The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2/13/1990 - RegularEa ~N~ F ~ 9 ,~, ~~~~~ ~~ ~~n~~~ ,~ 18 ~ 88 +~a~U1CENTENN~~~ A Btauli~u/8eginning ROANORE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION AGENDA FEBRUARY 13, 1990 u~-a~nu an 1 ~•9.8~9 Welcome to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors meeting.. Regular meetings areheld on the second Tuesday 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. ALL PRESENT AT 3:06 P.M. 2. Invocation: The Reverend Gordon Grimes Cave Spring .Baptist Church 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag. B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS. LBE REQUESTED FOUR ITEMS UNDER BOARD INQUIRIES: (1) REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL LAW ENFORCEMENT VEHICLES; (2) RESO REGARDING BOARD OF EQUALIZATION; (3) REVIEW OF COUNTY OPERATIONS; (4) REQUEST REGARDING FRALIN-WALDRON LAW SUIT - LATER WITHDREW ~ 2, 3 LBE ASKED FOR SEPARATE VOTE ON R-l, R-5 CONSENT AGENDA. C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS 1. Resolution of Congratulations to Glen Cove School for outstanding performance. DR. WILSON, MARY LEE DIVERS PRINC., BETTY MASSEY, PTA PRES. RECEIVED. R-21390-1 1 SAM TO ADOPT - UW 2. Resolution of Congratulations to Penn Forest School for outstanding performance. PATRICIA SALES, PRINC., DEEDIE RAGEY, ASST R-21390-2 LBE TO ADOPT - UVV D. NEW BIISINESS 1. Report of the NFPA and the Fire and Rescue Response Committee. R-91390-3 BLJ TO RECEIVE AND FILE REPORT UW 2. Request for approval of grant and matching funds for solid waste recycling program. HCN TO INCLUDE IN BUDGET PROCESS - WITHDRAWN LBE MOTION TO BRING BACK NO LATER THAN 30 DAYS TO ALLOW STAFF TO ALLOW FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION - URC 3. Request to the City of Roanoke for upgrade of the Roanoke River Sewer Interceptor capacity. A-21390-4 BLJ TO APPROVE STAFF RECOMMEENDATION URC 4. Application for a Bingo permit - Fort Lewis Rescue Squad. A-21390-5 SAM MOTION TO APPROVE BINGO PERMIT UPON RECEIPT OF AUDIT FEE, AND COMPLIANCE WITH STAFF RECOMl~NDATIONS - URC HCN SUGGESTED CHECK LIST BE SENT WITH PERMIT TO HELP ORGANIZATIONS COMPLY WITH REGULATIONS. 5. Adoption of the Secondary System Six Year Construction Plan (1990-96) and Priorities for 1990-91. R-21390-6 R-21390-7 ITEM VOTED ON AFTER WORK SESSION HCN MOTION TO ADOPT RESO APPROVING 6-YEAR CONSTRIICTION PLAN FOR 1990-96 AND ADOPT PRIORITY PROGRAM FOR VDOT SIX-YEAR PLAN 2 AYES-SAM, BLJ, HCN, RWR NAYS-LBE E. REQUEST FOR WORK SESSIONS ADDITIONAL WORK SESSION ON SIGN ORDINANCE SET FOR 2/27/90 F. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. First public hearing on the Pinkard Court grant application. RWR TO SET PUBLIC HEARING ON 2/27/90 UVV PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED SIGN ORDINANCE SET FOR 3/27/90 DURING WORK SESSION G. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES NONE H. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES NONE I. APPOINTMENTS 1. Community Corrections Resources Board 2. Grievance Panel LBE NOMINATED KENNETH LUSSEN TO A TWO-YEAR TERM 3. League of Older Americans 4. Health Department Board of Directors LBE NOMINATED ANNE RENNER TO A TWO-YEAR TERM 5. Landfill Citizens Advisory Committee 3 6. Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission BLJ NOMINATED KAREN PADGETT TO A THREE YEAR TERM 7. Regional Partnership Site Advisory Committee LBE ADVISED THIS COMMITTEE NO LONGER EXISTS AND THEREFORE NO APPOINTMENTS NEED TO BE MADE. 8. Roanoke Regional Airport Commission HCN NOMINATED BOB JOHNSON TO A FOUR-YEAR TERM AND REQUESTED I1~II~IEDIATE VOTE BLJ APPOINTED - URC 9. Transportation and Safety Commission J. REPORTS AND INQIIIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS SIIPERVISOR EDDY: (1) REQUESTED BOARD AUTHORIZATION FOR SHERIFF RAVANAUGH TO ORDER ADDITIONAL WHITE VEHICLES PRIOR TO THE STATE CUTOFF DATE OF 2/16/90 WITH FUNDING TO COME FROM THE 1990/91 BIIDGET TO ALLOW FOR MORE OF THE OLDEST VEHICLES IN THE SHERIFF'S FLEET TO BE RETIRED. HCN MOTION TO TABLE (DEFEATED) AYES-BLJ, HCN NAYS-LBE,SAM,RWR HCN MOTION THAT IN THE 1989\90 BIIDGET, THE COUNTY PURCHASE NO MORE VEHICLES FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT AND/OR CORRECTION PURPOSES OTHER THAN THOSE ArRFAny APPROVED BY THE BOARD - URC LBE MOTION THAT THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BE AUTHORIZED TO ORDER 13 ADDITIONAL WHITE VEHICLES TO BE USED FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT PURPOSES TO MEET THE 2/16/90 DEADLINE FOR STATE PURCHASES; WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE MONEY WOULD BE APPROPRIATED FROM THE 1990/91 BUDGET; WITH THE FURTHER UNDERSTANDING THAT THE MOTION IS CONTINGENT UPON REACHING A SUITABLE UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AND SHERIFF REGARDING THE ORDERLY TRANSFER OF ALL VEHICLES ASSOCIATED WITH THE ESTABLISHI-SENT OF A POLICE DEPARTMENT. (DEFEATED) AYES-LBE,SAM NAYS-BLJ,HCN,RR (2) SUGGESTED BOARD MAY WANT TO AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO REPRESENT THE COUNTY IN THE LAW SIIIT WITH FRALIN AND WALDRON OVER 4 OFFICE BUILDING ON ROUTE 419. RR MOTION TO AUTHORIZE COUNTY ATTORNEY TO TARE NECESSARY LEGAL ACTION TO PURSUE. AYES-LBE,SAM,BLJ,RWR NAYS-HCN SUPERVISOR MCGRAW: ADVISED THAT THE GRAYSON COMMISSION WAS PLACED ON HOLD FOR ANOTHER YEAR UNTIL FINAL REPORTS ON THE FINANCIAL IlKPACT ARE AVAILABLE ON THE PROPOSAL. $20,000 HAS BEEN RAISED BY VACO SO FAR AND WILL NOT BE IISED UNTIL NEXT YEAR. SUPERVISOR ROWERS: ANNOUNCED THAT THERE WILL BE A CONFERENCE ON APRIL 24 AT VPI REGARDING THE "SMART HIGHWAY", WITH 150-250 PARTICIPANTS INCLUDING GENERAL MOTORS, FORD, MOTOROLA, UNIV. OF CA. BERRLEY, MIT. R. CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO BE ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. LBE REQUESTED SEPARATE VOTE ON R-l,R-5 R-91390-8 BLJ MOTION TO .ADOPT .WITH R-1,R-5 REMOVED - URC 1. Approval of Minutes - June 14, 1989, June 27, 1989 BLJ TO APPROVE AYES-SAM, BLT,HCN,RWR ABSTAIN-LBE 2. Approval of Minutes - January 9, 1990, January 20, 1990. 3. Approval of Raffle Permit - Roanoke County Occupational School PTA. A-91390-8.a 4. Approval of Raffle Permit - Loyal Order of Moose Lodge 284. A-91390-8.b 5 5. Resolution of Support regarding solid waste management. BLJ TO APPROVE - NO VOTE LBE SUBST. MOTION TO DEFER TO 2/27 TO ALLOW STAFF TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. SAM ASKED THAT BELLY WHITNEY, CLEAN VAT.T.F.y COUNCIL BE PRESENT 6. Donation of sanitary sewer easement from Richard L. and Marilyn M. Popp. A-91390-8.c 7. Request from the Virginia Department of Transportation for resolution regarding changes to Route 639. R-91390-8.d L. CITIZENS' COI+IIKENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS 1. ALFRED POWELL HAD REQUESTED TO SPEAR - WITHDREW HIS REQUEST. 1"s • REPORTS HCN MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILL; UW 1. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Report from Treasurer on delinquent tax collections. RECESS AT 5:15 P.M. RECONVENE AT 5:30 P.M. N. WORR SESSIONS 1. Six-Year Plan 6 PRESENTED BY PHIL HENRY AND FRED ALTIZER, VDOT MOTION TO APPROVE UNDER D-5 2. Joint Work Session with Planning Commission and Sign Committee on proposed sign ordinance PRESENTED BY TERRY HARRINGTON SAM MOTION TO CONTINUE TO 2/27/90, SET FIRST READING OF ORD. ON 3/13/90 AND PUBLIC HEARING AND 2ND READING ON 3/27/90 - UW SIGN COMMITTEE TO SEND IN THEIR COMMENTS ON DRAFT ORDINANCE PRIOR TO WORK SESSION LBE MOTION TO ADJOURN UNTIL AFTER RESOURCE AUTHORITY MEETING AT 7:00 P.M. - IJVV RECONVENEMENT AT 8:35 P.M 3. Budget Work Session PRESENTED BY DIANE HYATT 4. Roanoke County Today PRESENTED BY ANNE MARIE GREEN NONE NONE O. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.1-344 P. CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE SESSION Q. ADJOURNMENT AT 9:05 P.M. 7 r ~ p AN ,~.~ ~ A Z a 18 ~ 88 sFSCU1CENTENN~P~ ,4 Btauti~ulBtRinning ALL-AMERICA CI111 ~~~Yi~ ~~ ~~~tYit~~~ ~ .. ~ i ~~9~8~9 ROANORE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FEBRUARY 13, 1990 Welcome to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors meeting. Regular meetings are held on the second Tuesday 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 Gordon Grimes Cave Spring 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 1. Resolution of Congratulations to Glen Cove School for outstanding performance. 2. Resolution of Congratulations to Penn Forest School for outstanding performance. D. NEW BUSINESS 1. Report of the NFPA and the Fire and Rescue Response Committee. 2. Request for approval of grant and matching funds for solid waste recycling program. 3. Request to the City of Roanoke for upgrade of the Roanoke River Sewer Interceptor capacity. 4. Application for a Bingo permit - Fort Lewis Rescue Squad. 5. Adoption of the Secondary System Six Year Construction Plan (1990-96) and Priorities for 1990-91. E. REQUEST FOR WORR SESSIONS F. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. First public hearing on the Pinkard Court grant application. G. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES H. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES I. APPOINTMENTS 1. Community Corrections Resources Board 2. Grievance Panel 3. League of Older Americans 4. Health Department Board of Directors 5. Landfill Citizens Advisory Committee 6. Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission 7. Regional Partnership Site Advisory Committee 8. Roanoke Regional Airport Commission 9. Transportation and Safety Commission J. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS R. CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO BE ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. 1. Approval of Minutes - June 14, 1989, June 27, 1989 2. Approval of Minutes - January 9, 1990, January 20, 1990. 3. Approval of Raffle Permit - Roanoke County Occupational School PTA. 4. Approval of Raffle Permit - Loyal Order of Moose Lodge 284. 5. Resolution of Support regarding solid waste management. 6. Donation of sanitary sewer easement from Richard L. and Marilyn M. Popp. 7. Request from the Virginia Department of Transportation for resolution regarding changes to Route 639. L. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS M. REPORTS 1. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Report from Treasurer on delinquent tax collections. N. WORK SESSIONS 1. Six-Year Plan 2. Joint Work Session with Planning Commission and Sign Committee on proposed sign ordinance 3. Budget Work Session 4. Roanoke County Today O. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.1-344 P. CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE SESSION Q. ADJOURNMENT >' AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1990 RESOLUTION 21390-1 OF CONGRATULATIONS TO GLEN COVE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL FOR OUTSTANDING PERFORMANCE WHEREAS, Roanoke County has an outstanding school system, which has won many awards on the state and national level; and WHEREAS, the County schools continue to provide an excellent education at all levels to the students of the County; and WHEREAS, the State Department of Education nominated Glen Cove Elementary School for participation in the U. S. Department of Education's Elementary School Recognition Program. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors does hereby commend the faculty, staff and students of Glen Cove Elementary School for outstanding performance; and FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors does hereby extend its congratulations to Glen Cove Elementary School for their nomination in this national program. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, WE have hereunto set our hands and caused the seal of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, to be affixed this 13th day of February, 1990. On motion of Supervisor McGraw, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Resolutions of Congratulations File Dr. Bayes Wilson, Superintendent, Roanoke County Schools AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1990 RESOLUTION 21390-2 OF CONGRATULATIONS TO PENN FOREST ELEMENTARY SCHOOL FOR OUTSTANDING PERFORMANCE WHEREAS, Roanoke County has an outstanding school system, which has won many awards on the state and national level; and WHEREAS, the County schools continue to provide an excellent education at all levels to the students of the County; and WHEREAS, the State Department of Education nominated Penn Forest Elementary School for participation in the U. S. Department of Education's Elementary School Recognition Program. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors does hereby commend the faculty, staff and students of Penn Forest Elementary School for outstanding performance; and FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors does hereby extend its congratulations to Penn Forest Elementary School for their nomination in this national program. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, WE have hereunto set our hands and caused the seal of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, to be affixed this 13th day of February, 1990. On motion of Supervisor McGraw, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Resolutions of Congratulations File Dr. Bayes Wilson, Superintendent, Roanoke County Schools ~-r AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1990 RESOLUTION OF CONGRATULATIONS TO GLEN COVE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL FOR OUTSTANDING PERFORMANCE WHEREAS, Roanoke County has an outstanding school system, which has won many awards on the state and national level; and WHEREAS, the County schools continue to provide an excellent education at all levels to the students of the County; and WHEREAS, the State Department of Education nominated Glen Cove Elementary School for participation in the U. S. Department of Education's Elementary School Recognition Program. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors does hereby commend the faculty, staff and students of Glen Cove Elementary School for outstanding performance; and FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors does hereby extend its congratulations to Glen Cove Elementary School for their nomination in this national program. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, WE have hereunto set our hands and caused the seal of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, to be affixed this 13th day of February, 1990. 9e "'~, AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1990 RESOLUTION OF CONGRATULATIONS TO PENN FOREST ELEMENTARY SCHOOL FOR OUTSTANDING PERFORMANCE WHEREAS, Roanoke County has an outstanding school system, which has won many awards on the state and national level; and WHEREAS, the County schools continue to provide an excellent education at all levels to the students of the County; and WHEREAS, the State Department of Education nominated Penn Forest Elementary School for participation in the U. S. Department of Education's Elementary School Recognition Program. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors does hereby commend the faculty, staff and students of Penn Forest Elementary School for outstanding performance; and FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors does hereby extend its congratulations to Penn Forest Elementary School for their nomination in this national program. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, WE have hereunto set our hands and caused the seal of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, to be affixed this 13th day of February, 1990. ACTION # - -3 ITEM NUMBER AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 13, 1990 SUBJECT: National Fire Protection Association and Emergency Response Study Committee Reports COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND INFORMATION: After the fire at Shenandoah Homes, the National Fire Protection Association conducted an investigation into the incident and prepared a report, which is attached. Additionally, the County formed a Committee consisting of volunteer and paid fire and rescue personnel to review the issue of response time throughout the County, and to make recommendations for any necessary improvements. This committee has been meeting since December, and has now completed a report, which is also attached. NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION_REPORT The NFPA investigated the Shenandoah Homes fire and found that the County's procedures were appropriate and that response time was not an issue. By the time the fire was reported to the Fire and Rescue Department, it had reached such an intensity that fatalities were unavoidable. EMERGENCY RESPONSE COMMITTEE REPORT The Emergency Response Study Committee Report is an excellent review of our procedures and contains twelve recommendations for improved response time during fire and rescue emergencies. The members of the Committee are to be commended for the time and effort involved in producing this document. Most of the recommen- 1 ~~ dations have no financial impact, and the County can move ahead with implementation immediately. One recommendation concerns "planned" overtime, which is not appropriate for ongoing operations. We may be able to address the additional coverage through mutual aid agreements with the sur- rounding jurisdictions, by arranging a set payment for each response, as we currently do with the City of Salem. Several recommendations concern issues which should be addressed in the budget process, as implementation would have a large financial impact on the County. The proposed waiving of personal property tax needs further study to be equitable, because it provides a different benefit for each volunteer, depending on the type of vehicle they drive. The increased disability benefit may be a fairer way of rewarding continued service to the County and providing protection to the volunteers at a minimal cost. The recommendation for control over the Fire and Rescue dispatchers will be addressed by the Fire and Rescue Chief and the Police Chief after July 1. The Committee should discuss the recommendation concerning water connection fees with the County Utility Department, and determine whether any adverse impact exists. The Board can then decide whether to implement this change in current policy. FISCAL IMPACT: If all the recommendations were implemented, the cost is expected to be $315,000 for the first year. RECOMMENDATION: The County should implement immediately those recommendations which will have no financial impact: • Setting a goal of decreasing response time by one minute per year • Inviting the State Department of Fire Programs to conduct a review of the County's procedures • Enter into Mutual Aid Agreements with the surrounding jurisdictions • Charging a fee for responses to false alarms • Encourage the installation of security lock boxes on major buildings Those recommendations with a fiscal impact, such as increasing the disability coverage, overtime at specific stations, and sleep- ing facilities, will be addressed during the upcoming budget 2 ~~ process and reviewed in context with other County priorities. The career and volunteer personnel of the Fire and Rescue Department can work together to improve response time, and should be given this opportunity to do so. ~, ~„. ,y.y~„"'~ ~'~ ELMER C. HODGE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ---------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved (x) Motion by: v n A. No Yes Abs Denied ( ) McGraw to receive & Eddy ~ Received ( ) f;1e re~or McGraw ~ Referred Johnson x To Nickens ~ Robers ~_ cc: File Tommy Fuqua, Chief, Fire & Rescue 3 - ~ --/ ~~~ MA.JUR FIRES IN ELUERI.Y HOUSING Will this be co~mmc~n in the 1990s? In just 13 days in December 1989, ~Ior fires killed 23 residents in three residential elderly housing complexes. The NFPI~.'s Fire Investigations Division, along v~nth representatives of Southern Building Cade Congress International (SBCCI) and Building Officials and Code Administrators (BOCA), investigated the fires, which involved a six-story b hdgh ~ e Roanoke, Virginia, on December 14; a Watertown, New York, building on December 15; and a Johnson City, Tennessee, high-rise building on December 2~ These three fires took an special significance because elderly Americans (age 65 or over) are one of the two high-risk age groups in the population, with a fire death rate per xnillian population that is twice the national average and t~,-~-A t,me~ the rate for young adults. Where is a growing move toward facilities catering to large numbers of elderly citizens, and these xnay pose a special risk. If this move takes large numbersthese th ee fires buildings with deficiencies like those seen in these fires, may be predictors of a continuing series of multiple-death fires involving elderly housing, just as major nursing home fires and board•and-care home fires occurred in frightening numbers in earlier decades. This bulletin summarizes key facts and presents the findings from these recent fires. We baps the bulletin will help the fire protection community Focus on strategies to mitigate the lose of life in elderly housing. Roanoke, ~u"gini~ On December 14, 1989, an early morning fire broke out in an apartment of the Shenandoah Homes, a six story, ua.sprinklered, fire-resistive apartment building far the elderly. Residents receive only limited - personal care from the managers of the building. However, on the second floor, there is an adult care center which provides direct care to occupants. The fire was confined mainly to the room o the~~v nn of origin before they trapped residents in their apartments on g could exit the building. Four occupants cued in the wing of fire origin. Three were. found in rooms behind closed entrance doors. 2'he fourth fatality, the occupant of the apartment of fire origin, was found in the exit access corridor. Ironically, this is the second multiple-death fire Nz+'PA hag investigated at this facility. (See Beat, Richard, Shenandoah 1Glomes Fi~~, dire ~7ournal, November, 1976.) The building was constructed of structural steel framing protected by reinforced concrete on the first two 1 Floors were eight inch thick f p~ ~g on the third through sixth floors. -/ ~ "flexicore" concrete with atwo-inch concrete tapping. Walls in corridors, between apartments, and on building exterior were eight-inch thick concrete block with afour-inch brick facing an the outside. Living floors contained 24 apartment unite each. The building was arranged with an undivided 6-foot wide, 268 foot long, main exit access corridor running the length of the building. Exit stairways at each end of each corridor discharged directly to the outside. Living units, positioned on both sides of the corridor, contained interior partitions of wood stud construction covered by gypsum or mineral board panelling. Combustible loading (primarily residents' possessions) varied roam-to-room, with many units judged to be cluttered with, far oxample, stacks of newpapers and magazines. Heat and air conditioning were provided by individual wall units. Ventilation for bath and kitchen areas was through louvered subvents to a fire-rated shaft, terminating at exhaust fans on the roof, The building fire detection and alarm system included smoke detectors and manual pull stations which were in e~dt access corridors. ,Activation of the building fire alarm system results in automatic notification of the county fire depaxtTnent. Single-station battery-operated smoke detectors were installed in the main roam of each living unit, and were not interconnected to the fire alarm system. Initial notification of an emergency came from Roam 307 when the occupant activated his "emergency call switch" just after 2:00 a.m. This action resulted in the response of the night manager, who monitored the emergency call gysteoa for the building. The manager was awakened and responded immediately to the call taking the elevator from the first floor to the third floor. Upon entering the Haar, the manager immediately encountered smoke which increased significantly ag she moved toward Room 307. Realizing the extent of the fire, she began knocking on apartment doors and yelling to occupants to evacuate the building. Early in this grocess she reported hearing the fire alarm system sounding. As she moved down the corridor, increasing . conceritxationa of smoke forced her to abandon the notification of the remaining occupants and drove her from the floor. As the fire department responded, they observed flames on the exterior of the building from several blocks away. Upon arrival, they proceeded to the fire floor where they attacked the fixe, using hose connected to the building standpipe system. Investigators from-the Roanoke County Fire ]?apartment have determined that the fire was accidental and mast probably electrical in nature. Once ignited, the incipient Errs grew feeding on the abundant amount of contents including combustible wood wall „lining, Sometime during its initial growth, the occupant of Apartment 307, who used a wheelchair for mobility, became aware of the fire, pulled the emergency call system, and evacuated the apartment. The fire in Apartment 307 continued to grow unchecked and spread praducta of combustion through the open entrance door into the corridor. Smoke and heat from the intense room fire spread through the corridor and into adjacent apartments around closed apartment entry doors. Three of the four fatalities of this fire were positioned behind closed doors in a relatively tightantsware difficult to awaken and re~uctant to Leave their some of the occup apartments. VVAT,ERTOWN, NEB YORK At approximately 22:36 a,m., on December Y5, 1989, a auspicious fire occurred at the 16-story Midtown Towers in Watertown, New 'York. The fire gutted a community room, caused extensive fire damage to other areas on the first floor and spread smoke throughout the remaining floors. Three elderly occupants died of smoke related ir~uries and were found in the exit access corridors on upper floors. The non-aprinklered building was designed to house elderly people and was constructed in 1370. The basement contains storage areas, utility roams, HVAG equipment, and other service areas. The first floor has several offices and a large community roo=n with a kitchen; the 15 floors above contain one-bedroom apartments. The building is afire-resistive structure with apour~d-in-place concrete structural frame, poured-ia~-place cot~te. door slabs and Fnasonry non- bearing exterior curtain walla. The building hag a center care area that houses two elevator shafts and a scissor stairway, The stairways discharge into a common lobby and to exits leading to the outside. The community roam (room of fire origin) also opens into the common lobby area. A building fire detection and alarm system is provided far occupant notification. The operation of any corridor smoke detector or manual pull station will initiate a local alarm sad send a signal to the fire department. Each apartment has asingle-station, battel'y-operated smoke detector and, reportedly, single-station detector8 were provided in the community canter. Other fire protection systems in the building include: standpipes in the exit stairways, hose cabinets in exit corridors and community room, and emergency lighting in the exit access corridors and exit stairways, powered by an emergency generator. State and Local firs investigators determined that the fire is suspicious in nature origins mb ~ibiee eon~t~ f ~~ C¢r~~~ylroom and spread toctho involved the eo first Aoor lobby and corridors through its open doors. -- / The smoke movement in the building appears to be consistent with the "stack effect" phenomenon typically found in high-rise buildings. All three fatalities were found in the central corridor. Two were on the 13th residential floor and one was on the 12th residential Aoar. JOHNSON CITY• z~EBSF.E At approximately 5:10 p.m., on December 24, 1989, an accidental fire occurred in the 11-story non-sprinklered John Sevier Center in Johnson City, Tennessee. The fire heavily damaged the first Hoar and spread vertically to two areas on the second floor, Smoke spread throughout the entire building. Sixteen elder residents died and at least 40 other residents were injured. The majority of the building was originally constructed in 1924. Tt consisted of masonry exterior bearing walla, a poured-in-place concrete structural frame, poured~in-place concrete floor ®labs, and terra Iota the nonbearing interior partitions. The building was renovated in 1977 far use as eidexly housing. This conversion resulted in a modification to the first floor. Space was allocated for a few small businesses, adininietration ofl"ices, a large community area, and soveral apartments. Also at this time modifications were made to the ~~ occupant floors. The following ~.re protection systems were part of the modification: two pressurized stairways, a standpipe syaterri, emergency lighting, a fire fighters intercom, and a fire detection and alarm system. The fire detection and alarm system consisted of corridor smoke detectors and manual pull stations near the exit stairways. Activation of the building alarm system sounds ari internal alarm and automatically notifies the fire department. Single-station, hard-wired smoke detectors are arranged to sound within the apartment of origin and send a signal to a security room. State and local fire investigators have determined that the fire was accidental. The investigators indicate that the fire moat likely occurred in the area of a sofa in s first floor apartment. The smoke detector in the roam operated and sent a signal to the emergency call penal. A security guard arrived at the first floor room, and faunal the room door open, and smoke filling the corridor. First arriving fire department units found fire venting from a first floor window and smoke began to show on the upper floors. With the door to the room of fire origin open, the fire readily spread into the corridor and reached public areas that had combustible interior finishes. In addition, the fire spread into the ceiling apace and ignited the combustible ceiling assembly. The fire was able to spread vertically because of utility equipment voids in the concrete floor slab. Smoke spread to all ~-~ ~ ~~ floors in the building. The primary mechanism for smoke spread was the three elevator shafts. The 16 fatalities were found in various locations. Two wexe found in a first floor apartment that had windows opening directly to the outside. The other 14 were found on the floors above. The majority of the fatalities were from rooms close to this elevator shaft and a common pipe chase void. The fatalities from the upper floors were found both in their respective apartments and in the corridor. StJ1YfNiARY gyp' INCIxI-F1VZ`~ There are several factors in these fires which resulted in fatalities including: (1) lack of automatic sprinklers; (2) failure of room compartmentation; (3) combustible interior finish; and (4} rapid fire growth. These factors are also common factors in other multiple-death fires in residences, independent of occupant age considerations. Each k~uilding in this analysis contained a certain Level of fire protection, yet, the level was not sufficient to prevent amultiple-death fire. What affect, if any, age considerations of occupants had on the outcome of these fires is beyond the scope of this summary. Each room of origin appeared to reach flashover, a critical point in the growth of a fire when the life safety of occupants is threatened. The installation of automatic sprinklers can effectively control or prevent flashover from occurring and save lives. ~~urther, there are building and firesaf'ety codes and standards available to eliminate such factors, determined from this analysis, in housing far the elderly or for that matter, in multi-family residential housing. The building and fire protection community should continue to assess the level of fire protection reflected in these codes and standards and that contained in their local codes and standards, in preventing multiple-death fires in residential facilities primarily housing the elderly, This preliminary report was prepared in the public interest and nay be reproduced with customary source credit. ' O~ (~OANp~~ ~ i 7 ~ Z mac? a~ 18 E50 $$ SFSQ!lICENTENN~P~ A Beautiful Beginning ~Alirifl~ ~Af ~D~triD~tP FIRE ANp RESCUE DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Elmer C. Hodge ~~ , ~ FROM: Chief ~-~~; Fuqua DATE: February 7, 1990 SUBJECT: Report on Response Study Committee T. C. FUQUA CHIEF Attached is the final draft of the Response Study Committee's report. Please review and if you have questions or changes contact me by 10 a.m. Thursday, February 8, 1990. Should you have questions or require changes after that time, contact Battalion Chief Mark Light. He helped put the report together and will be able to make any changes you feel necessary. ALL-AMERICA CITY ' ~ I I ~ I 1979 "'°j"'~,... ~ 1989 3568 PETERS CREEK ROAD. NW. ROANOKE. VA 24019 <703) 561-8070 FAX TELEPHONE (703) 561-8108 EXECUTIVE OVERVIEW EMERGENCY RESPONSE STUDY COMMITTEE The committee formed to evaluate the effectiveness of our emergency response has completed its charge. The committee members were: Rescue Captain Frances Murrie, District Chief Rick Wallace, District Chief Gene Wagner, Chief T. C. Fuqua, Captain David Hafey and Captain Steve Poff. This composition brought the various views of the department together to evaluate our overall response to requests for service. The committee evaluated numerous possibilities for improvement of fire and rescue protection. Throughout the process, data from incident reports, the computer-aided dispatch system, and personal experiences was assessed and potential causes determined. The base finding of the committee is that quality emergency service is provided in a majority of our responses. Unfortunately, there are times that adequate personnel are not available to handle emergency response. The committee has formulated a list of recommendations that will enhance the delivery of emergency services in Roanoke County. The following recommendations are made with no inference to either career or volunteer members, but for the overall improvement of the system. i. strive to improve each stations average response time by 1 minute per year, with no response time longer than 15 minutes (unless travel distance compounds the problem). This recommendation will be accomplished by a challenge to each station to improve overall response time. Each District Chief and Rescue Captain will develop a plan to meet this objective. The response times will be evaluated monthly by the Chief of Fire and Rescue to determine if this goal is being met. The Chief will meet with the District Chief or Rescue Captain if the response time does not meet criteria and discuss the problem and determine a solution. Projected Financial Impact: Staff Time Only 2. Request the State Department of Fire Programs to complete an evaluation of our department. The state Department of Fire Programs is willing to evaluate the total delivery of emergency services in Roanoke County. This evaluation will be very objective and will give an outside view of our strong points and deficiencies. The information is gathered from all segments of the organization and then evaluated as to the best approach for service OVERVIEW PAGE TWO ~ -~ delivery. The committee recommends that we move forward with this study so that we have an unbiased opinion for further action. Projected Financial Impact: Staff Time Only 3. Mutual Aid Agreements With Other Localities Roanoke County currently does not have written mutual-aid agreements with all surrounding jurisdictions, with the result that the closest station is not always the one dispatched. It is proposed that Roanoke County develop Mutual-Aid agreements with adjoining localities, so that the closest station will respond to fire and rescue calls, regardless of political jurisdiction. Projected Financial Impact: The cost will be offset by return of Mutual-Aid. 4. Extend Emergency Medical Service delivery with career personnel from 6 a.m. to 5 p.m. An evaluation of all response times was completed by the committee. Between the hours of 6 and 7 a.m. and 4 and 5 p.m. , calls are heaviest and those are times when there is not enough staff to respond to all the calls. This problem is inherent in a combination system as volunteers are going to and from work, and are therefore not available for calls, and the career staff is not yet on duty or has left for the day. This problem can be addressed by extending our current paramedic unit coverage. We can effectively staff 6 medic units for the extra time by paying overtime to current staff. Extending coverage in this manner will not require additional staff, yet will upgrade the delivery of service during this critical time period. Projected Financial Impact: $55,000 5. Extend Fire and Rescue Coverage to 10 hours at Bent Mountain Station. Roanoke County currently provides career support at the Bent Mountain Station 8 hours each day, Monday thru Friday. Calls are received after the career people leave and before the volunteers return back to the area. Calls that are received during this time period often have extended response times. The addition of 2 firefighters will allow for staffing of this station on a 10 hour per day basis. This response area will OVERVIEW PAGE THREE ~ ""~ then have the equivalent service that all other stations have for daylight response. Projected Financial Impact: $55,000 6. Addition of a Public Fire Education Officer The state fire code requires that building occupants of various types of structures be trained in fire safety practices. Due to present work load, the current Fire Inspectors are unable to meet this charge. This position will be responsible for designing, implementing, coordinating, program delivery, and evaluation of fire safety education programs for our county. Emphasis will be placed in the following order: Nursing homes/retirement centers, public and private schools, and the general public. This position is one that will have long lasting effects on the fire problem of our future. This position will provide more direct support ...................................... for the tier of fire deaths than any other position in the department. Protected Initial Financial Impact: $45,135 (includes vehicle) Projected Ongoing Impact: $26,000 7. Equip all current stations with bunk rooms and construct all future stations with bunk rooms. The most efficient night time response is made when personnel are at the station. Our volunteers are encouraged to stay at the station, whenever possible, at the stations having sleeping and bath facilities. However, Catawba, Mt. Pleasant, and Masons Cove do not have sleeping facilities, and it is recommended that these stations be updated to include bunk rooms and appropriate shower and bath facilities. Minor alterations and additions will have to be completed at other stations in order to bring all stations up to an acceptable level to accommodate male and female members. The committee further recommends that all future stations be constructed with adequate bunk room facilities. Projected Financial Impact• Cost projections are being prepared, recommend including funds in Capital Improvement Program and/or bond referendum. OVERVIEW PAGE FOUR ~/ 8. Designated Fire and Rescue Dispatchers that are responsible to the Chief of Fire and Rescue. Current dispatchers work for the Sheriff's Office, and any training relating to Fire and Rescue must be approved by the Sheriff. Historically most fire and rescue training is provided on the job. The committee contends that in order to have trained fire and rescue dispatchers, the Chief must have some control over their training and work conditions. The committee understands that the future Chief of Police and the Chief of Fire and Rescue will evaluate the communications center and reach a consensus. The committee believes that this should be a top priority, and some form of control/evaluation should be established for fire and rescue dispatching. Projected Financial Impact for Separate Dispatchers: Unknown- depends on system. 9. Reduction of sprinkler connection fees to actual cost only. An automatic sprinkler system is the most efficient method to immediately contain a fire. In order for a sprinkler system to be complete the system must be connected to a water supply system. When a building is required to have a sprinkler system, or the owner decides to put in a system voluntarily, a connection fee is charged. This fee serves as a detriment to the installation of sprinkler systems and the committee recommends that this fee be reduced to the actual cost incurred by Roanoke County. This change will give developers and owners that are operating on a limited budget an opportunity to install a sprinkler system without an overwhelming connection fee; furthermore, we can encourage owner of buildings not required by the fire code to have a system to install one that provides immediate response to all fires in the early phases. Projected Financial Impact: Unknown 10. Institute a fee for false alarm activations. Continuous false alarms have a tendency to reduce a station's response times. The committee proposes that a set fee be charged for each alarm system malfunction. This fee will not be applicable until after an allowance per period is reached. Reduction of continuous false alarms will improve our members' response to these automatic alarms. Projected Financial Impact: $25 per false alarm OVERVIEW PAGE FIVE ~ ... 11. Provide additional volunteer incentives Volunteers provide emergency response to calls in our county without direct compensation. The committee recommends that the following additional incentives be provided for each volunteer. A. Waive the personal property taxes on 1 vehicle. B. Increase the weekly disability benefit in case of injury. The county currently provides each volunteer with a free county decal for 1 vehicle. If the county waived the personal property taxes on 1 vehicle, it would give our volunteers more incentive to actively participate in departmental activities. If a volunteer member is injured in the line of duty he or she is paid only $190 per week. It is very difficult for someone to meet their responsibilities on this amount, and the committee believes that raising this amount will provide additional protection for our volunteers in the event of an injury. Projected Financial Impact For Personal Property Incentive: X150,000 (based on average of $250 per vehicle for 600 volunteers). Financial Impact for Additional Disability Insurance: $9,875 for $390/week 12. Security lock boxes on major buildings. Department history has shown that access to buildings during emergency situations is very difficult and the committee proposes that a standard lock box be required for certain targeted buildings. This box will contain a key to the building where the box is located and a master key will be on each response vehicle that will access the lock box. Appropriate security measures will have to be instituted to assure only authorized personnel have access to the master keys. Projected Financial Impact: No direct impact on department. The listed recommendations are items that our committee contends will enhance our overall delivery of Emergency Services in Roanoke County. Many of the recommendations will require additional planning and study in order to implement. This is understood and all members of the committee and our department realize that change does not occur immediately. If we set a course and develop a plan, together we can improve our level of service for the citizens. OVERVIEW PAGE SIX The committee will remain active, and periodically operational and organizational goals, priorities, With input from all segments of the Fire and Rescue can set our future course. Submitted by: tV~~.Q,O C Chief of Departure ,.~ -/ meet to review and problems. Department we Date : 2 - ~ - ~ ~ "~ ..:~ :::::::::::.::~:::: ::: ::::::~ :c c ~ ~ ~ o ~ o ::::> : r r ~X7::::>::>::::>:: : :,`:;I~~l''~M;: ;: ::;:>/y~/yii~;;:.;:.;:.;: . CO to CC N f~ O ~ N T r t- ~::::>:4M.:ii~ ~~ :::::i::3::::<:::::~::::r: ..................... ::# ... <;<; ~i::::::ii:: O O O O O O .....;:.;:.;:.;:.; ~::::::::: ~ M r ~ ~ ~ ~;:.; :.:;.;:.~:::>::::>::::: ~ tp r N O lA N (~ N .>::>::Ci::::>::>::::>::: z L :: :.: 0 \ 0 0 \ 0 0 \ 0 0 \ 0 0 \ 0 > ~~., ir~~!!443~~yyi,!!:~~!!:~i:~:~i:~:~i~: , i: :. . .::::::.~:::::::::::::: : ,~j :: T A T ~, r O U ~ ~ ~ ~ U Q~ ;. fi ~ W .. •- ::,:;;::; r;:;;€~ ::::::'r::~jj~ » >>? O T M N O ~ Z G `` W M /~ rr /~ W r w/ ~ ~ ; d ~ .~ c O c r M ~ O ..... ~ .: ... ...... V / iii:i%:::~~f£~ C T O M ~ Q . ...................... :.:: O r << Z - Z - Z - Z - Z - Z - Z - Z - Z - Z - Z - Z - Z - n .- Q W :»»»»::>::::>::::::>::::>:::: : z z.; ~ ~ ~ J J ...................... ...................... . >Cl~<':.~ `<:::;wt:: ' M I O CD I ~ O I f~ N r I tq r 1 00 r I r N I ~t N I f~ N I O M I O ~ I O ~ I O ~ I ~ Q ~ V 2 :>' ;:: O r M r t~ r O r N N ~ N M N r M r r 2 r U I- Q :::.::>:;~:: F- a ~::: ::>:<:>::: o 0 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: February 13, 1990 SUBJECT: Request for Approval of Grant and Matching Funds for Solid Waste Recycling Program COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: .~ .~a w X_- ~"~ BACKGROUND: The Virginia Department of Waste Management has recently set forth a mandate requiring all localities to implement a compre- hensive solid waste plan. The plan must include provisions to achieve recycling goals of l00 of the waste stream by 1991, 15°s by 1992, and 25o by 1993. In response to the new state requirements, as well as to a pressing local need to reduce the waste stream, the Roanoke Valley Solid Waste Management Board has initiated a program to provide financial assistance to local government members to implement recycling programs. Participation in the grant program will assist Roanoke County in the planning, implementing, and attaining the goals of a comprehensive solid waste plan. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Landfill Board has provided a 5250,000 recycling grant for local government use in implementing recycling programs (attached). The funds will be provided on a 35/65 landfill/local government basis. Funding allocation will be based on the tonnage taken to the landfill by each local government for fiscal year ending June 30, 1989. Based on the county's 32.4a of the waste stream, the Landfill Board will provide 581,000 and Roanoke County will match with 5150,600. Funds must be spent by June 30, 1990. If the grant is approved, staff plans to expand the current recycling program to another 4,800 homes. The landfill funds will be used to purchase a curbside recycling vehicle. The county's matching funds will be used for operating costs which will be an annual recurring cost. This recurring cost will require an increase in allocation to the Solid Waste Division and includes three additional personnel (one operator and two laborers). The program would be initiated in several sections of the county currently being studied. ,~~ -- As in the original program, the residents will be asked to separate targeted materials into the bins, and to transport them to the curb on the collection day. This program will work in conjunction with recycling recommendation #1 of the county's approved recycling plan (Attachment #3). Total cost $231,600 Grant funds 81,000 Matching funds 150,600 FISCAL IMPACT• This program was started after the beginning of the current fiscal year. Therefore, funds have not been allocated in the current budget for county participation. Request funds be transferred from unappropriated fund balance to meet the matching funds requirement of $150,600. Funds must be spent by 6/30/90. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the resolution and county application for the landfill grant program, as well as, matching county money from unappro- priated balance. ~yS.LiN~i~ED BY: APPROVED: ` ~ ardner W. Smith, Director Elmer C. Hodge Department of General Services County Administrator ACTION Approved Denied Received Referred To Motion by: VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy Johnson McGraw Nickens Robers AT A MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, ~ j~ VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER `'''-'' '""" ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1990 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE APPROVAL OF SUPPORT AND REQUEST FOR APPLICATION TO REGIONAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR RECYCLING IMPLEMEN- TATION GRANT FUNDS. WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County has initiated the search for a new landfill and, therefore, recognizes the need for alternative means of disposal; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia has reviewed and accepted the Waste Management Hierarchy (Source Reduction, Recycling, Resource Recovery, Incineration, and Landfilling); and WHEREAS, over the past two years the County of Roanoke, Virginia has taken the lead in curbside collection and source separation recycling with the goal of a regional approach to the Roanoke Valley solid waste problems. NOW, Tf~REE'ORE, be it resolved by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia as follows: 1. That Roanoke County accepts and adopts the Commonwealth of Virginia recycle rates of loo by 1991, 15o by 1993, and 25% by 1995; 2. That Roanoke County, Virginia will develop a comprehensive solid waste management program which will include state hierarchy; 3. That Roanoke County, Virginia supports the landfill implementation recycling grant programs, supports this application, and commits to the matching funds as required by the grant; 4. That the effective date of this resolution is February 13, 1990. 3 • f ~J~-~ T~ ~ . w • LJ . ~1~ 'S '~L1CPsT~~J ~~ ~,~p~~5~61 ~ ~ 2 n` JAN 1990 G January 10, 1990 Inv 5`Z CS ~ '~,Pti~T ~ j~ RDANOKE COUNTY ~~ FACILIpTI~ES~D~IV,,I~SION > EN~_'~Clw:E3 \~li,„ ~~ Chairman and Roanoke Valley Regional Solid Waste Management Board Roanoke, Virginia J Dear Chairman and Members of Board: Subject: Recycling Grant Program At the December 13, 1989 board meeting, the Landfill Board appointed a committee to evaluate the recycling grant program and report back to the Landfill Board with a recommendation. George Nester was appointed Chairman of this committee and Kit Kiser and John Hubbard serving as the other two members. This committee met on December 28, 1989 to review and evaluate this grant program. The committee agreed that it was in the interest of the Landfill Board to provide funds to the local governments to assist in implementing recycling programs. The committee felt that measures need to be taken to reduce the amount of waste material entering the landfill and to assist the local governments in meeting the new state recycling mandates. The committee recommended that $250,000 in grants be available this current fiscal year to the local governments for recycling programs. These funds would be provided on a matching basis through reimbursement of previously approved expenditures with the Landfill Board providing 35% and the local governments 65%. These funds would cover labor costs, supplies, materials, and equipment. The funding allocation would be based on the amount of tonnage brought to the landfill by each local• government for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1989. The recommended maximum allocations are as follows: City of Roanoke 63.4% @ $250,000 = $ 158,500 County of Roanoke 32.4% @ $250,000 = $ 81,000 Town of Vinton 4.2% @ $250,000 = ~~~50~0 4 "' In conclusion, the recycling committee recommends that the Landfill Board increase the grant allocation from $100,000 to $250,000 in the current fiscal year. This additional $150,000 appropriation is recommended to be funded from X50,000 in unobligated funds in the current recycling account ~:ith the remaining $70,000 transferred from retained earnings. R pectfu ly submitted, -~ ....... George W. Nester Recycling Committee Chairman 5 PROJECT BUDGET CAPITAL 1 - LaBrie Recycle Vehicle (Grant Expense) f 81,000 4800 - Sets of 3 Recycle Containers (County Expense) f 81.600 Total f 162,600 0PERATII~ (Solely County Funded) Personnel f 16, 000 Labor f 22, 000 Fuel/Maintenance f 6,000 Publicity/Education f 25.000 Total f 69, 000 TOTAL f 231,600 Total Funded by Grant f 8i, 000 (35X) Total Funded by County f 150.600 (65X) Total Project Budget f 231,600 6 RECYCLING '~-2 RECOMMENDATIONS ''±b .: • ~. Continue County~Recycling Program • 2. Require Recycling as Part o f New Land fill Contract • 3. Request Land fill Board to operate valley-wide yard waste compost program • 4. Request Clean Valley Council to determine ways to snvolve business sector • 5. jointly with other localities, strategically locate drop o ff centers 6. Privatize operations of buy back centers and col- lection process. .. ACTION # A-21390-4 ITEM NUMBER ,~ - ,,~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 13, 1990 AGENDA ITEM• Request to the City of Roanoke for upgrade of the Roanoke River Sewer Intercep±or capacity COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: The City of Roanoke owns the Roanoke River Sewer Interceptor and the Wastewater Treatment Plant. Those facilities provide sanitary sewer conveyance and treatment for Roanoke County under the provisions ~f the 1972 Sewage Treatment Contract. This contract and other action of City Council assign Roanoke County certain capacities in the interceptor and treatment plant. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: In order to provide future expansion of the Roanoke County Sanitary Sewer System, additional capacity is required within the Roanoke River Sewer Interceptor section owned by the City of Roanoke. The 1972 Sewage Treatment Contract provides that the County first request the City to construct or enlarge a City owned sewer line. If the City shall decline to construct or participate in the line, then the County may proceed with the construction of the line within the City. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors request the City of Roanoke to enlarge, construct or otherwise provide additional capacity within the Roanoke River Sewer Interceptor for use by Roanoke County. It is further recommended that the Board authorize staff to negotiate with the City concerning the capacity desired and method of sharing the cost of such capacity. Such negotiations would result in an agreement that would be presented for approval of both governing bodies. "` SUBMITTED BY: r Cliffo aig, P.E. Utility Director APPROVED: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ACTION VOTE Approved (~ Motion by: Bob L. Johnson to No Yes Abs Denied ( ) a~~rove staff recommendation Eddy x Received ( ) Johnson x Referred McGraw x to Nickens x Robers x cc: File Cliff Craig, Director, Utilities Paul Mahoney, County Attorney -~ N v 1 ^^~ V\ rr~~., vl ti 0 U 2 W ~`~I O U O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~sp~~o~M$ N N N N N N N N ~j X N ~j ° ~v°pi °r°~e~~~~h$nc ,~ ~ v .. .. ~~ e~e"'n ~i a ~o .ro~~`oaa~~ + ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . ~ ~o~.,~e~iN~~~ N ~ ~~ ~ 0 -~~e J'~rf ~c ~t ri m °c~ o~~~~ooo° POV C~ ~~ rl~ c3 e3 eJ ri a $ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ v r~ ~ e ni ri vin v; vS d'~vrr~ a p {~ NN V W O M M M~? [~ O oD ~ h N U E ~ L' Z v t~ t~ aE o0 O~ O~ t ~i < i V ~ D ~ C p . ~ pp p. ~p 8 8 8 vi t~ t~ t~ ~ N N ` ~ 5 n i V M O O .+ .M+ ti ti~ N~~ N N~ N Ly ~ ~ < < b ~ 000 a6 CT O. O .N+ ~ rS a C C .. .-' ~ C C S 8 N ~ 0~ V-{ c~ 0a 00' A e+ ~ N N N N N~ t n M~ M V D c~ r O g O. N O. O b M b r ~o n v ~o r Z . , oo N eJ rf rS ri ri Ni ri Q o r a o m o~~ g n r ~ 25 n v ~ ~o o a $ 0 ~ ~ o rf rS ~.; v ~ 06 od o: o: o ~ .; ~ ° ~~ O V ~O N ~'^ O. N K h P 0 r r r, a J J J ; ri i ivd dd ' e e r ~+ e r N g~~h~~g~g:o~~ o i e-t et ~c 6 ao 0 o~~r 5C~] p Q `` ; i ~ O, ~ ~ ~ C C ~ Z v i hI M M R R C a ~ $~ v ~ x fV ~ ~ ~o~e~3'~ ° ~ ~ vv~~ ~~pp R RR op0p ~.Dp N vri O `O a h ~ ~ V o0 Q ap ~O `O a0 O~ O~ O ~ ~ M '+ . .+ . i a ~~~i ~ ~n~M ~ ~ ~n pp ,, ~ N t~- N M M M M~ C C C °c~ ~F r.,a ~c`3, o~~a~g~~ ~n a c ~ ;~ . r~~ ~ ~ ~r Q Q 3.rr ~ ~ 25~~ n ~$ '~~ i a o v h vQ C O < vii N ~ M t'h tr~1 t ~ i mj ~ ~ ~ pp pp ~ p , . ~~/1 O l~ `O ~ ~ [~ Q f~ N O~ N O~ 0' ~ r O P CC . -i ~ N N . r ti N N N ~ ~~{ ~ ~ N~ V ~ ~L O~ Q ~O b N M M Q ~ ~ ~ Q N N ~ K C C -i i ti ti ti . ~ . N ~ p p ~ e V R t ~ ~ n ~ n t V 8 P ~D O N b ~ ~ ~ ~ V 0 c0 N t v D t 0pp i N t7 R P ~ h vpi vii ~D ~D ~ r ~ py p~ eV~ h av0~ b ao e-i .y v, a0 ~ ~ N i i M P N P y U~ C i . -i . + N 7 t 7 . N N f p v~ p p pp p p p p p ti N N M to M M~~ to to to v ~~~ ~~~ a v ° o ~ ~X ~ ~ ~ ~ j ( . ~ p p . ~ n < h `~O F r I~ a0 O~ O~ O O ti $rV,N ~ aFr~ c~oroMi , ( p ~ ~ ~ W ~O~ab ~~~ P ~~~ ~ y ~~~ +Q ~b: b:Sgoo~ooo~ N N N N N N N N N C d O ed O L a ~ o v ~' o. a °~ v °~ o g c ~ c f~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ y a U ~ v o '~~+`cc~ AU A F. a y ~ m ~ O L ~ L m .~ p~p c ~ ~ A ~ ~ 3 N A L ~ ~ ~ N O A ~ L' C ~ ~ !!C ~ U rp74 L N N R C am` ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m..~~., a v a o ~ o O p d ~ s yG. .'~~+ ~' y6y 4~y!~ O N L +' ~ a C ~ ?;,~ ~.. a~ ~ v c y o~ r y u L y ~ea~~~~ u tL. 'J' "'' 'J' E A ~ W Luv" L Lr~" L Lr' aAAAA~A A v v v v v~ c o 0 0 0 0 0 o s s~ s r~ N N A A N {Cp A a~~~~~~ s~ 9'3~~~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q cO C~A W u. C? C~ R: LG LG a. C. LG 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~" ~ u ~u v u ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ O G. O ~ d ~U ~~ y c vF U ~ c a c~ ~ W ~ u C A ~ N C_ L A ~ v N ~' ~s 0 0 o y d y c y y ~+ V U U ~ c A L A ~o u v ~ ~ L L E E °° c7 U F F 0 0 N N N a c O a 0 C[~ 0 C O C `o E C F~ H -~ N v 2 w ~wN "V ~~ ~.Il O U W w O U ~i k N ~ ~p NN { pq, ~ h r~ N P M O. H O r V II ~ [~ t~ O. ri a6 ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ r v i e i . -~ . -~ . + H H . + r ~ a pp Tr (~ R pp t~ f11 t7 ~V `O b n n ~ O~ O~ .~-~ + b ra GK] Z d ddd. ddddd dd ~ p Q 8 ~ ~ O N c ~ ~ ~ vi ri ~ j . i O . " ~ t3 ~ eS ri rf ~i ~ $~~ g ~~ ~ F ~ .-7 . i r i e~1 c J ~J B i p < oN p 8 N ~ ~ ~ -D v l~ Mr0 O~ ~ vi a . t i tai Hf 'P vi N N `S `O `S r r [~ ~ NN pp p ONO O e~ M ~ ~ ? n O ~ ~ h N ~ ~ SSS"' d I~ !~ Od Ot$ Oi O ~ t ~i Q h ` 6 d ` D ~ ~ p Op op <p p. 8 p , ~ b v° v I~ I~ l~ ~ N N V cp O i i y { p ~ .r-~ eQi e~+ N N ~ N N e3 N m ° c4i. ~O.mv~~ve `~~~~N-. ~~ r1 ~a 6 ad o: a d ~ ~ v e~c t 0( Jp yp ~ p ~ 8 v W N ~ ~ GD ~ Q ~ ~ ~ O 1 ~ ff V °c~ ~ ee~o:°. ego r; ~n °r J +; i + ; J 3 f ; +i ; ~ ~ ~ r l e e ~- r ~ o o. pp pp . p e ~p~pn N~ p 8 M C N ~O O a~ l~ `r0 O~ 5 O CJ C( vi ~S r OG 06 T P O .~ ~ ° (~ ~ ~ r .N+ a0 O~ N C vri P O N i J J i M < < i i y a ~ Z CC N t ~ t ~ f~I f t C C .~ ~ p p ~p fp V. p 8 O vP -I ~ h `O ~ ~ < O O ~ i e ~ C O .CSi .tS-i ~ lJ lS vi `GS OC P .~-•i O ~ `pQ ; V°i~ vi V i ~/t tai ~ V C Q ~ f , ~ k p ~ pp ~p J~ pp eQ ~. p 8 ~ I~ ~ ~ N GO < ~ V ~ @ ` ~ LV ~ = G r a6 O ti .~+ .~i .~+~. ~+ ~ .ri ~ z ~ Z T O ~ ~ ~ a0 ~ OD `G `G OO O 6 ~ ~ O pTpr vN ~ r N r~ r r J~ ~ vi a Q~ e ~ ~ . ~ Q N N N M M M ~ Y ~~ ha~~o6Sa~~~~ r ~ v; ' r r1' v v; v ~ ~n en e v v ~n m QQ ° U ~ ~ pp pp v~ pp,, . vii O N ~O ~ T r O~ N P N O+ O ~ P r ~ Q ~ ~ 6i + . . . . . N . . N N 8 p O. v N vi ~ N r ~ ~ N h ~ ` ` ~ i O O e r ~ ( d `D b `b ~ M M O O h h h yp° pp nn . N M o p ~ P<~ M OD `O O N O O o~0 M~ lJ O~ O ti~ N N ~ N K 5 Z ~ . + + Q N N -~ . RiM~ a ~h~ P.+r'o cif ~o Corr ~ ~ v~~O. h ~~f V~Qv~v.~~e~{{ao~PvNi~ ti ti~ 1 M M N N aa~~ ~ ~ t N N N c7 Y a ~ o V M to fry M ('i1 ~ ~ 17 M c~ <~°n ~I~~~~aao$~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s y g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ g ~ o ~ '~ as ~~" z ZakZ ~. E ~ jQ~; `~ 8p°~, oNN o~ ~ .-+ a• ~ N N N N~ N N C NNO O L aa3 0 p ~ ~ ~ o ~ S ~ g y ° ~a 7 ` V C ~ ~ ~?. U ', C oc ~ y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ °' ~ E °~ ~ a o~ ~.~ro~ ~ ., ~ ~ ~ N A Y U N O A ~i' p 0 0 L' d A C _C L' L C ~ O 7 C C A ~ O ~~~~~~8 C y m L o v 3 v o o 0 0 ~ O o o a.~ o c ~ ~ ~ ~ a L ~ ~ N g O ~ a ~ W ~ v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W m m A m ie A d v v v v v 'a'b e c c c~ c a~~~~~~ .°c ~rL v y~ J ~ 0 0 0 o E 6 0 8 cm~caw~c~ aaaaaaa ooSSSSo to ~ !n d d N u d v U c`3 o °' A ~ ~ N C L' •+ C y ~ U o C7 0 ~ v v c o y ~ U L V A 3 C7 u A ~ 'a ;, ~ u o ~ ~ ~ o Q Q G] FF ~~ O O y A G. 0 a" L 0 0 a 0 .o v ACTION NO. A-21390-5 ITEM NUMBER ~ ~""' AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 13, 1990 AGENDA ITEM: Application for a Bingo Permit - Fort Lewis Rescue Squad, Inc. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS : av-, p/~' Cv~~~'-'`~`~(~ a.2~~'^~ BACKGROUND• J On December 13, 1988, the Board of Supervisors approved the request of the Fort Lewis Rescue Squad, Inc. for a bingo permit for the calendar year 1989 and they were advised that the permit expired December 31, 1989. On January 31, 1990 the organization applied for their annual permit for games to be held at the Fire Station Company 9, owned by Roanoke County. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION County Attorney Paul Mahoney has researched the background on this permit application. The Commissioner of the Revenue's Office advises that the Fort Lewis Rescue Squad, Inc. has been conducting bingo games every Saturday evening in 1990 despite the expiration of the permit. Their 1989 financial report was due on November 1, 1989, but was not filed until February 1, 1990. The 1~ audit fee which is due with the financial report has not yet been paid and the gross receipts information required in the bingo application has not been provided. The applicants had acknowledged in their 1989 application that they were aware of these requirements. At the present time, the Fort Lewis Rescue Squad is in violation of both state law and county ordinances which may result in criminal penalties. Commissioner of the Revenue Wayne Compton has not recommended approval of the permit. The organization has paid the $25.00 permit fee. This issue has been discussed with Eugene Rhodes, the individual responsible for the bingo permit and he has indicated he is aware of the violations and will pay the l~ audit fee and complete the application. RECOMMENDATION• Staff recommends that the Bingo Permit be approved upon proper filing of the financial records, receipt of the 1989 audit fee and ~~ completion of the gross receipts section of the application. ~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ---------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved (x) Motion by: steven A. McGraw No Yes Abs Denied ( ) to a~.= rnvP Ri nqc~ Prmi tenon Eddy x Received ( ) rPCPi=t of audit fPP, and Johnson X Referred ( ) ~-.mm~l i anr.P w; th eta ff McGraw x TO ( ) rerrnmmPnc~atinn N1CkenS x Robers x cc: File Bingo/Raffle File Wayne Compton, Commissioner of Revenue ~ - ~f COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO CONDUCT RAFFLES OR BINGO Application is hereby made for a bingo game or raffle permit. This application is made subject to all County and State laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations now in force, or that may be enacted hereafter and which are hereby agreed to by the under- signed applicant and which shall be deemed a condition under which this permit is issued. All applicants should exercise extreme care to ensure the accura- cy of their responses to the following questions. Bingo games and raffles are strictly regulated by Title 18.2-340.1 et. seq. of the criminal statutes of the Virginia Code, and by Section 4-86 et. sec. of the Roanoke•County Code. These laws authorize the County Board of Supervisors to conduct a reasonable investiga- tion prior to granting a bingo or raffle permit. The Board has sixty days from the filing of an application to grant or deny the permit. The Board may deny, suspend, or revoke the permit of any organization found not to be in strict compliance with county and state law. Any person violating county or state regulations concerning these permits shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. Any person who uses any part of the gross receipts from bingo or raffles for any purpose other than the lawful religious, charitable, community, or educational purposes for which the organization is specifi- cally organized, except for reasonable operating expenses, shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony. THIS APPLICATION IS FOR: (check one) RAFFLE PERMIT BINGO GAMES YES Name of Organization FART LE~TIS RESCUE SQUAD INC. Street Address 3905 ~~`EST MA IN STREET Mailing Address P.O.BOX 446 City, State, Zip Code SALEM,,VA. 24153 Purpose and Type of Organization LIFE SAVING When was the organization founded? T962 1 ~•.U '~ Roanoke County meeting place? FI F STAmTnr~ ;n 9 Has organization been in existence in Roanoke County for two con- tinuous years? YES X NO Is the organization non-profit? YES ~ NO Indicate Federal Identification Number # `^~~ ° / ~~ cJ~ Attach copy of IRS Tax Exemption letter. Officers of the Organization: President: JOHN TATE Address : 3104 HAR~ORt~J'~OD Secretary: BRENA LOVEL, Address: 18+0 RICHLAND SA LEM VA. Vice-President~/~L.~~'~ L, l r't ~ ~~~ RD .SALEM Address : ~.~.Z B ~~e~e,~~ ~ ~~ _SAC~~ /~ 3CE Treasurer: LISA RHODES HILLS DR Address: 6I2 CENTRAL AVE.SALEM -Member authorized to be responsible for Raffle or Bingo opera- tions: Name EUGENE D.RHODES Home Address 61.2 CENTRAL AVE. SALEM, VA. Phone 389-1265 sus. Phone 389-~+58I A COMPLETE LIST OF THE NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF CURRENT MEMBER- SHIP MUST BE FURNISHED WITH THIS APPLICATION. Specific location where Raffle or Bingo Game is to be conducted. RAFFLES: Date of Drawing Time of Drawing BINGO: Days of Week & Hours of Activity: Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday From To From To From To From To From To From To From To~~ P • M• 2 ~-y State specifically how the proceeds from the Bingo/Raffle will be used. List in detail the planned or intended use of the proceeds. Use estimates amounts if necessary. To BAY FIRST ATD EQUIPMENT AN TOOLS TO REMOVE PEOPLE OUT OF CARS AN WREACKS WOULD LIKE TO PURSHUSE A NEW CRASH TRUCK 3 ~-y BINGO: Complete the following: Legal owner(s) of the building where BINGO is to be conducted: Name: ROANOKE COUNTRY Address: 3738 BRAMBLETON AVE b. W. County ROANOKE StateVA. Zip 24018 Is the building owned by a 501-C non-profit organization? Seating capacity for each location: APPO~ 200 Parking spaces for each location: T00 ALL RAFFLE AND BINGO APPLICANTS MUST ANSWER QUESTIONS 1 - 19 1. Gross receipts from all sources related to the operation of Bingo games or Instant Bingo by calendar quarter for prior calen- dar year period. BINGO INSTANT BINGO 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter Total 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter Total 2. Does your organization understand that it is a violation of law to enter into a contract with any person or firm, associa- tion, organization, partnership, or corporation of any classifica- tion whatsoever, for the purpose of organizing, managing, or con- ducting Bingo Games or Raffles? YES 3. Does your organization understand that it must maintain and file complete records of receipts and disbursements pertaining to Bingo games and Raffles, and that such records are subject to audit by the Commissioner of the Revenue? YES 4. Does your organization understand. that the Commissioner of the Revenue or his designee has the right to go upon the premises on which any organization is conducting a Bingo game or raffle, to perform unannounced audits, and to secure for audit all re- cords~r~quired to be maintained for Bingo games or raffles? 4 ~'`1~ _._.__ .~ _-~- 5. Does....-Your organization understand tha~-~-._E~n.ancial Report must,kr~ filed with the Commissioner of the Revenue on or before th first day of November of each calendar year for which a per- mi ha e 6. ~oeg--your organization understand that if gross receipts ex- ceed fifty thousand dollars during any calendar quarter, an addi- tional Financial Report must be filed for such quarter no later than sixty days following the last day of such quarter?~S 7. Does your organization understand that the failure to file financial reports when due shall cause automatic revocation of the permit, and no such organization shall conduct any Bingo game or raffle thereafter until such report is properly filed and a new permit is obtained? YES 8. Does your organization understand that each Financial Report must be accompanied by a Certificate, verified under oath by the Board of Directors, that the proceeds of any Bingo game or raffle have been used for these lawful, religious, charitable, commu- nity, or educational purposes for which the organization is spe- cifically chartered or organized, and that the operation of Bingo games or raffles have been in accordance with the provisions of Article 1.1 of Chapter 8, Title 18.2 of the Code of Virginia? YES 9. Does your organization understand that a one percent audit fee of the gross receipts must be paid to the County of Roanoke upon submission of the annual financial report due on or before the first of November? YES 10. Does your organization understand that this permit is valid only in the County of Roanoke and only at such locations, and for such dates, as are designated in the permit application? YES 11. Does your organization understand that no person, except a bona fide member of any such organization who shall have been a member of such organization for at least ninety days prior to such participation, shall participate in the management, opera- tion, or conduct of any bingo game or raffle, and no person shall receive any remuneration for participating in management, operation, or conduct of any such game or raffle? YES 12. Has your organization attached a check for the annual permit fee in the amount of $25.00 payable to the County of Roanoke, Virginia? YES 13. Does your organization understand that any organization found in violation of the County Bingo and Raffle Ordinance or §18.2- 340.10 of the Code of Virginia authorizing this permit is subject to having such permit revoked and any person, shareholder, agent, member or employee of such organization who violates the above to having such permit revoked and any person, shareholder, agent, member or employee of such organization who violates the above referenced Codes may be guilty of a felony? YES 5 ~ -~ 14. Has your organization attached a complete list of its member- ship to this application form? YE5 15. Has your organiz tion attached a copy of its bylaws to this application form? ~ES 16. Has the organization been declared exempt from property taxa- tion under the Virginia Constitution or statutes?~_ If yes, state whether exemption is for real, person 1 property, or both and identify exempt property. 17. State the specific type and purpose of the organization. O ~ 18. Is this organization incorporated in Virginia? ~ t`~ ~'' ~ `~ If yes, name and address of Registered Agent: 19. Is the organization registered with the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Affairs pursuant to the Cha itable Solicitations Act, Section 57-48 of the Virginia Code? ~~ (If so, attach copy of registration.) Has the organization been granted an exemption from registration by the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Affairs? ~,~,~ (If so, attach copy of exemption.) ALL RAFFLE APPLICANTS DESCRIBE THE ARTICLES TO BE RAFFLED, VALUE OF SUCH ARTICLES, AND PROCEED TO NOTARIZATION. Article Description Fair Market Value 6 ~-y ALL BINGO APPLICANTS MUST ANSWER QUESTIONS 20 - 27 BEFORE NOTARIZATION RAFFLE APPLICANTS, GO TO NOTARIZATION. 20. Does your organization understand that the bingo games shall not be conducted m~~ frequently than two calendar days in any calendar week? 21. Does your organization understand that it is required to keep complete records of the bingo game. These records based on §18.2- 340.6 of the Code- of Virginia and X4.98 of Roanoke County Code must include the following: a. A record of the date, quantity, and card value of instant bingo supplies purchased, as well as the name and address of the supplier of such instant bingo supplies, and written invoice or receipt is also required for each purchase of in- stant bingo supplies? ~~ S -T b. A record in writing of the dates on which Bingo is played, the number of people in attendance on each date and the amount of receipts and prizes on each day? ~~ ~ (These records must be retained for three years.) c. A record of the name and address of each individual to whom a door prize, regular or special Bingo game prize or jackpot from the playing of Bingo is awarded? ~`,~'~ d. A complete and itemized record of all receipts and disburse- ments which support, and that agree with, the quarterly and annual reports required to be filed, and that these records must be maintained in reasonable order to permit audit? ~ S 22. Does your organization understand that instant Bingo may only be conducted at such time as regular Bingo game is in progress, and only at such locations and at such times as are specified in this application? ~~ S 23. Does your organization understand that the gross receipts in the course of a reporting year from the playing of instant Bingo may not exceed 33 1/3$ of the gross receipts of an organization's Bingo operation? y',~ S 24. Does your organization understand it may not sell an instant Bingo card to an individual below sixteen years of age? S 25. Does your organization understand that an organization whose gross receipts from all bingo operations that exceed or are ex- pected to exceed $75,000 in any calendar year shall have been granted tax-exempt status pursuant to Section 501 C of the United States Internal Revenue Service? `~~ ~ (Certificate must be attached.) 7 ~.1.~ -' 26. Does your organization understand that a Certificate of Occu- pancy must be obtained or be on file which authorizes this use at the proposed location? ~ ~ 5 27. Does your organization understand that awards or prize money or merchandise valued in excess of the following amounts are illegal? ~~ ~ a. No door prize shall exceed twenty-five dollars. b. No regular Bingo or special Bingo game shall exceed One Hund- red dollars. c. No jackpot of any nature whatsoever shall exceed One Thousand Dollars, nor shall the total amount of jackpot prizes awarded in any one calendar day exceed One Thousand Dollars. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * NOTARIZATION: THE FOLLOWING OATH MUST BE TAKEN BY ALL APPLICANTS I hereby swear or affirm under the penalties of perjury as set forth in §18.2 of the Code of Virginia, that all of the above statements are true to the best of my knowledge, information, and beliefs. All questions have been answered. Signed by: Name Title Subscribed and sworn before me, My commission expires: Notary Public RETURN THIS COMPLETED APPLICATION TO: COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE P.O. Box 20409 Roanoke, VA 24018-0513 Home Address this .3~ day ofl ~u 19~ 8 `,1./ - NOT VALID UNLESS COUNTERSIGNED The above application, having been found in due form, is approved and issued to the applicant to have effect until December 31st of this calendar year. Date Commissioner of the Revenue The above application is not approved. ~- ~ - ~ ~-~ C~.~ Date ommiss'oner of he Re enue ~ ~ ~ ~~~ } Ili ~~ ~a ,ti- ~ , ~ ~ L.. ~, sue- ~ -~' ~s ~9 ~'~, ,,, L~ 1 ~~~a~ Q ~t~ ~r G i~., G v U ~~ 55. ~L~~~ ~ U /~r'' / ~ 1 G 1.~r" !~ M G c~~ °~~' ~~ ~~ 9 . ~ -~ ~ ~ ~ COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE ~ (~ ~~`~" ... ~ ~ BINGO OR RAFFLE FINANCIAL REPORT G~-''~ Pursuant to Section 18.2-340 of the State Code of Virginia andQQ Article V Section 4-96-97 of Roanoke County Code, all holders of a Bingo Game or Raffle Permit must file annually or quarterly with .t he county a record of all receipts and disbursements in accordance with the provisions of this Article. All such account- ing shall be made on or•before the first day of November of each calendar year for which a permit has been issued. FAILURE TO FILE:A REPORT OF SUCH RECORDS ON OR BEFORE NOVEMBER 1ST SHALL CAUSE THE AUTOMATIC EVOCATION OF THE PERMIT. Name of Organization ~ .-c!J cS Address 3 d ~ w ~~~- ~ 0 ` ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ Address Where Bingo/Raffle is held J~~ y S ~ ~ ~-yt. Person Preparing Report Daytime Telephone Number`of Peron Preparing Report ~~ ~"~l T ~~~ . ~ -~2 ~ ~ i Period for which this report is filed ~ ' ~ -~ I Permit was for Bingo Raffle I. BEGINNING BALANCES 1. Beginning Bank Balance from Bingo Raffle . .$ d" ~J ~a 2 . Cash on Hand . S ~~S~G' d 3 . TOTAL ( A ) $ ~~~ ~ ~ II. GROSS RECEIPTS f ,. , . 4. Admission (Regular and Extra Cards) $_~,,,~~~`~ ~~ 5. Instant Bingo Sales $~~~Ir ~~ 6.' Misc. Sales (Excl. rev. & Food) $ d Explain in Part IV. 7. Raffles $ 8. Other .Explain in Part IV $ ~ . ~. 9 . TOTAL ( B ) $~7.,3 ~ ~ ~ 10. TOTAL CASH AVAILABLE Add (A) and (B) $ J` ~~ p ~ ' ~ l ` ,; ~ ~~ ti ~ ~ 1 ~_ I~ ~ ~. ~1 w ', . _fi III. OPERATING COSTS (EXCLUDING BEV. AND FOOD) d ....S l33 ~o 11. Bingo Supplies . S'jQ ~jU 12. Instant Bingo Supplies,. J '$ ="'-""-'< t IV S ~ ~ ~ 13 Other Supplies:°&,pEquipment-Explain in Par . .$ ~~©° ~ ~ 14. Permit Fee SpD Dv 15. . .Jackpot Prizes Awarded .S S y Instant Bingo Prizes Awarded $~D. 16. ~ .$ 1~. . Rent ' . $ ' 18. Audit Fee •~ ~-S7 ~ z' 19. Other Explain in Part IV S 20. TOTAL (D) $ k~~~ 21. USE OF PROCEEDS Explain in Detail in Part IV ' ADD (C) and (D) S-.~ 22. TOTAL EXPENDITURES 23, ENDING BANK BALANCE .• ' ..• .cF) s (~0~ 0~ ' 2 4 . CASH ON HAND • ~ ADD (C) (D) (E) (F) $ Y 25, TOTAL ACCOUNTED FOR • * * * * * * * * * * PART IV * * * * * * * * * DETAILED EXPLANATIONS REQUII3D 19R ory21NTRIES ON LINES 6, 8, Line#13 Line# /3 C'/~ Line#~~ Line#o1t ~~. ~ ~ PE,v c J ~ ~f suers ~~~ /•/ o .5 u 7' ~ ~ iK M!''NI MGRS Fa ~ ~~ /~S ~,s RD'S ~ v,~ s~ R ~" vP ~U Line# Line# Line# * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * N© 2 BINGO OR RAFFLE PROCEEDS ~• ~,~: • CERTIFICATE OF USE ~ - 5~ This certificate MUST be verified Boadd of Directorse Fiscal Officer, President, and Members of the THIS .CERTIFICATE MUST BE FILED WITH THE ANNUAL FINANCIAL STATE- MENT ON NOVEMBER 1ST. Name of Organization I certify that the proceeds of all Bingo Games or Raffles reported herein have been used to support those lawful, religious charitable, community or educational purposes for which this organization is specifically chartered or organized and that the operation of such Bingo Games or Raffles has been in accordance with Title 18.2 of the Code of Virginia, as amended. Signature ~~"'= Date /~3 ~ - ~ O Name ~i~.~/AG~~ ~• GvE~RC~ Title C`f~0''J~9~~N Home Address:~~-(O /~-~C~~~~~~ ~t~~s .~~ S$L~ Signatur soot-~ - Date / ' r3 j •~~' ~ ••Name ,t1E ~foDE~ Title ~ S~ h~ Home Address: (~/,Z G°~aJ ~~~ ~- ~hy~ ~~~'~~ y~ ~ if/s~3 Signature Date , -~ Name Title ~~'C4.=SU~~- Home Address: Signatur Name ,(~ 1 Title Home Address : ~ u;~7 C',P~~'t`s~~. ~iP- S The above signed Officers and Directors hereby swear or affirm under penalties of Phatutheaabove statement Tis true8to the bestt of Code of Virginia, their knowledge, information, and beliefs. Subscribe3 and sworn to before me, this /~ay of 19~ My commission expires: 7 ° /D 19.E---- Notary Public ~- a Date ~ y ~~` 94____ ~. AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1990 RESOLUTION NO. 21390-6 APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE SECONDARY SYSTEM SIX YEAR CONSTRUCTION PLAN FOR ROANORE COUNTY FOR THE PERIOD OF 1990-96 BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Board does hereby approve and adopt the Secondary System Six Year Construction Plan as set out on the attached summary and as reviewed and/or amended by the Board on February 13, 1990 in accordance with the provisions of Section 33.1-70.01, of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended; and 2. That a public hearing was held on January 23, 1990, to receive comments on the Secondary System Six Year Construction Plan for the period of 1990-96; and 3. That a copy of this resolution duly attested be forthwith forwarded to the Virginia Department of Transportation Salem Residency office along with a duly attested copy of the secondary System Six Year Construction Plan by the Clerk to the Board. On motion of Supervisor Nickens, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers NAYS: Supervisor Eddy A COPY TESTE: t~ Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Phillip Henry, Director, Engineering Fred C. Altizer, Jr., Resident Engineer, Virginia Department of Transportation 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: February 13, 1990 AGENDA ITEM: Adoption of the Secondary System Six Year Construction Plan (1990-96) and Priorities for 1990-91 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS : ~,~Fywr+~.a~wr~ Cr-~U~'~~ ~+` BACKGROUND SUMMARY OF INFORMATION The Secondary System Six Year Construction Plan for Fiscal Year 1990-96 and funding priority for Fiscal Year 1990-91 was discussed in a Board of Supervisors work session today. A Public Hearing on the Plan was held on January 23, 1990. In accordance to Section 33.1-70.01 the Board of Supervisors must annually officially adopt the Six Year Plan and adopt the priority program for the coming year. ALTERNATIVES AND IMPACTS No County Funds are involved. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve the attached resolutions to adopt the Secondary System Six Year Construction Plan for Fiscal Year 1990-96 and the Secondary System Priority Program for Fiscal Year 1990-91. s~ SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED HY: ~~~ Phillip Henry P.E. Elmer C. Hodge Director of Engineering County Administrator --------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved ( ) Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied ( ) Eddy Received ( ) Johnson Referred McGraw To: Nickens Robers 2 -~ AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1990 RESOLUTION NO. APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE SECONDARY SYSTEM SIX YEAR CONSTRUCTION PLAN FOR ROANOKE COUNTY FOR THE PERIOD OF 1990-96 BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Board does hereby approve and adopt the Secondary System Six Year Construction Plan as set out on the attached summary and as reviewed and/or amended by the Board on February 13, 1990 in accordance with the provisions of Section 33.1-70.01, of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended; and 2. That a public hearing was held on January 23, 1990, to receive comments on the Secondary System Six Year Construction Plan for the period of 1990-96; and 3. That a copy of this resolution duly attested be forthwith forwarded to the Virginia Department of Transportation Salem Residency office along with a duly attested copy of the secondary System Six Year Construction Plan by the Clerk to the Board. AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1990 RESOLUTION NO. ADOPTING A PRIORITY PROGRAM FOR THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY SYSTEM SIX YEAR CONSTRUCTION PLAN FOR ROANOKE COUNTY FOR FISCAL YEAR 1990-91 BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Board does hereby establish and adopt for fiscal year 1990-91 in accordance with the provisions of Section 33.1-70.01 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, a budget for the expenditure of improvement funds for the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System Six Year Construction Plan in Roanoke County, and a list of projects to be carried out in fiscal year 1990-91 taken from said Six Year Plan by order of priority (priority program) as set out on that certain list of priorities reviewed and/or amended by the Board at its meeting on February 13, 1990; and 2. That a public hearing was held on January 23, 1990, to receive comments on the Secondary System Six Year Construction Plan for the period of 1990-96; and 3. That a copy of this resolution duly attested be forthwith forwarded to the Virginia Department of Transportation Salem Residency office along with a duly attested copy of said priority list of projects on the Secondary System Six Year Construction Plan by the Clerk to the Board. AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1990 RESOLUTION NO. 21390-7 ADOPTING A PRIORITY PROGRAM FOR THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY SYSTEM SIX YEAR CONSTRUCTION PLAN FOR ROANORE COUNTY FOR FISCAL YEAR 1990-91 BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Board does hereby establish and adopt for fiscal year 1990-91 in accordance with the provisions of Section 33.1- 70.01 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, a budget for the expenditure of improvement funds for the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System Six Year Construction Plan in Roanoke County, and a list of projects to be carried out in fiscal year 1990-91 taken from said Six Year Plan by order of priority (priority program) as set out on that certain list of priorities reviewed and/or amended by the Board at its meeting on February 13, 1990; and 2. That a public hearing was held on January 23, 1990, to receive comments on the Secondary System Six Year Construction Plan for the period of 1990-96; and 3. That a copy of this resolution duly attested be forthwith forwarded to the Virginia Department of Transportation Salem Residency office along with a duly attested copy of said priority list of projects on the Secondary System Six Year Construction Plan by the Clerk to the Board. On motion of Supervisor Nickens, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers NAYS: Supervisor Eddy A COPY TESTE: Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Phillip Henry, Director, Engineering Fred C. Altizer, Jr., Resident Engineer, Virginia Department of Transportation 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: February 13, 1490 AGENDA ITEM: Pinkard Court - Potential CDB6 Community Improvement _ Grant Application ~f COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ' S COiM/ MENTS : ~(-::cr~yY~,-r~ c>-E.t~~('~~'L-~-~1~ / p '~ `f~7~.'~-.' 'r, ..1.tla bl~ ~~S ~J~rv~~~ f,'~--L 7ic`~/-~,(.~:~ ~C. 'c1.-~.,t ..--f`-tvtU.:,,,~~,1/~ C n,-. ~.) ~ T . tl.~,(,t'_Lr~ ,/~.,q ~,-i'c?"~i-4~ P„~~ii' -~"t~;,,,r'LC.Y~-c; .r`~tsY71 ~~ ~~`~G..~ BACKGROUND: Ii JI The Planning Grant portion of the Virginia Community Development Block Grant program is intended to help local governments prepare for the Community Improvement Grant (CIG) through planning and preliminary design activities. The Pinkard Court Planning Grant was applied for in July 1988, a grant in the amount of X9,000 was awarded in September 1988, and all activities were completed by November 10, 1989. The purpose of the grant was to identify infrastructure deficiencies in the community, recommend improvements and estimate construction costs. These cost estimates can then be used to determine the amount of CIG money to apply for. The CIG can fund eligible water, sewer, road, storm drainage and housing rehabilitation projects. The deadline for the Community Improvement Grant application is March 4, 1990. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Planning Grant preliminary engineering report recommended the following improvements: (1) Water - main water line connection to the nearby Avenham tank., a domestic and fire distribution loop throughout the neighborhood, new water meters and main pressure reducing facilities; (2) Sanitary sewer - construction of a new gravity sanitary sewer system which would connect to the areawide sewage collection system; (3) Storm drains - open and paved ditches to intercept overland flow, curb and gutter, and upgrading of the existing channel which discharges from Quaii Valley apartments; (4) Roads - a combination of regrading, resurfiacing, widening, reconstruction, and new cul-de-sacs. Summit Street and the western end of Pinkard Street would be brought into the State road system. A geologic assessment was also conducted to determine sub- surface rock content. Borings indicated that depth to bedrock. will not interfiere with installation of water and sewer facilities. The housing rehabilitation assessment found six homes (out of 21) that need and qualifiy for rehabilitation. Two of these homes do not have indoor plumbing. The income assessment, conducted by stafif, found that 62% of the residents ofi Pinkard Court qualify as F-I low to moderate income persons. Staff is preparing a CI6 application for your review and approval. Totai pro.iect cost estimates are approximately X855,000 broken out as follows: Water - ~23U,000, Sewer - X120,000, Drainage - X300,000, Roads - X145,000, Housing - X60,000. An appropriation request is not being made at this time, but may be necessary to cover grant ineligible utility hook-up charges of approximately X16,000. Staff is exploring alternative funding sources for the utility hook-up charges and other construction costs. Some possibilities are the Virginia Water Project, construction and maintenance funds from VDOT, previously planned utility improvements in Pinkard Court along with local in-kind administrative funds. This alternative funding could provide approximately X200,000. The purpose ofi this hearing is to provide information and to solicit public comments. Another public hearing must be held to review and approve the draft grant application prior to the March 9, 1990 submittal deadline. ALTERNATIVES• Alternative No. 1: Authorize stafifi to schedule and advertise a Board of Supervisors public hearing on February 27, 1990 to review the proposed draft grant application and vote on a resolution to support submittal of the application. Alternative No. 2: ~^ Instruct staff not to schedule a public hearing to review the grant application. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No. 1. SUBMITTED BY: APP VED: ~;~~, ~f Terrance L. Harr ngton Elmer C. Hodge Directo of P1 Wing & Zoning County Administrator ------------------------------------------------------------------ ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received t ) Referred to Motion by: Robers Johnson McVraw Nickens Eddy ~`~ ~ - -~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1990 RESOLUTION 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 the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for February 13, 1990, 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 7, inclusive, as follows: 1. Approval of Minutes - June 14, 1989, June 27, 1989 2. Approval of Minutes - January 9, 1990, January 20, 1990. 3. Approval of Raffle Permit - Roanoke County Occupational School PTA. 4. Approval of Raffle Permit - Loyal Order of Moose Lodge 284. 5. Resolution of Support regarding solid waste management. 6. Donation of sanitary sewer easement from Richard L. and Marily M. Popp. 7. Request from the Virginia Department of Transportation for resolution regarding changes to Route 639. 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 A-21390-9 ITEM NUMBER ~ ~ "~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 13, 1990 SUBJECT: Appointments to Committees, Commissions and Boards COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: 1. Community Corrections Resources Board One-year term of Edmund J. Kielty, Alternate. His term expired August 13, 1988. One-year term of Bernard Hairston expired August 13, 1989. 2. Grievance Panel Two-year term of Eugene Martin expires February 23, 1990. 3. League of Older Americans One-year term of Webb Johnson will expire 3/31/90. 4. Health Department Board of Directors Two-year term of Susan Adcock expired November 26, 1989 5. Landfill Citizens Advisory Committee Carl L. Wright, representative from the Cave Spring Magisterial District has resigned and another representative should be appointed. 6. Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Three-year term of Alice Gillespie, Hollins Magisterial District expired June 30, 1989. 7. Regional Partnership Site Advisory Committee ..~L.. "` Three-year term of Charles Saul expired December 21, 1989. 8. Roanoke Regional Airport Three-year term of Bob L. Johnson expired 2/10/90. New term will be four years. 9. Transportation and Safety Commission Four-year terms of Arnold Struson, Medical Representative and Jackie Talevi, Legal Representative will expire 3/1/90. SUBMITTED BY: APPR VED BY• ~~~ ~~~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator Mary H. Allen Clerk to the Board Approved (x) ------------------------ ACTION Motion by: Harry C. Nickens -------- ----------- VOTE Denied ( ) nominated Bob L. Johnson to a Eddy No Yes Abs x Received ( ) four-year term on the Roanoke Johnson x Referred ( ) Regional Airport and requested McGraw x To ( ) immediate vote, Bob L. Johnson Nickens x appointed Robers x Lee Eddy advised that Regional Partnship Site Advisory Committee no longer exists and no appointment needs to be made. cc: File Roanoke Regional Airport File Regional Partnership Site Advisory Committee File MEMO - 2/8/90 To: Supervisors, Elmer Hodge From: Lee B. Eddy Subject: Vehicles for Police Department & Sheriff's Office I would like to pass on a suggestion from Sheriff Mike Ravanaugh regarding vehicles for the new Police Department. In addition to the 12 new cars authorized in the 1989-90 budget (to be painted white for the Police Department), he suggests ordering an additional 10 or 12 white vehicles prior to February 16, 1990 (the cutoff date for state purchases this year) to be paid from the 1990-91 budget (it's likely that delivery would not be made until after July 1, 1990). This approach would give the Police Department approximately 24 new patrol cars (rather than 12>, properly painted, and would allow 12 more of the oldest vehicles in the present fleet to be retired. For your information, I am attaching a list of all the Sheriff's vehicles as of November 30, 1989, and a summary arranged by model year. In the Sheriff's list, the first character of each identification number designates the assignment, as follows: A=Administration, C=Civil, D=Criminal Investigation (Detectives), J=Jail, S=Services, U=Uniform (patrol). Existing marked cars transferred to the Police Department will have to be repainted at a cost of approximately $700 each. As you can see, the list includes many old, high-milage vehicles, and you can understand the Sheriff's desire for the Police Department and his remaining personnel to have vehicles that are in reasonably good condition. The attachments show there are now 40 vehicles that are 1984 models or older. Sixteen of the vehicles had more than 100,000 miles on them in November. Also, there were very few vehicles purchased in 1987, and the Sheriff thinks that the advance purchase he proposes this year will help compensate for that lapse. If you support this idea, action would have to be taken at the Feb. 13 Board meeting in order to meet the state deadline of Feb. 16. Mike Ravanaugh told me he was not trying to be an "obstacle" in initiating an order for 12 new brown cars, but rather was merely trying to beat the Feb. 16 deadline. He says that the state code requires him to order brown cars, and that he planned to have the color changed afterwards by notifying the dealer. Please call me with any questions. cc: Sheriff Mike Ravanaugh :~ ,~, r, s w u M u N w w 0 a W Q w w w N a W ,Z W u H a 5 z O H N U N w H H z w A H I I I r ~ << . I om 0 { ~ eN u la ~°,~ .~ ~,~~ ~e ~~ ~~ NW I I a~ as x a E H 3t Iq r] H I 1 is I~ I~ ~~ ~~ 11~~ l~ Lb ~~~5~~ 00000 oao oaa ~ ~ aaa HH FE+ HH FH ~gHwWUw a HaoHo aoa ~ ~ oao aao ~ cao I 1 haw m~ as 1 I wHCXiw~aa•~d ~a ~a~~a A300W u A3 A °~~a~W~WN'WW~o~~ia°°ww~W+ ~a~ta Hra~1~PGxt1G0~~ oAON~ta9~7 oaD~~altn NWOOWC9Z ~'+ i W ~ p; ~~ I 1 0 r1 l pHC7 r+ I zW W 7. O 2 >+W i z a O pW~ t7f H a I A ~+ O H Ira V1 I U H ra W --~ I W I Z z t7 7• a H ~ I ~nzaaw~n~n~'aca~ wa nwwwa o>w z ~•zviz~w I ~ < voiwy o NaASz `~ ~zwww awayQ ~u~dawAHNrna~~u~ua~axzw~a°~c~u~u~waa>~i ~w~iHzw~w°~~o~~3aMz~~Nw °a~~~a~cawc~°~~so~wcic`~iE~HUawc~~~uaixE°aa~g~a "~z~w~wa~c~v~i~ ax ~vH, uzi~ i ; ~ i ; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~• I I I I I ( ~ i i ~ > ~ ~~ I ~~~~~~~ AQOaA > OAAA> • ~• ~>•»>AAAACIQA >um •OA»A A •~> AAfaAA ooowo~x~ooooxaaaaaaax~x~ooooooogxaaaoc~~~ ~OO~ax~ 00 00 wwwtiw~uuwwwwuaaaaaaauuuuwwwwwww uoa aw uu Aw~•uu ww ww j l ~ ~ ~ i I ~ ! I i I t 1 1 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 1 I M 10lN at~f)ty1 lN1N0100•'hltA0101rfONlN1m f+1 I 101A N1p10 r0 001 h o.-o apr11ou1r1o01~m1e1a10~r-eh10~l10101n~no101oOONa10 ~n~n.-oO~010 011010 01 a1 1n 10 f•11+1r I+I~DlOt'lmhh V'hhhhCOhRhd'!lNwNN~P~1101f1N I MV'TQIN11'1f'1 !l~N~ NN ~ i > ~ ~ i ~ m m 101o h 1o i ~ o i ~ ~ i i i ~ i i > 1 ~ ja i, i i i u1 i i i i Q1 i i i T~ i i i i p ~, i ~ iy C~7a04> hUHOV~1u£1iu~iu~im(w+.Gw.kwiwkw.Gw~.kwiZ~E[~•X>X~4r~4'~Z~rh~ UFUY.~rrh~~>E ~H~~~~i4iw4A4 wwtn ~NAo~aomapmooraaaaraaauAC~Awv~ww~hwa4~nr7 xAR.ulra 2 .~QA w~q.ww I ~ I , ~ ~ I I ~ I i ~ ! ( h101D1D1'11mOmMU1.-OONe+1V'hm1DiAMm 01m001r'1.rlmm0! !m h1O N Oh -fl10 .-1A r-rOh.~l010NNNNt"lhhhhhhh0~~'1f10~0~'-r'r' m1DN !O•rrmh ~ w~°1~ OOOmr mm~'1MhN•If.+mmmm~~"1~"1r~1n1~'1~"'1~"f~ V'vl0mmmmmmmNmm hOmNh V'01rNN~I'mm~.-m IA •!1 h 10 ~' r ~°1 .- 1/1 IA 1f1 V1 O P'1 t°1 r'1 P1 Pl f'•1 f'~1 N 1+1 f~1 ~'U1 t!1 IA 1!1 1fl V1 {A P.1 r m m O O IA 10 .- ! O N r .- IA 1!1 Q1 IA IA mmm~rlvlnaoaommmmaommmmmmr•lhnmmmmmmmmNm!loommmn.- omm mmmmm .-e-~1A~ ANN.-r ~.-.-NNNNNNN.-NNN~ ~~ ~.-~ ~ Nr-llrl pNp~y ~~.-.-~~'1 pNp~~NN ~~~-r~ WWh~fAA~AAWWWWf~+.~(wU't~.7(w9~w9t7t~7~GQAWWWWWWW4iCx7hhuOWU'C~9'xi'x uAOGWW1i7WW NOf"1mNNU1hm•-~ V'N! N V'X H(Q10.-!1001.- }C P'11I1~h'Q'Nf'110AOh~'1m10'-m I"11.-1/110tD~C0101 t9 C9w-aC9W1010(7C7C9~710SAAAAAQW101010C7~7C9C9C9C9(7E+10uuzaCt7W•o0?4 Z1o101oC7t9t7t7C7 t'1~"1Nmr 1D 0101 f+1 P1f+lr'10110t0 10 10 10 10 10 N010101N'1P•1f+1f"1f•1P'1r1~'~101!ltp10~'~1lOtN 10 tp010101f°1MP1f~1t+1 !lhNMN10tDV'!! V'10NNNNNNNU101D10 V'!al' V'! V'! N10 V1U1Nr'1r'.-tOh N N101010 V' V'!!! aaatia~eraaaaaaaaaaaaaatiraraaaaaaaaawaazooaav~aaA raararaaaaaa oa~rawraal~~amrammmoocamwmaamraa.~.xoaoocoaamaaoaxcaxxaaan wwaow ra.s~.t~oaaora~ •a •xe.~M~.-.a.aaa~MM~,M.-.-.-M~.-~.x•s~a.a~•aah.-IMM.s~u.-.cM M.-~.- .a~~a wwwhwcac~c~wwwu.aaaaaaaaauc~r,uwwwr..u.wwcac~c~c~awwc~r,ww ac~c~c~wwwww ry N ~ ,~ ,~ ~ ' ~ ti J ~ N4o, N ~ o J ~ K v, ~ ~ oo e ~ ° ti o ~ ° h „ ~ o• a ~ °0 r ~ h ao N .~~ o e~ 01 ~ ao r r o+ o .- o v1 10 O O O O O O O O r r r N 0 0 0 0 0 0 O~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 r r r O r r r r r r O O O O O O O O O O O O .- 1!1 1A .- .- 1~.~~,i"~1A _If11A 1A~Y1 r.v! .r„v~;;r.;~r1#- .- ~ ~ V1 tL1 ~!1 Y1 V1 IA i!1 1!1 .- .- ~ r .- •(1 ~ ~ 1!1 1A ~ ~ ~ .- 1f1 Ul Hl 1!11!1 V'lm011•'r P11"1!r'l11A 10101010101010.-MN1 f"1V'V'!V'!V'V'tll lOmmNMl1D 10hhmNlrlM V'!!!V' mmmmWmmmm00mOmeDmOmm WmmmaDa0GDa0ma0mdDmmmmmmmmmmmmmaOfD~mmmmm .d~~~•ij~u~uuluuuC~UluuuuU~..(~fiAQAIAAAAQAAIA~AIAAhih~~ihlhlhhlhNlWNVfvfVfN~/)tq t ~ 1 ~ I i I 1 t,= s V 1 O I .~ i W M ~E C4 W W w w H ~'. I paq (WS] N I 'y I I a , Z~ i I • C ~ W . n p; 'w3 ~ 333~33e;z33 33333 3 ~33 3333 ~~ pp4~y~ ~ ao zooopop~~ooaa~pop~~o~ooopop~~o~o aoo~aoaoa~pop~~o o°P~~ aN3cNO0pp~~wc~oORiRicAOE~DO4o0R7o0~o0o0ogR1o0a400~cA~1O(AtEgl[~~~moD o0 Q1~p0~p0~~p0~p0~~p0~p0~ t)3paDA[F'IN~ ~~HHE[H-IE+HH[H+HHHH i F[~'~HEOaO-H.7EH-IEPF+EEHN[F'~~HEH'~ WoG WtAafgpp V ~ I^n a ~ ~I J 0 I i ~ a In o zQ In zH ~ ~ zca .~~ w a -,°~a w z, -, ,~ In o ff ~ ac a wowHw awNw~~ ~a~~~w''InHwz ~ ~ i~caai ornv~x ~wavw~oal~ z 4 a a3x •c1~HHxHHa~i-'+~~4a~O1-I •~CR1~C.71"13 O~ •~~ia1 •H 1-1~i• ~~~~n~~na~i~Hacaua>cyaec3~~~caa~axa~>oaucaw~sa~huR~~oa~°~~ o~aia~ I I 1 I ~ I I i i ~ I ~ I 1 ~ G~ I•>~W»;»»»»»»»»»Q[~GQQGOOOGAC»;~»~?j"I. o°P~aa~xox~x~x~awc~~~x~x~x~x~x~awcooaoooooaooo~~C~~~x~~C, wuauuAUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUYuuiww~ww`ww~wwwuu~uuNuu; ' I ~ ~ I ~ i ~ ' I i ~ i • oI Io au h ' ~ v In I N I IOEO~OIDaDO V' V'COIf1U1MNMe-.-hhNOtOOIh V'~OOO~OOIOOtO.-NM IA 10 ~M10 V'NiAhOI NMQI V'NtDInInM V101MN V'Mh OMh Nv InInMInNNNIDNNMMMMMMMMtANNNNNNN (aI h~~E~E•H~~E~~~E~~E~~E~~EEh~i~3EST~~~E~~~~4E~~7C~~~ ,Y. NHM~OxxOIOI~OIO~O~O~0~010~0~010~0010~011']-7NMNNNNNNNNNNaIOlOl0~0~01010' w~NOfDV1-~r~~DCD~-~COCOQOCOGDaDCONClpO1WdOCDaw~NNNNNNNNNNNI-VONNNNNNN I i I ~ I i ~ ~ I I i I ~ i OI MEOtnOOr-OOITOI~Od'tDO1hMMOlON~~OtOWN1.1 1f110hfD010.'-N MN•V'MNhl00 r 1paDI0U1MhCDO1NhMNf!~MNIAhhYltOr'a1f110MlDaDgIDCDOm00 01 01 01 01NOON~OhMM iD NV'r-OID~O101~rr~.~.-r-~.-~~~.-T~hOtNNNNNNNNNNNNNMhO'-V't001 Inv..M.-oNMO101oo00000000000oo.-ohhhhhhhhhhhholo+oloooo~ aolnohminhhhhacaDaomaoaoaoaoaDmmaoaoaoaoaomaoaoaoaommaomaoaoaoaD00or-.-~.-~ .-d'NNNN~ ~~~~.-~~ ~.-~ ~-~.-~~~ ~~.-r e-~.-~ ~ ~.-.-~.-~r-NNNNNNNN ~eMa.-~xa•aIa•ala~ala•a~a•a•a/a•a~a•a/a~a•a•~•xxxxxxxxxxsexxxa~a~aa~aa~a WM(,1Qpwwwwww0+wwwwwwwwwww~ywt9t9hhh-7hhhhhhhh ?4 A4 !4 A4~ tDO MMOMV1hhM~InQ11pO V'InOInOIO V' ~~0001QIOO0X rMU'IhMlnhOlOhIflOOMfpNI w N z Io Io 3 Iv Io cllo Ic Io Io Io Iv ~o Ic Io /v Io Io Io /v co Io Io Io w w w w w w w w w w w w h h h h h h h h, M /C ID 01 OI ~ OI O~ OI OI OI OI GI O~ OI O~ OI O~ OI OI OI OI OI OI OI OI OI N N N N N N N N N N N N .- .- .- .- .- r .- r V~ QI N IO IO M IO ID IO IO tp IO IO 1G ~O ~O IO IO IO ~O IO IO ID 1D IO IO IO h h h h h h h h h h h h Vl In In In In In In In ~ aaaoaaaoaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa WNIA~C~hIg00a10000W W a1fA W IgCQ10[gt(1WI4tOW OgW fA110iq W CIfA01jW~QR1WQIRIW WQ1WR1{OW wxac~c~aac~c~c~c~c~c~ouc~c~c~c~uc~c~oc~c~uc~c~wwwwwwwwwwwwr,c~~?c~uc~c~c~' ~~ ~ ~~ 1 i 0 N ~ 0 ~ f+ V t` ~ ~ 4 , ~ ~` ~ ~ i ~ i d "~hw`~ ~C hF? ~ ~V ~m V ~ Nhn! t\l ~ ~ ~p~~~ V ~ U Oa- ~~1r1y ~ ~Ma~ 1` N , ~V~ ~ Q, J n-~ ,.R N r M~ h 01 ~ M V' O O N IO h ~ .-OTOr-00000000.-~r-~~'-.-~.-NN~O.~0000OOOOr-.-~~-00000000 In.-.-~~ 1A In In 1A lA 1n 1A 1n 1A 1n 1f1 Y11n In to In In In In lA~ ~.-~ r ~ ~ r-~e-r ~.- e-~ r fem.-~-r~-r 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 I t l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l '1 1 1 1 V' OI N M M 1n 1n In In 1l1 In in 1n 1f1 to V1 1n V1 In In In In In In 1n ID IO W E~ W CO CO GD a0 CD OD CO d0 0 01 01 01 01 01 01 Ol OI Wr CC C0cDa0ipW~W000DO0W~c0<pW<pODtDWa0~~ppa0DO~CDCDgaOaDSpWCOCDSpaOaD~aD cD000a010' Wa1~~00`a00aDOODaODD05DOD5a0~5a~a0a00a0a0000~OD~05a0'J~ i I i 1 ~ ( I i ' 1 1 I I I u N w w 0 O z W N z W u N a z O H H U N w H H W a N N SUMMARY OF SHERIFF'S OFFICE VEHICLES, BY MODEL YEAR Year No. 1989 1 8 Sub. 9 1988 1 2 1 12 Sub. 16 1987 2 Sub. 2 1986 7 1 2 2 SMb, 12 1985 1 1 20 Sub. 22 1984 2 4 7 1 6 1 Sub. 21 1983 2 3 1 3 2 Sub. 11 1982 1 1 1 Sub. 3 1981 2 1 1 Sub. 4 1979 1 Sub. 1 Milage Range Assignment Notes ------------ ------------------------- -------------- 1K Administration Jeep 8K - 17K Uniform Division 2 are dog cars 31R Administration 31K - 34R Criminal Investigation 75K Jail 24R - 40R Uniform Division 18R - 57R Jail 29R - 88R Civil Division 71R Criminal Investigation 18K - 49R Jail 59K - 72K Uniform Division Sheriff's car Van 'R' Cars lO1R Civil Division 4K Criminal Investigation Van 72R - 117R Uniform Division 53K - 107R Administration 97K - 127K Civil Division 55R - 96K Criminal Investigation S1R Jail 48K - 98K Services Division 57R Uniform Division Jeep 123K - 132K Civil Division 83R - 92R Criminal Investigation 1 Spare 85R Jail 80R - 117R Services Division 100R Uniform Division 88R Jail ? Services Division 99R Uniform Division Spare 94R Civil Division ? Criminal Investigation Unassigned 85R Uniform Division 84R Uniform Division Tot. 101 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1990 RESOLUTION 21390-8 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 the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for February 13, 1990, designated as Item R - Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 7, inclusive, as follows: 1. Approval of Minutes - June 14, 1989, June 27, 1989 2. Approval of Minutes - January 9, 1990, January 20, 1990. 3. Approval of Raffle Permit - Roanoke County Occupational School PTA. 4. Approval of Raffle Permit - Loyal Order of Moose Lodge 284. 5 . Res e3~-~e3~-a€~~gei~-~e~ar~~--s vz-r~--,rasze 6. Donation of sanitary sewer easement from Richard L. and Marilyn M. Popp. 7. Request from the Virginia Department of Transportation for resolution regarding changes to Route 639. 2. That the Clerk to the Board is hereby authorized and directed where required by law to set forth upon any of said items the separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant to this resolution. On motion of Supervisor Johnson with Items K-1 and K-5 removed, and upon the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None Item R-1 approved on motion of Supervisor Johnson, and upon the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Supervisor Eddy Item R-5 removed and deferred to February 27, 1990 on motion of Supervisor Eddy and the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors CC: File Clifford Craig, Utility Director Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney Phillip Henry, Engineering Director Gardner Smith, General Services Director 886 June 14, 1989 IN RE: AA70URNMENT At 5:56 p.m., Chairman Garrett declared the meeting adjourned. Lee Garrett, Chairman 88 ~ June 14, 1989 NAYS: None IN RE: REPORTS Supervisor Johnson moved to receive and file the following reports. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Garrett and carried by a unanimous voice vote. 1. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Status Report on Street Light Replacement Program IN RE: WORK SESSION 1. 75/25 Economic Development Strategy Director of Economic Development Tim Gubala reported that in 1983, the county was 86$ residential and 14$ commer- cial/industrial. At the present time, residential is 84.3$ and commercial is 16.6$. Mr. Gubala highlighted the commercial plans in process at the current time. He advised there were four things the county could do to encourage economic development: (1) have available ready-to-go industrial sites; (2) develop a marketing strategy; (3) a positive attitude and problem solving approach; and (4) a full-time professional economic development staff at the county and regional level. 882 ' June 14, 1989 this resolution. On motion of Supervisor Nickens with Items 6,and 7 removed for discussion, seconded by Supervisor Johnson, and upon the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None Items 6 and 7 moved by Supervisor Johnson, seconded by Supervisor Garrett and upon the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None RESOLUTION 61489-15.a SUPPORTING EDINBURGH SQUARE'S APPLICATION FOR FUNDS FROM THE DEPART- MENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT TO CON- STRUCT HOUSING FOR LOW INCOME ELDERLY WHEREAS, there exists in the Roanoke Valley a need for for additional housing for the low income elderly, and WHEREAS, Edinburgh Square Foundation has helped to meet that need since October 1986, providing a facility that has been fully occupied since that time, and presently has a waiting list of 92 persons; and WHEREAS, Edinburgh Square Foundation and its sponsors, the League of Older Americans and the Odd Fellows Mountain Dale Lodge #49, desire to apply for funds through the the Department of Housing and Urban Development under Section 202 Direct Loan Program for Housing for the Elderly to construct an addition to their present facility; and WHEREAS, this proposed addition, Edinburgh Greens, would 88 0 June 14, 1989 proposed for Catawba so he could communicate with the citizens. There has been no response from the Sheriff and he is now ready to oppose the location of a work farm in Catawba. There will be a meeting on June 20th, 7 p.m. at Catawba Community Center to discuss concerns with citizens. IN RE: CONSENT AGENDA Supervisor Nickens-moved to approve the Consent Agenda with Items 6 and 7 removed. The motion was seconded by Super- J visor Johnson and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None Supervisor Johnson requested that only cover reports be included in the agenda packet for bingo, raffle and fireworks permits. Supervisor Johnson moved to approve Items 6 and 7. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Garrett and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None Supervisor McGraw asked that the record reflect that the County Administrator's salary be set at $82,500 and the County Attorney's salary will be $68,500. RESOLUTION NO. 61489-15 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH X78 June 14, 1989 _ ~ or priva a en i ies as the Aut ority may determine. 4. Effective Immediately. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. On motion of Supervisor Nickens, seconded by Supervisor McGraw, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None IN RE: APPOINTMENTS 1. Board of Zoning Appeals Supervisor Garrett nominated Eldon L. Karr, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, to fill the unexpired term of Frank W. Martin which will expire June 30, 1991. 2. Clean Valley Council Supervisor Garrett moved to reappoint Richard Robers to a two-year term expiring June 30, 1991. 3. Fifth Planning District Commission Supervisor Garrett nominated Richard Robers to serve another three-year term as elected representative. 4. Landfill Citizens Advisory Committee Supervisor Robers nominated Robert House to serve as Windsor Hill Magisterial District appointee, filling the vacancy of Deborah Zamorski. IN RE: REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS 87 6 ~. June 14, 1989 ~! ~ 2. Articles of Incorporation. The Articles of Incor- potation of the Roanoke County Resource Authority are as follows: ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION OF ROANOKE COUNTY RESOURCE AUTHORITY ARTICLE I The name of the Authority shall be Roanoke County Resource Authority and the address of its principal office is 3738 Brambleton Avenue, Roanoke, Virginia 24018-0798. ARTICLE II The name of the incorporating political subdivision is County of Roanoke, Virginia. ARTICLE III The names, addresses, and terms of office of the ini- tial members of the Board of the Roanoke County Resource Authori- ty ("Authority") are as follows: Name Address Term Expires Lee Garrett The address of eachl2/31/89 Bob L. Johnson initial member is:12/31/89 Harry C. Nickens P. O. Box 2980012/31/89 Steven A. McGraw 3738 Brambleton Avenuel2/31/91 Richard W. Robers Roanoke, Virginia 2401812/31/91 The terms of office of each initial members shall begin on the date of issuance of a certificate of incorporation or charter for the Authority by the State Corporation Commission. The successor of each member shall be appointed for a term of four years by the Board of Supervisors ("Board") of the County of Roanoke, Vir- ginia, except that any person appointed to fill a vacancy shall 872 June 14, 1989 Section 7-73. xecbanical. There is hereby established the following schedule of fees for mechanical permits: Amount of Contract or Estimated Cost ee $ .00 to $ 500.00 $25.00 500.01 to 1,000.00 30.00 1,000.01 to 2,000.00 40.00 2,000.01 to 3,000.00 50.00 3,000.01 to 4,000.00 60.00 4,000.01 to 5,000.00 75.00 In excess of $5,000.00, the fee shall be $75.00 plus $4.00 for each additional $1,000.00 or fraction thereof. Reinspection fee $25.00 Section 7-74. Plumbing There is hereby established the following schedule of fees for plumbing permits: No plumbing permit shall be issued for less than $25.00. Fixtures (each) $ 3.00 Floor drains 1.00 Water heater 3.00 Sewer 10.00 Trailers 25.00 Reinspection fee 25.00 2. That this ordinance shall be in effect from and after July 1, 1989. On motion of Supervisor Nickens, seconded by Supervisor Garrett and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None 5. Ordinance increasing 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 of the 870 June 14, 1989 defray the cost of such enforcement and any appeals; and WHEREAS, Roanoke County adopted and established a building permit and fee schedule on September 1, 1974; and WHEREAS, legal notice of a public hearing concerning the adoption of an ordinance increasing these fees was provided as required by law, and the first reading and public hearing on this ordinance was held on May 23, 1989, and the second reading and public hearing was held on June 14, 1989. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Super- visors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That Chapter 7, Building Regulations of the Roanoke County Code is hereby amended by the addition of Article V, Fees, to provide as follows: ARTICLE V. FEES Division 1. Generally. Section 7-71. Building or Demolitions. There is hereby established the following schedule of fees for Building and Demolitions permits: Building or Demolition Valuations $ .O1 4,000 20,000 100,000 500,000 Over $1, to $ 4,000 to 20,000 to 100,000 to 500,000 to 1,000,000 D00,000 Reinspection Fee $25.00 Fee $25.00 6.00 120.00 520.00 1,320.00 1,820.00 per plus plus plus plus thousand valuation $5 per thousand $2 per thousand $1 per thousand $.50 per thousand Certificate of Occupancy Fee - Residential - $10.00 Commercial - $25.00 Section 7-72. Electrical. 868 June 14, 1989 This project will provide necessary utility service to the citi zens of Roanoke County. 3. That the properties to be acquired are identified as follows: Tax Maw 28.13-1-23 28.13-1-23.7 28.13-1-2-3 28.13-2-3.1 28.13-2-3.2 28.03.1-2 28.03-1-1 28.03-2-10 28.00-1-6 28.04-2.9 28.04-2-10 28.04-2-11 Property Owner Myrtle Garman Reginald Garman Stephen Davidson Stephen Davidson Winter Properties Ingersoll-Rand Co. Kathryn Taylor Paul Henson Bradshaw-Trustee William Sapp Mark Vinson Robert Runyon Acquisition Easement Easement Easement Easement & Property Easement Easement Easement Easement Easement & Property Easement Easement Easement 4. That the consideration for the acquisition of proper- ty for the pump station and water storage tank shall not exceed the assessed value of the property; and that the consideration for the acquisition of the easements shall not exceed forty (40$) percent of the assessed value of the property. That the sum of ten thousand ($10,000) dollars is hereby appropriated for these real estate acquisitions. 5. That the County Administrator is authorized to execute such documents and take such actions on behalf of Roanoke County as are necessary to accomplish the conveyance of said property, 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: 866 June 14, 1989 and cross-connection permits. 3. That each property owner has paid the sum of Fifty Dollars ($50) of the basic connection fee upon the execution of the contract with the County. The balance of the basic connec- tion fee shall be paid on or before October 1, 1989. The lan- downer further agrees to pay the balance of the special water connection fee ($3,500) either by October 1, 1989, or in seventy- two (72) equal monthly installments, unless otherwise specifical- ly approved by the County. The interest rate of these install- ments shall be eight percent (8~) of the unpaid balance. 4. That the property owner shall execute a promissory note and a lien document or instrument which shall be recorded among the records of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia. This lien instrument or document shall secure the repayment of the promissory note by the property owner to the County and shall be a lien against the property and shall be satisfied upon any conveyance of the property. The property owner further agrees to pay the County any Clerk's fees or recordation costs which may be required to record said lien instrument or document in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court. 5. That any property owner within the special water service area applying for public water service after October 1, 1989, and within six years (6) after the completion of construc- tion of this project, shall pay a total water connection fee which shall include: a special water connection fee of Four Thousand Dollars ($4,000), the off-site water facility fee in effect at the time of application, and the basic connection fee in effect at the time of application. This total water connec- tion fee shall be due and payable prior to the connection to the public water system and no installment payment financing by the County shall be available under the provisions of this ordinance. 6. That in the event that the estimated cost of construction is less than Three Hundred Sixty-Eight Thousand ($368,000) then the County shall proportionately reduce the amount of the special water connection fee charged to each contracting property owner in a proportionate manner based upon the number of participating landowners. The County shall pay any costs and expenses of construction which exceed this estimated amount. 7. That the County Administrator is authorized to execute, ratify, and confirm on behalf of the County those contracts offered by the property owners and to execute such other documents and take such further actions as may be required to accomplish the purposes of this ordinance, all upon approval as to form by the County Attorney. 8. That this ordinance shall take effect immediately. On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by Supervisor Robers and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None 864 June 14, 1989 ordinance with No. 5 amended to read "Local School Capital Improvement Fund", and that staff work with the School Board to ensure that the intent of the- motion is carried out, seconded by Supervisor Garrett and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None 2. Ordinance authorizing the construction of a public water svstem to serve a special water service area including real estate along Shadwell Drive in the Bellview Gardens and Bellevue Estates subdivisions. The costs thereof to be imposed upon certain abutting property owners by agreement Qroviding funds therefor, and directing that an abstract of this ordinance be recorded showing the amount that will be assessed against each such landowner. 0-61489-10 There was no discussion and no citizens were present to speak on this ordinance. Supervisor Johnson moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Robers and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None ORDINANCE 61489-10 AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM TO SERVE A SPECIAL WATER SERVICE AREA INCLUDING REAL ESTATE ALONG SHADWELL DRIVE AND IN THE BELLVIEW GARDENS AND BELLEWE ESTATES SUB- DIVISIONS, THE COSTS THEREOF TO BE IMPOSED UPON CERTAIN ABUTTING PROPERTY OWNERS BY AGREEMENT, 862 June 14, 1989 recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None ORDINANCE 61489-9 APPROPRIATING FUNDS FOR THE 1989-90 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET FOR ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA WHEREAS, upon notice duly published in the newspaper, a public hearing was held on April 11, 1989, concerning the adop- tion of the annual budget for Roanoke County for fiscal year 1989-90; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Vir- ginia, approved said budget on April 25, 1989, pursuant to the provisions of Section 13.02 of the Roanoke County Charter and Chapter 4 of Title 15.1 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this appropriation ordinance was held on May 23, 1989, and the second reading of this or- dinance was held on June 14, 1989, pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke Coun- ty, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the following appropriations are hereby made from the respective funds for the period beginning July 1, 1989, and ending June 30, 1990, for the functions and purposes indicated: 2. That the County Administrator may authorize the transfer of any unencumbered balance or portion thereof from one clas- 860 June 14, 1989 4. Ordinance vacating a portion of a 20 foot sanitary sewer easement recorded in Deed Book 1228, page 35 in accordance with Chapter 11, Title 15.1-482 (b) Code of Virginia 1950. Mr. Covey presented the staff report advising that Boone & Company is making the request in order to construct the third office building which will encroach into the existing easement. Supervisor Nickens moved to approve first reading of the ordinance. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Johnson and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None 5. Ordinance amending and readopting Section 12-8 Article I of Chapter 12, Motor Vehicles and Traffic of the Roanoke County Code. Mr. Mahoney advised that this ordinance will incor- porate the amendments made by the General Assembly into the Roanoke County Code. Supervisor Nickens moved to approve first reading. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Robers and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None 858 June 14, 1989 AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garret NAYS: None IN RE: FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance vacating a portion of a 25 foot water- line, ingress and egress easement and a portion of a 15 foot public utility easement, recorded in Plat Book 10. Page 41, Section 1, Fairway Forest Estates. Director of Development and Inspections Arnold Covey reported that F.F.E. Development Corporation has requested vacation of a portion of a water line easement and public utility easement to abolish any encumbrances on the proposed right-of- way for Section 3, Fairway Forest Estates. Staff recommends vacation of these easements. No one was present to speak to the ordinance. Supervisor Nickens moved to approve first reading of the ordinance. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Garrett and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None 2. Ordinance vacating the southern portion of an unimproved 50 foot right-of-way referred to as "Chelsea Street" recorded in Plat Book 2, Page 170, Section 1 Western Hills Subdivision. Mr. Covey advised that Carlin Nucholls and Marty and a5fi June 14, 1989 R-61489-8 Mr. Mahoney reported that the Cox Cable franchise to provide cable television service will expire in the near future and the Regional Cable Television Committee has selected the firm o/ O. D. Page to provide professional services in analyzing the current franchise and renewal proposal. Roanoke County's share of the fee is $2,947. Staff recommended allocating the funds from the Board Contingency Fund and authorizing the County Administrator to execute the necessary documents. Supervisor McGraw advised that he had a study taken concerning installation of cable in rural areas that shows there is not enough homes in many areas for installation. Supervisor McGraw moved to adopt the prepared resolution. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Nickens and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None RESOLUTION 61489-8 AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF CONTRACT FOR CONSULTANT SERVICES WITH O.D. PAGE, P.E. AND PAYMENT OF PROPORTIONATE CONTRACT COST WHEREAS, the current cable television franchise agree- ment covering the County of Roanoke and the Town of Vinton will expire; and WHEREAS, the Roanoke Regional Cable Television Commit- tee has determined that the services of a cable television con- 854 June 14, 1989 Commission over $100,000. The federal government is expected to reimburse the commission for 80 percent of the cost of the noise study. Supervisor Johnson moved to adopt the prepared resolution. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Robers and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None RESOLUTION 61489-6 APPROVING SPECIFIC CAPITAL EXPENDITURES FOR AN FAR PART 150 NOISE STUDY PROJECT BY THE ROANOKE REGIONAL AIRPORT COMMISSION, UPON CERTAIN TERMS AND CONDITIONS WHEREAS, Section 17.(b) of the contract between the City of Roanoke, Roanoke County, and the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission provides that the Commission shall prepare and submit for approval any proposed capital expenditure exceeding $100,000 to benefit five or more future accounting periods; and WHEREAS, by report dated March 28, 1989, a copy of which is on file in the Office of the City Clerk, the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission has submitted a request that the County approve capital expenditures by the Commission for an FAR Part 150 Noise Study Project in a total estimated amount of $180,000. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that the County hereby approves the capital expenditure by the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission of approximately $180,000 in connection with the Roanoke Regional Airport FAR Part 150 Noise Study Project, and the County 852 June 14, 1989 ^----- Comma ee, presen e a petition signed by county employees who will loose the $45 supplement for insurance other than healthcare. Supervisor Nickens moved to approve alternative #1 in the staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Robers. Supervisor Nickens withdrew his motion. Supervisor Nickens moved to approve the staff recommendation with Mr. Hodge's recommendation to fund 90$ of the employee's rate deleted. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Robers and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Robers, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: Supervisors Johnson, McGraw 3. Approval of Consent Special Order for Dixie Cavern Landfill A-61489-4 County Attorney Paul Mahoney presented the staff report, advising that staff is recommending that the Board authorize the County Administrator to execute a Special Consent Order with the State Water Control Board and the Department of Waste Management to address the production and discharge of leachate from the old Dixie Caverns landfill. Supervisor Garrett moved to approve the staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett 850 June 14, 1989 ~~ upon receiving note ication that the Commonwealth Transportation Commission has approved State matching allocation for these two projects. 5. That, Roanoke County has presently or will make available from County General Funds the local share of the drainage improvements on Givens Avenue upon receiving notification by the Commonwealth Transportation Commission of the approval of the State's matching allocation. 6. That, Roanoke County and the Virginia Department of Transportation construct drainage improvements on and adjacent to Givens Avenue, improve roads in Huntings Hills Subdivision, and Chaucer's Court, and that funds be allocated for the local share of these projects and be available to the Virginia Department of Transportation at the appropriate time. 7. That, the Virginia Department of Transportation and the Commonwealth Transportation Commission is hereby requested pursuant to Section 33.1-75.1 of the State Code, to make available an equivalent matching fund allocation for the improvements of the following priority projects: Priority #1: Drainage Improvements on Givens Avenue- Revenue Sharing Request = $32,500. Priority #2: Roadways In Hunting Hills Subdivision- Revenue Sharing Request = $87,500. Priority #3: Road Improvements on Chaucer's Court - Revenue Sharing Request = $22,500. in the total amount of $142,500 or the adjusted amount made g48 June 14, 1989 i`~~u on y in orming em o e oar o upervisors approva o the proposed development projects. On motion of Supervisor Nickens to rescind action of May 9, 1989 and adopt prepared resolution, seconded by Supervisor Johnson, and upon the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None IN RE: NEW BUSINESS 1. Request to Virginia Department of Transportation for Revenue Sharing Funds for fiscal year 1989/90. R-61489-2 Engineering Director Phillip Henry reported that at the April 11, 1989 meeting, the Board approved revenue sharing funds for improvements in the Hunting Hills Subdivision, Givens Avenue and Chaucer's Court for a total of $142,500. On May 12, the County was notified that Roanoke County would only be eligible for $83,700 in revenue sharing funds. Staff recommended prioritization of these projects with Priority #1, drainage improvements on Givens Avenue; Priority #2, Hunting Hills Subdivision; and Priority #3, Chaucer's Court and that the prepared resolution be adopted and send to the Virginia Department of Transportation. Supervisor Robers moved to approve the staff recommendation. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Nickens 846 June 14, 1989 sc oo s on eir mere sc o ar finalists and asked that the Board of Supervisors present appropriate recognition of these students at the next board meeting. IN RE: OLD BUSINESS 1. Reconsideration of denial of approval for VHDA financings for Grouse Point Apartments and Highgate Apartments R-61489-1 Lew Jamison, Heritage Builders, and Bruce Hobart were present. They requested that the Board of Supervisors reconsider their previous action denying approval of VHDA financing. They explained that the Board was only approving the financing mechanism, not the zoning. The property was already zoned for multifamily housing. They presented their plans for the proposed project. Supervisor Robers moved to approve the prepared resolution. County Attorney Paul Mahoney explained that it is also necessary to rescind the action taken on May 9th. Supervisor Nickens offered a substitute motion to rescind action taken May 9th and that the prepared resolution be adopted and send to VHDA. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Johnson and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None ~ y 844 June 14, 1989 Administrator for Human Services; John R. Hubbard, Assistant County Administrator of Community Services and Development; Don M. Myers, Assistant County Administrator for Management Services; Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney, Mary H. Allen, Deputy Clerk; Anne Marie Fedder, Information Officer IN RE: OPENING CEREMONIES The invocation was given by John Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator for Human Services. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all present. IN RE: REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS The following items were added to the Agenda: 1. Receipt of Letter from President Bush congratulating Roanoke County on All-America City award. 2. Resolution from the School Board congratulating Roanoke County on its All-America City award. 3. Reconsideration of approval of VHDA financing for proposed developments known as Grouse Point Apartments and Highgate Apartments. IN RE: PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS 1. Announcement of Distinguished Budget Presentation Award to Roanoke County. ~' June 27, 1989 887 Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Roanoke County Administration Center 3738 Brambleton Avenue, SW Roanoke, Virginia 24018 June 27, 1989 The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, met this day at the Roanoke County Administration Center, this being the fourth Tuesday, and the second regularly scheduled meeting of the month of June, 1989. IN RE: CALL TO ORDER Chairman Garrett called the meeting to order at 3:05 p.m. The roll call was taken. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Lee Garrett, Vice Chairman Richard Robers, Supervisors Bob L. Johnson, Steven A. McGraw, Harry C. Nickens MEMBERS ABSENT: Supervisor Bob L. Johnson (absent for the afternoon session, present for the evening session) June 27, 1989 8 8 g Supervisor Nickens moved to adopt the prepared resolution. The motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Johnson RESOLUTION 62789-1 EXPRESSING THE APPRECIATION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY TO GEORGE R. WRIGHT FOR TEN YEARS OF SERVICE TO ROANOKE COUNTY WHEREAS, George R. Wright was first employed in July, 1979, as a Transportation Officer in the Corrections Division of the Roanoke County Sheriff's Office; and WHEREAS, George R. Wright has also served as a Lieutenant/Assistant Chief Correctional Officer in the Corrections Division, since June, 1984. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County expresses its deepest appreciation and the appreciation of the citizens of Roanoke County to GEORGE R. WRIGHT for Ten years of capable, loyal and dedicated service to Roanoke County. June 27, 1989 891 ------ --. -.r ___ - __._ NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Johnson 2. Apuroval of 1990 Legislative Recommendations Virginia Association of Counties A-62789-3 County Attorney Paul Mahoney reported that the Virginia Association of Counties has requested that each locality submit its legislative recommendations by July 1, 1989. He presented several requests including a solid waste management program, one- half cent local option sales tax and full funding of state mandated programs; and requested authorization to communicate these priorities to VACo. Supervisor Nickens moved to approve these legislative priorities. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Garrett and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Johnson IN RE: REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS 1. Reuuest for Work Session on July 25 1989 with the Planning Commission A work session was set for August 8, 1989 to discuss 893 June 27, 1989 ------- - ----- - to construct a new forensics laboratory. No citizens were present to speak. In response to a question from Supervisor Nickens, Mr. Mahoney advised he will add a five year reversionary clause should the forensic lab not be built. Supervisor Nickens moved to approve first reading of the ordinance amended to include a reversionary clause with a five- year time frame. The motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Johnson IN RE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance appointing a separate individual to hold the t~osition of Clerk to the governing body and to perform certain duties as specified. 0-62789-4 Mr. Hodge presented the staff report and requested that the ordinance be adopted, that Mary Allen be appointed Clerk to the Board of Supervisors, that the secretarial position be abolished and the deputy clerk position reclassified and retained. No citizens were present to speak. Supervisor Robers moved to adopt the ordinance. The June 27, 1989 895 serve at the pleasure of the Board under the direction of the !~ County Administrator. He or she shall be clerk of the Board and will serve as custodian of the corporate seal of the County and shall have such other duties as prescribed by general law or as the Board may prescribe. The clerk shall in addition (a) record in a book to be provided for that purpose all of the proceedings of the Board; (b) make regular entries of all the Board's resolu- tions, ordinances, and decisions on all questions concerning the raising of money; (c) record the vote of each Board member on any question submitted to the Board if required by any member presen- t; (d) preserve and file all accounts and papers acted upon by the Board with its action thereon; (e) give information to per- _ sons presenting communications or petitions to the Board of the final action of the Board thereof; (f) publish or cause to be published all reports, notices, ordinances, or other documents required by this charter or by general law to be published, except as otherwise expressly provided; (g) maintain all dis- closure forms as required by Chapter 40.1 of Title 2.1 of the State Code; (h) prepare all papers and documents for the meetings of the Board; (i) issuance of soliciation permits pursuant to Chapter 19, Article II, Section 19.21-19.27. 2. That the clerk may, and with the consent of the Board, appoint one deputy and such number of assistants as the Board may authorize. Either the clerk or the deputy shall attend all meetings of the Board. Any of the duties of the clerk may be performed by the deputy. June 27, 1989 8 g 7 ,~. ~~~ _. Supervisor Nickens moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Johnson ORDINANCE 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 County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That Section 12-8, Adoption of state law, Article I, In General, of Chapter 12, Motor Vehicles and Traffic, be amended 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, all of the provisions and requirements of the laws of the state contained in Title 46.1 and in Article 2 (S- ection 18.2-226 et seq.) of Chapter 7 of Title 18.2 of the Code of Virginia, except those provisions and requirements which, by their very nature, can have no application to or within the County, are hereby adopted and incorporated in this chapter by reference and made applicable within the County. References to "highways of the state" contained in such provisions and require- ments hereby adopted shall be deemed to refer to the streets, June 27, 1989 89 9 "~amount~o~5$6400. There were no citizens to speak on the ordinance. Supervisor Nickens moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Johnson ORDINANCE 62789-6 ACCEPTING AN OFFER FOR AND AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF 37.86 ACRES OF REAL ESTATE, MORE OR LESS, LOCATED IN THE CITY OF SALEM (THE LLOYD PROPERTY) BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Charter of Roanoke County, the subject property has been declared to be surplus, and has been made available for sale; and 2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Charter of Roanoke County, a first reading on this ordinance was held on June 14, 1989; and the second reading was held on June 27, 1989, concerning the sale and disposition of 37.86 acres of real estate, more or less, located in the City of Salem; and 3. That offers having been received for said proper- ty, the offer of Bishop Walter Sullivan of the Catholic Dioceses of Richmond to purchase 37.86 acres of real estate, more or less, June 27, 1989 901 Supervisor Nickens moved to approve the Consent Agenda. The motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Johnson RESOLUTION N0. 62789-7 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM J - CONSENT AGENDA BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for June 27, 1989, designated as Item J - Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 4, inclusive, as follows: 1. Confirmation of committee appointments to the Clean Valley Council, The Fifth Planning District Commission, the Board of Zoning Appeals, and the Landfill Citizens Advisory Committee. 2. Acceptance of water and sewer facilities serving Roanoke Hyundai. 3. Approval of Fireworks Permit for the Town of Vinton. 4. Acceptance of Horsepen Mountain Drive and Horsepen Mountain Circle into VDOT Secondary System. June 27, 1989 9-fl 3 ~~ REs~ WORK SESSION 1. Vallevwide Library Automation Pro ect. Assistant County Administrator John Chambliss reported that at the December 13, 1988 meeting, the Board authorize staff to proceed with the bidding process with the Cities of Roanoke and Salem to determine the feasibility of a valleywide library automation system. Bids were received from six vendors which have been evaluated by the three staffs. Mr. Chambliss showed a slide indicating the statistics of both the Roanoke County library system and the valleywide system. Library Director George Garretson was present and explained how the process would work. He introduced members of the Library Board and his staff who were also present. Mr. Chambliss reported that the Board will need to decide whether to participate by July 30, 1989. A contract will be prepared indicating each locality's share of the cost. In response to a question from Supervisor McGraw, Mr. Hodge advised that there is no money included in the budget for the library system. Supervisor Nickens expressed concern that there are other departments also in need of funds and he felt he could not now support funding for this project. Following discussion, Chairman Garrett asked the staff to bring back a recommendation on July 25, 1989. EVENING SESSION (7:00 P.M.) June 27, 1989 905 for the Scholastic Aptitude Test by taking a similar preliminary test from which National Merit Scholarships are awarded, and five students from the Roanoke County School System were recently named finalists in the National Merit Scholarship Award Program; and WHEREAS, these students are deserving of special commendation for their successful academic achievement and their continued efforts towards excellence. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, offers its sincere congratulations to TODD AMMERMANN for being named a finalist in the National Merit Scholarship Award Program; and FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors expresses its pride in this achievement and extends its best wishes to Todd Ammermann for continued success in future academic endeavors. On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by Supervisor Nickens and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None RESOLUTION 62789-8.b CONGRATULATING JOHN PARR UPON BEING NAMED A NATIONAL MERIT SCHOLARSHIP FINALIST FOR 1989 WHEREAS, Roanoke County has an outstanding school system which has received national recognition for its teachers, students, and administration; and WHEREAS, an outstanding school system produces out- standing students who likewise gain national recognition for June 27, 1989 90 7 and administration; and WHEREAS, an outstanding school system produces out- standing students who likewise gain national recognition for their academic accomplishments; and WHEREAS, each year students in the eleventh grade prepare for the Scholastic Aptitude Test by taking a similar preliminary test from which National Merit Scholarships are awarded, and five students from the Roanoke County School System were recently named finalists in the National Merit Scholarship Award Program; and WHEREAS, these students are deserving of special commendation for their successful academic achievement and their continued efforts towards excellence. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, offers its sincere congratulations to DAVID SAR for being named a finalist in the National Merit Scholarship Award Program; and FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors expresses its pride in this achievement and extends its best wishes to David Sar for continued success in future academic endeavors. On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by Supervisor Nickens and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None RESOLUTION 62789-8.d CONGRATULATING KAREN BENDER UPON BEING NAMED A NATIONAL MERIT SCHOLARSHIP FINALIST FOR 1989 June 27, 1989 90 g -_ NAYS : - ~i_None RESOLUTION 62789-8.e CONGRATULATING PAUL STANCIL UPON BEING NAMED A NATIONAL MERIT SCHOLARSHIP FINALIST FOR 1989 WHEREAS, Roanoke County has an outstanding school system which has received national recognition for its teachers, students, and administration; and WHEREAS, an outstanding school system produces out- standing students who likewise gain national recognition for their academic accomplishments; and WHEREAS, each year students in the eleventh grade prepare for the Scholastic Aptitude Test by taking a similar preliminary test from which National Merit Scholarships are awarded, and five students from the Roanoke County School System were recently named finalists in the National Merit Scholarship Award Program; and WHEREAS, these students are deserving of special commendation for their successful academic achievement and their continued efforts towards excellence. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, offers its sincere congratulations to PAUL STANCIL for being named a finalist in the National Merit Scholarship Award Program; and FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors expresses its pride in this achievement and extends its best wishes to Paul Stancil for continued success in future academic endeavors. June 27, 1989 91) the Special Exception Permit; (2) that all provisions for proper- ty value protection be specifically extended to renter; (3) that property value protection be extended only to those who lie within 5,000 feet of the landfill site boundary line; (4) that property value protection begin only after completion of the Part B application, granting of the permit and selection of the site, and (5) that there be an engineering feasibility study on alter- nate access roads to the Smith Gap site. Assistant County Administrator John Hubbard explained in detail the permit conditions and operating policies. In response to a question concerning noise level, Mr. Johnson advised that 80 decibels is the state regulation. Supervisor Nickens made several suggestions changing the language from "should" to "will", strengthening the obligation to meet the conditions and policies. He also expressed concerns with the County reimbursing a mortgage interest differential as noted in the report. Supervisor Robers requested that the report be amended to adopt a comprehensive waste management plan by September 1, 1989. He also requested that if either of the current proposed site are rejected in the Part A process, that the third site, Mount Pleasant be added. Supervisor McGraw expressed concerns about the use of Bradshaw Road if the Smith Gap site is chosen, and also advised he felt property value protection should be extended to all those on Bradshaw Road. Without those additions, he advised he would June 27, 1989 913 --- ... .. _.. _., ,. _____..T.____._._~__.._.-_.____.~..~._...~___. Tfie motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw. Supervisor Johnson spoke against the motion because he felt it was ill-timed and should not be tied to the Part A application. The motion was defeated by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Robers, McGraw NAYS: Supervisors Johnson, Nickens, Garrett Supervisor Robers offer a substitute motion that if either site is rejected in the Part A application that Site 3, Mount Pleasant be added. The motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw and defeated by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Robers, McGraw NAYS: Supervisors Johnson, Nickens, Garrett Supervisor Nickens moved the staff recommendation with amendment no. 1. and 3 deleted and with the addition that Roanoke County submit a waste management recycling program with the Part A applications, followed by a separate vote of amendment no. 1 and no. 3. He explained his motion was to separate the issues for the purposes of voting on common agreement. Mr. Mahoney advised his motion was in order. There was no second and the motion died. The original motion was carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: Supervisor Robers, McGraw Mr Hodge asked for consideration of his additional amendment that a feasibility study be conducted on the Smith Gap 915 June 27, 1989 Landfill. OPERATING HOURS In consideration of the adjoining neighborhoods, it is recommended that the following operating limits be placed on the new facility: 1. Normal working hours shall be: Delivery ofOperation of Waste All Equipment Monday-Friday 8:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m. 8:00 a.m.- 8:00 p.m. Saturday 8:00 a.m.-3:30 p.m. 8:00 a.m.- 6:30 p.m. 2. Emergency operations shall allow for extended hours on all days and Sundays whenever an emergency has been duly declared by the Roanoke County Administrator. 3. Residential drop-off areas will operate during the hours of normal operation. 4. Operating hours can only be changed by action of June 27, 1989 917 an authorized agent of Roanoke County or by the Landfill Operators for compliance with state regulations. b. Problem areas arising during dry seasons will be controlled with water. c. Access roads should be cleaned and dust controlled with water if excessive amounts of dust are generated. d. Any fill area of intermediate cover must be seeded in vegetative cover within 30 days of fill. 3. Odor a. Odor problems will be minimized if the Landfill operation is conducted properly and active fill areas are covered daily. b. If problem odors exist that adversely impact surrounding residents, deodorizing agents will be used. c. All holding tanks for Leachate collection June 27, 1989 919 a. A bonded, licensed pest control company will be retained by the Landfill Agency throughout the active life of the Landfill to provide preventive inspections and treatments. b. Adjoining property owners who incur pest problems that are proven to be directly related to the Landfill operation must be provided proper extermination at the expense of the Landfill Agency. c. Breeding areas for flying insects must be treated as often as is necessary to prevent the breeding cycle. 6. A telephone number will be provided for use of surrounding residents to call-in complaints about noise, dust, odor, or pests. These calls will be recorded and corrective actions documented. ACTIVE FILL AREAS The active areas of the landfill are regulated by the Virginia Department of Waste Management. Strict guidelines are specified in the regulations; however, the Landfill Citizens 921 June 27, 1989 Adequate screening and buffering is a paramount concern of the Landfill Citizens Advisory Committee. Effective screening and buffering can reduce or mitigate the adverse impacts of noise, dust and light from the landfill on adjoining properties, as well as improve the visual appearance of the landfill operation. In addition, landscaping of obtrusive buildings and active areas within the landfill can reduce the visual blight from improved properties which are above and overlook the landfill site. Finally, minimizing the size of active and disturbed areas and immediate seeding of these areas once activity ceases can further reduce this visual blight. To address these items, the following standards are recommended. Additional requirements may be formulated for site specific conditions upon review of the proposed landfill sites. Any modification shall be subject to such site specific circumstances, as determined by the Director of Planning. 1. The following buffer yard and plantings shall be established around the perimeter of the landfill property, except adjacent to an existing residential property or public or private right- of-way. Trees shall be planted in three separate rows or in clusters, where natural land characteristics allow within the buffer yard. June 27, 1989 92 3 meet of buffer yard; and - Fifteen small evergreen trees with an ultimate height of 15 feet or greater per 100 linear feet of buffer yard. 3. The buffer yard may only be used for passive recreation, such as pedestrian, bike or equestrian trails provided that: - No plant material is eliminated; - The total width of the buffer is maintained; and, - All other requirements and conditions are met. 4. Buildings, active landfill areas, equipment storage areas and other facilities shall be landscaped in such a manner as to enhance (but not necessarily screen) the visual appearance from adjoining properties. 5. The administrative standards and procedures contained under Section 21-92 of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance shall apply unless more restrictive or specific standards are required above . June 27, 1989 925 --~-~-~---~ ~ ~ vehicle owned and operated by a member of the Regional Landfill. b. Access shall be permitted to any private hauler or company operating in the Regional Landfill Service Area who has applied for and obtained a permit from the Landfill Operator. c. A permit shall be refused at any time if the operator of the vehicle has been found not to be abiding by the regulations set forth in the application/contract. d. Access shall be permitted to any resident of a jurisdiction who is a member of the Regional Landfill showing proof of residency. 3. Each solid waste disposal facility should be provided with an adequately lighted and heated shelter where operating personnel can exercise site control and have access to essential sanitation facilities. Lighting, heat and sanitation facilities may be provided by portable equipment as necessary. a. Dusk to dawn lights to be placed around June 27, 1989 921 a. A designated salvage area to be set up with adequate drop off and pick up areas. A security person to oversee this area. FIRE PROTECTION AND PUBLIC WATER Fire protection for the site shall be provided on site with adequate storage, distribution, and hydrants to properly extinguish fires. The system shall be designed as a potable water system in conformance with the standards of Roanoke County for the system shall be deeded to Roanoke County for ownership and operation. The system shall be designed to serve all ~„_ site water needs as well as being capable of serving adjoining properties. Expansion of the water. supply system, except when groundwater contamination has been documented, shall be prohibited without prior review for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. This review shall follow the requirements and criteria outlined in Section 15.1-456 of the Code of Virginia, and shall also apply to any proposal submitted under Section 15.1-475 (subdivision) and Section 15.1-491(h) Site Plan Review, of the Code of Virginia. SITE REJECTION June 27, 1989 929 at its expense, provide to each eligible resident or business a clean source of replacement water. a. The Landfill Agency may select any source of water they so desire but it must meet all applicable health standards. The newly established water system will be extended to each residence or business and connected at the Agency's expense within 120 days after the date the contamination is verified. All interior plumbing contaminated to the extent that it is rendered hazardous for continued use will be replaced at the Agency's expense. b. Eligible residents or businesses will receive free water up to 6,000 gallons per month for as long as they own and occupy the residence. All water usage over 6,000 gallons per month will be paid by the resident or business at the rates in effect at that time. Heirs of residents will qualify for free water under this provision. c. The Landfill Agency agrees to continue to provide water to subsequent owners of affected residences or businesses. However, June 27, 1989 g 3 1 Agency. All testing is to be done at the Landfill Agency's expense. c. For all wells which pass the initial test, if subsequent tests show contamination, it will qualify under the terms of this agreement for guaranteed replacement, unless the Landfill Agency can prove that the source of the contamination is not the landfill. d. For all wells that fail the initial test, the exact nature of the existing contamination must be recorded and sufficient additional tests taken to establish an accurate base- line of data against which to compare future tests. If future tests demonstrate a deterioration of water contamination the well will qualify under the terms of this agreement for guaranteed replacement. e. All new wells drilled (within 1,000 feet of the landfill property boundary) during the life of the landfill that pass an initial water sample test (chemical and bacteria) will qualify for groundwater protection under the terms of this agreement. June 27, 1989 933 necessary actions as required by federal, state or local laws or regulations, including landfill permit conditions, to insure residents surrounding the landfill site that their property values will not be adversely impacted by the landfill. 2. Any resident or business owning property within 5,000 feet of the landfill site border on the day the site receives approval of the Part "B" application and issuance of a permit by the Department of Waste Management, and the site is selected for development by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, may be eligible for compensation if they can prove their property was devalued as a result of the landfill. 3. The resident must establish the value of the affected property just prior to the sale date (Appraised Value) by either obtaining an appraisal by a "Professionally Certified Appraiser" or by use of the current Roanoke County tax assessments. Tax assessments must reflect 100$ of fair market value. The responsible Landfill Agency will pay 50$ of the cost of the initial appraisal up to a total of $150. Appraisals to be made as if landfill was not existing. June 27, 1989 93 5 is closed. Heirs of residents qualifying under paragraph 2 will be eligible for compensation under the terms of this agreement. 6. Any resident who is eligible for compensation for property devaluation under the foregoing terms of this agreement will also qualify for reimbursement of the following expenses: a. Residents or renters will receive reasonable Moving Expenses to move to a new location within the boundaries of Roanoke County. Moving expenses are limited to the costs of transporting household goods. Requires three (3) written quotes approved by the Landfill Agency. b. Residents or renters will receive reimbursement for the Interest Differential between their existing mortgage loan and any new loan assumed on any replacement property within the boundaries of Roanoke County. This reimbursement will be defined as the present value of the remaining principal payments, discounted at the difference June 27, 1989 93 7 ___~ ~___ provisions of the Uniform Arbitration Act, Article 2 of Title 8.01 of the Code of Virginia (Section 8.01-581.01 et sec). LANDFILL OWNERSHIP The citizens of Roanoke County feel strongly that the landfill operator needs to be responsive and accountable for properly operating, maintaining, and adhering to the conditions placed on the permit. Roanoke County or the Roanoke County Resource Authority shall remain in full control and accountable for the construction and operation of the landfill. LANDFILL USERS The responsible Landfill Agency shall limit users of the Regional Landfill to qualifying residents and businesses of Roanoke County, Roanoke City, Salem and Vinton. Private haulers will be allowed to use the landfill only if the refuse that is submitted originates from one of°the municipalities previously mentioned and if they have applied for and obtained a dump penait from the Landfill Operator. Surrounding counties and municipalities who elected not to participate in the Regional Landfill on the date Part "A" application was made to the Virginia Department of Waste June 27, 1989 939 Safe and adequate roadways leading to the landfill is a great concern of the residents of Roanoke County. Properly constructed and maintained roads are critical in the protection and safety of the adjoining neighborhoods and motorists. The following conditions are an attempt to address these issues: 1. With the construction of the landfill and prior to its opening, all secondary roads utilized as the main access to the landfill will be reconstructed to the appropriate VDOT geometric design standards and pavement category to safely handle the projected type and volume of traffic. 2. The Landfill Operator along with VDOT will properly maintain the road in good, safe repair. 3. The Landfill Operator will keep the road and the adjoining rights-of-way and properties free and clean of litter and debris originating from vehicles traveling to and from the landfill. Litter pickup is to be made a minimum of twice a week, weather permitting. 4. Roanoke County will enforce speed limits along the access roads to and from the landfill as part of June 27, 1989 94 -- sha11 never exceed $150,000. The fund shall be utilized for the construction and maintenance of public improvements approved by the Board of Supervisors and the Planning Commission. A Public Improvement Plan shall be developed by Roanoke County with assistance from the residents of the Host Community for the expenditure of the fund. 2. Special Exception Permit to publicly own and operate a regional landfill on what is known as the "Boones Chapel Site". (PUBLIC HEARING HELD ON APRIL 25. 1989) R-62789-11 Mr. Hodge presented the staff report and recommended approval with the Landfill conditions and operating policies with the following amendments: (1) that all provisions for property value protection be specifically extended to renters; (2) that property value protection be extended only to those who live within 5,000 feet of the landfill site; (3) that property value protection begin only after completion of the Part B application; and (4) that special conditions be approved concerning property rented by Rebecca T. Sparks as follow: 1. After the purchase, renter may continue to rent the property from the County, at the same rate, until construction begins, unless other arrangements are made sooner. 2. Well in advance of the beginning of the construc- tion, County Assessor and his staff will assist renter to find comparable living arrangements (single-family residence, three June 27, 1989 943 . _ P _ _- - - _- .. , _~ -- -._ . ~__ - e rooms at no~more Arian $225 rental er month located in southwest County, if possible. Renter will advise County if suitable rental arrangements are found. 3. The County will pay normal moving expenses within the Roanoke Valley area and the move will be done during a weekend of renter's choice. 4. Household appliances, including dishwasher, wood stove, air conditioning units, that are renter's property will be moved to new location. Supervisor Johnson moved to adopt the prepared resolu- tion approving the Special Exception Permit with the previously approved conditions. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Nickens and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: Supervisors Robers, McGraw RESOLUTION 62789-11 GRANTING A SPECIAL EXCEP- TION PERMIT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, TO PUBLICLY OWN AND OPERATE A SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY ON WHAT IS KNOWN AS THE "BOONES CHAPEL SITE" WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on April 18, 1989; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a public hearing on this matter on April 25, 1989. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Board of Super- visors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Board finds that the granting of a Spe- June 27, 1989 94~ - rze -- y e o owing -recorded~vot~ t ~- AYES: Supervisor Johnson, Robers, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: Supervisor McGraw 3. Soecial Exception Permit to publicly own and operate a recrional landfill on what is known as the "Smith Gam Site". (PUBLIC HEARING HELD ON APRIL 25 1989,, R-62789-12 Mr. Hodge presented the staff report and recommended approval with the Landfill Permit Conditions and Operating polic- ies as listed under the Boones Chapel Special Exception Permit application with the following amendments: (1) That the Smith Gap access road not be a condition to the special exception permit, but that a feasibility study be conducted on the road; (2) that all provisions for property value protection be specifi- cally extended to renters; (3) that property value protection be extended only to those who lie within 5,000 feet of the landfill site; and (4) that property value protection begin only after completion of the Part B application. Supervisor Nickens moved to approve the Special Excep- tion Permit with the conditions. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Johnson and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: Supervisors Robers, McGraw June 27, 1989 947 _ - - - -~-- approve operating policies shall be deemed to constitute the creation of a debt, the lending of the credit, nor a pledge of the credit of the County under the Constitution and laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia, nor shall any provision thereof give any person any legal right to enforce the terms thereof against the County. On motion of Supervisor Nickens, seconded by Supervisor Johnson, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: Supervisors Robers, McGraw IN RE: PUBLIC HEARINGS 689-2 Petition of Stephan Rice. Bear Trap Inn, requesting rezoning from R-1 Residential to B-3 Business and to amend the future Land Use Map Designation from Neighborhood Conserva- tion to Transition of a tract containing 0.24 acre and located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Custis Avenue and Bunker Hill Drive in the Cave Spring Magisterial District. This petition was withdrawn at the petitioner's request. 689-3 Petition of Spradlin Petroleum requesting rezoning from B-2 Business to B-3 Business of a tract containing .848 acre and located on the west side of U. S. 220 200 feet north of its intersection with Valley Drive in the Cave Spring Magisterial District. This petition was continued to July 25, 1989 at the petitioner's request. 689-4 Petition of St. John's AME Church for a Special Use Permit to operate a clean landfi- ll on a 0.775 acre tract located at 3019 . June 27, 1989 9 ~ 9 689-5 Petition of Joe Bandy & Son, Inc. for a Special Use Permit to operate a private construction debris landfill on a 50 acre tract located on the east side of Deyerle Road, 800 feet from its intersection with Merriman Road in the Cave Spring Magisterial District. A-62789-14 Mr. Harrington presented the staff report advising that this landfill must abide by the Virginia Department of Waste Management regulations applicable to stump landfills. The Planning Commission has recommended approval with conditions. Supervisor Nickens moved to approve the Special Excep- tion Permit with conditions. The motion was seconded by Super- visor Garrett and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None CONDITIONS 1. Landfilling activities will not be conducted on more than 20 acres of the total site with the remaining 30 acres to continue undisturbed including a minimum buffer of at least 400 feet from any portion of fill area to any point on the property boundary. 2. Site shall be closed to all businesses and in- dividuals other than Joe Bandy and Son. 3. Operating hours shall be limited to 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday through Saturday. 4. No advertising signs of any sort will be erected. . , 95 1 June 27, 1989 - - --- -- - --- - ___ __ _. Supervisor Nickens offered a substitute motion to continue the public hearing to July 25, 1989 for the purpose of evaluating the property. The motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Eddy NAYS: None 689-7 Petition of Marty Lord to rezone a .268 acre tract from B-2, Business to B-3, Business to operate an import auto parts business with repair service, located at 3228 Brambleton Avenue in the Cave Spring Magisterial Dis- trict. Mr. Harrington presented the staff report. The Plann- ing Commission expressed concern about the lack of parking availability and the type of screening. The proffered conditions address this and the Planning Commission recommended approval. Supervisor Garrett moved to approve the rezoning with conditions. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Robers and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None FINAL ORDER NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDERED that the aforementioned t parcel of land which is contained in the Roanoke County Tax Maps as Parcel 77.10-4-36 and recorded in Deed Book 922 and legally . ~ _ June 27, 1989 ~ 5 •, well as billboards shall be prohibited. 9. A sewer manhole, acceptable to the Utility Depart- ment, shall be installed prior to occupancy of the building for purposes of repairing automobiles. 10. No more than 10 vehicles shall be stored outside the building at any one time. 11. Hours of operation shall be limited to 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Monday through Saturday. 689-8 Petition of Landon Hall Construction to rezone a 2.597 acre tract from M-1 In- dustrial to M-2 Industrial to operate a construction storage yard, located on the north side of Carr Rouse Road at its inter- section with Jae Valley Road in the Vinton Magisterial District. Mr. Harrington presented the staff report. The Plann- ing Commission recommended approval with conditions by a 4 to 1 vote. Supervisor Nickens moved to approve the rezoning with proffered conditions. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Johnson and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens,. Garrett NAYS: None FINAL ORDER NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDERED that the aforementioned parcel of land which is contained in the Roanoke County Tax Maps + • • June 27, 1989 9 5 5 that two~property~-owners-~reques~ed-this rezoning because they were unable to get mortgage financing because the land is zoned industrial. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the petition. There are no proffered conditions and no request to amend the Land Use Plan. Supervisor Robers moved to approve the petition. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Johnson and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None FINAL ORDER NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDERED that the aforementioned parcel of land which is contained in the Roanoke County Tax Maps as Parcel 87.14-2-8.1 and 87.14-20 and recorded in Deed Book 1128 and legally described below, be rezoned from M-2 Industrial District to R-1 Residential District BE IT FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this order be transmitted to the Secretary of the Planning Commission and that he be directed to reflect that change on the official zoning map of Roanoke County. IN RE: PUBLIC HEARINGS AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 689-10 Petition of Carlin Nucholls and Marty and •. WHEREAS, Section 15.1-482 (b) of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, requires that such action be accomplished by the adoption of an ordinance by the governing body; and, WHEREAS, notice has been given as required by Section 15.1-431 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and a first reading of this ordinance was held on June 14, 1989; and the public hearing and second reading of this ordinance was held on June 27, 1989. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the southern portion of an unimproved fifty (50) foot right-of-way referred to as "Chelsa Street," and being the remaining portion of Chelsa Street from its intersection with Overbrook Drive south to its end, approximately 240 feet in length and dedicated to Roanoke County, by plat found in Plat Book 2, at page 170, in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, be, and hereby is, vacated pursuant to Section 15.1-482(b) of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended; and, 2. That as a condition of the adoption of this or- dinance, the County reserves and retains a twenty (20) foot sanitary sewer easement for an existing sewer main and reserves a twenty (20) foot waterline easement along the centerline of the fifty (50) foot right-of-way for future system upgrade; and, 3. .That this ordinance shall be in full force and June 27, 1989 95 7 effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances ~ ~ M June 27, 1989 9 5 9 ORDINANCE 62789-16 VACATING A PORTION OF A TWENTY-FIVE (25) FOOT WATERLINE AND INGRESS/EGRESS EASEMENT, AND A PORTION OF A FIFTEEN (15) FOOT PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT, RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 10, PAGE 41, SECTION 1, FAIRWAY FOREST ESTATES Whereas, F.F.E. Development Corporation, the developer of Sections l and 2, Fairway Forest Estates has requested the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia to vacate a portion of a twenty-five (25) foot waterline and ingress/egress easement and a portion of a fifteen (15) foot public utility easement, dedicated to the County by plat found in Plat Book 10, page 41, Section 1, Fairway Forest Estates in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia; and, WHEREAS, Section 15.1-482 (b) of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, requires that such action be accomplished by the adoption of an ordinance by the governing body; and, WHEREAS, notice has been given as required by Section 15.1-431 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and a first reading of this ordinance was held on June 14, 1989; and the public hearing and second reading of this ordinance was held on June 27, 1989. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That a portion of a twenty-five (25) foot waterline and ingress/egress easement and a portion of a fifteen (15) foot public utility easement as shown on the attached plat dated 21 A 961 AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: 689-12 Petition of Boone and Company requesting vacation of a portion of a 20 foot sanitary sewer easement dedicated to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors in Deed Book 1228, Page 35 and located on Va. Route 419 in the Cave Spring Magisterial District. 0-62789-17 Mr. Covey presented the staff report. The owner plans to construct a third office building which would encroach upon the existing easement. Supervisor Robers moved to approve the ordinance. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Johnson and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None ORDINANCE 62789-17 VACATING A PORTION OF A TWENTY (20) FOOT SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT IN THE BOONE OFFICE PARK Whereas, Boone & Company, the developer of Boone Office Park has requested the Toard of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia to vacate a portion of a twenty (20) foot sanitary sewer easement, dedicated to the County by deed found in Deed Book 1228, page 35 in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia; and, WHEREAS, Section 15.1-482 (b) of the 1950 Code of ~~ R 963 __ -~_. _ _ ___ __ __ . _- -__ __ _ ._- -.. __une. -~ of this ordinance with the Clerk of the Circuit Court and shall pay all fees required to accomplish this transaction. On motion of Supervisor Robers, seconded by Supervisor Johnson, and carried by the following recoreded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: IN RE: CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS 1. Will Lindsey, Attorney for residents of Boones Chapel landfill site spoke and requested that if one of the sites is rejected after part A application that the next rated site be brought into the process. He asked for reconsideration of Supervisor Robers' earlier motion. 2. Roxey Fisher, Boones Chapel resident (1) Reminded the Board of the flooding problems at the proposed landfill site; (2) Asked for consideration of another access road to the site; and (3) Requested road improvements in the area. 3. Deborah Zamorski, Boones Chapel resident (1) Prese- nted a petition requesting that the Mount Pleasant site be in- cluded in the landfill siting process; (2) Requested that Roanoke County staff be willing to make information concerning the sites more accessible to her in the future; and (3) That some action be taken concerning mandatory recycling in the future. ~` January 9, 1990 Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Roanoke County Administration Center 3738 Brambleton Avenue, SW Roanoke, Virginia 24018 January 9, 1990 The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, met this day at the Roanoke County Administration Center, this being the second .Tuesday, and the first regularly scheduled meeting of the month of January, 1990. IN RE: CALL TO ORDER Chairman Robers called the meeting to order at 3:01 p.m. The roll call was taken. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Richard Robers, Vice Chairman Steven A. McGraw, Supervisors Lee B. Eddy, Bob L. Johnson, Harry C. Nickens MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; John M. Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator for Human Services; John R. January 9, 1990 Chairman Robers recognized several students from Glenvar High School who were attending the meeting. IN RE: NEW BUSINESS 1. Anoromriation of Funds to cover Hurricane Related Expenses. A-1990-1 Diane Hyatt, Director of Finance, reported that in September 1989 the County experienced extensive wind damage as a result of Hurricane Hugo, and that the staff was directed to proceed with cleanup and report back to the Board when all expenditures had been accumulated. She advised that the cleanup costs amounted to $109,000 and recommended appropriating these costs from the unappropriated balance. In response to a question from Supervisor Eddy, Mr. Hodge advised that in order to collect funds from FEMA, the state must declare Roanoke County a disaster. In response to questions from Supervisors McGraw and Nickens, Mr. Hodge advised there are no funds set aside for such emergencies and the County does not have insurance to cover these expenses. Supervisor Nickens moved to appropriate $109,000 to cover the Hurricane Hugo expenses. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Johnson, McGraw, Nickens, Robers 015 January 9, 1990 o~~ NAYS: None RESOLUTION 1990-3 OF SUPPORT FOR INCREASED STATE FUNDING FOR COI~iiJNITY BASED SERVICES FOR THE MENTALLY ILL, MENTALLY RETARDED AND SUBSTANCE ABIISERS WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors is greatly concerned about the citizens in needs of mental health, mental retardation, and substance abuse services; and i~~REAS, many local citizens are on waiting lists for residential services and are in need of associated support services provided by the Community Services Board, and many of these citizens have been waiting for several years; and Wes, Roanoke County provides significant funding for these services through local taxes; and WHEREAS, the lack of adequate treatment resources is not unique to Roanoke County but is pervasive throughout the Commonwealth of Virginia; and NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors urges the Governor and the General Assembly to consider the funding of services for mentally disabled citizens among the top priorities for the 1990-1992 Biennium. January 9, 1990 019 _____ Regulations. ~- Supervisor Nickens asked for a copy of the draft ordinance to be given to the board members in advance of the work session. Supervisor Nickens moved to set the work session on February 13, 1990. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Johnson, McGraw, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None IN RE:. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Rectuest for Public Hearing for Secondary Road Six- Year Construction Plan (1990-1996) Supervisor Eddy requested that copies of the Six-Year plan be placed in the County libraries, that advertisements reflect this, and also requested a work session following the public hearing on February 13, 1990. Supervisor Nickens moved to set the public hearing on January 23, 1990. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Johnson, McGraw, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None IN RE: FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 02, January 9, 1990 the Charter of Roanoke County, the first reading on this ordinance was held on January 9, 1990, and the second reading was held on January 23, 1990, concerning the lease of a building for the use of the Roanoke County library (Bent Mountain branch library) located on Bent Mountain, together with all appurtenances thereto belonging; and 3. That this lease is with I. Boyd Overstreet for a building located at 10402 Bent Mountain Road on a month-to-month basis for a rent of One Hundred Fifty Dollars ($150) per month, plus utilities; and 4. That the lease agreement setting forth the terms and conditions of this lease is incorporated herein by reference; and 5. That the County Administrator is authorized to execute this lease on behalf of the County of Roanoke and to execute such other documents and take such other actions as are necessary to accomplish this transaction, all of which shall be upon form approved by the County Attorney. On motion of Supervisor Eddy to waive second reading and adopt ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None 2. Ordinance authorizing the execution of a lease of real estate, Office space for the Roanoke County Department of Social Services located in the City of Salem Mr. Chambliss advised that the current lease at the January 9, 1990 ~ 2 3 e- ive~participa ing localities. 3. Transportation and Safety Commission Supervisor Eddy nominated Henry Gregory to fill the unexpired four-year term of May Johnson. 4. Court Service Unit Advisory CouncifYouth and Familv Services Advisory Board Following discussion on this committee, the County Administrator was directed to contact Michael Lazzuri, Director of Court Services to ascertain the status the this committee and report back to the Board of Supervisors. IN RE: REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS Supervisor Eddy: (1) Expressed concerns about the use of tax funds for Roanoke County Tod ~ and the timeliness of using a newspaper supplement. He moved that a citizen survey be conducted to assess the effectiveness of the newsletter. Supervisor Nickens offered a substitute motion that a work session be set to discuss the effectiveness of Roanoke County Todav and that board members offer suggestions to the Public Information Officer for improving the newsletter. The motion passed by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Nickens, Robers NAYS: Supervisors Johnson, McGraw (2) Moved that a resolution be prepared for January 23, 1990 asking for Board support to the General Assembly for tax-exempt January 9, 1990 025 AYES: Supervisors McGraw, Johnson, Nickens and Robers NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Supervisor Eddy Supervisor Johnson: advised that he felt the recent reassessments will generate additional revenue and proposed a one-cent per year reduction on the real estate tax rate. He requested that this issue be discussed at the Board retreat and during the budget process. Supervisor Eddy suggested looking at expenditure reductions also. Supervisor McGraw advised he would prefer the additional revenue be used to increase salaries, expand the recycling program, and to fund school programs and economic development. Suuervisor Robers• read a statement he plans to present to the Regional Airport Commission recommending the establishment of an advisory board that would advise the commission on (1) methods and alternatives to attract new carriers, (2) the best marketing methods, (3) the best utilization of the facility, (4) use of the facility in economic development efforts, (5) how to take advantage of future technology advances, and (6) how to best serve those who use the airport. He recommended who he felt should serve on such a board. IN RE: CONSENT AGENDA R-1990-5 January 9, 1990 02 7 2. Approval of Bingo Permit for the Loyal Order of Moose Lodge No. 284. 3. Approval of Bingo Permit for the Vinton Moose Lodge. 4. Acceptance of Williamsburg Court and Stonewood Drive into the Secondary System by the Virginia Department of Transportation. 2. That the Clerk to the Board is hereby authorized and directed where required by law to set forth upon any of said items the separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant to this resolution. On motion of Supervisor Johnson, with Item 2 removed for a separate vote and the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None Item 2 on motion of Supervisor Johnson and the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Johnson, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Supervisor McGraw IN RE: CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS 1. BOB WILLIAMS. 1015 CHESTNUT MOUNTAIN DR. VINTON spoke representing Pondersoa Adult Homes. He requested an extension of the water line so that a sprinkler system could be installed at the adult home. hookup fee. He also requested a waiver of the Supervisor Johnson requested Mr. Hodge to investigate January 9, 1990 O2 9 Supervisor McGraw also asked that a report be brought to the next Resource authority comparing maintenance costs between a new access road to Smith Gap and Bradshaw Road. IN RE: EXECUTIVE SESSION At 5:10 p.m., Supervisor Johnson moved to go into Executive Session pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.1- 344 a to discuss specific legal matters requiring provision of legal advice and briefing by staff members concerning (1) consolidation in accordance with Section 2.1-344 (7) and (2) sewer agreement with Roanoke City in accordance with Section 2.1- 344 (a) (7). The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Johnson, McGraw, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None IN RE: CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE SESSION R-1990-6 At 7:25 p.m., Supervisor Johnson moved to return to open session and certify the Executive Session. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Johnson, McGraw, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None RESOLUTION 1990-6 CERTIFYING EXECUTIVE MEETING WAS HELD IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CODE OF VIRGINIA ... _031 January 9, 1990 Supervisor Johnson moved that the Board of Supervisors convene in Special Session on February 20, 1989 at 7:00 p.m. at the Administration Center for the purposes of a public hearing on the consolidation agreement with the City of Roanoke. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Johnson, McGraw, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None 2. Adoption of a motion concerning the Town of Vinton Supervisor Nickens moved that notwithstanding proposed legislation which may be adopted by the 1990 session of the Virginia General Assembly pursuant to the recommendations of the Commission on Local Government Structures and Relationships, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors agrees that if the Town of Vinton seeks a boundary adjustment or annexation in December 1990, such action may be taken under the same regulations that exists under state statutes in December 1989. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Johnson, McGraw, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None IN RE: ADJOURNMENT At 7:35 p.m. Supervisor Johnson moved to adjourn to 8:00 a.m., January 20, 1990 at the Holiday Inn Tanglewood for the purpose of a Board retreat. The motion carried by a unanimous ~~ r #. January 20, 1990 033 Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Holiday Inn-Tanglewood Hotel Roanoke, Virginia 24018 January 20, 1990 The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, met this day at the Holiday Inn-Tanglewood Hotel, this being an adjourned meeting from the regularly scheduled meeting held January 9, 1990 for the purpose of a Board of Supervisors retreat. IN RE: CALL TO ORDER Chairman Robers called the meeting to order at 8:10 a.m. , and due to the nature of the meeting, suspended the regular rules of order. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Richard Robers, Vice Chairman Steven A. McGraw, Supervisors Lee B. Eddy, Bob L. Johnson, Harry C. Nickens MEMBERS ABSENT: None January 20, 1990 435 me ~ers :-- The board expressed agreement that economic development efforts have improved. They directed Mr. Hodge to set up trips to Chesterfield County and Greensboro, North Carolina for ideas to streamline the development and inspection process. IN RE: OTHER TOPICS Previous to the retreat, the Board members offered suggestions on subjects to be discussed. The following subjects were discussed with direction given to the staff how to proceed. 1. Consolidation County Administrator Elmer Hodge advised that a work session will be set to study the agreement prior to the public hearing. 2. Resource Authority Following discussion, the board asked the staff to have available at the next Resource Authority meeting documentation of all costs associated with both proposed landfill sites. Thev further directed Mr. Hodge to contact Roanoke City concerning their willingness to negotiate a contract to join the new landfill and asked for a report on costs to expand recycling. Mr. Hodge will bring back that information during the budget process. 3. Siring Hollow Reservoir Mr. Hodge advised that a work session will be set up within 60 days on the reservoir, and will include any tax rate necessary to finance the reservoir. January 20, 1990 037' -- -needs-for~-nclusion into the budget process. Supervisors McGraw and Johnson recommended increased salaries for all school and county employees. Supervisor Robers asked that a alternatives to Blue Cross-Blue Shield be considered to save on healthcare costs. The Board members asked for an employee turnover/attrition rate for the past several years. Supervisor Eddy recommended a study of efficiencies and economies throughout the county and suggested improvements to the budget forms. 9. Supervisors Meeting Facilities and Procedures Supervisor Eddy presented recommendations for moving the board members to the floor and changing the seating arrangements for the staff in the community room. The Board directed the staff to study the changes and bring back possible designs with cost estimates. Supervisor Eddy also suggested rotating the seating and voting at meetings. The Board had no comment on this suggestion. In response to a concern from Supervisor Eddy regarding the timely completion of the Board of Supervisors minutes, Clerk Mary Allen advised that she had handled additional responsibilities over the past several years, but would make an effort to bring them up to date within the next three months. Supervisor Eddy also expressed concern at the number of staff who attended board meetings. Mr. Hodge responded he felt it was important that they be informed of the board's actions and that they be available to answer questions. The Board directed that for a three-month trial period, only the County Administrator, County January 20, 1990 process. It was decided to include both an "addback" and "cutback" list from departments to encourage the staff to study ways of reducing costs. The board also requested continued study with the school administration on the possibility of consolidation of services. 2. Priorities Established by the Board Following discussions with the staff, the Board members listed their individual priorities. From that list, the Board established a consensus on what priorities to emphasize during the 1990 year. They were: A. Roanoke County Resource Authority (Landfill, Recycling) B. Capital Improvement Plan (Spring Hollow Reservoir, Major Maintenance, Asbestos, Drainage, Equipment Replacement) C. Budget (economies, efficiencies, employee salaries) D. Economic Development E. Emergency Services (Police Department, Fire Department Rescue) IN RE: EXECUTIVE SESSION At 3:05 p.m., Supervisor Johnson moved to go into Executive Session pursuant to the Code of Virginia 2.1-344 A to discuss legal matters, the consolidation agreement as it pertains 439 d ~ 2 ?; January 20, 1990 -~ -~~ -~----~~-~--Theme pas a genera~I iscussion on a mpac o e consolidation agreement if Roanoke County does not approve it and it is turned over to a citizens committee. There was also discussion on the possible changes that the General Assembly can make to the proposed agreement and what options Roanoke County will have at that time. Supervisors McGraw and Eddy both advised they still had questions regarding the agreement that they would like answered prior to voting. Supervisor Johnson suggested that they send any questions they may have through the Board of Supervisors office and the negotiating committee will attempt to provide answers to all board members. IN RE: ADJOURNMENT At 4:30 p.m., Chairman Robers declared the meeting adjourned. Richard W. Robers, Chairman ACTION NO. A-21390-8.a ITEM NUMBER ~' 3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 13, 1990 AGENDA ITEM: Request for approval of a Raffle Permit from the Roanoke County Occupational School PTA COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Roanoke County Occupational School PTA has requested a Raffle Permit to be held on April 28, 1990. This application has been reviewed by the Commissioner of Revenue and he recommends that it be approved. The Application is on file in the Clerk's Office. The organization has paid the $25.00 fee. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the application for a Raffle Permit be approved. SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: Mary H. Allen Elmer C. Hodge Clerk to the Board County Administrator ---------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved (x) Motion by: Bob L. Johnson No Yes Abs Denied ( ) Eddy x Received ( ) Johnson x Referred ( ) McGraw x To ( ) Nickens x Robers x cc: File Bingo/Raffle File COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO CONDUCT RAFFLES OR BINGO Application is hereby made for a bingo game or raffle permit. This application is made subject to all County and State laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations now in force, or that may be enacted hereafter and which are hereby agreed to by the under- signed applicant and which shall be deemed a condition under which this permit is issued. All applicants should exercise extreme care to ensure the accura- cy of their responses to the following questions. Bingo games and raffles, are strictly regulated by Title 18.2-340.1 et. seg. of the criminal statutes of the Virginia Code, and by Section 4-86 et. seq. of the Roanoke' County Code. These laws authorize the County Board of Supervisors to conduct a reasonable~investiga- tion prior to granting a bingo or raffle permit. The Board has sixty days from the filing of an application to grant or deny the permit. The Board may deny, suspend, or revoke the permit of any organization found not to be in strict compliance with county and state law. ' Any person violating county or state regulations concerning these permits shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. Any person who uses any part of the gross receipts from bingo or raffles for any purpose other than the lawful religious, charitable, community, or educational purposes for which the organization is specifi- cally organized, except for reasonable operating expenses, shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony. THIS APPLICATION IS FOR: (check one) RAFFLE PERMIT X ~ BINGO GAMES Name of Organization Roanoke County Occupational School Street Address 5937 Cove Rd., N.W. Mailing Address City, State, Zip Code Roanoke, VA 24019 Purpose and Type of Organization Parent-Teacher Association When was the organization founded? 1972 1 Roanoke County meeting place? Yes Has organization been in existence in Roanoke County for two con- tinuous years? YES x NO Is the organization non-profit? YES x NO Indicate Federal Identification Number # Attach copy of IRS Tax Exemption letter. Officers of the Organization: co-president: Karen VanDeusen ~~~~_preSidentLynne Bryant Address: ~~7SR Na1mS T,ane Address: 534 Stacie Drive ~eancke, Z~A - 24019' Vinton, VA 24179 Secretary: Kitty Ramsey Treasurer:Jim Crumpacker Address: 3015 Carolina Avenue AddreSS: 3145 Links Manor Drive Roanoke, VA Salem, VA 24153 Member authorized to be responsible for Raffle or Bingo opera- tions: Name Virginia Mattern Home Address 5460 North Lakes Dr., Roanoke, VA. 24019 Phone 563-0343 Bus. Phone - A COMPLETE LIST OF THE NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF CURRENT MEMBER- SHIP MUST BE FURNISHED WITH THIS APPLICATION. Specific location where Raffle or Bingo Game is to be conducted. Multi-purpose Room, Roanoke County Occupational School 5937 Cove Road, N.W., Roanoke, VA. 24019 RAFFLES: Date of Drawing 4/28/90 Time of Drawing 9:00 BINGO: Days of Week & Hours of Activity: Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday From To From To From To From To From To From To From To 0 2 State specifically how the proceeds from the Bingo/Raffle will be used. List in detail the planned or intended use of the proceeds. Use estimates amounts if necessary, Used to supplement material needs and supplies for the classroom teachers. b 3 BINGO: Complete the following: Legal owner(s) of the building where BINGO is to be conducted: Name: Address: County State Zip Is the building owned by a 501-C non-profit organization? Seating capacity for each location: Parking spaces for each location: ALL RAFFLE AND BINGO APPLICANTS MUST ANSWER QUESTIONS 1 - 19 1. , Gross receipts from all sources related to the operation of Bingo games or Instant Bingo by calendar quarter for prior calen- dar year period. BINGO INSTANT BINGO 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter Total 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter Total 2. Does your organization understand that it is a violation of law to enter into a contract with any person or firm, associa- tion, organization, partnership, or corporation of any classifica- tion whatsoever, for the purpose of organizing, managing, or con- ducting Bingo Games or Raffles? ves 3. Does your organization understand that it must maintain and file complete records of receipts and disbursements pertaining to Bingo games and Raffles, and that such records are subject to audit by the Commissioner of the Revenue? yes 4. Does your organization understand that the Commissioner of the Revenue or his designee has the right to go upon the premises on which any organization is conducting a Bingo game or raffle, to perform unannounced audits, and to secure for audit all re- cords required to be maintained for Bingo games or raffles? ~7PR 4 5. Does your organization understand that a Financial Report must be filed with the Commissioner of the Revenue on or before the first day of November of each calendar year for which a per- mit has been issued? yes 6. Does your organization understand that if gross receipts ex- ceed fifty thousand dollars during any calendar quarter, an addi- tional Financial Report must be filed for such quarter no later than sixty days following the last day of such quarter? yes 7. Does your organization understand that the failure to file financial reports when due shall cause automatic revocation of the permit, and no such organization shall conduct any Bingo game or raffle thereafter until such report is properly filed and a new permit is obtained? yes 8. Does your organization understand that each Financial Report must be accompanied by a Certificate, verified under oath by the Board of Directors, that the,~roceeds of any Bingo game or raffle have been used for these lawful, religious, charitable, commu- nity, or educational purposes for which the organization is spe- cifically chartered or organized, and that the operation of Bingo games or raffles have been in accordance with the provisions of Article 1.1 of Chapter 8, Title 18.2 of the Code of Virginia? yes 9. Does your organization understand that a one percent audit fee of the gross receipts must be paid to the County of Roanoke upon submission of the annual financial report due on or before the first of November? yes 10. Does your organization understand that this permit is valid only in the County of Roanoke and only at such locations, and fo.r such dates, as are designated in the permit application? yes 11. Does your organization understand that no person, except a bona fide member of any such organization who shall have been a member of such organization for at least ninety days prior to such participation, shall participate in the management, opera- tion, or conduct of any bingo game or raffle, and no person shall receive any remuneration for participating in management, operation, or conduct of any such game or raffle? ves 12. Has your organization attached a check for the annual permit fee in the amount of $25.00 payable to the County of Roanoke, Virginia? yes 13. Does your organization understand that any organization found in violation of the County Bingo and Raffle Ordinance or §18.2- 340.10 of the Code of Virginia authorizing this permit is subject to having such permit revoked and any person, shareholder, agent, member or employee of such organization who violates the above to having such permit revoked and any person, shareholder, agent, member or employee of such organization who violates the above referenced Codes may be guilty of a felony? yes 5 14. Has your organization attached a complete list of itls, member- ship to this application form? no A complete ist is available upon wrirequest. 15. Has your organization attached a copy of its bylaws to this application form? yes • 16. Has the organization been declared exempt from property taxa- tion under the Virginia Constitution or statutes? yes If yes, state whether exemption is for real, personal property, or both and identify exem~t property. We are a Parent-Teac erAssociat - We ho no rea or persona 17. State the specific type and purpose of the organization. ParPnfi-Taarhar ARRn[~iAtiOri ~c,+,=n= nrt rrn>>~ fnr StiidPntwarriyi ti a~ 18. Is this organization incorporated in Virginia? no If yes, name and address of Registered Agent: 19. Is the organization registered with the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Affairs pursuant to the Charitable Solicitations Act, Section 57-48 of the Virginia Code? no (If so, attach copy of registration.) Has the organization been granted an exemption from registration by the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Affairs? n/a (If so, attach copy of exemption.) ALL RAFFLE APPLICANTS DESCRIBE THE ARTICLES TO BE RAFFLED, VALUE OF SUCH ARTICLES,~AND PROCEED TO NOTARIZATION. Article Description Double Wedding Ring Quilt Fair Market Value $300.00 Wooden Hope Chest $150.00 (This article was a donation) 6 ALL BINGO APPLICANTS MUST ANSWER QUESTIONS 20 - 27 BEFORE NOTARIZATION RAFFLE APPLICANTS, GO TO NOTARIZATION. 20. Does your organization understand that the bingo games shall not be conducted more frequently than two calendar days in any calendar week? 21. Does your organization understand that it is required to keep complete records of the bingo game. These records based on §18.2- 340.6 of the Code of Virginia and §4.98 of Roanoke County Code must include the following: a. A record of the date, quantity, and card value of instant bingo supplies purchased, as well as the name and address of the supplier of such instant bingo supplies, and written invoice or receipt is also required for each purchase of in- stant bingo supplies? b. A record in writing of the dates on which Bingo is played, the number of people in attendance on each date, and the amount of receipts and prizes on each day? (These records must be retained for three years.) c. A record of the name and address of each individual to whom a door prize, regular or special Bingo game prize or jackpot from the playing of Bingo is awarded? d. A complete and itemized record of all receipts and disburse- ments which support, and that agree with, the quarterly and annual reports required to be filed, and that these records must be maintained in reasonable order to permit audit? 22. Does your organization understand that instant Bingo may only be conducted at such time as regular Bingo game is in progress, and only at such locations and at such times as are specified in this application? 23. Does your organization understand that the gross receipts in the course of a reporting year from the playing of instant Bingo may not exceed 33 1/38 of the gross receipts of an organization's Bingo operation? 24. Does your organization understand it may not sell an instant Bingo card to an individual below sixteen years of age? 25. Does your organization understand that an organization whose gross receipts from all bingo operations that exceed or are ex- pected to exceed $75,000 in any calendar year shall have been granted tax-exemot status pursuant to Section 501 C of the United States Internal Revenue Service? (Certificate must be attached.) 7 26. Does your organization understand that a Certificate of Occu- pancy must be obtained or be on file which authorizes this use at the proposed location? yes 27. Does your organization understand that awards or prize money or merchandise valued in excess of the following amounts are illegal? yes a. No door prize shall exceed twenty-five dollars. b. No regular Bingo or special Bingo game shall exceed One Hund- red dollars. c. No jackpot of any nature whatsoever shall exceed One Thousand Dollars, nor shall the total amount of jackpot prizes awarded in any one calendar day exceed One Thousand Dollars. NOTARIZATION: THE FOLLOWING OATH MUST BE TAKEN BY ALL .APPLICANTS I hereby swear or affirm under the penalties of perjury as set forth in §18.2 of the Code of Virginia, that all of the above statements are true to the best of my knowledge, information, and beliefs. All questions have been answered. Signed by: . . me Tit ,,//__ Home Address ~. Subscribed and sworn before me, this~T~ay o IZu 19~~ My commission expires: ' ,. ~J1~tJ__~_~C ~~) 02 7 19~ Lac--~-e-. ~'~sc. ~~'` ~ ~- o ary Public _ RETURN THIS COMPLETED APPLICATION T0: COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE P.O. Box 20409 Roanoke, VA 24018-0513 8 NOT VALID UNLESS COUNTERSIGNED The above application, having been found in due form, is approved and issued to the applicant to have effect until December 31st of this calendar year. /-~~- ~~ Date Comma sinner o the Revenue The above application is not approved. Date Commissioner of the Revenue 9 ROANOKE COUNTY OCCUPATIONAL SCHOOL LOCAL UNIT BYLAWS ARTICLE I--NAME The name of this association is the Roanoke County Occupational School Parent Teacher Association (PTA), Roanoke County. It is a local PTA unit organized under the authority of the Va. Congress of Parents and Teachers (State PTA), a branch of the National Congress of Parents and Teachers (National PTA). ARTICLE II--~-PURPOSES Section 1. The Objects of the Association, in common with the objects of the National PTA, are: a. To promote the welfare of the children and youth in home, school, community and place to:-worship. b. To raise the standards of home life. c. To secure adequate laws for the care and protection of children and youth. d. To bring into close relation the home and the school, that parents and teachers may cooperate intelligently in the education of children and youth. e. To develop between educators and the general public such united efforts as will secure for all children and youth the highest advantage in physical, mental, social and spiritual education. Section 2. The objects of this Association are promoted in cooperation with the State PTA and the National PTA, through an educational program directed towards parents, teachers and the general public; are developed through confer- ences, committees, projects and programs; and are governed and qualified by the basic policies set forth in Article III. ARTICLE III--BASIC POLICIES The following are basic policies of this association: a. The association shall be noncommercial, nonsectarian and nonpartisan. b. The name of the association or the names of any members in their official capacities shall not be used in any connection with commercial concern or with any partisan interest or for any purpose not appropriately related to promotion of the objects of the association. c. The Association shall not--directly or indirectly--participate or intervene (in any way, including the publishing or distributing or statements) in any political campaign on behalf of, or in oppostion to, any candidate for public office; or devote more than an insubstantial part of its activities to attempting to influence legislation by propaganda or otherwise. d. The Association shall work with the schools to provide quality education for all children and youth, and shall seek to participate in the decision- making process establishing school policy, recognizing that the legal responsibility to make decisions has been delegated by the people to boards of education. 2. TYie Association may cooperate with other organizations and agencies con- cerned with the child welfare, but persons representing the Association in such matters shall make no commitments that bind the Association. In the event of the dissolution of the Association, its assets shall be distributed for one or more of the exempt purposes specified in Section 501 (c) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as from time to time amended. ARTICLE IV--ARTICLES OF ORGANIZATION Che articles of organization of a local PTA include (a) the bylaws of such organization and (b) the certificate of incorporation or articles of incorpora- ~ion of such organization (in cases in which the organization is a corporation) ~r the articles of Assocation by whatever name (in cases in which the organiza- ~ion exists as an unincorporated association). ARTICLE V--MEMBERSHIP AND DUES Section 1. Membership in this PTA shall be made available to any individual Nho subscribes to the Objects and the basic policies of the National PTA, without cegard to race, color, creed or national origin, under such rules and regulations zot in conflict with the provisions of these bylaws, the bylaws of the State PTA ~r the bylaws of the National PTA. Section 2. Only members of the Association shall be eligible to participate in the business meetings or to serve in any of its elective or appointive positions. Section 3. _Every individual who is a member of this PTA is, by virtue of .the fact, a member of the National PTA and the State PTA by which this local PTA is chartered, and is entitled to all benefits of such membership. Section 4. The Association shall conduct an annual enrollment of members, but persons may be admitted to membership at any time. Section 5. Each member of the Assocation shall pay annual dues of $1.50 to the Association. Such annual dues include the portion of 60G per member payable to the State PTA, the portion of 50G per member payable to the Nc•.tional PTA, and 15G payable to Roanoke County Council PTA. Section 6. The State, National and County Council PTA portions of the dues paid by each member to the local PTA shall be set aside by the local PTA and remitted to the treasurer of the State PTA at the State Office and treasurer of County Council PTA on or before December 1; by March 1 of each year for those members received after December 1; and by June 30 for additional members received after March. The remittance to the State PTA and Roanoke County Council PTA shall be accompanied by a local remittance blank showing the name and address of the presi- dent of the Association, the amount of the dues collected during the period coverE by the report and the number of members of the Association. ARTICLE VI--OFFICERS AND THEIR ELECTION Section 1. Each officer of this PTA shall be a member of the PTA. r Sect ion 3. 2. Officers and their election. a. The officers of the Association shall be a president, one vice-president, a secretary and a treasurer. b. Officers shall be elected by ballot annually in the month of April. However, if there is but one nominee for any office, election for that office may be by voice vote. c. Officers shall assume their official duties following the close of the meet- .. ing in May and shall serve for a term of one year or until their successors are elected. d. A person shall not be eligible to serve more than two consecutive terms on the same off ice. Section 3. Nominating Committee a. There shall be a nominating committee consisting of three members, one of whom shall be"elected by the executive committee from its body and two elected by the association at a regular meeting at•least one month prior to the election. The association shall elect at least one of the members of the nominating committee to be chairman. b. The nominating committee shall nominate an eligible person for each office to be filled and report its nominees at the regular meeting in April at which time additional nominations may be made from the floor. c. Only those persons who have signified their consent to serve if elected shall be nominated for or elected to such office. Section 4. A vacancy occuring in any office shall be filled for the unexpired term by a person elected by a majority vote of the executive committee, notice of such election having been given. In case a vacancy occurs in the office of the president, the first vice president. shall serve notice of the election. ARTICLE VII--DUTIES OF, OFFICERS Section 1. The president shall preside at all meetings of the Association and of the executive committee at which he may be present; shall perform such other duties as may be prescribed in these bylaws or assigned to him by the Association or by the executive committee; and shall coordinate the work of the officers and committees of the Association in order that the Objects may be promoted. Section 2. The vice president shall act as aide. to the president and shall in his designated order perform the duties of the president in the absence or disability of that officer to act. Section 3. The secretary shall record the minutes of all meetings of the Association and of the executive committee and shall perform such other duties as may be delegated to him. Section 4. The treasurer shall have custody of all the funds of the Associa- tion; shall keep a full and accurate account of receipts and expenditures; and in accordance with the budget adopted by the Association, shall make disbursement as authorized by the president; executive committee or the Association. The treasurer shall present a financial statement at every meeting of the Association and at other times when requested by the executive committee and shall make a full report at the meeting at which new officers officially assume their duties. The treasurer shall be responsible for the maintenance of such books of account fd record bylaws. 4. as conform to the requirements of Article XII, Section 3, of these The treasurer's accounts shall be examined annually by an auditor or an auditing committee of not less than three members who, satisfied that the treasurer's annual report is correct, shall sign a statement of fact at the end of the report. The auditing committee shall be selected by the executive committee at least two weeks before the meeting at which new officers assume their duties. Section 5. All officers shall: a. Perform the dutiers prescribed in the parliamentary authority in addition to those outlined in these bylaws and those assigned from time to time. b. Delivery to their successors all official material not later than ten days following the meeting at which new officers assume their duties. ARTICLE VIII--EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Section 1. The executive committee shall consist of the officers of the Associa- tion, the chairmen of standing comittees and the principal of the school or a representative appointed by him. A faculty representative appointed by the principal or elected by the faculty also may serve on the executive committee. The chairmen of the standing committees shall be selected by the officers of the association and the principal of the school or his representative not more than thirty days following the election of officers. Section 2. The duties of the executive committee shall be (a) to transact necessary business in the intervals between Association meetiins and such other business as may be referred to it by the Association; (b) to create standing committees; (c) to approve the plans of work of the standing comittees; (d)to present a report at the regular meetings of the Association; (e) to select an auditor or auditing committee to audit the treasurer's accounts; (f) to prepare and submit to the Association for adoption a budget for the year; (g) to approve routine bills within the limits of the budget. Section 3. Regular meetings of the executive committee shall be held during the year, the time to be fixed by the committee at its first meeting of the year. A majority of the executive committee members :hall consitute a quorum. Special meetings of the executive committee may be called by the president or by a majority of the members of the committee. ARTICLE IX--MEETINGS Sction 1 Regular meetings of the Association shall be held in the months of September, October, February, April and May, during the school year, unless other- wise provic~cl by the Association or by the exec.uti`e committee, 15 days notice having been given. Section 2. Special meetings may be called by the executive. committee, five days notice having been given. Section 3. The election meeting shall be held in April. Section 4. Ten members shall constitu~ a quorum for the transaction of business in any meetings of this Association.(See below) Section 5. Voting on routine matters may be by voice; however votes on the bylaws or amendments, adoption of a budget, adoption of a project, or the election of officers shall be by a show of membership cards with the vote being counted and recorded in the minces. ~- .; 5. ARTICLE X--STANDING AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES Section 1. Only members of the Association shall be eligible to serve in any elective or appointive position. Section 2. The executive committee may create such standing committees as it may deem necessary to promote the Objects and carry on the work of the Association. The term of each chairman shall be 1 year or until the election of his successor. Section 3. The chairman of each standing comittee shall present a plan of work to the executive committee for approval. No committee work shall be undertaken without the concsent of the executive committee. Section 4. The power to form special committees and. appoint their members rests with the Association and the executive committee. Section 5. The president shall be a member ex officio of all committees except the nominating committee. ARTICLE XI---COUNCIL MEMBERSHIP Section 1. Selection of delegates: a. The Association shall be represented in meetings of the Roanoke County Council of Parent-Teacher Associations by the president or his alternate, the principal or his alternate, and by 1 delegate or his alternate. b. -Delegates and their alternates shall be elected or appointed in April. c. Delegates to the Roanoke County Council of PTA/PTSA shall serve for a term of 1 year. Section 2. This Association shall pay annual dues of 15G per member to the Roanoke Cot:nty Council of PTA/PTSAs as provided in the Council bylaws. Section 3. Responsibilites of delegates: a. Delegates shall report activities of the council to the local unit and shall present to the council such matters as may be referred to it by the local unit. b. Delegates shall vote as instructed on adoption of projects or on matters of policy, but shall use their own discretion on other matters except as provided by council bylaws.. **ARTICLE XII--RELATIONSHIP WITH NATIONAL PTA AND STATE PTA Section 1. This Association shall be organized and chartered under the autority of the State PTA in.the area in which this Association functions, in conformity with such rules and regulations, not in conflict with the National PTA bylaws, as the State PTA may in its bylaws prescribe. The State PTA shall issue to this Association an appropriate charter evidencing the due organization and good stand- ing of the Association. A local PTA in good standing is one which: a. Adheres to the Objects and basic policies of the PTA; b. Remits the national portion of the dues through the State PTA to reach the National office by dates designated by the National PTA; c. Has bylaws approved according to the procedures of each state; d. Meets other criteria as may be prescribed by the State PTA. Section 2 The bylaws of this Association are subject to the approval of the State PTA and may not conflict with the bylaws of the National PTA and the bylaws of the State PTA. Any provision of the bylaws of this Association that conflicts with the bylaws of the National PTA or the bylaws of the State PTA shall be null and; void , /'' ~ 6 . section 3. The Association shall keep such permanent books of account and records as shall be sufficient to establish the items of gross income, receipts, and dis- oursements of the Association, including, specificially, the number of its member; and the amount of dues remitted to the State PTA. Such books of account and record; shall at all reasonable times be open to inspection by an authorized representativE of the State PTA or, where directed by the committee on the state and national relationships, by -.a duly authorized representative of the National PTA. Section 4. The status of this Association as a local PTA/PTSA shall be subject to termination and its charter as a local PTA/PTSA shall be subject to withdrawal, in the manner and under the circumstances provided in the bylaws of the State PTA. Section 5. This Association is obligated upon withdrawal of its charter by the State PTA, (a) to yield up and surrender all its books and records and all of its assets and property to the State PTA or to such agency as may be designated by the State PTA or to another PTA/PTSA organized under the authority of the State PTA; (b) to cease and desist from the further use of any name that implies or conotes Association with the National PTA or the State PTA or status as a constituent organization of the National PTA; and (c) to carry out promptly under the super- vision and direction of the State PTA all proceedings necessary or desirable for the purpose of dissolving this Association. • SECTION 6. This Association shall collect dues from its members and shall remit a portion thereof to the State PTA as provided in Article V. *ARTICLE XIII-DISSOLUTION Any dissolution of a local unit and termination of its affairs shall take place in the following manner: Section 1. The executive committee shall adopt a resolution recommending that thi: PTA be dissolved and directing that the question of such dissolution be submitted to a vote at a special meeting of members having voting right. Written or printed notice stating that the purpose of such meeting is to consider the advisability of dissolving this PTA shall be given to each member entitled to vote at such. meeting at least thirty (30) days prior to the date of such meeting. Such meeting shall be held only on calendar school days during the academic year of the school involved. Section 2. Written notice of the adoption of such resolution, accompanied by a coF of the notice of the special meeting of members, shall be given to the President of the Virginia PTA at least twenty (20) days before the date fixed for such specie meeting of the members. The President of the Virginia PTA or his designated representative,-shall be permitted to attend the meeting and shall be accorded the courtesy of being allowed to speak for at least fifteen (15) minutes if he so desires, prior to the vote of dissolution. Section 3. Only those persons who were members in good standing of this PTA on the date of adoption of the resolution and who continue to be members in good stand- ing on t he date of the special meeting shall be entitled to vote on the question of dissolution. Section 4. Approval of dissolution of this PTA shall require the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of themembers present and entitled to vote at the special meeting, a quorum being present. r ~- ~ 7 . Section 5. If dissolution is approved, this PTA shall yield up and surrender all of its books and records and all of its assets and property to the State PTA or to such agency as may be designated by the State PTA or to another local PTA organized under the authority of the State PTA; and shall cease and desist from the further use of any name that implies or connotes association .with the National PTA or the State PTA or status as a constituent organization of the National PTA. **ARTICLE XIV--PARLIAMENTARY AUTHORITY Robert's Rules of Order Newly Revised shall govern the association in all cases in which they are applicable and in which they are not in conflict with these bylaws and those of the State PTa and National PTA or the articles of incorporatio **ARTICLE XV--AMENDMENTS Section 1 Procedure for amendment of bylaws: a. These bylaws may be amended at any regular meeting of the Association provided that notice of the proposed amendment shall have been given at least thirty (30) days prior to the meeting at which the amendment is voted upon; that a quorum has been established; and that the amendment shall be .subject .to approval of the State PTA. Bylaws amendments require a two-thirds vote of the members present and voting. b. A committee may be appointed to submit a revised set of bylaws as a sub- stitute for the existing bylaws only by a majority vote at a meeting of the Association or by a two-thirds vote of the executive committee. The requirements for adoptio of a revised set of bylaws shall be the same as in the case of an amendment. c. Submission of amendments or revised bylaws for approval of the State PTA shall be in accordance with the bylaws or regulations of the State PTA. Section 2. The Association shall include in its bylaws provisions corresponding to the provisions of the bylaws of the National PTA that are identified therein by a double star. The. adoption by the National PTA of an amendment to any of the "double starred" provisions of its bylaws shall serve automatically and without the requirementsof further action by the Association to amend correspond- ingly the bylaws of the Association. Notwithstanding the automatic character of the amending process, the Association shall take action promptly to incorporate such amendments in its bylaws. *ARTICLE XVI--APPROVAL OF BYLAWS The bylaws of this Association shall be submitted to the State Office for approval on behalf of the Board of Managers, by the Virginia PTA committee on Bylaws or its designee every five years. *ARTICLE XVII--FISCAL YEAR The fiscal year of this Association shall begin July 1st and end June 30. *Required by the Virginia PTA **Required by the National PTA ACTION N0. A-21390-8.b ITEM NUMBER~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 13, 1990 AGENDA ITEM: Request for approval of a Raffle Permit from the Loyal Order of Moose Lodge No. 284 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Loyal Order of Moose Lodge No. 284 has requested a Raffle Permit to be held on April 21, 1990. This application has been reviewed by the Commissioner of Revenue and he recommends that it be approved. The application is on file in the Clerk's Office. The organization has paid the $25.00-fee. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the application for a Raffle Permit be approved. SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: Mary H. Allen Elmer C. Hodge Clerk to the Board County Administrator ACTION VOTE Approved (x) Motion by: Bob L. Johnson No Yes Abs Denied ( ) Eddy x Received ( ) Johnson x Referred ( ) McGraw x To ( ) Nickens x Robers x cc: File Bingo/Raffle File COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO CONDUCT RAFFLES OR BINGO Application is hereby made for a bingo game or raffle permit. This ,application is made subject to all County and State laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations now in force, or that may be enacted hereafter and which are hereby agreed to by the under- signed applicant and which shall be deemed a condition under which this permit is issued. All applicants should exercise extreme care to ensure the accura- cy of their responses to the following questions. Bingo games and raffles are strictly regulated by Title 18.2-340.1 et. sec. of the criminal statutes of the Virginia Code, and by Section 4-86 et. sec. of the Roanoke•County Code. These laws authorize the County Board of Supervisors to conduct a reasonable investiga- tion prior to granting a bingo or raffle permit. The Board has sixty days from the filing of an application to grant or deny the permit. The Board may deny, suspend, or revoke the permit of any organization found not to be in strict compliance with county and state law. Any person violating county or state regulations concerning these permits shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. Any person who uses any part of the gross receipts from bingo or raffles for any purpose other than the lawful religious, charitable, community, or educational purposes for which the organization is specifi- cally organized, except for reasonable operating expenses, shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony. THIS APPLICATION IS FOR: (check one) RAFFLE PERMIT ~X: BINGO GAMES Name of Organization Loyal Order of tloose Lodge Pio. 284 Street Address 3233 Catawoa Valley Drive, Salern, Va. 24153 Mailing Address P. C. Box 538 City, State, Zip Code saleri, Va. 24153 Purpose and Type of Organization Fraternal Organization When. was the organization founded? 1915 1 Roanoke County meeting place? Ploose Home - 3233 Catawua Valley Drive Has organization been in existence in Roanoke County for two con- tinuous years? YES :~ NO Is the organization non-profit? YES x NO Indicate Federal Identification Number # Attach copy of IRS Tax Exemption letter. Officers of the Organization: President: Plorman S. Pleasanton 54-0287492 Vice-President Clarence E. Davidson Address : 2407 Laura Road NW Address : 1759 Pomeroy Road Roanoke, Va. 24017 Saleni, Va. 24153 Secretary: Paul J. Whittemore Treasurer: John E. Wade Address: P. 0. Box 538 AddreSS: 7104 Woods Crossin~~ Drive SW Salem, Va. 24153 Roanoke, Va. 24014 Member authorized to be responsible for Raffle or Bingo opera- tions: Name Frank T. Richardson, Jr. Home Address 1515 Gaines St. Salem, Va. 24153 Phone 986-0912 Bus . Phone Pd/A A COMPLETE LIST OF THE NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF CURRENT MEMBER- SHIP MUST BE FURNISHED WITH THIS APPLICATION. Specific location where~Raffle or Bingo Game is to be conducted. RAFFLES: Date of Drawing 4-21-90 Time of Drawing ppq BINGO: Days of Week & Hours of Activity: Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday From To From To From To From To From To From To From To 2 State specifically how the proceeds from the Bingo/Raffle will be used. List in detail the planned or intended use of the proceeds. Use estimates amounts if necessary. The proceeds of our raffle will be used for the purpose of donations to Civic Organizations, local, state & national. 3 BINGO: Complete the following: Legal owner(s) of the building where BINGO is to be conducted: Name: Address: County State Zip Is the building owned by a 501-C non-profit organization? Seating capacity for each location: Parking spaces for each location: ALL RAFFLE AND BINGO APPLICANTS MUST ANSWER QUESTIONS 1 - 19 1. Gross receipts from all sources related to the operation of Bingo games or Instant Bingo by calendar quarter for prior calen- dar year period. BINGO INSTANT BINGO 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter Total 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter Total 2. Does your organization understand that it is a violation of law to enter into a contract with any person or firm, associa- tion, organization, partnership, or corporation of any classifica- tion whatsoever, for the purpose of organizing, managing, or con- ducting Bingo Games or Raffles? Yes 3. Does your organization understand that it must maintain and file complete records of receipts and disbursements pertaining to Bingo games and Raffles, and that such records are subject to audit by the Commissioner of the Revenue? Yes 4. Does your organization understand. that the Commissioner of the Revenue or his designee has the right to go upon the premises on which any organization is conducting a Bingo game or raffle, to perform unannounced audits, and to secure for audit all re- cords required to be maintained for Bingo games or raffles? Yes 4 5. Does your organization understand that a Financial Report must be filed with the Commissioner of the Revenue on or before the first day of November of each calendar year for which a per- mit has been issued? Yes 6. Does your organization understand that if gross receipts ex- ceed fifty thousand dollars during any calendar quarter, an addi- tional Financial Report must be filed for such quarter no later than sixty days following the last day of such quarter? Yes 7. Does your organization understand that the failure to file financial reports when due shall cause automatic revocation of the permit, and no such organization shall conduct any Bingo game or raffle thereafter until such report is properly filed and a new permit is obtained? Yes 8. Does your organization understand that each Financial Report must be accompanied by a Certificate, verified under oath by the Board of Directors, that the proceeds of any Bingo game or raffle have been used for these lawful, religious, charitable, commu- nity, or educational purposes for which the organization is spe- cifically chartered or organized, and that the operation of Bingo games or raffles have been in accordance with the provisions of Article 1.1 of Chapter 8, Title 18.2 of the Code of Virginia? Yes 9. Does your organization understand that a one percent audit fee of the gross receipts must be paid to the County of Roanoke upon submission of the annual financial report due on or before the first of November? Yes 10. Does your organization understand that this permit is valid only in the County of Roanoke and only at such locations, and for such dates, as are designated in the permit application? Yes 11. Does your organization understand that no person, except a bona fide member of any such organization who shall have been a member of such organization for at least ninety days prior to such participation, shall participate in the management, opera- tion, or conduct of any bingo game or raffle, and no person shall receive any remuneration for participating in management, operation, or conduct of any such game or raffle? Yes 12. Has your organization attached a check for the annual permit fee in the amount of $25.00 payable to the County of Roanoke, Virginia? Yes 13. Does your organization understand that any organization found in violation of the County Bingo and Raffle Ordinance or X18.2- 340.10 of the Code of Virginia authorizing this permit is subject to having such permit revoked and any person, shareholder, agent, member or employee of such organization who violates the above to having such permit revoked and any person, shareholder, agent, member or employee of such organization who violates the above referenced Codes may be guilty of a felony? Yes 5 14. Has your organization attached a complete list of its member- ship to this application form? on File 15. Has your organization attached a copy of its bylaws to this application form? 16. Has the organization been declared exempt from property taxa- tion under the Virginia Constitution or statutes? Yes If yes, state whether exemption is for real, personal property, or both and identify exempt property. Real Estate 333 Catawba Valley Drive, Salem, Va. 17. State the specific type and purpose of the organization. Fraternal - Non-Profit - Charitable 18. Is this organization incorporated in Virginia? YEs If yes, name and address of Registered Agent: Paul J. Whittemore _ P 0 Box 538 Salem Va 24153 19. Is the organization registered with the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Affairs pursuant to the Charitable Solicitations Act, Section 57-48 of the Virginia Code? No (If so, attach copy of registration.) Has the organization been granted an exemption from registration by the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Affairs? No (If so, attach copy of exemption.) ALL RAFFLE APPLICANTS DESCRIBE THE ARTICLES TO BE RAFFLED, VALUE OF SUCH ARTICLES, AND PROCEED TO NOTARIZATION. Article Description Fair Market Value Choice of 2 free tickets on a fishing trip. $340.00 or $200.00 cash $20.00 6 ALL BINGO APPLICANTS MUST ANSWER QUESTIONS 20 - 27 BEFORE NOTARIZATION RAFFLE APPLICANTS, GO TO NOTARIZATION. 20. Does your organization understand that the bingo games shall not be conducted more frequently than two calendar days in any calendar week? 21. Does your organization understand that it is required to keep complete records of the bingo game. These records based on X18.2- 340.6 of the Code of Virginia and §4.98 of Roanoke County Code must include the following: a. A record of the date, quantity, and card value of instant bingo supplies purchased, as well as the name and address of the supplier of such instant bingo supplies, and written invoice or receipt is also required for each purchase of in- stant bingo supplies? b. A record in writing of the dates on which Bingo is played, the number of people in attendance on each date, and the amount of receipts and prizes on each day? (These records must be retained for three years.) c. A record of the name and address of each individual to whom a door prize, regular or special Bingo game prize or jackpot from the playing of Bingo is awarded? d. A complete and itemized record of all receipts and disburse- ments which support, and that agree with, the quarterly and annual reports required to be filed, and that these records must be maintained in reasonable order to permit audit? 22. Does your organization be conducted at such time as and only at such locations this application? understand that instant Bingo may only regular Bingo game is in progress, and at such times as are specified in 23. Does your organization understand that the gross receipts in the course of a reporting year from the playing of instant Bingo may not exceed 33 1/3$ of the gross receipts of an organization's Bingo operation? 24. Does your organization understand it may not sell an instant Bingo card to an individual below sixteen years of age? 25. Does your organization understand that an organization whose gross receipts from all bingo operations that exceed or are ex- pected to exceed $75,000 in any calendar year shall have been granted tax-exempt status pursuant to Section 501 C of the United States Internal Revenue Service? (Certificate must be attached.) 7 26. Does your organization understand that a Certificate of Occu- pancy must be obtained or be on file which authorizes this use at the proposed location? 27. Does your organization understand that awards or prize money or merchandise valued in excess of the following amounts are illegal? a. No door prize shall exceed twenty-five dollars. b. No regular Bingo or special Bingo game shall exceed One Hund- red dollars. c. No jackpot of any nature whatsoever shall exceed One Thousand Dollars, nor shall the total amount of jackpot prizes awarded in any one calendar day exceed One Thousand Dollars. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * NOTARIZATION: THE FOLLOWING OATH MUST BE TAKEN BY ALL APPLICANTS I hereby swear or affirm under the penalties of perjury as set forth in X18.2 of the Code of Virginia, that all of the above statements are true to the best of my knowledge, information, and beliefs. All questions have been answered. Signed by: y,-- ame ministrator 1741 Elbert Title Home Subscribed and sworn before me, My commission expires: ress ke, Va. 2401 this ~~day ofr 19 '~ / `--%'T~iotary Public RETURN THIS COMPLETED APPLICATION T0: COMMISSIONER OF THE REVENUE P.0. Box 20409 Roanoke, VA 24018-0513 8 NOT VALID UNLESS COUNTERSIGNED The above application, having been found in due form, is approved and issued to the applicant to have effect until December 31st of this calendar year. Date Commissioner of he Revenue The above application is not approved. Date Commissioner of the Revenue 9 ,. 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: February 13, 1990 SUBJECT: Resolution to Raise Legislative Awareness of Impact of Recycle Mandates COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS : ~~.tiL,.,,ti.,,,.4j,~,z~ ~./-~,/~~~~~~ BACKGROUND: In the past year the General Assembly has passed several pieces of legislation pertaining to solid waste issues. Each locality must now prepare a five-year solid waste plan that deals specifically with the requirements set forth by the legislature. The state has called for mandatory recycling with the goals of 100 diversion by 1991, 15°s by 1993, and 25o by 1993. In addition, a new double liner standard for landfills goes into effect 7/1/92. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Staff received a request for support from Alleghany County. The resolution deals with the issues that will also affect Roanoke County. Every locality must meet the recycling mandates as set forth in the legislation. Those goals may be unattainable without solid support from the state. The new double liner standard can cause an excessive burden being placed on a locality opening a new landfill. Other localities are reporting costs between 575,000 and 5400,000 per acre due to the new liner standard. In most cases, except where drinking water supplies and ground water conditions warrant special protection, the double liner is deemed an unnecessary burden on the local government. This proposed resolution of support will make the legislature directly aware of the impact of the recycling mandates. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve resolution of support and forward on to representatives of General Assembly. f f=5 SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED: ~~ Gardner W. Smith, Director Elmer C. Hodge` Department of General Services County Administrator ----------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved ( ) Motion by: Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred To Eddy Johnson McGraw Nickens Robers k-5 RESOLUTION WHEREAS, solid waste management issues are becoming environ- mental, political, and financial crises in many of Virginia localities; and WHEREAS, State and local governments cooperation is essential in addressing these issues and solving solid waste problems; and WHEREAS, the County of Roanoke Board of Supervisors feel members of the General Assembly need to take certain actions in support of this cooperative effort; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the County of Roanoke Board of Supervisors does hereby request the General Assembly to take the following actions in the interest of cost effective and environmentally effective solid waste programs: (1} To establish standards that prevent or strongly discourage any existing privately-owned landfills from importing large quantities of waste; (2) To adopt more reasonable single liner design standards for landfills after 1992, as endorsed by both VACO and VML, unless local drinking water supplies and ground water conditions require double liners; (3} To establish a program to promote recycling firms and markets within reach of Virginia localities to accept goods such as paper, glass, and plastic for which recycling outlets are often unavailable BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the County of Roanoke Board of Supervisors hereby instructs its Clerk to send a copy of this resolution to its representatives in the General Assembly seeking their support for the adoption of these measures. ACTION NO. A-21390-8.c ITEM NO. ~ `~`'` AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 13, 1990 AGENDA ITEM: Donation of a sanitary sewer easement from Richard L. Popp and Marilyn M. Popp to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: ' ~ .cc~'"^''" °~"~~`~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This consent agenda item involves the donation of a sanitary sewer easement containing 1286 square feet from Richard L. Popp and Marilyn M. Popp to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, across the northeastern portion of Lot 23, Block 2, Section 20, Hunting Hills Subdivision as shown on a plat dated 20 July 1988 prepared by Buford T. Lumsden & Associates, P.C. The location and dimensions of this donated easement have been reviewed and approved by the County's engineering staff. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends acceptance of this drainage easement. Respectfully submitted, ~~~ Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney Approved (x) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Motion by cc: File Phillip Henry, Director, Engineering Cliff Craig, Director, Utilities Paul Mahoney, County Attorney Action Vote No Yes Abs Bob L. Johnson Garrett x Johnson McGraw Nickens Robers x x x x John Willey, Director, Real Estate Assessment s cF 9~ogN EYJ ~SAIJ I AR. St=ME ~~• 9u~GN~ y~3 O ~ 128 Sg.Fj. f 42y~<<s~ O~ } Q` It QD~ O Q„ ' Q~ ~.~" ~ti Q e~~y~ o'' 1 ~~ ~ ~ ~°X ~~ ~ G \ ~ ~ 'P 0,9 ~S o. ~ ~% / B. LEE ~ FIENDE N. J~~ 14~ ~ ti. PLAT SHOWING NEW SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT BEING GRANTED TO THE ROANOKE COUNTY. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS BY RICHARD L. POPP & MARILYN M. POPP SITUATED ON LOT 23, BLOCK 2, SECTION U20, HUNTING HILLS (P.B. 9, PG. 317) ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA SCALE: 1" = 50 ~ DATE: 20 JULY 1988 BUFORD T. LUMSDEN Et ASSOCIATES, P. C. ENGINEERS-SURVEYORS ROANOKE, VIf1flIN1A C.oT 22 cvti+ne. ~F 8 i -1 raT M. 'r~'`: ~~G~~- ~ - _ ~` I-'_ ~~~~~7 i ~ ~~ ~~~' K-li ~ ~~ ':~, / i ~';:~: ~ , Ex~sT~aG t2.~Ae1. T ~'cr;\'V~ SE.MIEQ EA•SEMIiNT 1 ~• ~N ~.q'~ (~ ~i" ;~ -'~~ L ;' oT 23 ~~,~1 `yo . _o~n PARAGRAPH 5 CORRECTED 5/3/91 AND PARAGRAPHS 3, 4, AND 6 CORRECTED 6/13/91 AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SIIPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1990 RESOLUTION 21390-8.d REQUESTING CHANGES IN SECONDARY SYSTEM DIIE TO RELOCATION AND CONSTRUCTION OF WEST RIVER ROAD (ROUTE 638) 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 a portion of West River Road (Route 639) which was relocated and reconstructed under VDOT Project 0639-080-143,C-503; 2. That it appears to the Board or Supervisors that Secondary Route 639, from 0.88 Mi. E. of Route 649 to 0.4 Mi. W. of Route 734, a distance of 0.84 Mi., has been altered; a new road has been constructed and approved by the State Transportation Commissioner, which new road serves the same citizens as the road so altered; and these changes are shown on the attached sketch titled "CHANGES IN SECONDARY SYSTEM DUE TO RELOCATION AND CONSTRUCTION ON ROUTE 639, PROJECT 0639-080-143,C-503,B-628, dated at Richmond, Virginia, October 11, 1989." 3. That the portions of Secondary Route 639, i.e., Sections No.1 and No.2, shown in red and connections thereto, i.e., Sections No. 4 and No. S, shown in brown on the referenced sketch, for a total distance of -~~0.42 miles be, and hereby is, added to the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to Section 33.1-229 of the Code of Virginia, as amended. 4. That the section of the old location, i.e., Section No. 3, and Section 3A, shown in orange on the referenced sketch for a total distance of 0.78 miles., be and hereby is, to be renumbered and remain as a part of the Secondary System of State Highways. 5. That the section of old location, i.e, Section No. 8, shown in blue on the referenced sketch for a total distance of ~-:-6- 0.06 miles, be, and hereby is, abandoned as a public road, pursuant to Section 33.1-155 of the Code of Virginia, as amended. 6. That the State Transportation Commission be requested to take the necessary actions to discontinue the section of old location, i.e., Sections No. 6 and No. 7 shown in yellow on the referenced sketch for a total distance of 0.05 miles, as a part of the Secondary System of State Highways as provided in Section ~- ~'~33-1-150 of the Code of Virginia, as amended. On motion of Supervisor Johnson, and carried. by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: ~1 Brenda J. lton Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File George Simpson, Assistant Director, Engineering Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Fred C. Altizer, Jr., Resident Engineer, Virginia Department of Transportation ~`".c~_. ~_.._ , ~ sta. ~0+2 G, ' Q ~ ~onn. i.Lc. ..=~ r''' f I ~ ~ (O1G ion. j ~, i Sta. 89+77 G `~ ~~. 5 Main Line Sta. 109+85.87 .. .• .• ,~ .~ , ,~, ~,. ,, .~ •. ~:~~ Q,55N1:. ,,,. ' `~. Sect. 3 .%' ;~ ~, ~ ,~ . '~ • ~~. '~~ ~~ . -. '- i ~,,~~~' LEGEND ROANOKE COUNTY /~ j~ C `T r; h ' CHANGES IN THE SECONDARY SYSTEM DUE TO RELOCATION AND CONSTRUCTION ON ROUTE 639, PROJECT: 0639-080-143,C-503 Section of old location to be abondoned Va. Dept. of Transp. Section of old location to be discontinued Traffic Engineering ~s~Section of new location to be added to the October 11, 1989 Secondary System ~~Connection to be added to the Secondary System Section of old location to be renumbered ~ecTin~l 3~ 0.2.3 Mi• 0639-080-143, C-503 0639-080-f43,rS-717 DISTANCE IN PARAGRAPH 5 CORRECTED IN RESOLUTION ON 5/3/91 AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1990 RESOLUTION 21390-8.d REQUESTING CHANGES IN SECONDARY SYSTEM DUE TO RELOCATION AND CONSTRUCTION OF WEST RIVER ROAD (ROUTE 638) 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 a portion of West River Road (Route 639) which was relocated and reconstructed under VDOT Project 0639-080-143,C-503; 2. That it appears to the Board or Supervisors that Secondary Route 639, from 0.88 Mi. E. of Route 649 to 0.4 Mi. W. of Route 734, a distance of 0.84 Mi., has been altered; a new road has been constructed and approved by the State Transportation Commissioner, which new road serves the same citizens as the road so altered; and these changes are shown on the attached sketch titled "CHANGES IN SECONDARY SYSTEM DUE TO RELOCATION AND CONSTRUCTION ON ROUTE 639, PROJECT 0639-080-143,C-503,B-628, dated at Richmond, Virginia, October 11, 1989." 3. That the portions of Secondary Route 639, i.e., Sections No.1 and No.2, shown in red and connections thereto, i.e., Sections No.4 and No.5, shown in brown on the referenced sketch, for a total distance of 0.37 miles be, and hereby is, added to the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to r J 1 Section 33.1-229 of the Code of Virginia, as amended. 4. That the section of the old location, i.e., Section No. 3, shown in orange on the referenced sketch for a total distance of 0.78 miles., be and hereby is, to be renumbered and remain as a part of the Secondary System of State Highways. 5. That the section of old location, i.e, Section No. 8, shown in blue on the referenced sketch for a total distance of 0.06 miles, be, and hereby is, abandoned as a public road, pursuant to Section 33.1-155 of the Code of Virginia, as amended. 6. That the State Transportation Commission be requested to take the necessary actions to discontinue the section of old location, i. e. , Sections No. 6 and No. 7 shown in yellow on the referenced sketch for a total distance of 0.05 miles, as a part of the Secondary System of State Highways as provided in Section 33- 76.7 of the Code of Virginia, as amended. On motion of Supervisor Johnson, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. Hol on Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File George Simpson, Assistant Director, Engineering Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Fred C. Altizer, Jr., Resident Engineer, Virginia Department of Transportation 8 `:aim :.: .. .. =ta. gp+~ '~~y h (Old Loc. j ~q,~ Sta. A9+77 •s9 s 8-628 Sect. 4 ' ~ \ ~ ,~ , se ~ r ~ ~ 6 ~~ O w~ ~, ~ '~ 4~ • do 1X ~ ° 'ya ~ " c ~ D o , O L a ~ ~ ~,~ o ~ ~ ~ : ~ : ~< ~ ~ ~~ a i/ Sect. 8 OE39-08J-143, C-SC3 ~ 0639.080- X43, FS- 717 COL'~1TY =r Main Line Sta. 109+85.87 s Main Line ~~ ~~~9 Sta. 109+02 ~p Q Sect. 1 Conn. Rte. 639 ~' (Old Loc.) Sta. 13+44 ;_ _ ~ ~~'• 639 5~ ~ `. o Sect. S ~ " ~ Se•1c~ O ~ • f • M Conn. Rte. 639 ,? ~, ~ (Old Loc. ) ++~~' N Sta. 12+37 J 0 c w ~ i r~ ~ 1 r R- / Norfolk ~ SOUthetn ~ ~: i ~. ~• ~ Sect. 3 LEGEND ROANORE COUNTY Va. Dept. of Transp. Traffic Engineering October 11, 1989 f CHANGES IN THE SECONDARY SYSTEM DUE TO RELOCATIOr AND CONSTRUCTION ON ROUTE 639, PROJECT: 0639-080-143,C-503 ' Section of old•location to be abondoned Section of old location to be discontinued Section of new location to be added to the Secondary System ~f Connection to be added to the Secondary System _ Section of old location to be renumbered AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1990 RESOLUTION 21390-8.d REQUESTING CHANGES IN SECONDARY SYSTEM DUE TO RELOCATION AND CONSTRUCTION OF WEST RIVER ROAD (ROUTE 638) 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 a portion of West River Road (Route 639) which was relocated and reconstructed under VDOT Project 0639-080-143,C-503; 2. That it appears to the Board or Supervisors that Secondary Route 639, from 0.88 Mi. E. of Route 649 to 0.4 Mi. W. of Route 734, a distance of 0.84 Mi., has been altered; a new road has been constructed and approved by the State Transportation Commissioner, which new road serves the same citizens as the road so altered; and these changes are shown on the attached sketch titled "CHANGES IN SECONDARY SYSTEM DUE TO RELOCATION AND CONSTRUCTION ON ROUTE 639, PROJECT 0639-080-143,C-503,B-628, dated at Richmond, Virginia, October 11, 1989." 3. That the portions of Secondary Route 639, i.e., Sections No.1 and No.2, shown in red and connections thereto, i.e., Sections No.4 and No.5, shown in brown on the referenced sketch, for a total distance of 0.37 miles be, and hereby is, added to the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to Section 33.1-229 of the Code of Virginia, as amended. 4. That the section of the old location, i.e., Section No. 3, shown in orange on the referenced sketch for a total distance of 0.78 miles., be and hereby is, to be renumbered and remain as a part of the Secondary System of State Highways. 5. That the section of old location, i.e, Section No. 8, shown in blue on the referenced sketch for a total distance of 0.6 miles, be, and hereby is, abandoned as a public road, pursuant to Section 33.1-155 of the Code of Virginia, as amended. 6. That the State Transportation Commission be requested to take the necessary actions to discontinue the section of old location, i. e. , Sections No. 6 and No. 7 shown in yellow on the referenced sketch for a total distance of 0.05 miles, as a part of the Secondary System of State Highways as provided in Section 33- 76.7 of the Code of Virginia, as amended. On motion of Supervisor Johnson, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Philip Henry, Director, Engineering Fred C. Altizer, Jr., Resident Engineer, Virginia Department of Transportation Arnold Covey, Director, Development & Inspections 0 0 `Y ~ G . ~ .. `~~~ ,~ ' (OiG Loc. j =~ ~q~p Sta. f39+7~ •sY s ( 8-628 Sect. 4 1 •~ S ~ ' y 6 ': : ~~ ., ~O 1 , ~ o'~oi' 4' ~o o {' ' ° Go ,y b ~ ~ z ~ „ ` ~a. ~ o ~ ~ ~_ ;~• • ~ m ~ ~~ ,, Sect . 8 ` SRi~C~ has ~r ~~ .'~ ~~movEa . r - J539-C~-143, C-5..3 - 6-~~8 - 0639-080-143, =5- 717 :s Main Line ~ Sta. 109+02 Conn. Rte. 6.s9 a (Old Loc.) Sta. 13+44 5,_ ~- C O II'~ TY Main Line Sta. 109+85.87 Sect. 1 0 c A 639 u,~ ~~- Sect. 5 ~ u ' ~~ S e~ t .' M 1/ Conn. Rte. 639 " Sta. 12+37 • j ll ~~ ~/ / /' '~ Sect. 3 Va. Dept. of Transp. Traffic Engineering October 11, 1989 LEGEND ROANOKE COUNTY CHANGES IN THE SECONDARY SYSTEM DUE TO RELOCATION AND CONSTRUCTION ON ROUTE 639, PROJECT: 0639-080-143,C-503 Section of old location to be abondoned Section of old location to be discontinued ~wSection of ne~a location to be added to the Secondary System ~~Connection to be added to the Secondar~• _ System - 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: February 13, 1990 AGENDA ITEM: Request from VDOT to relocate a portion of West River Road (Route 639) MINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS : ~~'~'~~'~'~y~ Q~'~^"`~""`~ COUNTY AD BACKGROUND Project 0639-080-143, C505 was the relocation and reconstruction of portions of West River Road (Route 639). The project involved 0.37 miles of new alignment, including a new bridge over the Roanoke River; connections to the existing road section; and removal of the sub-standard bridge over the river. This project originated from the Secondary System Six Year Construction Plan. SiJNIl~lARY OF INFORMATION In accordance to various sections of the Code of Virginia the Board of Supervisors must concur with route numbering, route renumbering and abandonment of roads in Roanoke County. ALTERNATIVES AND IMPACTS No County funds are involved. K-7 STAFF RECOI~IENDATION Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve the attached resolution to concur with these route changes. SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: ~ %~G F:C ~ Phillip T. Henry, P.E. Elmer C. Hodge Director of Engineering County Administrator ACTION VOTE Approved ( ) Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied ( ) Eddy Received ( ) Johnson Referred ( ) McGraw To Nickens Robers 2 ^, g *:ain a.i: S ta. 90T~G \~ :Q Conn. R:~. ^3~ ~~ v~ (Old Loc. ) •q~. Sta. R9+77 ss s 1 8-628 SECTION 4 BROWN ,~of SECTION 6 ~ YELLOW ~~~1 ~C 4 v' of ' ~ ~o l o°~,a ti~~X~ ~ ~ Z G O L~~$ o ~ ~ ::o ~. o- • ~~ ,7D SECTION 3 ORANGE a _ ~~--- SECTION 8 BLUE •~ •1 - 0639-0810-143, C-SC3 6-GZg f' - 0639-080-143, FS-717 -'~ ICvr,:~O1:E C c; r COUNTY =} SECTION 1 RED •-., 639 N e • 0 P SECTION 3.~ ORANGE i i'~ SECTION 5 M ~ BROWN • . Rte. 639 ~ ~ Loc. ) ++~'' 12+37 1 ~Vtbttn a•R. ~~ ~. ~. i LEGEND ROANORE COUNTY. CHANGES IN THE SECONDARY SYSTEM DUE TO RELOCATION AND CONSTRUCTION ON ROUTE b39, PROJECT: 0639-080-143,C-503 Main Line Sta. 109+85.87 Main Line Sta. 109+02 .SECTION 2 RED ~^- Conn (Old Sta. 0 0 H a w ,>W+ ~---~ AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1990 RESOLUTION REQUESTING CHANGES IN SECONDARY SYSTEM DUE TO RELOCATION AND CONSTRUCTION OF WEST RIVER ROAD (ROUTE 638) HE IT RESOLVED by the Hoard 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 a portion of West River Road (Route 639) which was relocated and reconstructed under VDOT Project 0639-080-143,C-503; 2. That it appears to the Board or Supervisors that Secondary Route 639, from 0.88 Mi. E. of Route 649 to 0.4 Mi. W. of Route 734, a distance of 0.84 Mi., has been altered; anew road has been constructed and approved by the State Transportation Commissioner, which new road serves the same citizens as the road so altered; and these changes are shown on the attached sketch titled "CHANGES IN SECONDARY SYSTEM DUE TO RELOCATION AND CONSTRUCTION ON ROUTE 639, PROJECT 0639-080- 143,C-503,B-628, dated at Richmond, Virginia, October 11, 1989." 3. That the portions of Secondary Route 639, i.e., Sections No.l and No.2, shown in red and connections thereto, i.e., Sections No.4 and No.5, shown in brown on the referenced sketch, for a total distance of 0.37 miles be, and hereby is, added to the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to 3 K-'1 Section 33.1-229 of the Code of Virginia, as amended. 4. That the section of the old location, i.e., Section No. 3, shown in orange on the referenced sketch for a total distance of 0.78 miles., be and hereby is, to be renumbered and remain as a part of the Secondary System of State Highways. 5. That the section of old location, i.e, Section No. $, shown in blue on the referenced sketch for a total distance of 0.6 miles, be, and hereby is, abandoned as a public road, pursuant to Section 33.1-155 of the Code of Virginia, as amended. 6. That the State Transportation Commission be requested to take the necessary actions to discontinue the section of old location, i.e., Sections No. 6 and No. 7 shown in yellow on the referenced sketch for a total distance of 0.05 miles, as a part of the Secondary System of State Highways as provided in Section 33-76.7 of the Code of Virginia, as amended. 4 ~~ o _ - _ _ _ - _ _ - _ - APPEARANCE RE VEST _ Q _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ - _ - - AGENDA ITEM NO. _ - _ - _ - _ - -_ SUBJECT /~-ss~ssnl~~v ~~ - 1 like the Chairman of the Board of Su ervisors to _ I wou d p recognize me during the public hearing on the above matter so that I may comment.WHEN CALLED TO THE PODIUM, I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. I AGREE TO ABIDE BY THE GUIDELINES LISTED BELOW. • Each speaker will be given between three to five minutes to comment whether speaking as an individual or representative. The chairman will decide the time limit based on the number of citizens speaking on an issue, and will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to __ do otherwise. -_ • Speakers will be limited to a presentation of their point of view only. Ques- __ tions of clarification may be entertained by the Chau~man. • All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between a recognized speaker and audience members is not allowed. c __ • Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at all times. c • Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments __ with the clerk. • INDIVIDUALS PURPORTING TO SPEAK FOR AN ORGANIZED GROUP SHALL FILE WITH THE CLERK WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM THE GROUP ALLOWING THE INDIVIDUAL TO REPRESENT c THEM. _ i PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO DEPUTY CLERK __ - - NAME ~-~L~=~~O ~a w ~~~- ... L Si ADDRESS `~ `~ b ~ 2 A- ~ 1 L ~ n1 _ PHONE c c I'~iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii~iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiill _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ APPEARANCE RE UEST _ Q _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ AGENDA ITEM NO. _ - -_ SUBJECT ~~Y 4 p ` ~- - ~ ~ ~-~~.~-~`: __ 1 like the Chairman of the Board of Su ervisors to _ I wou d p recognize me during the public hearing on the above matter so that I may comment.WHEN CALLED TO THE PODIUM, I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. I AGREE TO ABIDE BY THE GUIDELINES s LISTED BELOW. __ • Each speaker will be given between three to five minutes to comment whether speaking as an individual or representative. The chairman will decide the time limit based on the number of citizens speaking on an issue, and will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to do otherwise. _ • Speakers will be limited to a presentation of their point of view only. Ques- tions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. s_ __ • All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between a recognized speaker and audience members is not allowed. • Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at all times. 'Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments =_ with the clerk. -_ • INDIVIDUALS PURPORTING TO SPEAK FOR AN ORGANIZED GROUP SHALL FILE WITH THE CLERK WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION FROM THE GROUP ALLOWING THE INDIVIDUAL TO REPRESENT THEM. °c _ ~_ PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO DEPUTY CLERK - - - - - - - ~. _ _ fiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii~iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiill ~ -/ September 12, 1989 COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA CAPITAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE Beginning Balance at July 1, 1989 Contribution towards Hollins Fire Truck Balance as of February 13, 1990 Submitted by ~ . ~~~ Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance $ 89,608 25 000 64 608 /"!.. November 15, 1989 November 28, 1989 December 19, 1989 December 19, 1989 December 19, 1989 January 9, 1990 January 23, 1990 COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA GENERAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE Balance at July 1, 1989 Dental Insurance Drainage Projects Library Automation Drainage Engineer Bushdale Road Right of Way Hurrican Hugo Expenses Implementation of New Police Department Balance as of February 13, 1990 Submitted by ~ ~,Q.~ ~ ~ ~~`~"`.' Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance $4,483,543 (106,980) (180,000) (300,000) (35,000) (15,000) (109,000) 157 700 3 579 863 On December 19, 1989, the Board of Supervisors adopted a goal statement to maintain the General Fund Unappropriated Balance at a minimum of 6.25% of General Fund expenditures ($63,168,000), which is $3,948,000. '"" COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA RESERVE FOR BOARD CONTINGENCY Beginning Balance at July 1, 1989 Additional Amount from 1989-90 Budget June 14, 1989 Contribution to Va. Amateur Sports July 11, 1989 Purchase of drainage easement July 11, 1989 Option on 200 acres real estate July 25, 1989 Donation to Julian Wise Foundation August 8, 1989 County supplement for new position in Sheriffs Department August 22, 1989 Part time volunteer coordinator August 22, 1989 Public Information for Police Department referendum November 28, 1989 Stormwater Feasibility Study December 22, 1989 Copy machine rental for Treasurer's Office (Administratively approved) December 29, 1989 Car phones for Rescue personnel (Administratively approved) Balance as of February 13, 1990 Submitted by Cam ~ . Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance $11,395 50,000 (25,000) (5,000) (3,750) (5,000) (869) (5,800) (9,000) (3,382) (2,415) 1045 134 ACTION NO. /~~ ITEM NUMBER / ~ / "' ? AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM• February 13, 1990 Report from Treasurer on Delinquent Tax Collections COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION As part of the Financial Plan adopted in 1989, the Board authorized an additional employee in the County Treasurer's office who would be responsible for the collection of delinquent taxes. At the Board of Supervisors retreat, it was requested that the County Treasurer report on the results of hiring this additional employee. Attached is a report from Alfred Anderson concerning the results realized from the new employee. / ~~ ~'~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ---------------------------------------------------------------- - ACTION VOTE Approved ( ) Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied ( ) Eddy Received ( ) Johnson Referred ( ) McGraw To ( ) Nickens Robers O~ ~tOANp,~.~ ti 'A 9 Z Z v'.. 'a 18 E50 8$ SFSQUI CENTENN~P~ A Beautiful Beginning T0: FROM: DATE: (tCaixnlg of ~tiattnake Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator Alfred C. Anderson, Roanoke County Treasurer February 5, 1990 ... ALLALL-AM 1~II~~ 1979 1989 ALFRED C. ANDERSON. CFO 'TREASURER ~;~' An additional employee was hired by the Treasurer's Office to help with the collection of delinquent taxes in August, 1988. In 1988 from August 15 through December 31 $69,012.21 was collected in delinquent taxes. In 1989, covering the same period, $75,716.21 was collected. This amounts to an increase of $6,704.00 in delinquent tax collection for that period. Her salary during this time was $5,331.00. When our new employee, Ms. Janosky, began work, she had to be trained not only in using the NCR registers and processing mail but in balancing bank statements which involved a great deal of her time. She is now doing bank reconciliations full time as well as delinquent taxes. One of the reasons also for the new position was a formal suggestion by the auditors that the person making the deposits should not be the one doing the bank reconciliation. Ms.Janosky's work has increased revenue for the county which exceeds her salary for this period. P.O. BOX 21009 ROANOKE. VIRGINIA 24018-0533 (703) 772-2056 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: Februarv 13. 1990 AGENDA ITEM: Work Session Construction Plan (19'90-961 COUNT~Y/'ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: for Secondary System. Six Year .~ SUbIIKARY OF INFORMATION The proposed Six Year Plan has gene through several steps of review and consideration of projects, which are as follows: 1. During November and December, 1989, VDOT Staff with Engineering Department Staff reviewed the current Six Year Plan, reviewed the needs of current funding, and tabulated the most recent cost estimates for projects on the 1988-94 Six Year Plan. 2. During December, 1989, both staffs completed the proposed Six Year Plan for 1990-96. 3. The Board of Supervisors scheduled a Public Hearing for the plan at their January 9, 1990 meeting. 4. During the period from January 9, to January 23, the proposed Six Year Construction Plan was available for public review at the Roanoke County Administration Center, Salem VDOT Residency Office, and the County Libraries. In addition, staff made a presentation of the proposed plan to the Roanoke County Planning Commission . N ~ / 5. The Public Hearing was held on January 23, 1990. Shelly Rosenbloom spoke on needed widening and repaving of Timberview Road (Route 1404), and Mark Siler spoke on needed improvements to Colonial Avenue (Route 720). In addition, a letter was received from Rockey Fisher on paving and straightening a curve on Hooves Chapel Road (Route 614). 6. A staff meeting was held on January 26, 1990, to consider further input from VDOT Staff, Department of Economic Development and the Planning and Zoning Department. 7. Based on the public input and interest expressed at the various meetings the plan has been revised. The revised Secondary System Six Year Construction for 1990- 96 is enclosed for your review and discussion at the work session. The following changes were made from the proposed plan, which was available for public comment on January 23, 1990. 1. Incidental Construction - The proposed plant mix schedule for the coming year is revised. a. Based on an additional review of the roads it was felt by VDpT Staff that spot improvements on Timberview Road (Route 1404) and Newport Road (Route 624) were a higher priority than portions of Embassy Drive (Route 1536), Warwood Drive (Route 1336), and Bear Ridge Circle (Route 1337). 2. The Incidental Construction Priorities have been revised as follows: a. Embassy Drive (Route 1536) priority 2C, paving to extend from the North Corporate Limits of Roanoke to Embassy Circle at a revised cost of $26,000, which is the area of major concern. b. Warwood Drive (Route 1336) and Bear Ridge Circle (Route 1337), were priority 2F and 2G~ have been deleted. The road conditions were felt satisfactory for at least another year. c. Toddsbury Drive (Route become priority 2F. 1082), priority 2Hl has 2 ~/- ~ d. Timberview Road (Route 1404) has been added to the plan as priority 2G, to provide for plant mix at spot locations along the total length of the road at an estimated cost of $48,600. e. Newport Road (Route 624) has been added to the list as priority 2H, for plant mix at spat locations along the road at an estimated cost of $17,308. 2. The Numbered Project list has been revised as follows: a. Cox-Hopkins Road {Route 915) has been added to the list as priority 13. Cox-Hopkins Road is an existing gravel secondary road, and based on the latest traffic counts has in excess of 50 vpd. By placing Route 915 as priority 13, this establishes the relative priority of this road for use of unpaved road funds. b. With the addition of Cox-Hopkins Road (Route 915) to the priority list the priority numbers for the remaining projects have been shifted by one number. c. Timberview Road (Route 1404) has been added as priority 37. The proposed project would reconstruct the first mile of the roadway starting from Dutch Oven Road (Route 1863). 3. The tabulation of ADDITIONAL PROJECTS TO BE CONSIDERED FOR SECONDARY ROADS SIX YEAR CONSTRUCTIQN PLAN (1990-96) has been revised to incorporate comments and concerns during the various meetings. The changes are as follows: a. Cox-Hopkins Road (915) is removed since this road has been added to the plan under the unpaved road category. b. Sterling Road (Route 663) has been deleted from the list since these improvements were made this past year with maintenance funds. c. Item #10 Timberview Road (Route 1404) is left on the list but with a notation that a portion of the road now is included in the plan. 3 ~~ 4. Additional roads discussed by staff during the review have been added to list the as follows: a. New Item #16 Carson Road (Route 758) - reconstruction of the road from Route 460 was requested by the Economic Development Department. The road was withheld from the Six Year Plan due to current planning which does not reflect access to Carson Road, but only to Route 460. b. New Item #17 Daugherty Road (Route 643) - requested by the ECOnom1C Development Department. VDOT believes that Industrial Access Funds would be a more appropriate method for these improvements. c. New Item #18 Carvins Road (Route 815) - Improvements to this road, located north of Interstate 81 and opposite Route 115, were requested by the Economic Development Department. Due to projected expense and construction difficulties due to the location of the Roanoke City Water Purification Plant, it was decided that this road needed further study before being considered for the plan. d. New Item #19 Lock Haven Road (Route 1894) - InterseCtion improvements at the entrance to the APCO Service Center were requested by Economic Development Department. It was agreed that these improvements should be considered with future expansion of APCO Facilities. ALTERNATIVES AND IMPACTS No financial impact to County Funds is involved. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff request that the Hoard of Supervisors conduct a work session on the Secondary System Six Year Construction Plan (1990- 96). 4 ~"-/ SUBMITTED BY: Phillip T. Henr P.E. Director of Engineering APPROVED BY: ~~~~ ~~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator /Y - / ADDITIONAL PROJECT TO HE CONSIDERED FOR SECONDARY ROAD SIX YEAR CONSTRUCTION PLAN - (1990-1996) 1. Taney Drive (Route 1507) - previous flooding of lower level of one house due to inadequate channel and double line of 42" culvert. Drainage crew has excavated upstream and downstream channel this past summer. VDOT proposes additional 42" culvert - estimated cost - $50,000 2. Kelley Street (Route 920) and Meacham Road (Route 910) - maintenance repairs have been made by VDOT. Property owners have requested road be resurfaced. Could be funded as Incidental Construction item. 3. Poor Mountain Road (Route 612) - road is narrow, narrow shoulders, poor alignment both vertical and horizontal for a length of approximately 1 l/2 miles. Estimated cost in range of $ 2-3 million. 4. Knowles Drive (1667) - previous flooding of one basement due to backup at entrance of 48" culvert. VDOT proposed replacement with double 6'x 4' box culvert. Estimated cost -$125,000. 5. Newport Road (Route 624) - rutting and rough condition of roadway. Could be funded as Incidental Construction item for pavement overlay. Same maintenance was completed by VDOT this past year. 6. Plain View Avenue (Route 1476) - There is no cul-de-sac or "T" turnaround at end of street, therefore public vehicles and other traffic must either turnaround in private driveways or back the length of the street. Estimate cost - $25,000. 7. Keefer Road (Route 917) - road was in poor condition and there is no turnaround at end of road. VDOT has made significant maintenance improvements during the past year. Estimated cost - $40,000. 6 -` 8. Hardy Road (Route 634) - The Town of Vinton by Resolution has requested an Urban and Secondary Road Project for Hardy Road. Urban Road Funds for the project within the Town may be available in 1992-93. Estimated cost - several million dollars. 9. Morgan Conner Lane (Route 852) - road improvements requested by Roanoke County Economic Development Department. 10. Timberview Road (Route 1404) - the road is narrow, lacks adequate shoulder and drainage with poor alignment both vertically and horizontally. Property owners spoke at 1988 public hearing. Estimated cost - several million dallars. The first mile of the road from Route 863 has been added to the 1990-96 Plan. 11. Colonial Avenue (Route 720) - Intersection improvements at Georgetown Road {Route 1626) to address poor sight distance and inadequate road widths. Turning traffic at this intersection can bottleneck Colonial Avenue. Several other roads were discussed by staff in 1988. 12. Ridge Drive (Route 883) - realignment of a curve at a projected cost of $20,000. 13. Riverside Drive (Route 639) - reconstruction of Riverside Drive to provide a better access to the proposed Green Hill Park Equestrian Center. Park Access funds may also be available. 14. Dry Hollow Road (Route 649) - proposed reconstruction from Route 639 to the proposed Spring Hollow Reservoir at an estimated cost of $300,000. It may be possible to provide partial Park Access Funding for Dry Hollow Road. 15. Olsen Road (Route 768) - Reconstruction of road from Peters Creek Road to North Barrens Road was considered desirable for the proposed second phase of Valley Pointe Development. The estimated cost of this project is $500,000. Other Road discussed by staff in 1990. 16. Carson Road (Route 758) - reconstruction of the road from 460 was requested by the Economic Development Department. The road was withheld from the Six Year Plan due to current planning which does not reflect access to Carson Road, but only to Route 460. 17. Daugherty Road (Route 643) - requested by the Economic Development Department. VDOT believes that Industrial Access Funds would be a more appropriate method for these 7 ~v - ~ improvements. 18. Carvins Road (Route 815) - improvements to this road, located north of Interstate $1 and opposite Route 115, were requested by the Economic Development Department. Due to projected expense and construction difficulties due to the location of the Roanoke City Water Purification Plant, it was decided that this road needed further study before being considered for the plan. 19. Lock Haven Road (Route 1894) - Intersection improvements at the entrance to the APCO Service Center were requested by Economic Development Department. It was agreed that these improvements should be considered with future expansion of APCO Facilities. i Y '°" PROPOSED SECONDARY SYSTEM SIR YEAR CONSTRUCTION PLAN 1990-1996 (1990-91 FUNDING) CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM DISTR ICT: SALEM (IN DOLLARS) COUNTY: ROANOKE ----- ----- ------------------------------------ -------------- 1990-91 THRU 1995-96 --------------------------- ----- ROUTE DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED PREVIOUS ADD ------ ITIONAL ------------------------------------------- PROJECTED COMMENTS LENGTH COST FUNDING FUN DING ALLOCATIONS - - ----- ----------------------------------- -------------- ---------------------------- ---------- 1990-91 ---------------------------------------- 1 COUNTYWIDE 989,910 0 989,910 --- 191,887 PLANT MIR ROUTE 1433 FR: RT 1434 10,265 0 10,265 10,265 (2A) T0: RT 1438 LENGTH: 0.12 MI (CEDAR CREST RD) ROUTE 1438 FR: RT 628 37,330 0 31,330 31,330 (28) T0: RT 1436 LENGTH: 0.39 MI (CROSSTIMBERS) ROUTE 1536 FR: NCL ROANOKE (RT 629) 26,000 0 26,000 26.000 (2C) T0: RT 1122 LENGTH: 0.26 MI (EMBASSY DR) ROUTE 832 FR: RT 833 18,345 O 18,345 18,345 (2D) T0: 0.10 MI W. RT 831 LENGTH: 0.35 MI (OVERBROOK DR) ROUTE 833 FR: SCL ROANOKE (RT 686) 2,444 0 2,444 2,444 (2E) T0: RT 832 LENGTH: 0.10 MI (CHELSEA ST) ROUTE 1082 FR: RT 1019 19,699 0 19,699 19,699 (2F- T0: 0.14 MI N RT 1093 LENGTH: 0.49 MI (TODDSBURY DR) 9 ~ ~e DISTRICT: SALEM ROUTE DESCRIPTION LENGTH - - -------- ROUTE 1404 ------------------------ FR: RT 863 (2G) T0: END 1404 SPOT IMPROVEMENT (TIMBERVIEW RD) ROUTE 624 FR: RT 311 (2H) T0: RT 697 SPOT IMPROVEMENT ---------- (NEWPORT RD) ------------------------ TOTAL PLANT MIX INCIDENTAL(TOTAL) ROUTE 1083 1083-5001 FR: N RT 1082 NON FAS T0:0.2O MI S RT 1082 TC: 120 LENGTH: 0.20 MI CONTRACT DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT (3) (BURNT QUARTER DR.) ROUTE 0840 0840-5607 FR: RT 838 TC: 380 TO: RT 839 CONTRACT STORM SEWER DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT (4) (NEIMS LANE- ESTIMATED COST 48,609 11,308 180,000 1,080,000 it0,i34 16,454 PROPOSED SECONDARY SYSTEM SIX YEAR CONSTRUCTION PLAN 1990-1996 (1990-91 FUNDING) CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM (IN DOLLARS) COUNTY: ROANOKE 1990-91 THRU 1995-96 PREVIOUS ADDITIONAL PROJECTED COMMENTS FUNDING FUNDING ALLOCATIONS 1990-91 ---------------------------------------------------------------- 0 48,609 48,609 0 11,308 0 180,000 0 1,080,000 65,734 45,000 46,454 30,000 11,308 180,000 180,000 45,000 PROJECT COMPLETE FINANCE DEFICIT 30,000 ADDITIONAL FINANCING REQUIRED, PROJECT BV ROANOKE 10 ,~ ~' / DISTRICT: SALEM ROUTE DESCRIPTION LENGTH ROUTE 0651 0651-080-228,M501 NON FAS FR: 0.20 MI W RT 220 TC: 61 LENGTH: 0.10 MI APPROACHES TO BRIDGE CONTRACT OVER BACK CREEK (5) (WINTER DR) ROUTE 904 0904-080-S40,C501 TC: REALIGN INT, RT 904 LENGTN; 0.20 MILES CONTRACT SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS (6) (STARKEY ROAD) ROUTE 0861 0861-080-202,8663 FAS WIDEN EXISTING TC: 10,508 BRIDGE OVER N&W RR STRUCTURE 1« 6160 CONTRACT (1) (ODGEN RD) ROUTE 0639 0639-080-143,C503 FAS APPROACHES TO BRIDGE TC; 294 OVER ROANOKE RIVER LENGTH: 0.43 MI CONTRACT (8) (WEST RIVER RD) ROUTE 0639 0639-080-143,8628 ~AS BRIDGE OVER ROANOKE fC: 294 RIVER; STRUCT, #6052 CONTRACT l9) (WEST RIVER RDi PROPOSED SECONDARY SYSTEM SIX YEAR CONSTRUCTION PLAN 1990-1996 (1990-91 FUNDING) CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM (IN DOLLARS) COUNTY: ROANOKE 1990-91 THRU 1995-96 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ESTIMATED PREVIOUS ADDITIONAL PROJECTED COMMENTS COST FUNDING FUNDING ALLOCATIONS 1990-91 73,100 63,100 10,000 10,000 PROJECT COMPLETE FINANCE DEFICIT 125,710 1,424 124,346 124,346 PROJECT COMPLETE FINANCE DEFICIT 1989-90 541,543 517,543 30,000 30,000 PROJECT COMPLETE FINANCE DEFICIT 1,113,140 875,931 291,203 291,203 PROJECT COMPLETE FINANCE DEFICIT 1,223,916 839,158 384,218 384,218 FINANCE COMPLETE FINANCE DEFICIT °~ DISTRICT: SALEM ROUTE DESCRIPTION LENGTH NUMBERED PROJECTS ROUTE 0614 0614-080-P24,N501 NON FAS FR: N RT 611 TC: 10 T0: S RT 611 LENGTH: 0.30 MI CONTRACT WID,GR,OR,STAB. & ST (10- (BOONE CHAPEL RD) ROUTE 0611 0611-080-P34,N501 NON FAS FR: S RT 614 TC: 57 TO: 1.30 MI N LENGTH: 1.30 MI CONTRACT WID,GR,DR,STAB. & ST (111 (WILLOW BRANCH RD) ROUTE 0691 0691-080-P41,N501 NON FAS FR: 0.10 MIS RT 132 TC: 56 TO: 1.18 MIS RT 132 LENGTH: 1.23 MI CONTRACT WID,GR,DR,STAB. & ST (12) (DAWNWOOD RD) ROUTE 915 0915-080-P VON FAS FR: RT 668 iC: 16 T0: END LENGTH: 0.25 MI CONTRACT WID,GR,DR,STAB, & ST (13) (COX-HOPKINS RD) ESTIMATED COST 139,000 260,000 665,000 110,000 PROPOSED SECONDARY SYSTEM SIX YEAR CONSTRUCTION PLAN 1990-1996 11990-91 FUNDING) CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM IIN DOLLARS) COUNTY: ROANOKE 1990-91 THRU 1995-96 ------------------------------------------------------------------ PREVIOUS ADDITIONAL PROJECTED COMMENTS FUNDING FUNDING ALLOCATIONS 1990-91 88,135 50,865 38,433 PROJECT ON HOLD UNPAVED ROAD FUND 164,000 96,000 0 PROJECT ON HOLD UNPAVED ROAD FUND 41.584 623,416 0 110,000 0 UNPAVED ROAD FUND 0 UNPAVED ROAD FUND 12 ~-- PROPOSED SECONDARY SYSTEM SIX YEAR CONSTRUCTION PLAN 1990-1996 (1990-91 FUNDING) CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM DISTRICT: SALEM (IN DOLLARS) COUNTY: ROANOKE ----- ---------------- 1990-91 THRU 1995-96 -- ROUTE DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED --------------------- PREVIOUS --------------- ADDITIONAL --------------- PROJECTED ---------------------------- COMMENTS LENGTH COST FUNDING FUNDING ALLOCATIONS ---- ----------------- ---------------------- ---------------- 1990-91 --------------- ---------------------------- ROUTE 1832 1832-080-196,C501 507,000 355,100 151,900 151,900 NON FAS FR: RT 117 TC: 2525 T0: RT 1839 LENGTH: 0.22 MI CONTRACT RECONSTRUCTION 1141 (BARRENS RD) ROUTE 0639 0639-080-201,C501 350,901 44,901 306,000 216,000 FAS FR: .30 MIS RT 11 TC: 511 T0: RT 649 LENGTH: 0.33 NI CONTRACT RECONSTRUCTION 1151 (WEST RIVER RD) ROUTE 0897 0897-080-200,C501 1,991,305 84,805 1,906,500 96,000 NON FAS FR: RT 221 TC: 266 TO: RT 1126 LENGTH: 0.84 MI CONTRACT RECONSTRUCTION (16) (CRYSTAL CREEK) ROUTE 0891 0897-080-200,C502 1,339,339 5,000 1,334,339 140,000 NON FAS FR: RT 1726 TC: 605 T0: RT 613 LENGTH: 0.11 MI CONTRACT RECONSTRUCTION (17) (CRYSTAL CREEK) 30UTE 0628 0628-080-232,C502 679,134 42,250 637,384 35,600 FINANCE ENGINEERING ~AS FR: RT 117 DEFICIT fC: 2263 TO. 0.15 MI W RT 1831 LENGTH: 0.31 HI CONTRACT RECONSTRUCTION (18) (WOODHAVEN RD) 13 ~`~ - PROPOSED SECONDARY SYSTEM SIX YEAR CONSTRUCTION PLAN 1990-1996 (1990-91 FUNDING) DISTRICT: SALEM ROUTE DESCRIPTION LENGTH ROUTE 0633 0833-080-S37,FS121 NON FAS CONST GRADE CROSSING TC: 783 INSTALL FLASHING RR FORCES LIGHTS & SIGNAL ARM (19) (BENOIS RD) ROUTE 0633 0633-080-231,C541 NON FAS FR: RT 904 TC: 163 T0: 0.35 MI S RT 904 CONTRACT LENGTH: 0.35 MI RECONSTRUCTION 120) (BENOIS RD) ROUTE 0780 0180-080- ,C FAS FR: 0.15 MI NCL RKE TC: 2757 T0: 0.10 MI N RT 1124 CONTRACT LENGTH: 0.28 MI DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT (21) (COVE RD) lOUTE 0610 0610-280, ,B ION FAS 0.02 MIS RT 694 'C: 95 REPLACE EXISTING LOW ;ONTRACT WATER BRIDGE WITH SLAB SPAN BRIDGE (22) (LOST MTN RD) OUTS 0636 0636,080, ,C ON FAS FR: 0.05 MI E RT 103 C; 361 TO: BOTETOURT C L ONTRACT LENGTH: 0.30 MI RECONSTRUCTION 1231 (GLADE CREEK) CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM (IN DOLLARS) COUNTY: ROANOKE 1990-91 THRU 1995-96 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ESTIMATED PREVIOUS ADDITIONAL PROJECTED COMMENTS COST FUNDING FUNDING ALLOCATIONS 1990-91 108,000 10,000 98,000 p 342,000 10,000 332,000 120,000 0 120,000 95,000 0 95,000 820,000 0 820,000 20,000 FINANCE ENGINEERING DEFICIT 0 0 0 14 /~/ _. ~ PROPOSED SECONDARY SYSTEM SIX YEAR CONSTRUCTION PLAN 1990-1996 (1990-91 FUNDING) DISTRICT: SALEM ROUTE DESCRIPTION LENGTH ROUTE 0768 OlfiB-080- ,C NON FAS FR: RT 1832 TC: 63 T0: DEAD END CONTRACT LENGTH: 0.14 HI RECONSTRUCTION (24) (OLSEN RD) ROUTE 0628 0628-080-232,C501 FAS FR: 0.14 MI W RT 1438 TC: 1043 T0: RT 1542 LENGTH: 0.48 MI CONTRACT RECONSTRUCTION (25) (WOODHAVEN RD) ROUTE 0601 0601-080-233,C501 FAS FR: 0.59 NI S RT 621 TC: 3596 T0: NCL RKE LENGTH: 1.60 MI CONTRACT RECONSTRUCTION (26) (OLD HOLLINS RD) lOUTE 1658 1658-080-223,D661 ION FAS FR: INT 1664 'C: 1911 BRIDGE OVER MUDIICK ;ONTRACT CREEK 121) (CRESTHILL DR) 'OUTE 1658 1658-080- ,C ON FAS FR: INT 1664 C: 1911 APPROACHES TO BRIDGE ONTRACT OVER MUDLICK CREEK (28) (CRESTHILL DR) CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM (IN DOLLARS- COUNTY: ROANOKE 1990-91 TNRU 1995-96 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ESTIMATED PREVIOUS ADDITIONAL PROJECTED COMMENTS COST FUNDING FUNDING ALLOCATIONS 1990-91 500,000 0 500,000 0 112,079 1,711,119 100,000 32,000 51,500 114,519 52,000 1,125,119 10,000 90,000 0 32,000 15 0 326,211 FINANCE ENGINEERING DEFICIT 0 0 ~-J PROPOSED SECONDARY SYSTEM SIX YEAR CONSTRUCTION PLAN 1990-1996 11990-91 FUNDING) CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM DISTRICT: SALEM (IN DOLLARS) COUNTY: ROANOKE - ---------------------------- ---------------- 1990-91 THRU 1995-96 ---------- ROUTE DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED ---------------------------- PREVIOUS ADDITIONAL ---------------- PROJECTED --------------------------- COMMENTS LENGTH COST FUNDING FUNDING ALLOCATIONS ---------------------------------- ---------------- ------------------------- - 1990-91 ROUTE 0615 0615-080-230,8611 308,000 4,000 ------------ 304,000 ---------------- 0 --------------------------- NON FAS BRIDGE OVER 6ACK TC: 151 CREEK CONTRACT (29) (STARLIGHT LANE) ROUTE 0615 0615-080-230,M501 34,038 3,000 31,038 8,038 FINANCE ENGINEERING NON FAS 0.95 MIS RT 613 DEFICIT TC: 151 APPROACHES TO BRIDGE OVER BACK CREEK CONTRACT (30) (STARLIGHT LANE) ROUTE 0613 0613-080-226,0501 103,695 4,000 699,695 24,126 FINANCE ENGINEERING FAS FR: RT 1640 DEFICIT TC: 4261 T0: RT 1682 LENGTH: 0.388 MI CONTRACT RECONSTRUCTION (31) (MERRIMAN RD) ROUTE 0668 0668-080-229,0501 801,538 50,000 151,538 15,943 FINANCE ENGINEERING FAS FR: 0.10 MI N RT 661 DEFICIT TC: 2230 T0: RT 220 LENGTH: 0.9i MI CONTRACT RECONSTRUCTION (32) (YELLOW MTN RD) IOUTE 1602 1602-080-248,0501 125,000 6,250 118,750 14,946 FINANCE ENGINEERING SON FAS FR: RT 221 DEFICIT fC: 500 T0: RT 682 ;ONTRACT LENGTH: 0.18 MI RECONSTRUCTION (33) (BUNKER HILL DR) 16 i~ DISTRICT: SALEM ROUTE ROUTE 0605 FAS TC: 1218 CONTRACT (34) ROUTE 0623 TC: CONTRACT PROPOSED SECONDARY SYSTEM SIX YEAR CONSTRUCTION PLAN 1990-1996 11990-91 FUNDING) CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM (IN DOLLARS) 1990-91 THRU 1995-96 COUNTY: ROANOKE DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED PREVIOUS ADDITIONAL PROJECTED COMMENTS LENGTH COST FUNDING FUNDING ALLOCATIONS 1990-91 0605-080-193,C501 582,049 34,815 541,174 0 FR: RT 621 T0: 0.20 MI N LENGTH: 0.20 MI RECONSTRUCTION (SANDERSON DR) 0623-080-231,C501 832,500 1,000 831,500 0 FR: RT 11 T0: RT 1867 LENGTH: 0.25 MI RECONSTRUCTION (35) (FLORIST RD) ROUTE 0120 0120-080- ,C 40,000 0 40,000 0 FAS FR: 0.20 NI SW RT 419 TC: 9313 CURVE IMPROVEMENT CONTRACT (36) (COLONIAL AVE) ROUTE 1404 1404-080- 610,000 0 610,000 0 NON FAS FR: RT 863 TC: T0. 1.00 MI N E CONTRACT RECONSTRUCTION (31) (TIMBERVIEW RD) TOTAL 20,251,924 3,418,350 16,114,014 2,445,851 17 e . ~ 1 _ fALLI R K /~ ~ 651 t9 ' `li~~~ I' r ~..:~ ._~v ~ ~~ _../- VICINITY MAP ~~ 5s~ ~ - -- - iv- ~ NORTH ROUTE 1083 BNGINBERING BST gUARTER DRIVE DRAINAGE Il~ROVEI+IBNT `. (3) N-`:. Q: NORTH ~~ 47 ~- , 34 SOAc Snew,abon ramrs r,r ., s 30 :~. 4 ' 1 ~' J i ~ r ~/, S, i 25 i ~ ~ ` i rp /53 ~D ~ ~~ 50 -- ; n ' Pie 67 oe / ~ / • ~ ~ 72 49 66 5 /~ poi ~ / / o ~ x SS / ' 64 ~ i / 9 45 4 40 ~ ~~ ' i ~ op ~, ~ / 63 e ~, ~ ~ , ,, ~ / / ~ 57 46 ~' , ~ i ,~ ~ 62 ~ •~ ~ i ~ i o ~ / s • 41 / / N J r /61 • 9$ ~ 5~ / / O d ~ it ' ~ •~ / 2 +y ~ ~s • 39 o ~ /7~0/ 1~ ~,o~° ~ 9 36 / b~ 7 ~ / i 04 Ac ~ / 37 _ ~ °a.~F G ~e ,~o ~°~' ~ I ~~ S ~Q 3 J 76 i 0 nc ~, 42" Storm i Drain i Existing ~. Sewer Line _` I ROUTS 840 HELMS LANE BNGINBBRING DRAINAGE IMPROVEI~NT ~(4 ) ~- /:. Q ' NORTS ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~ a/ ~ S 4 24 1448ACID1 2 I 200AC ~) B SS AC ~, _ 1265 At ICl LOpAc • _ • 293ACC1 860Ac ~~Y'223 f7 .x 4~ ~ 4 39.37AC 3 6 23 261 AC Ig ~ soAcl 1.4SAcIC) 7 O ~~ 669Ac 5070Ac ~ ~ ' cn~ a eea 2 D7 IS g IaoAClrn _ 10AC(CI , io ' / ~ 6 _ ~ eR 447AC 16\ C'tiA 9.1 3 S pAc ZI _ ~ 67~Ac ~ ~~~ ' 36.58 O - .. 1 R T b • ~/ 9 ~ „r 7 31.5' rte, + ew~,r e ~ 13 A j 3' .r.r 74 Ac I a `~ 57 ~ Ioo e _ 9.I•- •: 12 i u6AgDl 4 se Aacl i I 2182 Ac / 9 , 12 ~p o ' 1 ilAC / 3 SO Ac101 q . is -~ y, ~ 491 Ac ICI ~ \ / ~~ 4 •12 15 ; 19 i0l I ~ / s i5 85 AC 21 ~ e% ` 16 ~ 15 1 ;~ ,~ 1 a Is 27 20Ac '22 ' !" 294 qc + tSIAc IDI i 1 BOOAc 1.00 ACIDI / 23 24 .. y ~ 7 SnACIC 266 2 19ACID1 i22ACIC) ~ ~' 8994C ~ ~ 2 8741C1 " i IC+OAc 2 2S l• 'e. ' 27 26.1 17oAC ~ 1 . 41004c : S\ •, 4 ~ 3 ' /r 26 '635 Ac 1 OAc 56iAC ' P 'aa~ ~+~ + ~ 394 AtIDI 6 j :x sz6AC ~ 4 i / w i (C 3 r z 9z ACiDI ..,, . 33 II 2.53ACK) $ ~ 7 / 3J 9 7609Ac . 10 ' , 9 4p6Ac 2 t z 17AC 167AC 1 92 AC IDI + ! ~'a ' l91ACl 7 29Ae1C1 - 1 DDACICI ~ ~ 71 , 7 ~~ ,.,. : ~ ~ 34 R1.71S 28SAe 1,;3Ac 77 I 36.36 AclDl - - 1 ` 40 21 Ac ICl ~ e ~ 7$ 7 37Ae ~ • 782 Ac Ac(01 73 8.S9Ac -~ 2 a Ac lCl 11.40Ac • 36.21 Ac 3T I 4 ~ ~~ O ~ ` & ~ ~ •~ ~ 49 _. ' ~ ROUTS 657 BNGINELRING iIINTSR DRIVE APPROACHES TO BRIDGE OVER BACK CREER (5) /V'- / Q NORTS ~~ -- i~~ - 121 / ? Lo:.. P•• nl ; n p 9 b 2 2 R \ / ~H ~ > O ~i r ' 1 If \ 419 ~ _ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ / ~ / b • 2 ~~ 1 11 1 I.Ri ~r / 3! p 41 !a! Is 10 -T $ iL y ~ / ,goo c 1 A 1 1 x.x 4 ml 2094 KI / ~ ~ / r t2 4 IDI so ~ ¢I ~ / ~ 3 O r $ / ' i ' ' + ~ o 3 )9 1e / 29 ~ m 2114 / s ~'i Loo '. T ~ O 7J - . 6 ~ -_ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ I 2A24'. forYO ~ ilr2.. ~~ 2g ~ l3! 4 21 i ~ ~ ' c+ 2 T 0.02Ac We 4 ' o' • t4 . _ ' -__ l `_ to ~' z1 ` _~ 3 '~ $4' ' -_~_ 9 q 9 II • w 20 ~ r~ 2 Dn a: ' O Ig B r r 1 19 • 2I q O ' ~ n ~ 17 1.26 ~a I~ + ~ ro sTOO-1-11 \ ' s i I.,I~. \ 4 u 17 \ ' ~ .. ~a ~ ,tip a~ !~ >.tO1c ~ i,. 1 X14 Is M i 1 ~ 4 q Ig - r02 4 IDI 1.22 4 I[I ` / 3 f I ' \ b \ 1 +u i P/0 ~OB•!' e1 0' ~ \ 0 ROIITE 904 BNGDVBERING STARREY ROAD SAFETY IMpROVEI~ENTS (6) /1/-- / Q NORTS ~~ .a .+ , ~ ? '~ t 3 ~, ~~~ 29.1 0 i 7 •~ 4 I86Ae ~~ ~ <;:; ~-! ~' \ 20.3 •'4 , ~i \e ,~ , . ! • \o~. ~e s ~~ ~ ° ~ °r q! .~ . 15 7 ,-' 15.9 • 11 ~O y' -' °O ~ 's ~ . ,p a 15 6 '~ .+' , ,,' ' 5~? p it 1510 .~ ti'• ~1~` b ~ i5~3 .~°~4 e ' ~° v°1 IS:2 .'' 's y~~~ ~ ~ ° t .o °e ~''015.5 .~ ~a ~ s 15.1 °. p'~ ,., -- ----14 ~, ~oKe G~~y G e ~~° , 1 _ K 6 .p1' O ~a 29 2 ~ ~ ~~ I bS\5 QJ \ ,~ 6 ~ $~ ~ ,, ,,a 7 00 ~ a ~,, ~' =, ~'s 8 j qO I ~ 3 .y t~ ~ 10. 9 1.04 Az II / 137At / ~._- --_ _ - --- --___ -__- --- --.,__ v ROIITE 867 BNGINEBRING oDGEx Roan BRIDGE OVER H6W RR (7) ', lY- Q NORTB .. -067 , ~. .95 1 ~' B,al ~ B, ii;s 7i0 _~ 02• \ 0 r`~~ U __, ` ~.~ 3 dJ X896 , t6'2 ° v j~ l ` I - ~~ - ~-- ~ >> ,'- 8S ~ i !901 0 b53 ~ • - v ~ 84 7 57 ~ l4 ~~ '~ I o -` _ ~o O ~ ~~ I S~ ~~ fl.i -- t O j6 ~ -- ~ t r'j i 3 ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ I ~~ i~5 i -- ' -_~F ?/ f 4 y1 ~ , \ I H O \ - 1 i ROUTE 639 ENGINBBRING i~1EST RIVER ROAD APPROACH TO BRIDGE ~ STRIICTURE (8) ~ C9) N : `~ • -L'_l- • NORTB ~ I 30 ` zs.so Ae CMnW o ~ 1M B1'~HNrn 10 .. `. fl00As01 ~ 9.7s At (p ~~ I1 1 32 31 4AO As _ ~! r M 7W 72 SO Ae ICI. r r ~ 31 9:00 Ae 3.46 33 3.39AC~ 3.7'S Ae ! 34 ~ l00 At i Rf. ~ -..~~ . 17 28 al so Ac lDl 39.42 Ac IC) 2aooAz 39 22 27 _ Ius Ao w- 4 ~ 4S1 Ae lCl , 4900Ae ~ ,... ~ s~i 21 ...~ 28.96Ae ..., ' i O 24 i 20 96Az 2a 26.96 Ac ~ w. 26 ~ ~~ Ac 2'.99 At ~ \ • S L06 Ae ~:1 36 •`~ ~ 422 79.OOAs ~ . 220 Ae 41 9.I I AC ~ /424 -- ---- _ -_ -----,------ - ---..--- ___ -_ ROUTE 6I4 BNGINBERING BooxE c~BL ROAD UPGRADE OF GRAVEL SBCONDARY ROAD (10) Q NORTB \\ t ~ u7~K t i - z i ..« .. 771 !!l IOW4 !! i / •01K ~i\ / 11 aari4 b )7 Wi 4 !~~ 7004 36 >• t H7W4 t 1004 / 37 Jo~~ K ai 7 7K[I ~ , • 3) f~IK `~ ~ MOOKOI .JOOK CI 39 ))CK _ I ~ ~ It ~ ! a92K _ it eonKOl rt 7p 4C1 ~ 6 i)i)a ~~ 9 764 K t ~ rJp4 K,~ ~ r7J K 4[i A]OK l10K iOi~` n 1• g {tIK \ I ~~ r9z.~ `\II a)401 a097 K:71 IM`4 [I 7 b )909KIC1 19J4 ~ u~r.4c zc r)KS~ N 9 ~~'K ZO 704 D~ rr.s 4 cl / ~ ! )oo i 'i~ N 1= j r ~ 17 ,aK ~ JOOK ~ I N4 ~-yO1K0 19 la n K ` 2 i J01s 1 / i~ lu4 i ul ; . um4a 1 ~ scrKr! rr 6 1 • ta)K S ! _ ! r 374 ~ 21 r riK ~' ~ Jor4 rs i 27 *, 7r0itp 7 rl )1NK 9 ~ rs~i4o to r7uK ~ 7:»Ko »IOK / ~ ~ '~ b / :7 70 4 1 ~..~. M ~'I~ti+ p •004D1 9)740. l 11 1] i aoOK 31 V a0N4 1 ~ 31 1 90~ a< ~ )a\ r K 33 )»Ka ~) n K.~ - ~ 1 s. ~~ ~ ` -I OCK y\ \t zs ' t a>)~K ml t flVK101 70 OOK/ 1 33 j7 ~ ~ _,~a774 m1 • 22 M 41C1 aa~04 S { A Q'' :9964 , , 23 ,\ /. ~\, Oro >bK ~ \ ~ ~ ~ brl 79164 ... M r00 K ` 62• bil r, "e~' •7994ro 5' \~ r774 AfYK l~064101 ROUTE 677 BNGINSBRING WILLOW BRANCH ROAD UPGRADE OF GRAVEL SECONDARY ROAD. (11) ~/ -- `, . NORTH Spring. ~o, J eee o~, J~ ~, t~~O~ ~~ 688 ,690 ~ j 1' 9 o~~ 934 ~ Ii i ~ it ~ ~ . 6S3 732 ~I ~0 690 1 691 `J 654 I I ~~ OJ 9~ • MASONS i KNOB ~ __ _ - - __ _= f- ~~_~_,~__~- ROUTE 691 -~ BNGINBERING DAWriwooD ROAD UPGRADE OF GRAVEL SECONDARY ROAD. (12) R ~~~ -~. NORTH T 1.42Ac 4 ~ /~/ +" 3.ooAc to- 1.3i Ac t0) e 2.56 Ac lCI 1.09Ac (C) I.SOAt 9 ~` 1.7'9Ac ? sesi secs 6 13 Ac (D- `2 ~AtIC) 2. 9Ac LOOAc 518 19 ~ 163As ~O'~ sB37 3 5r69 Oa / r i' 4.18 Ac (D) o ~ S69 ~ S 97 Ac tC- c* 10 ~ Q~ Or el 5~~,~ f 67 Ac 10.25 Ac 1 '°~ \` ~~ 2.1 ~ 512 ,~''+~' 8.60A C1 ,,,~ '~\ ~ cuosvw '' eb~ w«,. ~r.. CAweA ~, s9~s \ ,.~.. s9a~ I s9 bM~w. Q ~ I seta ~ lAcIC) ~. na „~ 1 8~ N t.oea~toti ~ ~; 2C 12 38. ~°°~~ "' _ Yelbw ~tA 3 ~~ WM ` , ~- ~ zs 1.84 Ash 4.39Ae (D) s6~t ,=ors 5.91 AC (C) s6efr 24 I 3Q 11.70Ac I.OOAe s6rt -- __ ~ __ 31 ___ 915 BNGINBBRING coX~~t~PK2RS-READ UPGRADE 4~' GRAYE3~SECONDARY ROAD /1/ - ~ 'Q NORTB ~~ ^ ~ ~~ to S .~ '``eOrr 11 • ~At ti8 12 / :' 12 /1 ti tO'a ~ e 8 13 "' 5 ~ s I a ,~. e~ 10 / / \ • \ ) ~, ,~ i I `` ''~a .~~ ' _~ ~) ,, l e w 16 ••, ~~ 17O ,~ YY I Roonok• County E 1 BOO/O 0I Suptrritort O I I :, • )i 2.S2AC ~ + 9.62 Ac .• 2 ! i I S ,.. ag oa ° ~` 21 ~ b ~, ! ~ ~ •7 ,1~ f 8 ~ 20 ~ ti 22 ~f'a 1 ., ~ ~ 2 3 ')e 21 •. '~ ti ' :,~f P~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~~ '.f KO~~ j2 ~J i0 p • 9 ~,,f Norlhmon~ „~, ''., ~~ .ee~ie9"' .~ f i ~, •1 p •f ~ ff ~ IO 2Q Q`S`t,G` j ~ ~ t ~ ~~ 7 \ 26 3 M1 O t ' oe ax ~~,~ sfti wn t NorlA `p~oonaFt \ / T +~ ~~ \ \ Bopl~sll CnurcA \ a 31 30 „?9 29 0 \ \ N~/ \ t 32 „ o ~ \ ~~ \ \ ~ r J ~ • ~» c~ ~ / / \ \ \ i 33 ° Opd~ e ~ \ \ ;'\ Fi \ \ Gee ~„ • `~s \ \ ~ a9 e~ s ~ a ~9 •~ ~ 24 \ \ x.79 Ac. '~ s S .~ I~ 9 . .." ' ! 4~ tllf ti ROUTE 1832 BNGINBERING BARRENS ROAD , RECONSTRIICTION 1 ~+ ,~ ~ ~~ ~~\ ~. \\ v ~/ ~~ ~/, ~: 1 ~~' `~ /sJ l w ~r ~ ~ ~~ ~ ' 1 xr ~~' ~ lDl c la 25 2100 Ac 22 ~9~i~c ~ t~sa 181AC '~ ._ •~ `goa0 q1. 639 ~' ~ /r9/ 0 . Q NORTH 7 86Ac(O alk ca 11 J\\ 1~ t~., ~ \ ~w \ R~~~"~ 2126 sc ~ ' ~% ~ ~i ~ ~ ~ t, RI. 639 ~ aoe ae by I ti$f`.~ i ~~~ s` y I 5~~ Map 73.00 t' • 400' c i ._ 1 ROIITS 639 ~NGINBBRIN~i WBST BIVBB ROAD RECONSTRIICTION- 15 ~t, N -- / ;. Q NORTS ~b ~ti, _ _ b, t.7 - __ ~ _ IS21 ~v ~ 1Sd . 1 ~ ~ o `'J ~_... J - e,~ ,.., j o.o < ~ .~ o •~ IS / ~ ~ w 687 ~ . 12 'o ° ~ c 63 ° osi c ` ` 1690; ' ° / 0• Ot SSI ~ ,'!, 4 6~ ~. / ~ o ~ ° o. o o~~ ~. ~. c 5 e~ 7 2 ,~ +-- -- - °~~ ../ •s~9 0.. 66 e 3 63 0i0 oar 613 oa 689 1 S'8 '' 07 °, 158 S3Z tt ~ j , 7 Is ` o J ~~~+~~ ~~ ~ 1J~ I 166 a 7 ~ r0 't lI o ~6_8a, o • n , ~~r /~/ ~ -656 1669 J, o~ o r, ot~ IS71 / ~i6o6 i' 5+51 . oy o °y * 7 75 S8 r o ~ o .o~ ~ / ~ q ~~~ of $ , ~ l ,J 1683, i6~0~ ~ ~ 0 .• , r j l ~ o J ~,~ ,. ~ ~ ~ cJ- ~ ~ 1576 1681 ~ °~, ~ ~ 9~. ~~t ' / c~ S46 1 ~' ^` I ~ 1 ' 7 s 1 ~ 7T ~. ~' ~ z s ~ c ~c ~ 735 e ~ 7S S ~ 717 ' ~\ , •1~ .~ bee eea ct~ ~ -- w Vl ~.0 ~ 6b8 ~.- \` cis _ --~--~OS'-------- - ---- ---- r p ~i ,~~~ ROUTE 897 CRYSTAL CREEK BNGINEERIIVG RECONSTRUCTION 16 ~ ~~: ~ .. V ~~' ~~ ~~ ,,~ ~ f' ''~'~~ J ~ ~1~~~` BNGINBERING ROUTE 897 CRYSTAL CREEK RECONSTRUCTION '17' ~ -~ -Q. NORTH N'-J NORTS I (' `. F ~\O~ 81/ ~_ 626 I ~~ 1~ ° O A1o^ o~ o r ° ~1~ 22c c26 sew'\(J~ I• O~ O ~o .'J o _ . ~ y ~ , ~o 1597` I ° "' (1881 ~~, 18 ~e~ a 36 \ ~> o ~ 20 ~~ c~ y o~, oP 1832 ° ,~ 642 769, o,~ 1~' ~ ~ cL o ~ ti~ 1e19 ~ e_~ ' ti o.. ~e . 1e1e~ oP 4 i _ oo ~- ~, ' 1932' 4` ~ ~~ / ~` Ot 117 I e _, / ~ ` I ~jle~l O O ~I W36 ~ O t I$~ ~ 1' ~ ° C 1444 b I~ )9 2 2 1e 39 11 I` ~ 0~~ ~ ~~ ~L 1828 0 9 0 19~ 1 e ` " ~^ O ,~ Off! o> ~! ~ 922 O 1931 ~~v ~ '~ 1 o o~~ ~• 623 ~~ ~ l'~ 939 °iesl ie 117 ~ ~ ~O / / ~ , s ~ ~~~ / 1876 , o, GO p„ r 0 f~v. •, \ T O ~ ~ 18^76 w o 0 y a• / ~ u (~ I l e \84- C i / ~. `' ` 1a49 a d' v ~ o ~ ; ? :. - •. - • ~\ 37 ~~ ~;` °. ROUTE 628 BNGINBBRING F10oDHAVEN ROAD RECONSTRUCTION 18 ._ /v-- J Q NORTB ~~ \ 73 ,. ' .o Iss• ~ •• O i ~Nw .~ I•' 4 ~,,,,,~,,,, v :, A # B i " % • I 2r1 • a1 w I ' ? y 2 '•so ~css . a I • ; RCIS P/O sr.ro-z-s ~`\\ ~ 9 r• loo• NHe[ 2r i at .c • 2e - O 23 J1 4 c0 OeI KO 7 2S ~~ Q~ iW~ u _ P~ •I •'~ $ 2 22 ~/ /~ S J 6 ux ~s Iv 6eh4 _ _ - --- _- - - - ~- ,~ _ t jI* 00 et \ 29 ~ \ 28 S \ ~~ oces7 oe .. 1 \ O I 2~ J 00 ~ P/o ene-z-~ ~~ PJ ~ . goo' O ~ \ l y 1 \ e~ ~~ ~ ' P/O 8710-2-8 1•• 100 ~~ ~ °~ FF I ~/ ~• / P/O Br.IS-2-10~ I b I ~ I••100 I 004 6 I 6 53 ea L i I 7 ' •8 or I • 2 p 9 ~ - .li s ~ 1 5 i9 , t d „ i2 I •'4 i7 I `~_ ~ ,3 - i <~ IS P - M 2f~° .. ., ~ see. • 1111 ,3' :ss ~. ~'. 3 - 6 I !0 a ~ o: = S 1 1~ 7 I P i 2l <~ •• ' S2 9 _ _ BNGINBBRING ROIITB 633 ~, BBNOIS-ROAD RAILR~ CRbSSYNG ~ &QAD IMPROVEMEIITS i'9 & 20 /~/' -- / Q NORTB ._ _ -- - - ~. %• ~ \ \ i ~~ z \ ' . ~~ ~ I '`~~_ ~.. .,,, ~~ 1. • a. 4 V t i /`\~' 9 ~ ~ ~~~ as ~.. \ /~ ,/\` \ al ~I q 1 ~`/1 Jz \ ~ i 4 a7 ' ~ 1 S / ~ ~ /Y U \ r /~ / / :`~/ ,yam -~ ~ T 1~ \ ; /~ \ ,: Sz / •\ i ..y a ~,'. M ~rc V, 2~ • ,7 ^ \ h ~r a u \ 27 ~~ r~ 1 .Y .. r zi 3~ •~ 23\ 7~~\ q \• 1 ~~ww~'r\ Y ' '' • •/r • z ~~ ~~! ROUTE. 780 COVE ROAD ENGINEERING DRAINAGE IMPROVF.lSENT 21 / ' l -• _ 'L`am NORTH .~.~ 9 35 \ ~~~~'~~ , ~ X39 \. ~`. bye ~yz e .~ 38 9 ~ ' ~ ~~' 29 ~~o~ac {'t bb ~~37 ' zoo: i ~ ' ' 43 bye 44 .~.. Goad ~ 7ec t ~~ ~_ 27 ~ seal = g 26seas ~, .25 s ~~-ac a ~z a~ ~ ~~. w ~ C ~ 0 46 <~ ~ b~ ~ \ ~ 10 ~~ S x a< ., ~~ 6 \ s»f 9 ~ ~, n: ~ s9 ~` \ c~c. ac . ~ 9 9~'Ac ~ \ ~~ 5 ~ \, Rt 670 = :,.._ ,D~ % ` `~ 5 7~4c \ yb~9 77f1 a 9(•A: 4.1 ~~\ % 4 ~~ \ ~ ~••~ _' ~ ~~o ~ ,~~ A ~ 2 mot. 13 \ ~, ~ / 12 2 0 ` ` ~ / a ', -~_ \ see _ ---- ` ~~ t 5933 ,~` // \\`//, 80tJTE 670 BNGINB$RING LOST MOUNTAIN ROAD REPLACE LOW WATER BRIDGE WITH SLAB SPAN BRIDGE ~2 iv- it 'Q NORTS - -- ~,,, // 1` r1 ~ / ~ . i of 1 ~ \ ~ ~ ~~ ~ i o ' {. ~ ~ ~ •_ 3 11 At. i ~ ~ 1{1 6 ~ 1 52ACfD1 ~~~: ~~ 097Ac(L) v ~f - 5 / ~ ~• 104Ac ~ ~ 2 ~ t~ 1 oAc / 8 ~~ ~ ~~ 112 At .. ~ '111 3 ~ ' • L I f 125Ac / i ' ~' _ 28 3 Ac .f +; ~ I 3 37K /~ ` 1 ~~ ~ ~{ 10 i /{ i3534c i f~ t S `~ `30 ~~ i i ' I ~• ~ ~ as ez nctrn ao 3s Kea . .. ,.. ' 3 w ., _ ' \ , ~ 12 ~ 2 OOAt / 13; ~ i 3B! I I r n i3 S3K 0 -~ BNGINBBRING ROUTE 636 GLADB CREEK RECONSTRUCTION 23. ~.~ ~ .. .~,- .~ :~ ~~ F•,~';' .~L1~~ '. •J 1 ENGINBBRING ROUTS 768 OLSSN ROAD RECONSTRUCTION 24 ROUTS 628 BNGINBBRING woonHavEN Roan RECONSTRUCTION 25 / Y --: "'L'am NORTH ~~ •" ~r/o ~+ " ' -' e ,'~~Ie ~~ V ~90L ~• Sao _ _ •o J~ -- 2) ~ , , X909 ~/• ely 97" ~5 ~; 935' °~ o~ '93~ i ag~°_ `°.~ o o, K ~ O r e ~~ ~0 i 645 ti e~ ° _ 0, ~ ~ ~' ~ ~I J °. ~ ~ Dy ~ ~~l ~,l 1835 ?1~ ~ ,- ~ 0 ,~ 1816' 4&2 Ie1~'" X91 li X816 `' _~, ~- X193 ~a~5 , 1916 ~ 1961. ~ , i i -, _ 189Sr~ 961 - ~ 4 199 I j o y .y ~ ~. 1 0~ ° 989 ' ~w /~J 1913 0189 0~ 1y;3 ~ ~ _~ ~ - mod, , ~ 19i~, t,' 0 i2 1 4 ~ ~ tt 99 190 0 I 19~ 0 a. / ~7 10 " ° - cf° V G9 d ¢ ° 09 ~ ~ ~ 18 0 o z) o ° o 0 ~ ~ ~ ~.+ r G [! 91 ° ~ J ^ .~ .' s g R °' °' 1e5 - ~ oe a .n ° ° ° ° o s s - ~ 1e» 1912 ~,, 89 ° •_°i os a ~°' Y ~ ~'~9 (~es3~ a ~e>•z; ~\ 62s F _ ;` ~~ r • .. \ f'J ~ 4 J i~ _` ..743 y ~ ~ I . I I S ~ . ~/ ~i ~~ 6 /t ~61! e~ h `J '. _~_ /~ / ' ' I a `611 0l0-~ / .~ ~~ BNGINSERING ROUTE 601 OLD flOLLINS ROAD RECONSTRUCTION 26 ` '1_J- NORTH ~.^..~ 'S4 ~ 5~1 . J .s 42 2 ~ ~ .r - 41 ' a ' ~ ~ ~ t ~ ,a ,~ w ~ f r ~ ~ ``.,~ ~ .7~G Not ~ 13~. I •51 w '~ 49 t' ~ 'w 8 oT>d s7 70 13 J1 i ~ " •,a l,n. . i ,. T ' ~a ca : ' ~ ~ ,. IOI.N p •a~en tl = t3 N td ~. b'7 pal `^ 7 .~ ~ 61 ~ ~ !/ Iii' " .. 'o r~ ~ - cr•s1M11 -•- ~ ro n ~ w w se I q ~~ so ~ 1 24 ~ 2s,. .27 a g 28 ~ ~ . ~ ~ >r ~ „ 21 ~ c ~~ ~ _ ' p ~ f+ .. ,~ I ` ' ~'' ~~ 30 ~ f a I ~ ~ ~ 14 ~r • ~ •~. ~~ .~ ,: ~ ~ } / ~ 3t N e ~ . ` ~ 1 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ rf ~- tI ~ 34 g 33 °. ~ 31 ; Q~• O ~ : to • ' t/J ~ ~ 28 4 C 3 I 7si~ ~ " +ti ~.' KukWOOd' .~~ / ~s f> ~ ~ t0 ~; 7 / o ni ss ~ 33 ~ ~ ~ ,Fr a ~ ,. 3~ F 4 , ww J 3 .p 4~ ~ paP I ~ • ! .~~ --- ~.. f 24 13 ~ ' F '~' f p 9 a ~ ~ ~ r~ n r ~ n a ~~ ~ ' a µ, BOUTS 1658. _ CRBSTHILL DRIVE $NGINBERING APPROACHES TO BRIDGE ~ BRIDGE OVER MUDLICR CRSSR. 27 ~ 28 iY'-~: Q NORTB ^~. 17ANC to , N t_q 3 004c lD) K' "' I 1 7 At (C) \ 12SAtlD 2SAc(CI 4 / '3, /12 2 /~ 13~ B35Ac • r .~ ~ l4.1 "• 14 ' ~ 142 ~ ' ~) 11.12 AdD! ~ 6.97 AtICI 1 ,) • 14.3 183 At \~ ~ ~ I ~ _ 1 .s I 6 35 4t ) l' 2 40AC . I 17 ~ 30 00 Ac (0) G 33 73 Ac tCl £ G I ~ - .- ROUTE 615 - - . STARLIGHT LANE ENGINEERING APPROACHES TO BRIDGE ~ BRIDGE OVER BACK CREEK 29 ~ 30 ~- '1 '.~- NORTH ~~~,,, , ,, :;`ll, , - BNGINBERING ROUTE 613 MERRIMAN ROAD , RECONSTRUCTION 31 /~/'- Q NORTB - - /'/~ ` ~ 729 ; `% 3 944 ~ _ - - - , ~ w~. 63 / I 790 « Jp4 \. i / ` ' 8 i 9 o so o~ 74 73p J ___ _~ -.. .. N 7 9" 66 ~ ore ~ 73~ \\ ,Q ~ 993 f ... Q - ~ 9~Q~ . orf 73 ~ 663 ~ / F ~, o,~b o~ J Q .o 922 ~ 664 `~ ~ G'f'~, ' ~ 7 76 c ono .. 66s 1 \ 666 ~ 0.70 ~ ~ ro 1 72i .o T v _ -- - 1 B27 ~ 674 ~ 6 I i ore ~ zz i /f ~' 6 70 ~ ' s i j C~ea~o.oo J ~~ 5 °. 726 ~ I HAYSTACK \ o ' l MT ~ ~ ~ ~ { o •~ i ( o 652 ~ 930 ~ 6~~ ~ ~ 66 7 Q~S' ~ 7 ~ P 6~i O~ f -_ .. _ _ - - ~ -- 1e -- - I SJ F-880 \ ~ 666 ' o•• ~ ~ ~_ 1 _ _. 1 ROUTE 668 BNGIN~BRINrs YELLOW MOUNTAIN ROAD RECONSTRUCTION , 32 /~!- 1,~. '~` NORTH 0~5~ g Z2~ ~ 1 ~ • - 7 1.96 Ac ~~Q~~p4~ ~„ 6 f 7.t 10 . •° ~ ' / y t r{ ' 4~ 2 ''-, ~~~G~ve / ~\S~ u1S) 7 12 ~ fto '• 16 .. / •% 9 , V r ~p' .9= ~ ~ 1 .~ 17. ,~ ~ / 14 ~ ,° \ to e° Oj 13 ~ 1 4 r / • 9 o , 6 ' N ' Am ~°, ~'~ ° Cdn{r dOmmslror,vf Cn~fr ` 39 i~ ' R / ~~ "o.RCBS 2.40Ac (D) ~ ~ ~O ,• ~ w , 5 _L` 4 O 3 78 Ac lCl es~ X66 °~• ,6 ,J " / R C B S ',~ so ,. JpV•°~ 10 /~ ~P 41 ti s 0 `~ 'so ~s. ee` s n„ • ,2 ! / ~ ~, s s ~ _ '•f Aso ~ / 12 ~ 7 • fcf r 12 cu 1 » + 5 is Y ~ h~ ~1 49 52 s Ada. ~s~'r> r, ~, ~~ 13 14 ~ •q ,SO rs • / ~ 8 a d ~ ro r , ~' 4 ~ 3 C 2 ~ 1 ~, •, •: ya a 16 48 • s° s•° re ~ , A 4 • ,~;,i 13 ~ zr n :• n /•fl S3 e^ ,x• •o _ ~e ~2 roo O 1.S` nos .ios~ ~f f sz ~..~ / ~ 54 , / .of ` 117 ~' S7, 14 w~ iu° SS '' r• z ••s ~. .~ 59 $ ~ '~ ~ ~h 16 r "y "zrsi s ^^ ~ ~ /f /r •. 57 56 S 51 b // ~ ` / iw w 59 ~-ti 'f rr, ~ . v ° ` b, ?i' ' 61 ~ r/ ,P .e+z ' ~'•'• ~•Y ,.r s ^ \ /f rr ~ KI o ~ ' ' t~ 116 !• 18^ ~~' ~ yob ,P 62 n /?/ ~~ ua, • ~ • ~ "~ ~ b p~ S O~ 44~"-~S` r/ ~• g ~•e w .~ , ' ~ ~• f pj " ~~ "° ~ ° 8 !C 64 > F a ~ ~ r. 20 , • 1r r:~ 61 `+• ~' f./, ^ f ` `` ~"4 MI ~ o ` 7 ~~ ~ M t / 42' f"/r ~H. .)53 ' 46 X24 f•'' ,. _- ~ i ._.. •' BOUTS 162 ~NG~BERjNG BUNI~R HILL DRIVE RgCONSTRUCTION 33 N-~ -Q NORTH .~. ,_` 30 14.31 k 29 ~ It.9QAc. O `~ ^ ~ ^ ROUTB 605 ENGINEERING SANDERSON DRIVE RECONSTRUCTION 34 /~r_ ~. Q . NORTS ~. ~ 1 6 ~ O ~+~> { ~+u , 2 i '~ s ^ 2.66 Ac ! r~ ,r r _ ~ -- --_ - 13 .» ' la ?" Is r ~ ~ 16 G .~ ,, tel. °. ~ ~ ~~ 3 ~ o le _ ~ ~~ ~ °w _ U ~+ Y 3 I ~~ 2 ~i a~A a j i ~ R -~ z , ~ 6 ~, ~ .. ~. .r• ' '° I 21 . ~ n 12 ` 4 ti, # 's `~ 13 i 2iAc s ~ `• .4 ~ 00 / ,~ S P ~'~ °' 6 ~~ e ~ct zx a n~ J ~] J ~ ~ 2 Y' \ `r • 7 .. ~! 17 ~ \ '.ry Oi N ~ PJ J _ ~ ~' ~Iwwr P 1'ry 5 ,,• ~~,~~ e a ~, y e 3 a ," 1'' 8 ` s~'~ ,~ 4 5l 6, ~ t,o,s, 9 $ 3 3J 4c , G O O 2~ b 1 i1 1\ i ', a is ~ s% ~\ g ~ a Yernd0le ~^ ~"'~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~"' { II Z a ~ ROUTE 623 BNGINBBRING FLORIST ROAD RBCONSTRUCTION 35 .~~•'-.. :~~~ ~~= .~~;., ~: F ,, , .`i,~- ENGINEERING ROUTE 720"~ COLONIAL AVENUE CURVB IMPROVEI~NT 36 NORTH ROUTE 1404 BNGIIVBERING TIMBERVIEW ROAD RECONSTRUCTION (37) I1/'-- Z Members of the Roanoke County Sign-Subcommittee Gary Atkinson ~ Barry Brewer Lee Eddy J_ B. Gor~.a Jay W_ Inge IV E l d o n K a r r Butch Kelly Neal K~.nsey Bo b Poe tin e r T o m Rolle r ~ Mar k S e i l e r Don W z t t V a n W o o d /Y- 2- O N m H 0°4 a z N m 0 x O H a ~'. U z H ~ O E ~ ~ a~ ~ ~+ ~ ~ O ~ ~ a~ °~ z 9G H m H H 04 U V m V N ~ O ~D a 0 a O O •r{ N N .,~ 0 U sT O .~ s~ ro a .~ U A d s~ tr .'., N Q O •,.{ ro tr+ a .~ N -~ k w N 0 .,~ N .,~ O >'a a .~ N O ,0.1 ro •~ ~ s~ N •~ ~ ~ W N ro ~, ~, A ~ 'd U G1 N N •N ~ •N W ~ ~ •3.1 ~ ~ •~ y ~ b ~~ •~tTroU ~~Cd N~k••l1,pOyN r-I N ~ N ~ jT i~ •rl ~l •rI ~ Rf N N N .-i U .,..1 3~ N a N d1 b .,.~ f~ ~ ?+ O •d ro O ~~ N~~p~~ ~C•~O ~ ~--IN~+dbb~ W~ U •r1 N O U ro y •~ rl O ro O ~ ~ ro vi r-1 a~ +~ +~ w ~ ~ cn ~ o v cn cn •~+ o ~ o ~ ti, f~+ w b O y~ O ~ ~3~ ~~N~~ N N~~+ ~ ~ ~~b~~'rodN rt ~~ ~ k t~ b,o•~ ro ro row ro ro ~ ro roow ro•~ICn N ~~W Wd•~ro>rN cn toW-~ v~ cn ~SUchOUNCn N ~ ~o N ~ +~ O I ~ O i~•1 d •0, ~" -~ ~ y •~ -~rl ~ f•1 ro tI1 rl ?~ N ON ~ •~ N.d ~N b•O~ ~~~..}diSaO~ ~ ~ N N ''~ > '~ ~ 4a b O ~ ~ ~ O ?~ ~ 'rod A +~ w D,d bN~ N° ~~'o ~xro ro s~ro •rl 0 O ~ ro U ~'~f o ro+~ ro ~r w NA ~ N o o •~ d•~1 >w U aro ~ ~ +~ ~ ~ +~ ~ b f•a a a~ s~ o •~1 a~ ~ ro ~ ~ a~ +~ O NO 3i0 •'iN7r 'dUNQd~0~0 U rowy„i ~ ~a •~,~1~3 s~d ~bW O+~•rlf~N•rlN?+ro H w~b+°~ ~ ~ro p~rowo ~nA a•.+b ,robN~U~boo ro •` ~ .. ~ 0 0~ >~ •N N ~ ~j~~l ro ro ro N •Nrodb rl•k ~ NO~~~'d Ud-ro roN ~ O O ~d ri +l N N o~ o N~ o ~w a. N U 3~`~; ~~ ~ aNi a N 'd +~ W w o b N f•+ O C~ b w-+ d +~ O~ b N .[ ~ O •-1 ~ N O ~ ~ ~ W r-I N O ,i ro 1 O 0- ~ ~ ~ ~ +~ A b+ U ~ U d ~ +~ GQ ~o d ~ ... O ~ O O i~ O f~ w ~ N N +~ U b- rl ch N 1C 9+ •~ ~ V] W ~ 'd f~ -~ O x W •N W ~ •N ~ ro z H zro N a N N t~ •~' w O ~ •.•1 ~ ~ ~ d ~ ~ °~~' ~°' ia~ a wo ~ a i as ° a ~~ ro~ o ~ ro as ~ t7+ » ~ ~ O k X N a •~ to N •~ ~ to O •••1 U to d H N O W d a° ~ o x ,, •~ ,.~ •.~ ~ NN ~ U~ U~ Nd`w A •~p O ~~ a!~ O~t~A O +~ U +~ U ~ ~ ~ ai +~ ~ O U •p t~l~ N f~1~ W ~ W t/) w W N N • ~ C ~ U ~O X03 ~ ~obaNi °~ ~ p ~ 3 a i A , a~ a~ o a a~ ~ ~ ~ c~OUN ~~ ~ t0[1~d ~>a+~ .~•-~ b> to Oki ~ w O A W P4 to = > to ~ b ~ ~ cn +~ ~ . •~ d •~ • aroi~++, w~ . . ... ai~+~~N a+~ ~ N 3.1bW•. ~ b ~ N to +~ NfCWOCO Rf +~ O ~ a 3.1 O +~ d N+~ Z7- ~ ~ O CTS C rl N O CT W •'i ?+ CON N+~ ~+ O a ~C A O C~+ a ~ •~ a~ - o OONO• O o+ N •~ w o •1 W O N O i-1 .~' w o ~ tr i~ b+ ° .~ •~ w ~ •. N ~ w Nw"'+~.~ aCi •rl ~ y.a N RS N W ~ ° ~ G •~O ~~+ ~.~ w rt O> w O+~ wo•O3,[O wOTf•C'd~ +~O' w k O W O ~; l~ W k .~ N~ W ~ A N Q -~ U f~ ~ ~ W ° o ° r-i N ``:o N N ; O~ i~ via ~o a~i~ i •o~~a ti+ •o~~A ti+ ba i a~ v' ot N~ C N N 41 a1d Nrl~ ~ ~ ~ N~~ ~w~ N~ ~-~ ~ ~« ~ W O O a u1 ~++~ k k C~ If1 ~~ k~ N O U N u1 in ~ Coo ~ ~ ~ f N aC £ ~ ~ O N aC ~ ~ ~ W OA ~ a~oNA U~ ~o A+ a • ~ N ~+ d b+ C `~"~ O ~ O A C~ C ~ 3 w ,~ >' N tr ~ • O` •N rt1 O 0 ° '~ ~ b A N O ~ A ~ w w O O O b+ ~ b • ~ U+ .C a b •~ N ~ 3 a c k C N O,~ q''i ~ w3s ~U~ Wo •w~+ ~ O ~ ~ ~ N N W N r-I ~ ~,1 e•-1 N ',3' G3 d N -n !d N r-1 ••-1 ~ ~ C ~ ~ O S-i O •xa~ w~ o owl ~,o~ ~~•~ abN ~iw riaw wa ~a z m a N ~ o ~ U .~ ~ oN a b~ ° ° ~ ~ N ~ a H a O zcn 1 ~ N -•a a° as w N ~! M ' .~ ~ GCl N N M `I •rl O M .. ff U b v U ~ O OM it ~ ZT 1 ' O ~ 'd c s N ~ N •.-1 ~ N c~ N N N ' e~i ~ b ~ b NMM~ 3~ . b r. ~r ...... . r-i N M r•I O O r•-1 ~ Its l~ !tf as al ss ~ bw N S N O O O O N 1 -+ V ~ W p-i •~ N GD °~ W lts O ~ O M N N d' N e-1 N ~~ O r1 0 • O .. ~~~ N N N .. OQ •#- ~ ~ ~ O O N M M O 41 Cl 1 O C O M tT Z7- IT 1 U U aJ W k s ~ W W W'~". •~•~•.~ `.~ •'~ W N 'Q O a W O O •N N • to In 1f1 N N N N N ' ~•,i ~ ~ e-INN ~ NMd ~ O N N e-I~A ~ ~ r•I N M e~i r-I N M ~••I '••1 ~ ~N ;y0y ~ I I I I aaaaaa~ 1 1 1 1 oaaaoa~ a MO cn ~ as~ a cn N r-1 M J-~ td I U •~ ~ ,-~ •rl U ~ ~j O ~" b N •.~ i~ N ~ -rl ~ 'd U b ri N ~ ~ H 1 r-1 -rl.•-1 L". N b O b+ O O O Gl N j ~ ~ ~ 1 U !~ a,.1 ~• W W ~ N `I ~ M d"d' ~ N 3 NO~NS-1 ~ ~ N ~ O .... ~ '' •ri O O S-+ O ri N M e-1 rl N r-1 1 (f CO N N r•I 1~ O i~ t~ •rl wa • ~ o.w vi aaoaaa~ z ~aa ~o v ~Mb N U • ~ O m ~ a N 3.1 ~ •~ ~ ~ ~ a~ b ~ 3 N U + .~ ~ •rl N •.a e•-1 N ~ ~ V ~ ~ ~ i~ •,i IT••i ~ •r•I t~ •rl W ~ N ~ k p O •~ ~ •p ~ ~ b •~ O W •,.1 ••~1 ~ d I „~ a I W HQ ~xCQH ,`~fl~CA Otl~ ao ~a O~ A a~ w O N O •.i la a 4~` N -~ Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia Sign Ordinance Worksession February 13, 1990 2 Our Purpose This Afternoon: ...Present an overview of the proposed draft ordinance to you... ...Explain why and how the ordinance was developed... ...Provide an opportunity for you to discuss and ask questions about the draft... 3 ~iStOry (~vhy ~e are here..... ...Roanoke County Board of Supervisors adopted a Comprehensive Development Plan in 1985 • • • - ... The plan contained many recommendations designed to guide future growth and development in the County... ...One of the plans recommendations vas to adopt a comprehens ive revision of the County Zoning Ordinance...including: Commercial Districts Rural Districts Industrial Districts Residential Districts Sign Provisions Etc......... ...Three major components are currently being revised: Signs Rural (Catawba) Commercial 4 Existing Ordinance ...Existing Sign Regulations were adopted in 1970...(last comprehensive revision) ...Adopted prior to the rapid development /suburbanization of Roanoke County... ...Does not adequately address/define all type of signage... ...Lacks administrative clarity...internal consistency... ...Current ordinance is difficult to enforce... 5 Process (ho~v the draft ordinance was developed) SIGN SUB-COMMITTEE ...Planning Commission appoints asign- subcommittee in late 1 X88... ...Thirteen members ...variety of interests and perspectives on the issue of signage... ...Jan-May 1989...Committee discusses a variety of issues pertaining to signage/sign regulation. Purpose and Intent... What do we wish to regulate... Why and Ho~v? ... ...Staff prepares first draft of sign ordinance using committee discussions/decisions as a guide... ...Committee receives first draft in May 1989 ...May-June...Committee reviews/modifies four drafts of the ordinance before transmitting the ordinance to the Planning Commission in late June... 6 PLANNING COMMISSION ...July-Sept... Commission holds several public ~orksessions on the proposed ordinance...revie~ws the draft prepared by the Sign Sub-Committee... ...Many editorial changes are made (language and format... ...Commission has made several revisions to the standards recommended by the Committee... ...Oct 1989... Commission holds community meeting to present the draft ordinance.... ...November 1989...Pub 1 is Hearing held on the proposed ordinance. Commission makes changes to the draft based upon public comments received. Approves draft, and forwards to the Board. 7 THE DRAFT ORDINANCE ...The proposed Roanoke County Si, ~~~~ ®rdinance is a comprehensive ordinance that defines various types of outdoor signage, provides standards for sign display, and clarifies administrative and enforcement procedures for users and Roanoke County staff members. 8 THE PARTS (MAJOR) 1. PURPOSE AND INTENT 2. DEFINITIONS 3. EXEMPTED SIGNS 4. PROHIBITED SIGNS 5 . PERMIT PROCEDURES b. ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURES 7. HOW TO MEASURE SIGN AREA 8. TEMPORARY SIGNS 9. NON-CONFORMING SIGNS 10. DISTRICT REGULATIONS 11. OFF-PREMISES SIGNS 9 Exempted Signs..... ...Some types of signs are exempted from regulation. These include..... Traffic signs Directional signs (less than 5 square [eet) Signs on vehicles Reat Estate Signs (size limitation) Time/Temperature Displays Political Signs Signs on the inside of establishments. Agricultural Signs (less than 4~ square feet) 10 Prohibited Signs ...other types of signs wi11 be prohibited in Roanore County. These include... Signs that obscure official traffic signs Signs posted on public property without permission Signs that imitate official traffic signs Signs that rotate or move. Signs that obstruct doors or windows Signs displayed without the property owners permission. Signs that obstruct the view of motorists at intersections 11 Si n Permits and Enforcement ...As ~lth existing ordinance, a sign perffiit will be required prior to displaying any sign regulated by the ordinance. ...Applicant must provide information on the size of the sign, location of the sign, Iot frontage, etc. ...Permit will be valid for a six ffionth period; ®vi11 be voided if sign is not installed Nithin this time frame. ...A11 official notices of violations must be in writing: maximum of 15 days. to correct the violation. ... Civi 1 Penalties are proposed as a method of ensuring compliance with the ordinance. ~. 12 Temporary Signs .....A11o~ved in all coning districts. .....May be displayed up to 30 consecutive days; maximum of 60 days per calendar year. .....Maximum of 40 square feet of temporary signage displayed at one time. .....Only one portable sign may be displayed on a lot at one time. 13 District Regulations ...Allowable sign area on a lot will be based upon the frontage of the lot. EXAMPLE: DISTRICT RATIO/FOOT 200' LOT Agric. .25 50 sq. ft. Res. .25 50 sq. ft. B-1 .50 100 sq. ft. B_2 1.25 250 q. ft. B-3 1.5 300 sq. ft ...Each business wi 11 also be subject to a maximum amount of signage, and a maximum nu~ab er of signs .. . B-1 100 sq. ft 2 signs B_2 200 sq. ft 3 signs B-3 300 sq. ft 3 signs 14 Freestanding Signs ~ ... 250 feet of separation between freestanding signs on ~ single lot. ... A~Iax i mum height of 25 feet. ... Lot must be at least 10 0 feet wide for a freestanding sign to be permitted. Off-Premises Signs ...Allowed in: B-2, B-3, M- 1, M-2, and M-3 Districts. ...Maximum size allowed will be 378 sq. ft plus 10 ~ for embellishments. ...500' radial spacing xill be required between new and existing off-premises signs. ...200' setback from residential zoning districts, churches, schools, 1 ibrarys, etc. 15 ... side-by-side, and multi-decker boards prohibited. 1 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. - f..s AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 13, 1990 AGENDA ITEM: Joint Board of Supervisors/Planning Commission Worksession to Discuss Proposed Revisions to the Roanoke County Sign Regulations ~' COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS : „ ~.,,t (,e-y~-r~ '"'~''`'~~ C '. ,,,,, ~ ,,.~y1f •.f'I i h-c~v°9 coo--r..c c-~n.. C`t. i ~'J 4 M~ ~f J ' /~:~-c.~'vrWv~-,t-~,tt~,•~.c x-,/~~-c; c~j ~..=~ o-ri-c .-wc~r~.v~-c.9 BACKGROUND' This worksession has been scheduled at the request of the Board of Supervisors and Planning Commission for the purpose of reviewing the proposed Sign Ordinance. The members of the Sign Subcommittee have been invited to attend and participate in the worksession. The staff will begin the worksession with a overhead and slide presentation on the process used to develop the draft. Major provisions and standards of the ordinance will be discussed. First reading of the Sign Ordinance is planned for the March 13, 1990 meeting of the Board. At this meeting the Board will also be asked to schedule a public hearing and action for March 27, 1990. As currently drafted, the regulations will take effect upon their adoption. Respectfully submitted, ~~ ~ ~ ~ Terrance L. Har~gton Director of Pla ing and Zoning Action Vote No Yes Abs Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Motion by Robers Johnson McGraw Nickens Eddy ~` A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, XX-XX-XX. ORDINANCE XXXXXX-X ADOPTING A NEW SET OF ZONING REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO THE DISPLAY OF SIGNAGE WITHIN ROANOKE COUNTY, AND REPEALING OR AMENDING CERTAIN EXISTING ZONING REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO THE DISPLAY OF SIGNS. WHEREAS, the Roanoke County 1985 Comprehensive Development Plan recommended the update of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission did appoint a Roanoke County Sign Subcommittee to prepare draft recommendations pertaining to the display of signage in Roanoke County, and, WHEREAS, the Commission did receive the recommendations of the Sign Subcommittee in July 1989, and did review and study these recommendations, making modifications where deemed by the Commission to be appropriate, and' WHEREAS, on November 9, 1989 the Roanoke County Planning Commission did hold a public hearing in accord with Section 15.1- 431 of the Code of Virginia, as amended. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Zoning Ordinance of Roanoke County is hereby amended by repealing the following: Section 21-93 Signs. (REPEALED IN ITS ENTIRETY) Section 21-20 Words and Phrases The following words and phrases are REPEALED: Administrator Sign Sign Structure Section 21 22 5 R-MH Manufactured Housing Combined District I. (e) {REPEALED IN ITS ENTIRETY) Section 21-23-3 B-3 Special Commercial_District B. Signs (REPEALED IN ITS ENTIRETY) *w,t,r*,t+t,t*,t,t*,tirit****** 1 N- 2 SIGN STRUCTURE The supports, uprights, bracing or framework of any structure exhibiting a sign, be it single faced, double faced, v-type or otherwise. SUSPENDED SIGN A sign that is suspended from a wall, roof, canopy, awning, marquee, mansard wall, parapet wall, or porch of a building by means of brackets, hooks or chains,. and the like, and whose face is roughly perpendicular or parallel to the building element to which it is attached. TASABLE VALUE The value of the sign and sign structure as determined by the Commissioner of Revenue of Roanoke County. TEMPORARY SIGN Any sign structure which is not permanently affixed to the ground, a building or other structure, and/or an on- premise sign applying to a seasonal or brief activity such as, but not limited to, summer camps, horse shows, yard sales, Christmas tree sales, business promotions, auctions and carnivals. For the purposes of these regulations, on-premises real estate signs and signs displayed on active construction projects shall be considered temporary when displayed in accordance with Section 21-93 (J). ZONING ADMINISTRATOR The Zoning Administrator of Roanoke County, Virginia, or an authorized agent thereof. For the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance, also known as the Administrator. Section 21-93 Sians. Add the following as Section 21-93 of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance: Section 21-93 SIGNS A. PURPOSE These sign regulations are intended to define, permit and control the use of signs. They have been established by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County to achieve the following community goals and objectives: (1) To protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public. (2) To promote the economic growth of Roanoke County by creating a community image that is conducive to attracting new business and industrial development. (3) To distribute equitably the privilege of using the public environs to communicate private information. (4) To permit reasonable legibility and effectiveness of signs and to prevent their over-concentration, improper placement and excessive height, bulk, density, and area. 4 / Y-~ (5) To promote the safety of persons and property by requiring that signs not create a hazard due to collapse, fire, decay, or abandonment. (6) To ensure that signs do not obstruct fire-fighting efforts, and do not create traffic hazards by confusing or distracting motorists or by impairing drivers' ability to see pedestrians, obstacles, or other vehicles or to read traffic signs. (7) To provide for the reasonable advertising of business and civic products and services, with recognition of the effects of signage on the character of the community. (8) To control visual clutter, and encourage high professional standards in sign design and display. (9} To establish clear procedures for the administration and enforcement of this ordinance. B. DEFINITIONS (1) Definitions pertaining to provisions of these sign regulations may be found in Section 21-20 of this ordinance. (2) Graphic representations of sign designs and terminology may be found in Section 21-93 (R) of this ordinance. These graphics should be viewed as illustrative examples only, and are not intended to be inclusive of all sign designs. C. PERMITTED SIGNS-GENERALLY (1) Any sign displayed in Roanoke County shall be in accordance with: (a) All provisions of Section 21-93 of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance; and (b) All applicable provisions of the Roanoke County Building Code, as adopted, and all amendments thereto; and (c) All applicable state and federal regulations pertaining to the display of signage. (2) If any two or more sections of the above referenced regulations are in conflict, the provision that provides the most restrictive standard shall apply. D. EBEMPTED SIGNS (1) The following signs shall be exempted from regulation, and may be displayed within Roanoke County without obtaining a sign permit. However, an electrical permit shall be required for any sign requiring or incorporating electrical service: 5 ~""~ (a) Official traffic signs or similar regulatory devices owned, erected and maintained by a duly constituted governmental body. (b) Signs required to be displayed or maintained by law or governmental order, rule or regulation. (c) Memorial tablets or signs, provided they are displayed by a public or quasi-public agency. (d) Directional signs provided that each such sign does not exceed five (5) square feet per sign, and no such sign shall contain any advertising matter. (e) Street address signs, not exceeding ten (10) square feet in size. (f) Non-illuminated signs, not more than three square feet in area warning trespassers or announcing property as posted. (g) Signs displayed on~a truck, bus, or other vehicle while in use in the normal conduct of business. This section shall not be interpreted to permit the parking for display purposes a vehicle to which a sign is attached or the use of such a vehicle as a portable sign. (h) Flags and insignias of any government except when displayed in connection with commercial purposes. (i) On-premises real estate signs in residential or agricultural zoning districts not exceeding five (5) square feet in area, or on-premises real estate signs in commercial or industrial zoning districts not exceeding sixteen (16) square feet in area. On-premises real estate signs larger than these exempted allowances may be installed as temporary signs in accordance with Section 21-93 {J} (2). (j) Clocks that display time and temperature through the use of mechanical means or the controlled display of lights, provided these devices do not display any other message. (k) Political campaign signs provided that they are located outside of the public right-of-way, and are removed within fourteen (14) days after the campaign. (1) Signs displayed between Thanksgiving and Christmas associated with the sale of Christmas trees and wreaths. (m) Signs on the inside of establishments, except those signs specified in sections 21-93 (E)(1) (h) and (k}, which shall not be excluded. 6 /~/- 2,. (6) Any sign permit issued shall be null and void if any sign for which the permit was issued is not installed in accordance with the permit within six (6) months of the date the permit was approved. {7) Maintenance, repair, or restoration of nonconforming signs shall be in accordance with Section 21-93 (M). If the value of such work exceeds fifty (50) percent of its replacement value, it shall only be authorized after the approval of a sign permit application. G. ENFORCEMENT (1) The Zoning Administrator shall have the responsibility for enforcing the provisions of this ordinance. The Zoning Administrator may, as necessary, solicit the assistance of other local and state officials and agencies to assist with this enforcement. (2) Property owners, sign permit applicants, and/or establishment owners/managers, as applicable, shall be notified in writing of violations of the provisions of this ordinance. The Zoning Administrator shall, in the notice of violation, state the nature of the violation, the date that it was observed, and the remedy or remedies necessary to correct the violation. The Zoning Administrator may establish a reasonable time period for the correction of the violation, however in no case shall such time period exceed 15 days from the date of written notification. (3) If the violation is not corrected within the time period specified in the first notification, a second written notice shall be sent. The second notification shall request compliance with these provisions within a period not to exceed seven (7) days. (4) If the Zoning Administrator is not able to obtain compliance with these provisions in accordance with the procedures outline above, civil and/or criminal procedures may be initiated in accordance with County law. H. MEASUREMENT OF SIGN AREA (1) Sign area shall be calculated as follows: (a) The area of a suspended, attached, or projecting sign, where the letters, numerals, or symbols are on a sign surface which is hung or affixed to a structure, shall be the total area of the hung or affixed surfaces. (b) The area of an attached sign where the sign consists of words, symbols, or numerals painted on or affixed to a wall, fence, or other building element shall be the entire area within a continuous perimeter enclosing the extreme limits of each word, group of words, symbol, numeral, groups of symbols, or groups of numerals, where the symbols or numbers are meant to be read as a unit. 9 /v-~ (c) The area of a freestanding sign shall be the total area of all surfaces (excluding poles or other support structures) visible from the public right-of-way. For double or multi-faced signs, only the area of surf aces visible at any one time, at any one point on the public right-of-way shall be measured when calculating sign area. (d) The area of monument-type freestanding signs shall be determined by (1) the size of the copy area, (2) visual breaks in the structural components of the sign, and/or (3) variation in the monuments color scheme. (2) In situations where these criteria do not provide guidance in determining sign area, the zoning administrator shall determine the size of the sign. I. CALCULATION OF ALLOWABLE SIGN AREA ON CORNER LOTS (1) On corner lots, the front shall be either (a) the side fronting the street providing major access, or (b) the side which the main entrance of the structure faces. In situations where neither of these methods clearly distinguishes the front, the Zoning Administrator shall make a determination. (2) For commercial or industrial uses, the front shall not be a primarily residential street. (3) On corner lots where a building or buildings face more than one street, sign area shall be allowed for front lineal footage as indicated in the district regulations, and for one half the side street frontage, provided: (a) The side street does not front on a primarily residential area; (b) Sign area as determined by each frontage is placed only on the frontage from which it is determined. J. TEMPORARY SIGNS (1) Any person wishing to display a temporary sign must apply for a sign permit pursuant to Section 21-93 (F). Except as provided in Sections (2) and (3) below, pertaining to real estate and construction signs, temporary signs shall comply with the following standards: (a) Each business or use on a lot shall be allowed to display a temporary sign a maximum of two (2) times per calendar year. No business may display a temporary sign or signs for more than thirty (30) consecutive days, nor more than a total of sixty (60) days per calendar year. Businesses that wish to display temporary signage in excess of these provisions may apply for a permanent sign permit which shall be evaluated against the applicable district standards. 10 r `~ (b) Only one portable sign may be displayed on a lot or adjacent lots under single ownership and control, at any one time. Any portable sign displayed shall have a minimum sign setback of 40 feet from the centerline of any public right-of-way, or 15 feet from any front property line, whichever is greater. (c) No business or establishment shall display more than two temporary signs simultaneously and the total square footage of any temporary signs displayed at one time shall not exceed forty {40) square feet. (2) Real estate signs greater than sixteen (16) square feet in commercial or industrial zoning districts or greater than five {5) square feet in agricultural or residential zoning districts may be installed on a lot provided that each such sign does not exceed ninety-six (96) square feet in area, and has a minimum sign setback of fifteen (15) feet from any public right-of-way. All real estate signs must be removed within 14 days after the property has been sold or leased. (3) On premises construction signs may be installed on active construction sites. No construction sign shall exceed ninety-six (96) square feet in area. Any such sign must have a minimum sign setback of fifteen (15) feet from any public right-of-way. All construction signs must be removed from a construction site prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the building or project. K. ILLUMINATED SIGNS (1) Signs may be illuminated either through the use of backlighting or direct lighting provided the following standards are met: (a) Information on any illumination proposed as part of a sign must be provided by the applicant on the sign permit application. (b) (Reserved) (c) No light from any illuminated sign shall cause direct glare into or upon any building other than the building to which the sign is related. (d) No light from any illuminated sign shall cause direct glare on to any adjoining piece of property, or any adjoining right-of-way. (2) Any sign containing electrical components shall conform to current UL, ETL, CSA, or ULC standards and display a label from one of these recognized testing labs; or as an alternative, shall be designed and constructed to standards that would allow one of the above referenced labels to be affixed and thereafter inspected by Roanoke County to insure compliance with these standards. it L. PROJECTING AND SUSPENDED SIGNS (1) No projecting or suspended sign shall extend more than six (6) feet from any wall or other structure to which it is affixed, nor shall any such sign have a setback of less than fifteen (15) feet from the nearest public right-of-way. (2) The bottom edge of any projecting or suspended sign must be at least seven (7) feet above the ground if located above any publicly accessible walkway or driveway. (3) No projecting or suspended sign shall project or suspend over an adjoining lot, without the expressed written consent of the adjoining property owner. M. NONCONFORMING SIGNS (1) Nonconforming Signs-Generally. Any sign which was lawfully in existence at the time of the effective date of this ordinance which does not conform to the provisions herein, and any sign which is accessory to a nonconforming use, shall be deemed a nonconforming sign and may remain except as qualified in section (2), below. No nonconforming sign shall be enlarged, extended, structurally reconstructed, or altered in any manner; except a sign face may be changed so long as the new face is equal to, or reduced in height, sign area, and/or projection. (a) The addition of lighting or illumination to a nonconforming sign, shall constitute an expansion of a nonconforming structure, and shall not be permitted under these regulations. (2) Removal of Nonconforming Signs. Nonconforming signs may remain, provided they are kept in good repair, except for the following: (a} Damaae or destruction of a non-conforming sign. A nonconforming sign which is destroyed or damaged to the extent exceeding fifty (50) percent of its taxable value shall not be altered, replaced or reinstalled unless it is in conformance with these sign regulations.- If the damage or destruction is fifty (50) percent or less of its taxable value, the sign may be restored within ninety (90) days of the damage or destruction, but shall not be enlarged in any manner. (b) Damaae or destruction of use. A nonconforming on- premises sign shall be removed if the structure or use to which it is accessory is destroyed or demolished to the extent exceeding fifty (50) percent of the principal structures value. (c) Chanae of Zoning. Whenever a change of zoning occurs upon a lot which contains a nonconforming on-premises sign, such sign shall not be permitted without being modified in such a manner as to be in full compliance with these sign regulations. 12 ~/*~ "" (d) Off-Premises Sians Off-premises signs located in agricultural or residential zoning districts are, due to their location, inconsistent with the purposes of this ordinance. All off-premises signs located in agricultural or residential zoning districts shall be removed by January 1, 2000. After this date, the Zoning Administrator may order the removal of any such sign, provided Roanoke County compensates the owner for the taxable value of the sign structure. Nothing in this section shall prohibit the Chief Building Official from ordering the removal, without compensation, of damaged or neglected signs in accordance with 21-93 N. N. DAMAGED OR NEGLECTED SIGNS (1) The Chief Building Official of Roanoke County shall have the authority to order the removal, without compensation, of any sign or sign structure that due to neglect or damage poses a clear danger to the health, safety and welfare of the public. 0. DISTRICT REGULATIONS (1) A-1 ZONING DISTRICT (a) Lots within an A-1 district shall be allowed a maximum signage allocation not to exceed one-quarter (.25) square foot of sign area per 1 lineal foot of lot frontage. The following signs shall be allowed in the A-1 District subject to the regulations contained herein: BUSINESS SIGNS Each permitted business in an A-1 district shall be allowed a maximum of fifty {50) square feet of sign area, provided that the total signage on the lot does not exceed the allowable maximum as defined in (a) above. Businesses that request sign permits for lots that meet or exceed their allowable sign allocation shall be allowed a maximum of twenty-five (25) square feet of signage. IDENTIFICATION SIGNS A maximum of thirty (30) square feet shall be allowed per use. HOME OCCUPATION SIGNS A maximum of two (2) square feet shall be allowed per home occupation, or group of home occupations within one home. HISTORIC SITE SIGNS A maximum of fifteen { 15 ) square feet shall be allowed per sign. TEMPORARY SIGNS Temporary signs shall be allowed in accordance with Section 21-93 (J). 13 N - .Z (b) No freestanding sign shall be allowed on any lot having less than two hundred (200) feet of lot frontage. The required minimum separation for freestanding signs on a lot or lots under single ownership or control shall be 250 feet. No freestanding sign shall be located within fifteen (15) feet of any other freestanding sign on an adjacent or adjoining lot., (c) Any freestanding sign erected must have a minimum sign setback of 40 feet from the centerline of any public right- of-way, or 15 feet from any front property line, whichever is greater. (d) No freestanding sign shall exceed fifteen (15) feet in height. (e) No establishment shall be allowed more than two (2) signs. {2) RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS (a) Lots within R-E, R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, R-MH, R-5, and R-6 districts shall be allowed a maximum signage allocation not to exceed one-quarter (.25) square foot of sign area per 1 lineal foot of lot frontage. The following signs shall be allowed in the R-E, R-1, R-2, R- 3, R-4, R-MH, R-5, and R-6 Districts subject to the regulations contained herein: BUSINESS SIGNS Each permitted business in a residential district shall be allowed a maximum of thirty (30) square feet of sign area, provided that the total signage on the lot does not exceed the allowable maximum as defined in (a) above. Businesses that request sign permits for lots that meet or exceed their allowable sign allocation shall be allowed a maximum of twenty-five (25) square feet of signage. IDENTIFICATION SIGNS A maximum of thirty (30) square feet shall be allowed per use. HOME OCCUPATION SIGNS A maximum of two (2) square feet shall be allowed per home occupation, or group of home occupations within one home. HISTORIC SITE SIGNS A maximum of fifteen (15) square feet shall be allowed per sign. TEMPORARY SIGNS Temporary signs shall be allowed in accordance with Section 21-93 {J). 14 / Y ~~ (b) No freestanding sign shall be allowed on any lot having less than two hundred (200) feet of lot frontage. The required minimum separation for freestanding signs on a lot or lots under single ownership or control shall be 250 feet. No freestanding sign shall be located within fifteen (15) feet of any other freestanding sign on an adjacent or adjoining lot. (c) Any freestanding sign erected must have a minimum sign setback of 40 feet from the centerline of any public right- of-way, or 15 feet from any front property line, whichever is greater. (d) No freestanding sign shall exceed ten (10) feet in height. Any freestanding sign erected must be a monument type sign as defined in Section 21-20 of the Zoning Ordinance. (e) No establishment shall be allowed more than two (2) signs. {3) B-1 OFFICE DISTRICT REGULATIONS (a) Lots within a B-1 district shall be allowed a maximum signage allocation not to exceed one-half (.5) square foot of sign area per 1 lineal foot of lot frontage. The following signs shall be allowed in the B-1 Office District subject to the regulations contained herein: BUSINESS SIGNS Each permitted business in a B-1 district shall be allowed a maximum of 100 square feet of sign area, provided that the total signage on the lot does not exceed the allowable maximum as defined in (a) above. Businesses that request sign permits for lots that meet or exceed their allowable sign allocation shall be allowed a maximum of twenty-five {25) square feet of signage. IDENTIFICATION SIGNS Identification signs shall be subject to the same regulations as business signs within this zone. HISTORIC SITE SIGNS A maximum of fifteen ( 15 ) square feet shall be allowed per sign. TEMPORARY SIGNS Temporary signs shall be allowed in accordance with Section 21-93 (J). (b) No on-premises freestanding sign shall be allowed on any lot having less than one hundred (100) feet of lot frontage. The required minimum separation for freestanding signs on a lot or lots under single ownership or control shall be 250 feet. No freestanding sign shall be located within fifteen (15) feet of any other freestanding sign on an adjacent or adjoining lot. 15 N- ,2 (c) Any freestanding sign erected must have a minimum sign setback of 40 feet from the centerline of any public right- of-way, or 15 feet from any front property line, whichever is greater. (d) No freestanding sign shall exceed fifteen (15) feet in height. (e) No establishment shall be allowed more than two (2) signs. (4) B-2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT REGULATIONS (a) Lots within a B-2 district shall be allowed a maximum signage allocation not to exceed one and one-quarter (1.25) square feet of sign area per 1 lineal foot of lot frontage. The following signs shall be allowed in the B-2 General Commercial District subject to the regulations contained herein: BUSINESS SIGNS Each permitted business in a B-2 district shall be allowed a maximum of two hundred (200) square feet of sign area, provided that the total signage on the lot does not exceed the allowable maximum as defined in (a) above. Businesses that request sign permits for lots that meet or exceed their allowable sign allocation shall be allowed a maximum of twenty-five (25) square feet of signage. IDENTIFICATION SIGNS Identification signs shall be subject to the same regulations as business signs within this zone. HISTORIC SITE SIGNS A maximum of fifteen (15) square feet shall be allowed per sign. TEMPORARY SIGNS Temporary signs shall be allowed in .accordance with Section 21-93 (J). (b) No on-premises freestanding sign shall be allowed on any lot having less than one hundred ( 100 ) feet of lot frontage. The required minimum separation for freestanding signs on a lot or lots under single ownership or control shall be 250 feet. No freestanding sign shall be located within fifteen (15) feet of any other freestanding sign on an adjacent or adjoining lot. (c) Any freestanding sign erected must have a minimum sign setback of 40 feet from the centerline of any public right- of-way, or 15 feet from any front property line, whichever is greater. (d) No freestanding sign shall exceed twenty-five (25) feet in height. {e) No establishment shallvbe allowed more than three (3) signs. 16 (5) B-3 SPECIAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT REGULATIONS ~- (a) Lots within a B-3 district shall be allowed a maximum signage allocation not to exceed one and one-half (1.5) square feet of sign area per 1 lineal foot of lot frontage. The following signs shall be allowed in the B-3 Special Commercial District subject to the regulations contained herein: BUSINESS SIGNS Each business in a B-3 district shall be allowed a maximum of three hundred (300) square feet of sign area, provided that the total signage on the lot does not exceed the allowable maximum as defined in (a) above. Businesses that request sign permits for lots that meet or exceed their allowable sign allocation shall be allowed a maximum of twenty-five (25) square feet of signage. IDENTIFICATION SIGNS Identification signs shall be subject to the same regulations as business signs within this zone. HISTORIC SITE SIGNS A maximum of fifteen (15) square feet shall be allowed per sign. TEMPORARY SIGNS Temporary signs shall be allowed in accordance with Section 21-93 (J). (b) No on-premises freestanding sign shall be allowed on any lot having less than one hundred ( 100 ) feet of lot frontage . The required minimum separation for freestanding signs on a lot or lots under single ownership or control shall be 250 feet. No freestanding sign shall be located within fifteen (15) feet of any other freestanding sign on an adjacent or adjoining lot. (c) Any freestanding sign erected must have a minimum sign setback of 40 feet from the centerline of any public right- of-way, or 15 feet from any front property line, whichever is greater. (d) No freestanding sign shall exceed twenty-five (25) feet in height. {e) No establishment shall be allowed more than three (3) signs. (6) INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS (a) Lots within M-1, M-2, and M-3 districts shall be allowed a maximum signage allocation not to exceed one and one-half (1.5) square feet of sign area per l lineal foot of lot frontage. The following signs shall be allowed in the M-1, M-2, and M- 3 districts subject to the regulations contained herein: 17 N- ~. BUSINESS SIGNS ach business in an industrial zoning district shall be allowed a maximum of three hundred (300) square feet of sign area, provided that the total signage on the lot does not exceed the allowable maximum as defined in (a) above. Businesses that request sig permits for lots that meet or exceed their allowable sign allo ation shall be allowed a maximum of twenty-five (25) square fee of signage. HISTORIC SITE SIG S A maximum of fifteen (15) square feet shall be allowed per sign. IDENTIFICATION S~GNS Identification signs shall be subject to the same regulat'ons as business signs within this zone. TEMPORARY SIGNS Temporary signs shall be allowed in accordance with Section 21-93 {J) {b} No on-premi es freestanding sign shall be allowed on any lot having less than one hundred ( 100 ) feet of lot frontage. The required minimum separa ion for freestanding signs on a lot or lots under single ownersh'p or control shall be 250 feet. No freestanding sign shall be ocated within fifteen (15) feet of any other freestanding sign on an adjacent or adjoining lot. (c) Any freesta ding sign erected must have a minimum sign setback of 40 feet fr m the centerline of any public right- of-way, or 15 feet from ny front property line, whichever is greater. (d) No freestanding sign shall exceed twenty-five (25) feet in height. (e ) No establisY~ment shall be allowed more than three (3) signs. P. D (1) OFF-PREMISES SIG S Off-premises signs shall be allowed in the B-2, B-3, M-1, M-2 a d M-3 Districts provided the following location and design standa ds are met: (a) No off-prem ses sign shall be located within a five hundred (500) foot radius f an existing off-premises sign, or an off-premises sign for whic a valid permit has been obtained, but has not yet been erected. (b) No off-premises sign shall be located within two hundred (200) feet of an residential zoning district, public square, park, school, libr ry, or church. (c) No off-pre installed on any roof stru~ feet in height above the a ises sign shall ture, nor shall any utting road. be allowed to be such sign exceed 35 18 (d) Side by side signs shall not be permitte ~- .G.~ double and multi-decker off-premises (e) Any off-pre ises sign must have a minimum sign setback of 40 feet from the centerline of any public right-of-way, or 15 feet from any front pr perty line, whichever is greater. Any off-premises sign shall h ve a minimum side and/or rear yard setback of fifteen (15) fee . (f) The maximum ize of any off-premises sign on a lot shall be 378 square feet pl s 10°s for embellishments, (2) USE NOT PROVIDED approval of any Use Not Supervisors, after considez of the Planning Commission, use as may be deemed appro Commission and the Board sh public display and advert signage scheme on the chars (3) PLANNED DEVELOPM~ as part of any proposal for Planned Commercial Develop this ordinance. The signag preliminary development p: sufficient detail to allow to judge the compatibilit character of the proposed plans shall provide inforr style, color, and material: the PUD or PCD proposal, t the appropriateness of the ~ character of the proposed c FOR PERHITS In conjunction with the Provided For Permit, the Board of ttion of the advice and recommendation shall impose sign limitations for the riate. Prior to acting, the Planning 11 consider the nature of the use, its Lsing needs, and the impact of any :ter of the surrounding area. NTS A signage plan shall be submitted a Planned Unit Development (PUD) or a tent (PCD) as authorized elsewhere in plan shall be part of the required an. All signage plans shall be of ;he Commission and Board of Supervisors y of the proposed signage with the BUD or PCD. At a minimum, all signage ation on the general size, location, of all signs proposed. In evaluating ie Commission and Board shall consider roposed signage plan in relation to the evelopment, and the surrounding area. (4) AIRPORT IMPACT ZO ES The allowable height of signs within any established Airport Imp ct Zone shall be governed by the height restriction for that zone, r the height restriction imposed by the applicable district regula ion, whichever is more restrictive. (5) SITE DEVELOPMENT commercial and industrial general location of any f~ shall be designed so that f in a location that conform. PLANS Site development plans for new development projects shall show the eestanding sign proposed. Site plans eestanding signs may be placed on a lot to these provisions. 19 Q. VARIANCES (1) Requests for vari follow the procedures outlir Ordinance. The Board of Zoni request, shall follow the g 15.1-495 of the Code of Virc grant variances does not ext the cost, size or location ~ an applicant, nor should ~ regional or national busing sign when it does not confo R. GRAPHICS (TO BE INCLUDED) 3. SeverabilitY The sections, paragra ordinance are severable, < paragraph, or section of unconstitutional, or invali a court of competent jurisd: sentences, paragraphs, and valid. 4. This Ordinance shall the date of its adoption. N- Z ~nces to these sign regulations shall ed in Section 21-123 (B) of the Zoning ~g Appeals, in considering any variance sidelines of this section, and Section inia, (1950), as amended. The power to end to an .economic hardship related to f a new sign, or to the convenience of t be extended to the convenience of sses which propose to use a standard :m to the provisions of this section. phs, sentences, and clauses of this end if any phrase, clause, sentence, this ordinance shall be declared d by the valid judgement or decree of ,ction, the remaining phrases, clauses, sections of this ordinance shall remain in full force and effect on and after 20 /Y- 3 COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA BOARD OF SUPERVISORS BUDGET WORKSESSION FEBRUARY 13, 1990 CHAPTER 1: THE BUDGET PROCESS BEGINS.......... "THE REVENUES" 3 COUNTY OF ROANORE, VIRGINIA BOARD OF SIIPERVISORS BIIDGET WORRSESSION FEBRIIARY 13, 1990 CHAPTER l: THE BUDGET PROCESS BEGINS.......... "THE REVENUES" / U- ~ 1990-91 will be an exciting year for County operations. We will be addressing many major concerns requiring innovative solutions, such as the new landfill, recycling, Spring Hollow Reservoir, consolidation, continued work at Dixie Caverns landfill, the formation of the new Police Department, and continued emphasis on economic development. We are confident in our abilities to meet these challenges. At this time we are projecting a moderate increase in revenues to fund these programs. Revenues for the 1990-91 budget are projected to be $4,843,002 (or 7.83%) higher than the 1989-90 budgeted revenues. The largest revenue increase ($2,738,230) is from real estate taxes. This year assessments increased 8,26%. Approximately 3% of this increase is related to new construction. This reassessment is reflected in tax collections for the second half of the 1989-90 fiscal year (in payments due June 5, 1990), and collections for the first half of the 1990-91 fiscal year ( in payments due December 5, 1990). The second largest increase ($1,350,000) is from personal property taxes. These two revenue categories alone comprise 85% of the increase in County general funds. We are able to rely less and less upon increases in funds from the Federal and State levels. Federal funds disappeared from our budget in the 1986-87 Fiscal Year with the demise of the Revenue Sharing program. The current financial concerns of the State leave us with little hope of any large increase in funds from that source. State funding for education remains a major concern at ~- 3 this time. Any shortage in anticipated State funding would create a demand for increased funding for schools from the locality. In addition, the question of "no loss funding" for the new Police Department has not been finalized. At this time, passage looks very favorable and funds have been included in the revenue projections as if the Bill had been approved. There is a minimal increase in revenue sources based upon the economy, such as sales tax, business license, and motor vehicle license tax. The current trend shows a slackening in the growth of these areas and we are anticipating it to continue into the next year. During the month of March 1990, the Board will receive the consultant's report on potential user fees which could generate additional revenues. These are the revenue sources that should be carefully considered as a means of funding new programs and expanded operations. Fund Balance should be a concern in the budgeting of these revenues. Since July 1,1989, the Unappropriated Balance has been reduced by $903,680 to its current level of 5.67% of general fund expenditures. A percentage of each year's increase in revenues should be set aside so that at the very least, the ratio is maintained at the same level. At the Board of Supervisors retreat on January 20, 1990, the following list of priorities was established by the Board as the major concerns for the 1990-91 fiscal year: /Y-~ A. Roanoke County Resource Authority 1. Landfill 2. Recycling B. Capital Improvements Plan 1. Spring Hollow Reservoir 2. Major Maintenance 3. Asbestos 4. Drainage 5. Equipment Replacement C. Budget 1. Economies 2. Efficiencies 3. Employee Salaries D. Economic Development E. Emergency Services 1. Police Department 2. Fire Department 3. Rescue Operations We will now begin the process of attempting to address all of these concerns within the restrictions of these revenue estimates. This should be another challenging budget process, but we believe that this Board has the resources and the initiative to make progress in all of these areas. aOe a _ (~ [al a U N O m t 4+ ~ 0. m 0 U o~ G m F N ~'l ! F O oO N z ' i i x 0Oa a m U o m i H v. CO 0f O U rn CV O m ~• m F O aC U_ i ~ ~ O ~ 1 i F Z m C] Cd F c a ~ ~ r> > O~ i m ~ i O 4-' ~ 31 U F V rn `~ oa 1 J p m H ~ U W i ao ! 00 O a0 H ~ ! m 6+ i Oo r~-I N J D: d' F O ~ i Gp i m Z V GY O C W z F m m _ i ~ G r ~' ~ "iJ' m 0 O F ~ Y ~ ` us F >6 N V 06 ~ x ~ m m N ti O H i6 M I6 N w o N o„s m m a A N N >K K >~ M x p p 0 0 0 1 o O O O O o O o O _ ; C O 0 0 0 O N O O N N ..+ N ti .--~ ~s 6~ le 1 to O O O O O O O O O~ N 0 0 0 0 0 ~ O m ~ ws m ^ u N os ~ N .w N b ; ~ ~ 1 O m m ~ ~ C /Y K M n .~-~ N i F d N CO 6 _ ~_ Up i 1 J Z i J _ m 06 OD CO m F > 1 U d N N i N rO+ d CO F Z Z O O t - 1 00 ~ o• F OC U ~ -~ O = i i+ Cd Ott U F m D. 1Ur Z l i CQ i O~ m a U ~ J ~ O~ of 06 G 6 m 0 1 6-. N J~ N J ! ~ ~+ m 00 U rl e6 oO U ]111 O N O J of ^ _ F ~ N .~ U N m r r ~, O U 00 ~ m D. o. m ..i O , . d i ` J y 0 >a Zp J V I m aNi .' J F u U U i Z J O 0 i U N= d i O m m F U N m Ovi 1 ' O{ d d y N~ 4=O i ~ i J m pp u pO d m F 1 i~ `~ F 1 y 1 1 [a0 u 0~ i i i 1 e6 d 1 J d N d of O O x i i 6-~ N >e ~ 1~ N ~ i s U 1 S 00 00 ~ i 0 >s O J Co 00 96 y Q Z i O .-~ I i DO C !11 ~ i O O O` OUO F ~+ O OO ' - O F m~ m V 1 Z m m ~ J m 310 !~ 06 0 0 U d. 1 N 1 ~+ F 6 f/ J CD ~_ ! D m D U 00 U ~ N m O ~ G 6 Z i U dl ! 006 i U_ 6 d 0 O u ~ m O G >K 0 0{ 1 i November 15, 1989 November 28, 1989 December 19, 1989 December 19, 1989 December 19, 1989 January 9, 1990 January 23, 1990 COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA GENERAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE Balance at July 1, 1989 Dental Insurance Drainage Projects Library Automation Drainage Engineer Bushdale Road Right of Way Hurrican Hugo Expenses Implementation of New Police Department Balance as of February 13, 1990 % of Amount General Fund $4,483,543 7.10 (106,980) (180,000) (300,000) (35,000) (15,000) (109,000) 157 700 3 579 863 5.67 0 Submitted by ~~ ~~ ~~~ Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance On December 19, 1989, the Board of Supervisors adopted a goal statement to maintain the General Fund Unappropriated Balance at a minimum of 6.25% of General Fund expenditures ($63,168,000), which is $3,948,000. i ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER N °" AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 13, 1990 AGENDA ITEM: Work Session on Roanoke County Today COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: At their retreat, the Board of Supervisors requested a work session on Roanoke County Today to discuss issues such as timeliness, content, costs, and increased readership. Attached is a report from Information Officer Anne Marie Green addressing the questions and suggestions the board members have made. Staff will be available at the work session to answer questions, and Ms. Green will have samples available of older issues of Roanoke County Today and other similar newsletters. Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ---------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved ( ) Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied ( ) Eddy Received ( ) Johnson Referred ( ) McGraw To ( ) Nickens Robers /'`~ O~ ROANp,I.~ ti p 2 L) ~ 2 v a 18 E50 8$ SFSQUICENTEN~,P~ A Beautiful Beginning PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE ~ox~z~t~ ~~ ~~~x~o~e MEMORANDUM DATE: February 13, 1990 TO: Roanoke County Board of Supervisors FROM: Anne Marie Green,,, Public Information Officer RE: Work Session on Roanoke County Todav Roanoke County Today was first published in 1985, and the Board at that time directed that the staff provide a four-page monthly publication which combined hard news and reports with human interest material. Based on the cost of distribution, the decision was made at that time to publish it as an insert in the Roanoke Times and World News. When the newsletter was revived last year, this is the format which we continued to follow. Members of the Board have recently expressed interest in reviewing the format and content of the newsletter, and this work. session has been scheduled to identify an editorial policy and mission statement for Roanoke County Todav. A monthly newsletter cannot compete with the local news media, because of timing. Most local newsletters focus on reports on recent actions of the governing body, upcoming events in the libraries and schools, and in-depth stories on important issues and human interest stories. Those that publish on a quarterly schedule have more problems with timeliness, and focus on "big picture" types of issues, such as comprehensive plan updates, new subdivis- ions, etc. I have recently contacted several Virginia localities concern- ing the format and costs of newsletters, and have received the following information: 1 P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE. VIRGINIA 24018-0798 (703) 772-2010 ~~ Town of Blacksburg - Population 30,380 Format Six pages, desktop publishing. Combines hard news with human interest information, but due to schedule, not much timely information Publication Quarterly (may expand to bimonthly in 1990/ 91) Editor Customer Relations Coordinator Circulation 15,160 (All postal customers) Distribution United States Mail Cost Printing 10.5 cents per copy Mailing 10.1 cents per copy 20.6 cents per copy 82.4 cents per customer/year Total $12,491.84/year Town of Leesburg - Population 10,810 Format Ten pages, typeset by graphics agency. Combines hard news with human interest, but due to schedule, not much timely informa- tion Publication Quarterly Editor Public Information Officer Circulation 10,000 households and businesses Distribution United States Mail Cost $1.00 per copy $4.00 per customer/year Total $40,000.00/year City of Falls Church - Population 9,700 Format Eight pages, looks like desktop publishing. Combines hard news with public interest information Publication Monthly Editor Public Information Officer Circulation 6,250 (all postal customers), and 300 for libraries and other distribution points Distribution United States Mail, with services of mailing house for labelling Cost 30.3 cents per copy $3.63 per customer/year Total $22,687.50/year 2 County of Fairfax - Population 710,500 Format Four page tabloid. Almost entirely devoted to Board action. Small amount of human interest information Publication Weekly Editor Employee in Office of Public Affairs Circulation 17,000 - 14,000 to subscribers on mailing list and remainder to various distribution points in County. Distribution United States Mail Cost 23 cents per copy $11.96 per customer/year Total $203,320.00/year County of York - Population 40,400 Format Eight to twelve pages, typed, with lay-out completed by hand Publication Quarterly Editor Public Information Officer Circulation 16,000 - all County households Distribution United States Mail Cost 27 cents per copy $1.08 per customer/year Total $17,280/year County of Roanoke - Population 75,000 Format Four page tabloid (approximately 11 pages on 8-1/2 x 11 paper) Publication Monthly Editor Public Information Officer Circulation 37,000 - 35,000 to citizens and remainder to County distribution points. Distribution Afternoon newspaper Cost 7.5 cents per copy 90 cents per customer/year Total $33,300.00 Roanoke County has the lowest monthly distribution cost, as well as the largest circulation. We could increase this circula- tion to guarantee full coverage of the County by adding the morning paper and Read and Shop (distributed to everyone who does not subscribe to the paper) to our circulation. The costs, on a monthly basis, are as follows: 3 ~-y Afternoon paper - present distribution 35,000 copies x 80.21/M 2807.00 Color (4.50/M) 157.00 2M for libraries and other facilities 64.00 3028.00 Less County's Discount - 242.00 $2786.00 Morning paper 28,060 copies x 80.21/M 2250.00 Color (4.50/M) 126.00 2376.00 Less County's Discount - 190.00 $2186.00 Read and Shop 23,278 copies x 69.10/M 1608.00 Color (4.50/M) 104.00 1712.00 Less County's Discount - 137.00 $1575.00 Total Cost per month $6547.00 Cost per Customer 7.5 cents The afternoon newspaper has the largest local circulation, as the morning paper is generally aimed at statewide distribution. However, there are obviously citizens who do not receive the afternoon paper, and are therefore not receiving Roanoke County Toda These citizens must go to the library or a County office to obtain a copy. Our current publication schedule generally allows reports on the actions at the last Board meeting of each month and notifica- tion about upcoming topics at future Board meetings. Under that schedule, it is not generally possible to include upcoming Planning Commission actions, because the Commission runs on a different cycle from the Board. If the Board would prefer a different publication schedule or editorial policy, I will be happy to investigate the pros and cons of any suggestions. 4 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1990 RESOLUTION CERTIFYING EXECUTIVE MEETING WAS HELD IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CODE OF VIRGINIA WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia has convened an executive meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provisions of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and WHEREAS, Section 2.1-344.1 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia that such executive meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia Law. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia hereby certifies that, to the best of each members knowledge: 1. Only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the executive meeting which this certification resolution applies, and 2. Only such public business matters as were identified in the motion convening the executive meeting were heard, discussed or considered by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. F O A AN,y. ~. z L ~~ ~ o z a 18 E~ 88 ~FSQ UICENTENN~P~ A Bcauti~ulBcginning COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE AILAMERIU LITY ~ 1' I ~'' ~~ ~~~ ~,~ 1979 (~ x~~ ~~ i~ ~ 1989 February 14, 1990 Rev. Gordon Grimes Cave Spring Baptist Church 5133 Brambleton Avenue Roanoke, VA 24018 Dear Reverend Grimes: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RICHARD W. ROBERS. CHAIRMAN GVE SPRING MAGISTERLAL DISTRICT STEVEN A. MCGRAW. VICE•CHAIRMAN UTAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT LEE B. EDDY ViIINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT BOB L. JOHNSON HCXLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS VINT~DId MAGISTERULL. DISTRICT On behalf of the Board of Supervisors, I would like to take this opportunity to let you know of our appreciation for your attending the meeting on Tuesday, February 13, 1990, to offer the invocation. We feel it lat all is done according to HisE will and for the good meetings so th of all citizens. Thank you for sharing your time with us. Sincerely, Richar W. Robers, Chairman Roanoke County Board of Supervisors bjh P.O. BQX 29600 ROANOKE. VIRGINIA 2 4018-07 9 8 • (703) 772-2004 F P~lwcc` z~ a 18 ~ E~ 88 SFSCIUICENTENN~P~ A Bcautiful8cginning COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE Ms. Virginia Mattern 5460 North Lakes Drive Roanoke, VA 24019 Dear Ms. Mattern: February 16, 1990 ~~ A1l~AMERIG1I11TY '~i I~' 1979 1989 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RICHARD W. ROBERS. CHAIRMAN GVE SPRING I.IAGISTERUIL DISTRICT STEVEN A MCGRAW. VICE-CHAIRMAN GTAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT LEE B. EDDY WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT BOB L. JOHNSON HOLLINS MAGISTERALL. DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT At their regular meeting on Tuesday, February 13, 1990, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors unanimously approved the request of the Roanoke County Occupational School P.T.A. for a raffle permit. The raffle will be conducted on April 28, 1990. The fee has been paid and your receipt is enclosed. You may consider this letter to be your permit, and I suggest it be displayed on the premises where the raffle is to be conducted. The State Code provides that raffle and bingo permits be issued on a calendar-year basis and such permits issued will expire on December 31, 1990. This permit, however, is only valid on the date specified in your application. PLEASE READ YOUR APPLICATION CAREFULLY. YOU HAVE AGREED TO COMPLY WITH STATE AND LOCAL REGULATIONS AND FAILURE TO COMPLYMAYRESULT IN CRIMDIL4L PENALTIESAND REVOKKnVVG OF YOUR PERMI7: YOU MUST FILE A FINANCIAL REPORT BY NOVEMBER 1 OF EACHCALENDAR YEAR PLEASE SUBMITA NEWAPPLICATTONAT LEAST 60 DAYS PRIOR T1D DATE OR DATES YOUR OR~U4NIZATION PLANS TO HOLD BINGO OR RAFFLES PERMITS EXPIRE ON DECEMBER 3I OF EACH CALENDAR YEAR If I may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me at 772-2003. Sincerely, mom ~ a.u.e~ Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisor bjh Enclosures cc: Commissioner of the Revenue Commonwealth Attorney (~nunty of t~uttnnkr County Treasurer P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 • (703) 772-2004 OQa ANRF ~ 9 Z Z ,°~ ~ a 18 Eso 88 SFSQUICENTENN~P~ A Btauti~ulBeginning COUNTY ADMINISTRATQR ELMER C. HODGE Mr. Eugene D. Rhodes 612 Central Avenue Salem, VA 24153 Dear Mr. Rhodes: February 15, 1990 AII~AMERICA CITY ''III 1979 1989 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RICHARD W. ROBERS. CHAIRMAN GVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT STEVEN A. MCGRAW. VICE•CHAIRMAN GTAWE)l1 MAGISTERUIL DISTRICT LEE B. EDDY WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERAL DISTRICT BOB L. JOHNSON HOWNS MAGISTERAL DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT At their regular meeting on Tuesday, February 13, 1990, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors unanimously approved the request of the Fort Lewis Rescue Squad, Inc. for a bingo permit. The fee has been paid and your receipt is enclosed. You may consider this letter to be your permit, and I suggest it be displayed on the premises where the bingo games are to be conducted. The State Code provides that raffle and bingo permits be issued on a calendar-year basis and such permits issued will expire on December 31, 1990. This permit, however, is only valid on the date specified in your application. PLEASE READ YOUR APPLICATION CAREFULLY. YOU HAVE AGREED TO COMPLY WITH STATE AND LOCAL REGULATIONS AND FAILURE TO COMPLYMAYRESULT IN CRIMWAL PENALTIESAND REVOICIIVVG OF YOUR PERMIT. YOU MUST FILE A FINANCIAL REPORT BY NOVEMBER 1 OF EACH CALENDAR YEAR PLEASE SUBMIT A NEWAPPLICATIONAT LEAST 60 DAYS PRIOR TU DATE OR DATES YOUR ORG~WIZATION PLANS TO HOLD BINGO OR RAFFLES PERMITS EXPIRE ON DECEMBER 3l OF EACH CALENDAR YEAR If I may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me at 772-2003. Sincerely, Yn~a- ~ . Q~~- Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisor bjh Enclosures cc: Commissioner of the Revenue Commonwealth Attorney County Treasurer C~nixnt~ n~ ~ottnnk~ P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE. VIRGINIA 24018-0798 (703) 772-2004 F P~IwF ~ 9 Z Z v a 18 E50 88 gFSQUICEN7ENN~P~ A Bcauti~ulBtginning COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE (~oixn#~ of ~~ttnnke February 16, 1990 ~~ ALL-AMERICA CITY ''I ~~1 1979 1989 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RICHARD W. ROBERS. CHAIRMAN GVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT STEVEN A. MCGRAW. VICE-CHAIRMAN GTAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT LEE B. EDDY WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT BOB L. JOHNSON HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT Mr. Frank T. Richardson, Jr. 1515 Gaines Street Salem, VA 24153 Dear Mr. Richardson: At their regular meeting on Tuesday, February 13, 1990, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors unanimously approved the request of the Loyal Order of Moose Lodge No. 284 for a raffle permit. The raffle will be conducted on April 21, 1990. The fee has been paid and your receipt is enclosed. You may consider this letter to be your permit, and I suggest it be displayed on the premises where the raffle is to be conducted. The State Code provides that raffle and bingo permits be issued on a calendar-year basis and such permits issued will expire on December 31, 1990. This permit, however, is only valid on the date specified in your application. PLEASE READ YOUR APPLICATION CAREFULLY. YOU HAVE AGREED TO COMPLY WITH STATE AND LOG4L REGULATIONS AND FAILURE TO COMPLYMAYRESULT IN CRIII~NAL PENALTIES AND REVOKKIIVVG OF YOUR PERMIT. YOU MUST FILE A FINANCIAL REPORT BY NOVEMBER I OF EACHCALENDAR YEAR PLEASE SUBMITA NEWAPPLICATIONAT LEAST 60 DAYS PRIOR TD DATE OR DATES YOUR ORGANI7.ATION PLANS TO HOLD BINGO OR RAFFLES PERMITS EXPIRE ON DECEMBER 31 OF EACH CALENDAR YEAR If I may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me at 772-2003. Sincerely, `/)'~GZ~~- ~ Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisor bjh Enclosures cc: Commissioner of the Revenue Commonwealth Attorney County Treasurer P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE. VIRGINIA 24018-0798 (703> 772-2004 F P~IwF z ~ z o~ a ~ 8 E5~ $$ SFS~CENTENN~Pv A BcautifulBcginning COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE February 15, 1990 The Honorable Bob L. Johnson Roanoke County Board of Supervisors 6628 Northway Drive Hollins, VA 24019 Dear Mr. Johnson: RICHARD W. ROBERS, CHAIRMAN GAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT STEVEN A. MCGRAW. VICE•CHAIRMAN CATAVUBA MAGISTERAL DISTRICT LEE B. EDDY WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERAL DISTRICT BOB L. JOHNSON HOLLJNS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT This is to advise that at their meeting held on Tuesday, February 13, 1990, the Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to reappoint you as a member of the Regional Airport Commission for a four-year term. Your term will expire on February 10, 1994. State law provides that any person elected, re-elected, appointed to any body be furnished a copy of the Freedom of Information Act; your 1989 copy is enclosed. We are also sending you a copy of the 1989 Conflict of Interest Act. It is necessary that you take an oath of office before the Clerk of the Roanoke County Circuit Court. This oath must be administered prior to your participation on this Commission. Please phone Mrs. Elizabeth W. Stokes, Clerk, at 387-6208, as soon as possible and arrange to have the oath administered. 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. Sincerely, '7'Y'lah.c~•- ~d • ~~ Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors MHA/bjh Enclosures cc: Mrs. Elizabeth W. Stokes Mr. W. Robert Herbert, Chairman, Regional Airport Commission Ms. Jacqueline L. Shuck, Executive Director, Roanoke Regional Airport (~uuntg of ~Rattnakr u~.~M[elcuclTr (~II~~ 1979 1989 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE. VIRGINIA 24018-0796 • (703) 772-2004 F a°~~F Z~ ~ a _ a 18 E~ 88 SFSQUICENTEMN~Pv A Brauti~ulBtginning COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE C~nun~~ of ~nttnokr February 15, 1990 Mr. Fred C. Altizer, Jr. Resident Engineer Virginia Department of Transportation P. O. Box 3071 Salem, Virginia 24153 Dear Fred: n~i.r.Mtnlttl clrr ''I~~I 1979 1989 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RICHARD W. ROBERS. CHAIRMAN CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT STEVEN A. MCGRAW. VICE•CHAIRMAN CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT LEE B. EDDY WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT BOB L• JOHNSON HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT Attached are certified copies of the following resolutions which were adopted by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors at their meeting on February 13, 1990: 1. Resolution 21390-6 approving and adopting the Secondary System Six Year Construction Plan for Roanoke County for 1990-96. 2. Resolution 21390-7 adopting a priority program for the Secondary System Six Year Construction Plan for Roanoke County for 1990-96. 3. Resolution 21390-8.d requesting changes in Secondary System due to relocation and construction of West River Road (Route 638) If you need further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, yYt~~"'.~d Q.e_c~~ Mary H. Allen, Clerk .Roanoke County Board of Supervisors bjh Attachment cc: Phillip Henry, Director, Engineering P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 (703> 772-2004 c ~~ %~ ~ / 1 -~ - ~, ,,~~r~Y - .~.-~ ~u-e-- ~. ~ ~ Gtr' ~~ ~r.-~~ ~ ~, ~~ ~~ ti, ~... ~~~ s ~r2.~~ ~ ~~ ~ Gr~'~~ ~ ~ - C~/-~ ~ ~ ! r ~ ~, ~~ ~ ~~~ `~ ~~~~~~~~ r ~~.~ ~~ ~'~~ ~~ ~-~- ~- _~~ ~~ ' ; ~- c~., ~`/ ~ ~~~r~/ C~~.q~-~ /,I ~~ ~~, N E H O R A N D U N TO: John R. Hubbard, Assistant County Administrator Community Services and Development FROM: Gardner W. Smith, Director ry/C~ Department of General Services `~~~ DATE: February 5, 1990 RE: Solid Waste Plan Draft Resolution Attached is the draft copy of the resolution sent by Alleghany County. All of the items are included in the resolution prepared for the Board with the exception of Item #3, support for the bottle bill, "To adapt a bottle bill similar to Senate Bill No. 466 (1989) as endorsed by VACO;" Staff is not committed, at this time, to the bottle bill concept. However, research continues. The staff position on this bill does not alter the committment to a comprehensive recycling program. GWS:jsm _.,,.y'~wc;wig '~. • ~ ~ ~ ,~ey';:dEr ; ty„R ~®MM®NWE~LTI~ of VgR~IN~~1 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 714 SOUTH BROAD STREET RAY D. PETHTEL SALEM. 24t 53 COMMISSIONER January 22, 1990 Mr. Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator County of Roanoke P. 0. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 re Dear Mr. Hodge: F. C. ALTIZER, JR. RESIDENT ENGINEER Post Office Box 3071 Salem, Virginia 24153 Route 639 Roanoke County Attached for your review is a sample resolution and sketch showing changes to secondary Route 639 in Roanoke County due to construction on Virginia Department of Transportation project 0639-080-143,C502,B628. Please review the changes outlined in the sample resolution and sketch and present them to the next scheduled meeting of the Board of Super- visors. Once the resolution is adopted by the Board, please forward a certi- fied copy to this office to be included in our .request to the Transportation Board for changes to the secondary system. If you have any questions, please call. Sincerely, ~G~fixJ . J ~ g . • Contrac dmin~strator Jr. a - ~ 3 - 90 ~ ~~ s-9o TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY :.~~,~LL ~a a ~..~ , ~ __ ; ~, . --,~ , r "-€•~ y~H~,d. k~~.rh~ _.~::~~,_.~.g.. :._z.~ ~. At a regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County held this day of 19 it was duly moved and seconded that: WHEREAS, Secondary Route 639 from 0.88 Mi. E. Rte. 649 to 0.40 Mi. W. Rte. 734 a distance of 0.84 m~ es, has been altered, and a new road has been constructed and approved by the State Transportation Commissioner, which new road serves the same citizens as the road so altered; and WHEREAS, certain sections of this new road follow new locations, these being shown on the attached sketch titled, "Changes in Secondary System Due to Relocation and Construction on Route 639 Project 0639-080-143,0503,8628 dated at Richmond, Virginia October 11, 1989." NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the portions of Secondary Route 639 i.e., Sections No. 1 and 2 shown in red and connections thereto, i.e., Sections No. 4 and 5, shown in brown on the sketch titled, "Changes in Secondary System due to Relocation and Construction on Route 639 Project 0639-080-143,0503,6628, dated at Richmond, Uirginia October 11, 1989," a total distance of 0.37 miles be, and hereby is, added to the Secondary System of State Highways, pursuant to Section 33.1-229 of the Code of Virginia, as amended: And further, that the sections of the old location, i.e., Sections No. 3 shown in orange on the aforementioned sketch, a total distance of 0.78 miles be, and hereby is to be renumbered and remain as a part of the Secondary System of State Highways. And further, that the sections of old location, i.e., Section No. 8 , shown in blue on the aforementioned sketch, a total distance of 0.06 miles, be, and the same hereby is, abandoned as a public road, pursuant to Section 33.1- 155 of the Code of Virginia, as amended; And further, that the State Transportation Commission be requested to take the necessary action to discontinue the section of old location, i.e., Sections No. 6 and 7 shown in yellow on the aforementioned sketch, a total distance of 0.05 miles, as a part of the Secondary System of State Highways as provided in Sections 33-76.7 of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended Motion carried. A COPY TESTE: .. o 0 ~~i h (O~d Lc" j - - J °jq Sta. R9+7', i~ 6p 9 8-628 Sect. 4 ~S\ ~o' , ~ c t ~ 6 ~~.1 ~~ •~ Go 'ya ~ " z O ~ L~,~a' ~ m ~_ :~o=. a~ ~ ~m ~ t~ i i .`SS' Sect . 8 ~ 1 a~~~ has 6QVr •- •1 ~~mo/EO . 0539-09/-.43, C,-SC3 - 6 -`zg ~- 0639-080-143, =5- 717 :, :•. C 0?' 1 TT Main Line Sta. 109+85.87 Sect. 1 N 0 s s Main Line ~ Sta. 109+02 ~ Conn. Rte. 6~9 ~ (Old Loc.) .~. i I .= I v; Sta. 13+44 ,;_ ~ _ ~~~~ - ~ ~ 639 ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~~ '~• Sect. 5 u Sect M ° Conn . Rte . 6 39 (Old Loc. ) ', ~~ wg~;' Sta. 12+37 , ~~ '1 ~I~ i ~•- 8 SOU~~Cf ~~ /: ~J / i ~~ , Sect. 3 Va. Dept. of Transp. Traffic Engineering October 11, 1989 LEGEND ROANOKE COUNTY CHANGES IN THE SECONDARY SYSTEM DUE TO RELOCATZO\ AND CONSTRUCTION ON ROUTE 639, PROJECT: 0639-080-143,C-503 ® Section of old location to be abondoned ~ Section of old location to be discontinued ~~Section of ne~a location to be added to the Secondary System ~~Connection to be added to the Secondar~• System ® Section of old location to be renumbered S c~R~~i Eye ~AcJ t A R` ~9 ~• qN o s~~t~t- 3. 9v~~ NG~y~s~ 128 sc~. FT. G y ~ ,~ • ~~ i~~~ , `0~ ____ __. _ ~- _- ~` -~~s ,~ ~~ ~ ~. f4M~ 7` ~ '~:~.'t 'U~ ~C.VJEQ 'EASEMEt~IY 3 ~. o v, ti~ ~,, q~ w~~ c ~ tia ^•~ ~ ~. ,. ~~~~'' ~ i" t_oT 23 ~ ~ ~' o'' =~ ~\ ~3 °x ~~ ~ \ 1~G ,\ ~ ~ • ~ 'Po ~S . a. .~ ~, PLAT SHOWING NEW SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT BEING GRANTED TO THE ROANOKE COUNTY-BOARD-OF SUPERVLSORS BY RICHARD t.~POPP 8- MARILYN M. POPP SITUATED ON LOT 23, BLOCK 2, SECTION #20, HUNTING HILLS (P.B. 9, PG. 317) ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA c~ .. ,~~ n t CG ~'L ccALE~ t" _ ~,n ~ DATE: 20 JULY 1988 t,.oT 22 ~~,~1 ``,o _an ,