to provisions of Section 18.04 of the
1.
concerning the acquisi-
Charter of Roanoke County, a first reading
hereinafter-described easements was held on August
tion of the teinber
1988. A second reading on this matter was held on Sep rt of
23,
1988. The sewer easements are located across the prope-1y10)
13 - No. 36 15
Tax Map
the George Harris Estate (Roanoke County No. 36,10-1-14); and
and Leonard Huffman (Roanoke County Tax Map
That the acquisition of the sewer easements from
2.
r e Harris Estate in the amount of $4,300.00 and the sewer
the Geo g
t and 8-inch diameter carrier pipe 1,100 feet across In er
Basemen
1 from Leonard Huffman in the amount of $30,000.0 are
state 8
hereby authorized and approved; and
3, That the County Administrator is authorized to exe-
ocuments and take such actions on behalf of Roanoke
cute such d
s are necessary to accomplish the acquisition of these
County a roved by the County
easements, all of which shall be upon form app
Attorney. Su ervisor
seconded by P
On motion of Supervisor Nickens,
Johnson and carried by the following recorded vote:
Supervisors Johnson, Nickens, Robers, Garrett
AYES:
ABSTAIN: Supervisor McGraw
NAYS: None
A COPY TESTE:
'y'~'~GY--'z-~~ ~/'
Mary H. Allen, Deputy Clerk
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
cc: File
Paul Mahoney, County Attorney
John Willey, Director, Real Estate Assessment
Phillip Henry, Director, Engineering
Clifford Craig, Director, Utilities
ACTION #
ITEM NUMBER f~ w ''~
AT A REGULAR MEETING OFHEHROANOKE OCOUNTYEADMINISTRATIONNOCENTER
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT T
MEETING DATE: September 13, 1988
AGENDA ITEM: Ordinance authorizing the acquisition of easements
to facilitate the extension of public sewer ser-
vice to the Appalachian Power Company Service Cen-
ter
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
BACKGROUND:
The County is participating with Appalachian Power Company
(APCO) to extend public sewer from Montclair TheaCounty agreedeto
state 81 to the new APCO service center.
acquire the necessary easements required to complete the project.
Staff had been negot t t Tax MaphNose 36 r10 51-14 and 36. 15e1-
nard Huffman (Roanoke Coun y ro ert
10) to acquire the neee~s the Co ty'ss~offe~seveAt the pulp 26y
owners declined to acc p ublic hearing as a necessary
1988, meeting staff requested a p
step to acquire the easements by condemnation.
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
At the August 9, 1988, meeting, staff reported that a pur-
chase price had been negotiatofd 4°300g00r to htheaGeorges.Harrhs
Board approved the payment $ ment of $30,000.00 to Leo
Estate for a sewer easement and the pay
nard Huffman for a sewer ear t to 81 d an 8-inch diameter carrier
pipe 1,100 feet across Inte
Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter requires that
the acquisition of real estate or any interest thereon be accom-
plished only by ordinance.
The first reading of the proposed ordinance was held on
August 23, 1988; the second reading will be held on September 13,
1988.
~-/ - .2.,
FISCAL IMPACTS:
$4,300.00 paid to the Gasr9 orHthissproje t were prev0i°OusOy
paid to Leonard Huffman. Fun
allocated during the sale of Utility Bonds.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Authorize the County and behalf aofrRoanoke County hasoare
menu and take such actin
necessary to accomplish the roved by the County Attorn Y all o
which shall be upon form app
2. Do not authorize the , ons ton Abehalftoft Roanoke Countyuas
documents and take such acts
are necessary to accomplish therovedlbytthe CountydAptoPneyy~ all
of which shall be upon form app
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends Alternative No. 1•
Respectfully submitted,
~~
Paul M. Mahoney
County Attorney
----------
--------- VOTE
-------
ACTION No yes Abs
Approved ( ) Motion by: Garrett
Denied ( ) Johnson
Received ( ) McGraw
Referred Nickens
To Robers
' BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY1988INISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 13,
ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF ~°
EASEMENTS TO FACILITATE THE EXTENSION OF
PUBLIC MPANY SERVICE CENTER APPALACHIAN
POWER CO
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1, That pursuant to provisions of Section 18.04 of the
concerning the acquisi-
Charter of Roanoke County, a first reading
tion of the hereinafter-described easements was held on August
tember
23, 1988. A second reading on this matter was held on Sep
13 1988. The sewer easements are located across the property of
the George Harris Estate (Roanoke County Tax Map No. 36-15-1 10)
and
and Leonard Huffman (Roanoke County Tax Map No. 36.10-1-14);
2, That the acquisition of the sewer easements from
the George Harris Estate in the amount of $4,300.00 and the sewer
easement and 8-inch diameter carrier pipe 1,100 feet across Inter-
state 81 from Leonard Huffman in the amount of $30,000.00 are
hereby authorized 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 these
easements, all of which shall be upon form approved by the County
Attorney.
ACTION NUMBER
ITEM NUMBER
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE g~QARD C~~TyEADMI ISTRATION C LATER
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE RO
1988
MEETING DATE: August 23,
SUBJECT: Appointments to Committees, Commissions and Boards
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
1 • DUlluy~• -
Four-year term of Norman Eugene Jarrett, Hollins Magisterial
District. His term expired January 22, 1988•
L . wuuuUiil~ -----
ear term of Edmund J. Kielty, Alternate. Their terms expire
One-y 1988.
August 13, _ _ ~ ~.,,„; ~ ~, SPr_vice~
Adv si or Board:
outh member Emily Reaser, Northside High School.
One-year term of y 1987.
Her term expired November 13,
Two-year terms of Marilyn Morehead, Hollins District; Dr.
• and Sherry Robison, Windsor Hills
Andrew Archer, Vinton District,
District expired 3/22/88•
ne- ear term of Tracy Rothschild, youth member from Cave Spring,
0 Y
expired 3/22/88•
APPOINTMENTS TO THIS COMMITTEE HAVE BEEN POSTPONED UNTIL IT IS
REACTIVATED.
q, Grievance Panel
hree- ear term of Cecil Hill, alternate will expire October 12,
T Y
1988 . ~ _____~: }~,
Services Board will
Two-year term of Dr. Joseph Duetsch, Member at Large,
expire October 31, 1988.
_.~. °_
SUBMITTED BY:
YYL~..~-r-~, ~/. C"~- ~,e~~--,
Mary H. Allen
Deputy Clerk
APPROVED BY:
C f~
Elmer C. Hodge
County Administrator
-----------
--------------------------- VOTE
ACTION
Yes No Abs
Approved ( ) Motion by: Garrett
Denied ( ) Johnson
Received ( ) McGraw
Referred Nickens
To• Robers
..i
BUILDING CODE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS
TERM EXPIRES
Thomas A. Darnall Vinton 4 years 1/22/92
Reappointed 6/14/88
1010 Halliahurst Avenue
Vinton, Virginia 24179
Home: 343-4571
(Architect)
i Windsor Hills 4 years ~4'~7~%88~
ng
B. J. K
3512 Brambleton Avenue
Roanoke, VA 24018
Work: 774-5083
(Contractor)
Jon Walp Cave. Spring. 4 years 4/27/92
3153-8B Berry Lane,SW
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
Homer 774-3289
(Architect)
Albert Trompeter Cave Spring 4 years 10/24/90
5596 Highfields Road S.W.
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
Phone: 774-4445
Wilmore T. Leffell, Pres. Vinton 4 years 12/12/90
Temp-O-Matic Inc.
P. 0. Box 291
Vinton, VA 24179
(Building Contractor)
ALTERNATES 4 years 7/25/90
Larry Lester
2920 McNeil Drive
Roanoke, Virginia 24019
John Brownlee 4 years 7/25/90
5003 Shadyside Drive
Roanoke, VA 24018
Notify Mr. Skip Nininger of new appointments
u
,,.._e
COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS RESOURCES BOARD
p,, COMPOSITION: (From Bylaws and Section 53.1-183)
To consist of seven members appointed as follows: one
member from Roanoke County; one member from Salem City; three
members from the judges in the 23rd Judicial District; one member
from the Department of Corrections. The term of office shall be
determined by the appointing authority (Roanoke County's is one
year . )
B, DUTIES:
Review felony referrals from the Circuit Courts of
Roanoke City, Roanoke County and the City of Salem for possible
diversion from state penal system and local jails.
C, MEETINGS:
Third Tuesday of each month at 4:00 p.m.
.r^
COURT SERVICES UNIT ADVISORY COUNCIL/YOUTH AND
FAMILY SERVICES ADVISORY BOARD
p,, COMPOSITION
Board to consist of two members from each magisterial
district, and one youth member from each high school. Governing
bodies of each county and city served by a court service unit may
appoint one or more members to a citizen advisory council.
B, DUTIES:
Advises and cooperates with the court upon all matters
affecting the working of this law and other laws relating to
children, their care and protection and to domestic relations;
Consults and confer with the court and director of the
court service unit relative to the development and extension of
the court service program;
Encourage the members selected by the council to serve on
the central advisory council to visit as often as the member
conveniently can, institutions and associations receiving
children under this law and to report to the court the conditions
and surroundings of the children received by or in charge of any
such persons, institutions or associations.
The Council should make themselves familiar with the work
of the court. Makes an annual report to the court and the
participating governing bodies on the work of the council.
A_s the Youth and Family Services Advisory Board:
Establish goals and priorities for County-wide youth
services; assist in coordination and planning for comprehensive
youth services within the private sector. Serve in an advisory
capacity and to otherwise assist the Board of Supervisors to
establish goals and objectives in compliance with all "minimum
Standards of the Delinquency Prevention and Youth Development Act
of 1979". Assist in conducting an assessment of the needs of
youth every five years and to assist in developing an annual
Delinquency Prevention Plan, further to participate in evaluating
the implementation of the plan and making a report thereon to the
Board of Supervisors. Provide a public forum where concerns
about youth may be expressed and to receive recommendationreqular
raise concerns of public and private organizations at any
advisory board meeting upon proper notice. Advocates necessary
legislative amendments to improve community conditions for youth
development and toivaPeoforthoudhvenophencommunityed services
both public and pr Y
C. MEETING SCHEDULE:
One a quarter, the third Tuesday, beginning January; time
and place determined at meetings.
GRIEVANCE PANEL
p, , COMPOSITION
To consist of three (3) members, appointed by the Board of
Supervisors; for terms of two years.
g, 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 regulatioset aTtimeafor
shall select for each hearing a panel chairmractical, but no
the hearing which shall be held as soon as p rievant
later than fifteen (15) full working days after the g
appeal..
C, MEETING SCHEDULE
The County Administrator shall
panel members to hear the grievance.
arrange a hearing with the
~~ ~~_ ~
..~...,. ,~,m•,.
MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES OF THE ROANOKE VALLEY,
COMMUNITY SERVICES BOARD
p,, COMPOSITION
Board to consist of not less than five (5) nor more than
fifteen (15) members, with four (4) members from each of the
jurisdictions based on recommendations from the Board. Members
at large must be confirmed by the County and Cities of Salem and
Roanoke. Members may not serve more than two (2) full terms.
B, DUTIES:
To serve as Board of Directors for the Mentro ram1tTo be
Mental Retardation and Substance Abuse Services P g State
the sole recipient of local tax funds to be matched by
and/or Federal funds for the mental health, mental retarfOrlthe
and substance abuse services programs and has authority
expenditure of all said local tax funds allocated to it.
Reviews and evaluates community mental health, mental
both
retardation and substance abuse s~rov~acmesofndommunitylmental
public and private. Presents a p q
health, mental retardation and substance abuse services and
facilities.
Appoint an executive director of Mental Heathe department
whose qualifications meet the standards fixed by
and prescribe his duties. Prescribe a reasonable schedule of
fees for services provided by personnel or facilities under the
jurisdiction or supervision of the Board and for the manner of
collection of same.
Seek and accept funds through State and Federal grants.
C, MEETING SCHEDULE:
Third Thursday of each month.
L
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTYIAD8INISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 13,
RESOLUTION N0. 91388-8 APPROVING AND
CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH
ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA
FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM K -
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 13, 1988, designated as Item K
- Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as
to each item separately set forth in said section designated
Items 1 through 8, inclusive, as follows:
1. Confirmation of committee appointment to the
Grievance Panel.
2. Approval of minutes of meetings - May 10, 1988,
May 24, 1988, June 14, 1988
3. Approval of reimbursement for water line extension
on Tyler Road.
4. Authorization for County participation in
extending a water and sewer line adjacent to
Barrens Road.
5. Request for acceptance of Stonebridge Circle into
the Va. Department of Transportation Secondary
System.
6. Acceptance of water and sewer facilities serving
Winterberry Pointe.
7. Acknowledgment from Va. Department of
Transportation of the acceptance of 0.30 miles of
Hill Drive into the Secondary System.
8. Acceptance of an assignment of a sanitary sewer
easement being donated by Dominion Builders.
2. That the Clerk to the Board is hereby authorized
of said
and directed where required by law to set forth upon any
items the separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant to
this resolution.
On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by Supervisor
Nickens and upon the following recorded vote:
Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett
AYES:
NAYS: None
A COPY TESTE:
Mary H. Allen, Deputy Clerx
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
9/14/88
CC• John Hubbard, Assistant County Administrator
• Clifford Craig, Utility Director
Phillip Henry, Director of Enginee3ring
File
,~1- $
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION
CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 1988
RESOLUTION N0. APPROVING AND
CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH
ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA
FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM K -
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 13, 1988, designated as Item K
- Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as
to each item separately set forth in said section designated
Items 1 through 8, inclusive, as follows:
1. Confirmation of committee appointment to the
Grievance Panel.
2. Approval of minutes of meetings - May 10, 1988,
May 24, 1988, June 14, 1988
3, Approval of reimbursement for water line extension
on Tyler Road.
4. Authorization for County participation in
extending a water and sewer line adjacent to
Barrens Road.
5. Request for acceptance of Stonebridge Circle into
the Va. Department of Transportation Secondary
System.
6. Acceptance of water and sewer facilities serving
Winterberry Pointe.
7. Acknowledgment from Va. Department of
Transportation of the acceptance of 0.30 miles of
Hill Drive into the Secondary System.
8. Acceptance of an assignment of a sanitary sewer
easement being donated by Dominion Builders.
K ~ -~ ~`
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.
ACTION NUMBER 91388-8.a
ITEM NUMBER ~~
AT A REGULAR MHELDNATOTHEHROANO E OCOUNTYEADMINISTRATION OCENTER
COUNTY, VIRGINI
MEETING DATE September 13, 1988
SUBJECT: Confirmation of Committee Appointment to the Grievance
Panel
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
The following nominations were made at the previous board meeting
and must now be confirmed by the Board of Supervisors. The
nominee has agreed to serve.
Grievance Panel
Thomas T. Palmer has been nominated by Supervisor Nickens to
serve another two-year term. His term will expire September 10,
1990.
SUBMITTED BY:
Mary H. Allen
Deputy Clerk
~~~~~
APPROVED BY:
Elmer C. Hodge
County Administrator
----------------
--------------------------- VOTE
ACTION Yes No Abs
Approved (x) Motion by: Boy r 7ohr" Garrett x
Denied ( ) Nickens Johnson x
Received ( ) McGraw x
Referred Nickens x
T o: _____- Robe r s x
cc: File
Grievance Panel File
ACTION N0.
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 13, 1988
AGENDA ITEM: Approval of Minutes of Meetings
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
The following minutes from previous meetings of the Roanoke
County Board of Supervisors are now complete and have been sent
to the board members under separate cover.
- May 10, 1988
- May 24, 1988
- June 14 , 19 8 8
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the minutes listed above be approved as
presented.
Mary H. Allen
Deputy Clerk
~' C
Elmer C. Hodge
County Administrator
----------------------------------
ACTION VOTE
Approved ( ) Motion by: Yes No Abs
Denied ( ) Garrett
Received ( ) Johnson
Referred McGraw
Nickens
To:
Robers
' R
~ ..
ACTION # 91388-8.b
ITEM NUMBER 3
AT A VIRGINIA HELD AT THEHROANORE
COUNTY,
OF SUPERVISORS OF ROp,NORE
COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE: September 13, 1988
AGENDA ITEM: Reimbursement for water line extension on
Tyler Road
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
BACKGROUND:
Mr. and Mrs. William Brogan recently experienced problems
aid to extend the 8 inch public
with their individual we1450naeet along Tyler Road.
water line approximately
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: allows
The County off-site and oversized main creditofflsite line
a developer to aeinlexcess of 300 feetts W thout a reimbursement
that is extende owner (developer) could only receive
agreement, the property Mr. and Mrs. Brogan
credits fo tedhthe Countycextend a reimbursement agreement which
have reques
would allow them to receive 100 nAecttto his llirieees The ltotal
is
from other property owners that co
to $4000.00, which
cost of the water line to benreimbursed up l' 880.83 an ess of
agreement would allow them ortion of the water line in exc
represents the cost of the p
300 feet.
ALTERNATIVES AND IMPACTS:
The Board of Supervisors could authorize a
(1) the Brogan's to receive up to
reimbursement agreement allowing
$4,000.00 as other customers connect to this line. est leaving
(2) The Board of Supervisors could deny the requ
the Brogan's responsible for the entire cost of the line. t
These alternatives require no expenditures by the Coun y
1
..
~- 3
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The staff recommend etare Aaneagreemente and pthe aCounty
the County Attorney p p
Administrator be authorized to execute the agreement.
SUBMITTED BY:
APPROVED:
\ ~ ~~
Cliffo aig, Elmer C. Hodge
Utility Director County Administrator
----------------------
AC TION VOTE
Bob L. Johnson/Harry No Yes Abs
Approved (x) Motion by. Garrett x
Denied ( ) C. Nickens Johnson x
Received ( ) McGraw x
Referred Nickens x
to Robers x
cc: File
Cliff Craig
John Hubbard
Paul Mahoney
Diane Hyatt
2
f - ~
ACTION # 91388-8.c
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 13, 1988
AGENDA ITEM:
Authorization for County participation in
extending a water and sewer line adjacent to
Barrens Road
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
BACKGROUND:
The existing sewer line in Barrens Road has experienced
surcharges during periods of wet weather, resulting in flooded
basements. (i.e. Mr. Looney)
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
The developers of Roanoke Hyundai Inc., were extending sewer
to their property from Deer Branch. Staff requested that this
line be extended to Barrens Road to provide relief for the
existing line.
In addition, the water line was extended from Barrens Road
to their development. Staff requested that this water line be
extended past their paved area so the pavement would not be
disturbed when the line is extended in the future.
Since these additional extensions were not a requirement of
the developer, the County would pay the additional costs when the
work was completed and accepted by the County.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The cost of these extensions is $5,239.00 for sewer and $928
for water. Monies are available for these expenditures in the
Utility Fund.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The staff recommends that the Board authorize payment for
these extensions to the developer in the amount of $6,167.00 as
requested.
1
SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED: ~,~ y
Cliffor aig,
Utility Director
Elmer C. Hodge
County Administrator
---------------------------------------
ACTION VOTE
Approved (x) Motion by: Bob L. Johnson/ No Yes Abs
Denied ( ) Harry C Nickens Garrett x
Received ( ) Johnson x
Referred McGraw x
to Nickens x
Robers x
cc: File
Cliff Craig
John Hubbard
Diane Hyatt
2
AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIER ONLTUESDAYE SEPTEMBER013TY1 881NISTRATION
CENT
RESOLUTION 91388-8.d REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF
STONEBRIDTIONISECONDARY ROAD S ST~NIA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTA
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That this matter came this day to be heard upon the
proceedings herein, and upon the application of Stonebridge
Circle from the intersection with Stonebridge Drive, Route 1007,
to the terminus at the cul-de-sac for a distance of 0.11 miles to
be accepted and made a part of the Secondary System of State
Highways under Section 33.1-229 of the Virginia State Code.
2. That it appears to the Board that drainage easements
and a fifty t50) foot right-of-way for said road has been
dedicated by virtue of a certain map known as Stonebridge Court
which map is recorded in Plat Book 9, Page 304, of the record in
the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County,
Virginia, on September 4, 1984 and that by reason of the
recordation of said map no report from a Board of Viewers, nor
consent or donation of right-of-way from the abutting property
owners is necessary. The Board hereby guarantees said
right-of-way for drainage.
3, That said road known as Stonebridge Circle and which is
shown on a certain sketch accompanying this Resolution, be, and
the same is hereby established as a public road to become a part
of the State Secondary System of Highways in Roanoke County, only
from and after notification of official acceptance of said street
by the Virginia Department of Transportation.
On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by Supervisor
Nickens and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES• Supervisors Johnson, McGraw, Nickens, Robers, Garrett
NAYS: None
A COPY TESTE:
Mary H. Allen, Deputy Clerk
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
cc:: File
Phillip Henry, Director, Engineering
Arnold Covey, Director, Development & Inspections, and
Copy for Virginia Department of Transportation
ITEM NUMBER ~ - S
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE: September 13, 1988
SUBJECT: Acceptance of Stonebridge Circle into the Virginia
Department of Transportation Secondary System.
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
Stonebridge Estates, Inc. the developer of Stonebridge
Court, request that the Board of Supervisors approve a resolution
to the Virginia Department of Transportation requesting that they
accept 0.11 miles of Stonebridge Circle.
The staff has inspected this road along with representatives
of the Virginia Department of Transportation and find the road is
acceptable.
FISCAL IMPACT:
No County funding is required.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
The staff recommends that the Board approve a resolution to
the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) requesting that
they accept Stonebridge Circle into the Secondary Road System.
SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED:
j,~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~,~
~'~'~` Hod e
Phillip T. Henry, P Elmer C. g
Director of Engineering County Administrator
~~~
Approved ( )
Denied ( )
Received ( )
Referred
to
Motion by:
ACTION
VOTE
No Yes Abs
Garrett
Johnson
McGraw
Nickens
Robers
2
/~'~ -~
AT THE REGULAR MEETINHELD ATETHEAROANOKEUCOUNTYOADMOINISTRATION
COUNTY, VIRGINIA, 1988
CENTER ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 13,
RESOLUTION REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF
STONEBRIDGE CIRCLE INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY ROAD SYSTEM
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That this matter came this day to be heard upon the
proceedings herein, and upon the application of Stonebridge
Circle from the intersection with Stonebridge Drive, Route 1007,
to the terminus at the cul-de-sac for a distance of 0.11 miles to
be accepted and made a part of the Secondary System of State
Highways under Section 33.1-229 of the Virginia State Code.
2, That it appears to the Board that drainage easements
and a fifty (50) foot right-of-way for said road has been
dedicated by virtue of a certain map known as Stonebridge Court
which map is recorded in Plat Book 9, Page 304, of the record in
the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County,
Virginia, on September 4, 1984 and that by reason of the
recordation of said map no report from a Board of Viewers, nor
consent or donation of right-of-way from the abutting property
owners is necessary. The Board hereby guarantees said
right-of-way for drainage.
4
i
3. That said road known as Stonebridge Circle and which is
shown on a certain sketch accompanying this Resolution, be, and
the same is hereby established as a public road to become a part
of the State Secondary System of Highways in Roanoke County, only
from and after notification of official acceptance of said street
by the Virginia Department of Transportation.
5
/-~ -5
Q
NORTH
J
i ~-
PROPOSED ADDITION SHOWN IN YELLOW
/ DESCRIPTION:
~ 1) Stonebridge Circle from the intersection of
~ Stonebridge Drive (Rt. 1007) to cul-de-sac.
LENGTH: (1) 0.11 Miles
~< RIGHT OF WAY: (1) 29 Feet
~~~~ ` ROADWAY WIDTH: (1)
SURFACE WIDTH: (1) 23 Homes
SERVICE: (1)
IMPROVEMENT NECESSARY:
RECOMMENDATION:
,~
17
'~
,° 19
~~ b 1
i ~ 20 ~
3 2 , .. ~..
COMMUNITY SERVICES ACCEPTANCE OF STONEBRIDGE CIRCLE INTO
& DEVELOPMENT VDOT SECONDARY ROAD SYSTEM
3
91388-8.e
ITEM NUMBER ~~
AT A REGULAR MEETDNGATOTHEHROANOKE COUNTYEADMINISTRATIONNOENTER
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HEL
MEETING DATE: September 13, 1988
SUBJECT: Acceptance of water and sewer facilities serving
Winterberry Pointe
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
The Developers of Winterberry Point~hea watequeanddsewerRlines
County accept the Deed conveying
serving the subdivision along with all necessary easements.
The water and sewer lines are installed, as showp•oC.de eeri °ptled
plans prepared by Buford T. Lumsden & Associates,
Winterberry Pointe, eaEndineering DepartmentlatTherwateroand
which are on file in th g
sewer line construction meets the specifications and the plans
approved by the County.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The values of the water and sewer construction are $45,569
and $68,608 respectively.
RECOMMENDATION:
The staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors acweph all
water and sewer facilities serving the subdivisionAdmingstrato.r to
necessary easements, and authorize the County
execute a Deed for the transfer of these facilities.
SUBMITTED BY:
//_~
Phillip T. Henry, P.E.
Director of Engineeri g
APPROVED:
Elmer_ C. Hodge
County Administrator
/~ _
--------------------------------
ACTION
Approved (X) Motion by: Bob L. Johnson/Harry
Denied ( ) C. Nickens Garrett
Received ( ) Johnson
Referred McGraw
Nickens
To
Robers
cc: File
Phil Henry
Paul Mahoney
Diane Hyatt
Cliff Craig
John Hubbard
VOTE
No Yes Abs
x
X
x
x
2
~~ (o
"'L'~l
NORTH
. ~
I
~ 3T
~ 3t
` • M
•~
i ~
i
41 !
I
~~~~ '
r .~ ~~ ~~
1k
N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
O Lob Ae ~
I'
T ~
1
• ~ t KAC ~ ~7~ ~ 11 ~_ _ w.
. .
M
~3=?~
1
I~ ~
h~ ~ r
a
~•
n
.~.
n ~~ s
Acceptance of water and sewex•
Winterberry Pointe
COMMUNITY SERVICES
Sc DEVELOPMENT 3
ACTION N0.
91388-8.f
ITEM NUMBER '' l'
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE: September 13, 1988
AGENDA ITEM: Acknowledgment from Va. Department of
Transportation of Acceptances of Roads into
Secondary System
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
Acknowledgment has been received from the Virginia Department of
Transportation that 0.30 miles of Route 1095 (Hill Drive) has
been accepted into the Secondary System effective August 24,
1988.
Mary H. Allen Elmer C. Hodge
Deputy Clerk County Administrator
-------------
--------------------ACTION VOTE
Motion b Bob L Johnson/Harry C. Yes No Abs
Approved (x) y' Garrett ~_
Denied ( ) icken
Received ( ) Johnson ~X._
McGraw x
Referred Nickens x
To• Robers x
cc: File
Phil Henry
RAY D. PETHTEL
COMMISSIONER
DEPARTMDENA~ BROADSTRORTATION
RICHMOND, 23219
August 24, 1988
Secondary System
Addition
Roanoke County
Board of Supervisors
County of Roanoke
p, 0. Box 29800
Roanoke, VA 24018
MEMBERS OF THE BOARD:
As requested in your resolution dated February 23,
following addition tect ve Augusaa24,S1988m of Roanoke
hereby approved, eff
ADDITION
PINE HILL
OSCAR K. MABRY
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
1988, the
County is
LENGTH
Route 1095 (Hill Drive) - From Route 636 0,30 Mi.
to a South cul-de-sac.
Sincerely,
i
Oscar K. Mabry
Deputy Commissioner
TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY
ACTION # 91388-8.a
ITEM NUMBER f 1'- V
AT A REGULARAMHELDNATOTHEHROANOKE OCOUNTYEADMIONISTRATIONNOCENTER
COUNTY, VIRGINI
MEETING DATE: September 13, 1988
AGENDA ITEM: Acceptance of an assignment of a sanitary sewer
easement being donated by Dominion Builders
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
BACKGROUND:
Dominion Builders, a Virginia General Partnership, has
agreed to assign all of its right, title, and interest in an ease-
ment for the location and construction of a ten (10) foot wide
sanitary sewer line.
This easement is located in the Windsor Hills Mag e~~riof
District in the Farmingdale Subdivision across the prop y
Heritage Builders Ltd.
Pursuant to Ordinance
1987, the Board authorized
donations or dedications
matters.
ALTERNATIVES AND IMPACTS:
None.
No. 1027874 adopted on October 27,
the County Administrator to accept
of non-controversial real estate
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommendedon tundertthe ConsentaAgenday consider this
acceptance by resolu
Respectfully submitted,
~~~~~.
Paul M. Mahoney
County Attorney
~~
~ 8
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Approved (X)
Denied ( )
Received ( )
Referred
To
ACTION
Motion by: Bob L. Johnson/
Harry C. Nic ens
VOTE
No Yes Abs
Garrett x
Johnson x
McGraw x
Nickens x
Robers x
cc: File
Paul Mahoney
Phil Henry
Cliff Craig
ACTION #
ITEM NUMBER ~~
AT A REGULAR MEETD AT THEHROANORE COUNTYEADMINISTRATION CENTER
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HEL
MEETING DATE: September 13, 1988
AGENDA ITEM: Information Report on removal action at Dixie
Caverns Landf i 11
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
An oral report will be presented to the Board of Supervisors
and the general public by the Utility Director, Mr. Clifford
Craig, regarding the removal action at the Dixie Caverns
Landf i 11.
SUBMITTED BY
APPROVED
~ C l~
C
Cliffo aig, Elmer C. Hodge
Utility Director County Administrator
----
------------------------
AC TION VOTE
No Yes Abs
Approved ( ) Motion by: Garrett
Denied ( > Johnson
Received ( ) McGraw
Ref erred Nickens
to Robers
~--~
COUN'T'Y OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
CAPITAL FUND - UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE
Beginning Balance at July 1, 1988
1,637
$
Additional Amount from 1988- 89 Budget 50,000
Balance as of September 13, 1988
Submitted by
Diane D. Hyatt
Director of Finance
51 637
L "'
COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
T,.)NAPPROPRIATED BALANCE - C~ FUND
1,380,346
Unaudited Amount at July 1, 1988 $
(400,000)
August 9, 1988 Dixie Caverns Landfill_Cleanup
1988 S 980 346
Balance as of September 13,
The recorrmlended level for fund balance for 1988-89 is $1,748,124, which
is 3 percent of the total General Fund budget.
Submitted by
~,~~~~'.
Diane D. Hyatt
Director of Finance
'_ 7T
CDUN1'Y OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
RESERVE FOR BOARD CONI.'INGE~~ICY
Original Budget at July 1, 1988 $50,000
June 28 1988 Funding of Length of Service Benefit
for Volunteer Fire, Rescue, and (9,000)
Auxiliary Sheriff's Deputies
Tweed's Access Road (39,405)
July 26, 1988
$ 1 595
Balance as of September 13, 1988
Submitted by
Diane D. Hyatt
Director of Finance
ITEM NUMBER -'
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKEONCTUESDAYDMINISTRATION CENTER
IN ROANOKE, VA.,
MEETING DATE: September 13, 1988
SUBJECT: Accounts Paid - July 1988
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
Payments to Vendors: $3,586,930.32
Payroll: 07/08/88 $378,331.31 758,110.64
07/22/88 380,778.33 $ 4.346.040.96
A detailed listing of the payments is on file with the Clerk
to the Board of Supervisors.
SUBMITTED BY:
Diane D. Hyatt
Director of Finance
APPROVED:
~~~~
Elmer C. Hodge
County Administrator
-----------------------
-------------- VOTE
ACTION Nn Yes Abs
Approved ( ) Motion by:
Denied ( )
Received ( )
Referred
To
Garrett
Johnson
McGraw
Nickens
Robers
ITEM NUMBER
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
IN RO.ANOKE, VA., ON TUESDAY,
MEETING DATE: September 13, 1988
SUBJECT: Accounts Paid - August 1988
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
Payments to Vendors:
Payroll: 08/05/88 $382,105.63
08/19/88 370,580.60
$3,491,317.00
752,686.23
$4,244,003.23
A detailed listing of the payments is on file with the Clerk
to the Board of Supervisors.
SUBMITTED BY:
.rrirti~
Diane D. Hyatt
Director of Finance
APPROVED:
~. ~~ Y~
Elmer C. Hodge
County Administrator
------------------------------------------------------------------
ACTION VOTE
Approved ( ) Motion b No Yes Abs
Denied ( )
Received ( )
Referred
To
Y•
Garrett
Johnson
McGraw
Nickens
Robers
ACTION #
ITEM NUMBER J 1~ ` <
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER
MEETING DATE: September 13, 1988
AGENDA ITEM: Work Session: Street and Off-Street Parking
Design Standards and Specifications
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
In August 1986, the Board of Supervisors assigned the Depart-
ment of Development with the task to develop a manual to assist
the public, and especially the development community, in esta-
blishing the regulations and policies which apply with land
development in Roanoke County.
With this goal in mind, a committee composed of area engi-
neers, surveyors, members of the Roanoke Valley Home Builders,
and county staff was assembled to develop the content of the
manual and the design standards.
It was the consensus of the committee to address the follow-
ing major components: water, sewer, street and off-street
parking, and drainage. As of this date, the only component of
the manual which has been completed and adopted is the water
design standards.
The second component of the manual is entitled "Street and
Off-Street Parking Design Standards and Specifications." A work
session is scheduled for 4:00 p.m. with County staff, representa-
tives of the Roanoke Valley Home Builders Association, and Board
of Supervisors to review the proposed standards and specifica-
tions.
~_,
At this work session, the Board will receive information on:
A. The need for improved street standards;
B. Outline of key issues of Design Standards;
C. Discussion of County position versus Roanoke Valley
Home Builders Association;
D. Resolution by Board of Supervisors on key topics;
E. Implementation of standards;
F. Schedule for adoption.
SUBM~''$TED BY:
0. Arnold Coved, 'Direc or
Development and Inspec ions
APPROVED:
/.
~~-h%
Elmer C. Hodge
County Administrator
ACTION VOTE
Approved ( ) Motion by: No Yes Abs
Denied ( ) _ Garrett .____
Received ( ) Johnson
Referred MdGraw
to Nickens
Robers
2
N -1
p,. The Need for Standards
The Design and Construction
developing Street and Off-Street Par
address those areas which the State
streets and pipestem lots, and those
further regulated such as pavement
street connections, off-street parking,
Standards Committee in
king Standards," tried to
has not, such as private
areas which needed to be
design, curb and gutter,
and loading requirements.
B. Key Issues of Design and Construction Standards
1. Requiring plant mix (blacktop) streets versus
surfaced-treatment (tar and gravel).
2. Curb and gutter in the Urban Service Boundary Area as
defined by the Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan and
when the lot dimension is less than 100' width and less
than 15,000 square feet in size.
3. Entrance connections when relating to subdivision
(residential/commercial) development.
4. Private Street Standards - The intent was to address
streets within townhouse, apartment, mobile home parks
and condominium developments.
5. Off-street parking and loading requirements.
6. Waiver procedures for subdivision and site plans.
C. COUNTY POSITION VERSUS ROANOKE VALLEY HOME BUILDERS'
POSITION
After five (5) drafts and several meetings with the
executive members of the Roanoke Valley Home Builders, the issues
below are outstanding:
1. Curb and Gutter
Home Builders:
a) Require curb and gutter only where it currently
exists.
b) No Virginia county west of Richmond requires it.
c) Compound problem regarding affordable housing.
d) Adds additional development cost.
3
/~/ - /
County:
a) Better stormwater management.
b) Reduces pavement failure.
c) Improves the appearance of the neighborhood.
d) Provides driveway and traffic control.
2. Plant Mix Pavement
Home Builders:
a) Surpasses requirements of other Virginia counties.
b) Elevates development cost.
c) Creates problems in residential development
because of ongoing home construction and repair
work.
d) Surpasses Virginia Department of Transportation
standards.
County:
a) Provides a longer-wearing surface.
b) LowVDOTamaintenanceofundsrthat a~enallocatedlto
to
Roanoke County).
c) Preferred pavement type of the County citizens.
d) According to VDOT, bitum~oximatelcreiehtuyears
(plant mix) will last app y g rime and
before requiring maintenance, whereas, p
double seal streets last approximately five years
if there is no construction traffic and this
figure drops to three years if there is
construction traffic.
3. Private Street Standards
Home Builders:
a) Plant mix requirements.
b ) Curb and g utter .
c) Few geometric design standards exceed VDOT
standards.
4
/~' - /
Count ~:
a) Majority of the developed high density projects
have plant mix streets.
b) Curb and g utter as previously stated is to improve
stormwater management and its is more of a need in
higher density developments.
c) The minimum private road standards are direct
results of safety problems as:
(1) Narrow streets which hampered fire equipment
from reaching a fire.
(2) Internal streets having poor sight distance.
(3) Steep street grades.
E. Implementation of Standards
County staff recommends that effective immediately upon
adoption of the standards that all subdivision and site plans
which have not been received for review by the Department of
Development and Inspections must comply and those plans which are
in the review process must receive approval within 60 days from
the effective date of these standards.
F. Schedule for Adoption
1. Final draft ready by September 23, 1988.
2. Prepare petitions to amend the Subdivision and Zoning
scheduled public hearing before the Planning Commission
on October 4, 1988.
3. Final Order to amendments and resolution for final
adoption of standards on October 25, 1988.
5
ACTION #
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 13, 1988
AGENDA ITEM:
1989 Roanoke County Legislative Package
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:
~0 r
BACKGROUND:
At your meeting of August 23, 1988, the Board of Supervisors
scheduled a work session on the proposed 1989 Roanoke County leg-
islative package for September 13, 1988. Beginning in early
August, the members of the Board of Supervisors, the County
School Board, the Constitutional Officers, and key department
heads were requested to submit to the County Attorney suggestions
for legislative initiatives for the 1989 session of the Virginia
General Assembly.
The attached document is a compilation of these various leg-
islative requests. The work session scheduled for September 13,
1988, will provide an opportunity for discussion among the Board
of Supervisors, County School Board, Constitutional Officers, and
department heads concerning these legislative initiatives.
A breakfast meeting has been scheduled for Thursday, Octo-
ber 6, 1988, from 7:30 a.m. to 9:30 a.m. at Sunnybrook Inn to
provide an opportunity for the Board of Supervisors, County
School Board, and Constitutional Officers to discuss these legis-
lative initiatives with the members of the Roanoke Valley legisla-
tive delegation.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Board review these legislative
initiatives, and after discussion with County School Board, Con-
stitutional Officers, and key department heads and with the mem-
bers of the Roanoke Valley legislative delegation, adopt a legis-
lative program for the 1989 session of the Virginia General
Assembly.
r
~-z
Respectfully submitted,
Paul M. Mahoney
County Attorney
-------------------- ---------------------------------
ACTION VOTE
Approved ( ) Motion by: No Yes Abs
Denied ( )
Received ( )
Referred
To
Garrett
Johnson
McGraw
Nickens
Robers
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
r ~ a~
TOP PRIORITY ISSUE ........................................................1
Equal Taxing Authority ..................................................1
OTHER PRIORITY ISSUES .....................................................2
Solid Waste Management ..................................................2
One-Half Cent Local Option Sales Tax ....................................3
LEGISLATIVE REQUESTS .........
.............................................4
Education .........
......................................................4
Fire and Emergency Services ...
........,
.................................7
Law Enforcement ... .....
.................................................8
Social Services ... ....
..................................................9
Local Government Co operation ....
.......................................10
Youth Haven II .... ...
..................................................11
Other ...........
.. .....................................................12
f ':l
Abp ~ it ~ d 3 'rte ./ W. ~. fi ~ ~ ~ »i~v ~ ^ „l~ ~ PCdat'
•X ~ ~ 1388
~Y~
TOP PRIORITY ISSUE
Equal Taxing Authority
(Tax on Prepared. Food and Beverages)
The 1988 Virginia General Assembly adopted Section 58.1-3833 which
authorized any county "to levy a tax on food or beverages sold for human
consumption and consumed on such premises not to exceed four percent of the
amount charged for such food and beverages."
Cities are empowered by their charters to levy a meal's preparation
(restaurant) tax, and these charter provisions do not limit the levy of
such a tax to only meals consumed on premises. The Joint Legislative Audit
and Review Commission recommended in House Document No. 15 of the 1984 Gen-
eral Assembly that the taxing authority of counties and cities be equalized.
Roanoke County strongly supports equal taxing authority as a matter of equi-
ty as well as a means of reducing local fiscal stress.
It is requested that the General Assembly amend Section 58.1-3833 to
delete the limitation upon a county's authorization to levy a tax on food
and beverages. The elimination of this restrictive language limiting the
imposition of such a tax to food and beverages "consumed on such premises"
would not only be fair and equitable, but also reduce administrative confu-
sion.
1
- ~,.
OTHER PRIORITY ISSUES
Solid Waste Management
One of the more critical issues facing local governments in the Common-
wealth of Virginia is the disposal of solid waste. A comprehensive legisla-
tive approach outlining the duties and responsibilities of the state and
local governments to address solid waste management issues is necessary.
The survey of litter data and the placement of litter receptacles as autho-
rized by Article III, of Title 10.1 (Section 10.1-1414, et se .) barely
addresses the problem. A statewide initiative mandating recycling of waste
material and the process of separating waste material from the waste stream
and processing it for reuse is critical. Enabling legislation authorizing
localities to curb the flow of solid waste is necessary.
A comprehensive State-wide series of legislative initiatives to
address solid waste management issues is necessary. These initiatives
would include amendments to the Virginia Public Procurement Act (Chapter 7
of Title 11 of the Code of Virginia) authorizing a preference for recycled
goods, State funding incentives for regional cooperative agreements for
active recycling programs, statutory prohibition against certain plastic or
styrofoam disposal containers, and deposits for cans and bottles. This
request would require the repeal of Section 10.1-1425, which supersedes and
preempts any local ordinance which attempts to regulate the size and type
of any container or package containing food or beverage or which requires a
deposit on a disposal container or package.
2
iv-- z
One-Half Cent Local Option Sales Tax
Roanoke County supports the adoption of enabling legislation authoriz-
ing local governments to impose a one-half cent sales tax to be imposed by
local option. The failure of the state to fully fund mandated programs in
the areas of education, social services, and health have placed tremendous
fiscal strains upon local government budgets. Reduced federal funding as a
result of the elimination of revenue sharing and the limitations of the
Graham-Rudman-Hollings Act places additional stress upon the fiscal re-
sources of local governments. A local option increase in the sales tax
would allow local governments in the Commonwealth of Virginia to better
respond to the needs for increased services. The County urges the General
Assembly to recognize its responsibility in this area and to either direct-
ly provide State funding for these mandated programs or to adopt permissive
legislation allowing local governments to achieve new sources of local reve-
nue.
In the Roanoke Valley new sources of local revenue could be utilized
for education, flood control, storm water runoff and drainage, or economic
development.
3
v --~
LEGISLATIVE REQUESTS
Education
Roanoke County requests the General Assembly to address the following
issues as they relate to public education:
1. That the State fund kindergarten on a full-day basis. The State
currently funds kindergarten on a one-half day basis for all
school divisions.
2. That the State review the education funding formula, specifically
in the following areas.
a. Vocational Education - Roanoke County lost $37,000 in fiscal
1988-89 compared to 1987-88. For example vocational teachers
who coordinate such programs as marketing education and coop-
erative office education for three periods are calculated as
one teaching period for state reimbursement.
b. Transportation - Roanoke County lost $190,919 compared to
the previous year. "Indexing" of transportation funding re-
sulted in reducing the amount paid by the State by one-half,
from $33 million to $16 million. In both Vocational Educa-
tion and Transportation, the new funding formula has folded
these areas of concern into the basic State aid provisions
instead of categorically funding these programs as was done
under the old formula.
c. Middle School - State funding formulas should recognize the
middle school curriculum and staffing needs. Standards of
4
/ y r
Quality are requiring the middle school curriculum to be im-
plemented over the next three years; yet, there is no recogni-
tion of the increased cost for funding, i.e. middle school
grades 6 and 7 should be funded at 25 to 1 not 35 to 1 as is
presently being done.
3, Capital Outlay and Debt Service - The State funding formula for
education should include capital costs and debt service in its
provisions. This would include not only new construction but
also debt service on old construction. This would enable locali-
ties to address the serious fiscal stress for renovation of older
facilities, including asbestos removal. State lottery proceed
could be allocated for this program.
4. Roanoke County requests the General Assembly to fully fund fringe
benefits (VSRS, social security, etc.) for teachers and other
school personnel. The State has reduced its portion of payment
for fringe benefits to 95%. It is scheduled to reduce its share
to 85% next year and to reduce this amount at a rate of 10% per
annum until the State will only pay 55% of fringe benefit costs.
Each 10% reduction in State reimbursement will cost Roanoke
County approximately $100,000. Consideration should also be
given to removing the "1981 cap" on State funding of fringe bene-
fits for noninstructional personnel.
5. Roanoke County requests the General Assembly that if it mandates
educational programs that it provide 100% of the funding for such
programs. Specifically, Roanoke County opposes on the merits the
educational program for four year olds. If the General Assembly
mandates such preschool program then Roanoke County requests the
5
/1~ -~~
General Assembly to fully fund this mandate including the capital
costs required for constructi.orl or renovation of new facilities.
6. Roanoke County requests continued State funding assistance for
the Governor's School. The Governor's School is an innovative,
educational program utilized by all of the local governments in
or adjacent to the Roanoke Valley. It provides an enhanced educa-
tional environment for selected high school students in mathema-
tics and the sciences. Grant funding for this program is sched-
uled to expire in the current fiscal year.
7. Roanoke County requests the General Assembly to continue State
funding for the Regional Special Education Board. This Board
serves the school divisions of Roanoke, Botetourt, Craig, Frank-
lin and the cities of Roanoke and Salem and is a regional coopera-
tive effort to address the special education needs of our child-
ren.
8. Roanoke County requests the General Assembly to repeal Section
22.1-79.1, which requires each local school board to set its
school calendar so that the first day students are required to
attend school shall be after Labor Day. This provision was first
adopted in 1986, and in 1988 the General Assembly repealed the
limitation that would require this section to expire on July 1,
1988. Colleges and universities have gone to earlier openings
(e.g. VPI/SU and the community colleges opened August 20 and 25,
1988.)
6
V -
Fire and Emergency Services
Roanoke County requests the repeal of the sunset provision of the Fire
Program Funds legislation adopted by the 1985 General Assembly (Chapter
545). This provision expires on July 1, 1990.
Section 38.2-402 establishes a fire programs fund. This fund is main-
tained by an assessment upon all licensed insurance companies doing busi-
ness in the Commonwealth of Virginia in the amount of 8/lOths of one per-
cent of total direct gross premium income. Seventy-five percent of the
total amount collected is allocated to 'localities for the improvement of
volunteer and salaried fire services. These funds are used solely for the
purposes of fire service training, constructing, improving, and expanding
regional fire service training facilities, purchasing fire fighting equip-
ment or purchasing protective clothing and protective equipment for fire
fighting personnel.
This legislation has provided funds for the construction of Roanoke
County's Fire and Rescue Training Center. Removal of this sunset clause
provision will enable Roanoke County to complete total construction of this
training schedule.
7
~ / i'"
. ! tr ~.
Law Enforcement
1, Amend the Constitution (Article VIII, Section 8) to provide that
the proceeds from drug seizures made under State offenses are not set apart
entirely to the State Literary Fund, but are allowed to these law enforce-
ment activities.
2. Amend Section 14.1-70 to revise the funding ratio for law enforce-
ment deputies from 1 per 2,000 to 1 per 1,500 or even possibly 1 per 1,000.
3, Move the State pay level for Deputy Sheriffs from Grade 7 to Grade
9 to make the jobs pay comparably with State Police personnel.
4. Amend Section 15.1-90.3 (Acts of Assembly 1988, Chapter 626) to
provide that Sheriff's personnel may wear taupe colored shirts as an option
to the present requirement for dark brown or white.
5, Amend Section 15.1-90.3 to allow Sheriffs to have two-toned patrol
vehicles - taupe over dark brown as an option to the requirement for solid
dark brown.
6, Amend Section 14.1-105 to provide for an increase in the service
fees for civil papers, the present fee structure could be increased by 100%
without putting a strain on any of the litigants.
8
v "" ~-'"
Social Services
1. Roanoke County requests the General Assembly to fully fund the
administration costs for social services, and to maintain the reimbursement
ratio at the 80/20 rate.
2. Roanoke County requests the General Assembly to provide funds for
the staff and related administrative costs for state-mandated new programs
and policies, for example:
a. Child Protective Services Risk Assessment Policy
Effective July 1, 1988
b. Medicaid "Baby Care"
Effective July 1, 1988
c. Family focused services
d. Increase in grant funding for day care for ADC mothers
who are working or who are being trained. For example in the
current fiscal year Roanoke County received $40,000 for this
mandated program however it requires $75,000 additional funds
to complete the current fiscal year at current caseloads.
The County pays 10% of this cost and the State pays 90%. If
the State fails to provide its portion of this cost, the
County will be required to fund 100% of the amount needed.
9
/"~/ .- 2
Local Government Cooperation
Roanoke County supports the conclusions and recommendations of the
Virginia Association of Counties and Virginia Municipal League Committee on
annexation and also the recommendations of the Grayson Commission. Roanoke
County supports these legislative initiatives to end the expensive and time
-consuming divisiveness fostered by the structures of local government in
the Commonwealth of Virginia.
10
~-.° Z
Youth Haven II
Roanoke County requests the General Assembly to direct the Department
of Correction to reimburse the County for building construction costs in
the amount of $72,979.00. These expenditures were approved by the Depart-
ment of Corrections, and construction completed and documentation submitted
in the Spring of 1987, yet the County is still awaiting reimbursement.
Roanoke County requests the General Assembly to authorize an increase
in the County's block grant funding from $212,000.00 to $226,000.00 per
annum for the costs of operating Youth Haven II.
Roanoke County requests the General Assembly to direct the reinstate-
ment of Weighted Child Care Days funds. These funds are based upon the
utilization rate of a program and are in addition to block grant funding.
This year these funds were eliminated by the Governor's Office on Budget
and Planning. This loss of funding will result in a 20-25% increase in
local costs for the operation of group homes.
11
~°"`
Other
1, Roanoke County requests the General Assembly to amend Chapter 7
of Title 42.1 to provide State financ:i..al incentives and assistance to estab-
lish regional records retention centers. A regional records retention cen-
ter would house the permanent public records of any locality in that region.
Roanoke City Circuit Court is already renting off-site space to retain pub-
lic records. Roanoke County will soon run out of such space and will be
faced with the prospect of renting off-site space for these records. Local-
ities are required to maintain and safeguard the ever-growing mountain of
permanent, public records. A State-wide program to provide funding incen-
tives for regional records retention centers would address this problem as
well as promoting inter-governmental local cooperation.
2. Boards of Zoning Appeals.--Roanoke County requests the General
Assembly to amend Section 15.1-494 to authorize the appointment of members
of local boards of zoning appeals by the local governing body instead of
appointment by the circuit court.
3, Citations for Failure to Display a County License.--Roanoke
County requests the General Assembly to authorize the commissioner of the
revenue or his deputy to issue a summons or citation (similar to the sum-
mons authorized by Section 46.1-179.01 for violation of local parking ordin-
ances) for a violation of a local license ordinance authorized by Section
46.1-65.
12
ti'.~' .
'7 4 Y
May 10, 1988
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
Roanoke County Administration Center
3738 Brambleton Avenue, SW
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
May 10, 1988
Co
The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
ty, Virginia, met this day at the Roanoke County
nistration Center, this being the first Tuesday, and the
fist regularly scheduled meeting of the month of May, 1988.
i
I
IN RE: CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Garrett called the meeting to order at 3:05
p. The roll call was taken. y
ME ERS PRESENT: Chairman Lee Garrett, Vice Chairman Richard
Robers, Supervisors Bob L. Johnson, Steven
A. McGraw, Harry C. Nickens
RS ABSENT: Supervisor McGraw (arrived at 3:07 p.m•)
ST
PRESENT• Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; John
M. Chambliss, Assistant County
Administrator for Human Services; John R.
Hubbard, Assistant County Administrator for
Community Services and DevelopmeHt%Al1en,M
Mahoney, County Attorney, Mary
Deputy Clerk
742,
~' ~~ May 10, 1988
:. ~.
IN RE: OPENING CEREMONIES
The invocation was given by the Reverend Sam Crews,
Coopers Cove Baptist Church. The Pledge of Allegiance was
recited by all present.
IN RE: PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS
A staff member of U. S. Senator Paul Trible's offic ,
was present to donate to the County the U. S. Flag that was f wn
over the U. S. Capital on March 30, 1988, Roanoke County's 15 h
birthday. Receiving the flag was County Treasurer Alfred
Anderson and Board Chairman Lee Garrett.
IN RE: NEW BUSINESS
r
Project: Economic Development Director Timothy Gubala advise
that they have received the first set of road plans for the
valleypointe project. Lingerfelt Development has retained Ha s,
Seay, Mattern and Mattern as the engineering firm to formulat
the plans. The County will then go out for public bid for th
road construction. The Letter of Understanding clarifies the
' r
,l 4 3
- ----------- -11
_~~
d' cussions between the County and Lingerfelt. There is also a
s edule of events for construction.
Supervisor Johnson asked why the cost had gone up from
$2 million to $2.5 million. He asked why there have been changes
in the agreement with Lingerfelt. Mr. Hodge responded that the
co nty's portion is still $2 million for Phase I and Phase II.
Mr. Hodge advised that the agreement needs to be
am nded by the deletion of a paragraph.
Supervisor Johnson moved to approve the Letter of
Un erstanding after the elimination of paragraph 5. The motion
wa seconded by Supervisor Nickens and carried by the following
re orded vote:
AY S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, Nickens Garrett
NA S: None
AB~TAIN: Supervisor McGraw
II 2. Contribution to VACO for Rate Necrotiations with
A alachian Power Com an : Director of Finance Diane Hyatt
re orted that a VML/VACO Steering Committee was formed to
ne otiate rate reductions for their service. The negotiations
we e successful and Roanoke County's estimated savings are
$2 7,000 during this fiscal year and next fiscal year.
Ap roximately 750 of the savings is for school properties. VACO
an VML have requested a contribution of $7,000 toward the
ex enses of these negotiations. Staff recommends that the County
May 10, 1988
,. ~~„,_
:.r s••.
744'
-May--1.-0 . 1. -9-88---
---~
contribute to this expense in proportionate amount between the
County and the Schools.
Supervisor Nickens moved to approve the staff
recommendation. The motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw
end
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens Garrett
NAYS: None
3. Authorization to accept a grant from the Va
of Emergency Services for Regional Hazardous Ma'
response: Larry Logan, Fire and Rescue Department, reported t
Roanoke County has an opportunity to participate in a regiona]
response program with other localities in the Roanoke Valley.
The agreement funds all level 3 responses. Funding would be ;
minimum of $90,000 over the next three years and would include
annual physicals, all expenses incurred by Roanoke County for
response, technical training, and workman's compensation for
level 3 responses. They will also repair or replace any damag
as a result of responses. Supervisor Johnson moved to accept
grant. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Robers and carri~
s i
by the following recorded vote: {'
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens Garrett
NAYS: None
t
the
~he
4. Approval to proceed with public hearinQS and
ordinance amending premium refuse collection service- Directo
~.~:4.
'7 4 5
- - _ ___ -------__ -MaY 1~,- 19.88--------
o General Services Gardner Smith explained there is now an
o finance concerning premium service that allows for household
r use only. There are other bags left by residents not covered
b the ordinance. The change to the ordinance will allow pickup
o all bags to the rear or side of the house and increase the fee
t cover the additional bags. There are 350 residences
p sently using premium service out of 28,000.
Supervisor McGraw moved to amend the ordinance. The
mo ion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw and carried by the
fo lowing recorded vote:
AY S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens Garrett
N S: None
5. Approval of cooperative ventures proposed by the
Ro noke Valle Coo eration Committee: Supervisor McGraw
an ounced they had chosen a facilitator for the committee who
wi 1 also act as chairman. He and Supervisor Robers outlined the
pr jects that the committee had recommended for further study.
Th y include building inspections; asbestos control and removal,
sc ool buses, central purchasing, schools, building maintenance,
ec nomic development efforts, insurance coverage, and library
se vices
Supervisor Garrett moved that the Board members on the
co mittee be authorized to proceed with discussion on these
~.~.~~
~4s
-- .---Ma-v-1-4, -~9ss
projects. The motion was se onded by Supervisor Nickens and
carried by the following rec rded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnso , Robers, McGraw, Nickens Garrett
NAYS: None
n Co proceed w
for Roanoke County• Personn 1 Analyst Kathy Claytor reported
that the Department of Human Services has completed a study on a
wellness program. They are ecommending a program sponsored b
the American Heart Associati n entitled "Heart at Work". The
program consists of five are s - High Blood Pressure, Smoking
Cessation, Nutrition, Exerci e and Signals and Actions to prey nt
heart disease. The first st p will be a Health Risk Appraisal
through the County Health De artment which will include
cholesterol and blood pressu e testing. The first year cost f r
the program is $3400.
In response to a qu stion from Supervisor Johnson, M
Claytor advised that the Well ess Program will be voluntary.
Supervisor Johnson felt the p ogram should be mandatory and ho
it could be expanded in the f ture. Ms. Claytor stated that t
Health Risk Appraisal would s ow where the program needs to
expand.
Supervisor Nickens owed to approve the Wellness
Program. The motion was seco ded by Supervisor Johnson and
r .
ed
carried by the following reco~ded vote:
'7 4 ~
- ___ _ Ma _10,-~ 9:8 8_- - --- - - ------ ---------
-- -- ---
AY~~S: Supervisors Johnso~, Robers, McGraw, Nickens Garrett
S: None
P
wo
de
woi
pe:
19 8-89: Director of Human ]
t Classification Plan this
ap roximately 2-1/2o between
Pa for Performance merit sy~
Th average increase will rep
Th Classification Plan also
co petitive pay structure wi
se tor. The changes in the
su vey is also included. St
Cl ssification Plan.
esources Keith Cook announced that
year consists of 15 steps of
each step. This is to allow for the
tem if this program is approved.
ain at 50 or a two-step increase.
includes a 5o increase to maintain a
h other localities and the private
rades as a result of the market
ff recommends approval of the
Mr. Cook explained how the Pay for Performance Plan
ld work. There are five ercent increases funded in the
artmental budgets. Incre ses would average 5~, but the plan
ld allow for a 0, 2-1/2, , 7-1/2 or 10~ increase, based on
~formance.
Supervisor Johnson stated he did not like the
ad itional steps being adde which could mean it would take
to ger to reach the top of s ale.
Supervisor Nickens moved to approve the Classification
Pl n. The motion was secon ed by Supervisor McGraw and carried
by~lthe following recorded vdte:
X48
AYES: Supervisors Robers, McGraw, Nickens Garrett
NAYS: Supervisor Johnson
IN RE: WORK SESSION
Chairman Garrett advised .there would be a work sessi~n
on May 24 at 3:00 p.m. with the Corps of Engineers on the Roan~ke
River Tributaries.
IN RE: FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES
1 Ordinance amending and readopting Section 12-8,
and Traffic of the Roanoke County Code: County Attorney Paul
Mahoney reported that several months ago a substitute General
District Court judge had a problem with the County Code becau
it did not incorporate the most recent amendments of the Gener 1
Assembly. An ordinance has been drafted that addresses the
concerns of the judiciary. The second reading is scheduled fc
May 24th with an effective date of May 25, 1988. No one was
present to speak on the proposed ordinance.
Supervisor Nickens moved first reading of the ordina
The motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw and carried by th
Rce .
following recorded vote:
:.~
749
May 10,__J._9.8.
A S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens Garrett
N S: None
2 Ordinance amending Chapter 9, "Fire Prevention and
p tection", of the Roanoke County Code by regealinc~ Section 9-2
~~
~.
au horize the enforcement of same: Mr. Mahoney advised that the
st to has incorporated a new fire prevention code which would be
en orced by the State Fire Marshal. However, the state law
au horizes local enforcement of the code. Staff recommendation
is that local enforcement be authorized. This ordinance would
in orporate the state code, and adding certain sections including
a ermit fee. There will be a public hearing on the permit fee
on May 24 as well as the second reading of the ordinance.
Fire Marshal Ken Sharp was present to answer any
qu stions.
Supervisor Nickens moved to approve first reading. The
mo ion was seconded by Supervisor Robers and carried by the
fo lowing recorded vote:
AY S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens Garrett
NA S: None
,~ y..r
'750
the lease of approximately five (5) acres in the Hollins/Old
for recreational purposes: Mr. Mahoney reminded the Board tha
the ordinance was originally adopted several months ago. The
terms were originally negotiated for twenty-five years.
Ingersoll-Rand has requested that the term of the lease be
reduced to a three-year renewable lease which would allow for
expansion of their plant in the next 25 years. This ordinance
would amend the original ordinance, changing the terms of the
lease. No one was present to speak to the ordinance.
Supervisor McGraw asked if there was an understands
within the community that this tract would always be used for
recreational purposes. Supervisor Johnson responded that he d~d
not anticipate construction on this acreage, and that the requ~st
came from corporate headquarters. There would still be land
available for recreational purposes other than this land.
Supervisor Johnson moved to approve first reading.
motion- was seconded by Supervisor Robers and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens Garrett
NAYS: None
IN RE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
..,...
751
May. _10,_988
1. Ordinance amending and reenacting ChaQter 21 of the
n
h
fo
AY:
NA'
of article exem tions and an effective date: Mr. Mahoney
re orted this ordinance will become effective July 1, 1988.
St ff is requesting an appropriation of $11,500 from the Board
Co tingency Fund for expenses for forms and computer work to gear
up the meals tax ordinance. No one was present to speak to this
or-ttinance .
Supervisor Nickens moved to approve the ordinance. The
ion was seconded by Supervisor Robers and carried by the
lowing recorded vote:
S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens Garrett
~S : None
ORDINANCE 51088-8 AMENDING AND
REENACTING CHAPTER 21 OF THE ROANOKE
COUNTY CODE, TAXATION, BY THE ADDITION
OF A NEW ARTICLE VIII, TAX ON PREPARED
FOOD AND BEVERAGES; SUCH NEW ARTICLE
'~ 5 2
8-_
VIII IMPOSING A TAX ON CERTAIN FOOD AND
BEVERAGES SOLD IN THE COUNTY OF
ROANOKE, PURSUANT TO SECTION 58.1-3833,
CODE OF VIRGINIA (1950), AS AMENDED,
AND PROVIDING FOR THE AMOUNT OF SUCH
TAX, PROCEDURES FOR COLLECTION, DUTIES
OF SELLERS AND DUTIES OF LOCAL
OFFICIALS WITH RESPECT TO SUCH TAX,
ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES, CIVIL PENALTIES
FOR LATE PAYMENT, MISDEMEANOR PENALTIES
FOR VIOLATIONS OF ARTICLE, EXEMPTIONS,
AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE
WHEREAS, after consideration of this subject and aft
an opportunity for the citizens of this County to be heard
this matter at a public hearing held on April 12, 1988, purs
to Section 58.1-3007, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended; and
WHEREAS, the first reading on this ordinance was hel
on April 26, 1988, and the second reading on this ordinance wa
held on May 10, 1988; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County,
Virginia, finds that it is appropriate to impose a tax on cert~
food and beverages sold in the County of Roanoke, pursuant to
Section 58.1-3833, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanok
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That Chapter 21, Taxation, of the Code of Roano
County, is hereby amended and reenacted by the addition of a n~
Article VIII, Tax on prepared food and beverages, to read and
~~r
din
~w
provide as follows:
.. ~:,~.
May 10, 1988
S
c
d
ARTICLE VIII.
TAX ON PREPARED FOOD AND BEVERAGES
.. 21-150. Definitions.
The following words and phrases, when used in this arti-
shall have, for the purposes of this article, the following
pective meanings except where the context clearly indicates a
ferent meaning:
(a) Caterer: A person who furnishes food on the prem-
ises of another, for compensation.
(b) Commissioner of the Revenue: The Commissioner of
the Revenue of the County of Roanoke, and any of
his duly authorized deputies, assistants, employ-
ees or agents.
(c) Food: Any and all edible refreshments or nourish-
ment, liquid or otherwise, including alcoholic
beverages, purchased in or from a restaurant or
from a caterer, except snack foods.
(d) Person: Any individual, corporation, company,
association, firm, partnership or any group of
individuals acting as a unit.
(e) Purchaser: Any person who purchases food in or
from a restaurant or from a caterer.
(f) Restaurant: Any place in or from which food is
sold in the County, including, but not limited to,
any restaurant, dining room, grill, coffee shop,
cafeteria, cafe, snack bar, lunch counter, delica-
tessen, confectionery, bakery, eating house, eat-
ery, drugstore, vending machine, lunch wagon or
truck, pushcart or other mobile facility from
which food is sold, public or private club, re-
sort, bar or lounge. The word "restaurant" shall
not mean a grocery store or supermarket except for
any space or section therein designated as a deli-
catessen or for the sale of prepared sandwiches,
delicatessen food or food prepared in a delicates-
sen.
(g) Seller: Any person who sells food in or from a
restaurant or as a caterer.
`7 5 4
May 10, 1988
':~t+T
(h) Snack food: Unopened bottles or cans of carbo
ated soft drinks; chewing gum; candy; popcorn;
peanuts and other nuts; unopened packages of c k-
ies, donuts, crackers and potato chips; and of r
items of essentially the same nature and consu d
for essentially the same purpose.
(i) Treasurer: The Treasurer of the County of Roa ke
and any of his duly authorized deputies, assis
tants, employees or agents.
Sec. 21-151. Levy of tax; amount.
In addition to all other taxes and fees of any kind ow
or hereafter imposed by law, a tax is hereby levied and impos
on the purchaser of all food served, sold or delivered in the
County in or from a restaurant, whether prepared in such rest -
rant or not and whether consumed on the premises or not, orb a
caterer. The rate of this tax shall be four (4) percent of t
amount paid for such food. In the computation of this tax, a
fraction of one-half cent or more shall be treated as one cen .
Sec. 21-152. Payment and collection of tax.
Every seller of food with respect to which a tax is
levied under this article shall collect the amount of tax imp ed
under this article from the purchaser on whom the same is ley' d
at the time payment for such food becomes due and payable, wh
ther payment is to be made in cash or on credit by means of a
credit card or otherwise. The amount of tax owed. by the purc -
ser shall be added to the cost of the food by the seller who
shall pay the taxes collected to the County as provided in th'
article. Taxes collected by the seller shall be held in trus by
the seller until remitted to the County.
Sec. 21-153. Reports and remittances generally.
Every seller of food with respect to which a tax is
levied under this article shall make out a report, upon such
forms and setting forth such information as the Commissioner
the Revenue may prescribe and require, showing the amount of od
charges collected and the tax required to be collected, and s 11
sign and deliver such report to the County Treasurer with a r it-
tance of such tax. Such reports and remittance shall be made n
or before the twentieth day of each month, covering the amoun of
tax collected during the preceding month.
q, y,.
May 10, 1988
X55
S 21-154. Preservation of records.
It shall be the duty of any seller of food liable for
c lection and remittance of the taxes imposed by this article to
k p and preserve for a period of three years records showing
g ss sales of all food and beverages, the amount charged the
p chaser of each such purchase, the date thereof, the taxes col-
t ted thereon and the amount of tax required to be collected by
t 's article. The Commissioner of the Revenue shall have the
po er to examine such records at reasonable times and without
un easonable interference with the business of the seller, for
t purpose of administering and enforcing the provisions of this
ar icle and to make copies of all or any parts thereon.
Se 21-155. Advertising pavment or absorption of tax prohib-
ited.
No seller shall advertise or hold out to the public in
an manner, directly or indirectly, that all or any part of the
to imposed under this article will be paid or absorbed by the
se ler or anyone else, or that the seller or anyone else will
re ieve the purchaser of the payment of all or any part of the
to
Se~. 21-156. Tips and service charges.
Where a purchaser provides a tip for an employee of a
se ler, and the amount of the tip is wholly in the discretion of
th purchaser, the tip is not subject to the tax imposed by this
ar icle, whether paid in cash to the employee or added to the
bi 1 and charged to the purchaser's. account, pYovided, in the
la ter case, the full amount of the tip is turned over to the
em loyee by the seller.
An amount or percent, whether designated as a tip or a
se vice charge, that is added to the price of the meal by the
se le r, and required to be paid by the purchaser, is a part of
th selling price of the meal and is subject to the tax imposed
by this article. r
Se{~. 21-157. Dutv of seller when going out of business.
Whenever any seller required to collect any pay to the
Co my a tax under this article shall cease to operate or other-
wi e dispose of his business, any tax payable under this article
sh 11 become immediately due and payable and such person shall
im ediately make a report and pay the tax due.
X756
May 14, 1988
Sec. 21-158. Discount.
For the purpose of compensating sellers for the col c-
tion of the tax imposed by this article, every seller shall b
allowed three (3) percent of the amount of the tax due and ac
counted for in the form of a deduction on his monthly return;
provided, the amount due is not delinquent at the time of pay
ment.
Sec. 21-159.
The Commissioner of the Revenue shall promulgate ru
and regulations for the interpretation, administration and en
forcement of this article. It shall also be the duty of the
missioner of the Revenue to ascertain the name of every selle
liable for the collection of the tax imposed by this article,
fails, refuses or neglects to collect such tax or to make the
reports and remittances required by this article. The Commis
sinner of the Revenue shall have all of the enforcement power
authorized by Article 1, Chapter 31 of Title 58.1 of the Code
Virginia (1950), as amended, for purposes of this Article.
Sec. 21-160. Procedure upon failure to collect report, etc
If any seller, whose duty it is to do so shall fail
refuse to collect the tax imposed under this article and to m<
within the time provided in this article, the reports and rem:
tances mentioned in this article, the Commissioner of the RevE
shall proceed in such manner as he may deem best to obtain fac
and information on which to base his estimate .of the tax due.
soon as the Commissioner of the Revenue shall procure such fa<
and information as he is able to obtain-upon which to base the
assessment of any tax payable by any seller who has failed or
refused to collect such tax and to make such report and remit-
tance, he shall proceed to determine and assess against such
seller the tax and penalties provided for by this article and
shall notify such seller, by registered mail sent to his last
known place of address, of the total amount of such tax and pE
ties and the total amount thereof shall be payable within ten
(10) days from the date such notice is sent.
Sec. 21-161. Duty of County Treasurer.
The Treasurer shall have the power and the duty of
collecting the taxes imposed and levied hereunder and shall c
the same to be paid into the general treasury for the County.
Sec. 21-162. Penalty of late remittance or false return.
s
m-
ho
as
f
r
e,
s
AS
s
al-
se
,y.-.
'~ 5 7'
May 10, 1988
(a) If any seller whose duty it is to do so shall fail
o refuse to file any report required by this article or to remit
t the County Treasurer the tax required to be collected and paid
u er this article within the time and in the amount specified
i this article, there shall be added to such tax by the County
T asurer a penalty in the amount of ten (10) percent if the fail-
u is not for more than thirty (30) days, with an additional ten
(1 ) percent of the total amount of tax owed for each additional
t 'rty (30) days or fraction thereof during which the failure
co tinues, not to exceed twenty-five (25) percent in the aggre-
g e, with a minimum penalty of two dollars ($2.00).
(b) In the case of a false or fraudulent return with
in ent to defraud the County of any tax due under this article, a
pe alty of fifty (50) percent of the tax shall be assessed
a inst the person required to collect such tax.
Se~. 21-163. Violations of article.
Any person violating, failing, refusing or neglecting
to comply with any provision of this article shall be guilty of a
Cl ss 3 misdemeanor. Conviction of such violation shall not
re ieve any person from the payment, collection or remittance of
th taxes provided for in this article. Any agreement by any
pe son to pay the taxes provided for in this article by a series
of installment payments shall not relieve any person of criminal
li bility for violation of this article until the full amount of
to es agreed to be paid by such person is received by the Trea-
su er. Each failure, refusal, neglect or violation, and each
da 's continuance thereof, shall constitute a `separate offense.
Se~. 21-164. Exemptions.
The following purchases of food shall not be subject to
th tax under this article:
(a) Food furnished by restaurants to employees as part
of their compensation when no charge is made to
the employee.
(b) Food sold by non-profit day care centers, public
or private elementary or secondary schools or food
sold by any college or university to its students
or employees.
'7 5 g
May 10, 1988
(c) Food for use or consumption by the Commonwealt
any political subdivision of the Commonwealth
the United States.
(d) Food furnished by a hospital, medical clinic, n-
valescent home, nursing home, home for the age
infirm or handicapped or other extended care f il-
ity to patients or residents thereof.
(e) Food Furnished by a non-profit charitable orga 'za-
tion to elderly, infirm, handicapped or needy r-
sons in their homes or at central locations.
(f) Food sold by a non-profit educational, charita e
or benevolent organization on an occasional ba 's
as a fund-raising activity or food sold by a
church or religious body on an occasional basi .
(g) Any other sale of food which is exempt from tai
tion under the Virginia Retail Sales and Use T~
Act, or administrative rules and regulations
issued pursuant thereto.
2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and
effect on and after July 1, 1988.
IN RE: APPOINTMENTS
1_. Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals•'I
Supervisor Garrett nominated Jon Walp to a four-year term wh
will expires April 13, 1992.
2. Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission•
Supervisor Johnson nominated James Bryant to another three-ye
term expiring June 30, 1991. Supervisor McGraw nominated Yvo
Willis and Kenneth Bowen to another three-year term expiring
ne
30, 1991.
-i =
May 10, 1988
"~ 5 9
II~IRE: REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS
Supervisor Johnson requested that Supervisors Garrett,
R ers and appropriate staff study the results of privatization
i Phoenix, Arizona before proceeding with future efforts in
R noke County. Supervisor Garrett will contact Phoenix for
f ther information.
Supervisor McGraw requested Board support for doubling
t tipping fee at the landfill, asking Delegate Cranwell's
as istance with General Assembly action on waste-to-energy
of orts, and asking the Landfill Board to further investigate
wa to-to-energy. Chairman Garrett requested delay of a vote on
th se issues to May 24, 1988.
Supervisor Nickens advised that the schools paid
$6 ,000 for private trash pickup. He asked staff to investigate
th possibility of the County handling the school trash pickup.
He also requested a report on commercial trash pickup.
IN
RE: CONSENT AGENDA
Supervisor Nickens moved to approve the Consent Agenda.
Th motion was seconded by Supervisor Johnson and carried by the
fo lowing recorded vote:
AY~S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens Garrett
.,,t,,.,
7 6 0 ~t
NAYS: None
RESOLUTION N0. 51088-9 APPROVING AND
CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH
ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA
FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM K -
CONSENT AGENDA
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roan
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That that certain section of the agenda of the
Board of Supervisors for May 10, 1988, designated as Item K -
Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as~~to
each item separately set forth in said section designated Item 1
through 8, inclusive, as follows:
1. Minutes of Meetings - February 9, 1988, Febru
23, 1988
2. Request for acceptance of Fresh. Meadow Lane an
Cloverleaf Circle into the VDOT`Secondary Syste .
3. Request for acceptance of Haven's Trail into tl
VDOT Secondary System.
4. Confirmation of Committee Appointments to the
Fifth Planning District Commission, the Parks t
Recreation Advisory Commission, and Total Acti<
Against Poverty Board of Directors.
5. Resolution requesting approval of grant
application for Clean Valley Council.
6. Resolution of approval from the Planning
Commission for proposed park development in the
Hollins Project area.
7. Authorization to enter into an agreement for u~
and maintenance of private road.
'~ s x
------- -- - -- - - --- _ _ -- _ - _ May__10,- -1.98.8--
8. Acknowledgment from VDOT of the acceptance of 0.06
miles of Old Manor Drive and 0.11 miles of Old
Manor Court 0.13 miles of Branderwood Drive, 0.11
miles of Whipplewood Drive, 0.45 miles of
Summerset Drive and 0.07 miles of Summerset Circle
into VDOT Secondary System.
2. That the Clerk to the Board is hereby authorized
directed where required by law to set forth upon any of said
items the separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant to
th~~is resolution.
RESOLUTION 51088-9.a REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF
FRESH MEADOW LANE AND CLOVERLEAF CIRCLE INTO THE
VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY ROAD
SYSTEM
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
ty, Virginia, as follows:
1. That this matter came this day to be heard upon the
p ceedings herein, and upon the application of Fresh Meadow Lane
a Cloverleaf Circle to be accepted and made a part of the
Se~ondary System of State Highways under Section 33.1-229 of the
Virginia State Code.
2. That it appears to the Board that drainage easements
an~ a fifty (50) foot right-of-way for said roads have been
dedicated by virtue of certain maps known as Beverly Heights
No~th, Section 4 and North Meadows, Section 1, which maps
i
wee recorded in Plat Book 9, Page 264 and Plat Book 10, Page 36
., ...~..
'7 ~6 2
May 10, 1988
respectively, of the records of the Clerk's Office of the Cir it
Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, on October 28, 1983 and
December 15, 1986, respectively, and that by reason of the
recordation of said maps no report from a Board of Viewers, n
consent or donation of right-of-way from the abutting propert
owners is necessary. The Board hereby guarantees said
right-of-way for drainage.
3. That said roads known as Fresh Meadow Lane and
Cloverleaf Circle, which are shown on a certain sketch
accompanying this Resolution, be, and the same are hereby
established as public roads to become a part of the State
Secondary System of Highways in Roanoke County, only from and
after notification of official acceptance of said streets or
highways by the Virginia Department of Transportation.
RESOLUTION 51088-9.b REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF
HAVEN'S TRAIL INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY ROAD SYSTEM
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. Th~t this matter came this day to be heard upon the
proceedings~erein, and upon the application for Haven's Trai
from it's intersection with Route 864 to the terminus at the
f
cul-de-sac for a ~iistance,~of 0.08 mile, to be accepted and ma a
r
May 10, 1988 ` .V
-_~ - _ .
~ ----__
pa of the Secondary System of State Highways under Section
33 1-229 of the Virginia State Code.
2. That it appears to the Board that drainage easements
an a fifty (50) foot right-of-way for said road have been
de icated by virtue of a certain map known as Buckhorn Meadows
S division which map was recorded in Plat Book 10, Page 52, of
t records of the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke
C unty, Virginia, on April 13, 1987 and that by reason of the
r cordation of said map no report from a Board of Viewers, nor
c nsent or donation of right-of-way from the abutting property
o ners is necessary. The Board hereby guarantees said
_'ght-of-way for drainage.
3, That said road known as Haven's Trail and which is
hown on a certain sketch accompanying this Resolution, be, and
he same is hereby established as public road to become a part of
he State Secondary System of Highways in Roanoke County, only
rom and after notification of official acceptance of said
treet or highway by the Virginia Department of Transportation.
RESOLUTION 51088-9.d
~` AUTHORIZING THE CLEAN
VALLEY COUNCIL TO APPLY FOR
~AN ANTI-LITTER PROGRAM
GRANT FOR ROANOKE COUNTY
BE iT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
(County, Virginia, as follows:
'~ 6 4
-- •.,~
May 10, 1988
1. That the Board hereby expresses its intent to
combine with the City of Roanoke, Town of Vinton, Botetourt
County, and City of Salem in a mutually agreed upon and
cooperative program, contingent on approval of the applicatior~lby
the Department of Waste Management, Division of Litter Contro
and Recycling, and contingent on receipt of such funds for th
fiscal year ending June 30, 1989; and
2. That the Board hereby authorizes Clean Valley
Council, Inc., to plan and budget for a cooperative anti-litt
program for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1989 which shall
represent said program for all localities named in this
resolution; and
3. That the Board further authorizes Clean Valley
Council, Inc., to apply on behalf of Roanoke County for a grar~~t,
and to be responsible for the administration, implementation,
completion of the program; and
4. That the Board further accepts responsibility
jointly with the Clean Valley Council, Inc., and the City of
Roanoke, Town of Vinton, Botetourt County, and City of Salem
all phases of the program; and
5. That said funds when received will be transferr
immediately to Clean Valley Council, Inc; all funds will be u;
in the cooperative program to which the Board gives its
or
d
endorsement and support; and
...,~,.
`7 '6 5
- - -- - - - -- - - --- -- --
-={ _ ___May 10,_ 19.8.8
= ~ __---
6. That the financial records of Clean Valley Council,
I ., shall be subject to inspection and review by the Assistant
C my Administrator of Management Services and such data shall
b presented to allow proper reporting on a timely basis by the
C nty; and
7. That the Board requests the Department of
W to Management, Division of Litter Control and Waste Recycling
to consider and approve the application and program, said program
be ng in accord with the regulations governing use and
ex enditure of said funds.
IN~~ RE : REPORTS
Supervisor Nickens moved to receive and file the
fo lowing reports. The motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw
an carried by the following recorded vote:
AY S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens~Garrett
VA S: None
1. General Operating Fund income analysis and
St tement of Expenditures for month ended March 31, 1988.
2. Unappropriated balance in Capital Fund
3. Unappropriated balance in General Fund
4. Unappropriated balance in Board Contingency Fund.
INURE: CITIZENS COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
,~-:: ~
'7 6 6
-------------- --
1. Donna Wood, 3876 Pitzer Road, presented a petit
with 1,375 signatures opposing the proposed landfill site in
Mount Pleasant area.
2. Lvnee Brandi 1902 Queensmill Drive, Salem, spo
in support of adequate funding schools, and continued study o
consolidation of services between the schools and the County.
3. Doug Chittum, 3403 Pitzer Road, spoke in opposii
of the proposed landfill site at Mount Pleasant and expressed
concern with the locations of the proposed circumferential
highways.
IN RE: EXECUTIVE SESSION
At 5:15 p.m. Chairman Garrett moved to go into Execut'
Session pursuant to the Code of Virginia 2.1-344 (a) (2) to
discuss a real estate matter.
IN RE: ADJOURNMENT
tin
~e
uon
At 5:45 p.m., Chairman Garrett declared the meeting
adjourned.
.. >;~==
'76`~
May 24, 1988
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
Roanoke County Administration Center
3738 Brambleton Avenue, SW
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
May 24, 1988
The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
Co nty, Virginia, met this day at the Roanoke County
A inistration Center, this being the fourth Tuesday, and the
se and regularly scheduled meeting of the month of May, 1988.
IN
IRE
p•~}•
ST
CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Garrett called the meeting to order at 2:01
The roll call was taken.
PRESENT: Chairman Lee Garrett, Vice Chairman Richard
Robers, Supervisors Bob L. Johnson, Steven
A. McGraw, Harry C. Nickens
S ABSENT: -None
PRESENT: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; John
M. Chambliss, Assistant County
Administrator for Human Services; John R.
Hubbard, Assistant County Administrator for
Community Services and DeveMopmeHt%Al1en,M
Mahoney, County Attorney, Y
Deputy Clerk
`' V
May 24, 1988
IN RE: EXECUTIVE SESSION
At 2:03 p.m., Chairman Garrett moved to go into
Executive Session pursuant to the Code of Virginia 2.1-344 (a)
(2) to discuss a real estate matter with the Roanoke Valley
Regional Solid Waste Management Board. The motion was seco
by Supervisor Johnson and carried by the following recorded
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Gar
NAYS: None
IN RE: OPEN SESSION
At 3:07, Supervisor Garrett moved to return to open
session. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Johnson and
carried by a unanimous voice vote.
IN RE: OPENING CEREMONIES
The invocation was given by The Reverend Branan G.
Thompson, Colonial Avenue Baptist Church. The Pledge of
Allegiance was recited by all present.
IN RE: REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF
AGENDA
Supervisor Johnson asked that Item I-S, A Raffle
Permit Application be added to the Consent Agenda.
Chairman Garrett asked that Item C-5, Resolution
of Appreciation to Robert Brown be added and that Item L,
a Work Session on Flood Control for the Roanoke River trib-
utaries be held following Proclamatior:~ and Resolutions.
e:
_. MaY._ 2.4.,__ 1.9.8 8- _
INI
IRE: PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS
`769
1 Proclamation recognizing the Law Enforcement Torch
Ru for the Vir inia S ecial Ol m ics: Chairman Garrett
pr sented the proclamation to Lt. Michael Winston, Sheriff`s
De artment in recognition of those Roanoke County law enforcement
of icials who will participate in the torch run.
2 Resolution of Congratulations to Mountain View
_ Principal Tom Hall was present to receive the
resolution.
Supervisor Johnson moved to approve the prepared
re olution. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Nickens and
ca ried by the following recorded vote:
AY S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett
NA S: None
RESOLUTION 52488-1 OF CONGRATULATIONS TO
MOUNTAIN VIEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL FOR NATIONAL
RECOGNITION AS AN OUTSTANDING SCHOOL
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
Co nty, Virginia:
WHEREAS, Mountain View Elementary School was recently
ho ored as a recipient of the 1987-88 School Program Award, and
~~o
May 24, 1988
WHEREAS, the school was one of over 600 schools from the
United States and Puerto Rico nominated for this honor by thei
state school superintendents, and
WHEREAS, only 287 schools in the United States and two i
the State of Virginia were recipients of this award of
excellence, and
WHEREAS, Mountain View Elementary School was cited for its
outstanding special education programs for the learning-disabl~d,
autistic and emotionally disturbed children and for handicappe
pre-schoolers.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors
of Roanoke County, Virginia does hereby extend its
congratulations to Principal Tom Hall, the thirty-five teacher
and the 475 pupils of Mountain View Elementary School for thei
outstanding accomplishments,•and
FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County,
Virginia expresses its pride in Mountain View Elementary School
and wishes continued success to all those who participated in
this achievement.
On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by Supervisor
Nickens and upon the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett
NAYS: None
~.:.:
--_--~
r
. ,
X71 '
- .May . 2 4, _ 19 8 8 -- -- ---- ------ - ------------- ---------
3. Resolution of Appreciation upon the retirement of
Merle Brown: Mr. Brown was present to receive the
re olution.
Supervisor Robers moved to approve the prepared
re olution. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Johnson and
ca ried by the following recorded vote:
AY S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett
NA S: None
RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE APPRECIATION
OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY TO ROBERT MERLE BROWN FOR ALMOST
25 YEAR OF SERVICES TO ROANOKE COUNTY
WHEREAS, ROBERT MERLE BROWN was first employed in October
of 1963 as a Deputy Sheriff in the Roanoke County Sheriff's
Of ice; and
WHEREAS, ROBERT MERLE BROWN has also served as a
De ective for five years (5) and Detective Sergeant since 1973.
Fo the last thirteen (13) years, he has diligently handled all
ca es involving bad checks, credit card fraud and other related
of enses.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of
Su ervisors of Roanoke County expresses its deepest appreciation
an the appreciation of the citizens of Roanoke County to
ROBERT MERLE BROWN
., x..°,
X72
MaY 2 41 _ 19
for almost twenty-five (25) years of capable, loyal and dedical~ed
service to Roanoke County.
FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors does express its best
wishes for a happy, restful and productive retirement.
American Society for Public Administration Chairman Garrett
announced that Roanoke and Botetourt Counties have received th
Public Administration Certificate of Excellence in recognition
the cooperative community, economic and cultural development
projects undetaken by both counties. Director of Planning Rob
Stalzer introduced Sue Palmer, Hollins Project Coordinator;
George Garretson, Library Director; and Bonnie Johnson,
representing Botetourt County.
IN RE: WORK SESSION ON FLOOD CONTROL FOR THE ROANOKE RIVER
_ TRIBUTARIES
Assistant County Administrator John Hubbard reported th
are looking at five tributaries - Carvins Creek, Masons Creek,
Peters Creek, Mudlick Creek and Back Creek. The solutions will',
be very expensive and he recommended waiting until all studies
are completed and cost figures available before making any
decisions.
f
~.
- - May -- 2 4 , - 19 8 8_- --- -- -- __ -.. -- ------ --- ------ ------- -
Mr. Hubbard introduced Carol Axrod, the Project Engineer,
wh handled coordination with the County staff and Ron Fascher.
Bo h are with the Wilmington District of the Corps of Engineers.
Ms. Axrod advised that they have not received funding to
be~in to study Mason Creek. They have completed the study of
Pe#ers Creek and determined there is no federal interest in flood
co trol on the portions located in the County. They have
pe formed an interim study of Mudlick Creek in 1986. They have
co cluded there is no federal interest in flood control for this
or Back Creek because the damage was not sufficient to support a
i
~ pr ject. Lick Run, Tinker Creek and Glade Creek are presently
un~er study. There are three damage areas on Carvin Creek - at
Hollins College, at Hugh Avenue, and at the subdivision known as
Su Valley and homes on Greenway Drive, which had substantial
da age. They have studied dry reservoirs, ~channelization, flood
pr offing and diverting Carvin Creek into Tinker Creek. They did
no find these solutions financially feasible.
Supervisor Johnson advised he was concerned that the
fe~eral government was more .concerned with alleviating flood
da age for businesses than residents such as those in Sun Valley.
He recommended a community meeting with the residents affected by
fl od so that the Corps of Engineers could explain the process to
i
i th m.
..,~,..-
774
May 24, 1988
Supervisor McGraw moved to set a work session for J ne
28, 1988 on drainage and flood control to include proposals t
buy the flood prone properties at fair market value for resal
the possibilit
y of a bond referendum and any other alternativ
to reduce the flood problems. The motion was seconded and
carried by a unanimous voice vote.
Supervisor Johnson requested community meetings with
residents following the work session.
IN RE: NEW BUSINESS
1• Ado tion of the bud et for fiscal ear 1988 89:
Supervisor Johnson moved to adopt the budget for fiscal year
1988-89. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Robers.
Supervisor Robers reminded tY~e Board that as a result
of the budget problems this year, members of the board and staf
have been meeting with school board members and school staff to
continue study of consolidation of services.
Supervisor Nickens moved to amend Supervisor Johnson';
motion so that the VSRS payment be included with the teachers
salaries to reflect a 12.30 salary increase rather than 7.30.
There was no second to the amendment and the motion died.
Supervisor Johnson's original motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
_ - ------ - - - - _ - - -- - - - - - May - 2 4 , . 19 8 8- --- - - - - --- ------ --- ------------ -------
- ----- 11-- ----------- ------- ---- ----- - - - ---11-
AYJ
~S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett
NA S: None
2. Credit and Reimbursement for water and sewer
co st ruction to Trent's Trace: Utility Director Clifford Craig
re orted that Boone Builders is developing a residential
su division on West Ruritan Road and' will be required to extend
th water and sewer facilities. They are requesting board
au horization of the use of the second half of their off-site
fa ility fees to be credited against the $90,000 cost to install
th water line. They are also requesting a sewer reimbursement
ag Bement for 75o for a period of ten years. The staff
re ommends that the Board authorize the immediate reimbursement
of the second half of their off-site facility fees and a
fi e-year reimbursement agreement for the sewer facilities.
Supervisor Johnson moved to 'approve the staff
re ommendation amended that the sewer facility reimbursement be
fo ten years instead of five. The motion was seconded by
Su ervisor McGraw and carried by the following recorded vote:
AY S: Supervisors.~ohnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett
NA S: None
~ be
deg
3. Credit for water construction to Windemere
division: Mr. Craig advised that a 16 lot subdivision was
ng developed adjacent to three existing streets. The
eloper will supply water service to the subdivision and will
-.,~ ,~
t s
May 24, 1988
n
extend a 12 inch water line if the County will give him credit~i,
against his fees. Staff recommended authorization for the
additional fees, above the $8,288. This credit would be for
$1, 712 .
Supervisor Nickens moved to approve the staff
recommendation. The motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garret
NAYS: None
d
4. Authorization to approve contracts with airport
Commission and Roanoke City for the Valleypointe Project• Cou ty
Attorney Paul Mahoney reported that it is necessary to conclud
certain agreements with the Airport Commission and the City of
Roanoke to proceed with the Valleypointe Project.
Supervisor Garrett moved to authorize the County
Administrator to execute the necessary contacts. The motion
seconded by Supervisor Johnson and carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, Nickens, Garrett
NAYS: None
ABSTAIN: Supervisor McGraw
5. Adoption of a Vehicle Utilization Policy
Assistant County Administrator John Chambliss reported that at
~s
the April 26th meeting, the board of Supervisors suggested
.Y .~,M
_ May.. 2 4 , _ 19 8 8---- - - --- -- - -------
ap;
be ~
be
se eral changes to the proposed policy. The policy has been
re ised to reflect a 12,800 mile limit instead of a 10,000 mile
li it as previously recommended. This proposal is in agreement
wi h the Central Garage for the Commonwealth of Virginia. The
st~ff recommends that the proposed policy be approved; that the
ropriate vehicles be declared surplus; and that consideration
given for an automobile allowance supplement to their salary
(determined at an appropriate monthly rate.
Supervisor Nickens stated he felt that there were
ve
el
iicles used less than 12,800 that could be reassigned thereby
urinating at least 11 older vehicles which would save funds.
Supervisor Nickens moved that employees using their
personal car be reimbursed according to the state rate of
mi~eage; that 11 sedans be eliminated from the fleet, and that
th County Administrator be authorized to implement an automobile
po icy. There was no second to the motion and it died.
Mr. Hodge asked that the policy be adopted and that he
be allowed to assign the necessary vehicles. Supervisor Robers
su gested that rather, than a specific policy, that only employees
dr~ving more than 15,000 non commuting miles be allocated a
ve~icle and all others be part of a fleet with employees being
re mbursed at the state rate for use of their personal car.
v
Supervisor Nickens moved that the policy be adopted
that no new vehicles be purchased in 1988/89. There was no
second and the motion died.
Supervisor Nickens moved to adopt the policy with th
understanding that only 356 vehicles would remain in the fleet
of July 1, 1988. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Johns o:
and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, Nickens, McGraw, Garret
NAYS: None
IN RE: REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS
Chairman Garrett announced that a work session on fl
control and drainage had been set for June 28, 1988.
Supervisor McGraw requested a work session on the
possibility of a referendum vote on election of school board
members on June 14, 1988.
IN RE: REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS
Supervisor Johnson moved that a letter of concern be
sent to Botetourt County regarding a proposed land strip which
could affect the Bonsack Community. The motion carried by a
unanimous voice vote. Supervisor Johnson also expressed conce
gas
god
rn
x.x:;o--
--~~-
May 24, 1988
7 '7 9
t the proliferation of large billboard signs. He asked staff
to investigate the possibility of a new sign ordinance which
wo ld insure that these large signs are not "grandfathered" in
th~ ordinance, and that these signs are taxed whether or not the
ow ers are located in Roanoke County.
Supervisor Robers announced he had made contact with
th Center for~Innovative Technology concerning alternate methods
of solid waste management. He will bring back a report. He also
su gested that students be involved in the waste management
so ution and proposed that scholarships could be awarded for
i 1 dfill research. Supervisor Robers also advised that Roanoke
i
Ci y had appointed members to the Roanoke Valley Cooperation
C ittee and that the committee had established five priorities.
Supervisor McGraw asked the board members to review the
m' utes from the Roanoke Valley Cooperation Committee. He
a ounced that the VACO/VML task Force has met and prepared a
r ommendation to VML on annexation issues. Supervisor McGraw
a so suggested that County Administrator Elmer Hodge and
A sistant County Administrator John Chambliss be appointed to the
R anoke Valley Cooperation Committee. Chairman Garrett concurred
a d suggested that all localities involved have two elected and
too appointed representatives.
._.i2dX'.t+W
0
May 24, 1988
---------- -----
Supervisor Nickens requested a board report on June
14th allocating the human services funding that would be base on
last year's recommendations. Supervisor Nickens moved that
$3,000 be allocated to the Vinton Rescue Squad 50th Annivers
celebration and $1,500 be allocated to the Council of Communi
Services Information and Referral Services from the Board
Contingency Fund. The motion carried by a unanimous vote.
Supervisor Garrett announced that Occidental
Developers, Inc. has requested a continuance to a later date
their rezoning petition.
IN RE: CONSENT AGENDA
Supervisor Johnson had previously requested the
~r
addition of Item 5, approval of a Raffle Permit for the Commu ity
School. Supervisor Nickens requested that Item 1, Acceptance f
settlement offer with Roanoke Gas company for destruction of
backhoe, be deleted for discussion.
Supervisor Johnson moved to approve the Consent Age
with the addition of Item I-5, and the deletion of Item I-1.
motion was seconded by Supervisor Robers and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garret
The
~$ 1
May 24, 1988
yt --
NA'.
rS : None
RESOLUTION N0.52488-8 APPROVING AND
CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH
ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA
FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM I -
CONSENT AGENDA
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
Co nty, Virginia, as follows:
1. That that certain section of the agenda of the
B rd of Supervisors for May 24, 1988, designated as Item I -
C sent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to
ea~~Ch item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1
tY~rough 4, inclusive, as follows:
l--Aeeep~enee-a€-settlement-a€€er-with-Reer~e3~e-bas
Eempenp-€ar-destrttetian-e€-l~eel~hee
2. Confirmation of Committee appointments to the
Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals
and Parks and Recreation Advispry Commission.
3.Request for acceptance of Chippenham Drive and
Kettering Court into the Va. Department of
Transportation Secondary System.
4. Authorization to pay appraisal fee for Palmer
Property.
5. Approval of Raffle Permit for Community School
2. That the Clerk to the Board is hereby authorized
zd directed where required by law to set forth upon any of said
'7 8 2
--- Ma.v-2A-,----1-9 88----- .~
items the separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant~~to
this resolution.
On motion of Supervisor Johnson after the deletion
Item 1 and the addition of Item 5, seconded by Supervisor Rob s
and the following-recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garre
NAYS: None
RESOLUTION 52488-8.b REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF
CHIPPENHAM DRIVE AND KETTERING COURT INTO THE VIRGIr
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY ROAD SYSTEM
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That this matter came this day to be heard upon the
proceedings herein, and upon the application for Chippenham Dr
and Kettering Court from its intersection with Pleasant Hill
Drive Route 1548 to the intersection of Kettering Court for a
distance of 0.10 miles, and Kettering Court intersection with
Chippenham Drive to the terminus at the cul-de-sac for a dish
of .04 miles, to be accepted and made a part of. the Secondary
Sy-stem of State Highways under Section 33.1-229 of the Virgin
State Code.
2. That it appears to the Board that drainage easement:
and a fifty (50) foot right-of-way for said road have been
Lve
I
1
dedicated by virtue of a certain map known as Kingston Court,
'7 8 3
------ - --__ ------ - __-- ----- --- -- May 24, 1988
Se tion No. 1 Subdivision which map was recorded in Plat Book 10,
Pa e 6, of the records of the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court
of Roanoke County, Virginia, on May 13, 1986 and that by reason
of the recordation of said map no report from a Board of Viewers,
no consent or donation of right-of-way from the abutting
pr perty owners is necessary. The Board hereby guarantees said
ri ht-of-way for drainage.
3. That said road known as Chippenham Drive and Kettering
Co rt and which is shown on a certain sketch accompanying this
Re olution, be, and the same is hereby established as public road
1 to become a part of the State Secondary System of Highways in
Ro noke County, only from and after notification of official
ac eptance of said street or highway by the Virginia Department
of Transportation.
On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by Supervisor
Ro ers and carried by the following recorded vote:
AY S: Supervisors Johnson, McGraw, Nickens, Robers, Garrett
NA S: None
Acceptance of settlement offer with Roanoke Gas Company
fo destruction of backhoe: Supervisor Nickens asked if the
Co my requested a new backhoe from Roanoke Gas. Clifford Craig,
Ut lity Director, responded they did at the cost of $42,304. The
on destroyed was 2-1/2 years old and was originally worth
$6 ,000. In response to a question from Supervisor Nickens, Mr.
•. i :~s.
. 784
---------rla .__2.4 _.1.988__.__._. _.
Craig reported that insurance covered $22,480, and the settle nt
offer from Roanoke Gas was $14,923.
Supervisor Nickens moved to deny the settlement off
because he felt that the Gas Company should have settled for 11
replacement value. There was no second and the motion died.
Supervisor Garrett moved to accept the settlement o fer
from Roanoke Gas Company. The motion was seconded by Supervi r
McGraw and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Garrett
NAYS: Supervisor Nickens
IN RE: CITIZENS COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
Alfred Powell, 3440 Franklin Street, spoke in
opposition of adoption of the budget for fiscal year 1988/89.
felt there were substantial reductions available in unnecessa
or non-essential programs.
IN RE: REPORTS
Supervisor Johnson moved that the following reports
received and filed. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Mc
and carried by unanimous voice vote.
1. Accounts Paid for the month of April 1988.
He
aw
...,.
'7 8 5 ..
---,i_
May 24, 1988
2. Update on Automated Refuse Collection System
3. Income Analysis and Statement of Expenditures -
A it 30, 1988.
4. Report on Space Needs for Roanoke County.
5. Board Contingency Fund
6. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance
7. General Fund Unappropriated Balance
Supervisor Nickens requested that the staff prepare
a releases on the success of the automated refuse collection
sy~~tem.
I~IRE: EXECUTIVE SESSION
At 5:25 p.m. Supervisor Robers moved to go into
E cutive Session pursuant to the Code of Virginia 2.1-344 (a)
(1 to discuss a personnel matter. The motion 'was seconded
by Supervisor Garrett and carried by the following recorded vote:
AY S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett
N S: None
IN~I RE: OPEN SESSION
a "ova'
~, ~ 6
-- -----Ma - 2 4- --19.8 8 ----------- - _ - - - - - - - __ _-- - - - ----- - ---i
At 6:05 p.m. Supervisor Garrett moved to return to o en
session. The motion was'seconded by Supervisor Robers and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garret
NAYS: None
IN RE: RECESS
At 6:06 p.m., Chairman Garrett declared a dinner
recess.
IN RE: EVENING SESSION
At 7:05 p.m., Chairman Garrett reconvened the meetin~x.
IN RE; RESOLUTIONS, PROCLAMATIONS
wires for winning the State AAU Basketball Championship
Chairman Garrett announced that the Roanoke Valley Squires h
won the State AAU State championship and will be going to
Lawrence, Kansas to compete in the national AAU tournament.
certificates and a resolution.
May 24, 1988
`-'
Supervisor Robers moved to approve the prepared
res lution. The motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw and
car ied by the following recorded vote:
py Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett
1.TA None
RESOLUTION CONGRATULATING THE STATE
~UTH~OANOKEIVALLEYESQUIRESE~~
WHEREAS, the Roanoke Valley Squires basketball team,
Cave
c posed of twelve and thirteen year old boys from Roanoke,
S ring and Botetourt County, recently won the State AAU
C ampionship, in Staunton, Virginia, compiling a 5 - 0 overall
r cord; and
WHEREAS, the Roanoke Valley Squires, coached by Lacy
and Scott Prince, will play
D dley, and assisted by Tom Ondrus,
the national AAU finals beginning August 6, 1988, in Lawrence,
ansas.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of
ervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia congratulates an
up
ommends the following members of the Roanoke Valley Squires fo
heir outstanding athletic achievement:
Trey Ondrus
Greg Cooper
Bobby Prince Daniel Orfield
Tim Basham Greg Journette
~gg~
May 24, 1988
Stephen Hawks
Steven Kagey
Mike Bramblett
Curtis Staples
Jay Turner
J. P. Wilson
and further, expresses its strong support that the Roanoke Va:
Squires will be victorious at the national AAU tournament in
Lawrence, Kansas.
IN RE:
588-1
588-2
PUBLIC HEARINGS
ley
Petition of Inland Properties Corporation to
rezone a 1.70 acre tract from R=1 Residential o
B-1 Business to construct an office complex
located on the east side of Route 419 immediat ly
south of its intersection with Cordell Drive i
the Windsor Hills Magisterial District. (CONTI UE
FROM MARCH 22, 1988)
This petition was continued to June 14, 1988.
Petition of Virginia First Savincxs, F S B t
rezone a 0.787 acre tract from R-3, Residentia
B-1 Business to construct a building containin
bank and offices, located immediately southwes
the intersection of Electric Road (Route 419)
Chaparral Drive (Route 800) in the Cave Spring
Magisterial District.
APPROVED WITH PROFFERED CONDITIONS
to
a
of
Director of Planning Rob Stazler presented the staff
report. The petition was heard by the Planning Commission on
~,~.
'7 8 g
May_24 ,___19.8.8
Ma 3, 1988. No one was present in opposition. The significant
i act factors include the 46 parking spaces. Eight spaces
s uld be eliminated to avoid interference with thru traffic.
Th re is no location identified for for automatic teller machine.
Th re are proffered conditions, and the Planning Commission voted
u nimous approval with one members absent to approve the
re uest.
He
Heywood Fralin, attorney for the petitioner was present.
explained the change in the proffered conditions. The first
ch nge states that the lighting on the sign will be turned off at
10 00 p.m. The second change states that the proposed sign will
be submitted to the Planning Department for approval prior to
co struction. This will be a two-story office facility housing
th banking on the first floor and the mortgage facility on the
se and floor. The neighbors are in favor of the rezoning. The
au omatic teller machine will be located on the outside wall of
th building and the parking spaces that concerned the staff will
be designated as employee parking.
Supervisor_Robers moved to grant the petition. The
mo ion was seconded by Supervisor Johnson and carried by the
fo~lowing recorded vote:
AY~S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett
NABS: None
FINAL ORDER
.~y~
'7 9 0
-------
„ - _ _ -- ,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDERED that the aforementioned
parcel of land which is contained in the Roanoke County Tax
as Parcel 87.06-4-4 and recorded in Deed Book 1266, page 792 a~~d
legally described below, be rezoned from R-3 Residential Distzitict
to B-1 Business District
BE IT FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this order be
transmitted to the Secretary of the Planning Commission and th~~t
he be directed to reflect that change on the official zoning ~~p
of Roanoke County.
BEGINNING at a concrete monument on
the south side of Route 419, at the
intersection with the west side of
Route 800, thence S. 280 44' S4" E.
53.10 feet to a concrete monument;
thence with the westerly side of
Route 800, S. 210 13' 32" W.
139.56 feet to an iron; thence with
the remaining property of Fralin
and Waldron, Inc., N. 700 35' 19"
E. 159.32 feet th the BEGINNING and
containing 343,262.29 square feet,
and being 0.787 acre parcel.
PROFFER OF CONDITIONS
1. Office building will be built in substantial
compliance with the conceptual plan.
2. All lighting in parking areas will be directed
downward, with minimum lighted areas during evening hours.
3. There will be no lighting on the identification s
after 10:00 p.m.
.~•;;..
--- ------ ---- - ------Ma _ 2~ ___19 8.8 ---- ---- __
~' ~ - _____.___ r_
4. In the event an automatic teller machine is
in talled, it will be installed against the building.
5. The spaces designed for employee parking on the
de ign plan will be used for employee parking only.
6. The sign will be constructed in accordance with the
su mitted design plan, and the proposed design plan will be
s mitted to the Planning Department for approval prior to
co struction of said sign.
588-3 Petition of Occidental Development Ltd to rezone
a 2.0 acre parcel from R-l, Residential to B-1
Business and a 22.87 acre parcel from R-1,
Residential to. R-3 Residential to construct
offices and multi-family dwellings, located
immediately west of the intersection of Colonial
Avenue and Ogden Road in the Cave Spring
Magisterial District.
CONTINUED AT THE REQUEST OF THE PETITIONER TO JUNE
14, 1988
588-4 Petition of the Hobart Companies to rezone a 14.93
acre tract from R-1, Residential to B-2, Business
to construct an office complex, located on the
north side of Electric Road (Route 419)
approximately 700 feet west of its intersection
with Postal Drive in the Windsor Hills Magisterial
District.
APPROVED WITH PROFFERED CONDITIONS
Mr. Stalzer reported that this petition was heard by
th Planning Commission on May 3rd. There were two citizens in
op osition and five in support. The concerns were light glare,
dr inage, increased traffic and noise.
_ ..~,:w
'~ ~ 2
There were two significant impact factors. The
traffic generated is estimated at between 1,900 and 2,280. T ere
was a concern about circulation concerning one of the entrancE
through the existing Signet Bank. There are proffered condit~
to the rezoning request. The Planning Commission voted in
support of the request 4 to 0, with one member absent.
Ed Natt, attorney for the petitioner was present.
described the development of the property which will be known
Colonade II. The project contains four buildings with
approximately 137,000 square feet of additional office space.
The design will be compatible with the existing Colonade I.
access will be through existing Colonade Park, and through th
ons
He
as
Signet Bank. 550 of the property will remain green space and
approximatley 45o will be developed. The petitioner met with he
citizens to hear comments and concerns. Twelve people attend
the meeting.
In response to a question from Supervisor Nickens
Mr. Natt advised there will be a four-lane road and bridge wi
the necessary culverts across the creek. The petitioner will
ensure that there will ,be no debris backing up the water in t:
creek. Mr. Stazler advised they are satisfied with the drain.
plans.
The following citizens spoke concerning this rezor~~.ng
petition:
t .9}.,:
,~ q 3
--: ------- --------- ------------------Ma -24 _19.88-----------------
1 ~~- --
1. Paul Bell 27055 Hillbrook Drive, opposed the
pe ition because of the potential of flooding in the Cresthill
ar a.
2. Lloyd Lazarus spoke in opposition. He was
c cerned that there would be a convenience store and food
se vice store on the property and that a traffic light would be
in tailed at the intersection of McVitty Road and Route 419.
3. John Paul Johnson spoke in opposition because of
th drainage and flooding problems from Mudlick Creek.
({` 4. Rocxer Lordon spoke representing the Cresthill
j su division. He was concerned about the groundwater runoff from
th retention pond into Mudlick Creek.
Supervisor McGraw asked for an explanation on how a
re ention pond works. Director of Engineering Phillip Henry
ad ised that a retention facility is designed based on a two-year
st rm. The storm must be severe to be held in a retention pond.
Mr Henry stated that the runoff from the proposed development
wo ld be approximately the same as if the property were developed .
as R-1 residential hoes.
Supervisor Garrett asked Mr. Henry if phis
de elopment would have a significant negative impact on the -flow
fr m Route 419 to the lower part of Cresthill Drive. Mr. Henry
re ponded that while it would have a negative impact, it would
no be significant.
'~ 9 4
--- --- - --- Ma 2 4 _ 19 8 8
Supervisor Garrett outlined the publicity and pla
that took place during the study of the 419 Corridor Plan.
Supervisor Garrett moved to approve the petition wi
proffered conditions. The motion was seconded by Supervisor
Robers and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garre
NAYS: None
FINAL ORDER
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDERED that the aforementioned
parcel of land which is contained in the Roanoke County Tax M.
as Parcel 76.16-1-39 and Parcel 76.16-1-38 and recorded in De.
Book and legally described below, be rezoned from R-1
Residential District to B-1 Business District
BE IT FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this order. be
transmitted to the Secretary of the Planning Commission and tt
he be directed to reflect that change on the official zoning n
of Roanoke County.
A 14.93 acre parcel of land generally
located on the North Side of Va.
Sec. Route 419, east of Mudlick and
west of the Cave Spring Office
Park, within the Windsor Hills
Magisterial District
~s
~t
IMP
PROFFER OF CONDITIONS
. .~,
'7 9 5
--------- - ---_-- Ma _-24 -19.88 ---------
-=i --_---~~
w
1. Project will be developed in substantial conformity
h the site plan prepared by Ernie Rose Architects, submitted
herewith.
2. There will be no additional entrance/exists on Route
419.
3. Screening and buffering will be as proposed on the
si~e plan of Ernie Rose, architects.
4. All lighting will be directed away from the adjoining
re idential property. Poles shall be not more than 20 feet in
f he ght.
5. Signage will be similar in size and configuration to
th~ existing sign on Phase I.
6. No residential uses will be placed on the property.
7. Architecture will be compatible with Colonade
Co~porate Center.
8. Dumpster location for Phase I to be approved in staff
refY~iew.
588-5 Petition of M. E. Hinman and Dominion Trust
Company to amend the Roanoke County Future Land
Use Plan from Development to Transition, located
on the north and south sides of Hollins Road
immediately east of Tinker Creek in the Hollins
Magisterial District.
APPROVED
Mr. Stalzer reported that this request is a Land Use
796
~,;~~c~
------ -- --- --- Ma 2 4
-------
- „ ------
Plan Amendment in conjunction with a rezoning request that wa
heard and approved at the April meeting. Approval of this
request will ensure consistency with the Land Use Plan. Ther
were no citizens in opposition at the Planning Commission hea~~ing
and there are no significant impact factors. The Planning
Commission voted unanimous approval.
Supervisor Johnson moved to amend the Land Use Plan.
The motion was seconded by Supervisor Nickens and carried by
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garret
NAYS: None
FINAL ORDER
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDERED that the aforementioned
parcel of land which is contained in the Roanoke County. Tax
as Parcel 38.16-3-1 and legally described below, be amended
the Land Use Plan from Development to Transition.
BE IT FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this order be
transmitted to the Secretary of the Planning Commission and t t
he be directed to reflect that change on the official zoning p
of Roanoke County.
A 3.56 acre parcel of land,
generally located on the north
side of Route 601 east of TInker
Creek within the Hollins
Magisterial District.
May 24, 1988
7' 9 ~
-j _ _- ---- -------------------------
- I __--_-_~~
Roanoke Count Board of
P e t i t i o n o f T h e requesting vacation
588_6 ina, known as
Su ervisors and Carson- right-of-wayroximately
of a portion of an e w dth gof 30 to aPP
Airpoint Drive for a
0 feet beginning at Bent Mountda~eC~lon 365ufeet tin
and extending in an easterly
the Windsor Hills Magisterial District.
APPRO~D
alzer advised that vacation of a portion of this
Mr. St
-of-way is requested so that scheduled road
e fisting right The Planning
be completed.
i provements to Airpoint Drive can
ecommended approval by unanimous vote with one member
r mmission r
a sent. etition. The
Supervisor Garrett moved to approve the p
bers and carried by the
tion was seconded by Supervisor Ro
allowing recorded vote: Garrett
Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens,
YES:
AYS: None
N RE: -PUBLIC HEARINGS AND READING OF ORDINANCES
of ordinanc
Public Hearing and First Reading ~
588-7 the Roanoke County Code to increase th
amending ort th
im osition of the Law Librar fee to supp
Roanoke County/Salem Law Library.
No one was present to speak to this ordinance.. S.eco
reading will be June 14, 1988.
Su ervisor McGraw moved to approve first reading of t1
P
...;sv+
'~ 9 8
May 24, 1988
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garret
NAYS: None
588-8 Public Hearing and Second Reading of ordinance
amending Chapter 9, "Fire Prevention and
Protection" of the Roanoke County Code by
repealing Section 9-2, "Possession, Sale,
Discharge, etc. of Fireworks": the repeal of
Article II, "Fire Lanes"; and the repeal of
Article III,."Fire Protection Code"; and by th
enactment of a new Article II, "Virginia State 'de
Fire Prevention Code," to provide for the
establishment of certain permit and inspection
fees, and to authorize the enforcement of same.
No one was present to speak to this ordinance.
Mahoney pointed out that a public hearing must be scheduled
because this ordinance establishes a fee. The first reading
the ordinance was May 10, 1988.
Supervisor McGraw moved to approve the ordinance.
motion was seconded by Supervisor Nickens and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garre
NAYS: None
ORDINANCE 52488-13 AMENDING CHAPTER 9, ^FIRE
PREVENTION AND PROTECTION,^ OF THE ROANOKE
COUNTY CODE BY REPEALING SECTION 9-2,
^POSSESSION, SALE, DISCHARGE, ETC. OF FIREWORKS,°
THE REPEAL OF ARTICLE II, ^FIRE LANES,^ AND THE
REPEAL OF ARTICLE III, ^FIRE PROTECTION CODE,^;
AND BY THE ENACTMENT OF A NEW ARTICLE II,
"VIRGINIA STATEWIDE FIRE PREVENTION CODE,^ TO
PROVIDE FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF CERTAIN PERMIT
AND INSPECTION FEES, AND TO AUTHORIZE THE
ENFORCEMENT OF SAME.
~:..~,
7~9
May 24, 1988
____a ----- -----
1. That Section 9-2 of the Roanoke County Code,
ssession, sale, discharge, etc. of fireworks," is hereby
d eted and repealed in its entirety.
2. That Article II, "Fire Lanes," of Chapter 9 of the
R noke County Code is hereby deleted and repealed in its
e irety.
3. That Article III, "Fire Prevention Code," of Chapter
9 f the Roanoke County Code is hereby deleted and repealed in
it entirety.
4. That a new Article II, "Virginia Statewide Fire
Pr vention Code," of Chapter 9 of the Roanoke County Code is
he eby amended and re-enacted as follows:
Section 1. That pursuant to the provisions of
Se tion 27-98 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, Roanoke
Co my shall enforce the Virginia Statewide Fire Prevention Code
as written. with amendments. This Statewide Fire Prevention Code
wa adopted by the State Board of Housing and Community
De elopment and said Board promulgated certain regulations and
pr cedures to accomplish the adoption and enforcement of this
Co e. The Virginia Statewide Fire Prevention Code is
in orporated herein by reference as fully as if set out at length
he ein. The regulations set forth herein shall be known as the
Fi e Prevention Code of the County of Roanoke and shall be
re erred to as such or as this Code.
Q 0. ,1
May 24, 1988
Section 2. The purposes of this Code are to provi
for statewide standards for local enforcement to safeguard li
and property from the hazards of fire or explosion arising fr
the. improper maintenance of life safety and fire prevention a
protection materials, devices, systems, and structures, and t
unsafe storage, handling, and use of substances, materials, a
devices wherever located.
Section 3. The Roanoke County Fire Marshal is here
directed to enforce the provisions of the Virginia Statewide 're
Prevention Code and this Code. The County Fire Marshal shall
establish such procedures or requirements as may be necessary or
the administration and enforcement of said Code. The County 're
Marshal is hereby authorized to issue a summons for any viola 'on
of the provisions of the Code, pursuant to the provisions of
Section F-106.8 of said Code. The Fire Marshal shall coordin e
his enforcement activities with the County Building Official d
Zoning Administrator. The Fire Marshal shall assign and Beta'
such members of the Roanoke County Fire and Rescue Department s
inspectors or other assistants as he may deem necessary in
administering and enforcing the provisions of such Code.
Section 4. There is hereby imposed a Twenty-five
Dollar ($25) fee for all permits issued pursuant to the
provisions of the Virginia Statewide Fire Prevention Code.
permit issued shall be by the Office of the Fire Marshal.
..:;<-,
~~ 1
---------- - - _ - - - ---- - ----- --- - Ma Y__2_4,-.1.9.8 8
-------~I --- ---- --
Section 5. The provisions of this ordinance shall not
applicable within the limits of the Town of Vinton.
Section 6. That the Virginia Statewide Fire
P vention Code is hereby amended and changed pursuant to Section
2 97 of the Code of Virginia in the following respects:
1. F-102.1 Enforcement officers Add~the
following at the end of the existing subsection
F.102.1:
The provisions of the Virginia Statewide Fire
Prevention Code and this Code shall be enforced b
the Office of the Fire Marshal also herein referred
to as the Fire Marshal's Office the Fire Marshal
members of the Fire Marshal's staff the Fire
Prevention Division or the Fire Official.
2. F-102.1.1 Inspection by others. Add
subsection F-102.1.1. as follows:
The Chief of the Fire Department may designate such
other persons as he deems necessarv to make fire
safety inspections Such persons shall use the
Vircxinia~Statewide Fire Prevention Code and this
Code as the basis for such inspections
3. F-102.1.2 Impersonation. Add subsection
F-102.1.2 as follows:
8.0 2
24, _1988 _ ___
4.
It shall be unlawful for an unauthorized erson o
use a bad e uniform or an other creden ials s s
to ain access to an buildin marine vessel
vehicle, or premises or to otherwise falsely
identify himself as the fire official or his
desicrnated representative.
F-103.4 Investicration of fires. Add
subsection F-103.4 as follows:
The Fire Marshal shall investigate or cause to be
investicxated every fire or explosion occurring
within the Count that is of a sus icious nature r
which involves the loss of life or causes in'ur o
Persons or causes destruction of or damage to
ro ert Such investi ation shall be made at th
time of the fire or at a subse went time de endi
on the nature and circumstances of the fire. The
Fire Marshal shall take char e immediatel of the
physical evidence and in order to preserve any
h sical evidence relatin to the cause or on in of
such fire or ex losion take means to revent acc ss
by any person or persons to such building,
structure or remises until such evidence has be n
properly processed.
May 24, 1988
$~ 3
5. F-103.4.1 Summonsina the Fire Marshal. Add
subsection F-103.4.1 as follows:
The fire department officer-in-charae of any fire
explosion or incident scene shall immediately
summons the Fire Marshal to such scene to
investigate the circumstances involved where such
circumstances require investigation as outlined in
F-103.4 of this Code.
6. F-103.5 Modifications. Add the subsection
F-103.5 as follows:
The fire official shall have the power to modify the
application of this Code, upon written request by
the owner, lessee, occupant or their legal
representative, when there is practical difficulty.
in meetina the strict letter of the Code. However,
in all cases of modification, the spirit and intent
of the Code shall be met to ensure the health,
safety and welfare of persons is protected.
7. F-103.6 Notification of fire department. Add•
subsection F-103.6 as follows:
In any buildina subiect to inspection under any
,provision of this Code, when a fire or evidence of
there having been a fire discovered, even though it
has apparently been extinauished, it shall be
804
- -._ __May _24, 1988
..'n
immediatel re orted to the Chief of the fire
to the arrival of the fire de artment.
8• F-20.1.0 Applied Meanincx of Words and Terms:.
Add to section F-201.0 the following words, terms
and meanings:
Fire Lanes: An area ~tA~;n„-,+-..a L_ _
on ublic or rivate ro ert to ensure read
access for and to fire fi htin and rescue e u~
and facilities.
9• F-303.0 Torches for the Removal of Paint.
Add the following words to the title:
or Sweatin Pi e Joints.
10. F-303.3 Sweatincx Joints.
Add the following
subsection F-303.3:
structure shall have available in the immediate
< r.r- A tV
May 24, 1988
g05
vicinity where the sweating is done one (1) approved
fire extinguisher or wa r hose connec ed to a water
supply. Combustible material in close proximity to
the work shall be protected against ignition by
shielding, wetting or other approved means In all
cases, a fire watch shall remain in the vicinity of
the sweating operation for one-half (1/2) hour after
the torch or flame producing device has been used
11. F-303.3.1 Permit Recruired. Add subsection
F-303.3.1 as follows:
A permit shall be obtained from the fire official
prior to using a torch or other flame producing
device for sweating pipe joints in anv buildin or
structure.
12. F-313.1 Designation. Delete and
substitute as follows:
~l~e-eaele-a€€revel-shall-requ4re-anal-elestgnate
publie-ar-private-€lre-lanes-as-eleemeel-neeessarp-€er
tl~e-e€€lelent-and-a€€eetr~re-use-a€-€lre-apparatus-
Fire-lanes-shell-bade-e-mrnr~tum-wtdtl~-a€-18-€eet
-f5466-mgt}--
The fire official shall designate fire lanes on
public streets and on private property where
necessary for the purpose of preventing parkin in
'r ~ raW
VO
width of 18 feet 5486 mm .
13. F-313.4 Signs and Markings.
F-313.4 as follows:
Add secti
official.
14. F-313.5 Specifications.
Add section F-31
as follows:
Fire lanes shall conform to the followin
specifications:
~A) The deSi r'rn .,~ ,..__L .
Lane."
CB)
~,
so as to rovide at least one si n for ever
one hundred 100 feet of fire lane s ace.
Should the fire marshal determine that
May 24, 1988
i, ~
~•,.r
=; --~~-
May 24, 1988
8~ 6
a ent f he ro r shall rovide the same.
All such signs shall be maintained in proper
position and sufficiently legible to be seen by
an ordinarily observant person.
(C) Fire lane si ns shall be laced as follows:
(1) Pave edge to Sian edge:
Rural: Not less than 6' nor more than
10'
Urban: Not less than 1' nor more than 3'.
(2) Curb face to sign edge:
Rural: Not less than 1' nor more than 3'.
Urban: Not less than 1' nor more than 3'.
(3) Pavement top to sign bottom:
Rural• 5'
Urban • 7'
(4) Curb top to sign bottom_
Rura1• 5'
Urban• 7'
(D) Posts for fire lane si ns where re fired
shall be metal and securely mounted.
(E) The curb or avement ed e of all fire lanes
shall be painted yellow Any existing markincr
in the area ciesi nated as a fire lane shall be
808
24, _19
-._-
-- - --.r
obliterated or painted over in a manner
approved by the fire marshal
15. F-313.6 Where fire lanes are designated at
fire hydrant locations.
The following shall apply where fire lanes are
established at fire h drant locations:
(1) Where hvdrant~ ara ~ ~,•~to,a -, +- .._ .., ___ ~ _ , .
curb line or edge of the road and face on a
public street a public parking lot or a
fifteen (15) feet is prohibited
(2) A special curb marking designated areas
established pursuant to (1) above shall be
required and shall be yellow
(3) No planting, erection or other obstruction
shall be allowed withi n fn„r' Lei few} ,.~ ~,.._
fire h drant.
(4) All hydrants shall be painted in accordance
5. The provisions of this ordinance shall be effect~~ive
from and after June 1, 1988.
588-9 Public Hearing and First Reading of Ordinance
increase the salaries of members of the Board
Supervisors of Roanoke County pursuant to Sect' n
J
_~
g09
May 24, 1988
~ee"t
3.07 of the Roanoke County Charter and Section
14.1-46.0-1:1 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as
amended.
No one was present to speak to this ordinance. Mr.
y advised that a public hearing is required to increase the
salaries of members of the Board of Supervisors. The second
re~ding will be June 14, 1988.
Supervisor McGraw moved to approve first reading of the
orldinance. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Johnson and
c ried by the following recorded vote:
A S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens
N1~YS: Supervisor Garrett
I1~1 RE; FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES
1. Ordinance authorizin the urchasin of the residue
Mr. Mahoney
orted this ordinance will authorize the County to buy the
emainder of the Reynolds tract of 83 acres. Originally 157
Gres was purchased and this is the balance of the same property.
0 one was present to speak to this ordinance.
Supervisor McGraw moved to approve first reading of the
rdinarice. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Nickens and
carried by the following recorded vote:
$10~
May 24, 1988
„-----__
fiscal ear bud et for Roanoke Count Mr. Mahoney explained
that this is the second step in the budget process. During t:
afternoon session, the Board adopted the budget. This action
will appropriate the dollars to accomplish the budget. The
second reading will be June 14, 1988. No one was present to
speak to the ordinance.
Supervisor Johnson moved first reading of the
ordinance. The motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw and
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garret
NAYS: None
IN RE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
1. Ordinance amendin and reado tin Section 12-8
and Traffic of the Roanoke Count Code: Mr. Mahoney advised at
this ordinance amends the County Code to incorporate by refer ce
the most recent changes of the General Assembly concerning th
Motor Vehicle Code. The first reading was held on May 10, 19 8.
Mr. Hugh Key, 5355 Black Bear Lane, spoke concernin
this ordinance. He asked how much revenue the County has los by
not amending the ordinance in 1987. Mr Mahoney responded tha
.;. 3.L~ti
May 24, 1988
811
Cou t personnel estimated that $10,000 revenue is generated per
mon h. In February 1988, the Sheriff's Department stopped giving
ti ets on this code. Mr. Mahoney estimated approximately
$2 ,000 was lost. These funds are going to the State of
Vi ginia.
Supervisor Johnson moved to approve the ordinance. The
mo ion was seconded by Supervisor Robers and carried by the
f lowing recorded vote:
A S; Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett
S; None
ORDINANCE 524_ 88-11 AMENDING AND
READOPTING SECTION 12-8 OF ARTICLE I OF
CHAPTER 12 OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
ounty, Virginia, as follows:
1. That Section 12-8, Adoption of state law, Article
In General, of Chapter 12, Motor Vehicles and Traffic, be
.mended and readopted to read and provide as~follows:
sec. 12-8. Adoption of state law.
Pursuant to the authority of section 46.1-188 of the
Code of Virginia, a•11 of the provisions and requirements of the
laws of the state contained in title 46.1 and in article 2
(section 18.2-266 et seq.) of chapter 7 of title 18.2 of the Code
of Virginia, except those provisions and requirements the
8
__ May 24, 1988
r r:
,~- --- --
violation of which constitutes a felony, and except those
provisions and requirements which, by their very nature, can ve
no application to or within the county, are hereby adopted an
incorporated in this chapter by reference and made applicable
within the county. References to "highways of the state"
contained in such provisions and requirements hereby adopted
shall be deemed to refer to the streets, highways and other
public ways within the county. Such provisions and requireme s,
as amended from time to time, are hereby adopted and made a p t
of this chapter as fully as though set forth at length herein, .
and it shall be unlawful for any person within the county to
violate or fail, neglect or refuse to comply with any such
provision or requirement; provided, that in no event sha 1 the
penalty imposed for the violation of any provision or requi ement
hereby adopted exceed the penalty imposed for a similar fense
under the state law hereby adopted. `
-~
date that this ordinance is ado ted.
2. The effective date of this ordinance sha
May 25, 1988.
1 be I
.h•
__
8~3
-- - -- _ -- _Ma -_2.4 ---19 88
On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by Supervisor
rs and carried by the following recorded vote:
AY S: Supervisors Johnson, McGraw, Nickens, Robers, Garrett
N S: None
2. Ordinance amendin Ordinance No. 2988-6 authorizin
_ No one was present to speak to this
or~lnance.
Supervisor Johnson moved to approve the ordinance. The
mo ion was seconded by Supervisor Nickens and carried by the
fo lowing recorded vote:
AY S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett
S: None
ORDINANCE 52488-12 AMENDING ORDINANCE
N0. 2988-6 AUTHORIZING THE LEASE OF
APPROXIMATELY FIVE (5) ACRES IN THE
HOLLINS/OLD MOUNTAIN ROAD AREA BY THE
COUNTY OF ROANOKE FROM INGERSOLL RAND
FOR RECREATIONAL PURPOSES
Co i!
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
ty, Virginia, as follows :
1. That at the February 9, 1988, meeting the Board of
Su ervisors authorized the lease of approximately five (5) acres
lo(~ated in the Hollins/Old Mountain Road area from Ingersoll Rand
.R ~ 4
.>7.:.
_._._ ___
7r __.-______._-
for recreational purposes (Ordinance No. 2988-6). The t rm of
the lease was for a twenty-five (25) year period; and
2. That the Board of Supervisors hereby amends rdin-
ance No. 2988-6 adopted February 9, 1988; and
3. That pursuant to provisions of Section 18.04 f the
Charter of Roanoke County, a first reading concerning the mend-
ment of the lease of the hereinafter-described real esta e was
held on May 10, 1988. A second reading on this matter wa held
on May 24, 1988. This real estate is located in the Holli s/Old
Mountain Road area of Roanoke County; and -
4. That the lease by Roanoke County from In rsoll
Rand of approximately five (5) acres located in the Holli s/Old
Mountain Road area of Roanoke County for recreational purpo es is
hereby authorized and approved; and
5• That the annual lease amount or rental sh 11 be
$1.00; and that the term of this lease shall be for a thr e (3)
year renewable term; and
6. That the County Administrator is authorized to
execute such document-s and take such actions on behalf of Roan ke
County as are necessary to accomplish this transaction, all of
which shall be upon form approved by the County Attorney.
On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by Supervisor
Nickens and carried by the following recorded vote:
_ .<.~:~
~. 815
- -- - ----Ma _~4 , __
_ _ ----- - ---------- -- - -- ___1.9 8.8----
- ---1 _-- - -- ---II-------- ---
AY S: Supervisors Johnson, McGraw, Nickens, Robers, Garrett
N S: None
IT
INURE: CITIZENS COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
The following citizens spoke in opposition to the
Pr posed landfill site in Mount Pleasant. '
1. John Ferguson, 3868 Pitzer Road, advised there were
19 springs and two branches that lead into Back Creek. This will
of ect pollution in Smith Mountain Lake which could affect ~~
to rism.
2. Donna Wood, 3876 Pitzer Road, presented a petition
fr m the Mount Pleasant community requesting a waste-to-energy
so ution to solid waste. They also plan to study recycling.
~~~ RE : ADJOURNMENT .~
At 9:05 P.M., Chairman Garrett declared the meeting
ad
Mourned.
Lee Garrett, Chairman
8Y6.
June 14, 1988
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors
Roanoke County Administration Center
3738 Brambleton Avenue, SW
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
June 14, 1988
The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
nty, Virginia, met this day at the Roanoke County
inistration Center, this being the second Tuesday, and the
fi#st regularly scheduled meeting of the month of June 1988.
IN~~RE: CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Garrett called the meeting to order at 3:05
p. The roll call was taken.
ME BERS PRESENT: Chairman Lee Garrett, Vice Chairman Richard
Robers, Supervisors Bob L. Johnson, Steven
A. McGraw, Harry C. Nickens
ERS ABSENT: None -
S T.
PRESENT: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; John
M. Chambliss, Assistant County
Administrator for Human Services; John R.
Hubbard, Assistant County Administrator for
Community Services and Development; Don M.,
Myers, Assistant County Administrator for
Management Services; Paul M. Mahoney,
June 14, 1988
~~ - .. .
County Attorney, Mary H. Allen, Deputy
Clerk;
IN RE: OPENING CEREMONIES I
The invocation was given by the Reverend Gordon Gri s,
Cave Spring Baptist Church. The Pledge of Allegiance was rec' ed
by all present.
IN RE: JOINT WORK SESSION WITH SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
Chairman Garrett advised that all members of the Bo
of Supervisors were present. John Parrott, chairman of the S
Waste Management Board advised that the representative from t]
Town of Vinton, and one representative from Roanoke County wa;
absent.
Roanoke County representative John Hubbard reported
~.
that the Landfill Board met earlier in the day, and a draft
letter was prepared which included a commitment to waste-to-
energy, host community considerations, a recycling program.
Olver and Associates outlined the plans for the sit'
procedure, Part "A" application. They will also be doing a
waste-to-energy evaluation. Supervisor Johnson asked the me
of the Landfill Board if they were willing to begin a mandato
recycling program. He expressed the desire that this program
id
rs
. ,e. r,:
g1g
June 14, 1988
- -. _----
.~ - ---- 11 ---- -- - - ---- ___ _ -------- --
ha e a high priority. Mr. Parrott stated they did not have a
pr blem with beginning a recycling program. Supervisor Robers
pr posed that mandatory recycling of glass, aluminum, and plastic
to e place if the landfill is located in the County.
County Administrator Elmer Hodge requested that John
Ol er and the consultants study recycling and bring back a report
in 30 days. There would be budget implications that would have
to be studied. Mr. Kiser, representative from Roanoke City
st ted he supported recycling, but the budget implication in each
to ality should be studied. He felt it would take six months for
th City of Roanoke to study the issue.
Mr. Hodge recommended that the consultants bring back a
re ort in 60 days on recycling. Supervisor McGraw requested that
th tippage fee be substantially increased. Mr. Parrott
ex ressed agreement on that issue. In response to a question
fr m Supervisor Garrett, Mr. Olver responded ghat the first step
sh uld be an analysis of the proposed sites. They plan to have
th site analysis complete by the end of August. They would
be in an economic analysis at that time. They will begin a study
of waste-to-energy and recycling immediately. Supervisor Nickens
ad ised he would not support on-site analysis until he has a
pu lic commitment from the Landfill Board for a mandatory
re ycling program to be instituted by July 1, 1989, a commitment
sxs
. r..1'.
__ .
. ____
to waste-to-energy and a commitment to go forward with anothe
member on the Landfill Board.
Mr. Hodge stated he felt that the Landfill Board mus
begin site inspections for the sake of the neighborhoods. He
pointed out it was difficult to find financing for waste-to-
energy, He recommended moving forward with right-of-entry.
Mr. Olver advised they will bring back a report on
recycling in 60 days. Mr. Parrott asked if the City of Sale
should be included in any study of recycling. He responded t
Y
have been asked to participate. He suggested that the
participating jurisdictions invite the City of Salem to consi r
participation. Mr. Parrott assured the Board of Supervisors t at
the Landfill Board shared the same goals as they did.
IN RE: REQUESTS TO ADD, POSTPONE, OR CHANGE~,THE ORDER OF
AGENDA ITEMS:
Mr. Hodge requested that Approval of the bid for
cleanup of Dixie Caverns Landfill be deferred until after
Executive Session. He also requested the addition of E-8,
Implementation of the Classification Plan and E-9, Authorizat
to proceed with Landfill Siting.
IN RE; PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS:I
.,~aa
82 0
_ June _ 14 .__..19.8 B__________ ._________ _._____
1. Announcement of awards received b the Plannin
- -- --- ... ..~.~LL«u~~l~ rlannln Process: Chairman
Ga rett recognized Director of Planning Rob Stalzer and Associate
Pl nner Liz Parcell for their accomplishment in winning awards
fr m the Southwest .Virginia Chapter of the American Society for
Pu lic Administration and the National Association of Counties
fo their EXPLORE Planning Process. Mr. Stalzer acknowledged
of ers who had worked on the process.
2• Certificate of A reciation to Charlot e Dunston
+ --- ~-~~~ ~~aL ivr contributions to Youth
+ Ha en II: Chairman Garrett presented the certificate to Mrs.
Du ston for her efforts in obtaining contributions for Youth
Ha en II in the amount of $1,773.57 from the state and local
ch pters of the Order of the Eastern Star of Virginia.
3. Resolution of Con ratulations to the cit of
o noke for bein selected an A 1 1 ~21m~.-4 ,-. .. ,._ i__ • 1- _ _ ,. ,. _
Supervisor Johnson moved to approve the prepared
re olution. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Nickens and
ca ried by the following recorded vote:
AY S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett
NA S: None
Kit Kiser, Director of Utilities and Operations was
pr~sent from the City of Roanoke to accept the resolution from
Ch~irman Garrett.
~2 ~
RESOLUTION 614_ 8g-1 OF CONGRATULATIONS TO THE
CITY OF ROANOKE UPON BEING SELECTED AN ALL-AMERICA TY
FOR 1988
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF
COUNTY, VIRGINIA AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, The City of Roanoke, Virginia has consisten
Y
shown outstanding leadership qualities in its many outstandin
endeavors; and
WHEREAS, in recognition of this outstanding leadersh'
the City of Roanoke was named an All America City in 1953 and
1982 by the National Civic League, and received the same awar in
1979 with the other Roanoke Valley localities; and
WHEREAS, in recognition of their creative community
projects including the Harrison Heritage and Cultural Center,
their Comprehensive Plan and a Self Help Program for single
mothers, the City of Roanoke has again been selected as an Al
America City, one of only ten cities in the United States to
receive this honor.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervis
of Roanoke County, Virginia expresses its congratulations to
Mayor, City Council, City Manager, and the employees and citi:
of Roanoke City on being selected again as an All America City
for 1988, and
:~ i'~ it
s
-`r
- - -- ----- --- -- -- -- - --- - -
_ ~ ---- ~~
wi
ou~
Ni
AY
NA
IN
g22
FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors or Roanoke County
hes continued success to all those involved in this
standing accomplishment.
On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by Supervisor
:kens, and upon the following recorded vote:
.S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett
S: None
RE: NEW BUSINESS
1. Establishment of a Joint Risk Mana ement Section for
th School and count o erations: Director of Finance, Diane
Hy tt reported that on April 20, 1988, consolidation of services
be weep the Schools and County was discussed at a work session.
Ri k Management was one of those areas identified for study. The
Co my staff feels that the combination of property, casualty,
an liability and fidelity insurance policies of the County and
Sc ools should be monitored by a risk manager. County staff has
me with the schools and proposed a policy statement
es ablishing an area of risk management. Health Insurance and
wo kers compensation will continue to be handled by the
De artment of Human Resources. It is estimated that $100,000
wi 1 be saved by combining these areas under risk management.
_ ___ June_ 14.,___198
823
_n _ - ---
After staffing this area, approximately $60,000 savings will
realized.
Supervisors Robers and Johnson asked why health
insurance and workers compensation would not be part of this
program. Mr. Hodge responded that he would prefer that these
insurances continue to be part of Human Resources because it a
personnel function. Ms. Hyatt added that the Risk Manager wo d
be reviewing the health insurance proposals.
Supervisor Nickens recommended that the County wait
hire a Risk Manager until the contracts are studied and the
savings determined. Mr. Hodge responded that the contracts h e
already been studied for savings and it will be necessary to ve
a full-time person.
Supervisor Johnson moved to approve the staff
recommendation, combining the Risk Management operations for e
County and schools and establishment of the Risk Management
Section and Risk Manager. The motion was seconded by Supervi r
McGraw. Supervisor Nickens offered a substitute motion to
approve the staff recommendation with the exception that the 'sk
Manager be hired for one year subject to review by the govern'
g
body. Supervisor Johnson withdrew his motion and seconded
Supervisor Nicken's motion. The motion carried by the follow'
g
recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garret
824
June_.14 .._.1.9.88_._
NAB
~S : None
2. Re nest from the Industrial Development Authority
nce of IDA Bonds for Hollins Colle e: Economic
De elopment Director Tim Gubala advised that in August 1987,
Ho lins College had requested $3,500,000 from the Industrial
De elopment Authority for financing to construct a new gymnasium.
Si ce that time, they have reevaluated the project and decided
th t they can construct both the new facility and renovate the
of gymnasium for $3,000,000.
Supervisor Johnson moved to approve the prepared
re olution. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Nickens and
ca ried by the following recorded vote:
AY S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett
NA S: None
RESOLUTION 61488-3 OF APPROVAL FOR ISSUANCE
OF-INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BONDS
FOR HOLLINS COLLEGE
Ro ~I
a
WHEREAS, the Industrial Development Authority of
noke County, Virginia (the Authority) has considered the
lication of Hollins College Corporation (the College)
uesting the issuance of one or more of the Authority's revenue
bo ds or notes in the financing of (1) the construction of a
gy nasium of approximately 19,000 square feet (which will be
lo~ated on the College's campus, adjacent to and connecting with
,.,u
825
-___ _ June 14, 1988
the College's present indoor swimming facility, in Roanoke Co ty
Virginia) and (2) renovating the College's existing gymnasium
(collectively, the Project) will be owned and operated by the
College,and has held a public hearing thereon; and
WHEREAS, it has been requested that the Board of
Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia (the Board) approve t
financing of the Project and the issuance of the Bonds, and s
approval is required for compliance with Section 147 (f) of t:
Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF
COUNTY, VIRGINIA:
1. The Board approves the financing of the Project nd
the issuance of the Bonds by the Authority for the benefit of he
College, as required by said Section 147(f), to permit the
Authority to assist in the financing of the Project.
2. The approval. of the issuance of the Bonds, as
required by said Section 147(f), does not constitute an
endorsement of the Bonds or the credit worthiness of the Coll e
or otherwise indicate that the Project possesses any economic
viability. The Bonds"shall provide that neither the Commonwe th
of Virginia (the Commonwealth) nor any political subdivision
"thereof, including Roanoke County (the County) and the Author'
shall be obligated to pay the principal of or interest on the
Y.
Bonds or other costs incident thereto except from the revenue
... .. :, :k eC!A
826
June 14, 1988
~ ---- ---
------~I- ------ -- - -
an receipts pledged therefor and that neither the faith or
cr dit nor the taxing power of the Commonwealth or any political
su division thereof, including the County and the Authority,
sh 11 be pledged thereto.
3. This Resolution shall take effect immediately
up~n its adoption.
On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by Supervisor
Ni kens and carried by the following recorded vote:
AY S: Supervisors Johnson, McGraw, Nickens, Robers, Garrett
NA S: None
3. Allocation of Human Services Fundin for fiscal ear
19 8 89: Director of Management and Budget Reta Busher reported
th t with the dissolution of the Human Services Committee, the
as inistrative staff allocated the $20,000 budgeted for the
va ious human services agencies. Staff is recommending that the
. $2 ,000 appropriation be allocated exactly as~was allocated in
th 1987-88 budget.
Supervisor Nickens moved to approve the staff
re ommendation. The motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw and
ca~ried by the following recorded vote:
AY S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett
NA S: None
4. Recommendation for Fundin of Cultural Enrichment
ons: Ms. Busher advised there was $20,000 budgeted for
82'7
___ June 14, 1988
... ~ .. ~ r /.d{ ^~
Roanoke Valley Cultural Enrichment Organizations. In additi
the County applied for and received a Local Government Challe e
Grant from the Commission for the Arts which will match the
$5,000 monies given by localities to arts organizations. Thi
will bring the total contributions from Roanoke County to $25, 00.
Staff recommends that the County accept the grant and allocat
the total funding as follows: $5,000 to the Arts Council of
Roanoke Valley, $15,000 to Center in the Square, and $5,000
the Roanoke Symphony which is the same as last year with the
exception of the $5,000.
Supervisor Robers moved to approve staff recommenda 'on.
The motion was seconded by Supervisor Johnson and carried by e
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Garrett
NAYS: Supervisor Nickens
5. Awardincx of bid for employee health insurance
Director of Human Resources Keith Cook reported that the Bid
Committee received four proposals for health coverage and two or
dental insurance.. The proposals were narrowed down to two bi
Blue Cross-Blue Shield`and American General, and the County i
recommending award of the contract to American General Group
Insurance Company. They further recommend that the County's
allocation of $42.00 be limited to health insurance coverage
which would bring $50,000 into the health insurance budget.
.. ~. ii3
828
--~ ------- - ----------- --_------------- ------ --June _ 14,_19.88_..-----
- - ----~I-- --- -- -- -----
Supervisor McGraw and Supervisor Johnson expressed
co cern at choosing a company that the employees and-medical
fa ilities were not familiar with, due to similar problems in the
pa t. Mr. Cook responded that both companies offered the same
co erages, but the-main difference was the Blue Cross name
re ognition. Supervisor Robers pointed out that there was a
la ge difference in the unfunded balance between the Blue Cross
pr gram and the American General program. He suggested raising
th deductibles. In response to a question from Supervisor
Ni kens, Mr. Hodge advised that in order to keep the rates
qu ted in the recommendation, the $42.00 used by those employees
fo a medical insurance plan other than the health insurance must
be included. Otherwise, the rates will increase.
Supervisor Johnson moved to reject the staff
re ommendation. The motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw and
ca ried by the following recorded vote:
AY S: Supervisors Johnson, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett
NA S: Supervisor Robers
Supervisor McGraw suggested describing the two plans to
th employees and getting input from them. Mr. Hodge responded
th t the contract expires at the end of June and there was not
ti e for responses from the employees.
Supervisor Nickens moved to award the bid to Blue
Cr ss-Blue Shield lower payment plan and that alternate insurance
_ }~.t4~
8~9
continue to be available to those employees not participating,
and that premiums paid by employees be revised to reflect the I
increase as a result of continuing the alternate insurance.
motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett
NAYS: Supervisor Robers
Supervisor Nickens requested that the County
Administrator bring back a recommendation on health insurance o
later than June 1, 1989 for the next fiscal year budget.
6. Im lementation of the Classification Plan for
Fiscal Year 1988-89: Mr. Hodge reported that during
implementation of the classification plan, there were people
were below minimum step. The original plan was to move them
the minimum step. The outcome was that shorter service.emplo
could move to a higher step with a higher salary than those w.
have been employed with the County for several years. The st,
is recommending that employees move to the minimum step at the
anniversary date, and that employees hired after July 1 will t
hired one step below the A step of-the classification plan.
Supervisor Garrett moved to authorize the County
Administrator to implement the pay plan as outlined. The moti
0
s
r
died because there was no second.
:t..r
83p
- -' June_14,_14~--8----
--; ----ll- --- --
Supervisor Nickens suggested that the item be deferred
un it all board members were present.
7. Approval of fundincx to convert County street lights
to Hi h Pressure Sodium: Director of Engineering Phillip Henry
ex lained that during the past year staff has had discussions
wi h Appalachian concerning conversion of street lights. The
la est rate negotiations for electrical power also resulted in
sa ings and it was a good time to use the savings to convert to
hi h pressure sodium which is more efficient. The staff is
re ommending utilization of the remaining funds in this year's
bu get and next year's budget, to pay for the majority of the
co version.
Supervisor Nickens moved to approve staff
re ommendation. The motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw and
ca ried by the following recorded vote:
AY S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett
NA S: None
8. Authorization to Proceed with Landfill Sitin
Mr Hodge recommended that the Board authorize the right of entry
fo the proposed landfill sites. He explained .that the
ap lication will be a lengthy process and should begin. He felt
th residents in the neighborhoods should know whether the
pr posed sites will meet the criteria. He also recommended that
wi hin the next 60 to 90 days that the County go forward with
s lr'.
X831
their other requests that Roanoke City and the Town of Vinton
notified of the neighborhood considerations required for the .
sites, that the Landfill Board continue researching waste to
energy and recycling; and that the host locality have another
member on the Landfill Board.
Supervisor Johnson moved to approve the staff
recommendation. The motion seconded by Supervisor Garrett.
Supervisor Nickens made a substitute motion that th
issue be tabled until the Landfill Board receives from Olver
Associates the report on recycling. The motion was seconded
Supervisor Robers.
The substitute motion carried by the following reco
vote:
AYES: Supervisors Robers, McGraw, Nickens
NAYS: Supervisors Johnson, Garrett
IN RE: REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS
Supervisor McGraw moved to set a public hearing for
July 26, 1988 to consider the views of the citizens of Roanok
County on the issue of whether or not to adopt a resolution
requesting the circuit court to schedule a referendum for
November 8, 1988, on changing the method of appointment of
members of the Roanoke County School Board from the Roanoke
83.2
-------- --------- ---- June_~4_ -19-88
i ---~~
Co my School Board selection Commission to the Roanoke County
BO rd of Supervisors.
The motion was seconded by Supervisor Johnson and
ca ried by the following recorded vote:
AY S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Garrett
NA S: Supervisor Nickens
IN RE: FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES
1. Ordinance amendin Cha ter 2 Article II
u chases: County Attorney Paul Mahoney advised this ordinance
wo ld consolidate the purchasing of schools and. administration.
No one was present to speak to the ordinance.
Supervisor Johnson moved first reading of the
or finance. .The motion was seconded by Supervisor Nickens and
ca ried by the following recorded vote:
AY S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett
NA S: None
2. Ordinance establishin Premium Refuse Collection
an establishin fees: Mr. Mahoney explained that there will be
a ublic hearing on June 28th because there will be an increase
of fees. No one was present to speak to the ordinance.
~~~
.~3-3
----
__ _ __
_ll - -- - --- --- -
Supervisor Garrett moved to approve first reading o
the ordinance. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Robers
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens,
NAYS: None
the conve ance of a ri ht-of-wa and easement to A alachian
Power Company- This will grant an easement to serve the Roar
County Public Safety Building. No one was present to speak 1
the ordinance.
the ordinance.
The motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens,
NAYS: None
Hills: Mr. Mahoney advised the County has received an offer
acquire a surplus well lot for $100. No one was present to s k
to the ordinance.
Supervisor Nickens asked about the size of the lot, nd
why the price was less than other well lots that have been so .
Supervisor Nickens moved to approve first reading o
Mr. Mahoney did not have the information.
. .. ~.. }.
834
_--- _-- - ------- ----- --- _- June_14._1.9.8-8--------_
Supervisor Nickens moved to continue this ordinance to
Ju e 28th so that all information will be available. The motion
wa seconded by Supervisor McGraw and carried by the following
re orded vote:
AY S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garret t
NA S: None
5. Ordinance authorizin the lease urchase of certain
e i ment: This will authorize the lease-purchase of the
em rgency communication equipment. Mr. Mahoney requested that
th second reading of the ordinance be dispensed with because of
th time constraints to accept the offers from the leasing
ag ncies. Director of Finance Diane Hyatt explained that this
co ers four items that were merged to get the best financing.
Th re were ten bids and the interest expenses was considerably
le s by combining the items. No one was present to speak to the
or finance. - `
Supervisor Garrett moved to approve the ordinance and
to dispense with the second reading. The motion was seconded by
Su ervisor Nickens and carried by the following recorded vote:
Ay S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett
NA S: None
ORDINANCE 61488=g AUTHORIZING THE SALE AND LEASE
PURCHASE OF CERTAIN EQUIPMENT.
835
--__ --.a.JVU--.
The Board of Supervisors ("Board") of the Cou ty of
Roanoke,
Virginia ("County") has determined that it is
desirable to enter into a lease purchase transaction to fin nce
portion of the cost in the amount of a a
pproximately $1,550, 00 of
certain public safety radio system equipment «
("Equipment ). The
Board proposes to sell the Equipment to the Lessor whose
is accepted b ~ P posal
y this Ordinance ("Lessor") pursuant to a B 11 of
Sale ("Bill of Sale") from the County to the Lessor and to lea
the Equipment from the Lessor se
pursuant to a Lease Pu chase
Agreement ("Lease Purchase Agreement") from the Lessor
County. - o the
f
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BO
SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA:
1• This Ordinance shall be adopted as an e
measure, and the second reading of this Ordinance is
dispensed with in accordance with Section 18.04 of the
County Charter.
2• The Board hereby determines that it is
best interest of the County to accept the proposal ("Pro
of GE Capital Fleet Services, Inc., to serve as Lessor unc
Lease Purchase Agreement. The sale of the Equipment
OF
y~ncy
ereby
anoke
n the
sal")
r the
o the
----------_ - - ------June-L4._1988__--
$36
Le sor pursuant to the
Bill of Sale and the lease of the
Eq ipment from the Lessor pursuant to the L
A9" eement u ease Purchase
Pon the terms set forth in the Proposal are hereb
aP roved, y
3• The Bill
of Sale and the Lease Purchase
Ag eement are hereby approved in substantia
su mitted to this 11Y the forms
meeting, with such Chan es
om ssions g insertions, or
(including, without limitation, changes of the da
th reof) as ma tes
Y be approved by the Chairman or the Vice Chairman
of the Board, whose approval shall be evidence c
th execution and deliver onclusively by
y of such documents,
4• The Chairman
and Treasurer are each hereby
au horized and directed to execute and deliver
an the ~ the Bill of Sale
.Lease Purchase `
Agreement and, if required the Deputy
C1 rk of the Board is authorized and directed to
to be affix or cause
affixed the seal of the Board to such documents
at est such seal, and to
Each officer or agent of the County is
au horized to execute and deliver on behalf of th
in truments e County such
documents or certificates, and to do and
su h things and acts perform
as they shall deem necessar
to Carr y °r appropriate
Y out the transactions
authorized by this Ordinance or
co templated by the transactions authorized by this
Ordinance or
83'7
,~,
contemplated by the Bill of Sale, Lease Purchase Agreement r the
Proposal, and all of the foregoing, previously done or pe ormed
by such officers or agents of the County, are in all r
pects
approved, ratified, and confirmed.
5• The Board determines that sale of the E
'pment
to the Lessor pursuant to the Bill of Sale and the lease f the
Equipment to the County in accordance with the terms of the Lease
Purchase Agreement and the Proposal and all actions of the ounty
contemplated thereunder, will be in furtherance of the welf re of
the citizens of the County and will provide facilities whi h are
essential and necessary to the operations of the County.
6.
Agreement or any
contemplated by
shall constitute
County beyond
aPPropriations.
Nothing in this Ordinance or the Lease P chase
t documents in connection with the trans Lions
the Ordinance or the Lease Purchase Ag ement
a pledge of the full faith and credit f the
the constitutionally permitted a nual
~• The appropriate officers and agents
County are hereby authorized and directed to execute
Arbitrage Certificate and Tax Covenants setting foz
expected use of the proceeds from the sale of the Equipm~
the
Non-
the
t and
838
------ __June_ 14,_ 1~~8__- - -
i
(~ au
co taining such covenants as may be necessary in order to show
co pliance with the provisions of Section 148 of the Internal
Re enue Code of 1986, as amended, and applicable regulations
re ating to "arbitrage bonds." The Board of Supervisors of the
Co my covenants as behalf of the County that such proceeds will
be invested and expended as set forth in such Non-Arbitrage
Ce tificate and Tax Covenants and that the County shall comply
wi h the other covenants and representations contained therein.
8. The officers and agents of the County are hereby
~horized and directed to take such further action as they deem
ne~essary regarding the transactions contemplated by the Lease
Pu~chase Agreement and all actions taken by such officers and
aa~nts in connection therewith are hereby ratified and confirmed.
9. This Ordinance shall take effect immediately.
The undersigned Deputy Clerk of the Board of
Su ervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby certifies that
th foregoing constitutes a true and correct extract from the
mi utes of a meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
Co nty, Virginia, held on the 14th day of June, 1988, and of the
while thereof so far as applicable to the matters referred to in
suf~h extract .
839 .r ..
-- - - June. _14 .1988
WITNESS MY HAND and the seal of the Boa
Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, this 1
1988. 6th day ofl
On motion of Supervisor Garrett to approve ,
and dispense with second reading, seconded by Su
and carried b pervisor
y the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson
McGraw, Nickens, Robers, Ga
NAYS: None
'd of
Jurie,
nance
ckens
tt
- ~..` ur oses Valle 'nte :
Mr. Mahoney reported this
ordinance authorizes the conveya ce of
residual parcels of real
estate left over after constructi n and
dedication of the. industrial access road.
allow Lingerfelt Develo ment The agreemen will
p Corporation to acquire the p Perty
for $32,000. The mone
Y will be allocated to~the capital f
account. No one was ility
Present to speak to the ordinance.
Supervisor Johnson moved to approve
the ordinance. first read ng of
The motion was seconded by Supervisor Garre t
carried by the followin and
g recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson
Robers, Nickens, Garrett
NAYS: None
June 14, 1988
84Q
ABS'~AIN: Supervisor McGraw
IN Its: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
1 Ordinance to increase the salaries of members of
7
-!ih 11-I
Supervisor McGraw moved to approve the ordinance.
T e motion was seconded by Supervisor Johnson and carried by the
f llowing recorded vote:
r
A ES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens
N YS: Supervisor Garrett
ORDINANCE 61488-10 TO INCREASE THE SALARIES OF
MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE
COUNTY PURSUANT TO SECTION 3.07 OF THE ROANOKE
COUNTY CHARTER AND SECTION 14.1-46.01:1 OF THE CODE
OF VIRGINIA
A
WHEREAS, Section 3.07 of the Charter for the County
f Roanoke provides for the compensation of members of the board
of supervisors and the procedure for increasing their salaries;
(land
~.
WHEREAS, Section 14.1-46.01:1 of the 1950 Code of
Virginia, as amended, establishes the annual salaries of members
of boards of supervisors within certain population brackets; and
.~
l
_ __ __June__l~_,
842
2. Ordinance amendin the Roanoke Coun Code to
th---e imP°~i ' o- n of the Law Library feP t~ suonort ,mss
ordinance.
_ No one was present to speak to
Supervisor Johnson moved to approve the ordinance.
T motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw and carried by the
fo lowing recorded vote:
AYES
S:
Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett
None
ORDINANCE 614,_ 88-11 AMENDING THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE
TO AUTHORIZE THE INCREASE OF THE LAW LIBRARY FEE TO
SUPPORT THE ROANOKE COUNTY/SALEM LAW LIBRARY
i
WHEREAS, by Ordinance adopted March 12, 1985, the
Bo rd of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, imposed an
as essment for law libraries as part of the costs incident to
ea h civil action filed in the courts within it s. boundaries in
th amount of $2.00; and
wa
As
ca
ofl
WHEREAS, Section 42.1-70 of the 1950 Code of Virginia
amended during the 1988 session of the Virginia General
embly authorizing an increase of this fee to $4.00 per civil
e filed with the clerks of the various courts to pay the costs
maintenance, upkeep, and improvements of the law library; and
WHEREAS, the $4.00 filing fee assessed against
841
June 14, 1988
a. t
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke Count
Virginia, has heretofore established the annual salaries of Bo
members to be $7,987 by Ordinance No. 6987-7, and further, has
established the additional annual compensation for the Chairma
of the Board to be $1,800 and for the Vice Chairman of the Boa
to be $1,200; and
WHEREAS, this section provides that the maximum
annual salaries therein provided may be adjusted in any year b~
an inflation factor not to exceed five (50) percent; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing on the establishment of
these salaries was held on May 24, 1988; and
WHEREAS, the first reading on this ordinance was t
on May 24, 1988; the second reading was held on June 14, 1988.
I.
ld
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby ORDAINED by the Board of
Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that the annual salar es
of members of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County,
Virginia,- are hereby increased by an inflation factor of five
(5~) percent pursuant to the
provisions of Section 3.07 of the
Roanoke County Charter and Section 14.1-46.01:1 of the 190 Co e
of Virginia, as amended. The new annual salaries shall be $8, 86
for members of the Board. In addition, the Chairman of the Bo rd
will receive an additional annual sum of $1,800 and the Vice
Chairman of the Board will receive an additional sum of $1,200
This ordinance shall take effect on July 1, 1988.
.g 4 ~
______June__1.4,~988 _. __
parties filing civil cases is equitable and just in that it
places the cost of maintaining the law library upon those who
precipitate litigation; and
WHEREAS, the first reading and public hearing on t
ordinance was held on May 24, 1988; the second reading of this
ordinance was held on June 14, 1988.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of
Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That this ordinance amends and reenacts the
ordinance adopted on March 12, 1985, and pursuant to the
authority found in Section 42.1-70 of the 1950 Code of Virgini
as amended, increases the assessment as part of the costs
incident to each civil action filed in the courts serving Roan
County from the sum of Two Dollars ($2.00) to the sum of Four
Dollars ($4.00) .
-- This assessment and these funds shall be expended
the purposes as provided in said statute, specifically, for tY
acquisition of law books, law periodicals, and computer legal
research services and equipment for the establishment, use, an
maintenance of the law library which shall be open for the use
the public. In addition, disbursements may include compensati
to be paid to librarians and other necessary staff for the
!~i s
ce
r
f
maintenance of such library.
. ..,.c~
$44
---- - - --- ----- --- _- -- _ _ ___ June__l._4,_1.9_fl8__
This assessment shall be in addition to other costs
pr scribed by law, but shall not apply to any action in which the
Co onwealth, any political subdivision, or the federal
go ernment is a party, and in which costs are assessed against
th County, any political subdivision, or the federal government.
2. That the Treasurer of Roanoke County is
au horized to receive the funds for the maintenance, upkeep, and
im rovements of the law library from the clerks of the various
co rts, and from the Treasurer of the City of Salem, and disburse
sa d funds for the maintenance, upkeep, and improvement of said
la library on a regular basis to those persons designated by the
ch of judge of the circuit court responsible for the
a inistration of said law library.
3. That the provisions of this ordinance shall take
of ect on July 1, 1988.
4. That a certified copy of this ordinance be
fo warded to the chief judges and clerks of the courts serving
Ro noke County, the Treasurer of Roanoke County, the Treasurer of
th Ci.ty of Salem, and the Roanoke County/Salem Bar Association.
3. Ordinance authorizin the urchase of the residue
-- itV11VW reservoir: No one was present
to speak to the ordinance.
•r ..gip
~84~5
_ ----- June 14, _ 1988
_. __ ~
- - ---
..-__ _
__ __ _ .
„ __.
Supervisor McGraw moved to approve the ordinance.
The motion was seconded by Supervisor Nickens and ca
followin cried by t
g recorded vote: I
AYES: Supervisors Johnson
Robers, McGraw, Nickens
NAYS: None ~ Garr tt
ORDINANCE 614_ g~ AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF
REMAINDER OF THE REYNOLDS PROPERTY/ SPRING HOLLC
RESERVOIR
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roan
County, Virginia, as follows:
1• That pursuant to
provisions of Section 18.04 0:
the Charter of Roanoke County, a first reading conce
acquisition of the hereinafter-described real estate rning the
May 24, 1888. was held c
A second reading on this matter was held on
June 14, 1988. This real estate consists of 83 acre
particularl << s, more
y described as Roanoke County Tax Map No. 72,00-1-1,
west of Salem adjacent to the property owned by Roanoke
the future location of Sprin County
g Hollow Reservoir; and
2• That the acquisition of 83 acres of real esta
from Harold D. Reynolds`' to
et al., to the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County for $40,000 is hereby auth
orized and approved; a
3• That the Count
Y Administrator is authorized to
execute such documents and take such actions on behalf
County as are necessar of Roano
Y to accomplish the acquisition of this
~s
-_,
____i
---
g~6
-._-- -------- _ -- __ __ . June_14,__19.8.8__.-
--- -- --ll------- ___ _-- ---
Pr perty, all of which shall be upon form approved by the County
At orney.
4. Ordinance a ro ria in th funds f r the 1988 8
-- - ~•-~ ~~U11~ vir inia: Mr. Mahoney
po nted out a correction in the ordinances concerning dates. No
on~ was present to speak to the ordinance.
Supervisor Johnson moved to approve the ordinance and
co rected. The motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw and
ca ried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NA1CS
Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett
None
ORDINANCE 61488-13 APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR THE
1988-89 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET FOR
ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA
a
WHEREAS, upon notice duly published in the newspaper,
ublic hearing was held on April 26, 1988, concerning the
ad ption of the annual budget for Roanoke County for fiscal year
19 8-1989; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County,
Vi ginia, approved said budget on May 24, 1988, pursuant to the~~-
pr visions of Section 13.02 of the Roanoke County Charter and
Ch Ater 4 of Title 15.1 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended;
an
8.4 '7
--- - June 14, 1988
WHEREAS, the first reading of this appropriation
ordinance was held on May 24, 1988, and the second readin
this ordinance was held on June 14 g of
~ 1988, pursuant to the
provisions of Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roan ke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1• That the following appropriations are hereb m
from the respective funds for the y de
period beginning July 1, 198
and ending June 30, 1989, for the functions and '
indicated: .Purposes
2• That the County Administrator may authorize th
transfer of any unencumbered balance or portion thereof f
classification of expenditure to another within the same rom o
department or agency. That the County Administrator ma
uP to $10,000 from the unencumbered balance of the a ry trans
of one de artment or a enc -, PP °Priatic
P g y to another department or agency,
including-the contingency account encompassed in the N
Departmental a on-
PPropriation.
3• That all funded outstanding encumbrances b
operating and capital, ~at June 30, 1988, are rea ~ °th
the 1988-89 fiscal PPropriated to
.year to the same department and account for
which they are encumbered in the previous year.
4• That appropriations designated for capital
Projects will not lapse at the end of the fiscal year b
ut shall
..~,.
June 14, 1988 8 L~ 8
---~ _ ~~
re ain appropriated until the completion of the project or until
th Board of Supervisors, by appropriate action, changes or
el urinates the appropriation. Upon completion of a capital
pr ject, staff is authorized to close out the project and '
tr nsfer to the funding source any remaining balances. This
se tion applies to appropriations for Capital Projects at June
30 1988, and appropriations in the 1988-89 budget..
On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by
Su ervisor McGraw and carried by the following recorded vote:
AY S: Supervisors Johnson, McGraw, Nickens, Robers, Garrett
NA S: None
PERSONNEL
----
OPERATING ------------------------
CAPITAL TRANSFEP,S
• -------- ---
TOTAL
EXPENDITURES: --~-~-~- ~--- " " - " ' --
GENERAL FUND
BOARD OF SUPERVISOP,S
CO ADtlINISTRATOR 93,472 70,898 875
165,245
ADISINISTRATIOH
.
INFORMATION ~ REFERRAL
126,306
14,155
I40,4b1
HUMAN RESOURCES
• ADMINISTRATION ~
EMPLOYEE RELATIONS 146,GS4 28,807
1,455
17b,91b
TP,AINIHG 26;899 26,899
COUNTY ATTORNEY
SESOUICEHTENNIAL 179,958 25,679 5,060 (37,143) 173
554
ECONOlSIC DEVELOPMENT 31,542 25,000 ,
S6
S42
TREASU?ER 117,582 108,626 ,
226
208
COMMONkEALTH ATTORNEY 250'887
270
384 167,006 585 40,963 ,
4
59,441
VICTIM,/6'ITNESS , 17,400 800 288,589
COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE 5,000 5,000
ADMI!lISTRATION
PEAL E"•
:ATE 83,957 3,125
0
65,413 12,379 ~~'
02 ~I
7
. 849
- - --„- - -
June 14, 1988
~~:
210,973
110,856
408,042
78,260
-- - -
PERSONAL PROPEP,TY a
140,6.0 - --
70,333 --- ---
BUSINESS LICENSE 69,684 41,172
CLEP,K OF THE CIRCUIT COURT
PUBLIC RECORDS 324,202 82,915 925
MICROFILM 39,818 38,442
POLICING AHD INVESTIGATING
A9MINISTI;ATIOH 144,675 38,700
CIVIL DIVISION 569,059 53,150 1,355
UNIFORM DIVISION 1,269,347 247,162 162,131
CRIMINAL INVEST DIVISION 513,970 79,088 1,950
SERVICES DIVISION 772,470 103,465 650
TRANSPORTATION SAFETY COMHISSIOH~ 960
CART; 6 CO;iFIHEHENT OF PRISOttEP,S 1,565,062 319,762
CIRCUIT COURT 7,125 92,514
GENERAL DISTRICT COURT ~ 150 14,560 4,030
MAGISTRATE 730
J 6 D RELATIONS COURT 8,621
PROBATION 37,730 1,445
ASST COUNTY kDMIH-MGT SERVICES
COUNTY ASSESSOR
ADMINISTRATION 183,532 37,567 175
P,~ASS£SSHENT 310,047 45,122 31,230
BOAP.D OF EOUILIZATION 10,949
FINANCIAL PLANNING
CEt1TRAL ACCOUGTIt~G 198,856 90,496
PAYROLL 50,647 14,570 570
1
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION 60,000 ,
MANAGEMENT kND BUDGET 71,613 16,640
RISK MANAGEMENT 1,108,380
PROCUREMENT SERVICES 167,690 40,091 100 ~~
EIRE
ADMINISTRATION 66,397 39,225
FIRE SUPPRESSION 72b,203 253,578 333
500
FIRE PREVENTION 90,435 6,800 ,
11
800
TRAINING 29,692 38,105 .
,
9
700
TECHNICAL SERVICES 55,532 148,356 ,
2
500
PLANNING AHD RESEAP,CH - 33,088 2
455 ,
RESCUE SQUAD ,
OPERATIONS
EMS SERVICES 235,638 49,010
EMERGENCY SERVICES 190,698 9,075
PLANNING AND OPERATIONS 22,272 4,500
HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
ASST CO ADMIN-COMMU1lITY SVGS 17,420 1,000
M?fIAGEHEt;T 101,602 20,604 200
SOLID KASTE
STP,EET LIGHTING 793,746 482,854 288,741
96,116
183,375
623,564
1,67i;,64~
595,008
876,585
960
1,884,824
94,639
1e,74o
730
8,621
39,175
221,274
38b,399
;0,949
289,352
65,787
60,000
83,253
1,.108,380
207,881
105,622
104,781 1,418,062
104,035
77,497
206,388
35,543
284,648
199,773
26,772
18,420
(18,200) 104,206
97,971 1,663,312
96,116
y 4.. -
• June 14, 1988 8 5 Q
--- --
--------- ---
-, --- ---ter
ENGINEERING ---
ENGINEERING 202,785 18,732 12,750 (92,918)
DRAFTING ~ RECORDS 68,828 8,064 (37,864)
CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION ~ 104,796 11,124 15,000 (54,980)
DRAINAGE 46,431 30,650 122,919
ROADKAY 40,025 4,700
BUILDING MAINTENANCE `
BUILDING MAINTENANCE 410,271 528,926 24,075
PLANNING & ZONING ,
ADMINISTRATION 89,225 36,503 175
CURRENT PLAHliIli6 AHD OPER 94,864 3,250
SPECIAL PP,OJECTS 33,754 1,500
ZONING ORDINANCE 23,000
DEVELOPMENT REVIEf!
PERMITS 62,016 2,085
DEVELOPMENT REVIEK 43,927 1,400
PLA1lNIliG COMMISSION 15,233 2,700
CONSTRUCTION BUILDING SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION ~ 37,763 7,000
INSPECTIONS 141,189 21,753
ASST CO ADMIN-HUMAN SERVICES 80,825 12,055
GROUNDS MAINTENANCE
GROUNDS MAINTENANCE 574,565 233,764 19,000
LEAF COLLECTION 26,150
STP,EET SIGHS 4,200
PARi:S AND RECREATION
COMMUNITY EDUCATION 54,796 1,500
LEISURE ACTIVITIES 91,660 1,000
OUTDOOR ADVENTURE 26,549 3,500
5EHIOZ CiTli:~i~S 7E,292 3,850
SPECIAL EVENTS 54,544 5,193
THERAPEUTICS 97,454 14,100
ADULT ATHLETICS 56,892 4,000
YOUTH ATHLETICS 137,948 10,000
ADMINISTRATION 197,842 81,409 14,660
PUBLIC HEALTH 397,370
SOCIAL SEVICES ADMINISTRATION 1,522,569 251,143 17,445
PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 802,285
INSTITUTIONAL CARE 36,000
SOCIAL SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS 94,984
CONTRIBUTIONS SVC ORGANIZATIONS 20,000
LIBRARY
ADMINISTRATION 101,349 S9S 850
RESEARCH AND CIRCULATION 628,000 282,737 450
GENERAL MAINTENANCE 70,400
JOINT BOTETOURT/RKE CiiTY LIB 23,833 24,225 500
EXTENSION ~ C01iTI1iUING EDUCATION 83,356 5,170 7,800
141,349
39,028
75,940
200,000
44,725
963,272
125,903
98,114
35,254
23,000
64,101
45,327
17,933
~. 44,763
162,942
102,880
827,329
26,150
4,200
56,296
92,b60
30,049
82,142
-_-~
59,737
116,554
60,892
147,948
293,911
39T,370
1,791,157
802,285
36,000
44,984
20,000
102,?"4
911,187
70,400
48,558
96,326
•~j~!.Y~
~" `~ ~ June 14, 1988
ELECTIONS
REGISTRATION
88,472
23,049
6,100
119,621
ELECTIONS 27,066 13,925 6,000 46,991
ANIHAL CONTROL 102,283 43,355 145,638
EHPLOYEE BENEFITS 677,392 677,392
tlISCELLANEOUS ~ ~ 790,343 740,343
TRAtiS TO DEBT-GENERAL 3,029,967 3,029,967.
TRANS TO DEBT SERVICE-SCHOOL 1,646,575 1,646,575
TRktiSFER TO CAPITAL 816,699 816,699
TRANSFER TO SCHOOLS 26,666,000 26,666,000
TRANSFER TO YOUTH HAVEN II 75,768 75,768
TRANSFER TO INTERNAL SERVICE 325,942 325,942
TRANSFER TO UTILITY CAPITAL 40,000 40,000
CONTINGENT BALANCE 50,000 50,000
58,270,79
TOTAL GENERAL FUND
DEBT SERVICE FUND
CP.PITAL FUND
UTILITI' CAPITAL fUND
YOUTH HAVER II
RECREATION FEE CLASS FUND
COYfiUNITY EDUCATION
LrISURE ACTIVITIES
OU i DOOR ADVE:iTUP.E
sEntoR c1TtzEHs
SPECIAL EVERTS
THERAPEUTICS
ADULT ATHLETICS
YOUTH ATHLETICS
ADN[HISTRATION
INTERNAL SERVICES FUND
DATA PROCESSING
ADMINISTRATION
OPERATIONS
DEVELOPMENT
VEHICLE POOL
COtSt;UNICATIONS
5,384,542 5,364,54
866,699 666,69
40,000 40,00
227,301 90,415 1,000 318,71
12,000 4,688 1,464 18,1`_
16,127 12,870 4,000 32,9`
4,344 20,586 1,750 26,6E
6,827 12,265 2,000 21,0
5,376 12,800 3,000 21,1.
3,600 2,700 500 6,81
34,786 8,982 1,000 44,71
3,000 3,0~
2,419 5,075 1,000 8,4 ,
152,094 9,470 1,828 163,3
137,947 108,546 112,200 12,116 370,8
199,473 7,850 700 208,0
188,038 72,067 -6,745 266,8 0
June 14, 1988 8 5 2
---~
---,
~I ---
UTILITY FUND -- _ ~---
UTILITY BILLING
COLLECTIONS 89,243 96,395 4,750 190,388
HETER BEADING 50,906 9,509 11,100 71,515
UTILITY HAINT ~ OPERATIONS
ADHIHISTRATION 174,302 42,768 18,000 235,070
. PATER OPERATIONS 337,298 1,471,797 50,400 ~ ~ 1,859,495
VATER MAINTENANCE 250,824 373,182 112,440 736,446
SEk'ER OPERATIONS 132,128 916,781 1,046,909
SEVER MAINTENANCE 207,435 158,027 44,300 .. 409,762
SANITARY SEKER EVALUATION 228,141 122,536 66,.660 417,337
NON-DEPARTHEtiTAL-KATER 1,286,235 120,553 1,408,788
NON-DEPARTMENTAL-SEKER 1,274,120 120,552 1,394,672
Orr"FSITE FACILITIES FUf{D-WATER 92,353 92,353
OFFSITE FACILITIES FUttD-SEVER .197,956 ~ . 197,956
GARAGE FUND 226,826 2~6,82b
SCHOOL OPE4ATING FUND 55,155,722
SCHOOL BUS FUND 1,125,000
SCHOOL CAFETEt;IA FUND 2,564,812
SCHOOL FEDERAL PP,OGRAMS FUt;D 1,151,011
SCHOOL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FUND 535,000
SCHOOL LITERARY LOAN FUND ~ ~ 2,981,000
SCHOOL TEXTBOOK FUND 425,633
REGIONAL SPECIAL EDUCATION FUND 678,159
TOTAL SCHOOL FUNDS 64,616,337
TOTAL EXPENDITURES ALL FUNDS 138,978,840
. ~.~.,
. >~.~.
. 853
FEVENUES:
GENERAL FUND
DEBT FUND
CAPITAL FUND
UTILITY CAPITAL FUND
YOUTH HAVEN II
RECREATION FEE CLASS FUND
INTERNAL SERVICES FUND
UTILITY FUND
OFFSITE FACILITY FU!!D-NAT!
OFFSITE FACILITY FUND-SERI
GARAGE FUND
SCHOOL OPERATING FUND
SCHOOL BUS FUND
SCHOOL CAFETERIA FUND
SCHOOL FEDERAL PROGRAHS FU!
SCHOOL CAPITAL IMPROVEHENTf
SCHOOL LITERARY FUND
SCHOOL TEXTBOOK FUND
REGIONAL SPECIAL EDUCATION ,
June 14, 1988
TOTAL REVENUES ALL F
6
• :;.
~:~
June 14, 1988 Q ~ 4
IN~~RE: APPOINTMENTS
~~
'I H
0
V
h
v
C
i
s
a
Industrial Development Authority Supervisor Robers
no inated Charles R. Saul, representing the Windsor Hills
Ma isterial District to another four-year term which will expire
Se tember 26, 1991.
Planning Commission• Supervisor Nickens nominated A.
Po ell Robinson to fill the unexpired term of J. R. Jones, Vinton
Ma isterial District.
Social Services Board: Supervisor Garrett nominated
Be ty Jo Anthony to another four-year term which will expire July
19 1992.
RE: REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS
~ Supervisor Robers announced that Dr. Hardy and Polly
loway from the County Schools have visited a school cafeteria
rrrated by an outside vendor near St. Louis to study cafeteria
~rvices handled by outside contractors. He has also asked Tim
I~ala to coordinate with the Regional Partnership for a Roanoke
Lley Day to be held at George Mason University in northern
=ginia.
Supervisor McGraw advised that the Blue Ridge Region
announced they will have a regional data base, a map and a
ieo available. He also announced that the Roanoke Valley
operation Committee will meet on Friday, June 17, at Botetourt
~nty. He informed the Board that the VML-VACO Task Force on
vexation is coming"to a conclusion on their study of annexation
ues and plan a report by September 1.
Supervisor Nickens moved that the County Attorney
dy the Landfill Board contract to determine whether it would
ow Roanoke County to have another representative. The motion
i
855
June 14, 1988
_, _._ _--
---~
II--------- -- -------- - -------
IN
wa seconded by Supervisor McGraw and carried by the following
re orded vote:
AY S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett
NA S: None
~~~ CONSENT AGENDA
County Administrator Elmer Hodge advised that Item 8,
a fireworks Permit for Hills Department must be changed for
in urance purposes to reflect that the Sheriff's Department
em loyees working at the display shall be on-duty officers.
Supervisor Johnson moved to approve the Consent
Ag nda with the change to Item 8. The motion was seconded by
Su ervisor Nickens and carried by the following recorded vote:
AY S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett
NA S: None
Co
RESOLUTION 61488-15 APPROVING AND
CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH
ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA
FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM L -
CONSENT AGENDA
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
nty, Virginia, as follows:
1. That that certain section of the agenda of the
Bo rd of Supervisors for June 14, 1988, designated as Item L -
t
-r;
.8~6
June 14, 1988
Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in asllto
each item separately set forth in said section designated I
through 13, inclusive, as follows:
1. Minutes of Meetings - March 9, 1988, March 29,
1988
2. Request for acceptance of Beaver Lane, Horn
Circle, and Elizabeth Drive into the VDOT
Secondary System.
3. Request for acceptance of Tulip Lane, Sunflower
Drive, and Ivy Lane into the VDOT Secondary
System.
4. Acknowledgment from Va. Department of
Transportation that the following roads have bey
taken into the Secondary System:
a. 0.20 miles of Indian Hill Drive
b. 0.04 miles of Memory Lane
c. 0.06 miles of Shadow Lane
5. Request for acceptance of Lantern Street,
Candlelight Circle and Shadow Lane into the VDO~
Secondary System.
6. Confirmation of Committee Appointments to the
Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals.
7. Ratification of charter agreement for the
operation of the Cardinal Academy and
authorization to execute the charter.
8. Request for a Fireworks Permit from Hills
Department Store.
9. Request for a Fireworks Permit from the Town of
Vinton.
~n
1
10. Acceptance of a drainage easement donated by
Charles W. Houghton across Lot 6, Cave Spring
Professional Center.
a ; ~,. :"~
.;.:
85'7
__-- - --- ------- ------ -- -- ---- ------- --June _14 -~-988_
--------~J---------- ---
11. Acceptance of a water line easement donated by
Lloyd G. and Lee W. Lazarus - Woodmont Manor,
Section 3.
12. Acceptance of a sanitary sewer line donated by
Carter M. Coffey - Lot 2 and a portion of Lot 6A,
Queens Court Subdivision.
13. Resolution requesting authorization from the Va.
Department of Transportation to erect a speed
enforcement sign on Route 220.
2. That the Clerk to the Board is hereby authorized
an directed where required by law to set forth upon any of said
it ms the separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant to
th s resolution.
On motion of Supervisor Johnson, after discussion and
th amendment to Item L-8, seconded by Supervisor Nickens and
th following recorded vote:
AY S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett
NA S: None
RESOLUTION 61488-14.a REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF
BEAVER LANE, HORN CIRCLE, AND ELIZABETH DRIVE INTO
THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY
ROAD SYSTEM
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
Co nty, Virginia, as follows:
l.That this matter came this day to be heard upon the
pr ceedings herein, and upon the application of Beaver Lane, Horn
.-
,Y.}
8'5 8
June 14, 1988
_ _.-
Circle, and Elizabeth Drive to be accepted and made a part of he
Secondary System of State Highways under Section 33.1-229 of t e
Virginia State Code.
2. That it appears to the Board that drainage
easements and a fifty (50) foot right-of-way for said streets
have been dedicated by virtue of a certain map known as Foxfir
Subdivision and Montgomery Village, Section 7, which is record
respectively in Plat Book 9, Page 90, and Plat Book 8, Page 62
of the records of the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of
Roanoke County, Virginia, on June 30, 1977 and February 13, 19'
and that by reason of the recordation of said map, no report f~
a Board of Viewers, nor consent or donation of right-of-way frJ
the abutting property owners is necessary. The Board hereby
guarantees said right-of-way for drainage.
3.That said streets known as Beaver Lane, Horn
Circle, and Elizabeth Drive and which are shown on a certain
sketch accompanying this Resolution, be, and the same are hey
established as public streets to become a part of the State
Secondary System of Highways in Roanoke County, only from and
after notification of `official acceptance of said streets ~y
Virginia Department of Transportation.
On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by
Supervisor Nickens and carried by the following recorded vote:
~4 ;
om
m
Y
~,
... _ `.>
85y
-~ --- --- -- - June__.14,__1_988
_-~ ----11------------- -
~S: Supervisors Johnson, McGraw, Nickens, Robers, Garrett
NA
~S : None
RESOLUTION 61488-14.d REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF
TULIP LANE, SUNFLOWER DRIVE, AND IVY LANE INTO THE
VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY
ROAD SYSTEM
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
Co~nty, Virginia, as follows:
1. That this matter came this day to be heard upon
th proceedings herein, and upon the application of Tulip Lane,'
Su flower Drive, and Ivy Lane to be accepted and made a part of
Secondary System of State Highways under Section 33.1-229 of
th~ Virginia State Code..
2. That it appears to the Board that drainage
ea ements and a fifty (50) foot right-of-way for said streets
ha e been dedicated by virtue of certain maps known as Spring
Gr ve Subdivision, Sections 5 and 7, which maps were recorded in
P1 t Book 9, Page 225, and Plat Book 9, Page 281, of the records
of the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County,
Vi ginia, on June 28,.1982, and April 12, 1984, respectively; and
th t by reason of the recordation of said maps, no report from a
Bo rd of Viewers, nor consent or donation of right-of-way from
I th abutting property owners is necessary. The Board hereby
gu rantees said right-of-way for drainage.
,. i
8~6 0
__. _. _ _June. 14,.. 1988
3. That said streets known as Tulip Lane, Sunflowe.
Drive, and Ivy Lane and which are shown on a certain sketch
accompanying this Resolution, be, and the same are hereby
established as public streets to become a part of the State
Secondary System of Highways in Roanoke County, only from and
after notification of official acceptance of said streets by t
Virginia Department of Transportation.
On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by
Supervisor Nickens and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, McGraw, Nickens, Robers, Gar
NAYS: None
RESOLUTION 61488-14.b REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF
LANTERN STREET, CANDLELIGHT CIRCLE, AND SHADOW
INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
SECONDARY ROAD SYSTEM `
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That this matter came this day to be heard upon
the proceedings herein, and upon the application of Lantern
Street,Candlelight Circle, and Shadow Lane to be accepted and
made a part of the Secondary System of State Highways under
Section 33.1-229 of the Virginia State Code.
tt
ke
p
~ ..
.. ....it:'.
86x
__ ~ __.--- _ _ --- June__14,_1988_
ea
ha
Ri
re
th
Co
2. That it appears to the Board that drainage
ements and a fifty (50) foot right-of-way for said streets
e been dedicated by virtue of certain maps known as Beacon
lge Subdivision, Section 1 and Section 2, which maps were
:orded in Plat Book 9, Page 303, and Plat Book 9, Page 323, of
records of the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke
nty, Virginia, on November 14, 1983, and May 14, 1985,
respectively;and that by reason of the recordation of said maps,
no~~report from a Board of Viewers, nor consent or donation of
ri~ht-of-way from the abutting property owners is necessary. The
Bo~rd hereby guarantees said right-of-way for drainage.
3. That said streets known as Lantern Street,
Ca~jdlelight Circle, and Shadow Lane and which are shown on a
ce tain sketch accompanying this Resolution, be, and the same are
he eby established as public streets to become a part of the
St to Secondary System of Highways in Roanoke County, only-from
an after notification of official acceptance of said streets by
th Virginia Department of Transportation.
On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by
Su ervisor Nickens and carried by the following recorded vote:
AY S: Supervisors Johnson, McGraw, Nickens, Robers, Garrett
NABS: None
~ _ ,'^+
8~2
--- . _ __. _ - ------- -- June_ _ 1.4-,. -. _ 19 8 8 _ _. ------- -- - -- ---;
RESOLUTION 61488-14.1 REQUESTING AUTHORIZATION F OM
THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO ERE T
A BILLBOARD SIGN ON ROUTE 220 FOR THE PURPOSE OF
ADVISING THE PUBLIC OF A COUNTY ENFORCEMENT PRO CT
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roan~ke
County, Virginia, as follows:
WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Sheriff's Department h~s
received a federal grant through the Department of Motor VehicA.es
for a special patrol project on U. S. Route 220, and
WHEREAS, this grant will provide funding for off-d~ty
deputies to work special patrol schedules to reduce the incidefits
of vehicle crashes through strict enforcement, and
WHEREAS, billboard space located at the end of Rout
581 as it becomes Route 220 in the vicinity of Tanglewood Malll
has been donated by Advertising companies to advise the gener
public of this special enforcement project, and
WHEREAS, the proposed-billboard signs do not meet
criteria and regulations established by the Virginia Departmen
of Transportation for outdoor signs, and
WHEREAS, Roanoke County will apply for a ninety-da
waiver through the Roanoke County Department of Planning and
Zoning and will accept responsibility for the sign during this
period.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of
~e
Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby requests that
y
..,y_
:"#:,>:
_,.:~.~
ss3
--~
---,
INS
Vi ginia Department of Transportation inspect the location for
th proposed sign, and following said inspection, allow erection
of the sign which shall not be used for advertising purposes but
sh 11 be an official Roanoke County sign limited to the uses and
du ation established in this resolution.
On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by Supervisor
Ni kens and the following recorded vote:
AY S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett
NA S: None
IRE: REPORTS
The following reports were received and filed:
1. Accounts Paid - May 1988
2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance
3. General Fund Unappropriated Balance
4. Board Contingency Fund
IN 11
__June_14_,_1_~~
CITIZENS COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
1. Mr. David Shelor, owner of the one of the
pr posed landfill sites, presented reasons why he felt that the
~ _~„
rty
• ~~
g64
-------- _ -- __.-- ___. June 14, 1988.-
site located on Fort Lewis Mountain should not be considered i
a proposed landfill.
2. Charles L. Landis presented a petition signed k
the residents.in the Glenvar area of Roanoke County who are
opposed to the proposed landfill site on Fort Lewis Mountain.
3. Curtis Beach. Executive Vice President of the
Salem-Roanoke County Chamber of Commerce, explained that the
Chamber of commerce recently adopted a resolution requesting t
AMTRACK consider rerouting its Cardinal, New York to Chicago
passenger train through the Roanoke Valley. They are requesti
support from the Board of Supervisors also.
Supervisor McGraw moved that a resolution of suppo
be prepared for the June 28th board meeting. The motion was
seconded and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garr
NAYS: None
4. Lewis Kaeser, 451 Ingals Boulevard, Salem, spo
in opposition to the process by which proposed sites were
selected by the landfill Board.
IN RE: EXECUTIVE SESSION
At 6:10 p.m., Supervisor Garrett moved to go into
Executive Session pursuant to the Code of Virginia 2.1-344 (a
r
t
t
"`• ~°
865
__-_-------__-_-_ ___ _June_14,_---198.8
INS
(1 to discuss a personnel matter and (6) to discuss a legal
ma ter. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Nickens and
ca ried by the following recorded vote:
AY S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett
NA S: None
IRE: OPEN SESSION
At 6:30 p.m. Supervisor Garrett moved to return to
op n session and recess for dinner. The motion was seconded by
Su ervisor Johnson and carried by the following recorded vote:
AY S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett
NA S: None
IN~~RE: EVENING SESSION
At 7:05 p.m., Chairman Garrett reconvened the
meting.
INI,RE: NEW BUSINESS (CONTINUED FROM AFTERNOON SESSION)
8. Appropriation of Funds for the .Cleanup of
Di osal Areas Ad'acent to the Dixie Caverns Landfill: Mr. Hodge
pr sented a summary of the bids for cleanup of the Dixie Caverns
w~;~
..-~~
g -6 6
---~---- - - June -14 .19 8 8 .
Landfill. The cleanup is divided into three areas: Sludge,
Drums and Fly Ash. Mr. Hodge recommended approval to appropri
the amount to clean the Sludge and Drum Area only at a cost of
$457,000. He~requested approval to continue negotiations for
Fly Ash cleanup.
Supervisor Nickens moved to approve the staff
recommendation. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Johns
and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garr
NAYS: None
IN RE: PUBLIC HEARINGS
688-1
ate
t
Petition of Inland Properties Corporation to rez ne
a 1.70 acre tract from R-1 Residential to B-1
Business to construct an office complex located n
the east side of Route 419 immediately south of is
intersection with Cordell Drive in the Windsor
Hills Magisterial District (CONTINUED FROM MARC
22, 1988 AND MAY 24, 1988)
DENIED
Chairman Garrett reminded those present that there
was a public hearing on this issue previously. 'The Attorney f r
the petitioners were now planning to present new information.
Attorney Ed Natt stated that the access to the si
plan is off McVitty Road, the only feasible access from the
property. Mr. Natt stated the plan is in accordance with the ~19
~.,,.:~
.. .., ..~:s:
-_j -- . - -_. . - - - - ------- - --.June _14..._1.988
--- -- --
Fr ntage Development Plan. He felt that was the most relevant
fa for in the request.
The following citizens spoke in opposition to the
pr posed rezoning request:
1. Roger Lordon, 4390 Sheldon Drive, who represented
th citizens in the Cresthill subdivision who was concerned about
th amount of traffic on Cordell Drive.
2. Nancy Gillespie, 2643 Gaylord Road, opposed
be ause of increased traffic.
3. P. J. Gillespie, 2643 Gaylord Road concerned
be ause portions of the proposed rezoning are in the floodplain
an because of traffic on McVitty Road.
4. Kendrick Stevens, 4620 Cresthill Drive concerned
be ause of potential flood problems.
5. Thomas Leagette, Woods, Rogers and Hazelgrove,
re resenting residents of Sugarloaf East. They are concerned
ab ut the intersection of Route 419 and Cordell Drive. He
pr sented a petition to the Board containing 200 petitions in
op osition to the proposed rezoning.
Supervisor Garrett asked Mr. Natt how the petitioners
pl n to address the traffic problems on Cordell Drive and
Cr sthill Drive, and whether the property is in .the 100 year
fl odplain.
~ ti 8
--- _-----June--1-4 --1988 - --
__.
~( -- -
--
--. _. _.__ -rr-
Mr. Natt advised that the map Mr. Gillespie used i
an approximation from tax insurance maps, not the specific
location of the floodplain as designated by FEMA, and the
property is outside the floodplain. The petitioners are aware)
they must fill all requirements by the County concerning fl
control. Mr. Natt responded that the traffic will be going
the opposite direction than the residents. There will be 292
vehicles over an 8-hour period, which is not considered a
significant impact.
Supervisor Garrett outlined the efforts of the Cou ty
r.
to solve the speeding problems along Cresthill Drive since 198 .
He stated he was most concerned with the speeding rather than h
amount of traffic.
Supervisor Garrett moved to deny the petition.- T
motion was seconded by Supervisor Robers.
Supervisor Nickens asked Assistant`County
Administrator John Hubbard what progress had been made since
1985 letter was sent from Roanoke County to Kendrick Stevens
concerning flood control. Mr. Hubbard responded that the
Virginia Department of transportation was responsible and was
reluctant to work on the problem. He will check on the statu
since the letter was written.
The motion to deny the petition was carried by
following recorded vote:
ry s.,
.. .-.~~
~ h
$69
J - --
-__~ __.- -___-- ----------.__June_-_1-4,__ 19.8----
--_y _.--_ - - _-
il- -- ------ --- ---- ---------------- --
AYES:
NA
68.
Supervisors Johnson, Robers, Nickens, Garrett
~S: Supervisor McGraw
-2 Petition of Occidental Dev lopment Ltd to rezone a
2.0 acre parcel from R-1, Residential to B-1
Business and a 22.87 acre parcel from R-1,
Residential to R-3 Residential, to construct
offices and multifamily dwellings, located
immediately west of the intersection of Colonial
Avenue and Ogden road in the Cave Spring
Magisterial District (CONTINUED FROM MAY 24, 1988)
DENIED
Don Wetherington was the attorney for the petitioner.
Mr Wetherington reported that the company requesting the
re oning has been in business for 70 years and has dealt solely
inllthe development, ownership and management of quality
ap rtments for half that time. They own 28,000 apartment units
in 43 states. This pro 0 1 '
a
in
si~
Gee
i m~
to
p sa is for 216 low-rise garden style
~tments, 120 which will be one-bedroom. There will be fewer
i 10 apartments per acre and six buildings on 25 acres. The
~acter of the property will be maintained, as well as the
n spaces. There will be only one entrance at the
rsection of Colonial Road and Ogden where there is four-way
ialization. There will be no passage of traffic through the
'getown community. The calculations show there is nominal
ct on Colonial Avenue by the proposed complex when compared
Ingle family homes on the same property. There are two
}
• ~ ~ O
--~ ~- --- June--14
-------- - - -19 8 8 -_
offices planned and the types of uses have been proffered whic
are administrative, executive and editorial offices, professio al
offices, real estate, financial, insurance or other general
offices. There will be no retail uses such as banks and medic 1
offices. The proposed rezoning is in compliance with the futu e
Land Use Plan and the Comprehensive Plan. The staff report
acknowledges that drainage and utilities pose no problem.
Buford Lumsden, architect for the project, descri ed
the design of the project and outlined plans for the water, st rm
drain, sanitary sewer, and traffic.
Evans Jessee, attorney for property owner Katherine
Ronk, introduced Donald Ronk, her son, who addressed the Board
Mr. Ronk advised that he has been looking for the proper
development for the property. There are two or three options
available and multifamily is one of them. Mr. Ronk plans to
develop the property as single family homes with 75 homes if t e
proposed zoning is not approved.
The following citizens spoke concerning the propose
rezoning:
1. Attorney Bruce Mayer, 111 Virginia Avenue,
Vinton, spoke representing Georgetown Park and Greenwood Fores
subdivision residents who are opposed to the rezoning. They a e
concerned about the growth of apartment complexes in the area.
They would prefer the R-1 rezoning to remain for single family
! .+r9, i:~r'.
June 14, 1988
s. The additional traffic at the intersection of Ogden Road
sp
a
an Colonial Avenue would make it more difficult for those in
Ge rgetown Park to enter Colonial Avenue. There is no way of
kn wing how much more traffic will be generated by the business
of ices. He pointed out that the taxes would be the same whether
th property was developed as multifamily or single family.
Supervisor Johnson advised that based on 1.5 children
in each single family house. the cost would be $2,000 per child
in education costs and the impact would be greater to the County.
He also pointed out that with the additional traffic, Colonial
Av nue might be improved sooner.
2. Herbert N. Kilbourn, 3458 Greencliff Road spoke
in support of the rezoning because he did not feel it would have
a egative impact on the homes in Georgetown Park. Mr. Kilbourn
is a real estate appraiser.
3. Howard Swank, Jr., 3434 Ashmeade Drive, S. W.
sp ke in support of the project because it would limit the access
to streets in Georgetown Park, and will enhance the property.
4. Julia Knott2 3548 Georgetown Road S. W., spoke in
su ort of the proposed rezoning because the streets would remain
closed to access.
5. H. Cletus Broyles, 3511 Old Towne Road S. W.
ke in opposition to the project because of the large number of
rtments presently in the area, and because of possible
-~ 8 '~' 2
June 14; 1988
deterioration of the residential neighborhood, and the additio al
traffic.
6. Mark
in .opposition, parti
to future businesses
7. Cram
in opposition to the
rezoning request has
community.
S. Seiler, 3471 Old Towne Road, S. W. spo e
cularly the B-1 request because it would 1 ad
locating on Colonial Avenue.
~ McClellan, 3403 Greencliff Road S. W. sp ke
rezoning. He expressed concern that this
had a negative impact to the entire
8. David S. Courey, 3419 Ashmeade Drive S. W., sp.ke
in opposition because of the impact on schools, increased
traffic, and devaluation of residential property.
9. Sandra Ulrev, 5031 Keithwood Drive S. W., spok
in favor because of the low density of the apartments compare to
the high density of single family homes. She has cared for t
property for five years and outlined problems she has had wit
the residents from Georgetown Park using the property.
10. John Eby, 3504 Old Town Road S. W. spoke in
support of the rezoning request. He advised he was originall
opposed but has changed his mind because he does not want the
streets opened. He also felt that the proffers offered on th
business portion was adequate.
11. Howard ward, 3539 Georgetown Road S. W., spo
in opposition because of devalued property in Georgetown Park.
v
Supervisor Robers moved to deny the petition. The
mo ion was seconded by Supervisor Garrett and carried by the
fo lowing recorded vote:
AY S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, Nickens, Garrett
NA S: Supervisor McGraw
IN RE: RECONSIDERATION OF THE ITEM TO IMPLEMENT THE
C SSIFICATION PLAN
Supervisor Robers moved to reconsider the above item
wh ch was deferred during the afternoon session. The motion was
se onded by Supervisor McGraw. The motion was carried by the
fo lowing recorded vote:
AY S: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett
NA S: None
Mr. Hodge requested that the Board approve the
im lementation of the Classification Plan so that no new
em loyees bypass existing employees in salary when brought up to
th bottom of the scale, and that employees be brought up to
sc le on their anniversary date..
Supervisor Johnson moved to adjourn the. meeting. The
mo ion was seconded by Supervisor Robers. Supervisor McGraw
ad ised there was an item on the floor. Supervisor Johnson
8 ?' 3
June _ 14
j *~ ' >K",
,,.~.
8~'7 4
---------- _--June. 14,_ _1.988---- -- -- - --
withdrew his motion and then moved the agenda. The motion was
seconded by Supervisor Robers.
Supervisor Johnson withdrew that motion and moved o
authorize the County Administrator to work out those differenc s
that the new Classification Plan would have such that it does of
adversely affect any employee. The motion was seconded by
Supervisor McGraw.
AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Gar tt
NAYS: None
IN RE: ADJOURNMENT
Supervisor Johnson moved to adjourn. The motion
seconded by Supervisor McGraw and carried unanimously.
to s
Lee Garrett, Chairman
ROANp
GF 'YF
,~ ~, L
~. p
Z
o
a
183 E50 188
CSQV~CENTENN~p
A Beauri~ul6eginninR
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
ELMER C. HODGE
June 2, 1988
LEE GARRETT. CHAIRMAN
WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
RICHARD W. ROBERS. VICE-CHAIRMAN
CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
BOB L. JOHNSON
HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
STEVEN A. MCGRAW
CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
HARRY C. NICKENS
VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
Rev . •~®r;; Rage.r..s ~ ~ ,
Melrose Baptist Churc
3520 Peters Creek Road, NW ~(,(~-~(03~
Roanoke, Virginia 24019
Dear Reverend Rogers:
On behalf of the Board of Supervisors, I would like to thank
you for giving the invocation at the Board of Supervisors'
meeting in the past.
We would again like to call on you to present the invocation
on Tuesday, September 13, 1988, at 3:00 p.m. If you are unable
to do this, please call me at 772-2005. Someone from this office
will be calling you soon to see if this time is acceptable to
you, or if you would prefer another date.
The Board members are aware of how busy your schedule is,
and they appreciate your volunteering the time to offer God's
blessing at their meetings.
Sincerely,
~/Y~ ~~ ~
Mary H. Allen
Deputy Clerk
bjh
C~nixn~,~ of ~nttrcnke
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
~[~I~~
P.O. BOX 29800 - ROANOKE. VIRGINIA 2 4018-07 98 ~ f7031 772-2004
COMMITTEE VACANCIES IN 1988
JANUARY
Social Services Board (Welfare)
Four year term of William P. Broderick, Chairman, will
expire 1/1/88.
Transportation and Safety Commission
Three year terms of Leo Trenor, Hollins District,
Charlotte Lichtenstein, Windsor Hills District, and May
Johnson, Cave Spring District, will expire 1/1/88.
Building Code Board of Adjustments and A eals
Four year term of Norman Eugene Jarrett, Hollins
District will expire 1/22/88.
FEBRUARY
Grievance Panel
Two year term of Joe W. Rimes will expire 2/23/88.
MARCH
Court Service Unit Advisory Council/Youth and Family
Services Advisory Board
Two year terms of Gerald Curtiss, Catawba District,
Roger Smith, Catawba District, Marilyn Morehead,
Hollins District, Dr. J. Andrew Archer, Vinton
District, Sherry Robison, Windsor Hills District, will
expire 3/22/88.
One year term of Tracy Rothschild, youth member from
Cave Spring, will expire 3/22/88.
Two year term of judicial appointment Todd Turner will
expire 3/21/88.
League of Older Americans
One year term of Webb Johnson, County Representative,
will expire 3/31/88.
APRIL
Building Code Board of Adjustments and A eals
Four year term of B. J. King, Windsor Hills District,
will expire 4/13/88.
Four year term of Thomas A. Darnall, Vinton District,
will expire 4/27/88.
JUNE
Fifth Planning District Commission
Three year term of Lee B. Eddy, Citizen Representative,
will expire 6/30/88.
Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission
Three year terms of Kenneth D. Bowen, Catawba District,
Yvonne Willis, Catawba District, James Bryant, Hollins
District, Paul D. Bailey, Windsor Hills District, and
Roger L. Falls, Vinton District, will expire 6/30/88.
Roanoke County School Board - Appointed by School Board
Selection Committee
Four year term of Paul Black, Hollins District, will
expire 6/30/88.
JULY
Social Services Board (Welfare)
Four year term of Betty Jo Anthony will expire 7/19/88.
Roanoke Valley Regional Solid Waster Management Board
Four year terms of Howard R. Keister, Jr., County.
Representative, and John H. Parrott, Chairman, City
Representative, will expire 7/31/88.
AUGUST
Community Corrections Resources Board
One year terms of Bernard Hairston, and Edmund J.
Kielty, Alternate, will expire 8/13/88.
CFDTFMRFA
Grievance Panel
Two year term of Thomas T. Palmer will expire 9/10/88.
Industrial Development Authority
2
Four year term of Tom Isenhart, Catawba District, will
expire 9/26/88.
OCTOBER
Grievance Panel
Three year term of Cecil Hill, Alternate, will expire
10/12/88.
Mental Health Services of the Roanoke Vall
Services Board
Communit
Two year term of Dr. Joseph Duetsch, Member at Large,
will expire 10/31/88.
NOVEMBER
Court Service Unit Advisory Council
Services Advisory Board
/Youth and Family
One year terms of Cassidee R. Nickens, youth member
from William Byrd, and Molly Eller, youth member from
Glenvar High, will expire 11/13/88.
DECEMBER
Library Board
Four year term of Carolyn Pence, Vinton District, will
expire 12/31/88.
Mental Health SErvices of the Roanoke Vall
Services Board
Commun i t
Three year term of Barbara Higgins, County appointee,
will expire 12/31/88.
Roanoke County Planning Commission
Four year term of Michael J. Gordon, Windsor Hills
District, will expire 12/31/88.
3
OF ROANp,YF
Z h ~
o ? (~, fi
~~~
~~ ~ rt ~Y ~~
~Y
J a
, i~
~i'
Eso 88
18 8
~
S
FSQUICENTENN~p'
ABeauti~u(Bcginninp BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
LEE GARRETT, CHAIRMAN
WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RIC HARD W. ROBERS, VICE-CHAIRMAN
CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
ELMER C. HODGE BOB L. JOHNSON
HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
STEVEN A. MCGRAW
CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
HARRY C.NICKENS
VIN TON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
M E M O R A N D U M
To: Chief T~~s C. Fuqua
~~ J
From: E~fier C. Hodge
Date: August 10, 1988
Subject: Recommended site for Bonsack fire station
In our discussions yesterday regarding the Bonsack fire station,
Supervisor Johnson felt it was necessary to move forward with this
project. We need to determine the location for the new station and
report that to the Board at their September 13 meeting. At that time, we
should advise the Board of the scope of the project and schedule.
You should go forward with determination of a location. If we have
exhausted the possibilities of working with the City or with Botetourt
County, we should move on anyway and determine a location that is
suitable for the County and future growth. If we are able to use land
already owned by the County, that would be helpful, but we should do so
only if the location has the proper access and is suitable for delivery
of service. Please select three or four suitable sites, draft a Board
report, and get back with me by the end of August. We should be able to
provide run times and number of calls as justification for the sites
chosen.
ECH/meh
cc - Mrs. Mary H. Allen
P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE. VIRGINIA 240113-0798 (703> 772-2004
AGENDA ITEM ON LANDFILL/RECYCLING
BACKGROUND•
- ROANOKE COUNTY REQUESTED STUDY ON RECYCLING BEFORE ALLOWING
RIGHT-OF-ENTRY TO POTENTIAL SITES.
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION
WHAT DOES OLVER SAY IN HIS REPORT?
WHAT HAVE WE HEARD FROM ROANOKE CITY REGARDING RECYCLING?
WHAT IS PROGRESS ON THE SITE ALREADY TESTED (BUCK MOUNTAIN)
HOW MUCH WILL IT COST ROANOKE COUNTY TO RECYCLE?
RECOMMENDATION
MOVE FORWARD WITH RIGHT-OF-ENTRY AND PART "A" APPALICATION ON
SITES.
4
` AGENDA ITEM ON SPRING HOLLOW RESERVOIR
BACKGROUND
- RECAP OF ALL STUDIES
- INFO ON MEETING WITH ROANOKE CITY AND SALEM SEVERAL YEARS AGO
WHEN ALL AGREED TO GO FORWARD, NEWSPAPER CLIPPING IF AVAILABLE.
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION
- COST INFORMATION
- COST SEVERAL YEARS AGO
- COST NOW.
- WHY IT WILL COST MORE
- SCHEDULE
- DESIGN COMPLETION
- PUT OUT FOR BIDS
- CONSTRUCTION
- COMPLETION DATE
- HOW MUCH WILL ENGINEERING PHASE COST
RECOMMENDATION
- DO WE DESIGN TO MEET ONLY ROANOKE COUNTY'S NEEDS?
- DO WE DESIGN TO BE EXPANDABLE FOR FUTURE NEEDS?
- DO WE DESIGN TO BE MAXIMUM SIZE FOR ROANOKE CITY AND SALEM?
BA KGROUND•
AGENDA ITEM ON SPACES NEEDS
- NEED FOR ADDITIONAL SPACE
- COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE
- TREASURER
- REAL ESTATE ASSESSMENTS
- DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
- FUTURE GROWTH OF OTHER DEPTS
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION
- ALTERNATIVES STUDIED AND COSTS FOR EACH
- USE OF RENTAI;-SPACE
- RELOCATION OF OTHER COUNTY BUILDINGS
- LEASE OF MOBILE UNITS
- SOLUTION:
- LEASE OF MOBILE UNITS
- COST FOR MOBILE UNITS
- WHO MOVES TO MOBILE UNITS
- PARKING FACILITIES
FISCAL IMPACT
- TOTAL FISCAL IMPACT
- INCLUDE CARPETING FOR HALLWAYS AT RCAC FOR SAFETY REASONS
INCLUDE PLAT OF BUILDING AND ADJACENT LAND
s
r