Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
3/27/1990 - Regular
4 r; ' 9 Z 2 v a~ +., 18 ~ 88 sFSOU1CEN7EMN~P~ .4 8rauri~ulBrginning ~OUrif1J A~ 'l.RQ£tttDliP ROANORE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION AGENDA MARCH 27, 1990 nu-u~enca cm 1 ~ 7.9'8'9 Welcome to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors meeting. Regular meetings are held on the second Tuesday and th m onuthe Tuesday at 3da00 f•each month.heDeviations from this•schedule will fourth Tues y be announced. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 P.M.) 1. Roll Call at 3:05 p.m. 2. Invocation: The Reverend Branan G. Thompson Colonial Avenue Baptist Church 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag. B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND AWARDS D. NEW BUSINESS 1. Request to continue the Community Service Program. ECH AND RC TO BRING BACK ITEM AT NEXT MEETING WITH DETAILED FUNDING REQUEST. HCN MOVED TO RECEIVE AS REPORT. UW A-32790-1 2. Requ~sFundsmforeancAlcoholaandfDrugcAbusence of Gra Assistance Program. 1 Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. M. CITIZENS' COI~Il4'ENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS N. REPORTS 1. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board C ontingency Fund 4. Income Analysis and Statement of Expenditures for eight months ended February 28, 1990. 5. Update on Police Department Transition O. WORK SESSION 1. Budget Work Session p. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.1-344 A (7) as requested by Roanoke County staff Q. CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE SESSION EVENING SESSION (7:00 P.M.) R. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 390-1 An Ordinance to amend the Future Land Use Map designation of a 53.44 acre tract from Development to Principal Industrial and to rezone said property from R-E to M-1 for industrial development, located east of West Ruritan Road and north of Homestead Lane, Hollins Magisterial District upon the request of the Roanoke County Board of 4 estate located at the northeast corner of Glen Heather Drive and Route 419 in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District from B-2 Conditional to B-2 Conditional (Amendment of Signage Proffers), upon the request of Hop- In Food Stores, Inc. T. U. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS 390-9 Petition of Wally L. Andrews for a Special Exception Permit to operate a shooting match, located at the intersection of Rutrough Road and Highland Road in the Vinton Magisterial District.(WITHDRAWN BY THE PETITIONER) 390-10 Petition of Avis Rent A Car Licensee for a Special Exception Permit to operate a car and truck rental agency located at 3137 Brambleton Avenue S. W. in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District. CITIZENS' COMI~NTS AND COMMUNICATIONS ADJOURNMENT 6 ITEM NUMBER ~ "' AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DA`rE: March 27, 1990 AGENDA ITEM: Authorization to Continue Community Service Program COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~t~ti~c+r~'''+-~"~-~f" SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: In August, 19ts9, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors approved a request to establish a community service program for the County. Approval was given for a six month trial period. In this program, offenders are assigned community service in lieu of, or as an adjunct to, fines and other obligations determined in the disposition of a court case. Roanoke County receives court-referred workers from a variety of sources, including tYie Twenty-third Judicial District Juvenile and Domestic Relations Courts, the United States Federal Court, the Community Diversions Incentive program (CDI), and the Fine Option program of the General District Court in Roanoke County. These workers currently perform community service at a variety of Roanoke County worksites, including the Parks and Recreation Department, the library system, fire and rescue stations, and the Administration Center. 'l~he program became operational and a part-time Volunteer Coorainator was hired in November, 1989, to develop and administer the community service program. During the period 11/6/ts9 through 2/28/90, this program handled 45 cases, with a total of 1551 hours of assigned community service. Thirty-two of these cases are still in progress; thirteen have been successfully completed. Using pay rates which would be offered to employees performing the same work that community service workers perform for no compensation, and assuming successful completion of all assigned community service obligations, the financial benefits to the County amount to ~7,284.U0 (completed cases = $2,563.UU; current cases = $4,721.00). During that same period, the cost of this program was $2,097.UU. Net financial benefits to Roanoke County to date amount to $5,187.UU. M,-.~.- Attachment The success of the Roanoke County community service program has been aemonstrated through the number of cases and related financial information. Through specific examples, however, a more complete idea of the program can be offered. Case #1 - A 17 year old boy, was assigned 20 hours of comn-unity service, and was placed at the Parks and Recreation department to assist in the lean collection program. He completed his time in two days, and performed so well that the supervisor encouraged him to complete a job interest card and application for regular employment. Case #2 - A 15 year old girl, was assigned 25 hours of community service and was placed at the library. Working with her school and activity schedule, we developed a work schedule which allowed tier to complete r,er obligation in three weeks. Her assigned tasks included filing, clerical tasks, and worlceTgoomedl so we'll projects offered by the library. She, too, p that the librarian encouraged her to complete a job interest card and application. Case #3 - A i7 year old boy, was assigned 5 hours of community service as part of his sentence, and was placed at a fire station. This boy had several problems with which to contend. He was not in school, having quit in tenth grade; he had no job; he had no reaaiiy available transportation; and he had no prospects. During his work at the Lire station, he performed various maintenance chores such as waxing the fire trucks, cleaning the equipment, and cleaning the station. Of equal importance to his work was his interest in the work of a firefighter. He asked many questions about the education and skills required, about the nature of the work, and about the technical aspects of the job. The firefighters cheerfully and openly answered all questions, and act nterestscou~hendltlastospokerwithnhim,sheohaaareturned to on his i school. Case #4 is currently in progress. She is an adult who volunteered for the Fine Option program because she could not afford to pay a fine imposed as the result of a traffic tic~et. Because of her nursing education and experience, and because of her special interest in therapeutics and rehabilitation, she was offered a position with the therapeutics avision of the Parks and Recreation department. Every applicant for this divisiorY, whether paid or volunteer, is very carefully screened for suitability for the position. Because of the special nature of therapeutics, and because of such careful screening, volunteers in this area are often hard to find. Our client accepted the position, passed the screening process, and is currently worxYng as a recreational aiae in a therapy program for developmentally aisabled children. Her supervisor has only compliments about rYer work. 4~' ~ Our clients perform a wide variety of tasks, including but not limited to cleaning and maintenance of fire and safety equipment and stations; maintenance of county parks and property; chores related to library operations, including cleaning, tiling, and clerical work; and help with special projects, such as planting azaleas at aithcthetworksiteerto fosterlsuccesssforkboth match the client w ACTION # A-32790-1 ITEM NUMBER -° r AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 27, 1990 AGENDA ITEM: Acceptance of Alcohol and Drug Abuse Grant Funds COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~~x~~~ BACKGROUND: The Roanoke County School Board has received a grant of $17,960 from the Governor's Council on Alcohol and Drug Abuse. These funds will be used to establish an alcohol and other drug use prevention, intervention, and referral program at the secondary school level for Roanoke County students residing in the Glenvar and Northside school districts. This grant is for a one year period only. Mr. Jack Liddy, Roanoke County School Supervisor of Health and P.E., will be present to answer any questions related to this program. FISCAL IMPACT: If this grant is accepted, the County will record an additional $17,960 in revenues from the federal government and a related expenditure of the same amount in the school federal programs fund. There is no matching requirement from the County. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends accepting the federal grant for alcohol and drug abuse. ~ ~ ~~~~~ ~ Elmer C. Hodge Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance County Administrator ACTION Approved ( x ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To Motion by: Harr C' Ni r-kan~ to approve request _ VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy x Johnson x McGraw x Nickens x Robers x cc: File Diane Hyatt, Director, Finance Jack Liddy, Roanoke County Schools Ruth Wade, Clerk, Roanoke County School Board .. ~. ~` ,;;~ :`,, PART A tl) :FACE PAGE 1 ` (a) Project Titie: STtTDECdI' A.SSISTAI~E PR:rX~tAM Funds Requested $13,200 800 660 3.300 N) Brief Project Summary (50 words or less, please): Fturls, if a~roved, would be applied to establish an alcohol and other drug use prevention, intexven io: ,.~ and referral program at the seconc~r<~ school level through the employer of a Student I~ssistance F'roc~ram Coordinator. (c) Community Served: ~or~iside°~c~~ols is~-'stic~ssl rrxr in e envar (d) Estimated Number of I-Iigh Risk Youth to be Served: 200 (e) Project Budget Summary: ~~°(~- I ~ 13Q - i A ~ ~ 13 ~~gn*~ P ~~ ~ _ i A 3„o contracted Services i~l~q-iA5501 Trav 1 tail- iA poi 3 Qtl~r F<xR~n .~~ -~j~ - $17,960 (f) Identifying Information: ~m ~. ~~ 9_rga~iz~li2n ~tr~~llFi .Box ~-tx; State. Ziv T~l~pltone rimary Aulllor Jack Liddy Su~.rvisor Health & P.F,. ~und Total r m from 2ther Sources All Sources $13,200 $1,400 $1,400 Financial Officer Jerry Hardy Dir: of_ Finance Roanoke County Schools 526 South College Avenue Salem ~-„ 2,200 650 3,30 $19,360 S'ontact Person Susan Dobbs Jo.Ann Burkholder Student Assistance C Virginia 24153 X10 i - ~ (703) 387-6451 (703) 387-6480 (703) 890-3090 (g) Does your proposal include activities in public schools? Yes: X No: If yes, note requirements for inclusion of rivate schools ittyour community in the development and implementation ofpprograms (cf. p.4-5). (, (h) Is any organization involved in the application currently receiving funds from the Governor's Council High Risk Youth Grants Program? Yes: No: ~_ If yes, please specify: 11 ~~ FROM THE MINUTES OF THE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD OF ROANOKE COUNTY MEETING IN REGULAR SESSION AT 7 P.M. ON MARCH 8, 1990 IN THE BOARD ROOM OF THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, SALEM, VIRGINIA. , RESOLUTION REQUESTING AN APPROPRIATION BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY TO THE SCHOOL BOARD FEDERAL AND STATE GRANT FUND. WHEREAS, the County School Board of Roanoke County has received a grant of $17,960.00 from the Governor's Council on Alcohol and Drug Abuse, and WHEREAS, said funds which are 100 percent reimbursable, will be used to expand the student assistance program to North County; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the County School Board of Roanoke County] on motion of Paul G. Black and duly seconded requests an appropriation of $17960.00 from the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County to the School Board Federal and State Grant Fund. Approved on the following vote: AYES: Paul G. Black Maurice L. Mitchell Charlsie S. Pafford, Barbara B. Chewning, Frank E. Thomas NAYS: None TEST Clerk c: Mrs. Diane Hyatt ACTION # A-32790-2 ITEM NUMBER ~-~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 27, 1990 AGENDA ITEM• Approval of Brookwood/Hidden Valley Water System Project COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: // -C,CY~,/yrv:-,~-~f" Cc~i/~~=`-v'im' BACKGROUND• In order to improve the water service to the Mt. Vernon, Highfields, Layman Lawn, Bridlewood and Brookwood areas as well as provide adequate water service for orderly development along Route 221, it is necessary to construct additional water facilities in this area. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Brookwood/Hidden Valley Water Project consists of the following: 1. Construction of a 500,000 gallon water reservoir on property between the Bridlewood Subdivision and Roselawn Road. 2. Construct water lines to connect this reservoir with existing lines in the Bridlewood and Mt. Vernon Forest Subdivision. 3. Construct water line from an existing water line on Roselawn Road near Canter Drive, along Roselawn Road to County owned property at intersection of Roselawn and Highfields Road. 4. Construct water pump station on above County property with connection to the Highfields Water System and the above water line along Roselawn. 5. Construct a water line from the above pump station, along Roselawn Road with connection to the new water reservoir. 6. Construction of water line from the reservoir feed line to Route 221 in conjunction with development on Cotton Hill Road. Lr~ ALTERNATIVES AND IMPACTS: The Brookwood/Hidden Valley Water System Project will cost an estimated $375,000. Funds can be made available in an amount of $175,000 from the funded depreciation capital fund and $200,000 from the off-site facility fund. This project is the best method to provide adequate water for fire protection to five existing areas that currently do not have it. This project will also provide public water service to development along Route 221 without creating separate disconnected systems such as Forest Edge and Carriage Hills. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Board approve the construction of the Bridlewood/Hidden Valley Water System funded with $175,000 from funded depreciation and $200,000 from the off-site facility fund. It is further recommended that the Board authorize the acquisition of the reservoir property at an amount not to exceed the assessed valuation and required easements at an amount not to exceed 40$ of assessed valuation. Additionally, Staff recommends the County Administrator be authorized to execute the required documents to acquire the property and easements. SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED: Cliffo aig, P.E. Elmer C. Hodge Utility Director County Administrator ACTION VOTE Approved (x) Motio n by: Lee B. Eddy No Yes Aba Denied ( ) to ap prove request Eddy x Received ( ) Johnson x Referred McGraw x to Nickens x Robers x cc: File Cliff Craig, Director, Utility Diane Hyatt, Director, Finance Reta Busher, Director, Management & Budget Paul Mahoney, County Attorney Phillip Henry , Director, Engineering ~-3 ~c~- NORTB -- ~ _ ~ ~ - - - ----~ = -~~_- 1 iM~ I ~ . "'~ r / \ • ~ I ~ j ~ ~i I , J • ~ • ~ = •r r .. ~ = i . / • ~ r ~ 9 ~• f • ~ ~ .~ • • ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~; " r .' w' ~ 'i ;~ r O p17Y101 11nrKl 1 • STATION • ' O 1 f / , 1 ~ • w ~ . R . rf , ~1 ~ ~Hr F _ ~ 1 • ~ • ~ ~ `\\ ' •t~r ~. ~ ••- \ ~~ ~ c\ l 1 O • • • • `'~ ~ ~ ~• Mw ~ ,~ • O + • `~ a 1!1{K101 ~ pN•cCl ~ ~ ~ ~ I w 7 T ~ •. , -.. ~~, ~~ 1 , _ . ... ~.~~.~ ~ ~r ~. t ~ r ~ ' ~ ~ I ! .~ -w ~ r '~ I ~ 1 SW ~ODU Cil~. • \ ~ ~ ~ .: ~ _ W ~~ • ~ • ~ ~ np (~pj~ TT~~ ~Oa71Y~QOLA • t ~ .lrw 1 i ~. . ~ w • w • i / /I ~ M • ~ ~. ~ .~ ~ r . w ~ l b w ~' w w ~' ,1 ~ ~' " w ~ ~• ~ r4 Y r 3 Mw /~ • I I - ~ ~ • o~ .}I _ _ • • ~ • 4 wN~' • w ~ M • ~~ ~ • • ~ • O ' . , • .~ 7 r _ = O 1 • K r I~ • ~ • R~ f ~ ` ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ • w ' ! _-_ B6.o~ G'pb11r1UNITYSl4RVICB,S Beoo~oon/HrnDg~ ye~~ WeTSe pxo~scr 86,i~ AND DBVBLOPMSNT 86• ~s ,_ *,r-^_:_- _'+_~S^~~---.~-~-•i~"~~s~'".yr-~" .;'~_'W' ~:..- :,.~+, '_..~"', ". -- -_ ~~'~:.3: .r._. ..a;.:.a:.~ ~,i.~"'..'~:~,'~~"aB°•*~'%:'-~'-•.+~r _ V <` 09 WO EN -N'r.~`.~-JS ~ ~ \:~ ANTERBU ~ 6 ~ 8 "; ~ ~ rOLOntnL AV ~ j O'POPARK `y B ~ r G6r~N •~~'y ANN 2qt; ~ ' '~ .~3' o0. \4 ~ 91~ / :i ~ i O ~~, lVD 8 ~ '.., a y R`. P Sl •61~ BE ENEADED =O ~~ K `~~ _,/~ PKEO CAN 155 a,~ BE A `iqq 1aw _~.,ytc' c eu`"v Hr~ y ~ / ill H Sri g/ '~ ° 3~ ~ ~ to-y .; -~ ~° ~~~ NfGHFIE(OS `R f_: ~~, y~ m(„E o kENwK. rN p o S• x ~ ROSELP ~~~~~ W •4~- ~~,~ 'p~F ° ~u~ ~OD 38 \ e°p(~r7yq µ E ~' ~' ~ ~ . ~ P 4.~ LJF~E~MES ~~ '~~ `~` g `~ f ~~ _~OCg1'~T.V ~ ~. ~lL ~' o M c1~ ~"dPPPa~ sH~cws ae6 ~ ~.. ./ ~n B~p+~CK Pi^` ~~q IRS VICINITY M ~ ~`~REST u r ~f SAruoiri r~~-.~ R~ ~_ NORTB 8G•a~ COMMUNITY SERVICES sROOKW00D/HIDDEN VALLEY WATER PROJECT ~ ~, Ii AND DEVELOPMENT 8 G ~ A' ACTION # A-32790-3 ITEM NUMBER ~~~"' AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 27, 1990 AGENDA ITEM: Approval of Starkey Road Water System Project COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS : ~~~~,~~ u~.~-~~ BACKGROUND• In order to supply adequate water service for orderly development in the Starkey/Buck Mountain area and improved service to the Southwest Industrial Park, it is necessary to construct additional water facilities in this area. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Starkey Road Water System Project will consist of the following: 1. Construct a 500,000 gallon water reservoir located on the Munger property south of Starkey Road with the same working elevation as the Avenham Water System. 2. Construct a water line from the existing line on Buck Mountain Road, along Starkey Road with tie-in to the new reservoir, then along Merriman Road to a connection to the Starkey Well discharge line that feeds the Oriole Lane Reservoir. A water line will also be constructed from Merriman Road to connect with the existing water line in the Southwest Industrial Park. 3. Construct a water line from the new Arlington Hills well to connect to an existing water line on Merriman Road that feeds the Oriole Lane Reservoir. 5. Construct a water pump station along Starkey Road to pump water from the Oriole Lane Reservoir in the Penn Forest Water System into the new Starkey Water System. This project will be combined with the South County Pump Station Project previously approved and funded to pump from the water line on Buck Mountain Road into the Hunting Hills/Clearbrook Water System. ~D-4 ALTERNATIVES AND IMPACTS: The Starkey Road Water System Project will cost an estimated $340,000. Funds can be made available by using the remaining $115,000 of water bond funds and $225,000 from the off-site facility fund. If this project is not constructed, development in the South County area cannot proceed in an orderly manner with adequate water facilities to serve commercial/industrial or fire protection needs. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Board approve the construction of the Starkey Road Water System funded with $115,000 bond proceeds and $225,000 from the off-site facility fund. It is further recommended that the Board authorize the acquisition of the reservoir and pump station property at an amount not to exceed the assessed valuation and required easements at an amount not to exceed 40~ of assessed valuation. Additionally, Staff recommends the County Administrator be authorized to execute the required documents to acquire the property and easements. SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED: . ~~~ ~~~ Cliffo aig, P.E Elmer C. Hodge Utility Director County Administrator Approved (x) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Motion by: ACTION VOTE T.GP R Fr~r~t~ No Yes Abs to approve request Eddy Johnson McGraw Nickens Robers cc: File Cliff Craig, Director, Utility Diane Hyatt, Director, Finance Reta Busher, Director, Management & Paul Mahoney, County Attorney Phillip Henry, Director, Engineering Budget X x x x x ~F_ \ •~ ENE sK V CJ • N ~ ~ ~ ~sr ,,e ~ /' '~` • ,, ~`' ~ e . f -~ .,,~ ~ ~ ANC '• \ .,, y. ~'',: PUINTATION plpEIINE ~,_ _ VICINITY 1KAP ~ =y NORTB ~" ~ ~ , • ~ ~ ~~ . I ;. ~, ' \\ ~ ~~ ~ ~• \ • • ~•.v I•, ss . i. ~ ~ . ~ I I• ' _ • ~ • r~ ''I • • h. ~_._ l ~ I • • 1 ~ , • • I _ • ~ ' • • . ~~ ••I I• ' 1 ~ ~ ~ • . ~_ ' ! + ~ i ' ' .. ~ ~~ .r ~ , / ~r • • ~ Z • ~ ~ • f ; / • ~ . • • ~ l.ry~ gyn. ~ l ~ - ' , ~ - I .i. . ~~ \ / Q` ~ ~ 1. 1 ~ ~ , ~ ~~~ ------= "',t=~. __ l ~- ~ .Spy \ --_ _ • • • • ~ ~ ~ ~+ I~ •i ~ ~ • ~ . • o•~. A I ~ ~ ~ P~ • 7 arr , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t "\ ~• \ 1 (ru•r i ~ -- _ ~ u ; ~ ~ = ~ 1. ,T ~. I 500,000 GAL. „ _ ` -1 ~ ~ 1 ,„ ggSgRVOIR ~ , ..r s:. ~ ~ « ~~ } s r ~ O / ~, ` •rr / i. ~~ i / i . , , . ~ rr } cur a t M wr w.i•r • ~ varo • .Mr • * - B7• ~ r COMMUNI?Y SBRVICB,.S STARRSY ROAD SdATSR PBOJSCT 87' d 97.06 AND DSVBLOPMSNT ' ....( -ACR~S`MA .(RL'_. ~; ~] ~~~ RK : / ~ CAP ~~ - .. ~ ~~,'\` - -. - ~+ \ F' i ~/ .uH ~I ~~~" '` _ a,~-~ w~, °\ ~w ~~,? q souk Rff-Lr~..on n l YA (~ C1~ - '°° ~+rr!'+~ ,,1 ~ ~ P`~ ~ V ~HG'~~HUIiTMIG 7~j~~ ~V _ ~`.. 6 ~~~'~ ° ~HGC~ Tti`~~ 3lEEQ ~ HILLS-~a \ ~ N it r c ...1$ ~ R ~ 5~1. ~ X91 .~~ IPA '~J~'oRro~% W'~ ~!UgST ~ M~urA~NN $x ci ~I ~S TN ~ rax j~~) f~$T ~~. pa. FOB !^~.,_./M12. ~ '~1_ p~q. '( (f 1 1 41 ML'U_Nigl_N / PER ._._ ~'~~' DEN I \~~~~t~ EKE ~'4~~' ~ ~ 5B O ~ '~-' ~~ o ' ~ - ELE .SYM ~' _ ~:~ ~ `i~~ r ~ p0. ._ _ ~- '~ `Jw CRO ~` __~_BUCK _» .p~ ^300 _ c __~. ___ Nn 11 ~ ~ -- - - ~ ~~I ~ ~ .,,y ~,,ti,E ~V~~ ~11 ~ ~,-- PLANTATION PIPELINE ~~~~_ ~,,, __ .~...~ .._.__..~ -_ VICINITY MAP ~~ NORTB ACTION # A-32790-4 ITEM NUMBER ~' AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 27, 1990 AGENDA ITEM: Request to participate in the Virginia Department Of Transportation Revenue Sharing Program COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS : VLryL~~%~„~ ~y ~~~ nil/~~~~~ ~~+_ ~ ,may- .~,y~,t.;~ -~C,(.r-'L ~~t~ /~~- ./GK C~~+t/u.~"Yn-vrwav ~ pt ! ~~~ BACKGROUND' The Virginia Department of Transportation annually provides counties the opportunity to receive state matching funds for the construction, maintenance or improvement of the primary and secondary roads system. The Commonwealth provides $5,000,000 for the matching program. Each participant is limited to a match of $500,000. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Virginia Department of Transportation has informed all counties of the need to notify them of the county's intent to participate in the program and the amount of county funds to be provided. This Letter of Intent must be received by A1~ril 16, 1990. Projects need not be identified at this time. However, upon the determination of the funds allocated to Roanoke County, a list of projects must be presented. ALTERNATIVES & IMPACT: 1. Approve the submittal of the Letter of Intent to participate in the VDOT Revenue Sharing Fund in the amount of $500,000. 2. Approve the submittal of the Letter of Intent to participate in the VDOT Revenue Sharing Fund in an amount less than $500,000. 3. Do not participate in the VDOT Revenue Sharing Fund. °° STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The staff recommends Alternative Number 1 and authorization for the County Administrator to submit the Letter of Intent. SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED: ` ~~~~, J hn R. H bard, P.E. Elmer C. Hodge Assistant County Administrator County Administrator Community Services & Development ----------------------------------------------------------------- Approved ( x) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to ACTION VOTE Motion by: Harry C. Nickens No Eddy _ Johnson _ McGraw _ Nickens _ Robers Yes Abs x x x x x cc: File John Hubbard, Assistant County Administrator Phillip Henry, Director, Engineering Diane Hyatt, Director, Finance Reta Busher, Director, Management & Budget F a,~~F ~. .~ z a~ 18 ~~ 88 gF80U1CENTENN~P~' A Btauti~u/Beginning COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE March 29, 1990 LLL ~~MERILII CITY '~II~' 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 MAGISTERAL DISTRK:T BOB L. JOHNSON HOWNS MAGISTERAL DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT COUNTY PRIMARY AND SECONDARY ROAD FUND (REVENUE SHARING PROGRAM) FISCAL YEAR 1990-91 COUNTY OF ROANOKE Mr. Gerald E. Fisher State Secondary Roads Engineer Virginia Department of Transportation 1401 East Broad Street Richmond, Virginia 23219 Dear Mr. Fisher: The County of Roanoke, Virginia, indicates by this letter its official intent to participate in the "Revenue Sharing Program" for Fiscal Year 1990-91, pursuant to the provisions of Section 33.1- 75.1 of the Code of Virginia. The County will provide $500,000 for this program, to be matched on adollar-for-dollar basis from funds of the State of Virginia. The County will work with its Resident Engineer to develop and submit by May 15, 1990, a list of one or more improvement projects to be undertaken with these funds. The County also understand that the program will be reduced on a pro-rata basis if requests exceed available funds. Sincerely, . W. obers, Chairman Roanoke County Board of Supervisors RWR/bj h pc: Fred C. Altizer, Jr., Resident Engineer Elmer Hodge, County Administrator John Hubbard, Assistant County Administrator Phillip Henry, Director, Engineering P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE. VIRGINIA 24018-0798 (703) 772-2004 (~niantg of ~Rnttnnke ~~ 'F'TC, ~ ~ ~:1 "~ M1 C~9 ! ~ TY" ~~ A .. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1401 EAST BROAD STREET RAY D. PETHTEL RICHMOND, 23219 COMMISSIONER March 12, 1990 Boards of Supervisors of All Counties and the City of Suffolk Council Re: County Primary and Secondary Road Fund (Revenue Sharing Program) Fiscal Year 1990-91 Dear Members of Boards of Supervisors and Members of the Council: J. G. RIPLEY DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING The County Primary and Secondary Road Fund, more commonly known as the "Revenue Sharing Program", allows the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) to provide state funds to match county funds for the construction, maintenance, or improvement of primary and secondary highways in your county. This cooperative program between county governments and VDOT allows for an increased number of road improvements throughout the Commonwealth. In the current fiscal year, 29 localities elected to participate in the Revenue Sharing Program, thereby providing $10 million for additional improvements to the primary and secondary systems. At present, the Commonwealth's annual participation in this program is limited to $5,000,000 (Code of Virginia, Section 33.1-75.1[C]). However, bills were introduced in the 1990 session of the General Assembly to increase that amount to $10,000,000. Until such time as a bill becomes law, VDOT will operate under the assumption that $5,000,000 will be available as the state's match. However, the bill increasing this to $10,000,000 may be signed by the time you respond to this letter. If your county wishes to participate in this program for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1991, the Board of Supervisors must notify VDOT of its county's intent to participate in the Revenue Sharing Program and the amount of county funds to be provided, not to exceed $500,000. VDOT must receive a letter of notification by April 16, 1990. TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY .-~~'~ 1990 County Primary and Secondary Road Fund (Revenue Sharing Program) Fiscal Year 1990-91 County of Mr. Gerald E. Fisher State Secondary Roads Engineer Virginia Department of Transportation 1401 East Broad Street Richmond, Virginia 23219 Dear Mr. Fisher: The County of Virginia, indicates by this letter its official intent to participate in the "Revenue Sharing Program for Fiscal Year 1990-91, pursuant to the provisions of Section„33.1-75.1 of the Code of Virginia. The County will provide $ ($500,000 maximum) for this program, to be matched on a dollar-for-dollar basis from funds of the State of Virginia. The County will work with its Resident Engineer to develop and submit by May 15, 1990, a list of one or more improvement projects to be undertaken with these funds. The County also understands that the program will be reduced on a pro-rata basis if requests exceed available funds. (Applicable if County has requested $500,000 and wants more) Having requested the maximum of $500,000 in state funds, the County futher requests that an additional amount of $ be made available in the event that any funds remain unallocated after initial allocations are made. Sincerely, Chairman, Board of Supervisors pc Resident Engineer Guidelines for the Selection Financing and Accom lishment of ',Nark Performed under the Revenue Sharin Pro ram Pursuant to Section 33 I-75 I, Code of Virginia I, Pur ose These guidelines are intended to facilitate the joint cooperative efforts by the governing body of any county electing to participate in this program and the Department of Transportation, in the establishment and financing of the ~~ county primary and secondary road ~ fund" (i.e. Revenue Sharing Program) in accordance with the provisions of Section 33.1-75.1 of the Code of Virginia, as amended. Eligible Items Items of work on the primary or sec st of Y system eligible for financing under this program shall generally co A. Deficits on completed construction/improvements or supplemental funding for ongoing construction/improvements. B. Supplemental funding for future construction/improvements contained in the adopted Six-Year Plan. C. Construction/improvements not included in the adopted Six-Year Plan or the construction/improvements necessary for the acceptance of certain subdivision streets otherwise eligible for acceptance into the systemhf`o o k bein n providednf come this p~ogram wi th n the f scal cost of suc 9 year involved. p. Unprogrammed maintenance whose accomplishment is consistent with fhe Department's operational policies. Program Funding portion o ear Y to this program by the governing body. Pursuant to applicable provisions of the statute, the Department shall annually allocate funds to provide an equivalent matching allocation to the f h count 's federal revenue sharing or general funds designated In the event the total funds so designated in any one fiscal year by al I participating counties exceeds $5 million dollars, the state matching allocation to each such county will be adjusted. The basis .for this adjustment will be the proportion of $5 million dollars to the total of such funds designed by the counties, as applied to the initial amount pledged by each governing body. IV. Annual Notification of Intent to Participate in Program To permit the effective utilization of all funds available under this program, the governing body of each county electing to particpate must - 3 - Commonwealth Transportation Board. It is intended such projects be presented for the Board's consideration prior to the beginning of the fiscal year involved. NOTE: In the administration of the guidelines the following definition of certain terms shall apply: Maintenonce -Those activities involved in preserving or restoring the roadway facility or structure, as near as possible, to its condition as constructed. Improvements (incidental construction) -any operation which changes the type, width, length, location, or gradient of a road, facility, or structure; or the function of building into, or adding to such road, facility, or structure features not originally provided. The magnitude of all activities required is such that they can be accomplished within one fiscal year. As a consequence, improvements generally involve items of work which are relatively uncomplicated and limited in scope. Construction - Like "improvements", this involves operations which change or add to the characteristics of a road, facility, or structure from that originally provided. However, due to the magnitude of all activities required for the development and accomplishment of the work involved, more than one fiscal year will likely be involved. VII. allocated. Upon approval of the plan, it shall constitute the " . .county primary and secondary road fund". State matching funds will be allocated to the specific items of work included in the approved plan upon receipt of payment for .the county's funds designated to such items. All funds designated for this program by a county shall either be placed in a special fund account of the county for the purposes specified by Section 33.1-75.1 of the Code, or paid to the Department prior to the close of the fiscal year Accomplishment of Work under this Program A. By the Department: I. Prior to the Department initiating development of an item of work, it will present an appropriote billing for the county's share of the estimated cost for accomplishing the item. On more complex items, a separate billing will be rendered prior to the initiation of each of the three major phases of development, (i.e. preliminary engineering, right of way acquisition/utility adjustment, and construction), as may be deemed appropriate. _ S - E. State matching fu ~dosn °na'the I costa ofr el g ble improvements or limited to participa maintenance to qualified roads which culminate in the completion o the work as mutually deemed.appropriate. In the event of a request by the county for cancellation of an item of work initiated under this program prior to its completion, the Departmenofa al'Itsstate option may require reimbursement by the county matching funds expended between initiation and cancellation of the item. i=. The party responsible for administering any item of work performed under this program shall maintain the necessary records and files, as mutually deemed appropriate, to substantiate the actual cost incurred by it in accomplishing this work. Upon request, such information shall be made available for review by the other party. G. These guidelines may be modified by mutual cons un on at leas9.90 H. This program may be terminated by either party p days prior written notice. However, such t a m the 1 t me aof 1 such way affect any approved work underway notification. END ~~ 1 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. ~~.,~.L-I~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 27, 1990 AGENDA ITEM: Requests for Public Hearing and First Reading for Rezoning Ordinances Consent Agenda COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND• The first reading on these ordinances is accomplished by adoption of these ordinances in the manner of consent agenda items. The adoption of these items does not imply approval of the substantive content of the requested zoning actions, rather approval satisfies the procedural requirements of the County Charter and schedules the required public hearing and second reading of these ordinances. The second reading and public hearing on these ordinances is scheduled for At~ril 24, 1990. The titles of these ordinances are as follows: 1. An ordinance rezoning 51.62 acres from M-2 to R-1 for the purpose of allowing the development of a residential subdivision, located off Route 939 (Aerospace Rd.) in the Vinton Magisterial District, upon the request of Aerospace Research Corporation. 2. An ordinance to rezone approximately 7.64 acres from A- 1 to B-2 for general office use, located north of Plantation Road in the Hollins Magisterial District, upon the request of Dominion Bankshares, Inc. 3. An ordinance to rezone a 2.25 acre parcel from B-2 Conditional to B-2 Conditional (Amendment of Proffers) for the purposes of constructing a retail drive through window, located at 4515 Brambleton Avenue, in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Springwood Associates. 4. An ordinance issuing a Use-Not-Provided-For Permit allowing a series of 16 weekly summer concerts at Valleypointe, near the intersection of Peters Creek Road -`~ 2 and Valleypointe District, upon the Virginia. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Blvd. in the Hollins Magisterial request of the Easter Seal Society of Staff recommends as follows: (1) That the Board approve and adopt the first reading of these rezoning ordinances for the purpose of scheduling the second reading and public hearing for April 24. 1990. (2) That this section of the agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth as Items 1-4, inclusive, and that the Clerk is 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 action. Respectfully submitted, 1 ~ U ~\ Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney Action Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Motion by Eddy Johnson McGraw Nickens Robers Vote No Yes Abs ti. ~ Data R®a. s ~~ 5 0 ~~ ~ } (D ! ` Received 8 : S (// ~~ Y Case No.s O/` Ord. No.: ROANORE COUNTY REZONING APPLICATION 1. Owner's Name: Aerospace Research Corporation Phone: 342-2859 Address: 5454 Aerospace Road, Roanoke, Virginia 24014 2. Applicant's Name:Josepr T. I:amrick Phone: 342-3037 Address: 4353 hind_y Gap Drive, Roanoke, Virginia 24014 3. Location of Property: Between Back Creek and Aerospace Road Tax Map Number (s) : _ 90.00-3-12 4. Magisterial District: Vinton 5. Size of Property: 51.62 Acres 6. Existing Zoning: ~~-2 Existing Land Use: LU 7. Proposed Zoning: R-1 Proposed Land Use: Subdivi s~ on development 8. Comprehensive Plan Designation: 9. Are Conditions Proffered With This Request? Yes x No (If you are voluntarily offering proffers as a part of your applica- tion, these proffers must be in n-riting. A member of the Planning Staff can assist you in the preparation of these proffers.) 10. Value of Land and (Proposed) Buildings: $1,955.000 il. The Following Items Must Be Submitted With This Application. Please Check If Enclosed. Application Will Not Be Accepted If Any Of These Items Are Missing Or Incomplete: x Letter of Application x Concept Plan x Metes and Bounds Description X List of Adiacent Owners of Property (Attach Exhibit A) x Vicinity Hap (on Concept Plan ) X Application Fee x Written Proffers N A Water and Sewer Application (If Applicable) 12. Signature Of Property Owner, Contract Purchaser, Or Owner's A ent: Signature ~ ~ Date February 22, 1990 Joseph T. Hamrick .. . ,~~ AEROSPACE RESEARCH CORPORATION 5454 AEROSPACE RD. - ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24014 TELEPHONE 342-2859 AREA CODE 703 February 22, 1990 iirector of Planning, Roanoke County :.0. Box 29800 Roanoke, Virginia 24018-0798 Attention: Mr. Terry Harrington Dear Mr. Harrington: An application is hereby submitted for rezoning 51.62 acres of Aerospace Research Corporation property now zoned M-2 to R-1 for the purpose of devel- cping a residential subdivision for single family housing. There are no plans for providing water or sewer services to the area by the county. In addition the contour of the terrain is such that it is poorly suited for industrial .,:se. Mr. Gubala has viewed the property and agrees that it is not suited to commercial use. We are making the following proffer in the use of the land: 1. All purchasers of lots in the subdivision will be urged to preserve all trees that can safely be retained and they will be referred to the State Forester for advice. 2. The :~'_ount Pleasant Fire Department will be consulted regarding their advice and participation in prevention of and responding to forest fires in the area. 3. All lots in the proposed subdivision shall contain a minimum land area of one acre. ?~:alf of the lots are well over 1 acre. Any assistance your department can provide in effecting the rezoning of this property will be appreciated. Very truly yours, ~~~ JTH/cd FER ~ 19g~ Pte, ~ilflMG 6 ~~~~ AEROSPACE RESEARCH CORPORATION ~- ~ Joseph T. Hamrick President Y~ ..... ~1 I • apv IM l.•a. NI .'1 _~ r • l~~o-2r•rzTY o /~E /~r Z1r ~ i i. ~ l •^~ g1UM / I~~MMr ~'1 ^`i / •hrc~ na:.ala W u t0aalq ~ ~ ' ~ ~y ~d~~~c ' ~ ~ ~ ' ~. n. la .e 7 V t . • i ~~M~M ~~ • ~ y • r .. ~~ !t •4~4 ~ _ . 1/. >°~°~ C f ae^~~~~ .- ,_ ,.. .__ i ,~ r ~, yt ~,~ 4 ',~~. P ~ (1,, ~~^~ ~ > c~ ~l ~ ~ \ 7 ti, M 1 i i r ~. r Z ?d s ' .rr~ , ` O yQ \ ~9 z F~ F I U 2 Q \ ~ 1I Q ~ J h Z ~ ~ ~ W Q N J a \ ~o~O~ ~., Q o~~~~~ N ~ o ~' Z „sw~Z~~ ~~ ~ ~ £ ~ f \\ ~ ~~ -b'E'i8'oi \\ r s~ 6~ 2 o ~-.. N ~ ~N Q~ Dl ~ \ 2 S° \~ '~ VO ~ \ ~ ~ N t ~ i \~a W m ` ~ \d6 •Y n W~ ~ \n 2 n ~ U W oI ~' U ~}., '~ C F ~~~ 'J ~ ~~c QIN ~~ i ~.~ "~~. ~~~ W L .? u ~ ~, e f ~; _ o ZZ no p~~3c~Wf '~~~~u{N QU~r nrlQo .il Z l) Q I F Q z~ ~~~ ~ u~r_ Y , .ogoo~~¢¢z y~JrY)~~'~O~yyQ J ~ 2 N •!) lC! Lt ~/ a~~o a ~,~~~~~n RiQl~1N01~ COUNTY REZONING AppLICATION 1. Owner's Name: Church of God ~i~ ~~-~ Date R~a.s as Rocoivt3d eys -~s _ Cans No.s Ord. No.s Phone: 345-7204 Address: 1913 Ni 11 i amson Rd. N.E. Roanoke, VA 24019 2. Applicant's Name: Dominion Bankshares Phone: 563-7517 Address: P. 0. Box 13327 Roanoke, VA 24040 3. Location of Property: North Side Plantation Road Tax Map Number(s) : 2706 5-2, 2706 5-~ 4. Magisterial District: 5. Size of Property 6. Existing Zoning: Hollins 1 .. ~.. . ----- Existing Land Use: A,ricultural, Residential ~~~~~ 7. Proposed Zoning: B-2 GRAfi; S Proposed Land Use: General Office ~MO~f fAUMTY 8. Comprehensive Plan Designation: Principal Industrial 9. Are Conditions Proffered With This Request? Yes No (If you are voluntarily offering proffers as a part of your applica- t~on, these proffers must be is writing. A member of the Planning Staff can assist yon in the preparation of these proffers.) lo. Value of Land and (Proposed) Buildings: il. The Following Items Must Be Submitted With This Application. Please Check If Enclosed. Application Will Not He Accepted If Any o! These Items Are Missing Or Incomplete: ~ ~_ Letter of Application ~o Concept Plan ,L`~' ~_ Metes and Bounds Description List of Adjacent Owners of Property (Attach Exhibit A) ~ .Vicinity Map ~- -rte _,_., ~_ Application Fes Written Proffers ~~,. ,~c Water and Sewer Application (It Applicable) •'' t 2. S ignature Of Property Owner, Contract Purchaser, Or Owner's Agent: Signature ~ Date a?-r~r~- 9V r s ~'. Chu/C~ 0 f C~O~ MAILING ADDRESS: P. 0. BOX 7198 1813 WILLIAMSON ROAD, N.E. - ~ ~ f i 98 _ ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24019 PHONE 346-7204 J. .~_. - _ PASTOR: RES. 30&9189 PARSONAGE - 5513 SWEETFERN DRIVE - ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24019 SECRETARY: RES. 314-8773 February 26, 1990 Mr. Terrance Harrington Director of Planning Roanoke County Administration P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-6798 Dear Mr. Harrington: Attached is our application for rezoning 7.644 acres of land on Planta- tion Road in Roanoke County. This is necessary as we are planning to sell the property to Dominion Bankshares Corporation for the future expansion needs of their operations center. I would appreciate your favorable review of this petition. Very truly yours, Reverend Larry W. Lykens, Pastor Williamson Road Church of God wm cc: James Johnston ,'1 ~:~ '~.:i:rj1'r: 3:~!~:~~:;~i. ~; ~ ~'~..S{~• BLS .. i 1 _ .~ ~ ~ ~~~ ` 1i;..ter-t~9i ~'~• . .` ~ ; ~n ~ ~ t ~ F~~ ` . _ . ga b - - T~+~ s J ~ 6 7 4 .. `~ t . ` 9 ~~~ 1 ~K S ` Ktso~ ` . ~ i~ ~~~ _ I ` p `'` !006c 1 _ ~ ~ _ ~ nso ' ,,~ ~ u ` ~1 -'~ ., u _ l l; Py p 7I0~ `\. 9 / i~~ p~ : ~ / ~~\ ., ,\ ~\ / t' p a~w/ + \ o / ~~ i ~` ~, ` . ._ `~- /~~ ~ ,~~ ~ `` ~ ,~ ` -, ~ 6 S2 4 ._ lP,^ow 13 n ,2sr~ro oe~ rc~ ~, of ~~ ~~ \~ ,... \ ' ROANORB COUNTY ~, .- "USB NOT PROVIDED FOR" PERMIT APPLICATION 1. Applicant's Names The Easter Seal Societv of Va.. Inc. Phones 362-1656 (Susan Knight, Regional Director) Address: 4A41 Williamson Road. Post Office Box 5496 Rnannkp ~ Virginia _ Zip: 24012 2. Location of Property: Valleypointe Corporate Development Community Part of 3. New Tax Map #:37.07-1-14 Old Tax Map ~: "rR~Gf 4B 3~.e~-1 - I~l•~I 4. Magisterial District Location: xoilins 5. Size of Property: Phase 1; 51 acres acres/sq. ft. Size of Proposed Use Not Provided For: 5.1 acres acres/sq. ft. 6. Existing Land Use: Corporate Business, Mix use industrial park Existing Zoning: ri-1 7. Proposed Land Use: 16-week summer concert series, beginning Mid-May. 8. Comprehensive Plan Designation: Principle industrial 9. Are Conditions being Proffered? Yes No X 10. Proposed Annual Gross Revenue: 11. Value of Land: Value of (Proposed) Buildings: 12. Value of Machinery & Tools: Number to be Employed: 13. Check Completed Items: Consultation Letter of Application 8}" x 11" Concept Plan Legal Forms List of Adjacent Properties Application Fee ublic Hearing Notices Issued 14. Applicant's Signature: 15. Owner's Consent, if dif~'eren~ ~ia~fhta~p ~I~ican Director Name: ~olne,~-~ ~~ ~yL,4,c,~~t> Signature: , OFFICE USE ONLYz Application Deadlines Hearinq Datez Received By: Date Received: Board of Supervisors Hearing Dates Actions •4. ~Ta J- f~Yi ~ ~'~ The Easter Seal Society of Virginia, Inc. (s-~~- ' "~ ~' 4841 Williamson Road P. O. Box 5496 Roanoke. Virginia. 24012 (703) 362-1656 (Locav 1-800-365-1656 Cfoll-FYee Virginia only) The Pol.uerTo Overcome February 23, 1990 HOARD OF DIRDCTORS Officers: Chairman o[ the Board William B. Joyner. Sr.. Manassas t-irst Vlce Chairman 'Thomas E. Inman. V111llamsburg Second Vice Chaltmaa Nancy Hayden. Mechanicsville Terrance L. Harrington, Director Secretary-'IYeaaurer Robert E. Mullen. Jr.. Roanoke Department of Planning and Zoning Chatrmaa -House of tklegates County of Roanoke •Ittomas E. Inman. WSlliamsburg post Office Box 29800 Roanoke, Virginia 24018-0798 Members: th. Patricia J. Brown. Richmond Dear MI'. Harrington• Glenn Cr3rtmer, Mechanicsville Richard Eagan. Oakton Harry E. Ilanels, Jr., Gkn Allen J. Shelby Guss. Bowling Green Attached is the application and check for the "Use Not Provided sherry Hamlett. Tioanokc For Permit" for the Valleypointe concert series for consideration Nancy Hayden. Mechanicsville willlam A Hearst. vtrgtnia Tieach by the Roanoke County Planning Commission at their meeting on John M. Hudgins, Jr.. Salem Donald E. Huston, Virgirtfa Beach March 6, thus be i1111i21 our etition fora royal from the 'Thomas E. Inman. ww>,amaburg g g P PP Wllllam B. Joyner, sr.. Manassas Roanoke County Board of Supervisors. Walton Mahon. Bowling Green John W. Motieha, Jr., Salem Robert E. Mullen. Jr., Roanoke ~~ enclosed is a summary of Valleypolnte After Hours a Vi'alter °' Murray, Marlon + ~ Nanr -1iiT. Hampton 16-week summer concert series ro osed on the Valle ointe YveL ey, Ettrick Petersburg P P yP zttom~ .N. Rubk. Vinton property. We are very pleased to be working with Bob Crawford, Rlchazd W. Sloan.'IYoutvllle Valle ointe and Lin erfelt Develo ment Co oration on this Angela S. 'Iltrley, Jonestille yp g p rP Charlotte Via. Mechanicsville concert series to help promote awareness of one of Roanoke Charles A Wilson. CuL'en Leigh Wintz, Falls church COUnty'S newest facilities and to produce income for Easter Seal services here in the Roanoke Valley. Presldeat F. Robert Knight state T3eaagttazters Easter Seals has already successfully worked with Irinsbrook and 4841 Williamson Road Rowe Development Corporation iIl Richmond on a similiar Roanoke. Virginia zaolz partnership for the past two years making possible an event that Regional offices has popular appeal for the community and private business while 6319 Casue Place. Site A raising. funds for Easter Seal direct service programs for people Falls Church. Virginia 22044 ~~ disabilities. 116 North Boulevard Richmond. Virginia 23220 3101 Mag c Hollow Boulevard We're looking forward to a very successful concert series here i21 Richmond', ~~ ~~ the Roanoke Valley of the same caliber as Innsbrook Aber Hows 4841 Wllifamson Road iri Richmond. Roanoke, Virginia 24012 ~~` Sincerely. Camp Easter deal-East Route 1. Boot 111 Milford, Virgfnia 22511 Routep2. Hoc 12ga1 West r New stk. virglata 24127 usari S. Knight Regional Director For, ~tle vtg6da F.astc..,eat socre4r.la cnadren and /s Q~~ scat vrrQalfaa oldest and lamest not;jor- ~tt ileatth orHarttzarwl Enclosures P-+~v dined pattutt sen,tces to chadren mid adults urUh disabaaiea. G-¢ Vatteypo~nt After Sours is a proposed 16-week summer concert series designed to provide early evening entertainment opportunities for Roanoke Valley families each Thursday evening from mid-May to mid-September and to help promote awareness of Valleypointe as a business hub in the area. It is modeled on the successful Innsbrook After Hours summer concert series in Richmond combining the efforts of Innsbrook, Rowe Development Corporation and Easter Seals providing entertainment in a controlled environment from 5 to 8 p.m. one evening a week during summer months. A family-oriented event, the series has been a source of valuable income to support the services and programs provided by The Easter Seal Society of Virginia, Inc. Through the coordinated efforts of government, businesses and volunteers, the Innsbrook After Hours made possible an event supportive of the community and the people living there. The Audience The marketing of the series concert, the location, as well as the type of music that is proposed for Vaiieypointe After Hours will together determine the quality of the audience which will be attracted to the event; the security and control measures that accompany it will ensure success. The bands will be booked for appeal to the adult population providing summer beach music and other popular sounds targeted at the 25-50 year old age group interest. The assistance and cooperative sponsorship invitation will be extended to the media that has that appeal, such as WROV AM/FM. While the audience at the Richmond series averaged 5,000 people per night, the Roanoke event is expected to attract 3,000 - 3,500 people per concert. Th_ Valleypointe offers an ideal location for the concert series as does Innsbrook. Both are primarily business centers with enormous growth potential located at some distance from residential areas. Both have access in and out of the complexes and both have high profile potential. Valleypointe, still with much undeveloped area but growing rapidly, nonetheless has sufficient areas for entry, control, parking, entertainment, egress. The site(s) considered are on the front area of the property behind the trucking terminals. Consultations with Robert Crawford, Marketing Director for Valleypointe, have been extremely favorable for the realization of the concert series and to build awareness of Valleypointe and its opportunities for the Roanoke Valley by highlighting community involvement. Reference calls regarding the conduct and reputation of the Richmond event at Innsbrook concerning the working relationships and the benefit to the community were favorable. (jI ~ G-4 Many changes in the topography of the Valleypointe property over the next few months and upcoming construction and development are taken into consideration in the planning of the event. The completion of grading and surfacing of the two roadways -- 1) Valleypointe Boulevard completed all the way through to the intersection with Woodhaven Road and 2) the development of an arced roadway connecting in two places with Valleypointe Parkway -- will provide adequate traffic flow. All parking areas, including those already completed, will be used: no parking will be permitted on grassed areas; the existent lots have spaces for over four hundred cars. Supervised parking along Valleypointe Parkway and other completed roadways will not obstruct traffic in either direction and will provide the essential clearance for any emergency vehicles. For security reasons, the entry off Peters Creek Road, afour-lane street with a stoplight at the entrance to the Valleypointe property is considered as the primary entrance for the Valieypointe after Hours concert series. The location of the Valleypointe property provides proximity access to Interstates 581 and 81 to accomodate traffic flow. Arrangements will be made with appropriate law enforcement personnel to accomodate the smooth traffic flow entering and leaving the Valleypointe property between 5 and 9 p.m. Although the completion of Valleypointe Parkway is expected before the concert series begins, plans for control of any attendees entering from Woodhaven Road are under consideration. Waste Control and Site Clean-uv Provision and placement of an appropriate number of portable toilets in the least offensive location at a site on the Valleypointe property will be worked out with the Valleypointe management. Because the concert series is proposed for Thursday evenings. the clean-up of the entire site must begin immediately following the close of the evening's activities. Debris must be removed in an expedient fashion because 1) the property is ahighly-visible business community and must maintain a strong image: and 2) fast clean-up wlll prevent any litter from blowing over onto other property. A private contractor will be hired for this purpose. (2) ""~ Part of the evening's entertainment is to provide food and beverage options for all the attendees since no one will be permitted to take in coolers, picnic baskets, etc. as part of the security and control measures. Food for purchase at the concert will be provided through a contracted caterer; beverage options include sodas, beer and wine coolers. The selling of food and beverages requires appropriate coordination with the Roanoke County Health Department and the licensing and close coordination of activities with agents of the Virginia Department of Alcohol Beverage Control will assure everyone of a successful concert. A system of control for the selling of beer and wine coolers has been worked out successfully at the Innsbrook After Hours events in Richmond and will be replicated including some areas of improvement for the proposed Vaileypo~nte After Hours events as follows: 1) An admission of $2. wlll be charged for each attendee over 10 years of age. 2) A double ID program will be implemented for anyone wishing to purchase beer and wine cooler tickets. 3) Individuals 21 years and over who wish to purchase beer or wine cooler tickets will be limited to a maximum of 5 per concert. 4) Beverages will be served in plastic cups. 5) Plastic, cutaway ID wristbands will be nl,~aced on any individual's wrist who purchases beer or wine cooler tickets. A number written on the band in indelible ink will indicate how many tickets the person has purchased, consequently indicating how many additional can be purchased for that evening. 6) Anyone without an ID band seen drinking beer or wine coolers on the property will be escorted from the property by security personnel. 7) The color of the plastic ID band will be changed each week for additional control. 8) A designated driver program will be implemented. The importance of conducting an event with widespread community appeal and positive image for everyone involved while producing funding for services for children and adults with disabilities is paramount to The Easter Seal Society. It is important to establish a wholesome image of the event to make it an appealing summer activity for Roanoke Valley citizens. While volunteers can provide the much-needed assistive support, the coordination with and contracting for off-duty Roanoke County law enforcement personnel for the Vaileypointe A~f'ter Sours series will provide the professionally-trained people to handle any security problems. Security will also be used to escort Easter Seal representative(s) to various bank locations throughout the evening for night deposit of cash. (3) Permits ~ Ln_su~*±ce ~` "' Because the Vatteypotnte der Sous is a series of concerts with high visibility potential and as such requires a strong element of cooperation and understanding of citizens and government officials, Easter Seal staff will work closely to secure appropriate permits and licensing for the event and meet all regulations. While there were no incidents in the past two years issuing from the event in Richmond, The Easter Seal Society of Virginia, Inc. has and will provide appropriate insurance coverage for the length of the event. (4) ... 0 x~ ~~ a ~~ a~ ~ ~~ . ~ •.. O Cr -`~ a a ~~ ~~ W W '" i +; ~ c F~ ~ ~ ~, tF v b a~'a p .~ o ~, U a> ~ ~ ~SEo ~~' -- l7'"~ NORTH WOOD I-rgVEN RO,gD ' VALLEYPOI]I~TE A PLANNED CORPORATE ENVIRONMENT 2.8 AC. ~ ~-$ f ites in phase I totaling 51 acres in Valleypointe are now available for O purchase, lease or build-to-suit, designed ® to meet the individual needs of each 3.1 nc. 3.o nc. company. Valleypointe, located in Roanoke ~- RESEARCH ROAp County, is the largest planned corporate ® ; ~ environment in southwestern Vrginia. The 2.3 AC. 2.1 AC. total site is 250 acres, fronting two miles 4.1 ^~~ on Interstates 581 and 81 and is PHASE I immediately adjacent to Roanoke -- 0 • © Regional Airport. > ., ~ ~c 2.1 ~" For details, contact Lingerfelt o - ~ ~ Development Corporation. `W`~ 6.8 AC. O °~ Z ~ ~ p~ 4.8 /K. 5.3 AC. Z ~ ~ A Quality Development Of: ~ ~ I ' ~°'~'c~ ~ L/NGERFELT ~4 ~~ DEVELOPMENT I ~ ~ CORPORATION 0.9 AC. • r- ~-- - - R chmond, V d irna 223219 ~ ~ LIIMGERFELT 1804) 644-9119. . ~- ---- i -, 3.0/1C. '~ i `--~ ~ 18.1/~~P_~O~~iq>~'e~i i i 1~~~'"eiv i ,,II_ j NoLIKS l4E>~oM LJ i~i PETERS CREEK ROAp ROAD ~'~ REGIOrWI "'t4~(,-'g~~ I .-rte , , +~~ ,,, Ali f6Z7R lilN 1,! sr~+ ~ Y Vr,.r' ~f+" f W K ~ F • `kM~ \ ~' i ~ u w --~+nrynNns00•d~ 11~~ •~' 0 0 zl + + ~ + + + ~ + + + + • ¢ l .~ F- a[ aoe.o..N~+vsoad ~ A S W o~~ N N N N N ~[ W P Y ~ ~ ~ lJ . o pp ~~ ~ , ~: ~ OINSE ti~N~ ~~~ ~ 1`~ ^ , ~ vA E ~ ,~~ $ .._ ~p ~to~ ~~ s~~'~~ ~ _ i ~I ~ t! ~~~ ~ ct! ~~~ ~ ~ o ..` I` `~~` r M l~i.l1~ _+ ~e~~ \ 1iA~T 111r oP b.P '1~ ~a;~~ ~~' +^ ~~.E' ~F~rE~~~lAt~pq MA~1 ~I G `+,.. igz~~ ,AOyy ~ ,OC ~ Y ~$ a ,. -- -._.__ 3 s ~o o ~ \ I C• ~ c R~ ~ a. c 'qt, b~ I, ~ w ; I ~ R sue- °.c \ E,~ I .oy )Ie ,~~, ~ ~~ Ib~ a4• I I W t` .. ~ b I I i is v~ ~ ~I z ~ ~ ~l ~ Ij ~! ~ ~ ; ~i i i"I l ° ~ e + ~~I~ ~ uq~ j w 21 11° ~ , ~;IM ... /N51~1y'G3"~~~ = v < °`jl i ~ Q ~ WO( ~~ y? z ~ i~l _. ` `;I I ti .. ~~ it ~• ~' ~ Z ~~i i ~ ~ ~ I~ ~' x I " +~ ~ ~ ~i i M 2 ~ it ~ i s r ©o ~ ~ ~ ~ II• (~)~ I r 1N~W~~ir~ W I ~ m I I u; ~ _}'{ I ~ N19 y91rN'V ®x z ~' ~` ~~\ : _ ~ A• o i ~ y~Y39 AyY11Nr!' .02 MAN I z o ~ ~ ~ 10 iN Q ; I~ w 3' I ' `-! .H l1 '~.bfr,ll.14 6 e 3n~.t/ M (Nl iY 01 Y/1 U r-- S ~ ~.H-9.~ ~ ~(lOU.000b'M•llfi/+2Y5- ,iYi! _ .0009'M.10.3I.144 i •e ~~iM3 A1r9Rf,'t N399Y 3lYnrrd.SA gHll51X~-~~ I' _ ,tf~l. y1.0,~ . ~ ~ .iit01-- ~ yK • ~ ~ •~, •- '~.Irh.00.Lt 4 ----- I I .NM •1,4. ~YM.jry~M•GrN ~~. `t~ 19r1f 1 r0~./. 1N3W9fY3 ff39 f N ` I dlNyU7KlUrd 9rfI;;N~9 YM/9rlA r l i y l `' Q ~ e.~`e r Q V O e i •4~dr:JOyd 19r14~9 .---~~ I •I .~•_' ._ -Q ~ ~: r s~" ~ ~ ~ o 1y3d01li dB NO141elOrnb ~ s_ .. .a ~ e k/ 19bt011G r/':lOd hN1N/rW~N ~ I I I 'rte s ~ ~ ~ 8 ~ ~, ~` ~ O s ~ / z 11Nar+~-w y~rra ~; y~M~, Ayr11NxY .OS 9uu~tlt~ ~ I I I ~ z M , ~ r - ;t-7N ~ ~,~ ~~~- (Nl4rNIJ/1N~W~r~ ~ryYN1rr0.12 ~NJlbil~--t~"'(I i M~tt,it.ItN ~tgg ~ IN~N9f07 ,I1H11A'i ty9l9Y ~lYAlfld .Oi 4N1141X3- i 'i I i ~ ~ ~ a.A0.00.40 y --~ x ~ s 'f~., 7 ~~.t0 U34 ` "~~ ~_ ,Hai I ~ ~~`~ ~~ 1t F ~' ~ 4~` ..: L-•1•uit ~ xrl ~rNJ91ro........ ~~. : •. ;_... _ . ;.I ~ :: :c'-' Qo ~i~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s .. ~ :'.~:~ rti- M~N ~ i = .Q ~~- ~::.: r y y ` ~~/1N 1t ~ ii w.~ri.l - r 'N i~!/1 II.~I.a/M ~~~?.^"y i i~. ... ..1~ ~~~~~:.)y t ,~ _~ ACTION NO. ITEM NO. ~ -- 1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 27, 1990 AGENDA ITEM: ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE AND ACQUISITION OF SURPLUS REAL ESTATE (PARCELS 044 AND 074 -CAVE SPRING JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL SITE) FROM THE ROANOKE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, AND FURTHER, AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYANCE OF SAME TO THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS :p BACKGROUND' SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Virginia Department of Transportation is in the process of acquiring the right-of-way needed for the widening of Route 221. This road passes in front of Cave Spring Junior High School. The right-of-way needed includes 19,635 square feet of land and is identified as Parcels 044 and 074 as shown on Sheets 10, 11 and 10D of the plans for Route 221, State Highway Project 0221- 080-107, RW201. The offer to cover this transaction and all related damages is $73,632, which the County Assessor has agreed is the fair market value. This ordinance authorizes the acceptance of this real estate from the School Board and the conveyance of this property to the Commonwealth of Virginia for the widening of State Route 221 in front of Cave Spring Junior High School. The first reading of this proposed ordinance was held on March 27, 1990; the second reading was held on April 24, 1990. ALTERNATIVES AND IMPACTS: The Virginia Department of Transportation has offered $73,632 for the acquisition of land and improvements. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the second reading of this ordinance be held on April 24, 1990, and that the County Administrator be :. authorized to execute the necessary documents to consummate this transaction. Respectfully submitted, Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney Action Approved ( ) Denied Received Referred to Motion by Eddy Johnson McGraw Nickens Robers Vote No Yes Abs RESOLUTION DECLARING PARCELS 044 AND 074 OF THE ~` / CAVE SPRING JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL SITE SURPLUS PROPERTY. WHEREAS, the Virginia Department of Transportation has proposed to make improvements to State Route 221 which will require the acquisition of right-of-way on the Cave Spring Junior High School property, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, in accordance with Section 22.1-129 of the Code of Virginia, the County School Board of Roanoke County, on motion of Charlsie S. Pafford and duly seconded, hereby declares Parcels 044 and 074 as shown on Sheets 10, 11, and lOD of the plans for Route 221, State Highway Project 0221-080-107,RW201 and defined on the attached deed dated February 8, 1990, together containing 19,635 square feet, to be surplus property and directs the clerk of said school board to file this resolution with the Clerk of the Circuit Court for attachment to the deed of said property and vestment of title of said property to Roanoke County; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said school board requests that the sum of $73,632 to be paid by the Virginia Department of Transportation to the County School Board of Roanoke County be deposited in the School Capital Outlay Fund. Adopted on the following recorded vote: AYES: Paul G. Black, Maurice L. Mitchell, Charlsie S. Pafford, Barbara B. Chewning, Frank E. Thomas NAYS: None TEST . L Clerk c: Mr. Paul Mahoney, County Attorney H- / AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 1990 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ACCEPTANCE AND ACQUISITION OF SURPLUS REAL ESTATE (PARCELS 044 AND 074 - CAVE SPRING JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL SITE) FROM THE ROANOKE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, AND FURTHER, AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYANCE OF SAME TO THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter, the acquisition and disposition of real estate can be authorized only by ordinance. A first reading on this ordinance was held on March 27, 1990; and a second reading was held on April 24, 1990. 2. That the County School Board of Roanoke County on March 8, 1990, adopted a resolution declaring Parcels 044 and 074 of the Cave Spring Junior High School site to be surplus property pursuant to Section 22.1-129 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended. All proceeds from the sale of said property shall be credited to the School Outlay Improvements Fund. 3. That the acceptance and acquisition of certain real estate located along Route 221 in front of the Cave Spring Junior High School Site and identified as Parcels 044 and 074 as shown on Sheets 10, it and 10D of the plans for Route 221, State Highway Project 0221-080-107, RW201 from the Roanoke County School Board is hereby authorized. 4. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Charter of Roanoke County, the subject real estate is being made available to the Commonwealth of Virginia for other public uses, ~-/ namely, the widening of State Route 221. 5. That the offer of the Virginia Department of Transportation in the amount of $73,632 is hereby accepted and shall be credited to the School Capital Outlay Fund, and the conveyance of the real estate described above to the Virginia Department of Transportation for other public uses is hereby authorized and approved. 6. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions as may be necessary to accomplish these transactions, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. ACTION NUMBER ITEM NUMBER ~'S~ 1- L AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 27, 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. League of Older Americans One-year term of Webb Johnson will expire 3/31/90. 3. Landfill_Citizens Advisory Committee Carl L. Wright, representative from the Cave Spring Magisterial District has resigned and another representative should be appointed. 4. Transportation and Safety Commission Four-year terms of Arnold Struson, Medical Representative and Jackie Talevi, Legal Representative expired 3/1/90. Four-year term of Lt. Delton R. Jessup, Sate Police Representative will expire 4/1/90. ~. ~- SUBMITTED BY: Mary H. lien Clerk to the Board APPROVED B ~.- ~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ----------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved ( ) Motion by: Denied ( ) No Yes Abs Eddy Received ( ) Johnson Referred ( ) McGraw To ( ) Nickens Robers ~..~~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 1990 RESOLIITION 32790-5 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM L - CONSENT AGENDA BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. that the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for March 27, 1990, designated as Item L - Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 4, inclusive, as follows: 1. Approval of Minutes - August 22, 1989 2. Approval of Minutes - February 27, 1990 3. Request to approve changes in Secondary System due to relocation and realignment of Poor Mountain Road (Route 612) 4. Request for acceptance of Cedar Edge Road in the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. 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 L-1 removed, and upon the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None Item L-1 approved on motion of Supervisor Johnson, and upon the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McG~aw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Supervisor Eddy A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. Ho ton, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Phillip Henry, Director, Engineering Arnold Covey, Director, Development & Inspections August 22, 1989 O 7 ) Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Roanoke County Administration Center 3738 Brambleton Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24018 August 22, 1989 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 second regularly scheduled meeting of the month of August, 1989. IN RE: CALL TO ORDER Chairman Garrett called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m. The roll call was taken. Supervisor Nickens arrived at 3:10 p.m. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Lee Garrett, Vice Chairman Richard Robers, Supervisors Bob L. Johnson, Steven A. McGraw, Harry C. Nickens MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; John M. Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator for Human Services; Terry Harrington, Director, Planning & Zoning Department; Don M. Myers, Assistant County Administrator for Management Services; Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney; Mary H. Allen, Clerk; Anne Marie Fedder, Information Officer; Brenda J. Holton, Deputy Clerk; Mary H. Allen, Clerk August 22, 1989 O . -~ ~a.~ ' nn na ! ! nnn~ ~~ 7! DOQ-iQ 1lIG 1lW GiJ VJ J J J 4J I commemorating the occasion. She announced the All America Golf Tournament last Saturday and on September 22, there will be a 5-M race at Green Hill Park in Glenvar. IN RE: NEW BDSINE88 ~ Request for Resolution of Support for the Western Regional Forensic Science Laboratory. R-82289-1 County Administrator Elmer Hodge recalled that in 1987, the board donated to the State of Virginia several acres for the construction of a regional crime lab behind the Southview School on Peters Creek Road. It would be advantageous for the County to have this crime lab nearby and Sheriff Kavanaugh and Dr. Wilson of the County Schools support this project. Mr. Hodge introduced Dr. A. W. Tiedemann, Division Director, Consolidated Laboratory Services, from Richmond, who gave a slide presentation indicating the need for more space for the facility to provide better services for the Valley. If the General Assembly approves funding, construction could start next Spring. Dr. Tiedemann introduced Mr. W. P. Lawrie, of Dewberry & Davis, Architects, project leader for the design and layout, who described the site plan. Dr. Tiedemann also introduced Susan Wells, who has been handling the administrative background, Dr. David Oxley, Regional August 22, 1989 O 7 r 7 U FURTHER, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors does hereby encourage the General Assembly to fund the proposed facility in order to enhance the services provided to Southwest Virginia. On motion of Supervisor Nickens, seconded by Supervisor Robers, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisor Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None 2. Request to establish a Community Service Program A-82289-2 Assistant Director of Human Resources Kathy Clayton outlined a Community Diversion Incentive Program which would provide volunteer workers for the County from a group of non-violent offenders required to perform community services work in lieu of paying court fines and costs. The County will benefit from having a ready supply of labor for services which may not otherwise be completed. The staff also recommended the hiring of a part-time volunteer coordinator who would be responsible for administering this program. The coordinator would also be responsible for administering other volunteer type programs which might be community based and other programs administered through the courts. $5,800 is requested from Board Contingency Fund to cover the coordinator's salary for six months and if successful following this period, additional funding would be requested. She introduced Jim Phipps, of the Community Diversion Incentive Program and Teresa Childress, Clerk with the General District Court. Supervisor Robers suggested that a report be brought back at the end August 22, 1989 0 ] 8 i~3~F, n o AYES: Supervisor Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: Supervisor Johnson 3. Resolution authorisfnq the Regional Cable Television Committee to conduct community meetings for public comments on the franchise renewal R-82289-3 County Attorney Paul Mahoney advised that the consultant retained by the City of Roanoke, County of Roanoke, and Town of Vinton to assist the Regional Cablevision Committee in their review of the franchise from Cox Cable has suggested that each government body authorize by resolution to hold community meeting to receive public comments on the franchise renewal. Staff is asking that the Board authorize the Roanoke Regional Cable Television Committee to undertake these meetings in each jurisdiction for the purpose of public comment on the proposed renewal of the cable television franchise. There was no discussion. On motion of Supervisor Nickens, seconded by Supervisor McGraw, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisor Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None RESOLIITION 82289-3 AIITHORISING THE ROANORE REGIONAL CABLE TELEVISION COMMITTEE TO CONDIICT PIIBLIC HEARINGB BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that the Roanoke Regional Cable Television Committee is August 22, 1989 O 8 r-; , e ~ -- ~cm~s s Supervisor McGraw complimented Ms. Waldo on the excellent running of the facility. On motion of Supervisor Nickens, seconded by Supervisor Johnson, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers, Garrett NAYS: None 5. Request to accept and appropriate two grants on behalf of the Department of Social Services._ A-82289-5 Mr. Chambliss reported that the Department of Social Services has been informed by the state that they have been accepted for two grant programs, one in the amount of $6,953.75 to fund a Volunteer Parent Aid Program. The second grant is for $520 for an Independent Living Initiatives Program. Both of these grants are 100% reimbursable and staff requested permission to accept the grants and appropriate monies to be used by the Department of Social Services. Ms. Betty Lucas, Director, was present to answer questions. On motion of Supervisor McGraw, seconded by Supervisor Garrett, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers, Garrett NAYS: None 6. Request to appropriate additional grant revenues to the August 22, 1989 082 l _ - AYES: Supervisors McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers, Garrett NAYS: None IN RE: RBPORTB AND INQIIIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS Supervisor Johnson moved that staff bring back to September 12th meeting a report to begin a Stormwater Management Program, identify problems, and begin an engineering study. The motion was seconded by Supervisor McGraw and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers, Garrett NAYS: None Supervisor Robers: (1) Presented "smart food" to board members and reported on meetings with VPI and others concerning the smart highway between Blacksburg and Roanoke Valley. (2) Announced received response from VEC and Roanoke County Library on his suggestions for using automated library system.. Supervisor McGraw: Reported on the VACo meeting and the Grayson Commission. He announced public hearing dates for Grayson Commission hearings with the Roanoke public hearing to be held on September 25. IN RE: CONSENT AGENDA R-82289-7 August 22, 1989 0 ~ 4 following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None IN RE: APPROVAL OF RAFFLE PERMIT - MOOSE LODGE #284 A-82289-8 On motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by Supervisor Nickens, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Nickens, Robers, Garrett NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Supervisor McGraw IN RE: FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCES - CONSENT AGENDA Supervisor Johnson moved to approve first reading of the following ordinances, and to set the public hearing for September 26, 1989. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Robers, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Supervisor McGraw i. Ordinance to change the zoning classification of a .409 acre tract of real estate located at 5449 Franklin Road (Tag Map No. 98.02-2-9) in the Cave Spring Magisterial District from the zoning classification of B-2 to B-3 with conditions and a special exception upon the application of Eagle August 22, 1989 O a a ~~•o.o AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None IN RE: OPEN 8$BSION Supervisor Robers moved to return to Open Session at 5:45 p.m. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Johnson and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None RESOLIITION 82289-9 CERTIFYING EBECIITIVE MEETING AAS HELD IN CONFORMITY WITB 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 were 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, August 22, - .~-M ~ ~ . e +-. r ~ 1989 ~ B 8 take the sense of the qualified voters of the County on the question of establishing a police force in Roanoke County. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Board hereby petitions the Circuit Court of Roanoke County to order an election on November 7, 1989, on the question of establishing a police force in Roanoke County, provided that such date is at least sixty (60) days after the date on which the Court enters its order. The question on the ballot shall be in substantially the following form or such other form as may be approved by the Electoral Board of the County: Question:Shall a police force be established in Roanoke County? Yes No 2. That the Clerk of the Board is instructed to immediately file a certified copy of this resolution with the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia. 3. That the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, shall publish a notice of such election in a newspaper of general circulation in the County once a week for three consecutive weeks prior to such election. 4. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized ' and directed to take such actions as may be necessary to accomplish the intent of this resolution. 5. That this resolution shall take effect immediately. August 22, 1989 Q 9 O ....-s i artrrrrp proffer five conditions. Deacon Charles Anderson, Trinity Church, 3618 Janney Lane, was present and stated that the property was a central location for their congregation. They have attempted to contact the majority of property owners in the area and found no one who objects to the construction of a church. In reply to Supervisor Robers' inquiry about the proffers that staff proposed, Deacon Anderson advised that they were concerned about the desires of the Planning Department and the Planning Commission. They agreed to the proffered conditions. He stated that the property would be used for related church activities. Supervisor Johnson pointed out although the rezoning is for a good purpose, this is further downzoning of industrial property. On motion of Supervisor Nickens to approve with proffered condition, seconded by Supervisor Robers and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers, 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 114.00-1-68 and recorded in Deed Book 1114, Page 834, and legally described below, be rezoned from M-2, General Industrial District, to B-1, Office District. August 22, 1989 O JZ 889-2 Petition of LOBO Investors to resone a 6.14 acre tract from R-5, Residential to R-1, Residential to construct single tamilp homes, located along the south side of Buck Xountafn Road, 200 feet east from its intersection Nith Brandervood Drive in the Cave spring Magisterial District. Mr. Harrington presented the staff report. Planning Commission determined there were no significant impact factors and voted to approve the request. There was some discussion at the Planning Commission regarding the need for proffered conditions controlling access to the site and the applicant has proffered three conditions. Mr. W. H. Fralin, attorney for the applicant, reported that there was some concern by citizens about drainage in the area and pointed out that the property is presently zoned for 60 townhouses and reducing to 18 single family homes will significantly help the drainage situation. The following citizens spoke regarding the proposed rezoning: 1. Johniece Blankenship, 6924 Buck Crossing Drive spoke about the flooding problems due to continued development. She presented a petition of approximately 150 signatures of residents who are concerned with the flooding problems in the area. 2. E. C. Hedrick, Jr., 4338 Buck Mountain Road, asked about plans to take care of the drainage problems. Supervisor Robers advised that he had been to the area August 22, 1989 O 9 ~- s, *~an - - -- S~'PT3KSnf ~ ~ ~ drainage study in this area and report back by second meeting of next month. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Garrett, and denied upon the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisor Robers NAYS: Supervisors Johnson, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett Supervisor Nickens during discussion asked the petitioner what impact this delay would have on their plans. Mr. Boone stated that because of the time of year, their ability to grade and put the roads in before severe weather would be affected. He felt the issue of drainage should be left to the Engineering Department in their review of the plans for the project. Supervisor Johnson spoke against the motion stating that this was a zoning matter and staff should deal with the drainage problems. Supervisor McGraw asked Mr. Harrington for the type of requirements that might be put forth in drainage for this subdivision. Mr. Harrington described the drainage requirements for this subdivision. Supervisor Johnson moved to approve the petition with proffered conditions. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Nickens and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None FINAL ORDER August 22, 1989 ~ 9 6 __ _ yr r r x u r L.ulYJ (1) No driveways will enter individual dwellings from Buck Mountain Road. (2) A natural wooded buffer area will be retained between Buck Mountain Road and residences to be constructed on the north side of proposed "50 ft. roadway" (proposed Whipplewood Court) . (3) Only one roadway or entrance either public or private (excluding construction entrances) will be developed from Buck Mountain Road. This roadway will be the existing Branderwood Drive. 889-3 Petition of HDC, Inc. to rezone a 19.30 acre tract from R-6, Residential to R-3, Residential to construct single family homes, located along the south side of Adamson Road, 300 feet from its intersection with Garst Mill Road in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District. Supervisor Johnson announced that he would absent himself from the discussion because of a personal and professional interest in the rezoning and asked that his vote be recorded as abstaining. Mr. Harrington advised that several citizens were present at the Planning Commission hearing but no one expressed opposition to the project. There are no significant impact factors. Two proffered conditions were submitted. Mr. Harrington reported that originally the plans called for patio homes but the developer later decided to go forward with single family residences only and this has been proffered. The Planning August 22, 1989 0 9 8 ect to a po nt; t ence N. 78' 17' W. 340.0 feet to a ~+oint marked Dy an old iron; thence S. 87' Sl' 1i. 110.93 feet to a point; being the South- east corner of Tract "8" on the Plat hereinafter referred to; thence with the easterly boundary of Tract "8" N. S' 18' 2S" 1.'. 139.53 feet to a point, being the Southeast corner of Tsaet "A" on said Plat; thence with the easterly boundary of Tract "A" N. S' 18' 2S" W. 334.69 fect to a point; thence N. 84' 47' 43" W. 117.34 feet to a point; thence S. 38. 07' W. 171.36 feet to the place of nEGINgING. and containing 18.30 acres. and being decig~u ted •s Tract "C" on the Plat of the Survey n-adt for 1lcraan f. Larson Estate by T. P. Parker and bin. Engineers and Surveyors, dated December 1. 1914. PROFFER OF CONDITIONS 1. Property to be developed in substantial conformity with site plan prepared by Lumsden and Associates, dated July 25, 1989. 2. Development will be comprised of single family detached residences only. 889-4 Petition of Patsy and Clyde Collie for a IIse Not Provided for Permit to operate a bed and breakfast in conjunction with a residence on a 5 acre tract located at 4225 Harborwood Road in the Catawba Magisterial District. Mr. Harrington reported that one citizen spoke at the Planning Commission public hearing expressing concern about access. The Planning Commission felt that the width was sufficient for two vehicles. Eight proffers were offered by the petitioner. Zn response to a question from .Supervisor McGraw, Mr. Harrington advised that the maximum number of guest rooms is five even if another structure was built. August 22, 1989 --- - a ttf M~ that Mstai~ .00 ~~t'o ts~t. hel ` ~ !0 teot t~o~Mq to •iraiai~ Na~~ass ~ora~ ar ~Aa~w ~ Nsts~i 'i~t os~ -! !. !. htle~e oar« a a lsct Mr~eit atN L~Rq~t~1~ rN t`a~.'~~lo. Uw1~N~~ 1itA. ~ir~ !U a • ~~fio j i u~ Jvl~~. ~ 1! .. awb.~i .a~ ~~ ~ ~'s. eiw i. ~. ~~ s oos ~io~nolc~ Cistkto 0~~ o~t~o Cis~t Cast Cowq-. tis~ais. 100 PROFFER OF CONDITIONS 1. The owner or owner's family shall reside on the premises occupied by the bed and breakfast. 2. No more than five guest sleeping rooms shall be utilized for any one bed and breakfast establishment. 3. Any building erected, enlarged or modified to accommodate a bed and breakfast shall maintain the appearance of a single family residence. No rooms shall have a direct entrance or exist to the outside of the building. 4. Guests may stay no more than 14 consecutive nights in any one calendar year. The operator of the bed and breakfast shall maintain a log of all guests, including their name, address, license plate number, and length of stay, and shall make the log available to staff upon request. 5. Meals shall be provided only to overnight guests and no cooking shall be permitted in guest rooms. August 22, 1989 FINAL ORDER NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDERED that the aforementioned parcel of land which is contained in the Roanoke County Tax Maps as Parcel 70.11-1-21,22,20 be redesignated from Rural Preserve District to Principal Industrial 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. P. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance amending Article III, Sewer IIse Standards of Chapter 16 of the Roanoke County Code. County Attorney Paul Mahoney presented the staff report and reported that the changes to the ordinance are required to bring the County Ordinance in conformance with the Roanoke City Ordinance as required by the 1972 Sewage Treatment Agreement between the City and County. Supervisor Garrett moved to approve first reading of 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 102 August 22, 1989 ~ 0 4 _~~- - -apg - motion was seconded by Supervisor Garrett, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None IN RE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. ordinance authorisinq conveyance of riabts of Way in Hollins Community Development Project for acceptance into the State Secondary System. 0-82289-11 Mr. Mahoney advised that the Department of Transportation requires that these rights of way be conveyed to Botetourt County in order for them to be taken into the Secondary System. Supervisor Johnson moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Nickens, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None ORDINANCE 82289-i1 AIITHORIZING CONVEYANCE OF RIGHTS-OF-WAY IN HOLLINS COMMIINITY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT FOR ACCEPTANCE INTO STATE SECONDARY SYSTEM WHEREAS, certain parcels of real estate located in Botetourt County, Virginia, were deeded to the Board of August 22, 1989 ~ V 6 ~ l~ ' X77 7Pr1"1TT~ r K n a r'f c ~ H a n n "C" in this project unto the State Secondary System of the Virginia Department of Transportation. 3. 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 this 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: AYES: Supervisor Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None 2. Ordinance authorizing the dedication of County well lots for benefit of the Department of Health. Mr. Mahoney advised that this ordinance is required by the Virginia Department of Health. There was no discussion of the ordinance. Supervisor Nickens 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 82289-12 AIITHORIZING DEDICATION OF COIINTY WELL LOTS FOR BENEFIT OF DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH August 22, 1989 1 T'C77 T l .'i t Q 8 - (7C,7117QL.ll nC11 Lil Secondary Route y v ~+~-- 758, Deed Book 1285, pages 1521- 1522. 3. 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 dedications of these well lots, all of which shall be upon form approved by the County Attorney. On motion of Supervisor Nickens, seconded by Supervisor Robers, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisor Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None IN RE: APPROPRIATION FOR POLICE DEPARTMENT BROCBIIRE Supervisor Johnson moved to appro~ Board Contingency Fund for an informational Police Department Referendum. The motion Supervisor McGraw and carried by the following AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, NAYS: None IN RE: REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARING -riate $9,000 from brochure for the was seconded by recorded vote: Nickens, Garrett County Attorney Paul Mahoney requested a public hearing for September 12, 1989, for VPSA Public School Bonds. The Board concurred by unanimous voice vote. August 22, 1989 ~ ~ O -_ 7-GTic -iay ua County, Virginia that such executive meeting were 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. The Executive Session held during the evening session was certified on motion of Supervisor Johnson, seconded by Supervisor Nickens, and upon the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Robers, McGraw, Nickens, Garrett NAYS: None IN RE: ADJOORNMENT At 10:10 p.m., Chairman Garrett adjourned the meeting. Lee Garrett, Chairman February 27, 1990 '~ 2 '~ Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Roanoke County Administration Center 3738 Brambleton Avenue, SW Roanoke, Virginia 24018 February 27, 1990 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 February, 1990. IN RE: CALL TO ORDER Chairman Robers called the meeting to order at 3:04 p.m. The roll call was taken. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Richard Robers, Vice Chairman Steven A. McGraw, Supervisors Lee B. Eddy, Bob L. Johnson MEMBERS ABSENT: Supervisor Harry C. Nickens (arrived at 3:12 p.m.) February 27, 1990 123 __ _. ~~This item-was heard following Items D-2 and 3. Supervisor Eddy read a prepared statement regarding the proposed consolidation agreement stating he was not generally opposed to consolidation if the details are favorable to the citizens of the County. He did not feel that the proposed plan was favorable to the County citizens and advised he supported modifications to the plan and felt a time extension to incorporate the changes was necessary for County support. Supervisor Johnson reported that the negotiators have attempted to accommodate Supervisor Eddy's concerns, and some modifications were made to the plan. He described the opportunity for input from the citizens and the efforts at informing the public of details of the plan. Supervisor Robers advised that, according to legal advice from the County Attorney and City Attorney, the plan can still be modified in the future if both Roanoke City and Roanoke County agree to the changes. Supervisor McGraw reported that while he will vote for the resolution, he would not vote for the plan in November unless there are modifications to the proposed plan. He expressed appreciation and gratitude to the negotiators for their work. Supervisor Johnson moved to adopt the prepared resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers NAYS: Supervisor Eddy RESOLUTION 22790-3 AUTHORIZING THE EXECOTION February 27, 1990 - - __ agreement and the_adoption~of this resolution have been provided an opportunity to do so, and; WHEREAS, the County Consolidation Negotiating Team of Bob L. Johnson, Harry C. Nickens, and Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney, have recommended to the Board of Supervisors that such Consolidation Agreement be accepted by the Board, executed on behalf of the County and filed with the Circuit Courts for the City and the County on or before February 28, 1990. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Chairman and the members of the County's Consolidation Negotiating Team are hereby authorized, for and on behalf of the County to execute and the Clerk to the Board to attest, a Consolidation Agreement between the City and the County, dated February 28, 1990, a copy of which is on file in the Office of the Clerk to the Board. 2. That the Chairman and the Clerk to the Board are hereby authorized to execute a petition on behalf of the Board of Supervisors praying that the Circuit Courts for the City and the County order that a referendum be held with respect to the Consolidation Agreement pursuant to Section 9 of such Agreement. 3. That the Chairman and the Clerk to the Board are hereby authorized, for and on behalf of the County, to execute and attest, respectively, an Agreement between the City, the County and the Town of Vinton (hereinafter "Town"), such Agreement being attached to the Consolidation Agreement as ' February 27, 1990 ~ 2 7 -_-moo owing -recorded ~ vote AYES: Supervisors McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers NAYS: Supervisor Eddy 2. Approval of Public Private Partnership Policy R-22790-1 Economic Development Director Tim Gubala presented the report. He advised that this policy will allow Roanoke County to encourage economic development by funding all or part of certain public improvement costs such as roads and off-site facility fees for water and sewer for qualifying industries such as manufacturing, processing or assembling with a minimum of 10 full time employees or major employers initially employing 250 full time employees. The County Attorney, County Administrator and Utility Director .worked together to establish the procedures. In response to a question from Supervisor McGraw, Mr. Gubala advised that funding in the economic development fund is $100,000 with $38,000 left this fiscal year. Supervisor McGraw asked for a comparison of economic development funds between Roanoke City and Roanoke County during the budget process. Mr. Gubala replied to a question from Supervisor Eddy that the staff and Mr. Hodge would be authorized to approve a partnership with a payback of less than three years. A partnership agreement over three years must be approved by the Board. Mr. Hodge advised that he felt more comfortable receiving authorization to the Board. February 27, 1990 ~ 2 9 -_ -- 1.- That~the Board hereby adopts and establishes the following "Roanoke County Public-Private Partnership Policy" in order to provide policy guidance in applying the provisions of the Roanoke County Code in negotiations concerning local incentives for economic development projects. ROANORE COIINTY PQBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP POLICY Purpose: Roanoke County may fund all or part of public site development costs, roads, and off site facility fees for water and sewer for: a) qualifying industry that is manufacturing, processing or assembling a product with a minimum employment of ten full time employees; or b) a major employer initially employing 250 full time jobs. Determination: A company may apply for County assistance by addressing a letter to the Director of Economic Development that indicates: a. manufacturing, processing, or assembly to be conducted on the site b. total capital investment in real estate (land, building) machinery and tools and anticipated personal property c. total employment and annual payroll d. specific water and sewer needs (i.e., size line and/or capacity) e. date of construction and/or start-up (if in an existing building). f. if applicable, the terms of any lease to insure that the company will occupy the building during the period calculated for payback. The Director of Economic Development, upon consultation with the County Administrator and other County staff, will review .the request for participation to determine the extent of Roanoke County's funding. The County may either partially or fully fund participation in the project. If after calculation of anticipated taxes (real estate, machinery and tools and personal property), payback will occur within three years, the County may fully fund off-site facility fees for the project. A payback formula which compares new company taxes and public costs will be February 27, 1990 13 3.Approval of funding for Water Line Construction to Ingersoll-Rand. A-22790-2 Utility Director Clifford Craig reported that Ingersoll Rand has now presented a site plan and a water line can be designed to provide water to the facility. The line will serve the Ingersoll-Rand site, the balance of the Shamrock site and approximately 25 acres on the left of Daugherty Road. The cost is estimated at $46,000 with funds available in the water Off- site Facility Fund. Supervisor Johnson moved to approve the funding. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None IN RE: REQUESTS FOR WORR SESSION Supervisor Johnson asked that the School Board bring their problems regarding this year's budget to the Budget Work Session on March 20, 1990 and would like advance information available for the work session. IN RE: REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARING AND FIRST READING FOR REZONING ORDINANCE - CONSENT AGENDA Supervisor Nickens moved to approve first reading and requests for public hearings. The motion carried by the February 27, 1990 l 3 3 _or a wa er ine Qro-iect. Bonsack Industrial Park. County Attorney Paul Mahoney presented the staff report and advised these easements are needed for an economic development project. Second reading will be March 13, 1990. Supervisor Robers moved to approve first reading of the ordinance. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None IN RE: REPORTS AND INQIIIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS Supervisor Robers announced that there will be a major conference at VPI&SU regarding the "Smart" Highway on April 24, 1990. Attending will be personnel from General Motors, Ford Motor Company, Motorola, MIT and the University of California, Berkeley. He also discussed with the Principal of the Governor's School the possibility of sending students and teachers to the conference. IN RE: CONSENT AGENDA Supervisor Eddy requested a separate vote on Item 1. Supervisor Johnson moved to approve Items 2 - 4. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None Supervisor Johnson moved to approve Item 1. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers a February 27, 1990 ~ Z - upervisor Nic ens moved to receive and file the following reports. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None 1. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Income Analysis and Statement of Expenditures for seven months ending January 31, 1990 5. Accounts Paid - January 1990 IN RE: RECESS At 3:35 p.m., Chairman Robers declared a recess. IN RE: RECONVENEMENT At 4:00 p.m., Chairman Robers reconvened the meeting. IN RE: WORK SESSION 1. Proposed Sign Ordinance Mr. Hodge reported that he felt the proposed sign ordinance was a good ordinance. He suggested that the sign industry people present their concerns and then the staff can work with their concerns prior to the public hearing scheduled for March 27, 1990. Neil Kinsey presented a report showing where the sign industry differed with the Planning Commission and Sign y ~ February 27, 1990 ~ 3 - concerns in a ormat s milar to that presented by the sign industry and bring back to the Board at first reading of the ordinance on March 13, 1990. IN RE: RECESS There being no Executive Session, Supervisor McGraw moved to recess for dinner at 5:20 p.m. The motion carried by a unanimous voice vote. EVENING SESSION (7:00 P.M.) IN RE: RECO ~ ~ NT At 7:03 p.m., Chairman Robers reconvened the meeting. IN RE: REQUEST FROM CITIZENS TO SPEAR REGARDING "NO LEFT TURN" SIGNS IN BOXLEY HILLS SUBDIVISION Chairman Robers turned the meeting over to Supervisor Johnson for purpose of discussion of the No Left Turn signs at the Boxley Hills subdivision. Supervisor Johnson reviewed the history of problems surrounding the cruising problems in that community. He originally requested that the Virginia Department of Transportation place the No Left Turn signs on Williamson Road in response to a series of meetings and petitions received from over 190 people asking for help in relieving them from the negative impact of cruising in their neighborhood. The signs were not meant to keep people from legally accessing their homes, but to keep cruisers out of the neighborhood. He announced he had received many letters expressing appreciation from citizens who i February 27, 1990 ~ t Harry Withers, 5734 Thornrose N. W., spoke in support of the signs and questioned the accuracy of the survey that was turned in because he wasn't asked to sign. 8. Virginia Jones, 5619 Darby Road, spoke in support of the signs. 9. Ron Blandy, 810 Commander Drive, spoke in opposition to the signs and advised that many people have been ticketed as a result of the signs. He asked that all signs be removed. Mr. Hodge pointed out that the signs were installed to help the residents and spoke in support of the deputies who were ticketing. Supervisor Nickens pointed out that the citizens who were ticketed had deliberately ignored the law. Supervisor McGraw spoke in support of Supervisor Johnson's efforts to alleviate the problem. Supervisor Eddy advised that he was not knowledgeable about the background of the situation and was unsure how to vote. He suggested further research. Supervisor Johnson described the efforts that he, the Virginia Department of Transportation and staff had done to solve the problem including researching ordinances aimed at eliminating cruising. He pointed out that the No Left Turns were only in force for 18 hours per week. Supervisor Johnson moved to ask the Virginia Department of Transportation to remove the signs at Malvern and Commander and that the sign on Darby remain. The motion carried by the >; following recorded vote: February 27, 1990 ~ 4 n response to a question from Supervisor Eddy, Mr. Hartley explained that while they can recommend conditions, the property owner must agree to any conditions. Gail Boyer, 1209 Beaumont Road N. E., representing the Hollins Action League, spoke in opposition to the rezoning because of the devaluation of property, bad road conditions and lack of knowledge of what industry will go on the property. She questioned the legality of rezoning property without an option to buy. Mr. Mahoney advised that a governing body has the right to rezone any property. Supervisor Johnson moved to grant the petition. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None ORDINANCE 22790-5 TO AMEND THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION OF APPROXIMATELY 54 ACRES LOCATED WEST OF HOLLINS ROAD AND SOUTH OF LOIS LANG IN THE HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM DEVELOPMENT TO PRINCIPAL INDIISTRIAL AND TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION R-1 TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION M-1 WITH CONDITIONS FOR INDIISTRIAL PURPOSES UPON THE APPLICATION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA. WHEREAS, by Resolution 91289-4 the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, initiated amendments to the February 27, 1990 143 ami y esi en is District, to the zoning classification of M1, Light Industrial District. 3. That the Board initiated the application to change the Comprehensive Plan and the. zoning classification of this real estate located in Roanoke County to serve the public purposes of the County as required by public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice to implement the recommendations of the Economic Development Action Plan for FY 1989-90. 4. That the applicant has voluntarily proffered in writing the following conditions which the Board of Supervisors hereby accepts: a. The following permitted uses will not be allowed: i. flea markets ii. commercial laundries and dry cleaning iii. commercial kennels iv. seed and feed stores v. manufacture of pottery, etc. vi. automobile repair, etc. b. Type "E" screening where adjacent to residential uses. c. Noise levels to be limited to 60 decibels when measured at adjacent residence. d. Dust mitigation measures during site development and construction. 5. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: Beginning at an iron pin set in the right- of-way line of Hollins Road, State Route 601 (Old Route 115); thence with the right-of- way line of Hollins Road, S. 8° 54' 20" W. February 27, 1990 t4 515.70 feet to the point and place of beginn- ing; containing 52.11 acres as shown a plat of survey dated March 2, 1976, prepared by Buford T. Lumsden and Associates, C.L.S., to which reference is hereby expressly made for a more particularly description of the property herein expressed. 6. That the effective date of this ordinance shall be February 27, 1990. On motion of Supervisor Johnson, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None 290-3 Ordinance to amend the Future Land Use Plan map designation of approximately 105 acres from Development to Principal Industrial and to rezone said property from R-E to M-1 for industrial development located between Route 11/460 and Carson Road in the Hollins Magisterial District, upon the application of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County. 0-22790-6 Mr. Hartley presented the staff report and advised this was similar to the previous rezoning. He advised that it has been identified as a potential industrial site and has access to a primary road. The staff's major concern was the issue of access and on-site circulation. This has been addressed in the proffers. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the change to the land use designation and the rezoning request by a vote of 4 to 1. Supervisor Eddy noted that Mr. Winstead of the Planning Commission voted against this rezoning and recommended a corridor February 27, 1990 147 - e ruary , 990; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on January 3, 1990; and, WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Future Land Use Plan map designation of a certain tract of real estate containing approximately 105 acres, as described herein, owned by Fralin & Waldron Inc. and located between Route 11/460 and Carson Road in the Hollins Magisterial District be changed from Development to Principal Industrial; and 2. That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing approximately 105 acres, as described herein, owned by Fralin & Waldron Inc. and located between Route 11/460 and Carson Road in the Hollins Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of RE, Residential Estate District, to the zoning classification of Ml, Light Industrial District. 3. That the Board initiated the application to change the zoning classification of this real estate located in Roanoke County to serve the public purposes of the County as required by public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice to implement the recommendations of the Economic Development Action Plan for FY 1989-90. February 27, 1990 ~~ 9 provided via an internal road network plan utilizing the existing median cut on Route 460. j. Type E (Option 2) buffer and screening requirements will be provided between Parcel "A" and single-family residences. All Roanoke County screening and buffering requirements will be implemented as specific development occurs. k. Existing oak trees on Parcel "A" will be preserved to the extent allowing for feasible development of the subject parcel. 1. All internal thoroughfares will be designed and constructed to VDOT standards for future dedication. m. Dust mitigation controls will be implemented during site excavation activities. n. The developer will cooperate with the Roanoke County Utility Department to provide necessary utility easement(s) for a sanitary sewer submain along Route 758 (Carson Road) at a mutually agreed upon location. 5. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: Parcel 1 BEGINNING at a point on the southerly line of U. S. Route 460 (Variable R/W), said point being the northwesterly corner of property now or formerly James L. Swortzel (D.B. 764, page 596); thence with the southerly line of U. S. Route 460, the following five distances: N. 42° 48' 15" E. 583.03 feet; N. 54° 06' 05" E. 102.19 feet; N. 29° 36' 10" E. 153.33 feet; N. 58° 23' 40" E. 260.62 feet; N. 36° 07' 10" E. 321.02 feet to a point, being on the westerly line of property of Valley Reformed Presbyterian Church (D.B. 1105, page 512); thence with the same, the following two distances: S. 42° 23' 30" E. 367.84 feet; and N. 470 36' 30" E. 605.02 feet to a point in the center of Virginia Route 758; thence with the same, the February 27, 1990 ~ 5 o a point; thence S. 47 26' 40" W., crossing the centerline of a 20 foot waterline easement at 268.90 feet, in all 417.95 feet to a point; thence N. 51° 57' 30" W. 232.09 feet to a point; thence S. 860 43' 50" W. 294.09 feet to a point; thence S. 810 46' 55" W. 179.24 feet to a point; thence with the northerly line of property of I. J. Bower, et ux. (D.B. 712, page 302), S. 67° 22' 50" W. 942.82 feet to a point on line of property now or formerly Joel J. Ewen (D.B. 1449, page 737, Roanoke City); thence N. 210 35' 00" W. 565.59 feet to a point on the southerly line of property of Jack Waldrond (D.B. 996, page 719); thence with the same, N. 71° 16' 00" E. 201.70 feet; thence N. 010 29' 30" W. 1347.57 feet to a point; thence with the northerly line of aforesaid Swortzel, S. 790 29' 35" W. 268.07 feet to the place of beginning, and known as Tract A, containing 104.27 acres, as more fully shown on a survey of Dr. Richard Lowe Property for Fralin & Waldron Properties, prepared by Robert S. Lang, Land Surveyor, dated August 1988. TOGETHER with that exclusive easement Trustees of Valley Church of America, Lowe, Jr., in deed 1253, page 74. Parcel 2 certain 60-foot wide non- across property of Reformed Presbyterian as reserved by Richard H. recorded in Deed Book BEGINNING at a point on the southerly side of U. S. Route 460 (Variable R/W) at its intersection with the centerline of Virginia Route 758; thence continuing with the centerline of Virginia Route 758, S. 22° 12' 55" E. 241.32 feet to a point; thence leaving Virginia Route 758, S. 54° 20' 54" W. 163.89 feet to a point; thence N. 19° 03' 10" W. 244.90 feet to a point on the southerly side of U. S. Route 460; thence with the same, N. 540 20' 30" E. 150.00 feet to the Place of Beginning, and known as Tract B, containing 0.846 acre, as more fully shown on the aforesaid Survey of Dr. Richard Lowe Property for Fralin & Waldron Properties, prepared by Robert S. Lang, Land Surveyor, dated August February 27, 1990 1 5 7 - noise, eepers, an potential health risks from air and odor generated from the plant. The Planning Commission expressed concerns about the Blue Ridge Parkway and groundwater issues and inconsistency with the current land use designation of Rural Village. Proffered conditions were offered by the petitioner to address the noise and air pollution. The Planning Commission recommended denial of the land use amendment by a 5-0 vote but recommended approval of the rezoning by a 3-2 vote. Mike Pace, attorney for the petitioner advised that the property was originally rezoned M-2 to permit Virginia Asphalt to construct its offices and shop facilities on the property. They are now requesting rezoning to M-3 to consolidate their business and build an asphalt plant on the property. He pointed out that the facility will be shielded from the residents by the topography. He described conditions that the petitioner was willing to proffer to address the noise and air pollution such as installation of noise reduction devices, installation of dust control devices, screening and buffering, location of the plant and painting of the facility to blend with the environment. He advised that the staff received a letter from the National Parks Service, but Virginia Asphalt had met with the Parkway District Ranger who visited the site and felt that the Parkway should have no objection to the rezoning. The following citizens spoke in opposition to the proposed rezoning citing noise and air pollution, odor and dirt February 27, 1990 15 5 uperv sor McGraw also expressed concern about maintaining the current Rural Village land use designation. Supervisor Johnson pointed out that the site could still be developed as an industrial site under its present M-2 zoning. Supervisor Robers' motion to deny the rezoning carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, McGraw, Robers NAYS: Supervisors Johnson, Nickens DENIAL OF ORDINANCE 22790-7 TO AMEND THE FUTURE LAND USE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION OF APPROXIMATELY 24.09 ACRES GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF BUCK MOUNTAIN ROAD AND EAST OF THE BLUE RIDGE PARKWAY IN THE CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM RURAL VILLAGE TO PRINCIPAL INDUSTRIAL AND TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION FROM M2 TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION M3 WITH CONDITIONS UPON THE APPLICATION OF VIRGINIA ASPHALT PAVING CO., INC. WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on January 23, 1990, and the second reading and public hearing was held on February 27, 1990; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on January 3, 1990; and, WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: On motion of Supervisor Robers, and carried by the February 27, 1990 1 5 FOR THE PINRARD COIIRT COIrII~iiJNITY WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors had adopted policies aimed at promoting community development improvements in the County, and has directed the staff to prepare programs aimed at implementing these policies, and WHEREAS, staff has conducted a community needs assessment and ranked communities on the basis of needs, and WHEREAS, in this assessment the Hollins community ranked first and the Pinkard Court community ranked second, and WHEREAS, the Hollins community development project has been completed, and - WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors approved a Virginia Community Development Planning Grant to study the Pinkard Court community, and WHEREAS, the planning study has been completed and found significant community improvement needs, and WHEREAS, funding in addition to the Community Development Block Grant will be obtained from the Virginia Department of Transportation in the amount of $76,200, from previously planned utility improvements in the amount of $56,250 and from Roanoke County in the amount of $16,000, and WHEREAS, the improvements funded by the Community Development Block Grant will result in fifty-two residents receiving new and/or improved water, sewer, drainage, and road systems and thirty-four of these residents have low to moderate February 27, 1990 i5y ion Carrie y t e following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None Supervisor Nickens requested that the staff and Planning Commission present staff reports regarding proffered conditions in a consistent manner in the future. IN RE : AA70UrRNMENT At 10:02 p.m., Supervisor Robers moved to adjourn. The motion carried by a unanimous voice vote. Richard W. Robers, Chairman r "... AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 1990 RESOLUTION 32790-5.s REQUESTING CHANGES IN SECONDARY SYSTEM DUE TO RELOCATION AND CONSTRUCTION OF POOR MOUNTAIN ROAD (ROUTE 612) 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 Poor Mountain Road (Route 612) which was relocated and reconstructed under VDOT Project 0612-080-P18, N501; 2. That it appears to the Board of Supervisors that Secondary Route 612, from north of the intersection with Route 786 to south of the intersection of Route 916 for a distance of 0.28 miles, 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 612, PROJECT 0612-080-P18,N501, dated at Richmond, Virginia, July 19, 1988." 3. That the portion of Secondary Route 612, i.e., Section No. 1, for a distance of 0.11 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 old location, i.e. Section No. 2, for a total distance of 0.28 miles, be, and hereby is, abandoned as a public road, pursuant to Section 33.1-155 of the Code of r s 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. lton, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Phillip Henry, Director, Engineering Arnold Covey, Director, Development & Inspections Fred C. Altizer, Jr., Resident Engineer, Virginia Department of Transportation ~'. i V ~ .v~' .6 w~ r ~ :e+e ~ - \ 6t ~I LOST.,,. f ~! v ~ .,, ,~ ~ •z+oc,'~ NOTE: THE -ROdKfR END -URUSYER OE TNIS !I pE"EO[ A ENr -ERSOM, (pVENt OR (OR-g1ETN END tOR ENt ERROR, tT-O~wNKAI OR OtNEA'R "EtLOL"~S RdWOME Mll[~' "E- ' VICINITY MAP '"""'"°' ""`°"""~" L-3 ~.:~J NORTH UVNE-b / ~ i211 • 1 ~ / 26 17aSpACm ~ 6C}4 16a37Ee~(G ~/ ~ ~ ~ / pis 24 . ~ E / ~ U .s wE.. P/0 84.00 - 1- 9 2 // "\ ih q~6 3 0 8 Ii23 f I•~a00• r A ~2StiRa 8 7S ec 1D1 95B4cIC1 ~ 7! K I • ~ ~ • SECTION # 1 (0.28 MI) 7 Tt'7! 9 ~, ROAD TO BE ABANDONED ~ riso •e ei E< 4 ~~ »za 11 I N #2 (0 MI) ', a . I SECT O 6 ,aoo4~la 9z}~ 11 8 NEW ALIGNMENT u gsatcl ~ ~~ti 97Sec o ' 6 Q' [ ~ \ r Ie5 ~:DI j S 874[' ~ icnc ,~ ~ w„ 13 1o SOEC IC1 7094 ~. 668AC _./_ ~~ ~ ~ ` ' _\ .,oo s Sce< ' n ~~ce< 19 S ;44t /1 / 1 /~ / \ \' r9k xE~ al ass 5f 4~ 0 1 . COMMUNITY SERVICES CHANGES IN SECONDARY SYSTEM DUE TO RELOCATION AND DBVBLOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION ON ROUTE 6 12 , PROJECT 06 12-080-P 18 , N501 , dated at Richmond, Virginia, July 19, 1988. 4 24 AS 'S ~c~Dl ee E,~ ~t ~c /i ~ 19 ee ac 20 S32ac~r a}.~ct~ - ~ 21 ati92't/ •. ez}s 22 23 39 - e a5ac 533a~c ~ ~, 1 }e. ~l ACTION # ITEM NUMBER l•• ~" 3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 27, 1990 AGENDA ITEM: Request to approve changes in Secondary System due to relocation and realignment of Poor Mountain Road (Route 612) COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION Virginia Department of Transportation has completed the realignment of a portion of Poor Mountain Road (Route 612). Since the new alignment provides access to the same property owners and citizens as the old alignment, VDOT desires to abandon the old road. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve the attached resolution to implement the changes to Poor Mountain Road (Route 612). SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: Phi 11 ip Henry, . E. Elmer C. Ho-dg7e- Director of Engin Bring County Administrator ----------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE App roved ( ) Motion by : _____________ No Yes Abs Denied ( ) ______ _ Eddy -- Recei ved ( ) ______ __ Johnson -- _~ -- Referred _ __ _ _ McGraw __ __ __ To _ Nickens __ ~__ -- - - ------ - -- --- - - ---- -- Ro be r s _ L ,.3 AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 1990 RESOLUTION REQUESTING CHANGES IN SECONDARY SYSTEM DUE TO RELOCATION AND CONSTRUCTION OF POOR MOUNTAIN ROAD (ROUTE 612) 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 Poor Mountain Road (Route 612) which was relocated and reconstructed under VDOT Project 0612-080-P18, N501; 2. That it appears to the Board of Supervisors that Secondary Route 612, from north of the intersection with Route 786 to south of the i ntersecti on of Route 916 for a distance of 0.28 miles, 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 612, PROJECT 0612-080-P18,N501, dated at Richmond, Virginia, July 19, 1988." 3. That the portion of Secondary Route 612, i.e., Section No. 1 , for a distance of 0.11 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. 2 ~~ 4. That the section of old location, i.e. Section No. 2, for a total distance of 0.28 miles, be, and hereby is, abandoned as a public road, pursuant to Section 33.1-155 of the Code of Virginia, as amended. 3 ~ . za~e A % ITM . \ gc E~ .~ „~ 'i LOST~„•"ff~0~' .ti,~ ', ~ •z,x`•. NOTE ~ THE PROOVCER AND RIBUSMER Oi TNIS -'•b DAMAGE TO ANY PERSON, COMPANY OR CORpORATI( I ANO i0R ANY ERROR, TYPO4RAR+KAI OR OTNEAM M•uE I I MALCCNJ~'S ROANORE WHEY MAP VICINITY MAP MARY UNDO MAILOLM sMIIEY L~-~ '~J~ NORTB X115 7Y ~- __ ~ -- - - - ~ Cw•r«E. +a ~ lz7s ~ I % 2.6 / ec3ac n. sok to ~. IS437At~(C) ~~ 2.5 / ~~ 37J 24 ~ . B2~7 69 / ~•,,,,~Y,e G~ // ^ 9,6 • r P/0 84.00-I-9.2 ~ ~ ~ 3 g 7123 1" • 400 r / p i2 56Ac 8 75 Ac ID1 9584c(C) y 79K . I • ` SECTION # 1 (0.28 MI) 1•+~ ~ 9 7 ~~ • ROAD TO BE ABANDONED Q 'B'0 ,e ~ AC ,• a j A 79za6 r SECTION #2 (0. 1 1 MI) ~! ,aooAClDI II ; a NEW ALIGNMENT 22954c ~p 9234c ~~ti 9 7S Ac A G ~ ~ i Q~ ~ ~ . ~\ \~ ~~ T85a;;01 ~ S 874 +C JCAC ,D' BO+ i s 3050AtYC1 13 ~ TG9Ac 14 • 24 6 68Ac \ ~ IS • RS r5 ~aDl 1 ~ ~ 89694c+C . •\ \ ' Ci00 SSG 4c • 17 _ 764c • 18 -' ~ ~aAc ~ / ~ 4 19 :88 ac • r9At 20 42 532•~c~r • a3AciC1! ~ . x'A~ B ~ 21 ~ 41 ex+s e2~9e.~ / '~ / ` ' S 2Z 23 39 •_ a d6Ac ~ 533Ac !3+ \ ~1~ ' . Ar ,\• 9 COMMUNITY SERVICES CHANGES IN SECONDARY SYSTEM DUE TO RELOCATION AND DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION ON ROUTE 6 12 , PROJECT 06 ] 2-080-P 18 , N501 , dated at Richmond, Virginia, July 19, 1988. z tt ~~ AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 1990 RESOLUTION 32790-5.b REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF CEDAR EDGE ROAD INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY ROAD SYSTEM BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That this matter came this day to be heard upon the proceedings herein, and upon the application of Cedar Edge Road, from its south intersection with Forest Edge Drive to its North intersection with Forest Edge Drive, for a distance of 0.45 mile, to be accepted and made a part of the Secondary System of State Highways under Section 33.1-229 of the Virginia State Code. 2. That it appears to the Board that drainage easements and a fifty (50) foot right-of-way for said road have heretofore been dedicated by virtue of a certain map\maps known as Forest Edge Section 2 Subdivision which map was recorded in Plat Book 10, Page 69, of the records of the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, on June 30, 1987 and that by reason of the recordation of said map no report from a Board of Viewers, nor consent or donation of right-of-way from the abutting property owners is necessary. The Board hereby guarantees said right-of- way for drainage. 3. That said road known as Cedar Edge Road and which is shown on a certain sketch accompanying this Resolution, be, and the same are hereby established as public roads to become a partof the State Secondary System of Highways in Roanoke County, only from r and after notification of official acceptance of said street or highway by the Virginia Department of Transportation. On motion of Supervisor Johnson, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: QJ ' Brenda J. H ton, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Phillip Henry, Director, Engineering Arnold Covey, Director, Development & Inspections, and copy for Virginia Department of Transportation .~' ITEM NUMBER ~_ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 27, 1990 SUBJECT: Acceptance of Cedar Edge Road into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Fralin & Waldron, Inc. the developer of Forest Edge, Section 2, requests that the Board of Supervisors approve a resolution to the Virginia Department of Transportation requesting that they accept 0.45 miles of Cedar Edge Road, from its south intersection with Forest Edge Drive to its north intersection with Forest Edge Drive. The staff has inspected this road along with representatives of the Virginia Department of Transportation and find the road is acceptable. FISCAL IMPACT: No County funding is required. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The staff recommends that the Board approve a resolution to the VDOT requesting that they accept Cedar Edge Road into the Secondary Road System. SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: ~~ __ Phillip T. Henry P.E. Elmer C. Hodge Director of Engi Bering ------------------------------------ County --------------- Administrator ------------ ACTION VOTE Approved ( ) Motion by:___ No Yes Abs Denied ( ) - Eddy Received ( ) __ - Johnson _ _-__ Referred _ _ __ _ _ McGraw _ _ To -------- Nickens -- R o be r s ~~ L_y AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 1990 RESOLUTION REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF CEDAR EDGE ROAD INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY ROAD SYSTEM BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That this matter came this day to be heard upon the proceedings herein, and upon the application of Cedar Edge Road, from its south intersection with Forest Edge Drive. to its North intersection with Forest Edge Drive, for a distance of 0.45 mile, to be accepted and made a part of the Secondary System of State Highways under Section 33.1-229 of the Virginia State Code. 2. That it appears to the Board that drainage easements and a fifty (50) foot right-of-way for said road have heretofore been dedicated by virtue of a certain map\maps known as Forest Edge Section 2 Subdivision which map was recorded in Plat Book 10, Page 69 , of the records of the C 1 erk' s Office of the Ci rcu i t Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, on June 30, 1987 and that by reason of the recordation of said map no report from a Board of Viewers, nor consent or donation of right-of-way from the abutting property owners is necessary. The Board hereby guarantees said right-of- way for drainage. 3. That said road known as Cedar Edge Road and which is shown on a certain sketch accompanying this Resolution, be, and the same are hereby established as public roads to become a part 2 L - ~/ of the State Secondary System of Highways in Roanoke County, only from and after notification of official acceptance of said street or highway by the Virginia Department of Transportation. 3 _ / "'ti`.T NORTB ~.y a sz ~ Br ~s rs 31 '~ z ; PROPOSED ADDITION SHOWN IN GRAY DESCRIPTION: 1.) Cedar Edge Road between 181' ~ -' ;; - '• Forest Edge Drive so ?"°~ ~"' " 1950) ~"' IpiJ 17 rte'; ~ 26 r • c,: .• , ~,' 55 b '' ;~;~ LENGTH: (1) 0.45 Miles ~ ' ~ ~ , ~ '• ;; ~a„r, _ '~ '°" ~` ti ~? RIGHT-OF-WAY: (2) 50 Feet ~ , :~ 53 • 52 ~ '°° s7.~: ROADWAY WIDTH: (1) 30 Feet ~ ~s a ss "~ ,'"?' SURFACE WIDTH: (1) 20 Feet :~9lr ~.. r' ' , • 50 ~ . SERVICE: (1) 18 Homes 14~~' / r ; ,• ' ~ n '791 .~li~_ . ~ Y i+ 27 a9 59 i3~ ter ~ i1• ~'' ' .• _^ ~ I • facer . ~N ~~ 3 a `, J ~Y COMMUNITY SERVICES ROAD ACCEPTANCE AND DEVELOPMENT CEDAR EDGE ROAD COUNTY OF ROANORE, VIRGINIA CAPITAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE Beginning Balance at July 1, 1989 $ 89,608 September 12, 1989 Contribution towards Hollins Fire Truck (25,000) March 13, 1990 Automatic Court Documentation System (25,000) Balance as of March 27, 1990 39 608 Submitted by ~,c.~e, ~ . ~~ Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance T November 15, 1989 November 28, 1989 December 19, 1989 December 19, 1989 December 19, 1989 January 9, 1990 January 23, 1990 March 13, 1990 COUNTY OF ROANORE, VIRGINIA GENERAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE Balance at July 1, 1989 Dental Insurance Drainage Projects Library Automation Drainage Engineer - half year Bushdale Road Right of Way Hurricane Hugo Expenses Implementation of New Police Department Contract Mowing and Equipment for Parks and Recreation Balance as of March 27, 1990 of Amount General Fund $4,483,543 7.10 (106,980) (1so,ooo) (300,000) (17,500) (15,000) (109,000) (157,700) (50, ooo~ $3,547,363 5.62% 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. ~° COUNTY OF ROANORE, 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 Sheriff's 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 Portable telephones for Rescue personnel (Administratively approved) Balance as of March 27, 1990 Submitted by ~U ~~.. %~J ~ ~~~~ 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) 1 045 134 H :, . ' i't.~ __ _ _ ~ _ -,rL,,, ,.~. • L ~~ COUNTY OF ROANOBE INCOHE ANALYSIS GENERAL OPERATING FUND ASX 1988-89 1989-90 ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL 6-30-?9 2-28-89 2-28-?0 BUDGET X12 NONT4S1 (8 !tONTBS) % BUDGET (8 NONTB5) % TAXES-REAL ESTATE 3 25,780,009 26,802,142 13,170,879 51 3 28,511,770 14,274,152 50 TAXES-PERS6NAL PROPERTY 10,200,000 11,872,517 530,845 5 11,668,447 682,691 5 OTHBR PROPBRTY TAXBS 1,257,293 1,325,954 1,228,113 98 1,435,000 1,379,580 96 SALES TAX 4,390,492 4,140,633 2,492,317 57 4,200,000 2,667,145 64 ~ BUSINESS LICBNSE 2,400,000 2,248,433 2,065,010 86 2,100,000 2,165,272 103 I AUTO DECALS 1,150,000 1,322,655 96,753 8 1,325,000 97,820 T OTRBR LOCAL TAXBS 4,015,220 4,123,198 2,149,271 54 4,180,000 2,354,288 56 j DOG TAGS 18,000 14,963 10,285 5T 15,500 8,982 58 ~ ZONING FEES 15,000 25,426 17,968 120 10,500 16,050 153 BUILDING FEBS 345,000 321,549 198,870 58 408,611 265,113 65 ~ OTHER PERMIT, FBES A LICENSES 11,282 38,314 20,865 185 7,250 17,734 245 - FINBS AND FORFBITURES 162,000 226,709 128,456 79 173,850 98,023 56 SALBS & USE OF BQOIPMENT k SUPPLIBS 0 151 150 0 0 1,563 0 CRARGBS FOR SBRVICBS 150,510 203,654 110,378 73 160,401 96,627 60 RBCOVERBD COST-LOCAL 504,029 582,557 509,185 101 554,708 363,924 _ 66 ABC PROFITS 230,045 185,794 156,630 68 200,000 152,802 76 COMMONNEALTR'S ATTORNEY EXPBNSBS 263,843 244,871 123,969 47 251,670 123,623 49 SRERIFF'S EXPENSES 3,770,000 3,574,719 1,892,053 50 3,837,277 2,075,224 54 COMMISSIONER OF TRB RBVENUB'S BXPENSBS 179,485• 165,210 79,475 - 44 180,000 91,081 51 TRBASURBR'S EXPBNSBS 171,853 168,125 83,973 49 180,000 110,450 61 KBLFARE GRANT 1,961,441 1,950,053 922,752 47 2,067,474 1,016,138 49 LIBRARY GRANT 175,000 174,860 131,145 75 175,000 131,350 75 OTHER STATB RBYBNUB 321,015 264,908 159,062 50 245,000 241,608 99 NON-REVBNUB RECEIPT 5,035 6,520 291,527 5,790 0 12,805 0 TRANSFER FROM OTRER FUNDS 0 0 0 0 ------- 16,000 - ---------- 16,000 ------------ 100 ---- i ------------ 57,476,612 - ---- ----- 59,983,915 ------------ 26,569,931 --- 46 61,903,458 28,460,045 46 BEGINNING BALANCE USBD TO BALANCE 0 COSTS OF OPERATIONS 4,091,702 0 0 0 3,820,577 0 TBMPORARY LOANS A. LBASB PURCRAS6 PROCBEDS 778,764 572,891 0 0 2,202,168 0 0 i. BOND PROCEEDS 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 = 62,347,078 3 60,556,806 f 26,569,931 43 = 67,926,203 ~ 28,460,045 S 42 t SPBCIAL CONSIDERATION ADDED TO BASIC COMPUTATION Financial Stateoents: Paqe 1 of 3 . /~ COUNTY OF ROANO%B STATBNENT OF B%PBNDITURBS EIGBT NONTHS BLADED FEBRUARY 28, 1990 BUDGET B%PBNDBD X GBNBRAL ADNINISTRATION ------------ - ----------- - ----------- BOARD OF SUPBRVISORS = 176,678 ~ 111,634 67 COUNTY ADNINISTRATOR 258,668 163,362 63 HUNAN RESOURCES 245,596 154,256 63 COUNTY ATTORNEY 186,341 126,179 68 CONNISSIONER OF REVENUE 513,713 324,764 63 TRBASURBR 506,642 306,583 61 ELECTIONS 163,012 107,038 66 SBSQUICBNTENNIAL 0 23 0 FISCAL NANAGBNBNT ASST. CO ADN. NANAGBNENT SBRVICBS 69,621 42,561 62 COUNTY ASSBSSOR 642,622 391,168 61 CBNTRAL ACCOUNTING 393,370 338,65T S6 PROCURBNENT 218,274 138,866 64 NANAGBNBNT A BUDGBT 130,222 68,461 53 RISE NANAGBNBNT 1,130,318 743,970 66 JUDICIAL ADNINISTRATION ~ CIRCUIT COURT 118,133 14,644 12 GBNBRAL DISTRICT COURT 20,204 7,684 38 NAGISTRATBS 730 269 37 ~ ^ J d~ D DISTRICT COURT 11,758 1,401 63 CLBRH OF CIRCUIT COURT 516,653 296,567 57 CONNON(iBALTB'S ATTORNEY 312,279 191,526 63 COURT SBRVICB UNIT 44,175 18,435 42 VICTIN YITNESS 6,670 1,701 26 PUBLIC SAFBTY POLICB DBPARTNBNT 347,634 0 0 SBBRIFF'S DBPARTNBNT 4,034,034 2,561,187 63 BIGRWAY SAFBTY CONNISSION 960 105 11 FIRB 2,099,559 1,244,260 59 RBSCUB SQUAD 458,759 344,592 75 BNBRGBNCY SBRVICBS ~ RAZ NAT RESPONSE 42,535 22,861 54 CONFINENBNT/GARB OF PRISONBRS 2,018,249 1,326,859 66 ANINAL CONTROL 164,044 111,478 68 BAZ-NAT RBSPONSB 0 16 100 NUGO DISASTER RECOVERY 109,000 106,658 98 CONNUNITY SBRYICBS AND DBVBLOPNENT ASS. CO ADN. FOR CONN. SBRVICBS ~ DBVBLOPNEN 112,614 68,240 61 BNGINBBRING 118,790 521,878 73 GBNBRAL SBRVICBS 208,870 133,005 64 BUILDINGS NAINTBNANCB 832,204 464,005 56 PARES A RECREATION 990,924 593,670 60 SOLID YASTB 1,599,749 1,018,977 67 PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION 65,400 33,299 51 GROUNDS NAINTENANCB 932,092 658,612 71 .. Financal State -y COUNTY OF ROANO%E STATBHHNT OF EXPENDITURES BIGHT MONTHS ENDBD FEBRUARY 28, 1990 HEALTH ~ SOCIAL SERVICES PUBLIC flEALTH 425,T99 303,433 71 SOCIAL SBRVICES ADMINISTRATION 1,840,244 1,121,096 61 PUBLIC ASSISTANCB~ 954,030 555,764 58. INSTITUTIONAL GARB 36,000 13,488 37 SOCIAL SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS 94,984 47,492 50 DEVELOPMENT PLANNING ~ ZONING 336,553 182,235 54 BCONOHIC DEVELOPMENT 264,530 190,320 72 DBVBLOPHBNT RBVIBW 134,602 83,552 62 PLANNING COMMISSION 18,695 11,543 62 CONSTRUCTION BUILDING SERVICES 262,842 159,622 61 NON-DEPARTMENTAL ASST, CO. ADM. HUMAN SBRVICBS LIBRARY B%TBNSION A CONTINUING EDUCATION 6MPLOYBB BBHBFITS CONTRIBUTIONS TO SBRVICB ORGANIZATIONS MISC6LLANBOUS CONSOLIDATION 97,675 59,114 6I 1,147,333 669,550 58 104,694 44,626 43 ?87,138 480,970 61 30,000 21,450 72 869,430 119,573 14 196,350 42,054 21 TOTAL TRAHSFBRS AND RBSERVBS REIHBURSABLB 6%PBNDITURBS TRANSFER TO DBBT SBRVICB TRANSFBR TO INTBRNAL SBRVICB TRANSFBR TO SCROOL OPERATING FUND 4RANSFER TO SEVER FUND TRANSFBR TO UTILITY CAPITAL TRANSFER TO CAPITAL PROJBCTS TRANSFER TO YOUTH HAVBN TRANSFBR TO GARAGE II UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCB RBSBAVE FOR BOARD CONTINGBNCY TOTAL TRANSFBR ITBNS GRAND TOTAL 28,002,055 16,944,133 61 ----------- ------------ ----------- 0 (570) 0 5,668,360 3,274,336 58 339,365 203,888 60 28,717,090 15,165,032 53 40,000 26,667 67 525,000 350,000 67 2,334,612 223,075 10 78,658 52,439 67 120,000 0 0 2,093,795 0 0 T,266 0 0 39,924,146 19,294,861 48 ----------- ------------ ----------- ~ 67,926,201 Z 36,239,000 53 Financial Stateoents: Page 3 of ~~ ACTION # ITEM NUMBER N - S AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 27, 1990 AGENDA ITEM: Monthly Report - Transition to Police Department COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: FUNDING Funds for the implementation of the Police Department have been assured. Three pieces of special legislation were passed on our behalf during the recent session of the General Assembly. 1. Enabling legislation required by the Commonwealth for the establishment of a County Police Department. 2. Legislation waiving the normal one-year waiting period following application for 599 funding. Our funding through 599 will start on July 1, 1990. 3. Legislation transferring funds, which would have normally been provided to the County through the State Compensation Board, to 599; and earmarking those funds for the County of Roanoke. This legislation applies to both years of the biennium. RECRUITMENT OF CHIEF We received 154 applications for the newly-created position of Chief of Police. Applications were screened for minimum qualifications by Human Resources, and those meeting minimum qualifications are being further reviewed by members of the Police Chief Advisory Committee. This committee will then recommend a top group of no more than 10 candidates as finalists who will participate in an assessment center. ~/-5 The assessment center will be conducted by the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP). The assessment center will consist of group and individual exercises which are designed to evaluate behavior required for successful performance in the job of Chief of Police. The evaluation of finalists in the assessment center will be based on scores independently determined by assessors selected by the IACP in consultation with County officials. The top group of finalists from the assessment center will be reviewed by the County Administrator who will make the selection and appointment of the Chief of Police. TRANSITION ACTIVITY A management team consisting of Don Myers, Major Robertson and the three Law Enforcement Division Commanders are planning and coordinating the myriad of tasks and decisions necessary for a smooth transition and to minimize the number of decisions to be faced by the Chief. This team was put into place with the agreement and cooperation of the Sheriff. They meet weekly at a minimum and are addressing such issues as allocation of personnel and equipment, mutual aid agreements with other localities, responsibility for drug and youth programs, responsibility for transportation of prisoners, role of a police auxiliary and the requirements for membership, and responsibility for the photographing and fingerprinting of prisoners. The team is also preparing a file of information to be provided to the Chief for his use in making organizational and personnel decisions along with a list of priority items recommended for the Chief's immediate attention. They are also addressing on- going operational and personnel issues as they arise. ACCOMPLISHMENTS TO DATE Uniforms and accessories have been selected and placed on order. Vehicle markings have been selected and bids are being solicited for painting and marking. (Selection of uniform design and vehicle color and markings were conducted by an employee committee.) Thirteen new vehicles provided for in the current budget have been ordered for delivery in time for readiness by July 1, 1990. J OBJECTIVE Our goal is to address all outstanding issues and others as they arise, and resolve them so that those decisions deemed to be appropriate only for the new Chief are left for his attention when he arrives. SUBMITTED BY: Approved Denied Received Referred to ACTION Motion by:_ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator VOTE Eddy Johnson McGraw Nickens Robers No Yes Abs AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 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. ;.~ ,y . ,~ ,. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 1990 ORDINANCE 32790-6 VACATING PORTIONS OF TWO SLOPE EASEMENTS VARYING LOCATED ON LOTS 20, 21, AND 22, BLOCK 2 , SECTION 2 , AND LOT 31, BLOCK 2 , SECTION 2 , FAIRWAY FOREST ESTATES, WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, F.F.E. Development Corporation has requested the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia to vacate two slope easements located on Lots 20, 21, and 22, Block 2, Section 2, and Lot 31, Block 2, Section 2, Fairway Forest Estates, Windsor Hills Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, Section 15.1-482 (b) of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, requires that sucn action Ae CLGC:U1ll~J11.711GU ..~y ~-•~~_ 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 March 13, 1990; and the second reading of this ordinance was held on March 27, 1990. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That two slope easements located on Lots 20, 21, and 22, Block 2, Section 2 and Lot 31, Block 2, Section 2, Fairway Forest Estates, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, of record in the Roanoke County Circuit Court Clerk's Office in Plat Book 10, page 122, be, and hereby are, vacated pursuant to Section 15.1-482(b) of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended; and, 2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. 3. That F.F.E. Development Corporation shall record a certified copy of this ordinance with the Clerk of the Circuit Court and shall pay all fees required to accomplish this transac- tion. On motion of Supervisor Eddy, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. Hol on, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Development & Inspections Terry Harrington, Director, Planning & Zoning John Willey, Director, Real Estate Assessment Paul Mahoney, County Attorney ACTION # ITEM NUMBER ~.~d 3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 27, 1990 AGENDA ITEM: Second reading of the Ordinance requesting a vacation of portions of two slope easements, located on Lots 20, 21 and 22, Block 2, Section 2 and, Lot 31, Block 2, Section 2, Fairway Forest Estates, recorded in Plat Book 10, Page 122, Windsor Hills Magisterial District. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND F. F. E. Development Corporation is requesting that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors vacate portions of two Slope Easements described above, and as shown on the attached map. The Slope Easements were required by the Virginia Department of Transportation to protect the slopes which extend outside the dedicated 50 foot right-of-way. The Developer has improved the above referenced lots, thereby eliminating the need for portions of the Slope Easements. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION Roanoke County is requesting that the described Easements be vacated in accordance with Chapter 11, Title 15.1-482 (B), Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, by the adoption of the attached Ordinance. The Virginia Department of Transportation and the County Staff have conducted a field review and concluded that portions of the Slope Easements, as requested, are no longer necessary. The First reading of the Ordinance was held on March 13, 1990; The Public Hearing and Second Reading is scheduled for March 27, 1990. STAFF RECOMMENDATION The County Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors adopt the proposed Ordinance to vacate portions of the referenced Slope Easements. EMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: '1 _ ~ ~~ Arnold Covey Elmer C. Hodge Development and I spections County Administrator Director -------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved ( ) Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied ( ) Eddy Received ( ) Johnson Referred McGraw To Nickens Robers Z~ Ot '~ d I> 9d w y~lr~+:~ .y~do~,d; f•~Z~ NylWd3W ~ ~ py.i. ~~!~. // ~' i ~ ~+ ~ /4 ~ ~ ~ ~ O A W ..+ ~ O W Z ?4 61 ~ O V ~ -~ p w S W N ~" W O O 4 I q M ~ ~ - - ~ ~ x O a ~ t A N ~ ~ W ~ .+E EO n. a O m N a~ a W E w M U 0 W W N 3 Q~ r .1 Ex o ~ ~ ~~ o c owa w S N 0 d . A O 7 tL a 3 3 N N w '~,y~i `~ ''iY~~i~ ~\ j'F E,s f ~ ,d, S ~~~~~ di o, \\ ~ ~' ~ t~ q ~ t~ ~ w ~ ~\ ~z~ ~ _ ~ K. o~Q o 1 J ~ ~ ~ ~ W'~ O ' ~ ~yl_ si. Q O ~ V - .. y ~ -v ~.: ~ ' '' / ~A~ ~~ ~~~ un Y _ pcali• f~A1FM~~1 • s~.~ , .., t~. ..~ -. y-.._ ..{ .ti+ * .. _._ ~- ~~ . ~~~~~ ~ Z~~ _~ 0 o ~j~og~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ y .~ *.• f ~s _,~ w • (y O~ • H [[~~ ~2 r+ ~ U ~ ~ ~ V (y W W . w a W y O D; ~ ~ F o a o z ~pZ ox °q•a o o (~ < A S OJ ~ E Oa0 M tN+ W ~ o = ~ yy~ M N Q ' ~ H ~ '+ CW4 ~ ~ W ~ om ~N H~z°a o ~~+~~ aoF°- `~~ wa~a > o ~s~g I H N Vl T W Wo •~ H ~ K W x ~I a`A Y ~ N W N it W W ? i /s ~s Q O ~ O '"$ H~~a .~s~ ~.°-, v, ~ .yb ` 4, c, 6~~ a~~G a « ~ ~~ o ~y'rG s O~ W Z H W~~~~ ' ~ m W Q ~~ i N 3~0~~~ 9.iL.k•h5 y .•. 1 3 ,1li !EZ `~ 1 N ~ l• J r' ,1 ~o -- 2 ~ w ~ ,~1'il2 ~~ i 3~', 2 ~ M.ly,i5,ly n W S w ~ ~ ~ ? ~p ~ ~$ ~ Z ~ Z u~` g. iw oQ~ ~ ~ ''- WI' N c'~- ~ ~ >~`NScg~ °r~ N ° I Q ~4~Q cca~.c~'.~ 4 iV ~- w S `~ O~ v~ II A II A ,. z g .l1~oAL ~ s[ ~ ~ ~ a ~ c ~ m ~ Q ~ a.ls.~y.ls! -~ ~ 1 ¢u. o x_ 1 ter z ~ s O y, Ip W t C O ~ ~ ~ N i s i o ~ ~ O ice, h~ W; 0~~~ 0 . ~ r A~ A ~ /~ ~qh-' ,rt F Z ~ t~,~~ ~ ~ `~ 2 v o oQ of a~. r ,~ ~;-. ,i . r. . ~ , ~9~+.. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 1990 ORDINANCE VACATING PORTIONS OF TWO SLOPE EASEMENTS VARYING LOCATED ON LOTS 20, 21, AND 22, BLOCK 2, SECTION 2, AND LOT 31, BLOCK 2, SECTION 2, FAIRWAY FOREST ESTATES, WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, F.F.E. Development Corporation has requested the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia to vacate two slope easements located on Lots 20, 21, and 22, Block 2, Section 2, and Lot 31, Block 2, Section 2, Fairway Forest Estates, Windsor Hills Magisterial District; 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 March 13, 1990; and the second reading of this ordinance was held on March 27, 1990. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That two slope easements located on Lots 20, 21, and 22, Block 2, Section 2 and Lot 31, Block 2, Section 2, Fairway Forest Estates, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, of record in the Roanoke County Circuit Court Clerk's Office in Plat Book 10, page 122, be, and hereby are, vacated pursuant to Section 15.1-482 (b) of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended; and, 2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, ~d and the same hereby are, repealed. 4. That F.F.E. Development Corporation shall record a certified copy of this ordinance with the Clerk of the Circuit Court and shall pay all fees required to accomplish this transac- tion. w 'w. ,~ S ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 1990 ORDINANCE 32790-7 AUTHORIZING A USE-NOT- PROVIDED-FOR PERMIT TO OPERATE AN OPEN AIR MARRET LOCATED AT 3704 BRAMBLETON AVENUE IN THE CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT UPON THE APPLICATION OF E. E. CARTER WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on February 27, 1990, and the second reading and public hearing was held March 27, 1990; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on March 6, 1990; and, WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That a use-not-provided-for permit for a certain tract of real estate containing .35 acre, as described herein, and located at 3704 Brambleton Avenue, (Tax Map Number 77.13-3-1) in the Cave Spring Magisterial District, is hereby authorized. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of E. E. Carter. 3. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: Lot 1, Section 4, of Mount Vernon Heights as shown on a plat made by T. P. Parker, S.C.E., dated March 23, 1967, of record in Plat Book 2, page 67 in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court for the County of Roanoke, Virginia, and containing .35 acre. 4. That the effective date of this ordinance shall be March 27, 1990. On motion of Supervisor Eddy, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. Hol on, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Development & Inspections Terry Harrington, Director, Planning & Zoning John Willey, Director, Real Estate Assessment Paul Mahoney, County Attorney PETITIONER: E. E. CARTER CASE NUMBER: 10-3/90 Planning Commission Hearing Date: March 6, 1990 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: March 27, 1990 + "°' '~ A. REQUEST Petition of E. E. Carter to obtain a Use Not Provided For Permit to operate an open air market, located at 3704 Brambleton Avenue, Cave Spring Magisterial District. B. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION There was no opposition to the request. C. SIGNIFICANT IMPACT FACTORS None. D. PROFFERED CONDITIONS None. E. COMMISSIONERS MOTION, VOTE AND REASON Mr. Witt moved to approve the request. The motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Robinson, Massey, Winstead, Witt, Gordon NAYS: None ABSTAIN: None F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. G. ATTACHMENTS: Concept Plan !l Vicinity Map Staff Report ~ Other Jonatha artley, Alter to Secretary Roanoke ounty Planning Commission ~q°- .y' STAFF REPORT CASE NUMBER: 10-3/90 REVIEWED BY: Janet Scheid 1. NATURE OF REQUEST 2. 3. PETITIONER: E.E. Carter DATE: February 28, 1990 a. This is an unconditional request to renew a Use Not Provided For permit to continue operation of a seasonal open-air market. This permit will be valid for as long as the petitioner chooses to operate on this site. This market has been operating on this site with a Use Not Provided For permit since 1969. b. This site is zoned M-2. Open-air markets are not permitted in the M-2 zoning district nor in any zoning district delineated in the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS a. Section 21-102-5 of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance states that if in any district a use is not specifically permitted, the property owner has the right to petition for such a use. b. In a memorandum dated August 23, 1489 Terry Harrington stated that Use Not Provided For permits should only be offered as an alternative when the use proposed is not listed in any zoning district in the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance. These permits are not applicable when the use proposed is a permitted use in the ordinance. SITE CHARACTERISTICS a. Topography: Level. b. Ground Cover: Gravel. 4. AREA CHARACTERISTICS a. Future Growth Priority: Situated within the Cave Spring Community Planning Area. This area is designated for stable growth. Commercial infill development is encouraged. This area is within the urban service boundary. b. General area: The surrounding area is intensely developed with strip commercial and professional office buildings. The general area also contains significant single-family residential development along the secondary roads. '~ t'~ ,~"~ - t 5. LAND USE IMPACT ASSESSMENT Rating: Rate each factor according to the impact of the proposed action. Use a scale of 1 through 5. 1 = positive impact, 2 = negligible impact, 3 = manageable impact, 4 = disruptive impact, 5 = severe impact, and N/A = not applicable. RATING FACTOR COMMENTS LAND USE COMPATIBILITY 2 a. Comprehensive Plan: 1985 Comprehensive Development Plan has placed this area within the Core land use category. Office and retail commercial uses are encouraged. 2 b. Surrounding Land: The parcels to the north and south of this site along both sides of Route 221 (Brambleton Avenue) are generally strip commercial uses and professional office buildings. 3 c. Neighboring Area: The northern side of this site adjoins a R-1 residential zoning district on Kenmore Avenue. 3 d. Site Layout: The existing site layout will not be changed and consists of one open-air fruit stand and a welding shop. N/A e. Architecture: No change. N/A f. Screening and Landscape: Due to the length of time this use has existed on this site the Screening and Buffering requirements are not applicable. 3 g. Amenities: One open-air fruit stand, a metal welding shop and a gravel lot for parking for traffic and parking. 3 h. Natural Features: This site is protected on the south side by a steep upward slope. TRAFFIC 3 i. Street Capacities: This site is served by a major arterial - U.S. Route 221. This route has adequate capacity. The traffic generated by the currently existing use should not exceed 100 vehicles per day. 3 j. Circulation: The site has adequate room for traffic ingress and egress and on-site circulation. This site can be accessed from both Brambleton Avenue and Kenmore Avenue. ~~'~' . `; UTILITIES 2 k. Water: Adequate source and distribution. This site is within the urban service boundary. 2 1. Sewer: Adequate treatment and transmission. DRAINAGE 3 m. Basin: Located in the Back Creek drainage basin. 2 n. Floodplain: This site is not within the designated 100- year floodplain. PUBLIC SERVICES 2 0. Fire Protection: Within established service area. 2 p. Rescue: Within established service area. N/A q. Parks and Recreation: N/A r. School: TAX BASE N/A s. -Land and Improvement Value: -Taxable Gross Sales/Year: -Total Employees: -Total revenue to the County/Year: No change. ENVIRONMENT N/A t. Air: No effect. N/A u. Water: No effect. N/A v. Soils: No effect. N/A w. Noise: No effect. N/A x. Signage: All signs on this site are grandfathered. 6. PLAN CONSISTENCY This area is designated as a Core area on the Land Use Plan Map. This proposal is consistent with the Core land use determinants and is also consistent with Policy C-1 which encourages the development of intense mixture urban devel- opment and Policy C-2 which states that Core areas should be served by an arterial street. ~~~ _ ,~ 7. STAFF EVALUATION a. Strengths: (1) This proposal is compatible with the Core land use designation. (2) This site is accessible to a major arterial street. b. Weaknesses: None. c. Proffiers Suggested: None. ~j9N. /~~ ~ i y ~ i ~q~ _ y ~~~N~~y ~vu//y B,,/~,i1,P0 di' S~1PF,P /SD~S; _Z ~M iffQi/E"s/~,v ri- f~.r/ ~i~'~•t~s~oN Of~'/. A ivoJ`_~~iviOG9 ~oiP ~°,F.Prrli~~' O~E'.P~/J~ j f~H ~E',v Ai.P /JA,P,~Ff~lf ~7~ ~ B~PAin,~6~f ~/ /~l~E'.v6/ ~. ~~~~ o~ ~ ~C~~~- ~ - ~ ~ . ? ~ .~ o ~• ~P _ ;. ~~ ~, .. ~ ~ ~~ J ' ° ~ ~ ; ,~:~ ~, r ~ Q ti 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ A Q G1 ~ Q ~ (p ,lJ . ~/~ / Q ~ ~ ~ i q, . ti ~: ~ ~ O o, ~ s ao ~~ ,~o~ P~ ES ~ ~~ i / ~ ~ EL ~1E'~P E BE~~/ E A' CA~PTEie o Q. sts Pa s~~ TOT~4~ ,Q~~4, 3 DO AC. •~ES/.o~r,+~ctc ~0.373.4C. .--. , ' ~C YCL ONE /~'ENCt~ O N f gyp. c0~ - /e/14c. ~ E~~Mf~/T ~4,~,p .~ ~~~iT t ~,~ ~.~ '~ 'h ' ~j ~, : r a .~ ~~ g h y ., , ~ ~,~~ ~~ r ~A"•~v~G u i0e0.5 ~ . 4~'39J P.v,~r ~•• ~~ . `; ~~ i C~ !!G OQ`• iN a C ~t' ~Jt ' WELL ELEC. /SUMP 0 1 IO'• PINES '~ C /V'S.TRGCT/O p, i "L ~ /S~ / _ ~ ~ o~w J ~~ s ,y - _ - - ''',~~ 3 ooci8 ~ Tsp.==~_-~ - . ~~~ ~... • - - - .~ ,..n7C i.. -- - ~---:- .. -~.... ~~d -~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 1990 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING A USE-NOT-PROVIDED-FOR PERMIT TO OPERATE AN OPEN AIR MARKET LOCATED AT 3704 BRAMBLETON AVENUE IN THE CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT UPON THE APPLICATION OF E. E. CARTER WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on February 27, 1990, and the second reading and public hearing was held March 27, 1990; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on March 6, 1990; and, WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That a use-not-provided-for permit for a certain tract of real estate containing .35 acre, as described herein, and located at 3704 Brambleton Avenue, (Tax Map Number 77.13-3-1) in the Cave Spring Magisterial District, is hereby authorized. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of E. E. Carter. 3. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: Lot 1, Section 4, of Mount Vernon Heights as shown on a plat made by T. P. Parker, S.C.E., dated March 23, 1967, of record in Plat Book 2, page 67 in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court for the County of Roanoke, Virginia, and containing .35 acre. 4. That the effective date of this ordinance shall be March 27, 1990. 1 AMENDED AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 1990 ORDINANCE 32790-8 TO AMEND PROFFERED CONDITIONS ON THE REZONING OF A 1.83 ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED ON ROUTE 419 ADJACENT TO SUGAR LOAF FARMS AND GRANDER PARR IN THE WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF B-1, CONDITIONAL, TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF B-1, CONDITIONAL (AMENDMENT TO SIGNAGE PROFFERS) UPON THE APPLICATION OF HONG RI MIN WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on February 27, 1990, and the second reading and public hearing was held March 27, 1990; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on March 6, 1990; and, WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law; and WHEREAS, this property was rezoned from R-1, Residential District, to B-1, Business District with proffered conditions, on December 10, 1985. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing approximately 1.83 acres, as described herein, and located on Route 419 adjacent to Sugar Loaf Farms and Grander Park in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of B-1, Conditional, to the zoning classification of B-1, Conditional with amended proffered conditions. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of Hong Ki Min. 3. That the applicant has voluntarily proffered in writing the following amendment to Proffer #11 of the conditions approved by the Board of Supervisors on December 10, 1985, which the Board of Supervisors hereby accepts: (1) Signage shall not exceed 12' 10" in height and 85 square feet in area (156.6 square feet overall area). All other proffers and conditions would remain in full force. 4. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the northerly side of Virginia State Secondary Route 419, on the line with the property of Sugar Loaf Farms, Inc., said point designated as A5 on that certain plat dated December 6, 1965, made by C. B. Malcolm & Son, S.C.E., showing the remaining property of G. E. McDaniel; thence with the line of the property of Sugar Loaf Farms, Inc., S. 46° 27' W. 314.46' to a point designated as A4 on the aforesaid map, said point being the northwesterly corner of Lot 1, Block 1, Map of Grander Park, said plat recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court for the County of Roanoke, Virginia, in Plat Book 3, page 282; thence with the line of Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Map of Grander Park, S. 62° 21' E. 148' to a point designated as A3 on the aforesaid McDaniel plat; thence continuing with the line of Lots 3, 4 and 5, Block 1, Map of Grander Park, S. 70° 41' E. 232' to a point designated as A2 on the aforesaid McDaniel plat; thence continuing with the line of Lot 5, Block 1, Map of Grander Park, S. 89° 11' E. 69.30' to a point designated as Al on the aforesaid McDaniel plat, said point being on the westerly boundary of Lot 1, Block 1, Map of Blair Court, of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court for the County of Roanoke, Virginia, in Plat Book 5, page 36; thence with the line of Lot 1, Block 1, Map of Blair Court, N. 23° 57' E. 85.24' to a point on the northerly side of Virginia State Secondary Route 419, said point designated as A6 on the aforesaid McDaniel plat; thence with the } northerly right-of-way of Virginia State Secondary Route 419, a curve to the left whose radius is 1316.23 feet and whose chord bearing is N. 38° 23' S6" W. , an arc distance of 365.04 feet to a point designated as A5 on the aforesaid McDaniel plat, the place of BEGINNING, and containing 1.839 acres, more or less, and known as Parcel "A" on the aforesaid McDaniel plat; and BEING the same property conveyed to Guy S. Clifton and Pauline H. Clifton, husband and wife, by Truman B. McDaniel, widow, by deed dated May 23, 1968, and recorded in the Clerk's office of the Circuit Court of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, in Deed Book 853, page 748. 5. That the effective date of this ordinance shall be March 27, 1990. On motion of Supervisor Eddy, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, McGraw, Johnson, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. Hol on, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Development & Inspections Terry Harrington, Director, Planning & Zoning John Willey, Director, Real Estate Assessment Paul Mahoney, County Attorney ~ 4 , PETITIONER: HONG RI MIN "'~~~'-'~ CASE NUMBER: 11-3/90 Planning Commission Hearing Date: March 6, 1990 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: March 27, 1990 A. REQUEST Petition of Hong Ki Min to amend proffered signage conditions on a 1.83 acre parcel, located on Route 419, adjacent to Sugar Loaf Farms and Grander Park, Windsor Hills Magisterial District. B. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION There was no opposition to the request. C. IMPACT FACTORS Mr. Hartley summarized the staff report noting that petitioner is requesting to amend the previous proffer of 25 sq.ft. to 156.6 sq.ft. Under the current ordinance, 547 sq.ft. of signage would be permitted. In response to the Commission, he said the amended proffer would be in compliance with the proposed new sign ordinance. D. PROFFERED CONDITIONS signage not to exceed 12'10" in height and 85 sq.ft. in area (156.6 sq.ft. overall area). E. COMMISSIONERS MOTION, VOTE AND REASON Mr. Gordon moved to approve the amended proffers. The motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Robinson, Massey, Winstead, Witt, Gordon NAYS: None ABSTAIN: None F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. G. ATTACHMENTS: Concept Plan Y Vicinity Map ~taff Report ,~ Other Jona an Hartley, Al rnate Secretary Roa ke County Planning Commission r. ~~~ -- . M E M O R A N D U M TO: Planning Commission FROM: Jon Hartley and Lynn Johnson Donihe DATE: March 2, 1990 RE: Petition of Hong Ki Min to amend proffered signage conditions on a 1.83 acre parcel of land, generally located on Route 419 adjacent to Sugar Loaf Farms and Grander Park within the Windsor Hills Magisterial District and recorded as Parcel #76.15-1-4 in the Roanoke County Tax Records. Amendment of Proffers Requested: Petitioner is requesting to amend proffer #il approved by the Board of Supervisors in December, 1985, in order to increase the amount of signage permitted on the property. The petitioner has proffered as a substitute condition maximum signage not to exceed 12'10" in height and 85 square feet in copy area (156.6 square feet in overall area, according to concept plan submitted). F ;.sting Proffer of Condition Accepted by the Board of Supervisors: The current proffer #11 states as follows "11. Not more than one front-lit identification sign shall be allowed on the property. The sign shall be no more than 25 square feet in area and shall not be higher than four feet from the ground." Sionaoe Permitted Under Current Ordinance: Under the current sign regulation, property zoned B-1 is permitted 1.5 sq. ft. of signage per lineal foot of frontage, with a maximum height of 35 ft. Since the parcel in question contains 365 ft. of frontage on Route 419, a total of 547 sq, ft. of signage would be permitted had the property owner not originally agreed to substantially limit the signage. Sionaoe Permitted Under Proposed Ordinance• Under the proposed sign standards being considered by the Hoard of Supervisors, the maximum signage allowed on this parcel would be 192.5 sq. ft. of sign area (0.5 sq. ft. per lineal foot of street frontage), with a maximum height of 15 ft. Summary The petitioner's request represents a 240% increase in the signage allowed under the original proffer. However, this still only represents ib% of what currently would be allowed and would be less than 50% of the signage permitted under the proposed standards. Also, since the request only pertains to amending the height and area of the sign, it is the opinion of staff that all other proffers and conditions would remain in force, including the restriction to only one front-lit identification sign. Finanna/ Planner. Hong Ki Min Summit Producer Chairmans Council National Group Insurance Leader Council Regional Vice-President, 1985 National Association of Life Underwriters Lite Member, Million Dollar Round Table HONG KI MIN & ASSOCIATES New York Life Insurance Company 817 South Jefferson Street Roanoke, Virginia 24016 Phone (703) 344-0007 Fax (703) 982-0873 January 16, 1990 Roanoke County Administration Center 3738 Brambleton Avenue, SW P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 Dear Sir or Madam ~~~ Kathy A. Lodge Executive Secretary Janet Selkck Group and Health Consultant On December 10, 1985, the 1.83 acres of land located on Route 419, Parcel 76.15-1-4 in the Roanoke County Tax Maps and recorded in Deed Book 853, page 748, was rezoned from R-1 to B-1. At the time of rezoning certain conditions were established, (a copy of the conditions are enclosed), condition 11 deals with the identification sign. I would like to request that this condition be amended to allow a sign larger than 25 square feet in area and higher than four feet from the ground. The sign I would like to install is 12'10" tall, and is 84.11 square feet in area, this meets Roanoke County's sign specifications. Under the present conditions the identification sign (which you can see in front of the building now) is detrimental for the building, the tenants, and the neighborhood. The sign is just too small for the building and not large enough for the tenants use. The proposed sign will give both a prestigious and impressive look for the building itself, and the neigh- borhood, at the same time it will provide extra space for the tenants use. The proposed sign was designed by the same professional architect who designed the building, and all future tenants will be required to have their signage examined by the architect for compatability. At the time of rezoning, I was just not aware that the sign would not be compatable with the building, I think this was a case of my inexperience and I did not realize until we put up the present sign how much is lowered the image of the building and the neighborhood. I was assisted by the committee previously, and I look forward to your support and assistance once again with this request. Thank you for your time and consideration. HKM/kal Attachments Sincerely your /~ ! Ho Ki Min FRVANCIAL • ESTATE • INSURANCE CONSULTANTS ~1~,' .~ ~~ .. ~~~ J FEB 1 19q~ is,h- yil^Yt+~, iii '; ~. ,. 4712 Easthill Drive Roanoke, Virginia 24018 January 26, 1990 Mr. Hong Ki Min 817 South Jefferson Street Roanoke, Virginia 24016 Dear Mr. Min: We have received your letter of January 18 regarding the proposed sign change. Please note that item X11 of the proffered conditions clearly st&tes that the sign shall be "front-lit." The sign currently on the property is back- lit and we are wondering if this particular condition will be honored if permission is granted for the larger sign. The main issue at this point, however, seems to be the question of the fence. Perhaps you will recall during our many conversations prior to rezoning the feelings expressed by the adjoining neighbors regarding privacy and security. It was for that reason that you agreed to erect the stockade fence at the highest point of the property. Imagine our surprise to learn that you did not intend to erect this fence as we understood would be done! Item No. 12 of the proffered conditions states "..applicant and his archi- tect will meet with and consult with an advisory committee of selected neighbors concerning the architectural style of the structure and its compatibility with the neighborhood." It is certainly true that this was done; however, the original site plan and proposed style of the building were apparently discarded immediately after the rezoning was approved. We were not informed of this change. We will be happy to discuss the proposed proffer change regarding the sign but, at the same time, would also like to discuss the possibility of a modification of proffer and site plan to reflect the fence as initially discussed. Sincerely, Sandra S. Rosebro cc: Roanoke County Planning Commission Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Mr. Terry Harrington '' adiacent to Suaar Tnaf Farms and _ ) OF Orlander Park ) CONDITIONS within the Windsor Bills ) ~ ~~ Magisterial District ) TO THE HONORABLE SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTYs '~. Being in accord with Sec. 15.1-491.1 et seq. of the Code of Virginia and Sec. 21-11 of the Code of Roanoke County, the Petitioner a~M Y: w+n - hereby voluntarily proffers to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia the following conditions to the rezoning of the above-referenced parcel of land. 1. The structure will be in general conformance with the site plan. 2. The maximum height of the proposed office building will be 2 stories above grade. 3. The maximum height of parking lot lighting will be 14 feet. 4. Parking lot lighting will be directed away from adjoining landowners. 5. The zoning classification of the property shall revert to R-1 upon: a. Resale of property or parts thereof prior to commencement of the project. b. Failure to close on contract with Guy S. Clifton and Pauline H. Clifton c. Failure to commence construction of planned building within one year from date of rezoning to 8-1. d. Failure to complete said project within a reasonable length of time from date of commencement. 6. A security fence, stockade-type, minimum height of six feet, shall be built and maintained on the higher elevation of the buffer zones on the northwest and south sides of the property. 7. Trash pickup areas, as well as heating and cooling equipment, shall be concealed from view. 8. All utilities shall be underground. 9. Drainage shall be contained and directed to exit the lower at southeast area of property. 10. Unauthorized traffic after business hours shall be prohibited. 11. Not more than one front-lit identificatio b n sign shall e allowed on property. The sign shall be 25 v w no more than square feet in area and shall not be higher than four feet from the ground . 12. The a pplicant and his architect will meet with and consult with an advisor co it y mm tee of selected neighbors concerning the architectural style structure f o the and its compatibility with the neighborhood. J H ~~~ ~ J Y`a0 Q ~^_ ~ ~ ~ .V O a~ v~ ~ '4 aa ~ z ~ ~ y= ~~ ~ J ~ T ~ C ~~ ~ x ~~ J i ~ h ., ~ ~D --=.~ ,~ ~0~ 1 I AMENDED ,~,~. ~ ,,, AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 1990 ORDINANCE TO AMEND PROFFERED CONDITIONS ON THE REZONING OF A 1.83 ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED ON ROUTE 419 ADJACENT TO SUGAR LOAF FARMS AND GRANDER PARK IN THE WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF B-1, CONDITIONAL, TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF B-1, CONDITIONAL (AMENDMENT TO SIGNAGE PROFFERS) UPON THE APPLICATION OF HONG KI MIN WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on February 27, 1990, and the second reading and public hearing was held March 27, 1990; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on March 6, 1990; and, WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law; and WHEREAS, this property was rezoned from R-1, Residential District, to B-1, Business District with proffered conditions, on December 10, 1985. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing approximately 1.83 acres, as described herein, and located on Route 419 adjacent to Sugar Loaf Farms and Grander Park in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of B-1, Conditional, to the zoning classification of B-1, Conditional with amended proffered conditions. '~ -,~' 2. That this action is taken upon the application of Hong Ki Min. 3. That the applicant has voluntarily proffered in writing the following amendment to Proffer #11 of the conditions approved by the Board of Supervisors on December 10, 1985, which the Board of Supervisors hereby accepts: (1) Signage shall not exceed 12' 10" in height and 85 square feet in area (156.6 square feet overall area). All other proffers and conditions would remain in full force. 4. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the northerly side of Virginia State Secondary Route 419, on the line with the property of Sugar Loaf Farms, Inc., said point designated as A5 on that certain plat dated December 6, 1965, made by C. B. Malcolm & Son, S.C.E., showing the remaining property of G. E. McDaniel; thence with the line of the property of Sugar Loaf Farms, Inc., S. 46° 27' W. 314.46' to a point designated as A4 on the aforesaid map, said point being the northwesterly corner of Lot 1, Block 1, Map of Grander Park, said plat recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court for the County of Roanoke, Virginia, in Plat Book 3, page 282; thence with the line of Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Map of Grander Park, S. 62° 21' E. 148' to a point designated as A3 on the aforesaid McDaniel plat; thence continuing with the line of Lots 3, 4 and 5, Block 1, Map of Grander Park, S. 70° 41' E. 232' to a point designated as A2 on the aforesaid McDaniel plat; thence continuing with the line of Lot 5, Block 1, Map of Grander Park, S. 89° 11' E. 69.30' to a point designated as Al on the aforesaid McDaniel plat, said point being on the westerly boundary of Lot 1, Block 1, Map of Blair Court, of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court for the County of Roanoke, Virginia, in Plat Book 5, page 36; thence with the line of Lot 1, Block 1, Map of Blair Court, N. 23° 57' E. 85.24' to a point on the northerly side of Virginia State Secondary Route 419, said point designated as A6 on the aforesaid McDaniel plat; thence with the northerly right-of-way of Virginia State Secondary Route 419, a curve to the left whose radius is 1316.23 feet and whose chord bearing is N. 38° 23' S6" W., an arc distance of 365.04 feet to a point designated as A5 on the aforesaid McDaniel plat, the place of BEGINNING, and containing 1.839 acres, more or less, and known as Parcel "A" on the aforesaid McDaniel plat; and BEING the same property conveyed to Guy S. Clifton and Pauline H. Clifton, husband and wife, by Truman B. McDaniel, widow, by deed dated May 23, 1968, and recorded in the Clerk's office of the Circuit Court of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, in Deed Book 853, page 748. 5. That the effective date of this ordinance shall be March 27, 1990. t ~~` AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 1990 ORDINANCE 32790-9 TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF APPROBIMATELY 35 ACRES OF REAL ESTATE GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF INTER- STATE 81 AND WEST OF PLANTATION ROAD IN THE HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION R-1 TO B-2 FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT WITH CONDITIONS UPON THE APPLICA- TION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA. WHEREAS, by Resolution 91289-4 the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, initiated amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and to the classifications of certain real estate located in Roanoke County to serve the public purposes of the County as required by public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice to implement the recommendations of the Economic Development Action Plan for FY 1989-90; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on January 23, 1990, and the second reading and public hearing was held on March 27, 1990; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on March 6, 1990; and, WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing approximately 35 acres, as described herein, owned by Household of Faith and generally located south of Inter- state 81 and west of Plantation Road in the Hollins Magisterial ~ • ~ District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification R-1, Single Family Residential District, to the zoning classification of B-2, General Commercial District, for industrial development. 2. That the Board initiated the application to change the zoning classification of this real estate located in Roanoke County to serve the public purposes of the County as required by public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice to implement the recommendations of the Economic Development Action Plan for FY 1989-90. 3. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the southerly side of Interstate Highway Route #81, said point being the northerly corner of property of Interstate Motel Developers, Inc. (D.B. 861, page 124) and shown as corner 1; thence with the division line between property of Florence Marie Peters and Interstate Motel Developers, Inc., S. 31° 09' 00" E. 1364.15' to a point, corner 2; thence S. 58° 50' 00" W. 100.44' to corner 4B; thence S. 30° 45' 00" W. 453.23' to corner 4A, at the northeast terminus of Garvin Street; thence with the same in part, and the northerly line of Lot 9, Sec. 3, Walrond Court (P.B. 2, page 178), S. 59° 40' 45" W. 551.20' to corner 5 on the easterly boundary of Billy H. Branch; thence with same, and the easterly boundary of North Burlington Heights (P.B. 3, page 57), N. 36 44' 23" W. 1750.93' to a fence post, corner 6; thence with the easterly boundary of Ellsworth L. Snyder and Bonnie E. Osborne Snyder (D.B. 1026, page 631) and Randolph Howell and Gladys R. Howell (D.B. 570, page 293) , N. 37° 24' 00" W. 619.48' to an iron pin on the southerly side of Interstate Highway Route #81; thence with a curved line to the right, whose radius is 4490.66 feet, and whose chord bearing and distance is S. 89° 34' 57" E. 3.36 feet, an arc distance of 3.36 feet to corner 8, another point on the southerly side of Interstate Highway Route #81; thence with the same S. 89° 33' 40" E. 1044.68' to corner 1, the place of BEGINNING, and designated as Tract I, containing 35.14 acres, all as more fully shown on a plat prepared by Buford T. Lumsden & Associates, P.C., Engineers and Surveyors, dated July 31, 1985, entitled "Plat showing Tract I (35.14 ac.) being conveyed to the Household of Faith by Florence Marie Peters, situated along south side of Interstate Highway Route #81, Hollins Magisterial District, Roanoke County, Virginia"; and, BEING a part of the same property acquired by J. H. Peters, Jr. and Florence Marie Peters by deed from J. S. Jamison and Fannie A. Jamison, his wife, dated June 12, 1947, and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, in Deed Book 373, page 216, and subsequently conveyed by J. H. Peters, Jr. and Florence Marie Peters to "Florence Marie Peters and J. H. Peters, Jr., and/or the survivor as at common law as between the grantees," said deed being dated July 26, 1952, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 477, page 136, the said J. H. Peters, Jr. having since passed away, survived by the Grantor herein. 4. That Household of Faith, as owner of this real estate, has voluntarily proffered in writing the following conditions which the Board of Supervisors hereby accepts: (1) Building height no more than four stories, excluding steeples and bell towers. (2) Lighting not to exceed one foot candle measured at property line of any of the adjoining single-family residences. (3) Buffer zone to be 50 feet adjacent to back side residential area. (4) Exclusion of the following permitted uses: commer- cial kennels and veterinarian hospitals, freestanding dance halls and billiard parlors, flea market, freestanding used car dealer- ship, and freestanding laundry/dry cleaners. (5) Access to the property for the church shall be from Garvin Street and/or Plantation Road. Access to the property for any other commercial use shall be only from Plantation Road. 5. That the effective date of this ordinance shall be March 27, 1990. On motion of Supervisor Johnson, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Nickens, Robers NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Supervisors Eddy, McGraw A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. H ton, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Development & Inspections Terry Harrington, Director, Planning & Zoning John Willey, Director, Real Estate Assessment Paul Mahoney, County Attorney PETITIONER: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS (HOUSEHOLD OF FAITH) ~ ~~ .. j CASE NUMBER: 9-2/90 c~ Planning Commission Hearing Date: March 6, 1990 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: March 27, 1990 A. REQUEST p to Petition of Roanoke County BoardR 1 to B 2 lfors commerc 1 development, rezone approx. 35 acres from Hollins generally located south of I-81 and west of Plantation Road, Magisterial District. B. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION voiced her concern with increased Jean Shaffer, an adjacent resident, s oiling her water runoff and the possibility of a four story building p view of the mountains. Myrtle Pullen inquired about access from Enon Drive and was told that church use only would be allowed cerns•rvl aft re viewing the afour story She also noted the following con building on Route 419, four stories is a lot taller than she thought; there are still 31 commercial allow uased cars,,a serviceefacility,lbody new car dealership which would is proposed. shop); no specific use of the property C. SIGNIFICANT IMPACT FACTORS the Days Inn Motor Lodge, I-81, 1. Surrounding Land: The site is bordered by Lakeland Stables, and several single family residences. 2. Site Layout: Unknown due to lack of a concept plan. D. PROFFERED CONDITIONS stee les and bell 1. Building height no more than four stories, excluding p towers. line of any 2. Lighting not to exceed one foot candle measured at property of the adjoining single family residences. 3. Buffer zone to be 50 f in a erm tt d usesckcommercialdkennels and veteri- 4. Exclusion of the follow g p dance halls and billiard parlors; flea narian hospitals; freestanding laundry/dry market; freestanding used car dealerships; freestanding cleaners. shall be from Carvin Street and/or 5. Access to the property, for the church, Plantation Road. Access to the property, for any other commercial use, shall be only from Plantation Road. E. COMMISSIONER'S MOTION, VOTE AND REASON uttin commercial Mr. Massey moved to deny the request saying that by p g next to residential, the impact on the neighborhood needs to be minimized as much as possible. In his opinion, the neighborhood is not protected effectively. Mr. Winstead repeatC ~ rehensive Plan randy said he owould that are inconsistent with the p support Mr. Massey's motion. The motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Robinson, Massey, Winstead NAYS: Witt, Gordon ABSTAIN: None °~o-~ F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE Mr. Witt commented that B-2 is more consistent with the Comprehensive P an than R-1. G. ATTACHMENTS: Staff Report Other Concept Plan ~Vi ity Map Jon an Hartley, Alt nate Secretary Roan ke County Planning Commission ~~f'D-CD STAFF REPORT CASE NUMBER: 9-2/90 PETITIONER: Board of Supervi~urs REVIEWED BY: Jon Hartley nAfE: March 2, 1990 Petition of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors to rezone approximately 35 acres from R-1, Residential to B-2, General Commercial, located south of I-81 at exit 43 in the Hollins Magisterial District. 1. NATURE OF REQUEST a. Conditional request to rezone approximately 35 acres from R-1, Residential to 8-2, General Commercial. 2. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS a. The B-2, General Commercial District permits a wide variety of office and retail uses including new automobile dealerships, motels, theaters, restaurants and funeral homes. Also permitted are non- profit uses such as churches, libraries, schools and parks, as well as hospitals, clinics and nursing homes. Flea markets, public dance halls, poolrooms, and bowling alleys are permitted with a special exception permit from the Board of Supervisors. The maximum height permitted in the B-2 district is either 12 stories or 125 feet. The property owner has proffered as a condition prohibiting the following uses: (1) Commercial Kennels and Veterinarian hospitals; (2) Freestanding dance halls, billiard parlors, etc.; (3) Flea markets; (4) Freestanding used car dealerships; and, (5) Freestanding laundry and dry cleaners. In addition the owners have proffered conditions in the following areas: a limitation on the height not to exceed 75 ft., restricted lighting, and buffer yards which exceed the requirements of the ordinance. b. Site plan review would be required, prior to development of this site, to ensure compliance with County regulations. 3. SITE CHARACTERISTICS a. Topography: Site is gently rolling, sloping to the northwest toward Enon Drive. b. Groundn~Qned•st rage shed ais locatedconethe southeastscornertoflthe An aba site. 4. AREA CHARACTERISTICS a, Future Growth Priority: Situated within the Peters Creek Community Planning Area, this has been designated as a high growth area. General area is developed with single family residences, light industrial uses, commercial uses and a community park. ~ -- ~~ LAND USE IMPACT ASSESSMENT .tating: Rate each factor according to the impact of the proposed action. Use a scale of 1 through 5. 3 manageable impact, 4 = 1 positive impact, 2 = negligible impact, disruptive impact, 5 = severe impact, and N/A = not applicable. RATING FACTOR COMMENTS LAND USE COMPATIBILITY 3 a. Comprehensive Plan: 1985 Comprehensive Development Plan has placed this area within a Principal Industrial land use category. The proposed rezoning from R-1, Residential to B-2, General Commercial, is not consistent I111 (Discourage retail map and policies, particularly, Policy development in principal Industrial areas unroved b pthelBoa~d the area needs). Should this petition be app Y of Supervisors, staff thel Planning aComm~ssion pand Boa rd eof for consideration by Supervisors. 4 b. Surrounding Land: The site is bordered by the Days Inn Motor Lodge, I-81, Lakeland Stables and several single family residences. c. Neighboring Area: Light industry, residential, office and 3 assorted commercial uses. 5 d. Site Layout: Unknown due to lack of a concept plan. N/A e. Architecture: 3 f. Screening and Landscaping: Although no specific development _ proposal has been submitted at this time, future development of this site for commercial developrenulationsequ Thesproperty and buffering pursuant to County 9 owner has proffered as a condition a 50 foot buffer yard adjacent to the backside of residential areas, which exceeds the 35 feet required. The owners have also profncludin 25along buffer yard elsewhere on the property, 9 adjoining B-2 zoned uses. N/A g. Amenities: Unknown due to lack of a concept plan. N/A h. Natural Amenities: TRAFFIC 3 i. Street Capacities: Traffic counts con alon d Plantation vRoad~ a volume of 8,600 vehicles per day 9 Based on recent development activity along this segment of Plantation Road, staff estimates existing traffic volumes are significantly higher. The county's Six-Year Road Improvement Program for primary roads calls for widening Plantation Road to four laneVDOT than center turn lane between I-81 and Williamson Road. indicated that this pro3ect should begin in the Fall of 1991. ~~~ - ~ A j. Circulation: Access to the site is currently available from either Carvin Street or Enon Drive using rights-of-way reserved for this parcel. Access directly from Plantation Road to the east is not presently available but could be negotiated with adjoining property owners. The property owner has proffered as a condition that access to the parcel will be from Plantation Road. This proffer should be further strengthened by stating "only" Plantation Road. UTILITIES 3 k. Water: The Roanoke County Utility Department has indicated that this area is currently served by an existing Roanoke City water line which does not provide the minimum flow requirements necessary to support commercial or industrial land uses. Prior to development of this site for commercial purposes, a new water system in this portion of the County would need to be constructed. Plans are being prepared by the County to construct this water system in the near future. 3 1. Sewer: The staff of the Department of Utilities advises that adequate sewer facilities are located in proximity to this site. DRAINAGE m. Basin: This site is located in the upper reaches of the Deer Branch, a tributary of Carvin Creek. The county engineering staff has indicated that this site drains towards those residential properties located east of Plantation Road, with reports of localized flooding during heavy rains. The new stormwater management regulations should address this problem in all but the most extreme storm events. N/A n. Floodplain: See "m" above. PUBL IC SERVICES 3 0. Fire Protection: Provided the existing water system is upgraded, the Fire and Rescue staff advises that their department would have no problem in providing fire and emergency services to this site. 3 p. Rescue: See "o" above. ~ q. Parks and Recreation: Although this site is located in the vicinity of Waldrond Park, future use of the site for commercial development should have no impact on the park. N/A r. Schools: TAX BASE q 5. - Land and Improvement Value: - Taxable Gross Sales/Yearn - Total Employees: - Total Revenue to the County/Year: Unknown ~~~~~ ENVIRONMENT 3 t. Air: 3 u. Water: N/A v. Soils: 3 w. Noise: 3 x. Signage: Due to the limited frontage which is possible on Plantation Road, Signage would be extremely limited on this site. This site would provide a prime location for outdoor advertising or a billboard along I-81, if these types of signs were permitted again in the County. 6. PLAN CONSISTENCY This area is designated as Principal Industrial. Petitioner's request is inconsistent with the land use plan map and applicable policies. Should this petition be approved by the Board of Supervisors, staff will prepare a land use plan amendment for consideration by the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors. 7 . STAFF EVAI.UAT I ON Strengths: (1) Site is conveniently located to provide quick . access to I-81. (2) The property owner has proffered as a condition that access to the parcel will be from Plantation Road. (3) Owners have proffered as a condition buffer yards which exceed the requirements of the ordinance. b. Weaknesses: (1) Pe llicable polic est 1(2) E~aluat on oftimpactsais use plan map and app difficult due to the lack of a concept plan. c. Proffers Suggested: Staff would recommend that the following changes or additions be made to improve the proffers submitted by the property owners: (1) The proffer pertaining to access from Plantation Road should be further strengthened by stating access "only" from Plantation Road. (2) The building height should be limited to no more than four stories excluding steeples and bell towers. (3) The proffer pertaining to lighting should be expanded to further state, no lighting shall exceed one foot candle measured at the property line of any of the adjoining single family residences". ~~d°°~ PROFFERED CONDITIONS HOUSEHOLD OF FAITH PROPERTY REZONING FROM R-1 TO B-2 1. Building height shall be no greater than four (4) stories, excluding steeples and Bell Towers. 2. Lighting shall not exceed one (1} foot candle measured at the property line of any of the adjoining single family residences. 3. Buffer zone shall be fifty (50) feet on the property line adjacent to single family residences. 4. The proferred conditions exclude the following permitted uses: A. Commercial kennels and veterinarian hospitals. B. Freestanding dance halls and billiard parlors. C. Flea Market. D. Freestanding Used Car Dealerships. E. Freestanding laundry/dry cleaners. 5. Access to the property, for the church, shall be from Garvin Street and/or Plantation Road. Access to the property, for any other commercial use, shall be only from Plantation Road. The above Prof erred Conditions are presented by the Household of Faith: l~~~ Tom Poland, Pastor _~' % ~-' Date . ,.:~ ~ D Zoning: R1 Comprehensive Plan Designation: Principal Industrial Access: Carvin Street and easement to Plantation Road Water: Off site Sewer: Off site Availability: Owners are trying to sell the property, but there is an access problem to Plantation Road. Recommendation: The property should be rezoned to Industrial District M1. Roanoke County to improve area water service with new storage tank and water lines. Fiscal Impact: 1991 for water improvements. Department of Economic Development Site name: Household of Faith Size: 35 acres ~~ ~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 1990 ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF APPROXIMATELY 35 ACRES OF REAL ESTATE GENERALLY LOCATED SOUTH OF INTERSTATE 81 AND WEST OF PLANTATION ROAD IN THE HOLLINS MAGIST- ERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION R-1 TO B-2 FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT WITH CONDITIONS UPON THE APPLICATION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA. WHEREAS, by Resolution 91289-4 the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, initiated amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and to the classifications of certain real estate located in Roanoke County to serve the public purposes of the County as required by public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice to implement the recommendations of the Economic Development Action Plan for FY 1989-90; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on January 23, 1990, and the second reading and public hearing was held on March 27, 1990; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on March 6, 1990; and, WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing approximately 35 acres, as described herein, owned by Household of Faith and generally located south of Inter- state 81 and west of Plantation Road in the Hollins Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification R-1, ~~~~~ Single Family Residential District, to the zoning classification of B-2, General Commercial District, for industrial development. 2. That the Board initiated the application to change the zoning classification of this real estate located in Roanoke County to serve the public purposes of the County as required by public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice to implement the recommendations of the Economic Development Action Plan for FY 1989-90. 3. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the southerly side of Interstate Highway Route #81, said point being the northerly corner of property of Interstate Motel Developers, Inc. (D.B. 861, page 124) and shown as corner 1; thence with the division line between property of Florence Marie Peters and Interstate Motel Developers, Inc., S. 31° 09' 00" E. 1364.15' to a point, corner 2; thence S. 58° 50' 00" W. 100.44' to corner 4B; thence S. 30° 45' 00" W. 453.23' to corner 4A, at the northeast terminus of Carvin Street; thence with the same in part, and the northerly line o0 Lot 9, Sec. 3, Walrond Court (P.B. 2, page 178), S. 59 40' 45" W. 551.20' to corner 5 on the easterly boundary of Billy H. Branch; thence with same, and the easterly boundary of North Burlington Heights (P.B. 3, page 57), N. 36° 44' 23" W. 1750.93' to a fence post, corner 6; thence with the easterly boundary of Ellsworth L. Snyder and Bonnie E. Osborne Snyder (D.B. 1026, page 631) and Randolph Howell and Gladys R. Howell (D.B. 570, page 293) , N. 37° 24' 00" W. 619.48' to an iron pin on the southerly side of Interstate Highway Route #81; thence with a curved line to the right, whose radius is 4490.66 feet, and whose chord bearing and distance is S. 89° 34' 57" E. 3.36 feet, an arc distance of 3.36 feet to corner 8, another point on the southerly side of Interstate Highway Route #81; thence with the same S. 89° 33' 40" E. 1044.68' to corner 1, the place of BEGINNING, and designated as Tract I, containing 35.14 acres, all as more fully shown on a plat prepared by Buford T. Lumsden & Associates, P.C., Engineers and Surveyors, dated July 31, 1985, entitled "Plat showing Tract I (35.14 ac.) being conveyed to the Household of Faith by Florence Marie Peters, situated along south side of Interstate Highway Route #81, Hollins Magisterial District, Roanoke County, Virginia"; and, BEING a part of the same property acquired by J. H. _ - ~ 3qo ~ ~ Peters, Jr. and Florence Marie Peters by deed from J. S. Jamison and Fannie A. Jamison, his wife, dated June 12, 1947, and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, in Deed Book 3 7 3 , page 216 , and subsequently conveyed by J . H . Peters , Jr. and Florence Marie Peters to "Florence Marie Peters and J. H. Peters, Jr., and/or the survivor as at common law as between the grantees," said deed being dated July 26, 1952, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 477, page 136, the said J. H. Peters, Jr. having since passed away, survived by the Grantor herein. 4. That Household of Faith, as owner of this real estate, has voluntarily proffered in writing the following conditions which the Board of Supervisors hereby accepts: (1) Building height no more than four stories, excluding steeples and bell towers. (2) Lighting not to exceed one foot candle measured at property line of any of the adjoining single-family residences. (3) Buffer zone to be 50 feet adjacent to back side residential area. (4) Exclusion of the following permitted uses: commer- cial kennels and veterinarian hospitals, freestanding dance halls and billiard parlors, flea market, freestanding used car dealer- ship, and freestanding laundry/dry cleaners. (5) Access to the property for the church shall be from Garvin Street and/or Plantation Road. Access to the property for any other commercial use shall be only from Plantation Road. 5. That the effective date of this ordinance shall be March 27, 1990. Iillllillllillllllllllllllllllilllll!IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII~jJ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ APPEARANCE REQUEST _ _ _ _ - _ AGENDA ITEM NO. - - , "` - - SUBJECT - - _ - _ - = I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supexxisors to _ reco nize me during the public hearing on the above matter - WHEN CALLED TO THE PODIUM, c = so that I may comment. - - I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR T - _ _ _ - RECORD. I AGREE TO ABIDE BY THE GUIDELINE __ 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 ma~onty of the Board to - do otherwise. = • S Bakers will be limited to a presentation of their point of view only. Ques- =_ lions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. - c • All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between arecognized = 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 - _ c 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. _ - PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO DEPUTY CLERK c - NAME R ,~ ~ .~ ~'i ~ l~ ~~ A ~~~ - - - ~iz.~. = ADDRESS ~D ~~.%'' „~ ~ n ~ J - - - - PHONE ~ 1~ ~ ~ ,~ ~-~ ~/ ' _ c mllllllllllllillllllliilllllilllllllllllllllllillillllllllllllllililllillllllllillllilllllllllilllllillllllilllllliilillllllllll ~IIIiIIIiIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIiIiI~IIIIIIIII IIIIIIIiiIIIIIiIIIiIIIIIIIIIiIIIIiIIIIIIIIIiIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIiIIIiIIIiIIIIIIIIII11111111j1I - _ _ _ - - - _ _ - APPEARANCE REQUEST - - - - _ _ _ _ - - _ - = AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 ~ ,, -- - - SUBJECT ~. ~~~:,~ ? . z. ,~.~.~ - - I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supex~tisors to recognize me during the public hearing on the above matter .WHEN CALLED TO THE PODIUM, so that I may comment _ _ _ - I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR T - - - 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 c 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 cl ' 'cation may be entertained by the Chairman. • 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. 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 THEM. -_ _ PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO DEPUTY CLERK _ _ _ _ _ - - F ~ - NAME Nt. ~l ~ `~. t_ ~ -~' '~ ~-`;~ ~. ~ ~: , c ADDRESS ' ~' ~-~ ~ ~~~' ~ ~,,~' ? , , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ E - 1 ~ - - ,, - PHONE .~ G ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ _ = mlllillllllllllllllllilllllllllllllllllllllilllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllillllillllllllllllllllllillllllllilllillliliillillllli 1: ~~ AMENDED AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 1990 ORDINANCE 32790-10 TO AMEND PROFFERED CONDITIONS ON THE REZONING OF A 2.85 ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED AT THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF PETERS CREEK ROAD AND WOODHAVEN DRIVE IN THE HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF B- 2, CONDITIONAL, TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF B-2, CONDITIONAL (AMENDMENT TO SIGNAGE PROFFERS) UPON THE APPLICATION OF HOP-IN FOOD STORES, INC. WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on February 27, 1990, and the second reading and public hearing was held March 27, 1990; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on March 6, 1990; and, WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law; and WHEREAS, this property was rezoned from R-1, Residential District, to B-2, Business District with proffered conditions, on July 12, 1988. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing approximately 2.85 acres, as described herein, and located at the northeasterly corner of Peters Creek Road and Woodhaven Drive in the Hollins Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of B-2, Conditional, to the zoning classification of B-2, Conditional with amended proffered conditions. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of Hop-In Food Stores, Inc. 3. That the applicant has voluntarily proffered in writing the following amendment to Proffer 2(d) of the conditions approved by the Board of Supervisors on July 12, 1988, which the Board of Supervisors hereby accepts: (1) Signage shall not exceed 60 square feet on the freestanding sign adjacent to the Peters Creek Road right-of-way; identification sign on the building not to exceed 55 square feet; signage on the building of adjacent premises (donut store) not to exceed 35 square feet; plus an 18 square foot gas identification sign. All other proffers and conditions would remain in full force. 4. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: A 2.85 acre parcel of land, generally located at the northeasterly intersection of Peters Creek Road and Woodhaven Drive within the Hollins Magisterial District and recorded as Parcel No. 26.20-4-27 in the Roanoke County Tax Records. 5. That the effective date of this ordinance shall be March 27, 1990. 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. Ho ton, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Development & Inspections Terry Harrington, Director, Planning & Zoning John Willey, Director, Real Estate Assessment Paul Mahoney, County Attorney ~~~ °~' PETITIONER: HOP-IN FOOD STORES, INC.(PETERS CREEK) CASE NUMBER: 13-3/90 Planning Commission Hearing Date: March 6, 1990 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: March 27, 1990 A. REQUEST Petition of Hop-In Food Stores, Inc. to amend proffered signage conditions on an approximate 2.85 acre parcel, located at the northeasterly corner of Peters Creek Road and Woodhaven Drive, Hollins Magisterial District. B. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION Jennie Montgomery of Woodhaven Road expressed her opinion regarding billboard signs saying they are an eyesore and she does not like signs in general. She noted that the "alleged donut shop" has remained vacant and the proposed office building has not been constructed; therefore the proposed tax revenue for the County is not being generated as was presented during the rezoning request. C. IMPACT FACTORS Mr. Hartley summarized the staff report noting that the petitioner is requesting to amend the previous proffer of 60 sq.ft. to allow 174 sq.ft. (including 24 sq.ft. of signage for the office building). Under the current ordinance, 1,979 sq.ft. of signage would be permitted. In response to the Commission, he said the amended proffer would be in compliance with the proposed new sign ordinance. D. PROFFERED CONDITIONS signage shall not exceed 60 sq.ft. on the freestanding sign adjacent to the Peters Creek Road right-of-way; identification sign on the building not to exceed 55 sq.ft.; signage on the building of adjacent premises (donut store) not to exceed 35 sq.ft.; plus an 18 sq.ft. gas identification sign. E. COMMI38IONER~S MOTION, VOTE AND REASON Mr. Massey moved to approve the amended proffers. The motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Robinson, Massey, Winstead, Witt, Gordon NAYS: None ABSTAIN: None F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. G. ATTACHMENTS: Concept Plan Vicinity Map Staff Report ~ Other J athan Hartley, Al ernate Secretary R noke County Planning Commission ~' '`~~ - / M E M O R A N D U M TO: Planning Commission FROM: Jon Hartley and Lynn Johnson Donihe DATE: March 2, 1990 RE: Petition of Hop In Food Stores Inc. to amend proffered signage conditions on a 2.85 acre parcel of land generally located at the northeasterly intersection of Peters Creek Road and Woodhaven Drive within the Hollins Magisterial District and recorded as Parcel #26.20-4-27 in the Roanoke County Tax Records. Amendment of Proffers Requested: Petitioner is requesting to amend proffer #2(d) approved by the Board of Supervisors in July, 1988, in order to increase the maximum signage proffered and more specifically to: (1) install a freestanding sixty (60) sq. ft. sign adjacent to the Peters Creek Road right-of-way; (2) install a fifty-five (55) sq. ft. sign on the Hop In building; and, (3) install a thirty-five (35) sq. ft. sign on the building of the adjacent premises (referred to in current proffers as "donut store"). This would create a total of 174 sq. ft. of signage on the site, including the 24 sq. ft. proffered earlier for the office building on the same site. !. _sting Proffer of Condition Accepted by the Board of Supervisors: The current signage proffer as accepted by the Board Of Supervisors states as follows: 2(d). "signage for the Hop-In Store and the donut store will not exceed a total of sixty square feet. If signage is located on a pole, the pole will not exceed twenty feet in height. Sionaae Permitted Under Current Ordinance: In a B-2 District the current sign requirements allow 3 sq. ft. of signage per lineal foot of frontage,-which for the parcel in question, would allow 1979 sq. ft. of signage. There are presently no limits on the number of signs allowed. Sionage Permitted Under Proposed Ordinance: Under the proposed sign requirements being considered by the Board of Supervisors, 1.25 sq. ft. per lineal foot of street frontage would be permitted for Peters Creek Road only (residential streets are not included in calculating sign area) for a total of 472.5 sq. ft. of signage. Also under the proposed requirements, no more than 3 signs per establishment would be permitted, and free standing signs on the same property and on the same frontage must be at least 250' feet apart. Summary The petitioner's request represents a 150% increase in the signage allowed under the original proffer. However, this represents less than liG of what currently would be allowed and would be less than 357. of the signage that would be permitted under the proposed standards. Also, since the request only pertains to amending the number and area for specific signs proposed, it is the opinion of staff that all other proffers and conditions would remain in force, including the restriction on the color green and on "bunnies". ' p ANpr~ _..~ a 18 '~; 88 s~g~U1CEN7ENN~P~ A BcautifulBcginning PAUL M. MAHONEY COUNTY ATTORNEY ~~a~n~ ~~ ~~~~~~~ --~- . . - , ~ , OFFICE OF THE COUNTY bRN,F.X , ' . ; ' • t. _ . .t ~~~`"°` - ~'' 30 January 1990 JAN ~ h jggp Edward A. Natt, Esquire Osterhoudt, Ferguson, Natt, P. O. Box 20068 Roanoke, VA 24018 ~~ ~ll•AMERIG CITY '~II~' 1979 1989 JOSEPH 8. OBENSHAIN SENIOR ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY Aheron & -_A~{ee~A~OKE COUNTY vlcaclE L HUFFMAN 1 7 ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY Re: Appeal of Zoning Administrator's Decision Interpretation of Proffered Conditions Dear Ed: On January 23, 1990, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, upheld the Zoning Administrator's interpretation of certain proffered conditions concerning the size of signage for Hop-In stores located at the corner of Glen Heather Drive and Route 419 and the corner of Peters Creek Road and Wood Haven Drive. You have advised me that it is your client's intention to proceed with a request to amend the proffered conditions concerning signage for these two developments. In pursuing these administra- tive remedies, however, you desire to retain the opportunity to appeal the January 23 decision of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, to the Circuit Court pursuant to the provisions of Article 8, Chapter 11 of Title 15.1 of the State Code. Therefore on behalf of the County, this office agrees to toll the running of the thirty day requirement for filing an appeal with the Circuit Court so long as your client proceeds in good faith to amend the proffered .conditions. The time period for filing an appeal shall commence upon the date that the Board of Supervisors renders a decision upon your client's request to amend the proffered conditions concerning signage for the two develop- ments in question. You have further advised me that you will file on behalf of your client a petition to amend the proffered conditions concerning signage for these two developments on or before February 1, 1990. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney PMM/ sg cc: `'Mr. Terry Harrington P.O. BOX 29800 • ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 (703) 772-2007 .~~~ - ~ LAW OFFICES • OSTERHOUDT, FERGUSON, NATT, AHERON £~ AGEE A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION CHARLES H OSTERHOUD7 MICHAEL S. FERGUSON EDWARD A. NATT MICHAEL J. AHERON O. STEVEN AGEE 1919 ELECTRIC ROAD. S. W: P. O. BOX 20068 ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018 TELEPHONE 703-774-1197 FA% NO. 703-774-0961 MARK O~ KIDD January 26, 1990 The Board of Supervisors 3738 Brambleton Avenue, Roanoke, Virginia 24018 Gentlemen: for Roanoke County S.W. Re: Hop In Food Stores, Inc. -- Rezoning Intersection of Peters Creek Road and Woodhaven Drive Enclosed please find an application which I would appreciate your i"iling requesting a change in the proffered conditions for the above-described property situated at the intersection of Peters Creek Road and Woodhaven Drive in the County of Roanoke. As you know, the applicant appeared before the Board of Supervisors on January 23, 1990, requesting that you overrule the decision of the Zoning Administrator relating to his interpretation of the sign ordinance as applicable to this property. As Mr. Eddy stated at that meeting, this matter could be handled through a request for an amendment of proffers. Therefore, please consider this a formal request for an amendment of proffers on the above project. We would request that the proffers on the signage be amended to provide that the sixty square feet set out in the proffer 2(d) of the Final Order of Zoning of April 8, 1988, be amended to state that the sixty square feet relate to the sign on the pole located as an identification sign adjacent to the right-of-way of Peters Creek Road and Woodhaven Drive. We would further request that the proffer be amended to provide that an identification sign be permitted to be placed on the Hop In building and an identification sign be permitted to be placed upon the adjacent premises. We would request that the sign on the Hop In building be designated as fifty-five square feet and the sign on the adjoining premises be set at thirty five square feet. The signs would be attached to the building. In fact, the Hop In sign is already located on the building at the present time. Enclose please find a copy of a plan showing the size of the sign on ~~~M ~ Peters Creek Road, as well as the size of the sign to be located on the Hop In building. Respectfully submitted, OSTERHOUDT, FERGUSON, NATT, AHERON & AGES, P.C. ~ n,~a-- Edward A. Natt mp Enclosure Copy Frank Radford Peter Surprenant _~ LAW OFFICES +~ ~/' OSTERHOl1DT, FERGl1SON, NATT, AHERON £~ AGEE A PROFESSIONAL CORI'O RATION 1919 ELECTRIC ROAD, 5. W. CHARLES H. OSTERHOU OT P. O. BOX 20068 TELEPHONE MICHAEL S. FERGUSON EDWARD A. NATT ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 703-774-1197 MICHAEL J. AHERON 2~SOIH FA% NO. 703-774-0961 G. STEVEN AGEE MARK D. KIDD March 7, 1990 Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County 3738 Brambleton Avenue, SW Roanoke, VA 24018 RE: Hop In Food Stores, Inc. - Rezoning Intersection of Peters Creek Road and Woodhaven Drive Gentlemen: At the Planning Commission meeting on March 6th, 1990, in connection with the above matter, one additional amendment of proffer was requested and considered by the Planning Commission. This amendment included an additional 18 square feet of signage to provide for a sign identifying the pricing of the gasoline sold on the premises. The Plan- ning Commission included this in their considerations, bring- ing the square footage on the total signage to 192 square feet. This still represented only approximately 35$ of the signage permitted under the proposed standards. The Plan- ning Commission approved the request, including the signage for the gasoline pricing, and we would respectfully request that the same be included with the proffers when considered by the Board of Supervisors on March 27th, 1990. Very truly yours, OSTERHODUT, FERGUSON, NATT, AHERON S AGEE, P.C. Edward A. Natt /bp cc: Frank Radford 3421 Shadblow Lane Roanoke, VA 24014 -~ ~ d AMENDED AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 1990 ORDINANCE TO AMEND PROFFERED CONDITIONS ON THE REZONING OF A 2.85 ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED AT THE NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF PETERS CREEK ROAD AND WOODHAVEN DRIVE IN THE HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF B-2, CONDITIONAL, TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF B-2, CONDITIONAL (AMENDMENT TO SIGNAGE PROFFERS) UPON THE APPLICATION OF HOP-IN FOOD STORES, INC. WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on February 27, 1990, and the second reading and public hearing was held March 27, 1990; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on March 6, 1990; and, WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law; and WHEREAS, this property was rezoned from R-1, Residential District, to B-2, Business District with proffered conditions, on July 12, 1988. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing approximately 2.85 acres, as described herein, and located at the northeasterly corner of Peters Creek Road and Woodhaven Drive in the Hollins Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of B-2, Conditional, to the zoning classification of B-2, Conditional with amended proffered conditions. ~~~~~ 2. That this action is taken upon the application of Hop-In Food Stores, Inc. 3. That the applicant has voluntarily proffered in writing the following amendment to Proffer 2(d) of the conditions approved by the Board of Supervisors on July 12, 1988, which the Board of Supervisors hereby accepts: (1) Signage shall not exceed 60 square feet on the freestanding sign adjacent to the Peters Creek Road right-of-way; identification sign on the building not to exceed 55 square feet; signage on the building of adjacent premises (donut store) not to exceed 35 square feet; plus an 18 square foot gas identification sign. All other proffers and conditions would remain in full force. 4. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: A 2.85 acre parcel of land, generally located at the northeasterly intersection of Peters Creek Road and Woodhaven Drive within the Hollins Magisterial District and recorded as Parcel No. 26.20-4-27 in the Roanoke County Tax Records. 5. That the effective date of this ordinance shall be March 27, 1990. r , AMENDED AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 1990 ORDINANCE 32790-11 TO AMEND PROFFERED CONDITIONS ON THE REZONING OF A 0.6764-ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF GLEN HEATHER DRIVE AND ROOTE 419 IN THE WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF B-2, CONDITIONAL, TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF B-2, CONDITIONAL (AMENDMENT TO SIGNAGE PROFFERS) IIPON THE APPLICATION OF HOP-IN FOOD STORES, INC. WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on February 27, 1990, and the second reading and public hearing was held March 27, 1990; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on March 6, 1990; and, WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law; and WHEREAS, this property was rezoned from R-3, Residential District, to B-2, Business District with proffered conditions, on December 13, 1988. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing 0.6764 acre, as described herein, and located at the northeast corner of Glen Heather Drive and Route 419 in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of B-2, Conditional with proffered conditions, to the zoning classification of B-2, Conditional with amended proffered conditions. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of Hop-In Food Stores, Inc. 3. That the applicant has voluntarily proffered in writing the following amendment to Proffer #4 of the conditions approved by the Board of Supervisors on December 13, 1988, which the Board of Supervisors hereby accepts: (1) Signage shall not exceed 30 square feet on the freestanding sign to be placed near the intersection of Route 419 and Glen Heather Drive; identification sign on the building not to exceed 55 square feet; plus an 18 square foot gas identification sign. All other proffers and conditions would remain in full force. 4. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: An 0.06764 acre parcel of land, generally located on the northeast corner of Glen Heather Drive and Route 419 within the Windsor Hills Magisterial District and recorded as the southerly portion of Parcel No. 76.07-02-52 in the Roanoke County Tax Records. 5. That the effective date of this ordinance shall be March 27, 1990. 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. Ho on, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Development & Inspections Terry Harrington, Director, Planning & Zoning John Willey, Director, Real Estate Assessment Paul Mahoney, County Attorney /~- G! PETITIONER: HOP-IN FOOD STORES, INC. (ROUTE 419) CASE NUMBER: 14-3/90 Planning Commission Hearing Date: March 6, 1990 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: March 27, 1990 A. REQUEST Petition of Hop-In Food Stores, Inc. to amend proffered signage conditions on a 0.6764 acre parcel, located at the northeast corner of Glen Heather Dr. & Rt. 419, Windsor Hills Magisterial District. B. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION There was no opposition to the request. C. IMPACT FACTORS Mr. Hartley summarized the staff report noting that the petitioner is requesting to amend the previous proffer of 30 sq.ft. to allow 85 sq.ft. (does not include signage permitted for the recently vacated Hop-In located next door). Under the current ordinance, 1,089 sq.ft. of signage would be permitted. In response to the Commission, he said that the amended proffer would be in compliance with the proposed new sign ordinance. D. PROFFERED CONDITIONS signage shall not exceed 30 sq.ft. on the freestanding sign to be placed near the intersection of Route 419 and Glen Heather Drive; identification sign on the building not to exceed 55 sq.ft.; plus an 18 sq.ft. gas identification sign. E. COMMISSIONER'S MOTION, VOTE AND REASON Mr. Gordon moved to approve the amended proffers. the following roll call vote: AYES: Robinson, Massey, Winstead, Witt, Gordon NAYS: None ABSTAIN: None F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. G. ATTACHMENTS: The motion carried with V Concept Plan Vicinity Map Staff Report Jon an Hartley, Al ernate Secretary Roa ke County Planning Commission Other ~,~~ M E M O R A N D U M T0: Planning Commission FROM: Jon Hartley and Lynn Johnson Donihe DATE: March 2, 1990 RE: Petition of Hop-In Food Stores, Inc. to amend proffered signage conditions on a 0.6764 acre parcel of land, generally located on the northeast corner of Glen Heather Drive and Route 419 within the Windsor Hills Magisterial District and recorded as the southerly portion of Parcel #76.07-02-52 in the Roanoke County Tax Records. Amendmen t of Proffers Requested: Petitioner requests amendment of Proffer #4 approved by the Board of Supervisors for this property in December, 1988, in order to increase the maximum signage and more specifically to: (1) install a free- stand ing thirty (30) sq. ft. sign near the intersection of Route 419 and Glen Heather; and, (2) install a fifty-five (55) sq. ft. sign on the building. The total signage proposed for this corner lot would be 85 sq. ft. This would not include signage permitted for the space recently vacated by Hop-In, which is located on an adjoining lot and not subject to these proffers. ~. istina Proffer of Condition Accepted by the Hoard of Supervisors: The current signage proffer as accepted by the Board Of Supervisors states as follows: 4. The signage not to exceed 30 sq. ft. nor shall there be any green bunnies on the signage. No billboards, portable or temporary signs will be permitted on the site." Si na a Permitted Under Current Ordinance: In a B-2 District the current sign requirements allow 3 sq. ft. of signage per lineal foot of frontage, which for the parcel in question, would allow 1089 sq. ft. of signage. There are presently no limits on the number of signs. Sianage Permitted Under Proposed Ordinance: Under the proposed sign requirements being considered by the Board of Supervisors, 1.25 sq. ft. per lineal foot of street frontage would be permitted for Route 419 only (residential streets are not included in calculating area) for a total of 138 sq. ft. of signage. Also under the proposed requirements, no more than 3 signs per establishment would be permitted, and freestanding signs on the same property and on the same f rootage must be at least 250' feet apart. Summary The petitioner's request represents a 180% increase in the signage allowed under the original proffer. However, this represents less than 1% of what currently would be allowed and would be less than 65% of the signage that would be permitted under the proposed standards. Also, since the request only pertains to amending the number and area for specific signs proposed, it is the opinion of staff that all other proffers .and conditions would remain in force, including the restriction on billboards, portable, temporary signs. .~t~ - C~nixnt~ of ~nttnnke OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY ~. '~ • . 30 January 1990 JAN ,` : 193 Edward A. Natt, Esquire Osterhoudt, Ferguson, Natt, P. O. Box 20068 Roanoke, VA 24018 nu~ute~-cm '~II~' 1979 1989 JOSEPH B. OBENSHAIN SENIOR ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY ~t11~~IL, l.U~~i 7 Aheron &..A ee ~`E CAUNTY VICKIE L. HUFFMAN g ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY Re: Appeal of Zoning Administrator's Decision Interpretation of Proffered Conditions Dear Ed: On January 23, 1990, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, upheld the Zoning Administrator's interpretation of certain proffered conditions concerning the size of signage for Hop-In stores located at the corner of Glen Heather Drive and Route 419 and the corner of Peters Creek Road and Wood Haven Drive. You have advised me that it is'your client's intention to proceed with a request to amend the proffered conditions concerning signage for these two developments. In pursuing these administra- tive remedies, however, you desire to retain the opportunity to appeal the January 23 decision of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, to the Circuit Court pursuant to the provisions of Article 8, Chapter 11 of Title 15.1 of the State Code. Therefore on behalf of the County, this office agrees to toll the running of the thirty day requirement for filing an appeal with the Circuit Court so long as your client proceeds in good faith to amend the proffered conditions. The time period for filing an appeal shall commence upon the date that the Board of Supervisors renders a decision upon your client's request to amend the proffered conditions concerning signage for the two develop- ments in question. You have further advised me that you will file on behalf of your client a petition to amend the proffered conditions concerning signage for these two developments on or before February 1, 1990. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, ~~~~ Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney PMM/sg cc: '~I+Ir. Terry HarringtorY P_O. BOX 29800 • ROANOKE COUNTY. VIRGINIA 24018-0798 • (703) 772-2007 A Bca,ui~ut3c~Rning PAUL M. MAHC!VEY COUNTY ATTOR\EY i y~F ; r~r11 - ~~~ ~ t ho 5 yw .-- ,~ III ,~ Lr~ ~ ,- , i I. I - ~ ,,a~ „~ ~ ~ ~~~ t m O n W _` Q Q s a N ~_ O •Z. a ~, ~ S W, • V Q ~ N O -f~ I ~;••, i i I~ +~N 1 ti ! o~ ~ ~` ~ i ~~ ~' I CHARLES H. OSTERHOUDT MIC HAEL S. FERGUSON EDWARD A. NATT MICHAEL J. AHERON G. STEVEN AGEE MARK D. KIDD OSTERHOUDT, SLAW OFFICES FERGUSON, NATT, A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 1919 ELECTRIC ROAD, 5. W. r o sox zoosa ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018 March 7, 1990 Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County 3738 Brambleton Avenue, SW Roanoke, VA 24018 AHERON £~ AGEE `-~' ~ " TELEPHONE 703-774-I 1 97 FAX NO. 703 7 7 4-0961 RE: Hop In Food Stores, Inc. - Rezoning Intersection of Glen Heather Drive >; Route 419 Gentlemen: At the Planning Commission meeting on March 6th, 1990, in connection with the above matter, one additional amendment of proffer was requested and considered by the Planning Commission. This amendment included an additional 18 square feet of signage to provide for a sign identifying the pricing of the gasoline sold on the premises. The Plan- ning Commission included this in their considerations, bring- ing the square footage on the total signage to 103 square feet. This still represented only approximately 70$ of the signage permitted under the proposed standards. The Plan- ning Commission approved the request, including the signage for the gasotir~e pricing, and we would respectfully request that the same be included with the proffers when considered by the Board of Supervisors on March 27th, 1990. Very truly yours, OSTERHOUDT, FERGUSON, NATT, AHERON 8 AGEE, P.C. ~~~;~an~ Edward A. Natt /bp cc: Frank Radford 3421 Shadblow Lane Roanoke, VA 24014 Mr. Larry Landes Hop-In Food Stores, Inc. 5204 Bernard Drive, SW Roanoke, VA LAW OFfIGES " ~' OSTERHOUDT, FERGUSON, NATT, AHERON £~ AGEE A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION CHARLES H OSTERHOUDT MICHAEL S-~ERGU50N EDWARD A. NATT MIG MA EL J. AHERON OSTCVEN AOEE 1919 ELECTRIC ROAD. S. W. P. O. BOX 20068 ROANOKE, ViRGIN1A 240(8 TELEPHONE 703 • 774 - 1197 MARK D. KIDO The Board of Supervisors 3738 Brambleton Avenue, Roanoke, Virginia 24018 Gentlemen: January 26, 1990 for Roanoke County S.W. F'AX NO. 703-774-0961 Re: Hop In Food Stores, Inc. -- Rezoning Intersection of Glen Heather Drive and Route 419 Enclosed please find an application which I would appreciate your filing requesting a change in the proffered conditions for the above-described property situated at the northeast corner of the intersection of Glen Heather Drive and Route 419 in the County of Roanoke. As you know, the applicant appeared before the Board of Supervisors on January 23, 1990, requesting that you overrule the decision of the Zoning Administrator relating to his interpretation of the sign ordinance as applicable to this property. As Mr. Eddy stated at that meeting, this matter could be handled through a request for an amendment of proffers. Therefore, please consider this a formal request for an amendment of proffers on the above project. We would request that the proffers on the signage an the above property be amended to provide that the thirty square feet set out in the proffer (4) of the Final Order of Zoning of December 9, 1988, be amended to provide that the signage shall not exceed thirty square feet on the free standing sign to be placed near the intersection of Route 419 and Glen Heather Drive. In addition, we are requesting that an identification sign in a size not to exceed fifty five square feet be permitted to be placed upon the building. A plan is enclosed depicting the size and configuration of the permitted to be sign. Respectfully submitted, OSTERHOUDT, FERGUSON, NATT, AHERON & AGEE, P.C. Edward A. Natt mp Enclosure Copy Frank Radford Peter Surprenant `- ~ I ~n I i ,1 u~ ,'~ :; C~-' i :~_~ =` 1 ~~ , ~ , ~--- : ~ ; r ~'~ ~ ~~ --~ ,~` \ r-~ I r ~2 ~~~' 9 o cj M 1 ~j ~s ~$ f. .. ~ u J ti ~ Q Z ~ S ~- 1. ) ._ 2 W J i d `J ~ i ~~ a i \Y O 0 W ~ ? ~ ~ _ H ~ ~ ~e 0 CZ~ ~ ~ :' C ~ Iv c ~~ . - ----- _ ....3 ~~ e _ o _ W Q V • ~ ~ l 0~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ m S ~ ~ ~ m o H ~. O _` r~~tf ~ ~^ ~ ~ ~°_ ~J ,~ ; =~ ;2 ~~ --~ ~ i 1 ~~-~ s~ i -- ~`~ ~_~ II ~~, ~-\_ ,, ~ _ ~ ~_- , ~ ~~~ ~- ~~ i ~ `~ '~~ ~~, f - '~ 7~ ~ I -~ (~~ r, ~~ t t ~ T ~~ J v r ,~ :~ ~ l ~ c ~. ~ ~ ;) ~.:i y L 1 7 2 + .,,~ ~~ J J 1 •' J Z < ~ 4 o :~ v ~~ AMENDED AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, MARCH 27, 1990 ORDINANCE TO AMEND PROFFERED CONDITIONS ON THE REZONING OF A 0.6764-ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF GLEN HEATHER DRIVE AND ROUTE 419 IN THE WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF B-2, CONDITIONAL, TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF B-2, CONDITIONAL (AMENDMENT TO SIGNAGE PROFFERS) UPON THE APPLICATION OF HOP-IN FOOD STORES, INC. WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on February 27, 1990, and the second reading and public hearing was held March 27, 1990; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on March 6, 1990; and, WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law; and WHEREAS, this property was rezoned from R-3, Residential District, to B-2, Business District with proffered conditions, on December 13, 1988. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing 0.6764 acre, as described herein, and located at the northeast corner of Glen Heather Drive and Route 419 in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of B-2, Conditional with proffered conditions, to the zoning classification of B-2, Conditional with amended proffered conditions. ~9~ - ' 2. That this action is taken upon the application of Hop-In Food Stores, Inc. 3. That the applicant has voluntarily proffered in writing the following amendment to Proffer #4 of the conditions approved by the Board of Supervisors on December 13, 1988, which the Board of Supervisors hereby accepts: (1) Signage shall not exceed 30 square feet on the freestanding sign to be placed near the intersection of Route 419 and Glen Heather Drive; identification sign on the building not to exceed 55 square feet; plus an 18 square foot gas identification sign. All other proffers and conditions would remain in full force. 4. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: An 0.06764 acre parcel of land, generally located on the northeast corner of Glen Heather Drive and Route 419 within the Windsor Hills Magisterial District and recorded as the southerly portion of Parcel No. 76.07-02-52 in the Roanoke County Tax Records. 5. That the effective date of this ordinance shall be March 27, 1990. 1 ACTION N0. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 27, 1990 AGENDA ITEM: Petition of Avis Rent A Car to obtain a Special Exception Permit to operate a car and truck rental agency located at 3137 Brambleton Avenue in the Windsor Hilis Magisterial District. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: See attached Staff Report ALTERNATIVES: Alternative No. 1: Approve the petition for a Special Exception Permit to operate a car and truck rental agency, with the conditions recommended by staff. Alternative No. 2: Deny the petition for a Special Exception Permit. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends as follows: Alternative No. 1. Respectfully submi~~, J;eS~iathan Hartley anner ITEM NO . ~ g~ ~ ~ Action Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Motion by Eddy Johnson McGraw Nickens Robers Vote No Yes Abs 1 ACTION NO. A-32790.12 ITEM NO . ~ 90 ~ ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 27, 1990 AGENDA ITEM: Petition of Avis Rent A Car to obtain a Special Exception Permit to operate a car and truck rental agency located at 3137 Brambleton Avenue in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: See attached Staff Report ALTERNATIVES• Alternative No. 1: Approve the petition for a Special Exception Permit to operate a car and truck rental agency, with the conditions recommended by staff. Alternative No. 2: Deny the petition for a Special Exception Permit. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends as follows: Alternative No. 1. Respectfully submi~~, athan Hartley nner Action Vote No Yes Abs Approved (x) Motion by SAM Substitute Motion,Eddy x Denied ( ) amended by HCN, to approve Johnson x Received ( ) petition with signage limited to McGraw x Referred 1.5 sq. ft. per linear foot Nickens x to frontage, under-hood maintenance Robers x to be done inside, and the canopy to be removed by 9 1 90. cc: File Terry Harrington, Director, Planning & Zoning Arnold Covey, Director, Development & Inspections John Willey, Director, Real Estate Assessment STAFF REPORT ~ ~~ CASE NUMBER: SE-3/90 REVIEWED BY: TIM BEARD PETITIONER: AVIS RENT A CAR LICENSEE DATE: MARCH 27, 1990 Request of Avis Rent A Car Licensee for a Special Exception to operate a car and truck rental agency located at 3137 Brambleton Avenue, SW in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District. 1. NATURE OF REQUEST a. Applicant desires Special Exception approval to convert an existing commercial structure (formerly a service station and vehicle maintenance facility) of approximately 1,650 sq.ft. to office space and vehicle maintenance and the remaining paved area to rental vehicle parking. b. Concept plan and zoning vicinity map describe project more fully. 2. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS a. The B-3, Special Commercial District permits a limited number of specialized, usually high intensity commercial uses. A significant percentage of these uses require a Special Exception permit from the Board of Supervisors. b. VDOT has stated no objection to this petition. c. Site plan review will be required to ensure compliance with County regulations. 3. SITE CHARACTERISTICS a. Topography: East portion of site is flat; west portion slopes moderately downward to Harris Street. b. Ground Cover: Existing building and pavement; extreme east area exhibits scrub growth. 4. AREA CHARACTERISTICS a. Future Growth Priority: Situated within the Cave Spring Community Planning Area. The growth initiative for Cave Spring is to stabilize growth. b. General area is developed with a dense combination of single-family residential, office, retail and general commercial uses. Urban services are available. 5. LAND USE IMPACT ASSESSMENT Rating: Rate each factor according to the impact of the proposed action. Use a scale of 1 through 5. 1 = positive impact, 2 = negligible impact, 3 = manageable impact, 4 = disruptive impact, 5 = severe impact, and N/A = not applicable. RATING FACTOR COMMENTS LAND USE COMPATIBILITY 3 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: 1985 Comprehensive Development Plan has placed this area within a Transition land use category. The proposed use is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan map and policies, specifically TR-1 (prevent haphazard commercial sprawl along major highways and TR-8 (enhance frontage development quality, particularly concerning building facades as compared to parking lots and signs). However, the property is already improved and is in a historically established commercial strip corridor. 3 SURROUNDING LAND: Single family residential, retail and service commercial, general commercial, major arterial highway. 3 NEIGHBORING AREA: Single family residential, retail and service commercial, general commercial, office and institutional, major arterial highway. 4 SITE LAYOUT: Predominantly dictated by existring building which is situated virtually at the center of the parcel. Adequate interior circulation is feasible under a revised layout, provided canopy is removed. Most, if not all, parking spaces should be established on the front (south) half of site due to minimum travel aisle and buffer yard considerations. Rear (north) border parking area proposed by petitioner does not provide for safe backup movement relative to rear access of service bays. 2 ARCHITECTURE: Existing triple-bay structure is predominantly glass and metal with a lower stone face. 3 SCREENING AND LANDSCAPING: Per ordinance. Type D buffer yard and plantings normally called for in north portion of subject site near single family homes. Frontage plantings and refuse area screening required. 3 AMENITIES: Adequate parking probable under a revised site layout. 3 NATURAL AMENITIES: Flat east portion of site yields to moderate downslope approaching Harris Street. East border exhibits scrub growth. TRAFFIC 2 BTREET CAPACITIES: 1986 ADT US 221: 21,450. VA 1621: 1,151. 1987 Accident Rates US 221: 3 within .1 mile of intersection w/VA 1621. VA 1621: 1 at intersection w/VA 1615 (Fleetwood Avenue). 4 CIRCULATION: Interior traffic patterns will be severly constrained by lot size. Concept plan indicates access from both Brambleton Avenue and Harris Street. In its current configuration, plan does not comply with County Street and Parking Design Standards. Minimum 20 foot wide travel aisles and 9 foot by 20 foot parking spaces necessitate careful design over the entire 0.5 acre tract. Petitioner has indicated that the existing canopy will be removed, which is expected to create the minimum area necessary in the front (south) half of the site to accommodate 18- 20 parking spaces. UTILITIES 2 WATER: Adequate source and distribution. 2 SEWER: Adequate treatment and transmission. A base line monitoring report and complete plumbing plan must be submitted in addition to the installation of a sampling manhole prior to Utility Department approval. DRAINAGE 2 BASIN: Mud Lick Creek. 2 FLOODPLAIN: No additional stormwater problems anticipated. Recently completed VDOT drainage project northwest of subject site alleviated ponding problems previously encountered. PUBLIC SERVICES 2 FIRE PROTECTION: Within established service standard. 2 RESCUE: Within established service standard. NA PARRS AND RECREATION: NA SCHOOLS: TA% BASE LAND AND IMPROVEMENT VALUE: $133,800 Taxable Gross Sales/Year: Estimated by petitioner at $250,000 Total Employees: 2-3 Total Revenue to the County/Year: approximately $1,538 (current real estate only. ENVIRONMENT 2 AIR: 2 RATER: 2 SOILB: 3 NOISE: To prevent any additional noise in the nearby residential area, staff suggests all vehicle maintenance occur only within the existing building. 3 SIGNAGE: Petitioner has indicated that total site signage will not exceed 1.5 sq.ft. of signage per lineal foot of Brambleton Avenue frontage. (,. PLAN CONSISTENCY This area is designated as Transition. Petitioner's request is not compatible within the Transition land use category. However, the site fronts directly on a major thoroughfare, rests within an area both zoned for and exhibiting strip commercial development, and lies within the urban service area. 7. STAFF EVALIIATION a. Strengths: (1) Petitioner proposed to utilize an existing vacant building. b. Weaknesses: (1) Proposed use is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan map and policies. (2) Parking and on-site traffic circulation will be constrained. 8. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL In considering this application, the following conditions are suggested if the application is approved: a. Total site signage shall be limited to 1.5 sq. ft. per lineal foot of Brambleton Avenue frontage. b. All vehicle maintenance shall be conducted only inside existing structure. c. The metal canopy on south portion of the lot fronting on Brambleton Avenue shall be removed. AVIS RENT A CAR SYSTEM / LICENSEE FEBRUARY 22, 1990 5536 AIRPORT ROAD, N.W., ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24012 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING ROOM 600, ROANOKE COUNTY ADMIN. CENTER 3738 BRAMBLETON AVE, S.W. P. 0. BOX 29800 ROANOKE, VA 24018-0798 DEAR SIR: `~l ~~ s~~ / (703) 366-2436 I AM REQUESTING A SPECIAL EXCEPTION USE PERMIT FOR A RECENTLY ACQUIRED PIECE OF PROPERTY AT 3137 BRAMBLETON AVENUE. I INTEND TO USE THIS LOCATION AS A RENTAL FACILITY FOR MY AVIS BUSINESS; WE WILL BE RENTING PASSENGER CARS AND LIGHT TO MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS FROM THIS LOCATION. I WOULD THINK THAT THERE WOULD BE LITTLE CHANGE IN USE FOR THIS PROPERTY SINCE IT HAS BEEN AN AUTOMOBILE AND TRUCK TUNE UP AND REPAIR FACILITY AND A GAS STATION IN THE 20-25 YEARS THAT IT HAS BEEN IN EXISTENCE. MY PROPOSED USE WOULD BE SIMILAR TO THESE PREVIOUS USES. I HAVE A SIMILAR LOCATION AT 5536 AIRPORT ROAD WHICH YOU ARE WELCOME TO OBSERVE OR STOP BY TO INSPECT SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. SINCERELY, AVIS, RENT~~R, L I CENS EE J .G-~ v 4' GEOFF EY OTTAWAY PRESI ENT GMO/KSL ., .rJ,a~ ~~~~ r x ~-t~--~ ~~ ~++ .......r ~...~..- ..r.. ~....~. ~r~ti~~~t ~v~- ~.. _... _...... _.. ~.. a Nash ~~ 1-~~ ~~ tee.. - ~-~ D b ~ ~ou`s~. ~~ Qom.! •t~.~. ~~.c.~.~- ~ X~`~ ~C , - ~ ~~ ~~ ~; 1 ~t,.,r ._ ~~ l ~. S: ~~.~.: Y~ ~., ,, . ~ f r•v. i trvr+• . •r .~, ~v,r`/vim !/./v - 1D J 44~., `'~ / 4. e~ 1 ~ 41 1 + ~ .' I ` u ,o0 2 w ~o+=: • rl ~ 029 u+ FM~fMpOd ~ 'fO / + s_ 30 z 31 +O w + 39 I 28 ~ Y • ° 6 ' • I • - 32 R ~ 34 • ~ i p t°¢ $~ wt /ri 3T ,+ ro' , ~ ~ t 38 ~ t ~i ~, v 26 ~ , p g ( 3 2T ~ ~ 20 ~., ~v ,r .P~ `A x / / t+ 25 r ~ I ~ s ~. / ~~ ~~ rr ? B2 / / S I •3, 10 25 ~ 7 / ~~ ro \ 8 . B2 P,1O• ~ B2 r ~ , Ii ° 24 ~ ,«~ ~ //~,~' ~8 ~ / 234 I"-CI I - - - ,~ Big .. ~ ~ I ~. T. 7 ~ +~+ ~ , $ ete, 8.1 / S f 33 62 Io ,~ ,. • = I.OOAC o ~ 13 3 m2 22/ / = P~~ t " ~I I ~ ~rA/ Z , ~ 32 B 2 8 - 9 6~ _ Y % '+I'~ 6? 5~ ~0 0 R • 14 R I / ~ ~°: ~ ~ 3 IB 2 ~ .p` 83 35 ~ .. ~ 62 ~ ~ i 6 •~ 14 a ~ J"g2 36 , s ~ 62' E R, ~B~ , I I.OOAc ~ 16~ 2 / t~`,~ ua~ 33 3T `~ , ~ 29 62 • ~ ' / t 166 S I ~ SIT 62 / \ 83 ' 3 ,m~ • ~ 2g B2. ~ 13 I / B B2 _ / 19 ,~~~~ ~ ,0 19 \ / ~ 62 ~ ~ ~ 39 a I _ _ 15 / ~ ~ ! I .,oBC. 20 of 6 2 n e°`~\ 16 M~° ~ 2 20'~ i a . ii 24 B 2 . >: ' _ - _ ' B 2 0~ '~ , 2 ~ ` z ,t3 / 3 I ~\~~5 / / y ~ L \ _ 22 J g2 rr I'S ~ 1 . o B 2 ' _ - - rO r 8? `' '' ~ O 41 , ~ ~ m ~ w / J M ~`L 2 ~ $~ r' • 13 ' ~ .„ 2062' Q_ 3 2 r _~4 yI ~ ~ ~ 16 ,L2~ X14 • X24 ~ y > 43 _ _ .. B2 I a _ _'- M ~ 0 _ ~~ ~1 ~ ~ I 12 ~ ~ •~ 5 ~ ~~ ~, ~ r, pS r, B2 I _ r V ' d ~ ~ \ ', 2e 6 • ~ 4 ~1 i~ 99 .. 2T \ •6 ~ p ` O16 rs 12lAc S 17 8 \ ~ ,~ ` rod ~ ~ 1 y ~~ ~ • ~+ ~ 9 ' 24• • rr err ~ ,~ 4 to ' e ~, 23. ~ 32 ~ 29 - 9 S i 12 w 22• • 33 ` ~ '~ ~ 6 ~ 15 3 q ~ r u r w ~-, _• ~ r~ 21 34 r ~ ~,~ T = ti ~, ~ r w 20 6 3'~ • ~a • . 19 . ~ ~ ~ ` ~ r.'b r 6 g I a~ Y I I p~ • 37' ' ,. 6G ~ ' , , 15.1 ~~~ ~ 10 • 4 ~ FJ 9 40' ~ •,r 63 ~ , r ~~ 41 • •, ,0 6~• ~ ~ r ~ p \ ~~ 43 \ u t, ~ ~ 7 ~ 44• ° x 5B / ` I ~ ~ / 4 " ~. 56 >, ' r, ~ / ~1 i, , lf• 1Ullitilllllllllllllllllillllilllllllllillllllllllllllillllllllllllllililllllllllillllllllllllllllilllllllllllllllllllllllllllilll - APPEARANCE REQUEST - AGENDA ITEM NO. SUBJECT ~ ~»s ~ ~, .~~a f~ ~/ ~~ I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supe~tisors to recognize me during the public hearin on the above matter so that I may comment.WHEN CALLS 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 c do otherwise. • Speakers will be limited to a presentation of their point of view onl . Ques- Y tions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. • All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between a reco nized speaker and audience members is not allowed. g • Both s eskers and the audience will exercise courtes at all times. - p y • 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. PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO DEPUTY CLERK __ NAME C' ~ ~ : Sf~~ ~- t ~T - - - ADDRESS ~~,2 Gy ~~ ~ i~o ~ ~~,, lfi.~f~~ ~~n- , - - mllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllillllllllllillllllllllillllllllllllllllllllilllllllllllllillillllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll~ Ilillllillllllllilllllliillllllllllllllllillllllililllllllllllilllillllllilllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllillllllllllll~]() j~l = _ - APPEARANCE REQUEST _ - _ - _ - _ - AGENDA ITEM NO. _ ~ ~~ - SUB ECT ~~~/ ~ ~~;f '_ S ~ ,G[11~~ ~ ~~,~ ~J c _ J - _ _ - I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supex~isors to reco nize me during the public hearing on the above matter g CALLED TO THE PODIUM, _ so that I may comment.WHEN _ I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR T _ _ _ RECORD. I AGREE TO ABIDE BY THE GUIDELINE 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- bons of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. • All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between arecognized 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 ,~ - NAME ~ ~ ` ~ ~ ~` ~ ~ ~i ~=.. ,- _ - t" ~' ~`~ l ADDRESS ~ ~ ~~ c'~~,~~'~~.>c,~~,~- ~~ f., ~' - .~ ~_. ~_ PHONE .~ i" ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ c mlllllllllllllliilllllillllllllilllilllllllllllliilllliliilllllllliilllilllillllllllllllillllllillllllllllllllllllllllllllilll _ ~ - _ ,~ _ _ F ~,~ _ PPEARANCE RE VEST _ A~ Q s ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~_ ~ ~ ~ - AGENDA ITEM NO. SUBJECT ~~~' ~~f-~~ ~~'~.. , ~ ~ -~.,~~ _ - __ - I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supexxisors to recognize me during the public hearing on the above matter = nt.WHEN CALLED TO THE PODIUM, so that I may comme 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 c 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. • resentation of their oint of view onl . Ques- _ Speakers well be limited to a p p Y __ bons of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. • 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 c c with the clerk. c • 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 fiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiisiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitll ~-I ~ -> ~~ ~ !l t;~ % ~ -G'-~~tJ ~y~I~c.-rye ~ <~ ~z ~~ er=°~ ,~ ~.~ ~'-z~ ,t% ~~ c~ ~ ~-~ ./~ ~i~' ~~~~ ~~ ~- .. ~~ ~ ice'.-~'-~~~1~~'~ -gyp L;r-Ct.~~'' / ~ ~J ~; ~,{y ~~-2' ~T'<~' ~l C.r~~z'-- v~~ l~~'-,*-=~0 7,c. _Gi..: ,.: - (j .z1-L 1_'_~ v ci ~%~ ~ ~.~~- ~~1 ~~~~.'~,~% %-~--~- -2-«-~i' ~z-~ -lfz.c~. 2~-' ~~'-~~~ ~ l l/ ~ ` y ~y r~~ - ,/ c/f ~ d ~p~ 6 ~~ ~~ ,~ r ~ •/ ~_~_ .. T~ ~ ..OL ~ '//,/ ~ ~/~%~ ~~K.'C-~J V '~=-~- /]i" l..Fs-cv !sG' C:,.fi-~ /~~..> ~f~ / /////~/({~/^f~~'.p,,.,el lj~ ,/,~L ~GL"" _~ (~ LS~t~L-~r L~ -~Z'l~"`~ ~~L.~~ Y ~~ ~ ,_ LJ ;/ ~/`-J~ T~IIS RESOLUTION is being presen~~F>d to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisiors at their regular meeting at 7:00 P, pq, March 27, i9°'~ by Emanuel Francis Sowder a Roanoke County Resident for over Sixty years currently residing at 4850 Brookwood Drive in the Sugar Loaf Farms Subdivision,. 6JHEREAS appraisers are ~e Toyed by +?1e Count for the purpose of annual rev-~_e~~~ a;: d ~~p-,rai i Y of Roanoke the purpose of determining cL1rre,~t ~-a~ - sa+ of real estate for r marker values for taxes, and WHEREAS said apps iser~' are randated b t or Virginia to assess real estate in 2oano_e Count h~+Commonwealth percent ~=air market value, and Y one hundred WHEREAS fair market value is being based primarly on past two years sales prices of houses in the area without proper consider- ation being given to age of house, quality of construction, deteration quality of maintentance, condition of next door ro ert P P y, etc,, and WHEREAS the assessment on my 26 year old. house increased $2900 in 1987, $5200 in 1938, $2400 i increases of 850% from 1969 to 1990, and989 and $.,500 in 1990 with Whereas the newest house and lot i.n my subdivision which was constructed three years ago, appraised for $49,44 per Square Foot whereas my 26 year old house and lot appraised for $54.60 per Square Foot, and ~JHEREAS said appraisals are resulting in considerable tax increases at the current tax rate of One Dollar Fifteen Cents, and WHEREAS said tax increases are unfair to buyers of homes in Roanoke County and cause undue hardship on young families establishin homes for their families an-? on Senior Citizens and'on Handicaped g citizens wanting to live in I-comes they worked most of their lives for trying to keep family ties, friends, treasured memories and prized furnishings, therefore BE IT RESOLVED that the Supervisors of the County of Roanoke in their responsibility to serve all. of the citizens of said County rather than special interest groupes and to be fair and equitable to everyone, hereb current tax rate of $1.15 beyreducedhtor$lu0pofortthendeaote for the and to adopt a budget for the year 1990 that will not be a burden on Roanoke County property owners. Respectfully submitted by: .--~ :~ _ ~. . , i f, Eman~ ,:l Francis Sowder (,C -3 PREPARED `?`1'ATEMEN'T' OF C , E . ST ~ ;WART , JR - 's C. E. Stewart, Jr. My family and T reside at 467_ Cameron Drive, My name i which is located in Lindenwo-~d subdivision in east Roanoke Coun y o Vinton, Va•~ 20 I spoke t n;. ht mec~.ting on February You ma~~ recall that at the Tuesday 3 the then proposed plan for consolidating the governments of Roanoke you concerning basically t?~e City of Roanoke, which, as you know,/stipulates that all of the County and line must territory located east of the Town of Vinton to the Bedford County he eligible ro sal is approved by t become a part of the Town of Vinton if the p p° resented a voters in the City of Roanoke and Roanoke County• At that time I p ressing opposition petition signed by 375 residents of Lindenwood subdivision exp resented a petition to becoming a part of the Town of Vinton. and I likewise p a art ed b 6 residents of Lindenwood expressing their support for becoming p sign Y of the Town cf Vinton. Allen a petition resented to County Clerk Mary Later, c~a March 5, 1990, I p residents of Crofton subdi~'-sion expressing opposition to becoming a signed by ~ 3~ petition signed by 8 residents of. part of the 'T'own of Vinton, as well as a f etitions with Crofton who c`sire to do so. I requested Ms. Allen to file thos~ pas done. you and be mGde a part of the official record, which I understan Tonight I have with me and present to you similar petitions from the omer Village, Chestnut Mountain, Spring Grove, Stonebridge and Falling Montg Y subdivisions, which comprise the remaining major subdivisions located in Creek noke ~ounty• These petitions rFVeal that, of those residents who signe east Roa ' ions, the count was 427 to l-1 in Montgomery Village, 87 to 3 in Chestnut the petit i!:0 to 2 in Spring Grove, 94 t.~.~ 4 in Stonebridge, and 131. to 6 in Mountain, having to become Falling Creel-, the majority in each case overwhelmingly opposing t;Y~E~ Town of Vinton. The total ~.~f all petitions submitted concerning a part of c• r cent, favoring, of course, this matter thus far is 1,492 to 40, or .x.''39 ~ _ and I would like those who o~,t~ose having to become a part of the Town of Vinton 2 to remind yozz that petitions both far and ;~~ainst were circulated simultaneously. (I might add Yzere that the figures for Falling Creek subdivision are not quite complete, since roughly one-fourth of that subdivision remains to be covered.) I would like to publicly thank Messrs. Robers, McGraw and Eddy for their support in rectu~sting the City Council of Roanoke to amend the current proposed plan for consolidation and, among other things, permit the eligible voters in to vote on the matter of becoming a part of the eastern part of Roanoke County G,JrI/an ~fS~iCt . the Town of Vinton. I am keenly disappointed tha ~ Supervisor Nickens did not see fit to join in that endeavor, since my friends and neighbors (as well as I) believe that he was elected to the Board to represent us as well as the Town of Vinton. I, of course, do not intend to appear before you on a regular basis in the future since, if you don't realize how the residents in east County feel about this matter by now, you probably never will. Since we are not being permitted a vote on the matter, we simply felt that the best way to express ourselves collectively cn this issue was by the use of petitions. If you gentlemen can think of a better method to employ, please feel free to let us know. I thank you for your attention and tz1e privilege of addressing you tonight. Signed ~''~~~'"~ D:~te March 27, 1.990 Enclosures l:i All LIJ.L L VL.:7'-~ 3/1.6/90 (page 1 of i3 Pages) We, the under;il,ned residents of Montgorneri Vitl.a.:.re sutxtivisian in east Roanoke County, understand that ttr~ ~:~urrent proposed agreement Cor. consolidati.n~ Caunty and the City ~f~Roanoke provides that, u n a g the governments of Roanoke l.ocalitiea;s Motitlarr~ry Village will become a part ofp heTOwnyofhVintonifiw~ aoeeors osedbeto t~coming a part of t're Town of Vinton. Thie should not be construed to mean that we are or are not in favor ofi _~onsolidatinq the aovernmerts of Roanoke County and the City of RoanokeL since we will have t1e opportunity later to vot+~ on that issue; however, we are taking this means to register cnr; opposition to Montgomery Village becoming a part of the Town of Vinton. N;~irr,, Florr,eowner Voter _ _.. _ _ -- Aclc)re^' No Yes ~ ---_ _ --- -- ~-~:.~ - --- -_____..__. - ----- Yom'`- No _ ~ -- - ~_ -- _.. ~t~-~,-t~, . n ~~"y .'7 ,~ / / ~ ~ =i.-~-~.~.- ~,~ ~~ ~% - _~ ~-~<~ ----_ 11,1 ~ ~z ':mow ,~ ~- _ ~'. ~ _.._. ~ ~3 C~ ~Y,. _ GC/,La ~~' LtZ,I.~C~(-<q. _ _____~~_ H.3' 4~! ,~C29 iC.J r ~ ~s ~/ /" v r/ v' :~ /- c~ c~ l/ _/ v / ~/ ~_._____-~ ,i ~~ - ~% ~-~-_ --~ - ~ --- -___ ~'t~ ~ _ ~~..__'D~-----_ ._ -~ ______ ' 3/16/90 EXHIBIT CES-5 We, the underfYl;;rned residents of Montgomer~r Vi].l.age subdivision in easg Roanoke County ) irrderstand that the <:urrent proposed agreement for consolidatin the County ,and the City •;f" Roanoke provides that, u ,on a g governriE.nts of Roanoke localitiesr; Montgornc3 :y Village will become apar.-t ofp he Town ofhVintonifiWc7 voters of. both becomin a are Opposed to g part of t:e Town of Vinton. This should not be construed to mean that we are or are not in favor of_ •:onsolidatinq the governmPn+:s of Roanoke County and the City of Roanoke, since we will have t;ie opportunity later to votr~ on that issue; however, we are taking this means to register ou~~ opposition to Montgomery Village becomin- a - --- __ __ !_____ - y part of the Town of Vinton. Name Homeowner Voter -. __ ----- _---__w---------. __ A~lclre:>s~ Yes No Yes Nc~ 1/ zcr?. _, _ ~~~ i~ ;; _~ ,~ _~ ,~ ~~ --~ ~ ,,.~~ Wit'--~ ~~~ -~~~Q ~• ~~~ _ ~ ~.~~. _ - ~ _~_. ~ - / ~ - ---------- _~ S _ 4 ~~~-~`--i ~~ rr `~ '' ~% c-- ~-- ~ ~ l,r ~ ~ v r/ V~k~o v~/J~ v ~~ ~ ~., V-- __i ,. v ` 3/16/90 LXFiIBI'C' C:LS-5 (Page 3 of 1.3 Pages) We, the undersi~~ned residents: of Montgomer,;~ Village subdivision in east Roanoke County, understand that-the r_tttrent proposed agreement for consolidating the governments of Roanoke County and the City ~~f`Roanoke provides that, upon approval by the qualified voters of both localitie9i~ Montgomery Vi.ilage will become a part of the Town of Vinton. We are opposed to becoming a part of the Town of Vinton. This should not be construed-to mean that we are or are not in favor of ~onso.tidating the governmen~s of Roanoke County and the City of Roanoke, since we will have t=ie opportunity later to votE.-on that issue; however, we are taking this means to register our. opposition to Montgomery ~.~illage becomin a g part of the Town of Vinton. __ N~~me ilomeowner Voter _ .... ---------------- 11! cl rep; ~~~ ________ Ye ~ No Yes No . ~ -- - ~~_ _.~ /~ ~ r/ e~ ~~'~.-~ ~~ V1~ov~ V - - -._- --~" x,~-.~..,.,.. ,,, c._..-_ - - ---- ~-~-' ~ 4 l vi N t'c ~,1 !/ .~~~`'~ ~ ~ _. ~v . G,Ga~~7rr H- c.~- - 7 ~ ~-~ ~ - ~~~ ~~ ~ _ ___ ,J ~y°~~,,, i,,, v` .~ ~ L~ _ ----____._ ~ ~ s ~ ~ ~.. ~ ____ -~~_ ,Q ~ - -- ~,~ .~ ~ fit/ tx..Q~i~-.C_ ~~~.~ ~~ ,j . r - -- `.~ //~ ~D} L~ ~, ' 3/1.6/90 EXHIBIT CES-5 We, the undersi~xned residents of~Montgomery 'F~illage subdivision in east Roanoke County, understand that the ~~urrent proposed agreement for.- consolidatin the County and the City ~.p"Roanoke provides that, upon a g governments of Roanoke loc-alitiegp. Mont:ome.~ E pproval by the qualified. voters of •both ~ y Village will become a part of the Town of Vinton. WE' are op` to becoming a part of the Town of Vinton. This shou.id not be construed to mean that we are or are not in favor of consolidatin the overnments of Roanoke Count and the_City of Roanoke, since we will have t'~e opportunity later to vote on that issue; means to register ou°- o however, we are taking this _P~s_ ition to Montgomery Vllaye becoming a part of the Town of Vinton. _ Tiom~owner Voter ~-'-N~ _ llddress - --- Yes No Yes No ~~n Cl.~-(~. _ - ~DXIt~-- - , V :.,.~,_, ,~~~i ~l ~ ~X~~~L 17 P ~~ ~~i~~ r~..~ u, ~ 1 I ~y ~i-i _ --- ~-~' ______ ~~ - i ______ l/ ..._ _ _.~-____ . e ~~ a C~,,~.~ ~ __ 9~ ~ l ~~ / ,~ ~~ __ ~v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ` n~ ~~ t- _r.~ v /I . '--- ~/, r ~~2~~~~~~ ~~ ~a~ ~p %~~__-=~. i. ~ . n /) n /'~.-~ o z ~',~ ~~ L/~,~Z ~, , .11_ _ ~ ~ ---_ _ _~y~?~_ ~% ,,~ ~ ~ ,/ ,~ r /~~ 3/16/90 ~n~ i i (~ i::r'' ~: t~~5- (Page ~ of 13 Pages) We, the undersicJned residents of~Montgomery Village subdivision in east Roanoke County, understand that the ~~Urrent proposed agreement f~?r consolidating the governnr~nts of Roanoke County and the City ~~f'Roanoke provides that, uhf~n approval by the qualified voters of: both 1.ocalitie~~ Montgome.~y Village will become a par.': of the Town of Vinton. We are o sed to becoming a part of_ ille Town of Vinton. This shcuxld not be construed to mean that we are or are not in favor of__c:onsolidatinq the ctovernments of Roanoke County and the (`ity of Roanoke, since we will have tie opportunity later to vote on that issue; however, we are taking this means to register our opposition to Mont omen Villa e becomin a `~ y g g part of the Town of Vinton. ___ Namr~ Tlomeowner Voter --. ----- ---------- ..~ „_ nd<lress Yes_ No Yes No -~ - _--- 8~~ 'Vle ~ _ ~~I_ ..~ ~Yu'Lr~G ,~~ /0 - ,_-- ~_____ ~' 1~-z ~/ / ~~! .~' - - --, cu%ia ~c c~--~..-J7-~ -- ?~~ ___ ~, 'Ysg ~o ~ U A W{9Zr~' /~,9 ~ !/i~~r ~ ~~ -- ti ~ ~-- ~- ~~w~~ ~~ ~~G~a~~ - _~ ~ra~o ,~t-j _ ~_ .~_ ~--~ _~~. ~ ~ t . .~ ~ - `~P.. _ ~~ ...__ - --- .,;a • 3/6/90 EX1~IB7T CES-5 We, the undr~rsi ;ned residents Ot Mantilamer~. Village sutxlivision in east Roanoke3County } ~;~x9erstatid that the r-urrent proposed agreern~~nt i car c;ansolidating the governments of Roanoke c~,>unty and the City cif' Roanoke provides F,hat, ul ~ n approval by the qualifies! voters of both :c,calities~ MontgomF•-y Vi.ilage will becamr~ a part, of the Town of Vinton. WEB are o sed to t~coming a part aE t;~ •e Town of V,intan. 'z`tlis should nat be construed to mean that we are or are not in favor of ~.onsolidatinc the avernmerts of Roanoke Caunty and the City of Roanoke, ~~ince we will have file opportunity later to votE-• on that issue; however, we are taking this means to registor Ol3" OppOSlti011 to Montgomery 'pillage becoming a part of the Town of Vinton. N•~mr, 1lomeowner Voter _ -- _ ___ T1ciclr.e~,, - K ~ ._____--. Yes No Yes No_ P ~~-~_. , - ------- . 3 _~~~~ z ~ `-- ~. - ~ ~,, ~ ~ __ _ _ _ _-_._.__. ___-- r . , _ ~ ~___ __ - - ~~ _~'1 ~. __ --- . L ~j~ y/ ,, ~ 'J f '~-.,Y~..r. ~ ~--~ . ,' - ---- ~ ~,~~ ~'?.~ ~~~ ~y~ .~~'~ ,~ c~ 3/16/90 cnri-iisi~i~ c:t~~:5--~ (Page 7 of 73 Pages) We, the under~s ~. ned residents of Montc,~:~xne~:-.~ 'i l cage sul-,division in east Roanoke County, L~nderst.~nd that th~~.,urrent proposed agreement '~ C:c~~mty and the City <~E' Roanoke provides that, u,,~tl a.on"olidating the governments of Roanoke ]-a~alities j, Mont-orrx•~~• l ppr--oval by the qualified voters of both g y Village will become a pa>-~; aL~ the Town of Vinton. We are o sed to 1~coming a part of t; le Town of V.intor~. n'his sha~.ild not be construed to mean that we are or are not in favor. of _:_onso.tidating the cxovernmenE~.:~ of Ro_an__otce CounL-y and thP_City of Roanoke, since we will have the opportunity later to vote. on that issue; however, we are taking this means to register ou• opposition to Montgomery vi.tlage becoming a part of the Town of Vinton. Name ~ Tiorieown~r Voter ______ ~ _ - --- _ Yr_s; ~~ : - --- __--- ----- --- No Yes No _. _~ - l 3 ?~~ . /' ~ j ~_--- -- K.~- - J -- - - ~'- ~ V ~l ~D ~~--- --- ~~- ---~t! c;v1~V d i 3 3 ~e~~-~ C t rc ~ e t n s J --- ~ ----- _ _ ~~h,` ~~ ~~ - ,/ ~ ~ ---- - - - -- - -- d !Z- yv-~o 2 t'i,1r7~ _~ ---- ~ z_____ o _ .vim ,~~~ 1.~ , Joao ~'iI~-~.~3- ~~ - ,~ -~ r --~ c ti~ ---- ~?~ er' ' -~~--- ~ ~~ / ,---- t./ __ ~ v" ~_ ~ 3/1.6/90 EXTiIBIT CES-5 We, the tanclersi _;ned residents t7f tu;oi~t;c.rc~ner: y Vi.; Cage sut~division in east Roanoke County ) <<~ derstand that the -:urrent proposed agrec~n;ent :~,,>r. cc3nsolidating the governments of Roanoke ~:~,unty and the City _,f" Roanoke provides that, u~>nn approval by the qualified .voters of>both localities ja MontgomE ry Village will become a part; of the Town of Vinton. W~~ are opposed to hecominy a part o.E tree Town of Vinton. This sh~~.i1d not be construed-to mea~1 that we are or are not in favor oE_ ~;onsolidatinct the aovernmeni,;; cif Roanoke County and thp_City of Roanoke, since we will have the opportunity later try vote on that issue; however, we are taking this means to register r>ur o~L~osition to Montgomery ',~il.lage hecoming a part of the Town of Vinton. __ Nrm~~~ iiomeowner Voter --- _ -------____ ._.. n~lclre,s Yes No Yes No ,~ _ _~-------- - ~-_____---- --__.~__ I ~- T ~. ~ ~, __ /_' ~' -~_ cal-~~!'_. ~,./f ~~-~"..~?-:~< _ , ~,) /`; fir' --~-r-~ - r-- LCD ~~z ~ ~ ~,~- p ~ , ,~.:V.~.~~ .---- lol~-~,z ~ ~, ~' -r-~-i2-.~'n-~=-7 -z~, /~S ~ ~ -T . _.~ / v~~ -_`~~ - s u a, ,~f _ ___ ` ~~1~~ ~~~- - -- Ira ~~ ~~. -~-~-~~~ ~-vas .~- ~, ~z~ ~`~ _ . o~12.J ~ ~ -_ ivl! ~.. ~~ ~, . 1/ ~~ t/" ,d..r-- t~ ~' ~~ ~t~~ ~` _ 1~... / ioa~ ~.. ~ ,/ ,/ ~.u~~~.~J ~ ~ ~ ~ ' '_ M _ ----- -_-_- v ~ ~N~ ~~ ~~`e ~ ---~~r~_~~ ~ 5 U- ~X~~t~E f' >~ -_ - ~~i ~/L~~'3'~~ -- D C /1 , ;~ ~ n -- - - - ~ - +~ / ~ v ~/ ~ I ' ~ ~3~16~90 L;XFIIBIT CES-~5 We, the undera3 ;ned residents o~ Mont• orr+er}~ ;~' ~na~e 9 of 13 Pages) >>~ul~rstand that tlir ~tirrent proposed agreemnxit rr. ~consolidaa.i n1Sthe In easF,Roanoke County, ~~ County and the City t~f Roanoke provides that, u::?~,n approval b the g°vernm+_nts of Roanoke l.ocalities;t rfimt;ganc ry Village will bE~come a pa,~~,, of the Townyof Vinonlf ~W,~.voters of-both hecomin a are o sed to g part of tie Town of Vinton. 'C'hf,s sh+:;tild not- be construed to mea~1 that we are or are not in favor o[: :~onsolidatina the governmen~~s of Roanoke County and the_C_ity of Roanolte, since we will have f: ;e opportunity later to vote. on that issue; means to register ouY imposition to Montgomery 'ti~i.llage becomi.n However, we are taking this -_-_ _ - g part of the Town of Vinton. ~ni~ ,.~~ _ _ . ~ ~'~~~, ~= J - ~~' ~~' / ~j - __ -~-- ~T„ __ " , - -C::'J . -- ------ 11 l d ~ Homeowner Voter ess_--- ------ /~}/~~( _~~ ~c9_ ,~c,~ ~ Yes No Yes No -~- ~ l . - - ,~ ~ ~`~.__~=~ v v l~---- 5 ~~a m .~v k -_1_.~_._r~ '~ v ~. ~ D C~ ---------- - ~'- V - - -- 5 _ . G v l°rY~i- ~ , ~~-- -- `~ /y ~ ~. vim.- L.~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ T 2 2 ~, T ~-~ _ ~ d ~ ~-- A - ` _ li Prat S W~ ~~ .~ V Zr---' .,~f~/~i ~ ~ ~ n ~ ~ - ~~ ~ .._., ~ 3/l6/90 ~n~-rirj~ r' ors-'~ (Page 7.0 of 1.3 Pages) We, the under;~i,,ned residents of Montgomery Village suhclivision in east: Roanoke County, understand that thn _.urrent proposed agreement for consolidat.i.ng the governments of Roanoke C~x~nty and the City :~f' Roanoke pro~rides that, upon approval. by the qualified .voters ofboth lcx~alitiee',~ Montgara=•-y Vil-lage will become a part of the 'T'own of Vinton. WEB are o sed to tx~<~oming a part of t,e Town of Vinton. This shou'.d not-be construed to mean that we are or are not in favor of "onsolidating the governments ~f Roanoke County and the City of Roanoke, since we will have t:~e opportunity later to vote on that issuA• mc~-3ns to register our op~x>sition to Montgomery Village becoming aowever, we are taking this g part of the Town of Vinton. ._._ N,uur~ ilomeowner Voter - - ---_ :~---- _ ---_ ~ _ _ 1lcielrrrs __~. Ye,^, No Yes Nc~ . ~r=r• ~.~, ti ,, - _ -~-_ =~ ~~=-- ~ ~~- - 1 .~ _-1. Z ~ ~. ~~' ~~a t~~(~S L~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~~~-w-~ _ ~>~~-- ~.. ~ - -- °~_~ --- -- ~"~~ _------------- ~U y~ ~ - ---- ~~zz~~B~ -- - _ ao~ 9 ~.~~. -- - - -- -- - - _ -___-- ~~ ~~_~-~.~-1 ~l~t - ~~ ---- aD~3 ~ ~~,o b - -----1--. __ r'~ !% .D~ l~r, 1~~ ~, ~ r i ~_ r~ - _ /j I-I ~I v .v v _ v~~ ~' ~ ri 3~16~90 c,nra i.tsli` t,r;~-~ We, the undersi;tned residents of~Montgo*nery L'illage subdivision in(east Roanoke County, understand that thy? current proposed agreement :"'c-.;- consolidating the governments of Roanoke County and the Cit,~ ~~f` Roanoke provides that, u~ V~c~ approval by the qualified .voters of>both lc~calitieea MontIorr+r~c•y Viltage will become a part of the 'T'own of Vinton. We are o sed to 1~-~coming a part aF fne Town of Vinton, This shouad not be construed to mean that we are or are not in favor oE_„consolidatinG the Governments of Roanoke County and the City of Roanoke, since we will have the opportunity later to vote :_~n that issue; however, we are taking this means to register oc.cr opposition to Montgomery Vit_lage becoming a part of the Town of Vinton. N; ,cc~ homeowner Voter T--1 --•- - 11Ci(I CeS s A ~ - - - -------- Ye~_ Ng Yes No ,~?ark __ _ Q~ r__A. ___. _ n ___ o v_~~/c_;es ~~r a boo ~~ ~~ I n ~ ~ ~_ , n ~Z ~ ~ ti~ ~1C. ~.~5 7 ~S- J ~~ ~,,.-~ It t{ E~ i.~ r ~ _ cy c,~~ /J j _- _. / ~ V ____ ~j ~ ~ • ~~ 3/l6/90 EXTIIBIT CES-5 We, the under.;~i .~ned residents of t~or~tc~anE>r}• Vil.l:agr~ suhdiv3 sion in(e s~ R ) . oa oke County , understand that thr! ~ current proposed agreement Tor. consol.iclat.in the q°vernrn~_nts o.f. Roanoke County and the City :~f Ro k . ano e provides that, 13p(;n a »roval b the ifiW 7_ocalitiesr~ Mantgomr;-y Village will becom - ~ y voeeos ° ~ e a pai-L of the Town of Vinton }coming a part of t~~e Town of Vinton. This should not be a se to construed to mean that we are or are not in favor_ of ,•onsol_idating the aovernmant~, of Roanoke County and the c''it i s y of Roanoke, nce we will have t.-~e opportunity later. to vote on that issue; however, we are taking this means to register o rr opposition t.o Mont omer Village becomin a -- _____ . -____ g y g g part of the Town of Vinton. __ N,~mr~ homeowner Voter _. __ ---- --.- 11d~ires ~_ __ _ - -- ~ Yes No Ye N~~ ~ G ~~ /f~ _.l~.t~G.c~! ~ L /G' ~c7C~'ri'~~~.~ ~ ~/ , ~.- ~~~ ~_ ~- 6_ ~~c~ C~ _ • C • ~d~-~- 7 ~ , --- -~~ .~ _. ---- ~, .~ .~ ~ c ,, . • _ ,~ /_ ~ /_ ~ ~ ~,/ Cv'C~ ~- - -~~U~ ~-` -~.~ ~/ ~!~ f,/ ,_ ~----- ~Y~ ~` ~ Lam' ___ __ _ _ _-._1_____.__..~ . C~.~ 1 A'/ 7t/NA , / .17/9f `' G"P ~ ~^:~l /: I ~ A /1 /~ ~~ ~~ ~~ 1.~ v v • ~ 3/16/90 rXHIBIT CES-5 (Page 13 of 13 Pages) We, the undersi.{ned residents Qf~Montgomer~r village subdivision in east Roanoke County, understand that th~~ _~urrent proposed agreement for consolidating the governments of Roanoke County and the City :rf Roanoke provides that,?up~n approval by the qualifier9 voters of both localitieap, Montgomt t-y Village will become a part of the Town of Vinton. W~a are o sed to ix~coming a part of tare Town of Vinton. This should not be construed to mean that we are or are not in favor of consolidating the governme snt ~af Roanoke County and the City of Roanoke, since we will have tfre opportunity later to vote c;ri that issue; means to register our. o however, we are taking this _pposition to Montgomery Village becoming a part of the Town of Vinton. --- Na+u , homeowner Voter r' ` r .._..._-- llddress_-.- Ycs No Ye.^, ~r~„~~___-____ ~ l ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~~a --~~- C- r -. ~~ / --- x~ .~ ~r <~ _« , 9~/ ~~~~k cry i~ ~, -/ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~~ Q ''' ~ ~ >'r ~' ~~~ . e - ~..~/L°l7-'3°'~n~ ^ Off. d~• .~~, , .~~ __ J/ -~ ,~ ~, ,~ , ~ ---~'-! ~~~~-~- ~~ - ~- .~~ =i ~ ~_ ~,- V We, the unders .geed residents of Mont.gc~mel-~: Vi1 3 age sutx3 (Page ~ o` 3 Page) ivisio i . understand that t.t~e current proposed agreement for consolidat C n n e«c;t; Roanoke County, ing the cv ounty and the Cit;y a~ Roanoke provides that, if approved by localities, Montgcrtn<~r Vitl g errn.~ents of_ Roanoke the qualified voters of both y age will become a part of the Town to Montgomery Vill~t ~e 'tieccnning a a t f of Vinton. Fie are not opposed , p r o the Town of vinton. to mean that we are ar are not in f This should not 3~e construed _ ., avor of consc;lidatinq the and the City of Roatcc~lte, since we will have op~x3;~tunity later disap roval ' governments of Roanoke Count on to register our a rovat f p pp o concern nq th:~t matter; however, this is merely to register our sup~Ort for Montgomery Village i~~~comin a a t g p r of the Town of Vinton. N+~nu~ il~~m~owi~er Voter ____ ___ .._ -- --- n~~~3rr_r;,, _- __ No s Yes ~ _ No r .~ fn a ~._. _. ~ ~~~ -, ` -- `. - r ~ , __ ~ G---~: i~' ,~-~ ~ - --- t _ 1 r ; ~ r a ~ ~ Y ~,~~ 5~~~~.j~, ~~~E. n~°r • ~ Cif' a~1 y ~.'~ ~ ~ :a~~ ol~~,:~;o }~~~,. ~~oF. ~ ~~,z~,e ~ ~~`E~ .fie ~ of- 1~~e~e ~4 ~ `~~:~ti ~~,~,i. ~~~~~~. ~ o`a ~ oo ~~ r a et ~ he ~o Re v o~,e'C No ~ a~~ ;;'`~`'~ ~ a~~ . ~~>`1ti /anoec ~~e ~ pa ~. o`a`r , C P •- ~,~c'~~~i~1 ~ do ~~~~ ~~~ u~Ya~~ ~ // / ~ / v ,/~ ~~ ~ea~ e ~ ~'~~~ ~1~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~ ~ ~ 1 ~~~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~a'V"CG1~ •~~~ ~~~ ~ ti off` tiff , ; '' ~ i ~ ~ ~~, ,- -- ~ ~ w 1 i (/ ~~ • ,, ~ ~ 'y~~~,,~~, r/ J ~ ~ /`. G~ ~ ~ L~ ~, .i~ ~~ w`'" ~ % ~ j ~'~j ~ ~ ~(' 1\ li ~ ~~~~a U (~ ~ ~- ~ •., - ~J ~,, -~-~_ ~ ~-?t ~.' %- ' ' 2 = ~~ r ~ 4'~, !' .~`- ,,~ a ~ y,L ~f~ ~~ ~((ll _,,1i''_ r ~ 1.~/, ~J~'~~.---'`' _. ~ ~ ~-z~ - ~~;~ ~: ~, _~ ~~ _. ;~ . ~~=~. ~ ~ ', /-r ~~' ~ h ~ ~-/' ~~ ~~~,_. 113 d~.~~ -?~" ~ ~° -~ !~~ .~ h r ,/'~ (~ '' ~ 3p ~ .,~~~ 1 ~ ~~' ~ ~ (~Jlt~ ~ ~ %r~ ~ ,~ ~ ~~ U 1 ;~ ~ _ ~' EXHTBTT CES-7 c. v ~ ~ - 3/l ~/~o (Page Z of 3 rages ) the under,}~gur(rents~rotoosedcaCrnc'ment `lore;~~nsolidatinglthelgovernments of Roanoke We, g ('c. understand that t1~'c' ~ p r - . , ,~ ~ approval. by the qual i fiE~cl voters of both County and the City ~F Roanoke provides flat;~ Localities, C~estnut Mountain will becomes a °~r : of t~1e Town of Vinton. Wc~ are imposed to becoming a part c,f' the Town of Vinton. '3'~~ie, should not be construed to mean that we are or are not in favor of ^onsolidatinQ the cgovernmer~`~s of Roanoke County and thF~ ('ity of. Roanoke, since we wilt have the opportunity later. to vote on teat issue; however, we are taking this moans to register our op~~osition to Chestnut Mcrr~itai.n becoming a part of. the Town ofRegistered 1lomeowner voter llrldress Yes No Yes No Nano? _ ___-___._~ ~----- / ~.-. ~~~~ _-~ _ .~- .r 6 N ~ ("1 ` --1 ~ ~ ~ ' i ~ j ~ _ _~ __ 3 --~ ~~~._ - ~ G, 333 ~ is .~=5 r-vu r~ ~~ G .~~"~~ ~ rN~G~i~ ~,- , ~, ~ _ ~..r-- ~Z1----~--c.~.s7_. _- i ' , i ~ , ~, / ~/ fir, ~_ ~~ _ - ~, ~~ ; ~,,r ~' ~ ~ '~ /. /' -. _ / ~ ~t~ r"~""Z~ - ~ -- ,.,,_ _ v. ~-_ 3/7 8; 90 I:XI-iIr~IT CES-8 ~ P~~ge 1 of I Page ) We, the undr~rsiq~~ed residents of Chestrn.,!t r~':~untain sut~division in east Roanoke County, tarl~~erstand that thc~ current proposed agreemerrt E_~,_ consol.idatin~ the Ccn~nt-y and the C i_ ty c~E Roanotce g governments of Roanoke ~~}~, provides that, if approved by the qualified voters of both alities, Chestnut Mountain will became a part ~~f tine Town of Vinton. We are not o `,o Chestnut Mountain hecomin a posed g part of the `'i'ow;~ of Vinton. 'T'his should not be construed to mean that we are or_are not in favor of consoli-~~,,inc; the Governments of Roanoke County and tiie City of Roanoke, since we will have o ---- disa PPortun._~y later on to register our approval or pproval concerning that matter; however, this is merely to register our st_ ~pport for Chestnut Mountain kx~cominq a part of. the 'Powr~ of ~~inton. - N~iru, . _, f ~ - - "~-+ r ~c:h.,. ,, ~_ Registered Ftomeosannr Voter ncac3ress Yes No Yes No ~. ~~_~. ~3 i h _ .__. _ - ___._. _ _ _. _.__._. _ --.~-.FXlS.1.~-i.l.,.~. ._ ~._ t.......... _J. ( "age 1 of 5 ?ages) ~1e,' the under: ~gned re5zdent, ~;~ `Spring ~C v.~ s~i~ivi~ion f.r~ east Roanoke Couz2ty, 'under- stand that the cut ~.~nt proposed ~gre~,~;ent for' ~nso3.aciatzn~ %he governr~~~ents of Roanoke Caunty ~:nd the 'City of RG=~ioke prov~,des that,;,'upon ar~~ ~'~va3. by the rua?i;~~iCd voters oP both ': 2.ocalities, Spring C'rove wi1.11, ,become a part,oF , the ;,'T.`pWn off'` Vinton. .~Te are opposed 'to x>ecomirig a, part of the Town"of Vi~~,o~., 'l~xs `~~hcsu?c3 riot be constz~xed° to'~ean that's we are or are not in favor ~~f consolic~attnc~~b~~•`~governments `of>.Roanoke County ara the C%tv of` Roanoke, since ewe _wiil havE~ the, opporturiit "~.ate~-; to _vq,,e, on . t~;at :issue; means toy register; c>ur, o ~~~~ ' however, we-ate- taking`this ,_pposition r,to' S~~ing Gro~~e becc7ming `~, part:.. of the Town ~ oP> Vinton. Registered Name Ftornrowner Voter lldc3ress Ye, 1~Io yes --~ _.._ . ~ ~ ~, ~.- ,; U ~ _ ~---- ~,~ ~ env ~ t ~..~. - ~,.~- _._. tam ~ ~~,~ zap ~ ~ '~~ ._.... ;:,~ ~ ~ ~~~~ %. r ~--' __ __~~ l ~ ~' F. L .. J ~' -••.--~E,.~-~.. ~ ~ ~~ ~ n ., .. --- - _ _ __ . . _... _ . . _ ._. (f age 2 of 5 Pages ~ei' the Under= lgned reSa.(~E'_nf:S.~r~ Upri,g (~." )Z;rCi ~.;.i`~"~~ivi:~i:);i ~i'i fsu.5~ .1Gct:GiC(~ V.;CUY`a stand that the CUt'i f?j'pt ro - Y ~ ty,' under- p. posed ~~g_eemen~ far ~,~=ag~iwdating t;he gcve.rz~rr~ents o:' Roano'~ee County, and the City of_ Roanoke provides,;~hatr upon a~,:..~3Vci.L }y the qual:iPLe~~ voters of ~xtT, localities, spring i;`rove wii.11` ,~~ ,~C~1"`w d x3~it .t..r- t.iiE?. C3wn~ Gf V3:I~.O2i. Vde are ©~pGSeC: °LO becoming, a part of the 't'own'of? ~riritc.,~ 't'~x,s .,~ ~~~ir~'71Gt be ~°onstrczec3 ta':neanthat °we` are or are not in favor of conso.tic~atincr."t}~~, c~overnrr~e ~,~~ of, Roanoke Count, ~,rad t~h~ City of Roanoke1,. since. we will have the apportunzty 4later; to voL==; or, that.;issue; l~iowever, we are _taking 'this means to register tur c~positiori,to" S~..ring GrG~;. oe,;,~ing a payf- of', t'r:e Towne of Hinton. ~ ~ , _ ~ ; , ;-. - ! .Registered _ N<~me _ ~ itcrrr~owner Voter ~. ~ ncidress ~ Yes No Yes i~ ... ~ Y ~~ ~/ ~ V~ _ _ ~ ~ ~- _ ~'" ~--- ~ ,~ r~ ~~~ t ~~''' ~ a/ ~ ) .~-~ -~1"t c r -- ~. ~ ~... os- ' ` .~.. . C ~ ~,/ +' ~____. ~~~ ~'/ ~= ,~~~ k~~ ~ y ~ ~ -fir /, ,! ~ ~ ;:( !; ~~~` ~ _ ~/ ~ ~, ' ~-_ ~---I--. -_ ~ ~J ~/r~~ r ~ Gam'- ! C_ (~_ ~~~ , ~(t ~ d ----~--...-~ -------_.~...... ~.__.-...~_ L ~t ^~ ~ { ~+ fl ~~~ ~ ~% i ~.~/ ~ , ' L ..~ Ir d v _"~~.Z ~ _ ~ .. /11.7 Ls~l.dl l .'l ( ~ ~ [ .. _~ w_._ ~.w.-.~.~..~ .. ~lerr tYie 17ridP :;.gnc?ci reSii;t3ni:~ is1 ~?~ its ('l ':yE? .~`,t r.Elt .:~''ii1. '1.7 ~?caSt izo:.ii~.ikcP"CGl;cn~'.y.'uTYd2r- '3tand that the Cul : t?T~t prOpOSeC~ iyC:~ ~ ~~ ':o~ rliS~.i1...uu~, Li, j' '~:i~ , and the City of Ro~~-yoke rovides vii«w, 5,~ ~ ~`~~'1-~~~rrcr«t5 0~ ~oanoke'County P - °~~.,rl a~~ ;rova~ by y.r~e qua l~ i zt~~ voters of both localities, Sprirc~ i;rove wi~.~.l necc~, . r~ p ~~t r, thc~ s o~rr7vf V.L i:~o;, ~ iNC? at-e~ o~ sed to , becoming a ,part o,' r l"yG' 1,Own a~ ~Ir"';.i dx %"_4] ,~ ~ ~ ,,,~i,:t~~.C3 'iC)t_ 'U`rs i:.oT"iSt~'~z~:C (::~ mean - t~t "w'e =arg Or are nab in favor o_£ consolida~inc~ ;d1: C~ovt~rr~rtt- ~-, ,,~, ~,,. ~.. - _ vL ~oan01 .~ i ..~yrlty a1d tre~~,xty of Roanoke, since we will hav~:~ the opportunity ~.~,;;~; ~.o vat„_. Vn G:;at +.ssue; however, we are,taking~this means to register c ~~r, opPos3.tion ur,' ~~r~.ng Crr;~•re ~co;:~in~~' a part a:" the 'yawn o~• trinton. - Registered N<~me _ P iiorn,'o_ wryer Voter ---~ f~~ ~ 7\ci~ i cSS ~ n__ ~ ',,~~ 6 ~ ~'~`? No Yes No ~~' l/ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ' t J ~ 7 ~ / ~ {~ ( e Y ,,. ~ ~', l ,. ~ ., V T'} ~f, ! ~ ti -r ~~~~,- ~ 1 -_ •! X^ qv ~_~~ ~~ , c-- ~ ~ ~ ,a,~ S ~ , ' f'* ~'~ ~ / P L. ~,J ~~~~,r~~ j _.~.~y. P s ~_ ~~ i/ ~ Y ., 4•'~ i Cam=, j/"J i~ ----~---- _ ~ •,~' ; t' ,~ ~ ~s ~ ~~~ ~ ~ i ~ - ____~ ` 'l • , ~~._, 's ~~~ V ~ Z~~ ~ ~ _._ ,~`~1 ~ ~ v'~ ~ ~,,/ i .` J~ `~~ !/.~ o , ~~ ~~~ ~~~$ z _, __ _.___- { P~;c~~e ~ of 5 ~~ges ) *,~e,r the ttr~c e~ i ~nec3 resiuor,~- ~ ~~ 4 t t}le •:~ tt~4~ rl ''~ ~ i1t~ l i ' d.~i t _i `Ci~7~i ~ " t stand tna cu ~ 4 : =ret ro• oseu .~ _° - , ~ e~ ~ _ ~e ~~ - .. .. C~ t7 «. _Y: i:UL• ~ ~ _'~a iCic:.,iii~Yj i ~''F~ ~~`r =r;;'('~:i1'i.:i~C}L nOanfJ}CE C`OL1nCy and the City of lac .;lolce provides ~~.ri _ , a.~c~.~a a ~ ,~-~,v4__ oy ~;}-~c=. c,ua~i~,.e.d votErs cr bot~-i localities, Seri:rc; s;r~ve ~rilil ~~o:. ~ ,,~, ;, , - Y "~~ t~Cr ~1a~,;,., Cak 'J3,,t~c:.~x ,.~'rG '~'Y'r"~ apposed "40 becoming a part cat: the 'x'ot~rn ~of Vin;ca;;, ,, ~,:~:s o+~rir~ ~~~t ;~w, cc~n:~tz~e~ o rr~ean that cae are or are not in favor c,~ consol.idat~.r~~ ,-i,e',~=~;~,re;~~~ ',s ;~~ ~oano~e Co~,iYty ar.~^ the City of noanoke, since we will have the opportunity.;l.~tr~r i:o v:~ ~ c;r: ti~at issue; ~so~rever, ire are taking this means to'registe~ czar oa si_tia,~ .t,~-s ~c,i~r Gi:v E, ~,-- ,., r'L° .~_~._ .. ;. ~ ~c:oraa.rg ;: ~Grt of the to~Yn of Virtan. ~ . - - ~ ~ r'. ~' ~ ~~ ~ ~Registnred N~~mc~ ~ ~~r~reownc'r ~ Voter ~ ~ ~ • ~ s`~ciC~rt?SS / { Yes ~ No R Yes e Ny ~~ ~~ -~`/ ~ ~ ~ r~ =°'~ L,_/ i ~ ~ " ''ice ` ~- /.u~'i~' tzsn~t~. t ~' ~_ ~i~Z?/. `L'~-rL•.~ ®r-. / ~ ~C/~ ,`fir ~~C ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~x~ ,7 ..r ~~ ~ In ~ --, t' ~~'~~ /~ ~ ~ ~ ..->~ [~~\~ J "~ ~ ..!i y ~ '~ ~ ~, ;/ ~._ ~~ s .arm ~~y'I ) q p' ~ ~~ $ ~ /> q C 7 ~ -__ ..-._ ~...'~s~ fed,-~~-~s-~~~1' ' .~;. ~. 1 .~ 3 '; j ~ t'7 `' ( ~ /~ ~L 1 /G• r t°C `" ~' C~ J 1 'i t / ~ -, '']]``~~ d ~ \ n ~ ~ p ~ ~ L~~ ~ g ~+ ~ ` /~ Y ~~ ~'' b g i/" ~ I a ~~ ~! i c ja/'~J ® ~°" 1 1~ C 0 ~n3 .rte ~; ~,~, -,. ,> r ~ ~;1 n /// ~'_"" ~~...._ h7 + / i ~ e~ it /. ~ r _z ~ ~i 3 .~ c i, ~' 1~ _ i1 / ~ ,.~ :.+~r5.i.1.. ~ -Y _ fix. ~, ~ .~ `r. ~ 's %~ L"°.w ;,,i `, ,. i s.~____ ~' __---' H ;~.~ i.~ 1-~----- ~,,: z--'" @@ / G ~/. ~ d „ ~ Y ~l/' ;,% a ~ L%= _. . .-. ,, ,, _._. _.,; ~ _~ __ - ~ J ~V~i3~~ ~~ie li'dCiE'" _ Z~C~C'~ r~~',.'t.r~ t~k e' `3~ ~° v ~ ~~lv~ .`' ^ "- _-;'_ ~l.C~l i~~ ~i~iiX f.. ~llf~' Clj~ ~E'T'jG prl~J~~.k t4 ~ ; ~} ~ '- `'' ds ~ tiv x ~~x~ ~,T:y K IL G~4.Y7 Y is ~ °~ UV'.rri~-tlvi! anc~ the i^i~y of Ro :;voice prcvice , - ,-~ _ , ~ - tr v:, ~:YJv.s c .. tJ'~.i oy z,ii~ Cjt'1c:1..3. L._'~:t b'',1;.~?iE' vi. ,~5, leCdlitieS ~ Spring ~~iOVG , 'W'l;i:~.1, ~~C`t, a Y ci $~u.,_~ _ , -0: %~'c. ri"r.:~~iv" s ~~~" V1i1~C7" . T^,~' <;': ~~ t3 ~;~C"~.?CY . ~v }JeCOTCt1T1C~y* d part G': t11e 'T'©WC1r~C3i `4t_'2".~."„s~ x~ iS C`:L Y^.~~ ~e CC3;"i=C~" E'+.~ ~.(' i~,,~`: i,~:rl' i~7F~ c:c? •>Y_ are TtOt 1 Cl favor O1` CO'C'iSOi.ICSd~. 1 V ~ 'i1., yYy ~ "YY! ' L,_~.~r t{t7°-s'i1t~{t ~.°C.i::I'i` ~f o,l'lt`i t fY~?a t" t > r3 S1TlCe We Will ~2dVC tt1~ OppO~'1:i,:n,._t:y _r.tr.tr.4 'GCi V,.1~:~ Lrll `i:;2c~,t -1.SS'.I~t ~1'a~kt!~%~;. ,, Svi~ ~ti:C, ic,iti..,..',y4", s2S TYiE?c7ri8 t0 Yeg.i-Star .;,,~r O.~~C7S.~",,lC~i t.=:i 1.r`e_' 'LTI~.%' ? .~...'1",v..i%ri~ Ci tJd~'t O~ '4~'.':C:. nti:l'ti:i G! S7~?"i'.vie. 3• + , r ~ ~ ~. IV7iTiC' ~ e ', + C~"~3t?C')tnT,if?r ~ 1+tC~e,+ryr (/i/° ,/~ ~ ` '~ ~/~ li"t/°~ryrt ~ f' i `.~>~.J `~ ~ ~. )ilk ~ ~,. ,~' t /~ /1 (J G 1 ~~ /' FJ ~ 4 .s~ 1"'1 4 7 -.! YJ'~r' ~~ /~~~'( ~ Y -L:.=~L ~'`~-Lp~'' .t ~ ^~V~',. ,~,/~ r--... T t ,',tt J \ may, p~ ' qt p~ ~ 1 t ~. ...~.. Y! ~ F..~I 4_'d ., }'4'p R`Y~'di ..~Y ~.Y \2°.A..~.~~J ~~~~S ! f'~ < \ ~'" r ~ ~,+ 5 R ~._. _., '1 i _h [ C~~~~~J t ~ is E FS A -S r3 """'~"r........ ~lir- F } ` -~~~..~ f 0 r e _ ~ ~ E~ 5 B _`____ ---_.__- g_- ~-----~..~....._...~.-..___~_.. is ~~~t?~ %[l E' Uii~:;e~1 .. yC'iE'Ci iC?:i~i.+:~i1tS C" t~ i. ._ .,.~.a_._~V1.~=i:Cii2 ...:`c'iSt, i\ ;~e.i,i~:ti_ 1....z". / ,.. ie~1. St;dT-IC3 ~~ld~ t:(]0 CiitT'!'C1Y: ~I'0~7pr3t?~~ {J~rEti',..c.~; 't OT' ,_,a;O...,.~,r `~.ili'~~ ~;'~re c+:sVE''1`('imERi/~> vt i~~'i~,.z_,i..~' ~~.,<;~.,.ii'i,j anti the ~i~`y Gl (~~1t"'„OICE' prOV2C~E?S ~~.'C'i~. , ~ , _. i' }~~i J 'C t_s=' ~< ~ ~ - , ' L C~t~a~ ~'iE~ VC~l:EL C: ~X.) lOCdZl~leS~ >~t`1C1C~ i=rOVe WI.L7. t7Ci.:vi u ~r,.i; O,•:! :.iti~ 'L..,.;~: G~ Vl.n~On. YYE3 u~.~. i::3 :)~':/J.;E'r ~O O S~rin~ Grove ~'C'~JYitlitC~ d ~Jdr~ GC v~a~ r<'~;u O[ ~~,.,.,.".}::., rfii.l~-` 5~"i0i1iG` ^.t7{~. _CE'J :; .,C.i.. `O Ct^ts?ci?1 _,Y1dLL We dr2 Or dr'' _:O {: ii"i ~dVOi' iii C.~~y •^i li "fi,1~ tS'< `_~+^.iVtry"~iYSL'nS O'i ~4C1%ai r_"~~.C_y~.~1,;C:'ij/ .,i^, t' '.:"'ir-: l;.it~1 O~ Radnolce~ ~1 'SCE WC? Wi1.L fidVe C ~i~v~".i.~ci.L~.: ..~i~E'i vif "C,O 1"~'~7.~,!'i CS'.::C ii~'7iiC0i.ra."Qi '_.. i~1SdUi~rOVd2 COC1CEYi":~ii~ ~.};c?L CCldl,%tjr j "'.J.ac'~':~:"~ 1`:`.~ ~ _., .(iE._r'"_/ tC3 ii=°~^ie:,:,~~"Z" vial: =i J'.r~.+"~ i`.~0~,. S(3rIYi~ GrOVe i?C?COT(?~ I~ cl ~dY't Oi t, CIE "~'O\tii"1 Oi V1;;t,0;s. { 9 ,~~, t ite?igl.~~F'LEC] "r - ' } " i ir'i~TtyCiW11C'_Y' ' `rC~Li'}~ - IV <liiil~_.....~. ~ ? ~,_ ~~<rC~SS 1 ~~'S ~ i~p0 ~ t?Ec p i~i0 `°\ ~ G l't~3i ~ ~ h,,a..~. / ' +~, _ f r_ ~ ~,,,~4;• ~tJyt ~ ('~ `:`) `_ { .._ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1~',r d J f v c --- .. ._ .~r_.__._.. k ~.~. ~. ___._____._ ._ Y.__.____ ~ .... a ...~ .. a 6 d _.... -^v^.-v.r....-,--.-•.. _.~.....» is ..~ i 1 ~-'~ -- ~ ~ E c?~ L'Y~~~ 11 ~ {'7 ~ 1.~; Re ..,. i ~ iz r i I v. ~..G 1 Lc d I.dUT:' d ~ V l F E,.L li r` ^ ~ ..v ~GY~dh t C a 3 SCi i,: v ~~i,~ C~i r,r J V Lii~, S~~ C i'rlr rcG.~ TG Ci~`CO[i~iTl ~' ~ (_.iT C a a ._ ; ~ ii 1 ~ ~. ~~' iJit~L u q ~ ~ J L r '1 l c/~ Lt l i 1f. 7 / t ~ "-`~ ~~ .. \J 1.'ilf",0;2. 'I`t'II.S C! i?La.L. t 1I; -~ {' r l - t- a Ci T 'ci~C'B 4~ z.~ ~1~T~ c-'.. '~ Or <a nc3~iL JZ L,tIL lf~.^7 ~._ ~. '_ s ~ ~ r ~dr:id~zd ~1?ZL'G i1*e i~„VOr df COTISd~.' ~~~ i1C_1-~.~1`'-? CfCiVE?L'Ilftit?iIL.S d~ i~J~T"i _' ~.~ 1 c y.~ ~.{'t~~ f.`iL J___„_ ~___.._.__.L y~ - -- - - ~iit~.- SS' "' ~ ` ~ ~^! czit; ~cA ~ i i`l j Vii LS IC;E'uZ1S t0 ~7.~_ IIC~iVe t'-,fIG C>E~~X) -liii7lL~' 1~3c~',Gr i;0 Vd'iE'_ d': Y i _ ;'~.a ~Vf_ r L Gi l l,tj alG~.'i:"l O~ VL~3~0'i. r '~~ l.St2r OLlr OLl1~'v.~ " ~.dn f'.O Sl'".oYiE'[~i 7.C?~°'= i7d~::~iCt1Y C; 'i ~ c,i: _ - - '' ~/~~ ,~'fjJ/J, ~/] µ1 J ~--1~ ~i? ".;~. t±~_' ._~_~ ~ al ____._ ~~~ ,~ ~ fr~i .~- e°-" ~ i~ - l~ N . ~.-~ -~ ._ ,. ~ ~ ~ ,} -~ ~; ::~ ~~ / ~ ~~.`/ 1 IC>Y4~'U tdT t {-'-_~ `.~ ~' E t 1,'~ ~ ~ ~/ ` i~': - ~. ~~ ,0 9 ~.°". `'/ p /; -' ./ ~..~.n_ - ,~ ~'~U`x y,~ ~, ''~ s ,. , ;j p ~-..- ;~~,. ~s~.:Jrec? J ~fIG; fR-~ Ices a i ~~~~. ~~~ '/" j, ~if'y~ r G--.- ~.--- P ~~`.,. _., lr1L'~a"g'~`'---'~`Q' ~ ~ /r' /---- ~ ~j i°~`~~....~ ~' ~Cy / ~ f;,.'"' -._-i . -- ~~--/-/r' ~ t,_ --~-~-- - {g _?~ _f1t ~.c~ _rr a/1,..~s~ :"'G.C.~ a ~i::J°~ ~ °'' J~ ~ 1..8. ~,.- /L.___`~ `_.,,,1 / T ;..__Lr_"'/'"` ._'`/ " a ..Y... ._ _ 5 _ t ^ j ~ ~ ~ `y / ~r~..f-.> /~'r1.G~~L '1 ~lti- /~1,.,,, 6 ~.~ ' _ ./ ' 1 _ g ~ ~ !f/ r'/ / / ~j '~ ~,, - ~ ` ,~,1 ~,,, .... G_~~...~- '''s ~, ,) 1 ~ 4 ~ __ __ _ _. ----- x ~- ,;', ~. ',.ci 7 -. v ...rl V yam./~~ - 4 J. / / j ,~ / i~ rr ~~ /~ .~~ )' ' -'~ i > ~ ~ ~.... ~-- --~y- ,6~ ..... v ~~ ~/~ T~/ r.:~ ~r~rr r,~`S_1 ~ J i +C~ ~ ~ ~ +i; ~ ~c 5 l C. ~ ..r v_ L v ) 1 i i tr h..- r `~ t.1 ~ + ..., c, L,U t.... a ' t C' a O. C. ~i ',LL tt~ C- ~`'~ Fl 'J O T<: ~~7 tt' ~i -' L1.:. iC .+ uG O . i O i~%~. r ++t ~ Gi ~lt.~ ~+~ v ,-t}rC' ?lOV ~ FE3 1 (1GL.~ r- e ~ . .; "--~ r.°x `Jt~f~l ~'i: i ~ ,c?J. e t~+ irtYlt,Cj:;. yv'` ~x'".P O_j:)~.ri_C~' LC ~'xi;0:t11t"'iC~ I. J c4 i i LiLS r ~ i.Gi ! ~tC' ,v i ;. ~ i.X.-.~Q t.t. d f• `- . V ~- C , i rat nil ?-O °1?CiiC1 ~(?ut''. rEG'' cZ. `i<? O'C c.~ - ~7i, i11 it ~~d°"~.. O~ t`,SiC' }i~v ii ', i :i)tOT:. i"f2iS Si10S:i;~ r __ _ -_. --- i~VOr Oi COT',SOf.I~~~" i~_~:tl^ C;O~JE'LTlt.Y~S Oi °~Uc_f1C1 ^' C'JU1E~1~ cY~i~,'i ~'lE' ~i"v-tj Oi .{OiiT?O{C~r 5.•Ct- ~'Iv v Y z n ' -' t ,N"~,"~ lliii,cj 1c~,i:L~i: ~G VOGG v r i ': 15:~~ it~r :;O~ti _''J2~, ;°T?_ c~,t~ ~c~ltli: j i11S tt:t~'.t,+;:5 ~O W1. i_1 ~d3t 1`,(it. (~ ~'C?C~715~2Y Oiler ~~_%_`_• .lSii ~;O S1;0Y1<`'.K)i~iCiC`E' Yr°CCn:;ti.,_ ~ ~~;t."~. Oa 'L.i1C' ~i'OvJC'1 O{ ~~IY'i~011. _ ` tZ%'cStt~Ct?d ~ 9 tc}.i ! `y~0.rii i iC)~l'C'04iT Ye:~ ~ Ala ~ Y~~ ~ No ~, , s ti;1r1 ~~ --'~~ __`_ ------ ------- - ~j j)J 1 hY -~____~'_ y _ ~ - - ~ , ,, ~ i~ .-, - ... - .- ~ ,. ~ '. ~ ! ` cif p G ~ r~ ~~ ~y4 ~ a, r :i _ ` ~_.__. a z ~ , .~ ,! ~ ~ - „/ ;ter.. ~,r''°~_. _r_ 1:.~~ ~ ~~'/. ~ / /~ i~ 7 ' ~.'~/'~i ~ ~ . ~.._. i O"" Y/ tl ~~ e j ~ / r a ~ `._~- _ z 9 ,, f 4 } ~ v ,1 r_~ q__. s } ... 1'~ ~ V '~ S~ 4 ° ? ~ ~ ,. _- e L~ ! l _ ~ JC lJ t i 7 1~ i ~ < l_Cw U L 1, L~ l al -- .,i '~:, . J / ~ .. .. . _ ~ ~' _ ~ fi _ i ~7 L,~~ J ~ \ l ~ YJ .-Y lJtfw L.- ~..~JU.. f ~ t ~ ~~' ~ .,V ~. .._ 1 , : 1 .)7 ~ ~J'~i~~w j~t~+.-,.i ~~SV / 3~ iv 1 . U.. J , _ E - L J , , 1 y.-~ ,,i t ~ f ll t~S' ~ ~, . VO~C S O ~n"71..`1 y L L : 1_ Yit.r j l 1'_C ~ C .1 . f - - ,mot} '!-^~ CJI"itT~ -L -• ~ 7 ^l l~~ t. : ~~'..: .~ 1~ `;~'; ~ u ;' r t? • L ~ rii ` r: f - t ~ l , l tit ll eJ.. L ` _ .. x. t ^.iii t il r~ "' C)~ c-l l:a' .. a , l ~ 3 ~ ~' 1 i C- . < G c I f ~ ~ ~ ~ '` t ° 1.:3 - v7. L l cx _ -: 1 ~ ~_ u G t ~ ~ L y ! ~, Ar :_ t _ ~ u ~`.' ~ __ -` ` , ~ C~ ~ - ~ ,~ •r 3 ~ : __ _ __ __~._ n '' C3~~ ~' _ ._ t'i \ll VC7..k_ Q~i fit.«~ ]~ ~ 123 C 2 ..~ ~r <,0 L., ~ i..> ( - i .. a ... r ~ i.~ C:~Vc ~ t E l , ~ L .J i_5i,hi tiia ~i (> > ~_ ' J1L t'J ~~1.(~~~i .. '. iJ_ L~~YI ~ 1~~~.~Jc.1~.IiC~ i - - ~ 1`~`t 1 ~f _ . _ _.. r _-.__.--_--___ _. ..n - f 4 °~ P 8 I ~ J~ •,', /; -~~-1--~- =-L'` -~~.L~'~-' f ~ ~ !- ` rr i, ~ t 'V _ ^ ~ N .a /^ Y. -~ A ( ~ i n c J t ~ °. V ``_, _i ~''r-~~L 'ice __. ~`-'~ _. - _ ~~,- ._-_-- ; J ~ t ' ~_ r ~ It ~ ~~ j/~y xf~r'r,,~ ~ ~ ~ '1 /i ~r, ~ `L/~ ~ ` ~~e..__-~--~• ~/ •- - --- *...-~ - ~i y ) 1i~) ~ CA~~d ~itL'~...•' /f ~ ~..Y. eb..d y y~ ,,J\-y~,_,_ ~ ,, i i ~~~,-~. r _,~~u.,.- - ---- - t .. ~~ i ~ ~ / i / ~ ..-' r .y ,e i p ,/~/pr -jr ~' '>'~ .. ~ (, ~__;1 _ - ~ ( ~ ti , t .J P;.ti.'t Cam/ ! -f , r, f~ __-_ r /, ^~ W~-'y f/ I t i i s ~ ' `~ C'~~ Yr~r do f~~ ~~ :...~ i i., , l Y v''~~,' ~~ i V t / .. fJ _- i ,~ ~ ~ / ., .~' ~. r_ - .. 4' ~ ~\ ~~' °w~./. d..: a `A.iLr~-~if.:..:J CV ~^° ~-- v ~ A 4~~~ -__ ~y '~,.- --- ._._.__.- ! T,- ----_____-. ~ e t ,,~, n 4 ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ s.~ ,~ ,l .;~, ti.... , .. ' j ~I e.: J L r i ~_ Lit ~ ~~~~ _/. ~°' _ , _ -_.~- ~_ .,.- --- ~`E, j ~ it /r / i ' / r~ 1 a i . \ ~~,„1 ~ `.' _ _. ! ~ e ,~ ~ ^r r ~, %1 s ~ r i f ,. , ~ ~~ 4 i - --- - , s ~ ` ~ ~ ; i f ~, ,, . ;- ,., L. _ : _ ~ .__ ._~.~ -- ._ ~ -- !ry J '; ~_.~ ~ f 3"9 AA ~ .: / Y ~• ~ '.."'fir i f ~l~ 1 O 6 9 /` - r _ "__ .. .~ ~ _.~- ~ ~ ~ - 3 / '_', ~.~./~ ~ _.~_ I. __"'.~_4...__..u.. _..___. e _ .. .. _ -.__ . _. ~ , f ~ i .+..._......--.... _.. r dj . .. ___.-.-____" _- ~ i ~' ~ f __. _. ------"_ _ ... - __ - - ~ r r f . _ _ _ _, _. _ ~ ,. ,;-~ ;~~ .~ ,t, ,~, .ve: a u... ~ ` v~ a 1 n.a. v. iC~' L ~. ~i. `t <7i ~, i,~. ")_'~"~ ..~ ,. ._ C ' .. v ',r - t .. _ ..a ~r l~ ~ t i i ~ _ _ l~ J t ~ ~ E ~ , t _ t. t -~i;.~:i~~i;iLl:~ t7C1_.7:~ti ` t~.i "_~. .~ _\ ",- .v -- -- ~- t jet ~~-v~" ~~ ,~ - r f r '- ~ \r : J tis ~ r. i i l ,.,, ;... .. ~ „-~ T - r -...... .. ~ .,,r _ _ i ~ t.. L ._ 1. ~. ._._-L._ C~c71:C21'%13"ly i,~i<ia(, ,:<_~ ~ iiU.'.t-`i_~ Y Lt.x,~ i.~ _•, _ .....«.:i-~.,. .. >F3CC'74Ti I i3r_,+ c~ ~n 3 ~ i; O ` ;, ~.~'. iCiW[1 7 ~ `'d ].1. ~Cf: . ;~ _ __ _~- Y. i '• ~~ r / ~~ i ~. .__. .. - / ~ t 1~~ ~1 ~ `a ,~ //'^y" ,~~~+ Y ~t "~j~r'k` tf .: a.~ ...r'..' a. i '''' di^.:i _ _'~ *y- ~~ ~f' ~ " ~~ ~_ t r.,r~"i ..~...---^-~ ~~ t ~ ~ It at ~ i 7 s I x 1 -------__ ~_ - - __ --- -~-- - s F _~ fi y s ---_--- __ . i t ~ _...__._...._ .........~........ , r......-.. } ~ ~ . .«. .-..___ , .~.._ i ~ _~ 1` _ _ -~ i 7 .~_ 1 ... _ - -- .tit. - - . _.. _ _ _ _ .. ~ . _ , - - - . _ _ . - ..., - , J J ..~ '~ ~ - _ _ __ - - - a,: r •, t i ~ C _ _ ___.__.._~ _ _ _. _ -~ - ` _... _Y.._~r. ..-._ ~... ____ _~v.. __. ~ .,. .. .. _. .. i.- x: t~ .a. 4v ~S.~.~ ~ i'ir 4 1~.~`'~. .. ..,..__ l.v i <.. _. ~_i _s V.._C_~ ~ ..- a.,. .... _. .. -o.~_. ~ _ .~. _ + i ... .- ._. .r->~t. ~':? i::Z L ~ __-_ --- Y ~~ \.! ~ c r r / r _ t• / ,- __, __ _ _ _ _.. _ - ~ r ~ ti .,V~~.sr ..«,r' f6•' .. ~ - r'~~ -~^'s. ;..-..a € roi / p ,r... _, ~' ,Py~ . ,l .,~=--a- "-~-. ___-~_ ti m 3 ~ ; . . a - ~- k / { _ yr_ ... ._ ~ <~,,...:4 _.____ __ __ ~.~ r ~~ sr'---~ ~;... S, e„_ tea. f~ ~ ~~ _ ~~, _. ,_.~._ =~ ~ ~; y _a ~ 1/j;1 ~ ~ r ~ ._~~~ J i 4 _ ~ _.._ -- ---- ~c f// ,1/~ i f ' e J / ~ r ~ 7 i ~ ~ ~'?~ ;~'/ *~ 'L r ' r r r ~ 7 i " f i I r7 ~ ~ ., ~4 r~ n ff ~ 1 -- -- I ~ ;~. ~ r'-s'C.%LL T`.'T it ` C ~ l•~! ~~~%j``! _ ~~2~~'~ ~ ~,.cC, t ~-~ .u1f r~,~ ~"tr _ s> ~/' ; ____ 9 ~_ _ _ _ `~~~ '~,~~+'_vr" I ~~~''-- / rr~> ~_- ~ ~~ >` ~-' ,~• A..r_~'/ , f~ ~ i~irrr`w,~ r'f- - ,y../ _ .~..~_A -'-'may- Y ~ i P r :-~ "-" ' ! / ) ' `r ~ '~ ~ ~ r ~ / Q ~ .~.I ` ,' ~~; .'/;S<`G" ~,J,/° "" .,.,,i ~S S~~"'J,/ •/; jf ~~`-.~`-~r .._°~ ~.~~ _J~-~ r J'~''~."ff ~ sr..~ ~~~~-.~.....__ q .. - _. ~ .__ Y _.__ < ~ .. i ,mot. ~- ~, ~ K. ~r,_ ~; ~.- 4 a r~,~~, ~ _ ~ ~ - r ~ , ~ -- . ~~ A .d s -. w _. F _, i ~, / ~r .. ~- ~, /~ / / r r \ . ~.' ~ Cl/r..-~,~ r-r - ~r r _- _ __.__..._~_._. ~ -_ __ __ - - - ., ,. A v ,,.~ ~.. ,~ r i ,'~ r' : // ~ { r ~ -! t r/ ' Jt t ..~ n r / _ •i i - . _ ---- - -- - _' __-J ---L------- - ~ _. f a.1 f _L.- .. ~ . _ _.. ,- ,. _ _ .. _ ,, . _, ..... _ _. ~ _ ._~. ~r C;_ _. .. ,. ~ _._. ___~~._____-._ _ _. _.._ _..__ _ __.._ _:_._~_ _ ..., _ _. _, . _._ _. _ _ _.~.:. _ ...__. _. ... ._ __ .a ___ _. ._. _..:. ___ . .._...,_. _ ~ _ __ ~ .._~.__ w~ _ __ v ___._ _ G ~d. ~. ~. Acu ..sa .. .i.. s Y ~ ,,.. .. ~ ~ ~ .~ ,7 ,~ ... .. A.i, . _ . ., C. _~ ~ ~l c~ _ 1. .... U ~ ~ ...,G4'. ~ _. d - 1, Ct ~_~ .~:_ ~..'. ~ 1, i_ t .~~~_i ~ ... '.~ ~.... _. Y .~___.., _ ... ._.. ,~ ~,,._ F~~.~~ _. _... .~rl . .. i . _ ~l V Y,~i j ' ~'.., ~. ~_ ~. f ~ ,( . _ J, ~ +`~~ ) ~ 1,"" ~ ~ r% ~. .. .r ' i J . ~ t i 1 a \J / J r i ii~~,r~-rr.,~. r l' ~. c ~-- ~ ~~ , fi i C j ~ r, ,, , - / -% + ~ 1 ~ -~ , . ti, ' y - ... __. ._._.:. __- - - -- - ---- - - , ~ `, L ~ r , 1~ .. ~ ~ vl ~ ~ / _/ ~ /n !/~ J / ;~ !~ i f, l / f ~ ~ ~ /, ~, _ _. - ~ . ~ ., ? ' ~ - ~ ~ . t -- 7 / ~. .. ; °1 ~ _ \. J ; % M1 r i ~ . i ~ ~~ - ~ ' ~ ---- .._ _ - - - ~ ~~ __ J ,. ~ 7 . ~ J ~~ ~ -__ _ _ v_ . _ / ,; ---{ , . ~~ 17 it /°~ ~----.._.~.___.. :., ._ _ -~.. _ _'.,~ -______ •. - ,~ ~~\ ~ i~ ~ / ' ~ r J r ~ l z "r ~ ~ ~' 1 , -~ / .,. / J ~ 1 {/ , ., -r ,~ ~, ~ ~ f R % ~ r ~ .- ~ ~ r' / ~. ,, J.. ; ,., ;~; . :- . ~ , , r ` -. ---.__ __ _ , ~r r r ,. . __ F _. .. ___ _ ._ ...._ _. _ _.~.,.~ _ __...~._. .- .. z-~ f1 < ! t~ ~. _~_:- _ -r .~ -.._ _.._ _ ~...__.._ - .. .. _ ~ f , _ _r~ .__ _ _ . .. _ ~ ,.a . a f,..._ ._ _. .. __ _ _ ______.. ,. . - .. - __ - --- ----___ _ __ - _ , i ~ _ - - - - -- __, -- --- - ---- i ~ ~ _- ,~ ~,. _ ~ i .a > .-. 4 , ~.._ ~ F, _ ._ u.~ ~ - .~ _._ _- _ __ _- _ ._- '; -~ , . _ _.._..__._. `> r _._ .__,. ~_ ~ _ __ _._ ~; R _.._._ _ _ I - i- _-------- ~. i'~l c ~ ~/. ~ ./ ._ _ __ ~_. ~ ~ - _ _._ _ - ~~ t __~ __ ~ j _ ~ 1 _ __ _ _ ~- « ,. , , -, t; ~ ,_ _. ~ J , r ~ ,, . i; r?~~E'C~t -- ------ ~ ~ ~ J - ~, r // .. ~~ ~ ,~ Jp -' ..__.<, - ~L.- / /; 1, ~ ~ // i i C-~ ' . ~ _.._ _, -~ _.. ~.. . . ... ___.. __~-__~. _..___.~__ _.r...~.__.. _.._.._ ~_e ~..~~_~~ ~ % ~ , / / ~ r r' ~. _ ---'-- ---=---r. ~ ~«--- ~ -----~- --- -r- , J.~._ =u'~ ~ ~ t - ~ , ;, ~ ~ ~ ~ / _ • / < . ~ ~ _ _ ~ ~~ ~- k f , ,. ~, ., u ; ~ ~ ~ ,' '~ -. >~ ~.Y i .i ~ f / / ` ! i ~ i _ ~ , - - / _.._ .__--- ~--_... --•--- .~._. `/ s ~ ~ , i ' ; ,... ~ ,. . ~'/~ ~ ~~~ / r ~ / ,~~ ~ / ~ x~ ~ -~ ~ IJ ~ t if ,; .. ~~!i. .-, S' ~._r ~ ~ ~ _ - _ ~ t _.~ ._ _.y. __-~.-_. ._..._... ___ ~._.__ ~ _..._. / ~ / i .~_ ...._..... .... _ .._ ..~.._~.~._« ~ ._..._.e. ~~.. l / .~.~ . . ~ ~ . I t J 1 ' ~ ~ <~ ~.. ~. ._.._.... ..-.d..n ~._. ~ ~ ~ T r < ~ r -i r r ~ - /r " f , ~J ~ t j i ~ -, ~ / -- ~ ~ ~ ~ / ~ r / ~ f ~ _ _, ~. _ t ~ - ~~ ~ / ~,( , ~.__.. J ~ ~~- ,_,~ _ .._ _ _ ._ _ j' ~~ ~ i it ~i ~ - r?~, ~ / ~A ',. ~ /~. ~ _ ~ _ , _ ~ ;, i. ~ t, / ~ ~ ! ~~ / . ~~ / 1 r / i ~: , _. ., -% _ i ~.~ r. ~ J ' U` ~~ ' < i '' / .s. .. ~ i / ., ~ /~~ 1 ~ I ' <~ R ~' ~ / , . _ ~. ~ , . t ! ~~ ~ ~ ~ a.> . ~ r~ ; -7 _. .. i % ~~- ~ ~s. ~ . ,. - , ~~ s ~ ; ~ : ~ ~ _ ~ - ~ - r ~ __ ,~ i ~ / r / ~. J _ _ _ «- , . a ~ ~ i i / ,- ~ . ~„ ,,~, ~ .,.. - : ,. , , „ , , ,,~ ~ i ;.. - r ,. , ,~ . , , :: ,; Y.~ , ~../ _. _. _ ,-.. ' ~ r ~ `' ... ~ -ie _ ~ ~.~ i a 1 \ / f ~J f. ~ ' < ( ~ . ' 'c ~ ~ 3 , ~ , - % tom.: ~.~ --..~' 1 ~ - P/ ^ t t I . ~ P AN ,~.~ ~ i a 18 ~.~ 88 $~SQUICENTENN\f'\' A Bcautiju/Bcginning COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE March 29, 1990 Rev. Branan G. Thompson Colonial Avenue Baptist Church 4165 Colonial Avenue, S. W. Roanoke, VA 24018 Dear Reverend Thompson: All-AMERICA 0111' 1' ~ I'' 1979 1989 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RICHARD W. ROBERS. CHAIRMAN CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT STEVEN A. MCGRAW. VICE-CHAIRMAN CATAWE)A MAGISTERUIL DISTRICT LEE 8. EDDY WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERALL. DISTRICT BOB L. JOHNSON HOWNS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS VINTON MAGISTERIAL 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 March 27, 1990 to offer the invocation. We feel it is most important to ask God's blessing on these meetings so that all is done according to His will and for the good of all citizens. Thank you for sharing your time with us. bjh Cnaunf~ of i2uttnnke Sincerely Richar W. Robers, Chairman Roanoke County Board of Supervisors P.O. BOX 29800 • ROANOKE. VIRGINIA 24018-0798 • (703) 772-2004 MEMO - 3/23/90 To: Supervisors, Mary Allen From: Lee B. Eddy~~--- Subject: Appointment to Transportation and Safety Commission Following previous inquiries, I have discussed possible appointment as medical representative on the County Transportation and Safety Commission with Mr. W. G. Rosebro, of 4712 Easthill Drive SW, Roanoke 24018. Mr. Rosebro has agreed to serve and, if there is no objection, I plan to submit his name in nomination at the 3/27/90 Board meeting. ~~ ~~~c~ , ~~ ~,~ - ~, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ~~ ~ Y r, ~ 714 SOUTH BROAD STREET RAY D. PETHTEL SALEM, 24153 d~ J n '` COMMISSIONER February 27, 1990 Post Offi Salem, Virginia 24153 Mr. Elmer C. Hodge Roanoke County Administrator P. 0. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 re: Project 0612-080-P18, N502 Route 612 Roanoke County Dear Mr. Hodge: Attached for your review is a sample resolution and sketch showing changes to secondary Route 612 in Roanoke County due to construction on Virginia Department of Transportation project 0612-080-P18, N501. Please review the changes outlined in the sample resolution and sketch and present them to the next meeting of the Board of Supervisors. 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 or ask at the next Board meeting. Sincerely, ~6' - ~ U~~it~c~3. S. B. Buston Assistant Resident Engineer for: F. C. Altizer, Jr. Resident Engineer SBB/mj Attachments TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY /' -,,J i o- c ~7 '526 AC _ ~~ .z; _ "~= ~ . c ,, C: , 3 12.66A~e 5 27.OOAc ~0~ 30.50Ac (C~ I -- -,- ~~~.~ ~~ I i ,.~ .~ 9 16.66 Ac vicna't~c trip 13 -~ ,~ 3~l ~ cs 7 O9AC O e ,~ I. 1 ~;~~ • ~ ~ 6.68Ac , ~ .~ ., ,~, ~C ,~ , o r o ~~.. M ..w A P ACTION N0. ITEM NUMBER ~- -J AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: March 13, 1990 roval of Grant and Matching Funds for SUB_ T; Request for App Solid Waste Recycling Program ~tr COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS : ~.~,~-ry~rn.~ ~~~ BACKGROUND: The Virginia Department of Waste Management has recently set forth a mandate requi lag alThe plan tmusttincludemprovisionsrto 1991, 15a Y hensive solid waste p achieve recycling goals of 100 of the waste stream by 1992, and 25o by 1993. In response to the new state requirements, local need to reduce the waste stream, the as well as to a pressing Roanoke Valley Solid Waassistancem to Bocal hgovernmentem mbersrto to provide financial implement recycling programs. Participation in i plementi g ~gand will assist Roanoke County in the planning, attaining the goals of a comprehensive solid waste plan. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Staff is resubmitting this application following a meeting with board member to clarify details and answer questions. The Landfill Board has provided a 5250,000 recycling grant for local government use in implementing recycling programs (attached). The funds will be ~ 1 ca e on will be3 based onntheltonnage government basis. Funding a taken to the landfill by each local government for fiscal year ending June 30, 1989. Based on the county's 32.40 of the waste stream, the Landfill Board Funds mus d be 8speno bydJunen30e 1990ty will match with 5150,600. If the grant is approre~~800ahomesan The la dfil ltfundsrwill recycling program to anothe vehicle. The county's be used to purchase a curbside recycling costs which will be an matching funds will be used for operating annual recurring cost. This recurring cost will require an increase in allocation to the Solid Waste Division and includes three additional personnel (one program would be initiated in currently being studied. operator and two laborers). The several sections of the county 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 (Attached). Total cost 5231,600 Grant funds 81,000 Matching funds 150,600 FISCAL IMPACT: This program was started aftve not bbeennallocatede inrthetcurrent year. Therefore, funds ha budget for county participation. Request funds be transferred from unappropriated fund balan be soent by h6/30/gOhing funds requirement of 5150,600. Funds must p STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the resolution and county application for the landfill t rogram as well as, matching county money from unappro- gran p priated balance. SU TTED BY: i ti - ~ ,~ ~ ~~L! ~L Gardner W. Smith, Director Department of General Services APPROVED: (~' r„"^' Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator __ ----- ------------- - --'-- VOTE ACTION No Yes Abs Approved ( } Motion by: Eddy Denied ( ) Johnson Received ( ) McGraw Referred Nickens To Robers AT A MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMWISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1990 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE APPROVAL OF SUPPORT AND REQUEST FOR APPLICATION TO REGIONAL SOLID WASTE MANAGII~NT BOARD FOR RECYCLING Il~LF~~N- TATION GRANT FUNDS. WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County has initiated the search fora 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 Wf~REAS, 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, THEREFORE, 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, 15°s 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. ~ 9 Z Z a 18 E50 88 ~FSOUICENTENN~P~' A BcautifulBcginning COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE March 5, 1990 Rev. Branan G. Thompson Colonial Avenue Baptist Church 4165 Colonial Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, VA 24018 Dear Reverend Thompson: QL~MERICA CITY '~I ~'' 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 MAGISTERAL DISTRICT BOB L. JOHNSON HOLLINS MAGISTERALL DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT On behalf of the Board of Supervisors, I would like to thank you for agreeing to give the invocation at their meeting on Tuesday, March 27, 1990, at 3:00 p.m. The meetings are held at 3738 Brambleton Avenue, in the Roanoke County Administration Center Community Room. On Monday before the board meeting, I will call you as a reminder. If you find at any time that you are unable to do this for us, please let me know so that other arrangements can be made. My telephone number is 772-2005. The Board members are aware of how busy your schedule is, and they appreciate your volunteering the time to offer God's blessing at their meeting. Sincerely, Brenda J. olton, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisor bjh C~ALtIttL~ A~ ~IIMnAI2P P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE. VIRGINIA 24018-0798 (703> 772-2004 FROM THE MINUTES OF THE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD OF ROANOKE COUNTY MEETING IN REGULAR SESSION AT 7 P.M. ON MARCH 8, 1990 IN THE BOARD ROOM OF THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, SALEM, VIRGINIA. RESOLUTION DECLARING PARCELS 044 AND 074 OF THE CAVE SPRING JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL SITE SURPLUS PROPERTY, WHEREAS, the Virginia Department of Transportation has proposed to make improvements to State Route 221 which will require the acquisition of right-of-way on the Cave Spring Junior High School property, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, in accordance with Section 22.1-129 of the Code of Virginia, the County School Board of Roanoke County, on motion of Ch arlsie S. Pafford and duly seconded, hereby declares Parcels 044 and 074 as shown on Sheets 10, 11, and lOD of the plans for Route 221, State Highway Project 0221-080-107,RW201 and defined on the attached deed dated February 8, 1990, together containing 19,635 square feet, to be surplus property and directs the clerk of said school board to file this resolution with the Clerk of the Circuit Court for attachment to the deed of said property and vestment of title of said property to Roanoke County; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that said school board requests that the sum of $73,632 to be paid by the Virginia Department of Transportation to the County School Board of Roanoke County be deposited in the School Capital Outlay Fund. Adopted on the following recorded vote: AYES: Paul G. Black, Maurice L. Mitchell, Charlsie S. Pafford, Barbara B. Chewning, Frank E. Thomas NAYS: None i AN F kF L 7D 2 ~ i' ~~ a OFFICE OF DIVISION SUPERINTENDENT ROANOKE COUNTY SCHOOLS 526 SOUTH COLLEGE AVENUE SALEM, VIRGINIA 241 53 March 16, 1990 Alen, Clerk to the Board of Supervisors TO: Mrs. Mary FROM: Ruth Wad ~ ~'~ Enclosed is another item for the March 27 meeting of the Board of Supervisors. The Department of Transportation is making a ou a copy as soon as correction on the deed, and I will send y we receive it for attachment to the resolution. Either he Homer Duff or Paul Mahoney can make the presentation to t board on the 27th. Thanks for your assistance. Enclosure c; Mr, Paul Mahoney r FROM THE MINUTES OF THE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD OF ROANOKE COUNTY MEETING IN REGULAR SESSION AT 7 P.M. ON MARCH 8, 1990 IN THE BOARD ROOM OF THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION BUILDING] SALEM VIRGINIA. RESOLUTION REQUESTING AN APPROPRIATION BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY TO THE SCHOOL BOARD FEDERAL AND STATE GRANT FUND. WHEREAS] the County School Board of Roanoke County has received a grant of $17]960.00 from the Governor's Councit on Alcohol and Drug Abuses and WHEREAS said funds which are 100 percent reimbursable will be used to expand the student assistance program to North County; NOWT THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the County School Board of Roanoke County on motion of Paul G. Black and duly seconded requests an appropriation of $17 960.00 from the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County to the School Board Federal and State Grant Fund. Approved on the following vote: AYES: Paul G. Black] Maurice L. Mitchell Charlsie S. Pafford Barbara B. Chewning~ Frank E. Thomas NAYS: None TEST ~.~~~ r C l e r k c: Mrs_ Diane Hyatt OANO F ~F >. z ~ 2 a OFFICE OF DIVISION SUPERINTENDENT ROANOKE COUNTY SCHOOLS 526 SOUTH COLLEGE AVENUE SALEM, VIRGINIA 24153 March 9, 1990 Mary, Enclosed is an appropriation resolution approved by the school board on March 8. Would you please put this item on your March 27 agenda. Mr. Jack Liddy, supervisor of health and physical education, will appear to answer any questions. I have sent a copy to Diane Hyatt. Enclosure Thanks, ,, ~Gt~- 4~• % ~1 ~'!t'' '`~'~'K' .s h .. W ~ N O t~ EH+ H tx H Paz Z ~ ~ H a H H O ~ ~ ~ w . H a t- W N o 0; ~ W ~~ ~ W p .a p p O u W p o u a :a U ~ ~ W N `~ a o o `~ ~ d Z O O `~ H ~+ ~' < _ ~ ~ ~ °a~n H~ cnH a z ° W W(7 ~W W cn to Q ~ E,, ~ ~+ a ~ ~ uWi a pm ~N cEncn~a ~ ~~~ w ~p "D W aU W o FW ~ H ~+ ~ N W ~ ~ ~ II ~ W e cs ~`" N W N a W "' ? y`~b i t!I >+ ~ P04 / a Z ~~ H 6 w '~~J's~y'' °, a to y -sb i. Ca~ 'G6 f'bv ati~ ~` •O ~ `^l~ ~y (+ J ~ ~ m o~~ ~ g .r ~A~ N ~..~.~c,~sy-- ltc !FL ~ ~ '~ r _ N ~ Q :. ~ ~ M~~y,ryosy n Z ~ ~ . '~ r ~ '- 8~ Z 'Q Z V~ p ~ et N ~' ~ o N r It• i.. ~ ~ > ~ N ~ Qa 4 ~ ' a` o yI Q ~ tl. v d 11 n II p, ~~ ~c' v ~ ~ , ~ ~~~ Q a~Qvv o ,!L'OBL ~ --- ~ ~ s S ~: x ~ c ~ ~ ~ ~ K ~ Z w ~ c~c~ o ua, r~ '.. ~ : o a o •.,. 4i0 u, ~ • ~ o c ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ?~NNN N ~ ~. ~, N 1 1 ~ i ~ - ~ c Nil _ ~ ~,' to 9d1y3y0a ~pM~tll9 ., "y~1~'y~Z t10~y ~4 Nyt6,d3W 1• NO ~ .. ~ t ~v K ~ ~aH~ ~ N .Qa O p.~ . ,-~ ~ D N • H ~++ ~ W 0 ~u4 04 W O o a o a N ~ H a 0 N N t9 W ai N 4 w ~ ' H 0" ° a ° °° M 4 a~ H a p. °i Hc n awHu o ~ H x o 0 ° o °' a w° o~ w a 3 a ~ a ~' a w V ~~f / w ~~ ~ s ~ ~ ~ '°E . ~ ~-. ~ / ti ~~h~ ~- ~~~ z ~ ~~~~~ h w ~ ~, ~ ~ ~ st ~, \ ~ ~~ o ~ •~ z ~ _ ~ ~ o ~ ~ Q. `` I y ~ '~`. r ~ss~ / O V i W n. 0 W W 0 W W 0 0 ~~ =t ~• ~ _~~ ~ g 3W s ~ m .- ~ ";t~- ~o W ~ ~ ~, W J~ ~~ m o~~. ~ W t