Loading...
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