Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7/23/1991 - RegularO~ ROANp~~ a L ti A Z ~, J ? a B~ 88 SFSQUICEN7ENN~P~' A Btauti jui Beginning ~g'89 ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION AGENDA JULY 23, 1991 Welcome to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors meeting. Regular meetings are held on the second Tuesday and the fourth Tuesday at 3:00 p.m. Public hearings are held at 7:00 p.m on the fourth Tuesday of each month. Deviations from this schedule will be announced. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 P.M.) 1. Roll Call AT 3:00 P.M. SAM, CHAIRMAN ABSENT HCN, VICE CHAIRMAN PRESIDING 2. Invocation: The Reverend Steven W. Harris Baptist Children's Home 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag. B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS ITEM D-4 - ECH ADVISED THIS ITEM WAS BEING DEFERRED i C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND AWARDS D. NEW BUSINESS 1. Adoption of the revised Secondary Road System Six-Year Construction Plan for Fiscal Year 1991-92. A-72391-1 RWR MOTION TO ADOPT URC WITH SAM ABSENT 2. Authorization to accept from Virginia Department of Transportation the Roanoke River Wayside on Route 11/460 for use as a public park. A-72391-2 BL.T MOTION TO ACCEPT URC WITH SAM ABSENT BL.T DIRECTED STAFF TO BRING BACK REPORT SURROUNDING THE EVENTS ABOUT RIVER PROPERTY OFFERED AS DONATION BY TOE THOMAS SEVERAL YEARS AGO RWR SUGGESTED THAT EFFORTS BE MADE TO COMBINE THE SCHOOLS AND PARKS & RECREATION MAINTENANCE OF PROPERTIES TO BETTER EFFICIENCY 3. Request from the Roanoke County School Board to submit literary fund loan applications. 2 A-72391-3 BL.T MOTION TO APPROVE URC WITH SAM ABSENT LBE REQUESTED THAT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION BE OBTAINED FROM SCHOOL BOARD WITH SPECIFIC TUSTIFICATION FOR PROTECTS INCLUDING WHY AND WHAT PROTECT WILL ACCOMPLISH LBE REOUESTED THAT ECH ASK SCHOOL BOARD FOR A REPORT CONCERNING THE STATUS OF ROOF LEAKS AT SCHOOLS 4. Approval of Mutual Assistance Agreement with City of Salem. E. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS 1. Request for Work Session on August 13, 1991, with the Explore Advisory Committee. HCN TO SET WORK SESSION FOR 8/13/91 F. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS NONE 3 G. PUBLIC HEARING AND FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES -CONSENT AGENDA BLJ MOTION TO APPROVE 1ST READING 2ND AND PUBLIC HEARINGS - 8/27/91 URC WITH SAM ABSENT 1. An ordinance to rezone 0.20 acre from B-1 to B-2 to allow retail uses, located west side of US 220, Red Hill area, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Maxey Homes Incorporated. 2. An ordinance to rezone approximately 12 acres from M- 1 to B-2 and obtain a Special Exception Permit to operate a retirement community, located north side of Route 11/460, west of Salem, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of Richfield Retirement Community. 3. An ordinance to rezone .71 acre from R-1 to M-1 to allow aself-storage facility, located at 6426 Merriman Road, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of 301 Gilmer Associates. H. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance authorizing the assessment of fees taxed as costs in certain cases filed in the Courts of the County for construction, renovation or maintenance of courthouse, jail or court-related facilities. RWR MOTION TO APPROVE 1ST READING 2ND READING - 8/13/91 URC WITH SAM ABSENT 4 2. Ordinance amending Chapter 22, Water of the Roanoke County Code by the addition of a new Section 22-6, "Reduction of Rates" to authorize the reduction of water rates in hardship situations for elderly and disabled persons. BL.T MOTION TO APPROVE 1ST READING AND APPROPRIATE $30.000 FROM UTILITY FUND, 2ND READING TO BE HELD 8/27/91 AT THE SAME TIME OF THE PERSONAL PROPERTY RELIEF ORDINANCE, AND ONLY ONE APPLICATION TO OUALIFY FOR RELIEF FROM BOTH PERSONAL PROPERTY AND UTILITY RATES URC WITH SAM ABSENT 3. Ordinance ratifying and confirming the acquisition and acceptance of the necessary easements for the Valleypointe Phase II Sanitary Sewer Project. LBE MOTION TO APPROVE 1ST READING 2ND READING - 8/13/91 URC WITH SAM ABSENT I. APPOINTMENTS 1. Clean Valley Council 2. Community Corrections Resources Board HCN APPOINTED EDMUND KIELTY TO SERVE ANOTHER ONE- YEAR TERM AS A REGULAR MEMBER INSTEAD OF AN ALTERNATE MEMBER J. CONSENT AGENDA 5 ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO BE ROUTINE AND WII.L BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. R-72391-4 BL.T MOTION TO ADOPT URC WITH SAM ABSENT 1. Confirmation of appointment to the Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission. A-72391-4.a 2. Donation of drainage easements in connection with the Hunting Hills Road Project. A-72391-4.b 3. Resolutions requesting acceptance of the following roads into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary Road System. R-72391-4.c R-72391-4.d R-72391-4.e R-72391-4.f R-72391-4.g a. Crossbow Circle b. Chukar Drive c. Archer Drive d. Red Stag Lane e. Elk Hill Drive 4. Resolution of support for the creation of the Center on Rural Development (CORD) and location of CORD in the Roanoke Region. 6 R-72391-4.h 5. Acknowledgement of acceptance of 0.10 miles of Lakeland Drive, 0.02 miles of Green Meadow Road, 0.60 miles of Fairway View Trail and 0.32 miles of Buckwood Trail in the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. A-72391-4.i 6. Acknowledgement of addition to, discontinuance, and abandonment of portions of Route 752 and addition to portion of Route 1765 in the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. A-72391-4.i 7. Transmittal of resolution from the Planning Commission regarding conformity of the Explore Park to the 1985 Comprehensive Plan. A-72391-4.k 8. Donation of water line and sanitary sewer easement in connection with Bernard Drive/Fallowater Sewer Line Extension from Dominion Bank, N.A. A-72391-4.1 K. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS SUPERVISOR EDDY: (1) REQUESTED UPDATE ON CITIZEN SURVEY CONDUCTED LAST WEEK. ECH ADVISED NOT COMPLETE. (2) URGED STAFF AND PLANNING COMII~IISSION TO PROCEED RAPIDLY WITH ZONING ORDINANCE AND PUBLIC HEARINGS. (3) REQUESTED LETTER OF APPRECIATION TO BRAMBLETON AVENUE ASSOCIATION FOR BEAUTIFICATION OF AREA AT 419 AND BRAMBLETON. HCN AND ECH EXPLAINED THAT STAFF TOOK OVER THE 11~IAINTENANCE OF THIS AREA AND BOTH LBE AND HCN EXPRESSED APPRECIATION TO THE STAFF. (4) COMII~NTED THAT BOARD MEMBERS RECEIVED COPIES OF "ZAP" BOOK ABOUT EMPLOYEE EMPOWERMENT AND HE HAS A COPY AVAILABLE OF THE REPORT "CITIZENS AND POLITICS" WHICH BOARD MEMBERS MAY WANT TO READ. L. CITIZENS' C011~IlVIENTS AND COMMU1vICATIONS NONE M. REPORTS BL.T MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILE _ UW WITH SAM ABSENT 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Board Contingency Fund 3. Accounts Paid -June 1991 4. Report on compliance and enforcement regarding display of street address numerals. LBE SUGGESTED A PRESS RELEASE BE MADE CONCERNING THIS INFORMATION 5. Report on the utilization of the Automated Message System. LBE SUGGESTED DISCONTINUING NUMBERS WITH NO CALLS AND MAKING SURE MESSAGES ARE UPDATED N. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.1-344 A NONE O. CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE SESSION NONE RECESS AT 4 P.M. EVENING SESSION RECONVENED AT 7:05 P.M. P. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND AWARDS 1. Resolution of Congratulations to Glenvar High School Girls Softball Team for winning State Group A Championship. R-72391-5 RWR MOTION TO ADOPT UW WITH SAM ABSENT 9 PRESENTED TO COACH HARRISON AND TWO PLAYERS. ECH TO REPORT BACK TO BOARD ABOUT POSSIBILITY OF SECURING TWO SIGNS OF CONGRATULATIONS TO POST IN CO Q. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 791-1 An ordinance to rezone 1.709 acres from A-1 to R-3 to construct townhouses, located in Emerald Court Subdivision, Reservoir Road, Hollins Magisterial District upon the petition of A. J. Everett, Lynward Twine and Cline Conner. 0-72391-6 BIT MOTION TO ADOPT ORDINANCE URC WITH SAM ABSENT 791-Z An ordinance to amend proffered conditions on 3 acres zoned B-2 and obtain a Special Exception Permit to operate a home for the elderly, located on Fallowater Lane, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of The Wilkinson Group, Inc. 0-72391-7 RWR MOTION TO ADOPT ORDINANCE URC WITH SAM ABSENT 791-3 An ordinance to amend the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance to include Section 21-25-1, Explore Park District (EPDI, to provide for a zoning district designated and reserved solely for activities associated with the Explore Park. 0-72391-8 so RWR MOTION TO ADOPT ORDINANCE ~~~" URC WITH SAM ABSENT R SECOND READING. OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance amending and reenacting Article IV, Sewer Use Standards of Chapter 18 of the Roanoke County Code of 1985 (formerly, Article III, of Chapter 16 of the Roanoke County Code of 1971.) BI,~T MOTION TO ADOPT ORDINANCE BI,~T WITHDREW MOTION JOHN HANSEN, ENVIRONMENTAL COORDINATOR FOR INGERSOLL-RAND COMPANY AND RUSSELL V. RANDLE, ENVIRONMENTAL COUNSEL FOR INGERSOLL-RAND COMPANY REQUESTED ELIMINATION OF BAN ON DISCHARGE OF TWO METALS~BISMUTH AND MOLYBDENUM. IN THE ORDINANCE AND FOR THE COUNTY TO REQUEST THE CITY DO THE SAME O~ p,OANpk~ ~. .~ z Z °a a 18 E50\ 88 SFSQUICENTENN~P~ A Btauti~ul8cginning C~nixn~~ ~f ~nttnnkr ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA JULY 23, 1991 ALL-AMHtICA Clilf ~ -~ i x•9.8.9 Welcome to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors meeting. Regular meetings are held on the second Tuesday and the fourth Tuesday at 3:00 p.m. Public hearings are held at 7:00 p.m on the fourth Tuesday of each month. Deviations from this schedule will be announced. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 P.M.) 1. Roll Call. 2. Invocation: The Reverend Steven W. Harris Baptist Children's Home 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 i fi D. NEW BUSINESS 1. Adoption of the revised Secondary Road System Six-Year Construction Plan for Fiscal Year 1991-92. 2. Authorization to accept from Virginia Department of Transportation the Roanoke River Wayside on Route 11/460 for use as a public park. 3. Request from the Roanoke County School Board to submit literary fund loan applications. 4. Approval of Mutual Assistance Agreement with City of Salem. E. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS 1. Request for Work Session on August 13, 1991, with the Explore Advisory Committee. F. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS G. PUBLIC HEARING AND FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES -CONSENT AGENDA 1. An ordinance to rezone 0.20 acre from B-1 to B-2 to allow retail uses, located west side of US 220, Red Hill area, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition a of Maxey Homes Incorporated. 2. An ordinance to rezone approximately 12 acres from M- 1 to B-2 and obtain a Special Exception Permit to operate a retirement community, located north side of Route 11/460, west of Salem, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of Richfield Retirement Community. 3. An ordinance to rezone .71 acre from R-1 to M-1 to allow aself-storage facility, located at 6426 Merriman Road, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of 301 Gilmer Associates. H. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance authorizing the assessment of fees taxed as costs in certain cases filed in the Courts of the County for construction, renovation or maintenance of courthouse, jail or court-related facilities. 2. Ordinance amending Chapter 22, Water of the Roanoke County Code by the addition of a new Section 22-6, "Reduction of Rates" to authorize the reduction of water rates in hardship situations for elderly and disabled persons. 3. Ordinance ratifying and confirming the acquisition and acceptance of the necessary easements for the Valleypointe Phase II Sanitary Sewer Project. I. APPOINTMENTS 3 1. Clean Valley Council 2. Community Corrections Resources Board J. CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO BE ROUTINE AND WII.L BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WII.L BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. 1. Confirmation of appointment to the Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission. 2. Donation of drainage easements in connection with the Hunting Hills Road Project. 3. Resolutions requesting acceptance of the following roads into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary Road System. a. Crossbow Circle b. Chukar Drive c. Archer Drive d. Red Stag Lane e. Elk Hill Drive 4. Resolution of support for the creation of the Center on Rural Development (CORD) and location of CORD in the Roanoke Region. 4 5. Acknowledgement of acceptance of 0.10 miles of Lakeland Drive, 0.02 miles of Green Meadow Road, 0.60 miles of Fairway View Trail and 0.32 miles of Buckwood Trail in the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. 6. Acknowledgement of addition to, discontinuance, and abandonment of portions of Route 752 and addition to portion of Route 1765 in the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. 7. Transmittal of resolution from the Planning Commission regarding conformity of the Explore Park to the 1985 Comprehensive Plan 8. Donation of water line and sanitary sewer easement in connection with Bernard Drive/Fallowater Sewer Line Extension from Dominion Bank, N.A. K. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS L. CITIZENS' CO1I~IlVIENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS M. REPORTS 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Board Contingency Fund 3. Accounts Paid -June 1991 5 4. Report on compliance and enforcement regarding display of street address numerals. 5. Report on the utilization of the Automated Message System. N. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.1-344 A O. CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE SESSION EVENTING SESSION P. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNTITIONS, AND AWARDS 1. Resolution of Congratulations to Glenvar High School Girls Softball Team for winning State Group A Championship. Q. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 791-1 An ordinance to rezone 1.709 acres from A-1 to R-3 to construct townhouses, located in Emerald Court Subdivision, Reservoir Road, Hollins Magisterial District upon the petition of A. J. Everett, Lynward Twine and Cline Conner. 6 791-2 An ordinance to amend proffered conditions on 3 acres zoned B-2 and obtain a Special Exception Permit to operate a home for the elderly, located on Fallowater Lane, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of The Wilkinson Group, Inc. 791-3 An ordinance to amend the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance to include Section 21-25-1, Explore Park District (EPDI, to provide for a zoning district designated and reserved solely for activities associated with the Explore Park. R SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance amending and reenacting Article IV, Sewer Use Standards of Chapter 18 of the Roanoke County Code of 1985 (formerly, Article III, of Chapter 16 of the Roanoke County Code of 1971.) S. CITIZEN CO1VIlI~NTS AND CONiMU1VICATIONS T. ADJOURNMENT t ~,'~ - d AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JULY 23, 1991 RESOLUTION 72391-1.a APPROVING THE REVISED SECONDARY SYSTEM SIX-YEAR CONSTRUCTION PLAN FOR ROANORE COUNTY FOR FISCAL YEAR 1991-92 WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on March 26, 1991, to receive comments on the Secondary Highway Six-Year Construction Plan for Roanoke County for Fiscal Year 1991-92; and WHEREAS, The Board approved Resolution 51491-4 on May 14, 1991, adopting the Secondary Road System Six-Year Construction Plan for Fiscal Year 1991-92; and WHEREAS, The Board was notified by the Virginia Department of Transportation that Roanoke County's allocation had been reduced due to the state's budget; and WHEREAS, The Board does hereby approve the Revised Secondary Highway Six-Year Construction Plan for Roanoke County for Fiscal Year 1991-92 as set out on the attached summary. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution duly attested be forthwith forwarded to the Virginia Department of Transportation Salem Residency Office along with a duly attested copy of the Revised Secondary Highway Six-Year Construction Plan for Roanoke County for Fiscal Year 1991-92 by the Clerk to the Board. On motion of Supervisor Robers to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Robers, Johnson, Nickens NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor McGraw A COPY TESTE: >r)- ~d . Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File George Simpson, Assistant Director, Engineering Fred C. Altizer, Resident Engineer, Virginia Department of Transportation ACTION # A-72391-1 ITEM NUMBER .Y ° AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: July 23, 1991 AGENDA ITEM: Adoption of the revised Secondary Rvad System Six- Year Construction Plan for Fiscal Year 1991-92 C1)UNTY ADMIAiISTRATOR' S COMMENTS : ~ ~ ~,~ ~/~ BACKGROUND In March, 1991, the Board approved a resolution adopting the Secondary Road System Six-Year Construction Plan for Fiscal Year 1991-92 in the amount of $1,998,871. Ede were recently notified by VDOT that our allocation has been reduced to $1,659,104 a reduction of $339,767 due to the State's Budget. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION As a result of this reduction in funds we have made the following changes; reduced the "Countywide Construction" Category from $250,000 to $199,000, reduced the "Incidental Construction" Category from $180,000 to $167,500, reduced the Numbered Projects funds from $1,568,871 to $1,292,604. These revisions are reflected in the attached Proposed Secondary Road System Construction Plan for Fiscal Year 1991-92. ALTERNATIVES AND IMPACTS This action requires no expenditure of County funds. i STAFF RECONII~iFsNDAT ION Staff Recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve a resolution adopting the attached revised Secondary Road System Six-year Construction Plan for Fiscal Year 1991-92. ~` APPRO ED BY: SUBMITTED Y~ n 3` ~ ~` Elmer C. Hodge Arnold Covey,`,Dir or County Administrator of Engineering & Inspe ions ----------- -- ---------- -------------------- VOTE ACTION No Yes Absent Approved (x) Motion by: Richard W,_~nberEddy -x-- Denied ( ) Johnson --x- Received ( ) McGraw -~- Referred Nickens .-_ .__ _-.~- --- Robers -_ __. _. cc: Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Diane Hyatt, Director, Finance Reta Busher, Director, Management & Budget 2 ~_i SECONDARY ROAD SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION PLAN FOR ROANOKE COUNTY FISCAL YEAR 1991-92 VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (SALEM DISTRICT) ~-~ ~9 ~G N -~ Q- 1 ei © RS ST ~pp ~ rl ts7 C.3 a O~t9 ~Q a ~O Q~~ Q .wl M O d l~ O~y ~ fY7 r [A~ ~ N ~ ~ Q C? f+') a ~ ~ a ~ ~ o Q W r^I r^I Q'~ ~ ` ^~.. ~ ~ `~. N • M ~ pp •ri "F" + W CtJ '"~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ Cn ~ . .-a . • ~ ~ ~ + a ~ o Gi ' ~ 4; ~ ~ Liz r: o p , ~ (Ii ~ a N ~ + ~ { , o O c ~ ~"~ ro s pa per'. n o p,d p,; ~ G7 ~ ~ ~ ,~,~ ~" pa o '^~ a i a a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~i~+ ~a~i .~ ~~ ,~ ~~ ~,N ai~ . i a . a '~ ~ ~~"j ~c~n4~i ~cpN ~~~ ~ cd~N~ ~+~cn~ ~~~~ ,. ,,~ ai ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a ""'~ W ~ ~ aaOGa p1 C3+ fZ1 fs7 ~.7 qa W [~7 F"7 Ra W [t7 "~ ~, C,~ CJ C.J ~"~ C..1 U a~W~ . O ~ ~ ~ w N ^ f„~ ,..,.~ N ~ w aa. pG 4~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ U ~N ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ y~-iD N ~ ~ (~ ~ ~.+ ~ •r~ Q~ ~ p ~r d ~ ~ ~ ~ ta ~ ~ O d 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~~ p ~ ~~ c7c~ xt~ ~ ,~ c 4 ~-i U O d ~I ~ O rl M r1 rl Q d o N ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~,, W ~; '.,~ ~ '-i '..~ "~' ill .~ \ ,~ R] ,,~ ,.~ N ~+ ~ d ~ O R: 41 N G4~ Q1 cr7 GY+ ~ C'.7 ~Y, ~ N GG ~ d P4 12' Lr d P4 G'.. i.c') d P'C R' to C7 P4 (~ ~ d ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ CJt ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ tip +~.~ N ~ ai ~ tU ~ ~ ~ ~ a~i n~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;~,, y `,.-+tl, y `n w ,-., a~i +.~ as '-+ w +~ ~ a, w°~ ~ a a. cra c~ a w wa a, as wtAwa a.wc~a a. caa~a a ~~i, ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ N pG Ri N f`1 a a. a~ ~ f~] ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N o 0 &, G5M ~+N ~M t'A~ ~d tD ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .-a ~ ~ ~ ~ t]"G V ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~0, Q ~ pip Rte,, ,~ ~ C? R' ~ ~ ~ 5 ~i E W U 0 ~~ o ~ ,'?„ 0 ri M ~ ~ .-~ W ~ ~ o o ~ o ~'' o ~ ° rn ~ N N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .--i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '~. ~ Q ' ' PC R. O PC R'~ C-- © PC n'r ~i ~ ,~ ~' ,.,~ •ri py Q.' O ) Q i U DC Q . 1' -W N ~ +^~ +~ 41 ~ ~ t + RS .E.~ C!) K.+ ~ ~ Q1 G N d cC3 ~ N +~ ~ ~"'~ d +~ N aotza ~ ~w ~ w ar~~~ ww~w a c ~~a ~~a wmt~a w A r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ n~j a N ~ N fr+ M a a N b a~ H ~ '+"' G ~ ~ .l W h ~ ~ ~ ~ Q W ~ ~ f' ~ ~ N ~ ~ pMp ~ ~ It') W ~~'"+ ~ D •rl l ~ ~ ~ 'b `--~ LL ~i L ) ~+ ca y ~ ~ CO ~} ~-+ N ^'~ ~ ~ r-1 r1 cq ~ ' of ~.-~ ~ ~~, .aa~ ~a~ m° W ~ ~ ~ 'a ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ° ° o & x ~ U O a~ ~~ (ja W~ as ~ ~ ~ ~ 6 ~- ca ~o a ~+ cn •~+ ~~ a o ca I ~ o oca rnt~ ~ ° `~a ao ~ ~ e~ 1 M 01] N ~ I ~ ~ ~ (Y1 C`~ O'+ ~ ~ N ~ i!? ~~ H VVV °' ~ ~, ~ ~n ~ o , ^'~ X21 ~-+ .a ~ ~ b ~, .~ c~ ~" Q1 ,~, ~ o P4 W' ~ ~ ~ o m ~ ac GG ..~ tad ~qqyy W ~ rtf +~ N >~ N N a ,~., ~q~ W ~ ,-i d ~ N q G~..QA~~ 4+f7A~~ ~A~ Ca.QpAa p,GgA.-~ H C~ p^ Q M W C1Ci N N N N N a a. a ~ o r~ +~ •N ~ w ai A LL "'~ ""i ~ ~" O c~ ~ ~ .'~ y'' '"~ ~ ~ '~ ""~ .- ~" A tr r^+ ~ ~ Q to G" ~+ ~ "{ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ax 7 _ ~'~ w +~ •~+ ro r+ rn _~ ~ U ~ ~ A ~ ~ , a~ ~~ ~ ° ' 0 ~ ~ N ~ O Cf) ~ a..~ ~ ~ •.a ~ ~ ro ~ w Qc~n ~ ~ ~ w w~ U ~ rs ~ ~ Q o I cD QC~ ~ ~ ObCT rn ~ ~Q ~Po ~ ~jo rl H I`~ I ~Ir~~ ~4N o ~~ ~ ~ I ~ p ~ ~ ~, O O N ° ~ 0 0 o o N o ,e~ ~Q~ ~O ~ M ~ ~ ca ~ Lrr N M U ~ '"~ [!r .,~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ N O~x~ O N x W G~ ~ ~ CTro ~~ Q m~ o ~ ""~ N N +~ Q p ~ ~. H R' M 4-I ~'' ~ ~ . ~ rn 47 U ~ •.-1 Q U W ~ H CD C'~ w O ~ O ~ +~ O C7 "y+^i 1~ 0 ~ DE Q ~'+ ~ ~ O o +~ ~ 'qC " 0 a N 4+ N R! 1~ ~ W U] R' N .r;'+ " Ua tR ,t 0.i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ tti ~ ~ ~ ~ i'' +~ ~ ~ ,~~, I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O N N t71 U +a ~ iw'' "" CJ ~ N .,~ N o a ~ t ~ ~ ~ , ~, ro•~+~ U o o a~ w o w a ~ ~ ~ aai we ~ T Q.,w U ~ Z~ ~aHaz ~ ~w x~za q ~ U ~V~W~a ~cn c n ~~ M f'] o ~ LL') tD ~ 4Tr ~+ m O.r W ~ n . ,,.r ~ i-~ CJ N ~ ~ ~ !n w ~ w ~ o " N ro ra O y ~ '-' ~ A ~ ~ ~ t~ ~^' ~ N c~ ~~ ° pO ~ ~ a'' .p ~ ~+ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ va cn Cs. W G? ~ ~ ~ `O N 41 ~ ~ ~ ~ q~ Q7 -I-' N 4~ ~ ~ N ~ >w +~ r, ~ ro ~ ~ a ro o ~ ~ ~ o .,~ o ~a p ~° ~, a w ram ~ aar.>~ 8 ~-i +-~ ~ U +~ +' U U V N U U O O O . .r, N .~ n .r.., O O O H N ~ w w o ~ ~ a N N N O w U U ~"' U U U ~ ~ ro t., ro b ~ ~ .~ G ~ ~~ •~' ~.. w ~ w N ~ i C'D ~ i i '-1 W W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o O Q ~ ~ C ` Q eel M Q y11 ~ O r-~1 W Ctr ("11 N N N f'G ~ ~ p ~ C•7 O ~ O p O ~ p O ~ O~ ~ - OL7 - ef+ ~ N e~+ ~ ~ M O C+7 M ~ r.. H W b ~ ~ .~ '£~' .~ , ro~ ~~ ~~~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '' H ~,~ rn q~accnw •~+ ' ~ N'c? p~ H ~ .-1 O+ O ~ ~ ~ Q 7 O O N pp ,~ 4 0 G U C71 C7'~ ~ H +"~ +~ ~~ ~ .~ H ~ U1 ~ ~ +-~ ~ O ~ ~ N N N O H +~ b1 U ~ f]5 +~ Cl ~ ~ • ~ U R. •r+ U CT 4+ ~ ~ O +~ O N 5~? ° N ~ O•~+ ~W .- H ~ ~R~ ~o~ ,a ..~ ~U~.tn C~G~v~a ~+ '.a wcno ~a.ma txaW W a o ~-~+ ~ ~ M ~ ~ H A E w N ,~ ~ N ~ w ~ b ro `~ ~ a 'a ro & N ~ ~, oM x ~, ~~ ~ ~w ~'va ~, tr'w `~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ w H O O ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ P O x~ ~~ 9 ~-i b ~ ~ ~ ~ a C3~ ~" O Q O A A ~ H A ~ U ~ ~ ,~ '~', U ~y O O ~ O ~ ~ ~ 4a Ca ~' ~ ~ I ~ ~, Q? ~r~~tr, ~ ~ ~ ~o ~~ ~ M ~ A ~ Q ~ 1 1 ~ I ~. O Q ~ O © C7 Q ~ M N ~ ~ O '-i M W (x,) .~,. ~. '^i b e~-1 'Cj ~ C71 d ~ ~ SY ~ ^i ~ . -1 ~ , . ~ . a -~ ' ~ ^ ~~ O R' +~ H Qcao v , + ~ -F i cr ~' a ~ ~ .~ ~ . ~ ~ i F+A a N ~ ~ ~~ po a~ W ~+~ ~ a~ ~ ro y °~~°Hac ~° °' o to +~ a ~o ~ -+ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ tr,. ~ N a,x r Q 'b ~ . .~ a~°~ ~ ~„ r ,~ Cy + .~ ~ o ~ w ° U ~ ~ ,, ~a AH~ a i C~''' 3AcA0 ~~~ ~~U q ~ p ~r `~ ~ ~ Q H ~ ~ . -+ ~i W '~' A ia A as ~ LC7 'd O . ~ o C- Q -~~^ ~i +-~ Q~ ~ ~ N +' -Fa .}.r Q ~ ~ . to + ua ~ ~ C ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ O P ' 7~ w ~ C„) . ~~ -~- i .~, U .~ 4-1 Gl ~ ~ E .~ C,~ Gz. N ~ I ~ I ~ ~ ~ O Q ~ y Cs+ Cxr [`4. Op I ~ O W ~ E H ""~ G/1 rn rn E„ 0 ''' Cn W w O ~+ Ca G O .AC •~ N U ~ H ~ {,i ~-^~ C~+ N +.~ ~ U "/v ~ C~ E H W Q~ ~ W H r..-~ ~ ~ 'Ly H a ~ W x h ~ H a U ~" rn ~, W '-+ oa p ro ~ a ~.; cx! U `~ ~ ~~ ~O CO N ~ ~ l1~ N e ~ { '-i i ~? [!? di E 4 H E+ U [s] P.. w x W I ~ ~~ C1~ O~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (~? +h a E~ Q ACTION NO. A-72391-2 ITEM NUMBER ~ '° ~"'~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: July 23, 1991 AGENDA ITEM: Authorization to accept from the Va. Dept. of Transportation the Roanoke River Wayside on Route 11/460 for use as a public park. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR' S C'J~rOMMENTS: ~~,;,~, ~.~a C~,er'rw"~'q'o..,r. BACKGROUND' The Virginia Department of Transportation has offered to donate to Roanoke County the 1.6 acre Roanoke County River Wayside located on Route 11-460, approximately 5 miles south of Green Hill Park. Staff has expressed interest in the site and has begun preliminary steps to accept title to the park, contingent upon authorization by the Board of Supervisors. SUNIlKARY OF INFORMATION The site has substantial direct frontage on the Roanoke River. The amenities include: (1) a gravel access road, (2) a large picnic area with ten picnic tables and receptacles, (3) access to the river for fishing and small nonpowered water craft boating. The property is in very good condition with well established trees and turf areas. The staff has reviewed and supports the proposal and the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission unanimously recommended that the County accept the wayside as a designated County park. FISCAL IMPACT' Attached is a Maintenance Impact Statement from the Department of Parks and Recreation outlining the costs to maintain the park. The estimated costs will be $3,626 per year. Funds are available in the Parks and Recreation budget and no additional appropriation is necessary. RECOMMENDATION' at no cos Roanoke County Public Park. Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors authorize the County Administrator to accept title to the Roanoke River Wayside property t to the County and that the wayside be designated as a ~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ACTION VOTE Approved ( ~ Motion by: Bob L. Johnson No Yes Absent ( ) to approve staff recommendation Eddy x Denied Johnson x Received ( ) McGraw x Referred ( ) Nickens x To ( ) Robers x ------------------------------ cc: File Steve Carpenter, Director, Parks & Recreation John Willey, Director, Real Estate Assessment .l.J"" Roanoke County. De artment of Parks and. Recreation MAINTENANCE IMPACT STATEMENT Roanoke River Wa side - Route 11 DESCRIPTION: Impact Statement is based on the annual maintenance of a 1.6 acres formerly maintained wayside by the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). The wayside is located on Route 11 South, approximately 4.8 miles south of Green Hill Park. The existing site is rectangular in shape, having substantial direct frontage on the Roanoke River. At present, site development and amenities include: 1) A gravel base access road providing both ingress and egress; 2) A large picnic area including ten picnic tables and associated receptacles and; 3) Roanoke River access for fishing and small non- powered watercraft boating. 4) General condition of site development and amenities is very good. Subject area has an abundance of mature tree stands (i.e. shade) and well established turf areas. EXPENDITURE ITEM: I. CONTRACT MAINTENANCE SERVICES Note: At present, the County does not have sufficient Parks Division manpower or equipment resources to provide the following services. As a result, the Department would propose to commercially contract the following services as part of the regular park system contract maintenance program. A. 29 Mowings/Trimming (one mowing per week - 2nd week in April through 3rd week in November or appropriate .seasonal adjustments) $40.00 per acre x 1.6 acres x 29 g. Fertilization (3 applications) $35.00 per acre x 1.6 acres x 3 C. Broadleaf Herbicide Treatment 1 application} $125.00 per acres x 1.6 acres x mowings......$1,856. applications..$ 168. (pre-emergent - application.$ 200. Sub-total contractual services (Per annum) .............................$2,224. II. SALARIES AND FRINGE BENEFITS A. Litter Control - 65.0 hours/year B. General Maintenance/Repairs - 28.0 hours/year Total: 93.0 hours/year at $10.45/hour Sub-total, SALARIES AND FRINGE BENEFITS.$ 972. III. MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES A. Equipment Usage ...................$ 240./year B. Materials, supplies ............. ..$ 190./year Sub-total, Materials & supplies........$ 430. TOTAL ESTIMATED ANNUAL MAINTENANCE COSTS ..............$3,626 DATE SERVICE TO BEGIN - LATE SUMMER, 1991 ALTERNATIVE/RECOMMENDATIONS: Area residents have offered to continue volunteer services to regularly collect and dispose of litter at the wayside and report any instances of vandalism noted. Although not a guaranteed maintenance service, the volunteer efforts could potentially save the County approximately $750/year (22°~) of annual indirect maintenance costs. The 1.6 acre site is located within the CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICounty Rpublkc County, which presently is served by two (2) parks and two (2) school parks (total acreage: 265.0). The Department of Parks and Recreation recommends acceptance of the 1.6 acre site into the County Public Park system. Although the estimated maintenance cost is $2,876 - $3,626 per year, the site is a unique and beautiful potential When with high public benefit Roanoke River access. development funds become available, the site would be ideal for the development of a medium sized picnic shelter. The picnic she reservation lrental net nrevenuelof $700-$800rper estimated year. ~- 1~~~ 1 Prepared by: Date: ACTION # A-72391-3 ITEM NUMBER ~J,f""~ MEETING DATE: July 23, 1991 AGENDA ITEM: Authorization for the Roanoke County School Board to submit certain Literary Fund Applications COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: In accordance with discussions with the Board of County Supervisors during the past several months, the Roanoke County School Board is in the process of preparing applications for Literary Fund loans for certain new school additions and renovations to existing buildings. These projects total $13,900,000 and, once the applications are received by the state, will be placed on the waiting list until funding is available. It is envisioned that these projects will be constructed during the period of 1993-1999, as shown on the attached schedule. In addition to the Literary Fund projects, the school board recommends that a site be procured in the Cave Spring/Sout'n County area as soon as possible for a future high school or middle school. A minimum of forty acres would be required. FISCAL IMPACT: In accordance with schedule prepared by Diane Hyatt and presented to the board of supervisors on July 9, 1991. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that authorization be granted to the school board to submi ro he t ltdefinedund lthe applications to the state for the p j attached resolution. C~~--y''+~^/ o-~ ,~ , .. ~~ ~ ayes Wilson, Superintendent Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ~~~ -2- ---------- ------------------ VOTE ACTION No yeS Absent Approved ( x) Motion by: Bob L. Johnson Eddy x Denied ( ) to approve staff _ Johnson __ McGraw x x Received ( ) recommendation - Nickens x Referred ( ) Robers x To cc: cc: File Dr. Bayes Wilson, Superintendent, Roanoke County Schools Diane Hyatt, Director, Finance ;. ~~ .RESOLUTION REQUESTING AUTHORIZATION BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY TO SUBMIT APPLICATIONS TO THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA FOR LITERARY FUND LOANS. WHEREAS, the County School Board of Roanoke County has evaluated school facilities serving all areas of the county and has concurred that a need exists to commence a program of new additions and renovations to certain present facilities, and WHEREAS, said school board deems it appropriate and in the best interest of the school division to submit applications for Literary Fund loans for the following: Green Valley Elementary - kindergarten 1,000,000. addition and building renovations $ 2,500,000. Cave Spring Junior - building renovations William Byrd High - addition of science 2,000,000. rooms and building renovations Glenvar High - classroom addition and 2,500,000. building renovations Northside High - classroom addition and 1,500,000. building renovations Cave Spring High - addition of science ilding renovations d b 2,500,000. u classrooms an Cave Spring Elementary - library addition 800,000. and building renovations Mason's Cove Elementary - classroom renovations ildin 500,000. g addition and bu Back Creek Elementary - classroom addition 600,000. $13,900,000. TOTAL NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the County School Board of Roanoke County, on motion of Maurice L. Mitchell and duly seconded, requests the Board of County Supervisors of Roanoke County to authorize said school board to submit applications to the Commonwealth of Virginia for Literary Fund loans as herein set forth. J 1. ~~ -2- Adopted on the following recorded vote: AYES: Paul G. Black, Maurice L. Mitchell, Charlsie S. Pafford, Barbara B. Chewning, Frank E. Thomas NAYS: None TESTE: -~-~ ~ ~~~~~~ C l e r k i ~,~` "x da a v m s h J J O CL U ~ V] CG P~+ Fr "l. "31 '~"~ V V I--a D od i O F S t/a ! F ~ O j ~' I j 1 Zr W i ~ m m IcNa .y N o rn N fNp °_ ~ a N e~ ~ ~• 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~~ C 1 J °~ ~ y 1 rn. r~ M ,~ rn ea. r, N o W~ o~ m 0 0 0 0. o 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ M It 1 ~ ~ ~ _ 0 a O O O O O O O O Iia ~ M ° O I F ~ 00 i O F. F O N pp Ca M N O Oa N ICa .-ti m OW ICs O. Is9 O_ u"s ~ E ~f tp N N tC -- ~ M F VJ 1--1 .~ 1 F ..7 O 1 O . r Oa W _ _ +~ M M tp 01 N Iea Oa N M N CO N 01 O M 47 tp ICs r. N ~--~ O Of W F ra ICD f M M N .--i .--~ .--i "" .--I --' . 1 m~ o i m~ 0 o 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 oq F, p l 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o° o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0° o 0 0 0 0 0 0=i0 C ~ o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 e.b 7C O I CJ 00 t 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~" •~ W Iea rn ~ M r./ .p ...I m rn tO M Iaa .F ~F .a• M ° ~ N . p I e' J N 1 e +a M N N N ~I . .I . .. I C ~ 0+ ~~ ~. Q6 0 ~. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 6 O O O O O U= O 1 O O O O O O O O O o O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Z 00 O 1 O O C u'a O ~ O ua O 4'a O Iea 1!f O Iea O Ie'a Ica ° O H O C/i 00 41 _ ~ Iea I[ a t.• ~M ~1• ~ t_ Ie'f N O t.- N O N ti ..v ~.°..~ ti Ita "~' M M M N N N N ~-I N ~ J N Z M ~~ 1 U' V+ ~~ 1 Z O'6 0 , O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O C ~ ~ C ° O O O O O O O O O O 0 C O O O O O O O O O O O di Vi Op O 1 _ O O .. w .. _ O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O o 0 m 00 CO W 1 _ „+, O u N m~ W r.- rt w o ao N f 1~ V~ tD tp Ip If) Ita N Y J N M N M ~ N N .--~ i OG ~. ~ V 1 ~~ 1 U ° 1 O 1 O O O O O o O O O O 6 O O O O o O O o O O O O O O O O O O 1 ~~ 1 O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 y o ~ 67 Iea 1 c - o .ea o Ies o In O us o Iea o Ica o Iea o Iea o Iea Iea O tom. Ilf N t 4i O P- N N ° OO 1 _ ~ N . -I I ~ ti _ N O m F t0 M N O W sn. ~D M N r ~' N 1 ~ M . N N N N N .--I ' .--~ .r ..ti ~--~ .~ ~ti .r V ~~ 1 1 O 00 O 1 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 A O 1 0 0 0 ° 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1--I C>7 ~ 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m O 1 ° O ICs o O 49 O IC) O F m Iff 1 ~°~ C aV ~ N M N N N N ~ ~ G O Oa Of m e0 t0 Ia S ~ M M N ~+ .-. x ._..~ .-..--..--.... 1 ° cv °o ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ 1 0 0 0 0 e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ?~° 0 Iea o o~ o .ca o u-s o Ira o Iea o a oe7 m Ica i ~ o Iea o .e-a Ia°-a N Iea o e>- M N N ~ a C.7 N 1 1 ~ . -i _ W _ _ _ _ _ _ o m o- M a .a .-~ N N N N N .ti ~I .--~ ~y .--1 ti ..r '-n O ° 1 O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c o 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~' C7 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m m e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ° ° m o o ° ° 't N ~ e a Ie i r . e a w ~ o rn o°o 0 o Isoi ~ e°a o 0 N .r .r ~--i ti ti .--~ .--y .-~ ~ .-r O O 1 Z O 1 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O 0 0 ~~ 1 ~ O C 1 0 O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ _ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 L O t!~ 2~ t 5 1 O I`C`'a O ICa O 1[a ~~°~ O o W o I[a O N CV O~ a!a t` Ia'a N O [~ O 47 ti C ~ N 6 N N N N N •--~ .-i .-.. ...~ .--. .--~ .--. .--~ v 1 w °d p^o a cr o i 000000 00 00000000000'0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~~ O 1 ` 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ~ Z O 1 m o 1 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ' x x o 1 C a o Iea .c°a .e. f Ica o Ica o Ic-a o Ica o rn rn ec m~ a°~ Ic iD 10 Ia'a ..P p OG 1 M M N N .--I ~~ CC 00 M V ~~ 1 U 1 N " N F C'! Z P~+ 1 _ N t._ ONi r./ N N N ~. _N l~ ~ ..,1. DI ~ <O M ~ ~ t~ ~ r. _ W ~ = ~ Cp f O W tp t O t Vi 1 ~ ICs = I u'a O 4 W .--~ I O ° Ca ~ M ~ O e N O ~--I V] f. CO O S t O N Ica ! _ ~~ M M M Ief .-. I-..1 F H O I _ ~ o c0 m ~Y O i! C/ 7 J 1 ^O fi+ J N ~ _ _ tp N eo ep ICs tCa ~V• ~I• r~ M M N N _ _ _ •--~ ^'~ ^'I O i l+ m Oa O O O O~ ~s O~ W of O .~ N M I Iia tp W J <Y Oa 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ y m pn ~. .-r 1 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N O N N O _ _ _ 1 Oa 0 0 0 0! ~a O o 0 0 .-+ ~ti 1 ~~ .--i .--~ .--~ ~I .--i .--~ .--I Oa N N O N N N N O O O 1 .-r ~ti ..r N N N N N N N N N N N N ~~ ~ ~ ' , ~ , . ~ ! ~! ~~ ~~ J~ } N rn 00000 o.ea .n e-iea am M-~mM a-.+.l:T.+~ -1 W ~ ~ O ep tp {O tm s0 CG tp tp i0 i A N m i O N t i i %~ (-~ [a O r N O! ti O O M ~ti O N ~ti Of L~ W ~ ac~esam ~ Z T C7 i _ ~ t0 W N O .--~ O tp 'r iG N ief ie9 M .r CD tD ~ tea OD i 1ya .-+ D I y = iea .es us C ~ M eff M ~ r .-.~ Oa .m ~ W .~r ~D isf t0 l~ ~ Oa ! tp L~ OD m O ns ILa tr+ i 03 G1 fA ~--~ .r r+ .-~ .r ..ti .r .--~ .--i N N N N Y O 1 i 1--i O O C] O C O O C G O C O C] C C C] C O C O CC pn ~~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m G{ O m ~. O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ~ 0 0 0 00 tD T N O aD tD T N O m i0 ! N O m tO C F O .. .. ~ V ._ m 0 1 CG O elD N ~-+ O Os W CO .ea M N O Of Cp l~ sp T M N ~--~ M M .--~ 49 ~Ca !!!!! Y T! M M Ni M M M M M ~, Od ~! O 1 U m to C ..~ M m m `~ i i 1--i C C O O O O C O O O C] A G O O C G O C] C m Y ~'~ O O O O O o O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O y os o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~~ o Z m 0 M N .--~ !! T!! M a~a M M M !'a M a~a M M N N N N O ~! ~ 1 V] m 6 .~ M S 00 ~...~ 1 i 6 ar D C] C C C O C C C C G C C C C C G G] O O V p+ ~- m N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O z oC o W o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1-i t 0 1 a.S F o ~' O O v m N CD O! m N tp O! W N sp O ~V' O N iO .. _ .. .. d z f/i m O _ _ O m~ ! N O Os ! N ~1 W !p aD M .r ! N N tp CD tp ip CO tp lea iea iea Ief tea ies t ! t ! T ~' Z O m m m y .~« i m ~-.~ V 1 ! i r-1 C O O C O C O G o O G O O C 0 C] O C O O C5 O o O O O O O O O O O O O O o O O O O O O O < z o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o ' ' od sl a v o V] 1 O _ .es o .es o_ .ea o .es o .ea o .ea o .es o .ea o .e-s .ca o M N i~ m W N o --I T ica ^. ~ N N N N N ti .--~ .r ~ .-. .-~ .~ .-~ .-r .-.. .--~ .r ..w .--i m y N 4 1 U ~--~ 1 ______________________ ` _ K 1--1 G O O O C G O A O C C C C C C] C G C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O m o O O O o O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C] O 1...1 CC 1 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O .. .. V] CJ O SS HI O 1 O O ita N Os tp M O ~ w-~ m iCa N Oa t0 f7 O tr- ~y m T F M N N N N .-~ O O O Oi Oa T Os W OD OD t i F ~ F S iea C .-w ~ .~-~ .--~ .--~ .-ti '-r .-. ..~ .--i 1 O Z 1 ~~ 1 1 i! 1-r C O O G C C] G] C C C C C G C C Q C C C G 6 1 aea iea 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m ~ O 1 CC O ~ N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O M tO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O U • i m 1 y O .ea O O iea M O O iea O iea O .ea ies O uz .ea O o O =' ! ~ ~ Z O e -a o- tCJ N O f ~ ~ N N N .--~ O O F CC S 4'f J .--~ .--~ .--~ .--~ N N N N N .r ti ~--~ .r ti ti ~--~ .r .-.~ ~-1 4~ ~ V N .,... 1 m m ~ i v 0 C] D g O D O o C C G C C O G C G C C C C O O O O O O O o O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O z 'Q C O O6 S O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O D m U - Y V O 00 H O 1 O O O tp N W T O tG N m! O CO T O tp N a0 N O cD m N N .--r r+ O O CC J O S O y .r ~ .r .-.~ .-.r .r .--. .-.. .r ..... ..w .-i .--~ .--~ .r .r ..ti ti ~ .-~ .r = m O S s « 1 s ~ _,.., m e .e .-. A e e e e e e e e e A o e e e e e e o a c~ x c7 .~ ..~ ~ ~ .__. ,..r ..~ .__..~ _.., . ~ ~ ~ .__. ~ .__. ,..~ ._...__..~ ~..- ._. o Z S V O 1 Z O 1 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O F O ~1 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O i C7 H qC O O ~+ Os O efa 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O F 2 Z ~ O. ~ b C!J Z O ~n u'9 O'a O ie'i O u9 O is'a O le'a O iea O iff tOD Ie'a O Ufa O i[a M N ~--~ N i~ N ~-r .--~ O O Oa O'a m m N tp lea tea ~' r' M O a' O+ O iel m ~"a ~ ~-r ~--~ N N N N N rr .-r ~ ~--~ .--+ .-r .r .-r .r .~-~ ~--~ ti .--~ ~ Cc. V! C 7 y N C o. = O m G } 6 U ~--- 1 m O y i s U 2 6 1--1 O D D O O C] O C O O C G O O C] D O D D C] C m 3 [a a p., m x ' z C m a. o J 1~. O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O o O o O O O O O O O O O o O O O o O m ce m m C ' J h O.. J ~ O .C F 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 o ~ _ _ m O CC C7 S ~ E r O y .Z o O M m s.o T N o a N o m ev ! mo o w a F t _ CA m O ~ e~ o- ~ tD t0 tD tp iCi Ufa lea iea t0 m m m CO aD u 's _ t/] Z Q: E O C - S9 Z U m m m m .~ .... m o O m CC ec. ~ y y m W m~ C7 ~~ 1 Z m OC p D v ~ y y i..,, p d O m 6 x m o t a c x ce o y N o, __ _ m o., s ._ m v m e O S C7 1 N ap CO M O N O c- N m~ aD c~ L+ O •O tD <O CD i0 tp C.5 2 m i ' y V U 1--1 Z_ V] r-1 F M m .r t~ O! IC'a iea co O m Z C F S 6 C O to O m J YC C' O 6-~ z Z Va V' z 1--1 .ti O v...l y = ~ ti N i0 N N r N~ F O is'a CO N N f OD Oa m T N O'a r 0 ~--~ .--~ M iea ee m o 0 o to e~ oa o M en ee ca cn to so to m m ~ ...~ F IY m Q: m m m O F U G FC ~ O E = i.r 1 d CJ t CC m m V] m .~+ .-~ ~I ..-w ~--~ ~--~ ~-~+ ~-+ N N N N N N N N N N N N N Z S S r-' F VJ J d C ~ T m p E~ ~ j z z z m m m O S cn .~ o m .r m M t o -.~m Nm.ea m m ~' o S F o sm G u m. ~.., .z-. _ _ _ _ ca N s oo~ •• _ _ _ z wz C r/] z 0 o- m C E GG to m iea O ICa a~ N L`- M N M o- m m T m! J m .~ O d m m Z r-1 G] p.! N O rn m o m eo u'f ! N 6 0 a! U O S m w--+ ~ o m N N N N N ~--~ ~--~ ~-+ ~--, .-w E U Y U v~ F C C v i G] v~ m F m M ~n o f H S C' 5 F m E O O O ~--~ Oa O~ N M! Ila t~ m Of Ic9 tD c~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O U E m ~ O 'S. m .~ __ O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O 6 F ~-+ D ~~ E C~ N N N N N N N N N N N N -- m U d cn m Ita °° _ _ _ _ 1 _ _ m O 0 _ ~ -- . u~ D. rr p-. Cx. 0 0 0 0 0 0 oa Qa oa ~+ .-r ~ .-r .r .--~ .--~ O 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y ~~ ~~ ~~ Cx: F E"' O U 1 ~ N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N Y Z ACTION NO. .. ITEM NUMBER AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE' AGENDA ITEM: Implementation of a Mutual Assistance Agreement with the Roanoke County Police Department and the City of Salem Police Department. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ,/~ /f EXECUTIVE SUMMARY' Review and authorize the use of a Mutual Assistance Agreement prepared by the administrative staff of the Roanoke County Police Department. BACKGROUND' The Code of Virginia provides for the creation and implementation of mutual assistance agreements (19.2-250, 19.2-77, 15.1-131, 15.1-131.5). Without such agreements, the arrest powers and law enforcement capabilities of police officers is adversely restricted. The need for our department to enter into Mutual Assistance Agreements has been advocated by: 1. The Department of Criminal Justice Services; 2. The Commission on Accreditation of Law Enforcement Agencies; 3. Mr. Patrick Gallagher, a consultant with the Institute of Liability Management. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Mutual Assistance agreements should be reached among law enforcement agencies in adjoining jurisdictions or at a minimum with agencies within our jurisdiction to provide assistance to each other in the event of natural disaster, mass disorder, or other emergency situations. It is conscientious on the part of management to establish lines of command prior to an actual emergency taking place. ~-~ Emergency situations often require augmented law enforcement capabilities to restore order and assist victims. A cooperative agreement between Roanoke County and the City of Salem will allow for quick and efficient augmentation of resources. The agreement describes provisions for the indemnification of the provider agency and its personnel (i.e., life, health, and liability insurance) and would include a list of resources to be shared. The agreement stipulates provisions for maintaining adequate law enforcement services within the service area of the provider agency when its personnel and/or other resources are sent elsewhere to provide aid. FISCAL IMPACT• The modest cost involved (mostly administrative) is underscored by increases in service capability, legal protection under State Code, and an improved working relationship between Roanoke County and the City of Salem. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the County Administrator be authorized to execute a Mutual Assistance Agreement with the City of Salem Police Department after the agreement has been reviewed by the County Attorney. The initial stages of the process have been accomplished by Chief Cease, of the Roanoke County Police Department, and Chief Haskins, of the City of Salem Police Department. The agreement will be revised annually and reviewed periodically by members of both agencies throughout the year. Staff would recommend that immediate consideration be given to the Mutual Assistance Agreement. SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED: i "~ n H. Cease Elmer C. Hodge, Chief of Police County Administrator ACTION Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred To VOTE Motion by: No Yes Abs Eddy Johnson McGraw Nickens Robers ~/z ~. ~~ T0: R. M. SMITH CITY MANAGER FR: H. T. HASKINS, JR. CHIEF OF POLICE RE: MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT DA: 7-11-91 Attached is an amended draft copy of the proposed Mutual Aid Agreement. Steve Yost has approved the changes. Respectfully submitted, HARRY TINS, JR. HTH,JR:h cc: Steve Yost Attachment !~ MUTUAL ASSISTANCE AGREEMENT This Agreement made and entered into by and between the City of Salem and the County of Roanoke, Virginia. WHEREAS, the law of the Commonwealth of Virginia provides un- der 15.1-131 and 15.1-131.5 of the Code of Virginia that each political subdivision within the Commonwealth is empowered to make and enter into a Mutual Aid Agreement with other contiguous political subdivisions within the Commonwealth in order to more effectively allocate law enforcement and other public safety ser- vices during emergency situations; and WHEREAS, the undersigned political subdivisions which are parties to this Agreement are desirous of obtaining additional law enforcement protection for the citizens of the several political subdivisions during emergency situations by making the most efficient use possible of the law enforcement personnel of the several political subdivisions; and WHEREAS, it is desirable that each of the parties hereto should voluntarily aid and assist each other in the event that an emergency situation should occur, by the interchange of law en- forcement services; and WHEREAS, it is necessary and desirable that a Mutual Aid Agreement be executed for the interchange of such mutual aid on a local, county-wide, and regional basis; Now, therefore, it is hereby agreed by and between each and all of the parties hereto as follows: 1) As used herein, the phrase mean an actual or potential diction of one or more of immediate threat to life o: resources and capability of cessfully bring the situation "emergency situation" shall condition within the juris- the parties which poses an r property, and exceeds the the jurisdiction(s) to suc- under control. 2) Each party agrees that in the event of an emergency situation, each other party to this Agreement will fur- nish such personnel, equipment, facilities, or services as is, in the opinion of the assisting member, available. Provided, however, that each party reserves the right to refuse to render assistance or to recall any or all ren- dered assistance, whenever it is determined that such 1 ~~ actions are necessary to the continued protection of the assisting party's jurisdiction. 3) The following officers shall have the authority to invoke this agreement: Salem Police Department a. Chief of Police; b. Captain of Police; c. Detective Division Commander; d. Services Division Commander; and e. On-duty Shift Supervisor. Roanoke County Police Department a. Chief of Police; b. Uniform Division Commander; c. Criminal Investigations Division Commander; d. Services Division Commander; and e. On-duty Shift Supervisor. Each party shall provide the other with an updated list semiannually, specifying the name, position and telephone number of the above officials. 4) In order to invoke mutual aid under the provision of this Agreement, the designated official from the requesting party shall be required to contact the designated offi- cial of the responding party by telephone, radio, in writing, in person, or by any other traditionally accept- able means of police communications. The responding par- ty may request such information from the requesting party as is necessary to confirm the emergency situation, and to assess the types and amounts of assistance that shall be provided. 5) During a declared emergency all personnel from responding agencies shall report to, and work under, the direction and supervision of the designated supervisor of the requesting agency at the emergency site. Provided, however, that at all times officers shall adhere to the policies and procedures of their own department, and shall be required to respond to lawful orders only. Each party reserves the right to refuse to render assistance or to recall any or all assigned officers whenever it is determined that such assistance would necessitate viola- tions of their own departmental policies and procedures, or is unlawful. 6) Personnel responding to a call for mutual aid outside their appointed jurisdiction shall have those law en- forcement powers provided for by the Commonwealth of Virginia. 2 ~-`~ 7) In the event of a mutual aid request involving actual or potential mass arrests, responding party law enforcement officers shall make arrest for offenses only directly re- lated to the incident, and assist in the processing of arrestees as follows: a. Identification of arrestees; b. Control of property obtained from arrestees; c. Completion of arrest reports; d. Transportation of arrestees; e. Complete proper arrest warrant and prosecutorial procedures; and f. Court duty pertaining to arrests. 8) In any emergency situation in which the Mutual Aid Agreement has been invoked, radio communications shall be established between both parties. 9) Each party providing personnel under the purview of this Agreement agrees to be responsible for the wages, pen- sion, and workers' compensation benefits incurred by its own personnel as a result of the emergency. However, a party invoking the Mutual Aid Agreement may be charged with personnel overtime costs. 10) Each party shall be responsible for maintaining and providing to each other on a semiannual basis, from the date the agreement was signed, an accurate account of available resources including, but not limited to, avail- able personnel per shift, equipment, and specialized units. 11) Both parties shall develop and update on a regular basis a plan providing for the effective mobilization of all its resources and facilities to cope with any type of emergency or unusual occurrence. 12) Mutual aid operational directives shall be developed and updated on a regular basis by the parties hereto, and are operative between the parties in accordance with the provisions of such directives and this Agreement. 13) Both parties agree to meet on a semiannual basis to review all mutual aid plans and the provision of this Agreement. 14) This Agreement shall become effective as to each party political subdivision when approved and executed by the governing body of that political subdivision. The Agreement shall remain in effect as between both parties until it is terminated by either party. Either party to this Agreement may terminate participation upon thirty days written notice addressed to the chief law 3 ~-`~ enforcement official of the other signatory political subdivision. 15) The execution of this Agreement shall not give rise to any liability or responsibility for failure to respond to any request for assistance made pursuant to this Agreement. This Agreement shall not be construed as, or deemed to be, an agreement for the benefit of any third party or parties, and no third party or parties shall have any right of action whatsoever hereunder for any cause whatsoever. 16) Both parties to this Agreement shall: (1) waive any and all claims against all the other parties thereto which may arise of their activities outside their respective jurisdictions under this Agreement; and (2) indemnify and save harmless the other parties to this Agreement from all claims by third parties for property damage or per- sonal injury which may arise out of the activities of the other parties to this Agreement outside their respective jurisdictions under this Agreement. 4 ~-~ IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed and ap- proved and is effective and operative as to each of the parties as herein provided. CITY OF SALEM DATE SIGNATURE DATE TITLE SIGNATURE TITLE COUNTY OF ROANOKE DATE SIGNATURE TITLE DATE SIGNATURE TITLE 5 ACTION NO. }}'~°°'~ / ITEM NUMBER G' / AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: July 23, 1991 AGENDA ITEM: Request for Work Session on August 13, 1991, with Explore Advisory Committee COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND• The Explore Advisory Committee was organized by board action on September 25, 1990 to assist as needed in the plan review process for the Explore Project. Since that time, committee members have been meeting regularly and they would like to meet with the board in a work session on August 13, 1991, to present an update of their activities. Approv d by, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ---------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved ( ) Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied ( ) Eddy Received ( ) Johnson Referred ( ) McGraw To ( ) Nickens Robers ACTION NO. ITEM NO . ~ ~"3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: July 23, 1991 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 August 27, 1991. The titles of these ordinances are as follows: 1. An ordinance retail uses, Cave Spring Maxey Homes to rezone 0.20 acre from B-1 to B-2 to allow located west side of US 220, Red Hill area, Magisterial District upon the petition of Incorporated. 2. An ordinance to rezone approximately 12 acres from M-1 to B-2 and obtain a Special Exception Permit to operate a retirement community, located north side of Route 11/460, west of Salem, Catawba Magisterial District upon the petition of Richfield Retirement Community. 3. An ordinance to rezone .71 acre from R-1 to M-1 to allow a self-storage facility, located at 6426 Merriman Road, Cave Spring Magisterial District upon the petition of 301 Gilmer Associates. G i-3 2 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: 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 August 27, 1991. (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 through 3 , 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, ~~ Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney Action Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Motion by Eddy Johnson McGraw Nickens Robers Vote No Yes Abs G-1 ROANOKE COUNTY REZONING APPLICATION Date Rec.: v ~~ I Received By:~_ Case No.: Ord. No.: ~lAC~~Dti (SSJt~ 1. Owner' s Name : Maxey Hanes I ncorporated Phone : 343-4005 Address: 2510 C stal ri Avenue, Roanoke, VA 24014 2. Applicant's Name: Maxey Hanes Irscorporated Phone: 343-4005 Address: 2510 Crystal Spring Avenue, Roanoke, VA 24014 3. Location of Property: West side of U.S. Route 220 in Red Hill Area of Roanoke Count Tax Map Number(s): 98.04-2-20 4. Magisterial District: Cave Spring __ 5. Size of Property: 0.20 acres 6. Existing Zoning: B-~ Existing Land Use: Antique Shop - Vacant 7. Proposed Zoning: B-2 Proposed Land Use: Retail 8. Comprehensive Plan Designation: Vi I lage Center 9. Are Conditions Proffered With This Request? Yes X No (If you are voluntarily offering proffers as a part of your applica- planning tion, thesassistf ou n the preparation of hese proffersh) Staff can y 10. Value of Land and (Proposed) Buildings: Land - $8,700; Bldg - X89,600 11. The Fo1lo tlBe eN n ms AcceptedlIfaAnyn0fPThese o Will Applic do Enclosed Check If Items Are Missing Or Incomplete: X Letter of Application d Bounds Description ~ Concept Plan List of Adjacent Owners X Metes an of Property (Attach Exhibit A) _~, _ _ Vicinity Map X Application Fee ~ _ Written Proffers X Water and Sewer Application (If Applicable) 12. Signature Of Property Owner, Contract Purchaser, Or Owner's Agent: _ Date (~ - ~ ''~ Signature G-~ LA~L ,,~f~~ I, OSTERHOl1DT, FERGLISON, NATT, AHERON £~ AGEE ~ PROfESS10hAl CORPORATION CHARLES N. OSTERNOUDT MIC NI.EL S. FEROUSON EDWARD A. MATT MICHAEL J. AHERON G. STEVEN AGEE MARK D. KIDD 1919 ELECTRIC ROAD, 5 W P o eox zoo~a RO~NOKE, VIRGINin 24018 May 8, 1991 TELEPHONE 703.774-I ID7 FA% NO. 7 03- 7 7 4-096 Board of Supervisors Roanoke County p. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 RE: Maxey Homes Incorporated Gentlemen: This letter is being written, together with the Rezoning Application, requesting the rezoning from B-1 Office to B-2 Retail for a 0.20 acre tract situate on the west side of U. S. Route 220 in the Red Hill Area of Roanoke County. The existing structure on the tract has been utilized for retail business for approximately 70 years. However, the county zoning ordinances, as interpreted by the Zoning Administrator, indicate that, even though the property has been used for an antique shop for a substantial number of years, a general retail use cannot be made of the property unless it was rezoned. In effect, the Zoning Administrator says that retail uses are not grandfathered; hence the request for the rezoning. As you can see from the attached proffer, we are submitting that there will be no changes to the existing structure in this rezoning request. The owner is desirous of placing the property on the market for sale, but the existing B-1 zoning precludes general retail business; hence, this request for rezoning. We would appreciate the Board's consideration of this request. Very truly yours, OSTERHOUDT, FERGUSON, NATT, AHERON & AGEE, P.C. ~/~ ~ ~~ Edward A. Hatt EAN/bp Encl. G-i PROFFERS OF MAXEY HOMES INCORPORATED RELATING TO RED FOR ROANOKE. VIRGINIA 1. The use of the property for retail purposes will be limited to the existing store building as shown on the attached plat. MAXEY HOMES INCORPORATED By OX Its prof.n2.p G-I ROAHORB COUNTY OTILITY DEPARTKBNT APPLICATION FOR WATER OR SEWER SERVICE TO PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Date 5/8/91 Name of Applicant nnaxP~ Homes Incorporated Phone 343-4005 Address of Applicant 2510 Crystal Spring Avenue, Roanoke, VA 24014 Name of Developer N/A Phone Address of Developer Name of Design Engineer N/A Address of Design Engineer Phone Name of Contact Person Edward A. Natt, Esq. Name of Proposed Development Type of Development and proposed number of units (Be specific) The existing structure is being rezoned from B-1 to B-2 in order to comply with existing zoning requirements for retail use. Location of proposed development (Furnish copy of map): Size of proposed development in acres: 0.20 Acres Give minimum and maximum elevation (Use USGS Elevations) at which the individual water/sewer service connections would be located: Minimum feet MSL. Maximum feet MSL ua r ~E~~ R F~ Is this application for a development that will be a part or section of a larger future development? ~ No Yes If yes, provide map of entire area if avail le. (OVER) Signatu a of Appli an t G-a Date Rec .: (c ~ 2~ ' `~ ~ Received By: ~ Case No.: Ord. No.: ROANOKE COUNTY REZONING APPLICATION 1~~~~~~ ~ ( ~l~`~ ~ ~ ~,~ 1. Owner's Name: Richfield Retirement Communitv Phone: 380-4500 Address: P 0 Box 1240 Salem Virginia 24153 2. Applicant's Name: same Phone: Address: 3. Location of Property: North side of Route 11/460 west of Salem ~~,U~i _ /_ IS ~'~, Tax Map Number(s): - 4 . Magisterial District: Catawba ~ `- ~ = ~"' - ' - ' ,~ 5. Size of Property: 49.3 acres 6. Existing Zoning: M-l, 3~- Existing Land Use: retirement communit ~, 7. Proposed Zoning: B-2 Proposed Land Use: retirement communit 8. Comprehensive Plan Designation: "core" 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 writing. A member of the Planning Staff can assist you in the preparation of these proffers.) 10. Value of Land and (Proposed) Buildings: $ 8-10,000,000.00 11. The Following Items Must Be Submitted With This Application. Please Check If Enclosed. Application Will Not Be Accepted If Any Of These Items Are i~iissing Or Incomplete: X Letter of Application ~_ Concept Plan ~_ Metes and Bounds Description _~_ List of Adjacent Owners of Property (Attach Exhibit A) ~_ Vicinity Map ~_ Application Fee ~_ Written Proffers X Water and Sewer Application (If Applicable) 12. Signature Of r p~r y Owner, Contr ct Purchaser, Or Owner s Ag ~ Signature Date June 21. 1991 Lar V9. De MARTIN & A O IATES _._ .. 6-2 " .:_ k _ ~ " ~ __ • ~.,. June 18, 1991 Mr. Jon Hartley Department of Planning & Zoning County of Roanoke P. 0. Box 29800 Roanoke, Virginia 24018-0798 RE: Richfield Retirement Community John: ,, ,..~~ Please find enclosed six 16) copies each of the Application for Property Rezoning and the Application for Special Exception Use, for the property owned by the Richfield Retirement Community. These applications are submitted concurrently, in an effort to bring the entire property under a uniform zoning designation, as well as to bring the existing and planned future buildings into compliance with that zoning. As we have discussed, the cross section of building types that will be required to provide a full range of elderly housing and care options, do not neatly conform to one zoning designation. When development of the property is complete, we envision facilities that will provide service for up to one thousand residents. The development (including buildings and paved areas) will cover a maximum of thirty-five percent 135%) of the total site. This low density use of the site will maximize utility, as well as create an environment that will enhance the lives of the residents. Thank you once again for your assistance with the preparation of the Applications, and please feel free to give us a calf if you should have any questions or comments regarding the submittal. Larry~SlV. Degen MARTIN & ASSOCIA F architecture • planning • construction management O'~ APPLICATION FOR REZONING RICHFIELD RETIREMENT COMMUNITY This application includes two parcels totaling an 11.48 acre portion of the 49.3 acre parcel of land, generally located on U. S. Highways 11 and 460, West of Salem, Virginia between Knollwood Drive and Allegheny Drive within the Catawba Magesterial District, and recorded as parcel X55.09-1.16 in the Roanoke County Tax Records. TO THE HONORABLE SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY: Being in accord with Sec. 15.1.491.1 et seq. of the Code of Virginia and Sac. 21-102-+~ of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, the Petitioner Richfield Retirement Community hereby voluntarily proffers to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia the following conditions to th• granting of a Rezoning for the above referenced parcel of land: 1. The Petitioner agrees to maintain an on-site surface water detention facility, in accordance with the applicable ordinances of Roanoke County. 2. The Petitioner operates a full service retirement community on the parcel. Within this community are the following levels of services: a.) A nursing center which provides skilled and intermediate care designed to meet all living as well as medical needs, with the exception of surgery; b.1 A convalescent living center providing residenri with 24-hour sheltered care; c.1 A variety of housing units which provide a full range of retirement housing options; d.) All ancillary structures and utilities required to operate and maintain the fac~ity; and e.1 Those commercial occupancies as required to provide supplemental support and services to the community residents. The purpose of this Petition is to obtain a Rezoning of portions of the property, to bring the entire property under a uniform zoning designation. This wll allow the Petitioner to supplement and augment the existing facilities with additional elderly housing structures, as well as miscellaneous utility and service buildings, increasing the level and scope of services. The Petitioner believes that the intended use of the subject property is within the use defined and contemplated by the aforesaid Code definition and is consistent with the existing facilities on the property. Respectfully submitted, RICFI~IE~D~RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, By ~~ y y1 / ~. Larry Degen MARTIN ~ ASS G.-a. ROANORE COUNTY APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION USE 1. Applicant's Name: Richfield Retirement Comm. Phone: 380-4500 Address: P. 0. Box 1240 Salem, Virginia Zip: 24153 2. Property owner's name Richfield Retirement Community Address: P. 0. Box 1240, Phone: 380-4500 Salem, Virginia Zip: 24153 3. Location of Property: North side of Route 11/460 west of Salem Size of property 49.3 acres Size of proposed special exception use 4. Tax Map ~: 49.3 acres 55.09-1-16 Old Tax Map ~: 6172741-008 5. Zoning Classification: B-2 General Commercial District 6. Magisterial District Location: Catawba 7. Existing Land Use: full service retirement community S. Proposed Special Exception Use: same 9. Comprehensive Plan Designation: "core" 10. Proposed Annual Gross Revenue: $750,000.00 Value of Land X45,000.00 Value of Proposed Buildings $8,000,000.00 Value of Machinery 6 Tools N.A• Number to be Employed 17 11. Check Completed Items: X 8}" x 11" plot plan X Consultation X List of adjacent property owners X Letter of Application X Filing fee made payable to "County of Roanoke" $20 Special Use Permit for sanitary fill method garbage and refuse site, commercial amusement park, or airport $40 All other Special Exception Uses ~ 12. Date of Application: Junk 2t1;~ 1 1 13. Applicant's Signature: ..~ NORTH ~t !~ --~ _~~ 1 .... T. 6TUART- PAY1~ CENTER ~URSINO CENTER "__~1 U.S. 11 / 460 'OVERALL SITE PLAN COMMUNITY SERVICES AND DEVBLOPINENT !Richfield Retirement Center ;June 21, 1991 '• Scale 1" = 300' G-~ _ N W ~. N W ~ ~ ~ ~ a N m a w ~"" (+! ~"' .. N M W Z to z 0 N Z O f- z W v W Z N Q a W a Z ~ n. Q a C) ~ ~ W t7 Z a a N a Nz a r. .. ~,,; a cr3 Z Z b 9 31f10H _ 'A~' _ - ~ Z '~ a ~ a J ~ ~ a i '' ~° i ~~ w '~ - W N N W ~y- = _= a Z ~ -~ ~ Z W i O . L7 Q _ ® , v 3 LL. v ~ W ~ ~- oc ~ ~ W o Y ~ _ Z i a. Q --- -_ _1 ~- _ ~` = M W Q --. ; ~ ~ Q Z N Z ~ N ~ O a ~ ~ ~ z o W [C ~ Z W ~~ ~ ~ ~ a Q d d Z ~ Q ~~ ~~ ~ a N a 0 N ~ ~ ~- W ~"' W ~ ~ Z o~ C7 x ... W Z p Z W ~- O W Z`a ~ O O u. a Na V ~"~ N W C7 ~ Z p J Q J V W W W ~ () w } Q V 3 W Q Q Z W ~" Z ~~ ~~ f- Z tWi J J a Z W W W~ aCWi ~ t7 Y Q ? W F- ~" ~ w Z V1 ta. ~ ~~ Z V ~z a °C ~~ `W d ~ a V Z Zb9 31flOd ------ i~ I ~` ~ ~ ~ ~~ Z ~ r. -- __._._ ~" ~ o aJ. 1 ' ~~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~~ W I ~ ..._ _ _ ~ i-. T 1 ~ 1 ~ ~ vs ~ W ~~~ ~ ~~_ ors ~ ~~ •n Q J Z W J o , - - ~ - ._....~ ~ Q LL ~ '" ~ t ® w ~ ' 3 ~ ` ~ ~ a °G , ~ ~ ~ O z ~.°z ~ ~ ~ Z = '` ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~'~" ~.....~ .... ~... ter. _....r...••~ J --- r ` ~ W --. i N ~ ~ ~ ~ O H ~ W } ~ ~` U W Z ~" J ~__._~ Q H O ~ U ``r.,,,~• ~ D W ~ ~~~ O W W V ~ ~ Z a - V G-a ROANORE COUNTY UTILITY DEPARTMBNT APPLICATION FOR WATER OR SEWER SERVICE TO PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Date ~1~tne 21 , 1~~1 Name of Applicant It.ichfield Itetircment Comm. phone 380-4500 Address of Applicant }'. O. Box 1240, Salem, Virginia 24153 Name of Developer Itichtield Retirement Comm, phone 380-4500 Add•-ess of Developer i'. O. Box 1240, Salem, Virginia 24153 Name of Design Engineer Martin ~ tlssoci.ates phone 989-9700 Address of Design Engineer I'. O. Box 20038, Roanoke, Virginia 24018 Marti n £~ /lssociates - Atr. Larry Degen Name of Contact Person Name of Proposed Development misc. unnamed buildings Type of Development and proposed number of units (Be specific) additional elderly housi.n~ J'acilities. as well as utility and service huildin~s Location of proposed development (Furnish copy of map): North :;ide of Route 11/460 west of Salem Size of proposed development in acres: 49.3 Acres ~. Give minimum and maximum elevation (Use USGS Elevations) at which the individual water/sewer service connections would be located: Minimum 1120 feet MSL. Maximum 1125 feet M5L Is this application for a development that wfll be a part or .section of a larger future development? No X Yea If yes, provide map of entire area if available. Signature of App cant ,~ ~- . ,~ ,. ~ .. __ - _ , ` _ ~~ t ~ ~ -_ ~ o ~ r _. ` ~ ., , -. ~. III ./ ~ ~. `~ ~ r,^~ - =_ I l ~ ~ \ ~' GwENS' J ,, - _ ~ , ~1 ~ - ~ ,, ~~~. tt, ~, ..~ ~ ~_~ ~~ ~ ,. •~~ ~ ~. ~ ~~_ ~; y, , ~ f D - ---, n r 9 Jo a 11~ _ ~~, ,,s ~ oy~'" r. 1 ,.~ ~~, ~ ~ ~ f f \ ~ / ~r ~ % ' ~~ G'?moo ~ f ,; ~ ~ ~~ _ 4~ x~ ; ~ f ~ ~ ~ __ ~_ S s t+ 2 \ , _ ., _ ~~ ~ ~. /, j , -~ _ ~~ , SE~IVER P ~A i E: RI ~: .,. ,~ ~ 7 . ~ ,~ x ~~ o -~ _ _ ~~ . -~~ ~1 ~ ,~ •1~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ,~~ ~~ ~. % ~ _~ ;~ ~~ ~~ % ~ ~~ ~~ I _ ~. Y" /~ ~ ~ ~ - ,~ / f , ~ , ___ t ,\ ~ ~, ~ I ~' ~ ~~ ~__ I _~ ~ ~- '~ --= _ _, - D `` '~~ ~ • ~ ~ - _ ' ~J ^ _ % ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~ __~ ~~_ ~~ ~, III ~, i 1 ~ ~ \ ~ I, ' \ ~ ' \ m ~ ~ ~ -~~ t ~ - ~° II ~~ _ ti G ~ I~ \ c ytU .--~ _ ~,; '°- i ` ~ ~ ~ l .. ::. ~-a NORTJJ ~/~ .~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ ' RE ~~, / ~ ~ ~ N' AE RE ~ / ~ ' /,/ ~ ~ • ~~r trr ~ / • u.r ~ ~ ` `~ 1 / » ~~/ Ott ~ \ ItE ,:. / ~ C ~ _.~ ~ \ ;' pE ~ ~ / ~ ~` B2XC / ,~ O / ~~~ B3 ', ` ,~ 1 M .. ~, ~ \ , , ' /.' ` ~ / \\ MSC ~ , \ ~~ ~ .~ ~ ,.. 41 .;.. M~ B ~ ~: ~., ~` t ,. ... ~ gut 1 i .~~~ M~ ~ ~-+' ~ ~ i~ i ~' ' i ~ i ~'n ~ / / ~ h4~ M ~.~ ~ M.~ rr ~N~~ t COMAIONJTYSBRVICSS ANDDBVBLOPMBNT Richfield 'tetirement !'oromunity 55.9-1-15,13,19 ~/0 55.13-1-2.1 !9-1 to f -2 4!/S9~CI."-.L EXCE!'TIO'! _ _..__...,..~____--.y ~~ P~.~ea~4s ~~'~ ... ~ F ~ Sri Date Rec .: _ + ~ • ~, - ~ Received By: ~/ 1. ~~,' ~\ Case No..: ~\ Ord. No.. ~,., ~~-~ ROANOKE COUNTY REZONING APPLICATION 1n~ /~„' lY\ l'_ r.. ., t ~ ~' ~ owner's Name: ,301 Gr~~n,~e /~-ssoc~~~=s ~~ ~ =Phon~ 9g~-lalo C „• Address: ~°~ 3o I GiJmeR /~sSoci.gTcS~• `' ` ~~Phone: 98~-1210 2. Applicant's Name: Address: ~ 1~. 1ST 5T.' S~ tJ. ~P•o• 8°X ~138~ /~oA~oKc. VA• .2yooL 3. Location of Property: 6~~( fYl,tRR~r~~/ R~I S,W ~ol~ 5'711,eK~y .k.l~wL B~J~,) Tax Map Number(s) : q'7.OG - 01--06 4. Magisterial District: G ve 5. Size of Property: .'~f /4c, 6. Existing Zoning: ,~- J l~esi,L~fi~L Existing Land Use: V/y~c~ 7. Proposed Zoning: 1'Yl ., ~ui~`i~ -- .1-l~ifv /YJ~~Fi4-~7`vr~r Proposed Land Use : 5 eL ~ - S~o.Paw 2. 13~i ~~~;v, 8. Comprehensive Plan Designation: GoR~ 9. Are Conditions Proffered With This Request? Yes No (If you are voluntarily offering proffers as a part of your applica- tion, these proffers must be in writing. A member of the Planning Staff can assist you in the preparation of these proffers.) 10. Value of Land and (Proposed) Buildings: ~ /~ poo f 11. 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: ,/ Letter of Application / Concept Plan / Metes and Bounds Description -7 List of Adjacent Owners of Property (Attach Exhibit A) --~ Vicinity Map ./ Application Fee Written Proffers ~iB-'~ Water and Sewer Application (If Applicable) 12. Signature Of Property Owner, Contract Purchaser, Or Owner's Agent: ~ - 30~ G,i11~~ ~lssxiro7as Signature A„ ~,T~~'a,~Z- ,~~ Date ~yv~ ~ 1, 1 y 4 / ...Y '~~} s~.: %~ ~.+r f~~ cs7^ El~....~1~y S~jtoo ~ i ., u ~i' io'c -'~ ' ~~'"'~' I.P. 0~ ` ' ~ ~ ~~ ~~ o~, f~ v ~ ~ ~ / ~~ It1 Q • / . w A z ~ 11~ ( '~ -- ~, ~ ~ ~ ;g ,~l ~ t ,9 ~ ,t~ ~~ 1J ~• ._ ~• ~ ~ ~ ~ D• . i ~ y ~' ~ a M ~ ,~ ~, . ~._ Quo ~ ` .`y ~~ •-• ~.. 1 ~ i~,- ~ .. ~ , ~ ~~ rw r ,~JrF. I~ ti~ guy a ~ ~~~~~ 1 Gsuc e~sl, rl~v 7~137.~7 -~T~y,-~ e ~~ ~~ 30l 6ilw~, e4ts.~ .. ~~ • N~i~lfj'~ K1 ~ ~~ ~ /.~ . ~~ . ..~ ~+ •-..r.... ~ .... . JiN, r. ,. ~ ~; - ~ - .:eta ~ •- •: ~~ / 63 ~~~ .,~ ,..~ ,, ., ~, ~. -LAT SIIOIIiMfi IIrIS10M s ...n._~ ~ ,.' .... 1 a norEnTr (o.~l ~c.~ Fa , ;:..:, ~Y .~~ ~~ y~i h ~.•- ~ ROAr'at COUITr YIkGIVIA V ~Ur~~ ''• •-+- tITWTE/ M THE ELiT 111E rA. iEC. IOY'TE ~tlf tArE fn IIM IMi1tTEtl~l IIiTIICT IOW1E CMMTr. rIKIM1A r L_F:'TER 0~ i=+~~+=~i__IC!=~TIOi`d _. _ , ! flN =V.i_~ ] c"~r_'r ~,i -.,r;E r - ~...._• ,,F-_, -,- i ,T. ._, i} C;r -,~i , ~.:.} ~ _ ,~~r-, _ q ~'-~ ~,ti-..i]-t~:_;i ~~-,_: .r-r!~ Sri T4 _,- is~;~ F,~,-, -.. c. ;~,h~. =;-_~.- 1 a-', ~ _ __. _ c _ - Tfi~ ~j7_[~~E,i...{..y ic; r-~_~ i-et",Ti';' ~OiIG[i F'-). r; C.,~.ir'.~~)l;;t~;i.,. ~:~-p~~c?~ t•~ ~,r-}-n~:<, {:rit=? ~ i.:-~'~~ 1'_ ~_~.i-~c_d n-_' C!_1~>7.i-:~=,V,a F-~~..[;r;c r`~ C, 1'l the ~C!fT1fT1C,1'llNPd'lth 1)'I i'-'E? S1OE 1!~ ~C,T"IBd r'i'-C '', ~hE' pr-C~pF-Ty Uil the OthGt- ~r1dE'S 15 C,nGd 1=,:`1 ~.I~d C,V~1-?ed by tale 1=tQc711Q~:E~ !_C,!ti1'~=Y ~ChG41 HGc!'i-d . Thi= pi°c,F}r~t...t,.~ Fire, en;airte~; ~;~.ca.rit =_~ir-~r_e i±: wa=. l~:~T !_!.__ed by Rc,~.t~C,E::e Cc~!_!.t~tyn 7i; i=. C. !_±.r it-!±.eritic,n To }_!.pg~ _~.[~e ±:i'iis ~t-aperty .,r-~d u,F. i.t _a=_ a em~li =_.[=elf s±c,t_age f_cility u;-~cil 1.! C h } 1 R1 ~ a, c j- ~...! F~ ~} ~, ; - i, r_:.:- r_ ,_, i ~ 1 r : Q 1-1=> Vii, 7- rJ d F': R? ~. i-i ~ •; i a, }- }- ~~. i i t _ ~, i [,rim,- ~,-,~ b~, t t'~:-, !_i_r__ . 'f-.~ f P ~' ~. i f i -i i:; C; ~• l _ - .. C 1_ 1 _ T ~~; i. c ~'; i - ~~ ~~ F~ +. _ ? `t '~ i._ ~. rl .I. ~. _ . ° '. T O r 4 ~ f 1 7. C h L h E.' I " L~ 1 ~ c+ _ ..- ~ c= i iT ^ C ~} ,~, i (_j ! ]. r !•`~ ]. ~. 1 E? 1. ]. (R. ]. 1'1 i='. ~.. ~ i'l e,'E'5~+1-P c7t {}'lt? P1'lti'-c!tlr c• ~ [i t:r~F 5C!UT fly°~F'~•t t IIrJ! ~~i_ 1 1 =-! 1. F'c•;-f'. =-!1 id provide the Ca!~t-!f.y U,iTr; additional t. ;: t-e•,•enu.e. '.' 1. r 1. 'J. (?? P }•- ~=} c; ~ rr _ ]. ~. t r' S G-3 r '~ ROAgORB COONTY OTILITY DEPARTMENT APPLICATION FOR WATER OR SEWER SERVICE TO PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Date - N~i9 - ~o w~7'~ o ~ j~~ ~~~P's-e d ~2 uses , Name of Applicant Phone Address of Applicant Name of Developer Phone Address of Developer Name of Design Engineer Phone Address of Design Engineer Name of Contact Person Name of Proposed Development Type of Development and proposed number of units (Be specific) Location of proposed development (Furnish copy of map) Size of proposed development in acres: Acres Give minimum and maximum elevation (Use USGS Elevations) at which the individual water/sewer service connections would be located: Minimum feet MSL. Maximum feet MSL Is this application for a development that will be a part or section of a larger future development? No Yes If yes, provide map of entire area ff available. (OVER) f Signatu of Appli ant ~-3 NORTH COM~lUNITYSERVICBS 3~1 Gilr~er Associates ANnnRVRI,OPMRNT 97.6-01-76 i +„ o.~ ~ ACTION NO. ITEM NO. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: July 23, 1991 AGENDA ITEM: ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ASSESSMENT OF FEES TAXED AS COSTS IN CERTAIN CASES FILED IN COURTS OF THE COUNTY FOR CONSTRUCTION, RENOVATION OR MAINTENANCE OF COURTHOUSE, JAIL OR COURT-RELATED FACILITIES, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS : G~~~~,n~~,~ R~/~~ BACKGROUND• The 1990 session of the Virginia General Assembly enacted House Bill 74 which added a new section to the State Code, Section 14.1-133.2. This legislation authorized the assessment of a fee to be taxed as costs in each criminal and traffic case in the district and circuit courts serving Roanoke County This fee is limited to $2.00 per case. The assessment shall be imposed by ordinance of the governing body, and the ordinance may provide for a different fee in district and circuit courts. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This assessment imposes court costs for the purposes of construction, renovation or maintenance of courthouse or jail and court-related facilities and to defray increases in the cost of heating, cooling, electricity, and ordinary maintenance. This legislation included a "sunset" provision providing for the act to expire on July 1, 1991. The 1991 session of the Virginia General Assembly enacted House Bill 1510 repealing the "sunset" provision of Chapter 543 of the 1990 Acts of Assembly. The assessment is collected by the clerks of the district and circuit courts, and remitted to the Treasurer subject to disburse- ments by the Board for the purposes specified in the statute. The first reading of this ordinance is scheduled for July 23, 1991; the second reading and public hearing is scheduled for August 13, 1991. 1 ~-i ALTERNATIVES AND IMPACTS: The Finance Department has reported that approximately $22,000 was collected for fiscal year 1990-91. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board favorably consider the adoption of this proposed ordinance. Respectfully submitted, 1 I ~, Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney Action Approved Denied Received Referred to Motion by Eddy Johnson McGraw Nickens Robers Vote No Yes Abs 2 µ-~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JULY 23, 1991 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ASSESSMENT OF FEES TAXED AS COSTS IN CERTAIN CASES FILED IN COURTS OF THE COUNTY FOR CONSTRUCTION, RENOVA- TION OR MAINTENANCE OF COURTHOUSE, JAIL OR COURT-RELATED FACILITIES, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE WHEREAS, the 1990 session of the Virginia General Assembly enacted Chapter 543 (House Bill 74) which amended the Code of Virginia by adding a section numbered 14.1-133.2; and WHEREAS, this enactment authorized the assessment of fees to be taxed as costs in each criminal or traffic case in the district and circuit courts of the county for the construction, renovation or maintenance of the courthouse, jail or court-related facilities, and further provided the expiration of this authority on July 1, 1991; and WHEREAS, the 1991 session of the Virginia General Assembly enacted House Bill 1510 repealing the sunset provision of Chapter 543 of the 1990 Acts of Assembly, and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on July 23, 1991; and the second reading and public hearing was held on August 13, 1991. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That pursuant to the authority found in Section 14.1- 133.2 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, (1991 Acts of Assembly, Chapter 543), there is hereby assessed a fee to be taxed as the costs in each criminal and traffic case in the district and 1 -i circuit courts serving Roanoke County the sum of TWO DOLLARS ($2.00). The fees assessed by this ordinance shall be expended for the purposes as provided in said statute, specifically, for the construction, renovation and maintenance of the courthouse or jail and court-related facilities and to defray increases in the cost of heating, cooling, electricity, and ordinary maintenance. This assessment shall be in addition to other fees and costs prescribed by law. 2. That this assessment shall be collected by the clerk of the court in which the action is filed, and remitted to the Treasurer of Roanoke County and held by him subject to disburse- ments appropriated by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, for the purposes specified herein. 3. That the effective date of this ordinance shall be July 1, 1991. 4. That a certified copy of this ordinance shall be delivered to the Chief Judges of the district and circuit courts serving Roanoke County, the Clerks of said courts, and the Treasurer of Roanoke County. 2 ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER *" AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: July 23, 1991 AGENDA ITEM: Adoption of Resolution to Allow Relief of Water Rate Increases for Qualified Elderly Citizens with Low Water Usage COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~,~ ^u l/ -rte e~N•~ ~ ~'''~ ~rttnn,.~~~c~.«,tt• BACKGROUND• On June 25, 1991 the Board of Supervisors directed the County staff to prepare a plan to relieve qualified elderly citizens from the impact of the proposed water rate increases. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The staff recommends the following qualifications to be eligible for this water rate relief. 1. The individual must currently qualify for tax relief for the elderly, which includes the following criteria: a) An application must be filed with the Commissioner of Revenues office between January 1 and March 31 of each year. b) The applicant must own and occupy the property involved. c) The individual must be 65 before January 1 of the year for which the application is made. If the applicant is under the age 65, such applicant must be certified by the Railroad Retirement Board, Veterans Administration or Civil Service Commission as disabled or have sworn affidavits from two medical doctors licensed to practice medicine in the Commonwealth of Virginia, one of which must be based on a physical examination. d) The gross combined income of the owner and any relatives living in the dwelling shall not exceed $30,000, except that the first $4,000 of income of ~f ~o~ each relative, other than the spouse or the owner, who is living in the dwelling shall not be included in such total. e) The maximum allowable resources is $75,000 per year. This $75,000 does not include the value of the dwelling lot or one acre of land. 2. To qualify as a low volume user, the household must use 9,000 or less gallons per quarter (an average of 3,000 gallons per month). The qualifying individuals. will receive a credit that will reduce their water bill to the amount they would have been paying under the old rate structure. Individuals will need to apply for the credit before December, 1991 in order to reduce their water rate to the rates in effect prior to June 30, 1991. Thereafter, individuals may apply at the same time they are applying for tax relief. This credit will be available with the bills that are mailed after September 1, 1991. FISCAL IMPACT• Currently, there are approximately 1, 400 people who qualify for tax relief. The credit could amount to $30,000 during the 1991-92 fiscal year. There are several alternatives for the source of funds. The $30,000 could be taken from the Utility Fund, the General Fund Balance, or Board Contingency. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adopting the attached resolution instituting this program of water rate relief. Respectfully submitted, '~`~- Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance ACTION Approved Denied Received Ref erred To Motion by: Approv d by, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy Johnson McGraw Nickens Robers ~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JULY 23, 1991 ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 22, "WATER" OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW SECTION NUMBERED 22- 6, "REDUCTION OF RATES" TO AUTHORIZE THE REDUCTION OF WATER RATES IN HARDSHIP SITUATIONS FOR ELDERLY AND DISABLED PERSONS WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, intends to provide financial relief for its elderly and disabled citizens in the provision of certain critical public services; and WHEREAS, it is the intent of this ordinance to provide for a reduction of water rates or charges for governmental services provided to economically-disadvantaged elderly or disabled citizens and their families; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on July 23, 1991, and the second reading and public hearing was held on August 13, 1991. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That Section 22-6 of Chapter 22, "Water" of the Roanoke County Code is adopted and enacted as follows: (a) The finance director is hereby authorized to develop, publish and implement rules and regulations to provide for the reduction of rates imposed by the county for the delivery of water service by the county. The reduction of rates shall be based upon demonstrable hardship and inability to pay and shall be consistent with this section. 1 ,. ~~ (b) The finance director shall, upon application made and within the limits provided in this section, grant a reduction of the water rate for dwellings occupied as the sole dwelling house of a person (utility customer) holding title or partial title thereto or a leasehold interest who is not less than sixty-five (65) years of age or totally and permanently disabled. A dwelling unit jointly owned or leased by a husband and wife may qualify, if either spouse is over sixty-five (65) years of age or is permanent- ly and totally disabled. (c) Reductions provided for in this section shall be granted only if the following conditions are met: (1) That the total combined income, during the immediately preceding calendar year, from all sources, of the owner of the dwelling and his relatives living therein did not exceed thirty thousand dollars ($30,000); provided, however, that the first four thousand dollars ($4,000) of income of each relative, other than the spouse of the owner, who is living in the dwelling shall not be included in such total. (2) That the owner and his spouse did not have a total combined net worth, including all equitable interests, exceeding seventy-five thousand dollars ($75,000) as of December 31 of the immediately preceding calendar year. The amount of net worth specified herein shall not include the value of the sole dwelling house and up to one acre of land. 2 l~- ~-. (3) That the amount of water used is less than 9,000 gallons per quarter. (d) That any person eligible for an exemption from the tax on real property as provided for under Division 3 of Article III of Chapter 21 of the Roanoke County Code is eligible for a reduction in water rates. That any other person seeking a reduction of water rates under this section shall utilize the forms and follow the procedures under Division 3 of Article III of Chapter 21 of the Roanoke County Code, except as modified by the finance director. (e) The amount of the reduction provided for in this section is that portion of the water rate which represents an increase in rates since the fiscal year ending June 30, 1991, or the year the person reached age sixty-five (65) years or became disabled, whichever is later. (f) Changes in respect to income, financial worth, ownership or leasing of property or other factors occurring during the year for which an affidavit or application is filed pursuant to this section, and having the effect of exceeding or violating the limitations and conditions provided in this section, shall nullify any reduction for the then current year and the year immediately following. (g) A change in water usage exceeding the limitations of this section shall nullify any reduction for the then current quarterly billing cycle. 3 ~~-a (h) That the utility enterprise fund shall be reimbursed annually by the general fund for the total amount of rates reduced under the authority of this ordinance. (i) An eligible person (utility customer) applying for a reduction on or before December 1, 1991, shall utilize the rate in effect June 30, 1991; for applications received after December 1, 1991, the rate utilized shall be the rate in effect at the time of application. 2. That this ordinance shall be effective with billings mailed on or after September 1, 1991. 4 ACTION NO. 2 ITEM NO. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: July 23, 1991 AGENDA ITEM: ORDINANCE RATIFYING AND CONFIRMING THE ACQUISITION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE NECESSARY EASEMENTS FOR THE VALLEYPOINTE PHASE II SANITARY SEWER PROJECT COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY• This is the first reading of the proposed ordinance to ratify and confirm the acquisition and acceptance of the necessary easements from seven property owners in the County of Roanoke for the Valleypointe Phase II Sanitary Sewer Project. BACKGROUND• The Valleypointe Phase II Sanitary Sewer Project is one aspect of the overall economic development project for Valleypointe Phase II, which involves the development of a mixed use business park in the vicinity of the southeast intersection of Interstate Routes 81 and 581 in Roanoke County, Virginia. On March 22, 1988, the Board of Supervisors authorized staff to acquire the necessary rights-of- way and easements for this project. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Upon completing the design for the Valleypointe Phase II Sanitary Sewer Project, County staff negotiated with the property owners for purchase of the required easements. County staff proceeded with the acquisitions and as of June 26, 1990, sanitary sewer easements from five of the seven property owners had been obtained at a cost equal to 40~ of the assessed valuation (for tax purposes) of the easement area acquired. An easement from a sixth property owner, Azusa Street Ministries, U.P.C.I., was acquired at a cost based upon its expense in attorney's fees to obtain the necessary court approval for a religious organization to convey an interest in real estate. County staff was unable to reach an agreement for the purchase of the final easement from Jesse N. Jones and Mary H. Jones. An ~I-3 independent appraisal established a proposed easement to be $2,579.00. the Board on June 26, 1990, the Count construct the remaining portion of proceedings were subsequently filed, possible settlement of the case. fair market value for the Pursuant to authorization by y entered upon the property to the project. Condemnation but were postponed pending As a result of continued cooperation between the parties, the case was settled and dismissed on May 28, 1991. The easement was acquired by deed from Jesse N. and Mary H. Jones for the sum of $2,579.00, plus the interest which had accrued thereon while on deposit with the Clerk of Court. All of the necessary easements have now been acquired by purchase, accepted by the County Administrator on form approved by the County Attorney' s office, and recorded in the Clerk' s Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County. The project has been completed. The specific properties and property owners involved, and the cost of acquisition from each, are as follows: (See plats attached.) Tax Map No. Property Owner 26.26-2-17 Alice C. Olsen 26.16-2-15&16 James R. & Thelma F. Crawford 26.16-2-3 Barbara H. Flinchum 26.16-2-4 Edward F. & Ruth H. Shott 26.16-2-6 Erma C. Crotts 26.16-2-13 Azusa Street Ministries, U.P.C.I. 26.16-2-14 Jesse N. & Mary H. Jones FISCAL IMPACTS• $11,357.00 - Virginia Resources Bond Fund ALTERNATIVES• Consideration $ 500.00 $ 490.00 $4,768.00 $1,785.00 $ 235.00 $1,000.00 $2,579.00 Ratify and confirm the acquisition and acceptance of the above-named easements for the Valleypointe Phase II Sanitary Sewer Project . STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors adopt an ordinance ratifying and confirming the acquisition and acceptance of the necessary easements for the Valleypointe Phase II Sanitary Sewer Project. ~-3 Respec fully submitted, V ck'e L. H m n Assistant County Attorney Approved Denied Received Referred to Action Motion by Eddy Johnson McGraw Nickens Robers Vote No Yes Abs l~~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JULY. 23, 1991 ORDINANCE RATIFYING AND CONFIRMING THE ACQUISITION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE NECESSARY EASEMENTS FOR THE VALLEYPOINTE PHASE II SANITARY SEWER PROJECT WHEREAS, on March 22, 1988, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County authorized county staff to proceed with acquisition of the necessary rights-of-way and easements for the Valleypointe Phase II Sanitary Sewer Project, as one aspect of the overall economic development project for Valleypointe Phase II; and, WHEREAS, the necessary easements for said project have now been acquired, accepted by the County Administrator on form approved by the County Attorney, and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County; and, WHEREAS, the project has been completed, with the total cost for the easement acquisitions from seven property owners being $11,357.00, paid from funds allocated to the Valleypointe Project from the Virginia Resources Bond Fund; and, WHEREAS, section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter directs that the acquisition of real estate be accomplished by ordinance; the first reading of this ordinance was held on July 23, 1991, and the second reading was held on August 13, 1991. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, as follows: 1. That the acquisition and acceptance of the necessary sanitary sewer easements for the Valleypointe Phase II Sanitary Sewer Project is hereby ratified and confirmed, said easements being across the following properties, referenced by Tax Map -~ Number, for the consideration specified from the following property owners, their successors or assigns: Tax Map No. Property Owner Consideration 26.26-2-17 Alice C. Olsen $ 500.00 26.16-2-15&16 James R. & Thelma F. Crawford $ 490.00 26.16-2-3 Barbara H. Flinchum $4,768.00 26.16-2-4 Edward F. & Ruth H. Shott $1,785.00 26.16-2-6 Erma C. Crotts $ 235.00 26.16-2-13 Azusa Street Ministries, U.P.C.I. $1,000.00 26.16-2-14 Jesse N. & Mary H. Jones $2,579.00 2. That the payment for said easemen ts, aggregating $11,357.00, from funds allocated to the Valleypointe Project from the Virginia Resources Bond Fund, is hereby ratified and confirmed; and, 3. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute such further documents and take such further actions as may be necessary to accomplish the purposes hereinabove set forth, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. v .. f I 1 v / / \. ,/ n / ^ • KETBS A?fD aOtJND3 DBSCRIPTI01'1 St~OS~lI Ol! TAI8 YL1-T REPRB8E>Nt A COt~QSITZ 'OP DEEDS, • ' PLATB, AND CALCULATED INFORKATIOI! A1~D DO Ii0't RBTLECT A>N ACCUitAT1< BOUNDARY 8UAVEY. ' q' . • ro, • ~ 19'~~ r .C. .B~ s }~ ~+ ~ .' ~ ~ . ; ~' . L '~ In = FIRST UNITED PENTEC08TAL CNURCN ' ..D.. • ~H~ 3~'~ . E ~ M~•od'~ 0 20~ S.S. LINE N EASEMENT o a STA. 19+40 - N26.55~OO~~W ~ MH' ~4 ~~ ~_ ~ 12~ SANITARY SEWER b' t W ~.~ i ' ~~ ~j ~~ ~~ 3 ~f3 ,~~ • ,- ~ ' 2 S% • ~~ N44.56bT~~ W h 18 Z't • G• N 39'l2' W 20Q'Sd •F • TAX MAP N'4. 26.16 - 2-13 SCALE t . (~~~ (00~ ' PLAT ~SAOKt~iG SAPITJIRY. SEVER ~E~ASE2i$tt'f BEING CpNVEYBD T0. ROAHOIO~ COUNTY BY' FIRST UNITED PENTECOSTAL CHURCH • HETES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION SHOWN ON THIS PLAT REPRESENT A COMPOSITS'OF DEEDS, PLATS, AND CALCULATED INFORMATION AND DO NOT REFLECT AN ACCURATE BOUNDARY SURVEY. --- -~ S 5C PLAT SHOWT_NG SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT O TAX MAP N0. 26.16- 2 -17 BEING CONVEYED TO ROANOKE COUNTY ~ i ~ ~~ SCALE : 1 ' 100 BY ALICE P. OLSEN PreDored 8y : untr Enq~neer~nq Deportment Oate: ~I-17-89 Rocnok• • ,~ K 1 31 b P ~ uvo~ ~~ HE SAND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION SHOWN ON THIS PLAT REPRESENT A CQMPOSITB OF DEEDS. PLATS. AND CALCULATED INFORMATION AND DO NOT REFLECT AN ACCURATE BOUNDARY SURVEY. ~`~ F `~d~ ~~ ,n9 q0 , 3 b H. ~ 13 l23:0' E N?5.30 - a~6 ~. s~'~O.E , g a .= -- - ~ ' - - ~---- --- -.... s - - ----~'! i t "'-'--- z 20 S.S. LINE MH.~12 EASEMENT ~ ~'~.~.~ BARBARA H. FLI'NCHUM N 74.5 ~W 660. TAX MAP N0. 26.16-2-3 PLAT SHO'~IING SAY?TARY SEWER EASEMENT BEING CONVEYED TO ROANORE COUNTY BY BARBARA H. FLINCHIIM Precored 8y : Roanoke County Enq~neer~nq Oepar/ment M ~. 0 M W M O O N N 84'15'yy SCALE t 1~~= 200 Oote: n-zi- !FETES A!~II~BbI~~ t~E~CRO~N~F'lOWN ON THIS PLAT REPRESENT A COMPOSITE OF DEEDS, PLATS, AND CALCULATED INFORMATION AND DO NOT REFLECT AN ACCURATE BOUNDARY SURVEY. cn~~~7~ G dR QI PLAT~SfldWING SAh=TARP SE;,TER ~ n`A';ER I,~1Z FASE;~.NT BEING CONVEYED TO ROANOKE COUNTY BY EDWARD F. ~ RUTH H. SHOTT PREPARED BY: ROANOKE COUNTY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 1 1 a~ itIVUtU 1-Ly-yV DATE: II -28-89 TAX MAP NO. 2 s. I s- 2- 4 SCALE: I"= I oo' . ~I(13~brb u~u7~ METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION SHOWN ON THIS PLAT REPRESENT A COMPOSITB'OF DEEDS, PLATS, AND CALCULATED INFORMATION AND DO NOT REFLECT AN ACCURATB BOUNDARY SURVBY. ~! -3 ,~ ~•3. ti~b. ~,~ so ~, a ,~ N es~~3, ~ f />~ 30 ~ ~ CAF ~ 20' S.S. LINE P ~ _- _ _ EASEMENT ~,~ a! ~~ ~ ~. ~ M ~ IN _ ~~' ~ ~ ERMA C. CROTTS \\ 3 ~~ W M \\ M ip MK ~8 ~ • ~ Z N I' I I sss•ao w ~3.sa ' TAX MAP NO. 26.16 -2 - 6 PLAT• SflOti1ING SANITARY SBWER EASEMENT BEING CON9EYED TO ROANORE COUNTY BY ERMA C. CROTTS SCALE: 1~~= loo' Pr~oar~d By : Roanoke County Enaineerino Depd~tment Oate: ~~~ METES ANU BOUNDS DESCRIPTION SHOWN ON THIS PLAT REPRESENT A COMPOSITE OF DEEDS, PLATS, AND CALCULATED INFORMATION AND DO NOT REFLECT AN ACCURATE BOUNDARY SURVEY. i N3 9• /~ r ~. /o~ . / . O ~tiv JESSE N. JONES a ~ ~ / OrgtK~~, °j / West Fork 0~~ ~ ~ .~ ~~~ / ' ~~ ~ ~'-~~ 276r"r 250 MH.~`2A / ~ ~ / - ~ /M ~2 20' EASEMENT ,i/tea ~Eiisihq ~' ~ MH.I'I ~~ _~ ?~ c~/ ~?o~oo~ Z _~ ~m ~_ x i1°oo~r sz.o'~ ~~ N s•iow ~~.o; om M 7°56 E 92.0 H 33•SIE 27.00' TAX MAP N0. 26.16 - 2 - 14 n ~ SCALE : I = 2 50 PLAT SHOWING SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT BEING CONVEYED TO ROANOKE COUNTY BY JESSE N. JONES 0~ ~0' .ti /~ h6 ~iS, o `~ N32000 p0 s~ ~i ~~ !' 9~ ~p MH.~3 c? ~O- VALLEYPOINTE PHASE IL Prepor~d By: Roanoke County Engine~rinq Oeporfmant Date: II-21-89 ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER .~. ~m AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: July 23, 1991 AGENDA ITEM: Appointments to Committees, Commissions and Boards COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS' SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: 1. Clean Valley Council Two-year term of Vince Reynolds expired June 30, 1991. 2. Community Corrections Resources Board One-year terms of Bernard Hairston and Edmund J. Kielty, Alternate, will expire August 31, 1991. Respectfully submitted, rn ,-~. Q Mary H. Allen Clerk Approved by, ~~ ~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ------------------------------------------------------------ ACTION VOTE Approved ( ) Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) Eddy Johnson McGraw Nickens Robers AY AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JULY 23, 1991 RESOLUTION 72391-4 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM J - CONSENT AGENDA BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. that the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for July 23, 1991, designated as Item J - Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 8, inclusive, as follows: 1. Confirmation of appointment to the Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission. 2. Donation of drainage easements in connection with the Hunting Hills Road Project. 3. Resolutions requesting acceptance of the following roads into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary Road System. a. Crossbow Circle b. Chukar Drive c. Archer Drive d. Red Stag Lane e. Elk Hill Drive 4. Resolution of support for the creation of the Center on Rural Development (CORD) and location of CORD in the Roanoke Region. 5. Acknowledgement of acceptance of 0.10 miles of Lakeland Drive, 0.02 miles of Green Meadow Road, 0.60 miles of Fairway View Trail and 0.32 miles of Buckwood Trail in the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. 6. Acknowledgement of addition to, discontinuance, and abandonment of portions of Route 752 and addition to portion of Route 1765 in the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. 7. Transmittal of resolution from the Planning Commission regarding conformity of the Explore Park to the 1985 Comprehensive Plan 8. Donation of water line and sanitary sewer easement in connection with Bernard Drive/Fallowater Sewer Line Extension from Dominion Bank, N.A. 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, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Robers, Johnson, Nickens NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor McGraw A COPY TESTE: .~D Mary H. lien, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Parks & Recreation Advisory Committee File Cliff Craig, Director, Utility Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Terry Harrington, Director, Planning ACTION NO. A-72391-4.a ITEM NUMBER ~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: July 23, 1991 AGENDA ITEM: Confirmation of Committee appointment to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The following nomination was made at the July 9, 1991 meeting. Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Supervisor Nickens nominated Roger L. Falls to another three-year term representing the Vinton Magisterial District. His term will expire June 30, 1994. RECOMMENDATION' It is recommended that this appointment be confirmed by the Board of Supervisors. Respectfully submitted, ~"~~~~ ~~,/ ~ ~...~..c..~.~__ Mary H Allen Clerk Approved by, Elmer C. Hodg County Administrator ---------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved (~) Motion by: Bob L. Johnson No Yes Absent Denied ( ) Eddy ~_ Received ( ) Johnson x Referred ( ) McGraw x To ( ) Nickens x Robers x cc: File Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission File ACTION NO. A-72391-4.b ITEM NO . '~ "°'~ ~' AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: July 23, 1991 AGENDA ITEM: Donation of drainage easements in connection with the Hunting Hills Road Project to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: G~~ Y~~'~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This consent agenda item involves the donation of easements for drainage purposes over and across properties located in the Cave Spring Magisterial District of the County of Roanoke in relation to the Hunting Hills Road Project as follows: a) Donation of a drainage easement, triangular in shape, from Jack E. Peebles and Mary A. Peebles (Deed Book 920, page 227) (Tax Map No. 87.08-2-11), shown and designated as "PROPOSED D.E." on a plat prepared by the Roanoke County Engineering Department, dated March 7, 1991. b) Donation of drainage easements from Hunting Hills Land Corporation, a Virginia Corporation, (Deed Book 873, page 61) (Tax Map No. 87.12-1-21), as follows: (1) An easement, twenty feet (20') in width, shown and designated as "PROPOSED 20' D.E." upon a plat (Plat Number One) prepared by the Roanoke County Engi- neering Department, dated March 5, 1991. (2) Two easements, twenty feet (20') in width, shown and designated as "PROPOSED 20' D.E." upon a plat (Plat Number Two) prepared by the Roanoke County Engineering Department, dated March 5, 1991. (3) Two easements, twenty feet (20') in width, each shown and designated as "PROPOSED 20' D.E." upon a plat (Plat Number Three) prepared by the Roanoke County Engineering Department, dated March 6, 1991. The location and dimensions of these properties have been reviewed and approved by the County's engineering staff. f STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends acceptance of these properties. Respectfully submitted, V'ckie L. H m n Assistant County Attorney Action Vote No Yes Abs ent Approved (x) Motion by Bob L. Johnson Eddy x Denied ( ) Johnson x Received ( ) McGraw x Referred Nickens x to Robers x cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Cliff Craig, Director, Utility _...._ RTES Al~D BOUNDS DESCRfiT1WV SHOWN ON Tti/3 PLAT REPRESE/YT A COJ{lPOS1TE OF DEED, P~.,A TSy AAD CALCULATED N1fFlOR~tATI01V A/A7 DO NOT REFLECT AN ACQURAJE BOUNDARY SURVEY. ~-~ CHUKAR OR/VE N 59.26~OO~~E TAX N0. 87. TAX NO 87.12-I-21 TiIX A[APNO. 87.os-2-II PLAT SHOWING NEW DRAINAGE EASEMENT BEING CONVEYED TO ROANOKE COUNTY BY JACK E. & MARY A. PEEBLES SCALE: i"= 30' PREPARED BY: ROANOKE COUNTYENGINEER/NG DEPARTMENT DATE: 3- 7-91 A~'ETES AND BOUNDS DESCR/PT10N SHOWN ON THIS PLAT REPRESENT A COMPOSITE OF DEEOS, PiU1 TS, A/YD CALCULATED INFORMATION AND DO NOT REFLECT AN ACCURATE BOUNDARY SURVEY. • I ,~ `"" TAX NO 87.12-I-4 0pe 0~\R''~ ~~ ~ 109 ~ ~QTF9 ~ ---- ~ ( I c~RSF NAT WATER COURSE I _OI PROPOSED ~NI ~' 20'D.E.- „ ~, -- N N 5' S5~ q0 Props~ly of~ +t I e HUNT/NG HILLS LAND CORP. C/0 HENRY SHOL I /R. ( o • ( o 3 LOT 12 I Block 3 p TAX NO 87.12-I-2 ' I ca N N }N I ~ 1 N47.34'OO~~W -- CROSSBOW C/RCL E TAX MAP NO. 8712 - I -21 PLAT SHOWING NEW DRAINAGE EASEMENT BEING CONVEYED TO ROANOKE COUNTY BY HUNTING HILLS LAND CORP. PREPARED BY: ROANOKE COUNTY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT SCALE: I" 50' PLAT NUMBER ONE DATE: 3-5-91 I .I C~ETES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION SNOWN ON THIS PLAT REPRESENT A COMPOSITE OF DEED, #'A~ITS, AND CALCULATED INFORMATION AND DO NOT REFLECT AN ACCURATE BOUNDARY SURVEY, •J ,- c~' CROSSBOW CIRCLE .r o`~ CH : N 32° 33'17 E ~'~~ _- 39.38 GONGFL co ,. ~' ti ~ y ~B S46°09'00'E i O~ ~ `mss ` 21.00(S) ~~ `D, ` N~ ~, ~Q ~~os ` 1~`aw~ °, s %,~D ° N ~ ~ ~9 p, ~ ~ O O, TAX N0.88.09-2-8 'o:~ ~ ; m, ~ m N~ y~' `°' ° ``~° ` ~ '` CA W ~OT~ 25 Block I TAX N0. 88.09-2-IT Property of• s `n?`N; HUNT/NG HILLS `~,~ ` ~ ~1 LAND CORP. C/0 HENRY SHOL Z /R. ~ ~ \ ~ M Jj~~~ h PROPOSED ~~ ! 20 ~ D. E. ~N O~ CURVE "1 B" N A ARC = 181.52' RAD. = 726.18' CND. = N 26° 56'50"E 181.05' TAX MAP NO. 87.12-I-21 PLAT. SHOWING NEW DRAINAGE EASEMENT BEING CONVEYED TO ROANOKE COUNTY BY HUNTING HILLS LAND CORP. a a, 1~J rt NATURAL. ~'~- WATER COURSE .,\ SCALE:. I "= so' PLAT NUMBER TWO PREPARED BY: ROANOKE COUNTY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT DATE: 3 - 5 - 91 „~~ETES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION SHOWN ON THIS PLAT REPRESENT A COMPOSITE OF DEE03, r~LATS, AND CALCULATED INFORMATION AND DO MOT REFLECT AN ACCURATE BOUNDARY SURVEY. ~~ q ~' S. //43 03 R~; ~ ~g ~4 44336 ~ PROPOSED 20'D. E. ~/ .y1 /,~/'~ /'~• x'15 2~ ~ `~ `~ __~ LOT 9 Block 3 TAX N0. 87.08-2-12 ~a/~ ~ / ~6\ ~~9/ LOT 6 Block I TAX NO 87.08-2-9 ~, y9 TG 9 ~ N ~ ~ . y j. c0 Property of~ F,~~o 0 HUNT/NG N/LL S LAND CORP. G o~ C/O HENRY SHOLZ /R. ~sF ~ cy S2 G, ~ ~S il~• ~O ~i ~~ O ~ 's~, O~ 'sue ~s~ i ~~~ ' / .~ / LOT 5 TAX N0.87.08-2-8 TAX MAP NO. 87.12- I - 21 PLAT SHOWING NEW DRAINAGE EASEMENT .. BEING CONVEYED TO ROANOKE COUNTY BY HUNTING HILLS LAND CORP. PREPARED BY: ROANOKE COUNTY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT PROPOSED 20' D. E. % ~~/ ~ i ~ e ~~~ ,tea J~'' / ~ \~ OO\ ~ ~ ~ ~ a X t ~o om ~o o~ N 1 4,Qc S 'ESo /~~, F9, ~s~\ s~h;~/~ SCALE:~"= 40' ~ ~°~ PLAT NUMBER THREE DATE; 3-6-91 ITEM NUMBER ~*~/_~ ""~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: July 23, 1991 SUBJECT: Acceptance of Crossbow Circle, Chukar Drive, Archer Drive, Red Stag Lane and Elk Hill Drive into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUNII'9ARY OF INFORMATION Crossbow Circle, Chukar Drive, Archer Drive, Red Stag Lane and Elk Hill Drive are five (5} of several roads within the Hunting Hills Subdivision, which were placed on the 1985 Road Bond List. Staff has developed plans for the various corrective actions required to bring these roads into the State Secondary System. Prior to acceptance by the Virginia Department of Transportation and the assigning of state route numbers to all of the above roads, staff has to submit a complete package of information, including Board Resolutions requesting acceptance of these roads. FISCAL IMPACT' Funds for surveying, engineering, and administrative work on these roads are funded within the yearly roadway activity of the Engineering Department. Construction funds will come from the Rural Addition Funds. These construction funds are available in the accounts administered by the Virginia Department of Transportation. No appropriation of County funds is required. ~~~_~ RECOMMENDATIONS: The staff recommends that the Board approve the to VDOT requesting acceptance of Crossbow Circle, Archer Drive, Red Stag Lane and Elk Hill Drive into Road System. SUBMITTED BY: George W. Simpson, III, P.E. ,~..~ ~-~ Thru: mold Covey, Director of Engineering & Inspections Approved Denied Received Referred to ~ ) { Motion by: APPROVED: resolutions Chukar Drive, the Secondary ~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy Jflhnsfln McGraw Nickens Robers 2 r ~ ~./f ~~ t AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE~BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JULY 23, 1991 RESOLUTION 72391-4.C REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF CROSSBOW CIRCLE INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY ROAD SYSTEM BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That this matter came this day to be heard upon the proceedings herein, and upon the application for Crossbow Circle, a section of road extending from U. S. Route 220, extending in a southerly direction 0.58 miles to Elk Hill Drive, pursuant to Section 33.1-72.1, Paragraph C-1 and funded pursuant to Section 33.1-75.1, Paragraph A of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended. 2. That this Board does guarantee the Commonwealth of Virginia an unrestricted right-of-way of 50 feet with necessary easements for drainage as recorded in Plat Book 7, Page 21, (Section 4), of record in the Roanoke County Clerk's Office. 3. That this Board does certify that this road was opened to public use prior to July 1, 1978, at which time it was open to and used by motor vehicles. 4. That this Board does certify that speculative interests are involved and a check for $2,750.00 has been received and placed in the Capital Account for Revenue Sharing. 5. That said road known as Crossbow Circle and which is shown on a certain sketch accompanying this resolution, be, and the same is hereby established as a public road to become a part of the state secondary system of highways in Roanoke County, only a from and after notification of official acceptance of said street or highway by the Virginia Department of Transportation. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Robers, Johnson, Nickens NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor McGraw A COPY TESTE: /°v' Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections George Simpson, Assistant Director, Engineering, and copy for Virginia Department of Transportation S ~~ '~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROAN©KE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JULY 23, 1991 RESOLUTION REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF CROSSBOW CIRCLE INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY ROAD SYSTEM BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That this matter came this day to be heard upon the proceedings herein. and upon the applicat~.on for Crossbow Circle, a section of road extending from U. S. Route 220, extending in a southerly direction 0.5$ miles to Elk Hill Drive. pursuant to Section 33.1-72.1, Paragraph C-1 and funded' pursuant to Section 33.1-75.1, Paragraph A of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended. 2. That this Board does guarantee the Commonwealth of Virginia an unrestricted right-of-way of 50 feet with necessary easements for drainage as recorded in Plat Book 7, Page 21, (Section 4), of record in the Roanoke County Clerk's Office. 3. That this Board does certify that this road was opened to public use prior to 3uly 1, 197$, at which time it was open to and used by motor vehicles. 4. That this Board does certify that speculative interests are involved and a check for $2,750.00 has been received and placed in the Capital Account for Revenue Sharing. 3 J-3 (~) 5. That said road known as Crossbow Circle and which is shown on a certain sketch accompanying this resolution, be, and the same is hereby established as a public road to become a part of the state secondary system of highways in Roanoke County, only from and after notification of official acceptance of said street or highway by the Virginia Department of Transportation. 4 -- - ~.. _ ., c~ .o, ~Rp ~ .. g ¢~ c ~ i T1y,N Rp pip ~ `/ _ i -NVN ~i~.G ~ . ~ - ~ _ ~ ) S>/G gPMU" - .. 4EaFiE~ .~ u ~- ...~ _. ..~~/ ~. W g o . ~P00 ~ _ s ~ ° ~r,~ "~~n ~ ~ W o Sµyy~H - i aN O Op ~ y, ~ m ~ ~ - ~ _ ~~ ~ ` 7iNG Wit. vrcrxr~ ~ : ,y~ PROPOSED ADDITION SHOWN IN GREY DESCRIPTION: LENGTH: RIGHT-OF-WAY: SURFACE WIDTH: SERVICE: ,J rr CROSSBOW CIRCLE BETWEEN U.S. ROUTE 220 & ELK HILL DRIVE (1) 0.58 MILES (1) 50 FEET (1) PROPOSED 22.0 FEET (17) 17 HOMES ~:~ = ~ o v O , • iM~ .rY ~~ ... O -~ ,... , a ~% ... :~ ~ ~ o . ~ ,~. / ~ / N \ ~ '' ~ ~ • I \~\ ~ ~ -~- a . / ~/ ACCEPTANCE OF CROSSBOW CIRCLE INTO THE BNGINBBRING STATE SECOtiDARY SYSTEM S .:.. .. a ~' r~ . O .' I t e °•-' ~ •.b. ~~ ~ . __ • P • t ~ i~ ~ P s n '~•. r ~ f ~~ " F ~~~ • :.~::\:. ~ L/.:. \ ~11- AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JULY 23, 1991 RESOLUTION 72391-4.d REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF CHURAR DRIVE 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 for Chukar Drive, a section of road extending from Crossbow Circle, 0.46 miles south of U. S. Route 220 and continuing in a south westerly direction 0.10 miles to a cul-de-sac, pursuant to Section 33.1-72.1, Paragraph C-1 and funded pursuant to Section 33.1-75.1, Paragraph A of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended. 2. That this Board does guarantee the Commonwealth of Virginia an unrestricted right-of-way of 50 feet with necessary easements for drainage as recorded in Plat Book 7, Page 21, (Section 4), of record in the Roanoke County Clerk's Office. 3. That this Board does certify that this road was open to public use prior to July 1, 1978, at which time it was open to and used by motor vehicles. 4. That this Board does certify that speculative interests are involved and a check for $198.00 has been received and placed in the Capital Account for Revenue Sharing. 5. That said road known as Chukar Drive and which is shown on a certain sketch accompanying this resolution, be, and the same is hereby established as a public road to become a part of the state secondary system of highways in Roanoke County, only from and after notification of official acceptance of said street or highway by the Virginia Department of Transportation. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Robers, Johnson, Nickens NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor McGraw A COPY TESTE: Mary H. len, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections George Simpson, Assistant Director, Engineering, and copy for Virginia Department of Transportation ~~.~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JULY 23. 1991 RESOLUTION REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF CHUKAR DRIVE 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 for Chukar Drive, a section of road extending from Crossbow Circle, 0.46 miles south of U. S. Route 220 and continuing in a south westerly direction O.iO miles to a cul-de-sac, pursuant to Section 33.1-72.1, Paragraph C-1 and funded pursuant to Section 33.1-75.1, Paragraph A of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended. 2. That this Board does guarantee the Commonwealth of Virginia an unrestricted right-of-way of 50 feet with necessary easements for drainage as recorded in Plat Book 7, Page 21, (Section 4), of record in the Roanoke County Clerk's Office, 3. That th15 Board does certify that this road was open to public use prior to July 1, 1978, at which time it was open to and used by motor vehicles. 4. That this Board does certify that speculative interests are involved and a check for $19$.00 has been received and. placed in the Capital Account for Revenue Sharing. 6 ~~. 5. That said road known as Chukar Drive and which is shown on a certain sketch accompanying this resolution, be, and the same is hereby established as a public road to become a part of the state secondary system of highways in Roanoke County, only from and after notification of official acceptance of said street or highway by the Virginia Department of Transportation. 7 ~,:,.~~ ;; -_~ ~ m~ ~ ~.~ ~ ~ 1541 c •``"-~~ ~ sa-R0 "-~DF; v;, ..l ~ XVN i~NC ~^. l Ay__- ~ \ ~ 2, c $TERiiE _ •~,~ ~~ 1, o ~p c " u ~.+ °~ N m " ~ 5µY1AND Cp ~, ; t VICINITY MAP T'"" "~' ;RH %a~ F Q NORTH i~ _~; ,~ .. \ M~ ~ ~ ~~ C «. n ~~ .\ / N ~ l / i ~. - - PROPOSED ADDITION SHOWN IN GREY DESCRIPTION: CHUKAR DRIVE FROM CROSSBOW CIRCLE TO CUL-DE-SAC LENGTH: (1) 0.10 MILES RIGHT-OF-WAY: (1) 50 FEET SURFACE WIDTH: (1) 20 FEET SERVICE: (1) 10 HOMES ..... •.4.' SNGINBBRING ACCEPTANCE OF CHUKAR DRIVE INTO THE STATE SECONDARY SYSTEM s ,~ AT A REGIILAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JULY 23, 1991 RESOLUTION 72391-4.e REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF ARCHER DRIVE 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 for Archer Drive, a section of road extending from Crossbow Circle, 0.38 miles south of U. S. Route 220 and extending in a northerly direction 0.198 miles to a cul-de-sac, pursuant to Section 33.1-72.1, Paragraph C- 1 and funded pursuant to Section 33.1-85.1, Paragraph A of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended. 2. That this Board does guarantee the Commonwealth of Virginia an unrestricted right-of-way of 50 feet with necessary easements for drainage as recorded in Plat Book 7, Page 21, (Section No. 4), of record in the Roanoke County Clerk's Office. 3. That this Board does certify that this road was open to public use prior to July 1, 1978, at which time it was open to and used by motor vehicles. 4. That this Board does certify that speculative interests are not involved. 5. That said road known as Archer Drive which is shown on a certain sketch accompanying this resolution, be, and the same is hereby established as a public road to become a part of the state secondary system of highways in Roanoke County, only from and after !~ ! notification of official acceptance of said street or highway by the Virginia Department of Transportation. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Robers, Johnson, Nickens NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor McGraw A COPY TESTE: Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections George Simpson, Assistant Director, Engineering, and copy for Virginia Department of Transportation r ~= 3~~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING .OF THE HOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JULY 23, 1991 RESOLUTION REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF ARCHER DRIVE 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 for Archer Drive, a section of road extending from Crossbow Circle, 0.38 miles south of U. S. Route 220 and extending in a northerly direction 0.198 miles to a cul-de-sac, pursuant to Section 33.1-72.1, Paragraph C-1 and funded pursuant to Section 33.1-85.1, Paragraph A of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended. 2. That this Board does guarantee the Commonwealth of Virginia an unrestricted right-of-way of 50 feet with necessary easements for drainage as recorded in Plat Book 7, Page 21, (Section No. 4}, of record in the Roanoke County Clerk's Office. 3. That this $oard does certify that this road was open to public use prior to July 1, 1978, at which time it was open to and used by motor vehicles. 4. That this Board does certify that speculative interests are not involved. 9 '. s ~`~~ 5. That said road known as Archer Drive which is shown on a certain sketch accompanying this resolution, be, and the same is hereby established as a public road to become a part of the state secondary system of highways in Roanoke County, only from and after notification of official acceptance of said street or highway by the Virginia Department of Transportation. 10 ,oej ~.~ ,o, \ai 2 fir, •n 44 •R<~ ~ gyp ~~ G ~yj RC D ) _ q( }~ NliNi~M~ ~~~y STE IRF E~ ~Y-- •''.~ ~ - i~ - ,,~~ z •. 5( ~~ So j W o ~ ~ YICINIT'Y MAP r'" G "~'' I .RN ?yr5 Q NORTH ~~ PROPOSED ADDITION SHOWN IN GREY DESCRIPTION: ARCHER DRIVE FROM INTERSECTION OF CROSSBOW CIRCLE TO CUL-DE-SAC LENGTH: (1) 0.20 MILES y RIGHT-OF-WAY: {I) 50 FEET '` SURFACE WIDTH: (1) 20 FEET ' SERVICE: {1) 17 HOMES v 1 s ` / _ ~~ •~Y ~` iY i t •~~ i J O .. o ..... •. ; _,, •-- .., ~ ~ aM ~ 1I \ \ 0 • \ ~~ / N \ ~ ~ ,:. BNGINEERING • ' '? ~Y~ •y~ yf ,: ~' :~. ~V~ .R. a •.~ s ACCEPTANCE OF ARCHER DRIVE INTO THE STATE SECONDARY SYSTEM ~ ~ s \\ ~• ,' \ ~ • 17 \\ O' ~ ~ ~ ,. l~ ' ~ ~ ..~ - / ' / ~ .o, ~~O 4 M ~I O w p~ e . . O ~ ~ • p •~ ~ ~ ~ / a ~~ ~'•~ • AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SIIPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JULY 23, 1991 RESOLUTION 72391-4.f REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF RED STAG LANE 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 for Red Stag Lane, a section of road extending from Crossbow Circle, 0.125 miles south of U. S. Route 220 and extending in a westerly direction 0.06 miles to a cul-de-sac, pursuant to Section 33.1-72.1, Paragraph C and funded pursuant to Section 33.1-75.1, Paragraph A of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended. 2. That this Board does guarantee the Commonwealth of Virginia an unrestricted right-of-way of 50 feet with necessary easements for drainage as recorded in Plat Book 7, Page 21, (Section 4), of record in the Roanoke County Clerk's Office. 3. That this Board does certify that this road was open to public use prior to July 1, 1978, at which time it was open to and used by motor vehicles. 4. That this Board does certify that speculative interests are not involved. 5. That said road known as Red Stag Road and which is shown on a certain sketch accompanying this resolution, be, and the same is hereby established as a public road to become a part of the state secondary system of highways in Roanoke County, only from and ~ 1 after notification of official acceptance of said street or highway by the Virginia Department of Transportation. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Robers, Johnson, Nickens NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor McGraw A COPY TESTE: ~. C.~.e.c~.~ Mary H. llen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections George Simpson, Assistant Director, Engineering, and copy for Virginia Department of Transportation S3 (di AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE HOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JULY 23, 1991 RESOLUTION REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF RED STAG LANE 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 for Red Stag Lane, a section of road extending from Crossbow Circle, 0.125 miles south of U. S. Route 220 and extending in a westerly direction 0.06 miles to a cul-de-sac. pursuant to Section 33.1-72.1, Paragraph C and funded pursuant to Section 33.1-75.1, Paragraph A of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended. 2. That this Board does guarantee the Commonwealth of Virginia an unrestricted Tight-of-way of 50 feet with necessary easements for drainage as recorded in Plat Book 7, Page 21, {Section 41, of record in the Roanoke County Clerk's Office. 3. That this Board does certify that this road was open to public use prior to July 1, 1978, at which time it was open to and used by motor vehicles. 4. That this Board does certify that speculative interests are not involved. 12 J3~d~ 5. That said road known as Red Stag Road and which is shown on a certain sketch accompanying this resolution, be, and the same is hereby established as a public road to became a part 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. 13 sfY1µ_~~~Z . _ .,\ _ ,, _ a / 1541 c ~ y ~ -~ -ao ~D~ ~_.Rli ~ ~ ~' N riMG t ~Y~- '- z ' ` :~~ cJt ~ Ica ~ ~ ° ~ ~ "~~o ~. ~' W. o ~SKV..w '~` 3 m o DR_ ~ ~._ , ~" _ YICINIT'1' MAP T' "' "~' :a" ~,y PROPOSED ADDITION SHOWN .•'' IN GREY n DESCRIPTION: RED STAG ROAD FROM THE INTERSECTION ``` a OF CROSSBOW CIRCLE TO CUL-DE-SAC ';,1 0 "~ f ' O . LENGTH: (1) 0.14 MILES RIGHT-OF-WAY: {1) 50 FEET ~ '. SURFACE WIDTH: (1) 20 FEET ~ SERVICE: (1) 8 HOMES ~ " ~. ( n a.a a ~ , •.os ,' ~\ >~ ~ p ` ~ 1 • p '• ' \ O • N ~ • ~\ j . t ~ . t ' O- \~ ~ i .~ )~ ' -~ // i ~ / f ~ ~- I ~ ~~ ~Y ~ * ~ • //~ O ~ O M ~ Y ' e , . ~ 1 M A~ . • O o • u • ~ / ~ ~~ ACCEPTANCE OF RED STAG LANE INTO THE STATE SECONDARY SYSTEM BNGINBERING 14 ~ . - J' ~ .-. • ~~ ,• i n .r o ` w \~ ,.. O n \~~ .\ / ~ / N \ s ' ~~ ~~ -Q- NORTg 0 r , AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JULY 23, 1991 RESOLUTION 72391-4.Q REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF ELR HILL DRIVE 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 for Elk Hill Drive a section of road extending from Crossbow Circle 0.58 miles South of U. S. Route 220 and extending in a westerly direction 0.08 miles to a cul-de-sac pursuant to Section 33.1-72.1, Paragraph C-1 and funded pursuant to Section 33.1-75.1, Paragraph A of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended. 2. That this Board does guarantee the Commonwealth of Virginia an unrestricted right-of-way of 50 feet with necessary easements for drainage as recorded in Plat Book 7, Page 21, (Section No. 4), of record in the Roanoke County Clerk's Office. 3. That this Board does certify that this road was open to public use prior to July 1, 1978, at which time it was open to and used by motor vehicles. 4. That this Board does certify that speculative interests are not involved. 5. That said road known as Elk Hill Drive which is shown on a certain sketch accompanying this resolution, be, and the same is hereby established as a public road to become a part of the state secondary system of highways in Roanoke County, only from and after r * r notification of official acceptance of said street or highway by the Virginia Department of Transportation. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Robers, Johnson, Nickens NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor McGraw A COPY TESTE: ~, C~~p~ Mary H. lien, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections George Simpson, Assistant Director, Engineering, and copy for Virginia Department of Transportation ,. .5- 3 (e) AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE Ht?ARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY. JULY 23, 1991 RESOLUTION RE#3tTESTING ACCEPTANCE OF ELK HILL DRIVE 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 for Elk Hill Drive a section of road extending from Crossbow Circle 0.58 miles South of U. S. Route 220 and extending in a westerly direction 0.08 miles to a cul-de-sac pursuant to Section 33.i-72.1, Paragraph C- l and funded pursuant to Section 33.1-75.1, Paragraph A of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended. 2. That this Board does guarantee the Commonwealth of Virginia an unrestricted right -of-way of 50 feet with necessary easements for drainage as recorded in Plat Boak 7, Page 21, (Section No. 4), of record in the Roanoke County Clerk's Office. 3. That this Board does certify that this road was open to public use prior to July 1, 1978, at which time it was open to and used by motor vehicles. 4. That this Board does certify that speculative interests are not involved. 15 ~ ~~~ 5. That said road known as Elk Hill Drive which is shown on a certain. sketch accflmpanying this resfllutifln, be, and the same is hereby established as a public rflad to become a part of the state secflndary system of highways in Roanoke County, only from and after notification of official acceptance of said street or highway by the Virginia Department flf Transportation. 16 .. ~W/ 1~ • b . ~ '~\~.. ~ I IAGC! ~ RR 11u ~ ~ ' Q~TS .,~~ w ~ 2 ,. y ~`°y $ 1541 c ~ `' `y " ~ ac co __ c n _ h~uriw~ qp4 . G s` ~Mu ~s ` SrERF~E~ . Qp ~~ ~ - - . AY- LL w-'~ . _ . ~,i ~ _ , ~' ~ P ,y~ ~ V 4 o ~ ~~" ~ W o ~r~KYLAND - OR_ r ~ 3 ~ Y.1_ T--'"~ p YICINII'1' MAP -' "" ,~, y~ _R~ PROPOSED ADDITION SHOWN IN GREY /^~~ ~ a u NORTH DESCRIPTION: ELK HILL DRIVE FROM INTERSECTION OF CROSSBOW CIRCLE TO CUL-DE-SAC ' LENGTH: (1) 0.06 MILES RIGHT-OF-WAY: (1) 50 FEET SURFACE WIDTH: (1) 20 FEET SERVICE: (I) 3 HOMES '_` - ~r M 1 u ~~ ~l 1 /,f:fi~"i ~~~+ ,.. O \J w n ~ O2 ~ ~~.. ,.. ~ ~e ~r~ ~ ~ w \ ~ !' i .« . e} \ ~ ~ o . \ ~~ i ~ / N \ r 1' ,or r ~ ~ a 1\ ~~ 1 \ s , it .` O~ ~ ~ ' ~l /~ . ...~ / ~~ f ~ ,, * / ~ O / O q ~ • ~ d M • ~ N / q ~~ Rya •. m' ~- i / ~ ' ~,°° O \ 2 •~ ~ ~~ .~ ACCEPTANCE OF ELK HILL DRIVE INTO Z--- STTE SECONDARY SYSTEM 13NGINBERING ~ ~ ~i AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JULY 23, 1991 RESOLUTION 72391-4.h SUPPORTING THE CREATION OF THE CENTER ON RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND THE LOCATION OF THE CENTER IN THE ROANORE VALLEY WHEREAS, Governor Wilder's Rural Development Conference pointed to the need for the State to increase its role in rural economic development, and WHEREAS, the Governor has taken the initiative to enhance rural economic development through the creation of the Center on Rural Development (CORD), and WHEREAS, the Center on Rural Development is charged with providing leadership in developing a strategic planning process which will assess the needs of rural areas and provide a vehicle for citizens to achieve regional goals, and WHEREAS, the State may wish to consider locating this Center in a place other than Richmond in a location central to rural Virginians located in the Roanoke Valley, and THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia commend the Governor for creating this agency that will provide leadership and support to rural communities in developing a strategic planning process, and FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia recommends that the Center for Rural Development be located in the Roanoke Valley, a central location to many rural communities. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Robers, Johnson, Nickens r i NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor McGraw A COPY TESTE: Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File The Honorable L. Douglas Wilder, Governor of Virginia The Honorable Lawrence H. Framme, III, Secretary of Economic Development Neal J. Barber, Director, Department of Housing and Community Support Wayne G. Strickland, Executive Director, Fifth Planning District Commission ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER `~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: July 23, 1991 AGENDA ITEM: Resolution of Support for the Creation of the Center on Rural Development (CORD) and location of the Center in the Roanoke Valley COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND' As a result of a Rural Development Conference, held in Roanoke, Governor Wilder has created the Center on Rural Development (CORD) to enhance economic development efforts in rural areas. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Fifth Planning District Commission has adopted a resolution of support for the Governor's initiative, and further expressed interest in locating the CORD Office in the Roanoke Valley. Roanoke would be an ideal location for the office because of its central access to many of the rural communities in Virginia. The Fifth Planning District Commission is requesting support for this action from other Planning Districts, economic development agencies and the local governing bodies in the Fifth Planning District. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the attached resolution supporting CORD and its location in the Roanoke area be adopted and that copies be sent to the Governor, the Secretary of Economic Development, the Department of Housing and Community Development and the Fifth Planning District Commission. Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator S-~ ------------------- ------------------ ACTION VOTE Approved ( ) Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied ( ) Eddy Received ( ) Johnson Referred ( ) McGraw To ( ) Nickens Robers r ~ J-'{ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JULY 23, 1991 RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE CREATION OF THE CENTER ON RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND THE LOCATION OF THE CENTER IN THE ROANORE VALLEY WHEREAS, Governor Wilder's Rural Development Conference pointed to the need for the State to increase its role in rural economic development, and WHEREAS, the Governor has taken the initiative to enhance rural economic development through the creation of the Center on Rural Development (CORD), and WHEREAS, the Center on Rural Development is charged with providing leadership in developing a strategic planning process which will assess the needs of rural areas and provide a vehicle for citizens to achieve regional goals, and WHEREAS, the State may wish to consider locating this Center in a place other than Richmond in a location central to rural Virginians located in the Roanoke Valley, and THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia commend the GOvernor for creating this agency that will provide leadership and support to rural communities in developing a strategic planning process, and FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia recommends that the Center for Rural Development be located in the Roanoke Valley, a central location to many rural communities. ACTION NO. A-72391-4.i ITEM NUMBER ~T ,5- AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: July 23, 1991 AGENDA ITEM: Acceptance of Lakeland Drive, Green Meadow Road, Fairway View Trail and Buckwood Trail into the Secondary System by the Virginia Department of Transportation COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Roanoke County has received acknowledgement that the following roads have been accepted into the Secondary System by the Virginia Department of Transportation effective July 1, 1991. Windmere 1. 0.10 miles of Lakeland Drive (Route 1586) 2. 0.02 miles of Green Meadow Road (Route 1676) Fairway Forest Estates - Section 2 1. 0.60 miles of Fairway View Trail (Route 1389) Buckhorn 1. 0.32 miles of Buckwood Trail (Route 886) SUBMITTED BY: APPROV D BY: Mary Allen Elmer C. Hodge Clerk to the Board County Administrator ---------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved (X) Motion by• Bob L. Johnson No Yes Abs ent Denied ( ) Eddy x Received ( ) Johnson x Referred ( ) McGraw x Nickens x To ( ) Robers x cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections +_.=. t~~` , ~, ~~; DEPARTMENT OFTRANSPORTATION 1401 EAST BROAD STREET RICHMOND, 23219 RAY D. PETIiTEL COMMISSIONER July 2, 1991 Secondary System Additions Roanoke County Board of Supervisors County of Roanoke P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 MEMBERS OF THE BOARD: i';~d ~ ~, ~v'Y`~~-~"`' ~C , As requested in your resolutions dated May 14, 1991 and June 11, 1991, the following additions to the Secondary System of Roanoke County are hereby approved, effective July 1, 1991. LENGTH ADDITIONS WINDEMERE Route 1586 (Lakeland Drive) - From 0.20 mile East 0.10 Mi Route 1652 to 0.30 mile East Route 1652 Route 1676 (Green Meadow Road) - From 0.19 mile 0.02 Mi East Route 1652 to 0.21 mile East Route 1652 FAIRWAY FOREST ESTATES - SECTION 2 Route 1389 (Fairway View Trail) - From Route 1388 0.60 Mi to 0.6U mile Northwest Route 1388 BUCKHORN Route 886 (Buckwood Trail) - From Route 864 to 0.32 0.32 Mi mile Southwest Route 864 Sincerely, y D. Pethtel o issioner TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY ,•- . ACTION NO. A-72391-4.j ITEM NUMBER AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: July 23, 1991 AGENDA ITEM: Addition to, discontinuance, and abandonment of portions of Route 752 and addition to portion of Route 1765 in Secondary System by the Virginia Department of Transportation COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Roanoke County has received acknowledgement that the following additions to, discontinuance and abandonments have been approved by the Virginia Department of Transportation effective July 8, 1991, for Project 0752-080-221-M501, M502. Additions 1. 0.12 miles of Route 752 - Sections 3 and 4 of new location 2. 0.02 miles of Route 1765 - Section 5 of new connection Discontinuance 1. 0.03 miles of Route 752 - Section 1 of old location Abandonment 1. 0.04 miles of Route 752 - Section 2 of old location o ( ) SUBMITTED BY: APPROV D BY: ~~ Mary H. Allen Elmer C. Hodge Clerk to the Board County Administrator ------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved (X) Motion by: Bob L. Johnson Denied ( ) No Yes Absent Eddy x Received ( ) Johnson x Referred ( ) McGraw x T 'c: File Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Nickens x Robers x :.__ ~~ 1 .::! :` i.. ~. -W - f s-,.'. ~. DEPARTMENT OFTRANSPORTATION 1401 EAST BROAD STREET RICHMOND, 23219 RAY D. PETHTEL COMMISSIONER July 8, 1991 0~ •1 ~_ ~ ~ '! 7 a . ,. Secondary System Additions, Discontinuance and Abandonment Roanoke County Project 0752-080-221, M501, M502 Board of Supervisors County of Roanoke P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 MEMBERS OF THE BOARD: As requested in your resolution dated August 14, 1990, the following additions tRo anokelCountynarechereby appr ved t effective Secondary System of July 8, 1991. The discontinuance was approved by the Commonwealth Transportation Board at their meeting on June 20, 1991. LENGTH ADDITIONS Route 752 - Sections 3 and 4 of new location, 0,12 Mi Project 0752-080-221, M501, M502 Route 1765 - Section 5 of new connection, 0,02 Mi Project 0752-080-221, M501, M502 DISCONTINUANCE Route 752 - Section 1 of old location, p.03 Mi Project 0752-080-221, M501, M502 ABANDONMENT Route 752 - Section 2 of old location, 0.04 Mi Project 0752-080-221, M501, M502 Sincerely, a D. Pethtel ommissioner TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY 1 ACTION NO. A-72391-4.k ITEM NO. `-~""".~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: July 23, 1991 AGENDA ITEM: Transmittal of Planning Commission Resolution Adopted Pursuant to Section 15.1-456 of the Code of Virginia; Conformity of the Explore Park with the 1985 Comprehensive Plan. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ,~,.,.~ BACKGROUND' The Planning Commission is proceeding with the review process for the Explore Park. This process involves: 1. Adopting revisions to the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance that establish the procedures and standards for the review of the Park; 2. Reviewing a forthcoming rezoning request for all of the land owned by the Virginia Recreational Facilities Authority; 3. Initiating a "456 Review" of the Explore Park to determine conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. The attached resolution was adopted by the Commission at their July 2, 1991 meeting. The resolution indicates the Commission has reviewed the Explore Park against the applicable provisions of the 1985 Plan and has found the Park to be generally in conformance with these provisions. The adoption of this resolution fulfills Item #3 listed above. State law requires that the Commission transmit their findings to the Board of Supervisors. No action of the Board is required. State law also provides that the Board may overrule the action of the Commission. .~- `~ 2 ALTERNATIVES' 1. Accept the resolution of the Commission. 2. Overrule the action of the Commission. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative #1. Respectfully Submitted, Terrance L. Harringto , Secretary Roanoke County Plan ng Commission Action Vote No Yes Absent Approved (x) Motion b n..~ T ~^hnGOn Eddy x Denied ( ~ to acce~t Johnson x ( ~ McGraw x Received Nickens x Referred Robers x to cc: File Terrance L. Harrington, Director, Planning & Zoning 5~ AT A REGULAR COi NITY ADMINISTRAT GONE CENTER ON~TUESDAY OrJULY ION,19 Ei D AT THE ROANOKE A RESOLUTION OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION PURSUANT TO SECTION 15.1-456 OF THE CODE OF VIRGINIA, AS AMENDED, REPORTING ITS FINDINGS ON THE PROPOSED EXPLORE PARK AND ITS COMPATIBILITY WITH THE 1985 ROANOKE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. WHEREAS, the Explore Park (Park) was proposed in 1985, and; WHEREAS, in 1985 the Virginia General Assembly created the Virginia Recreational Facilities Authority as an entity authorized to develop and own the Park, and; WHEREAS, between September 1986 and January 1987 a community- wide public involvement process was held to solicit community input on citizen concerns pertaining to Explore site selection, site analysis, and master plan design, and; WHEREAS, as a result of this process a site of approximately 1450 acres located along the Roanoke River near the Blue Ridge Parkway in the Vinton Magisterial District was selected for the Park, and consensus was achieved on major issues pertaining to access, environmental protection, and master plan design, and; WHEREAS, the Park site is located within a Rural Preserve Land Use Designation in the 1985 Comprehensive Plan, and policies within this designation promote the establishment of large scale state and local outdoor parks and recreational facilities as a strategy to protect environmentally sensitive areas from more intense uses, and; WHEREAS, the retail, lodging, conference and similar elements of the Park shown on the 1987 Explore Master Plan may be seen as inconsistent with the adopted policies of the Rural Preserve Land Use Designation, and; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed and recommended to the Board of Supervisors revisions to the zoning ordinance creating the Explore Park District. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Roanoke County Planning Commission has evaluated the entire 1450 acre Explore Park against the Rural Preserve land use types, principles and guidelines of the 1985 Comprehensive Plan, has found that the 1987 Master Plan for the Park is in substantial conformity with the Comprehensive Plan. Adopted on a motion of Kyle Robinson, and the following recorded vote: AYES: Gordon, Massey, Robinson, Witt NAYS: None ABSENT: Chappelle ACTION NO. A-72391-4.1 ITEM NO. - $ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: July 23, 1991 AGENDA ITEM: Donation of a water line and sanitary sewer easement from Dominion Bank, N.A., to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: /J_'I,~~~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This consent agenda item involves the donation of an easement for water and sanitary sewer purposes in connection with the Bernard Drive/Fallowater Sewer Line Extension over and across property owned by Dominion Bank, N.A., located in the Cave Spring Magisterial District of the County of Roanoke as follows: a) Donation of a water line and sanitary sewer easement, twenty feet (20') in width, from Dominion Bank, N.A., (Deed Book 1030, page 290; Tax Map No. 87.07-2-9), said easement being shown and designated as "NEW 20' WATER & SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT" on a plat prepared by the Roanoke County Engineering Department, dated 11 March 1991, revised April 24, 1991. The location and dimensions of this property have been reviewed and approved by the County's engineering staff. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends acceptance of this easement. Respe tfully submitted, ickie L. H m n Assistant County Attorney Action Approved (x) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Motion by Bob L. Johnson Vote No Yes Abs Eddy x Johnson x McGraw x Nickens x Robers x cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Cliff Craig, Director, Utility m-~ COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA GENERAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE ~ of General~l~ Amount Fund Expenditures Unaudited Balance at July 1, 1991 $4,269,399 6.10 and Balance as of July 23, 1991 Submitted by Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance Note: On December eral Fund Unappropriat d Balance at o6 t2 ~ aof oGeneraleFund to maintain the Gen expenditures ($70,036,927). m-~ COUNTY OF ROANORE, VIRGINIA RESERVE FOR BOARD CONTINGENCY Beginning Balance at July 1, 1991 $ 50,000 July 9, 1991 Additional funds for Alleghany Health (8,000) District July 9, 1991 Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors 3,000) Bureau Balance as of July 23, 1991 $ 39,000 Submitted by Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance ACTION # ITEM NUMBER / ' ° "~` AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: July 23, 1991 AGENDA ITEM: Accounts Paid - June 1991 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Payments to Vendors: $1,993,176.79 Payroll: 6/07/91 $ 456,206.76 6/21/91 456.872.21 913.078.97 $2,906,255.76 A detailed listing of the payments is on file with the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors. SUBMITTED BY: SV ~'YYC; ~ ~a ~~ Diane D. Hyat Director of Finance APPROVED: ~i~r/ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ---------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To Motion by: Eddy Johnson McGraw Nickens Robers ACTION # ITEM NUMBER /YI - AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: July 23, 1991 SUBJECT: Display of Street Addresses in County COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At the June 25 meeting of the Board of Supervisors, Supervisor Eddy requested information on problems encountered by the Police Department in locating street addresses when responding to emergency calls. When the E-911 system was put into place, the County enacted an ordinance that sets forth specific requirements for marking the address of a building. Unfortunately, not all county homes and businesses are currently in compliance with the County Code. Engineering and Inspections, charged with enforcing the ordinance, rarely has the opportunity to inspect existing buildings, while the Police and Fire and Rescue Departments see the problem daily, but have no means of enforcement. There has been no mechanism for relaying information about non-compliance between the Departments.. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Public Safety Team, with representatives attending from Police, Fire and Rescue, Animal Control, Engineering and Inspections, Public Information, Planning and Zoning, County Attorney, and the Sheriff's office, met and discussed the problem. Reports indicate that it is most serious in business and indus- trial parks and in rural areas. It was determined that the problem needs to be addressed through a combination of information and enforcement. The following will be done by the team: o Printing of a door hanger which can be used whenever a County employee notes a violation of the ordinance. The door hanger will include information on the ordinance and its requirements, and provide citizens with a telephone number to call for more information. The bottom of the hanger will be perforated, so that m-~ it can be filled out and returned to Management Information Services for recordkeeping. The cost of 1,000 door hangers is approximately $100.00, and funds are available in the Public Information Office Budget. o MIS will compile regular lists of violators, and the Police Department, Sheriff's Office, Fire and Rescue Department and Animal Control officers will follow up as part of their regular duties. It is anticipated that this can be achieved during regular patrol duties and will not require significant extra work. o The Engineering and Inspections Department currently requires all new construction to meet the County ordinance with respect to addresses; in the future, the Department will add this requirement to all permit checks. o The Police and Fire and Rescue Chiefs will meet with private delivery companies to determine if they experience any particular problem areas, and/or whether they would be willing to help with this problem. The Postmaster will also be contacted. o An article will be placed in Roanoke County Today concerning the importance of properly marking houses and businesses, along with some general information about the E-911 system. The Committee will proceed to implement the above recommendations concerning education about and enforcement of this ordinance. i ~ ~ ~ I ~~~ THOMAS C. FUQUA, C IRMAN ELMER C. HODGE PUBLIC SAFETY TEAM COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred To ACTION Motion by: VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy Robers _ Johnson _ _ _ Nickens _ _ _ McGraw cc: File ACTION N0. ITEM NUMBER - AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: July 23, 1991 AGENDA ITEM: Report on the Utilization of the Automated Message System COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: During the Spring of 1991 when the new telephone directory was distributed, the County began using an automated messaging system to help provide the residents with information on the services offered by the County. These unique telephone numbers were printed in the blue pages of the telephone directory as a part of the governmental listing and have also been provided to our residents in the form of an insert in the tax mailing this spring. Attached is a summary of the utilization of the system for the months of May and June 1991. This information is provided from a statistical report we are now receiving from the vendor and we will periodically update this information to the Board of Supervisors. Obviously there are peak seasons of use for certain messages and staff will continue to monitor the use to eliminate ones which are not cost effective. Staff will also continue to monitor the feasibility of continuing to purchase the service from a private vendor as compared to acquiring our own equipment. In either case, over 2,000 residents per month have been served by this effort which would have taken away from productive time of other employees. Respectfully submitted, Approved by, ,. m ~ ~~~ /John M. Chambliss, Jr. Elmer C. Hodge Assistant Administrator County Administrator --------------------------------------------------------------- Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) Motion by: ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy Johnson McGraw Nickens Robers f71-5 VOICEMSG PHONE N0. TITLE MAY JUNE 2 MO TOTAL - --------- 772-8900 ---------------------------------- FREQUENTLY CALLED NUMBERS ------- 216 ------ 196 --------- 412 772-8911 ANIMAL CONTROL 287 187 474 772-8912 REAL ESTATE TAXES 147 83 230 772-8913 PERSONAL PROPERTY TAXES 564 87 651 772-8914 AUTOMATED REFUSE COLLECTION 175 127 302 772-8915 BRUSH & BULK COLLECTION INFO. 265 155 420 772-8916 AUTO DECAL INFORMATION 363 104 467 772-8917 PARKS AND RECREATION 64 71 135 772-8918 TAX RELIEF ELDERLY, DISABLED 16 8 24 772-8920 DOG LICENSE 22 14 36 772-8921 BUSINESS LICENSE 23 15 38 772-8922 MARRIAGE LICENSES 0 0 0 772-8923 BUILDING PERMITS 107 112 219 772-8924 LOCAL TAX DEADLINES 65 16 81 772-8925 UTILITY BILLING OFFICE 57 54 111 772-8926 HUMAN RESOURCES 324 241 565 772-8927 VOTER REGISTRATION 18 13 31 772-8928 STATE INCOME TAX 25 18 43 772-8929 JUNK CAR COMPLAINTS 0 12 12 772-8930 BUILDING INSPECTIONS 127 120 247 772-8931 CLERK OF CIRCUIT COURT 0 0 0 772-8932 JURY INFORMATION 0 0 0 772-8933 CLERK OF GENERAL DISTRICT COURT 76 88 164 772-8934 CLERK OF JUVENILE & DOM REL COURT 29 22 51 772-8935 DEVELOPMENT AND REVIEW 0 0 0 772-8936 CORTRAN 3 2 5 772-8937 HUMAN RESOURCES (JOB LISTING) 294 233 527 772-8938 JAIL 0 0 0 772-8939 FIRE AND RESCUE INFORMATION 56 45 101 772-8940 HEALTH DEPARTMENT INFORMATION 51 37 88 772-8941 HUNTING AND FISHING LICENSE INFO 0 0 0 772-8943 PLANNING AND ZONING INFO 0 11 11 772-8944 PROCUREMENT INFORMATION 0 0 0 772-8945 RECYCLING INFORMATION 34 14 48 772-8946 REGIONAL LANDFILL INFO 45 23 68 772-8947 SOCIAL SERVICES AND WELFARE 0 0 0 772-8948 UTILITY DEPARTMENT 40 63 103 772-8949 BD OF SUP, PUBLIC HEARING INFO 17 16 33 772-8951 SPECIAL EVENTS SCHEDULE 11 11 22 772-8955 SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION 28 32 60 ------ 3,549 ----- 2,230 ----------- 5,779 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JULY 23 1991 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. r AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JULY 23, 1991 RESOLUTION 72391-5 OF CONGRATULATIONS TO THE GLENVAR HIGH SCHOOL GIRLS SOFTBALL TEAM FOR WINNING THE STATE GROUP A CHAMPIONSHIP WHEREAS, the Glenvar High School Girls Softball Team, coached by Spike Harrison, recently won the 1991 State Group A Championship; and WHEREAS, the team achieved a record of 21 wins and only 3 losses during the season; and WHEREAS, high school sports are an important part of the education of the children of Roanoke County, providing the opportunity to learn coordination, competition and team playing; and WHEREAS, the Glenvar High School Girls Softball Team has demonstrated an outstanding commitment to the goals and ideals of high school athletics as well as excellence on the playing field. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, on its own behalf and on behalf of the citizens of Roanoke County, and particularly the citizens of the Glenvar community, expresses congratulations to the GLENVAR HIGH SCHOOL HIGHLANDERS and to COACH HARRISON on winning the State Championship. On motion of Supervisor Robers, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Robers, Johnson, Nickens NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor McGraw A COPY TESTE: _ ~' Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Resolutions of Congratulations File Dr. Bayes Wilson, Superintendent, Roanoke County Schools 'f"/ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JULY 23, 1991 RESOLUTION OF CONGRATULATIONS TO THE GLENVAR HIGH SCHOOL GIRLS SOFTBALL TEAM FOR WINNING THE STATE GROUP A CHAMPIONSHIP WHEREAS, the Glenvar High School Girls Softball Team, coached by Spike Harrison, recently won the 1991 State Group A Championship; and WHEREAS, the team achieved a record of 21 wins and only 3 losses during the season; and WHEREAS, high school sports are an important part of the education of the children of Roanoke County, providing the opportunity to learn coordination, competition and team playing; and WHEREAS, the Glenvar High School Girls Softball Team has demonstrated an outstanding commitment to the goals and ideals of high school athletics as well as excellence on the playing field. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, on its own behalf and on behalf of the citizens of Roanoke County, and particularly the citizens of the Glenvar community, expresses congratulations to the GLENVAR HIGH SCHOOL HIGHLANDERS and to COACH HARRISON on winning the State Championship. ~ r AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, JULY 23, 1991 ORDINANCE 72391-6 TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A 1.709 ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED IN EMERALD COURT SUBDIVISION, RESERVOIR ROAD, (PORTION OF TA% MAP N0.27.08- 2-27) IN THE HOLLIN3 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A-1 TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF R-3 WITH CONDITIONS UPON THE APPLICATION OF A. J. EVERETT, LYNWARD TWINE AND CLINE CONNER WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on June 25, 1991, and the second reading and public hearing was held July 23, 1991; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on July 2, 1991; 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 1.709 acre, as described herein, and located in Emerald Court Subdivision, Reservoir Road, (Portion of Tax Map Number 27.08-2-27) in the Hollins Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of A-1, Agricultural District, to the zoning classification of R-3, Multi-Family Residential District. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of A. J. Everett, Lynward Twine and Cline Conner. 3. That the owner has voluntarily proffered in writing the 1 following conditions which the Board of Supervisors hereby accepts: (a) Permitted uses on this 1.709 acre tract shall be townhouses or lower density uses in accordance with 21-22-4A (1-3). (b) The height of the proposed structure shall not exceed 35 feet. (c) Type B screening shall be installed along the property lines adjoining lesser density zoning in accordance with Section 21-92 of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance. (d) The density of the proposed development shall not exceed 12 units per acre. 4. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: BEGINNING at the point common with the right- of-way of Reservoir Road (Route 648) and the northernmost property corner of Tax Parcel 27.08-2-26; thence S. 01 deg. 49' 30" W. 26.60 feet to the point of beginining of Lot 8, Emerald Court Subdivision; thence S. O1 deg. 49' 30" W. 217.29 feet; thence S. 67 deg. 30' 00" W. 207.43 feet; thence N. 37 deg. 26' 19" W. 130.39 feet; thence N. 23 deg. 30' 45" E. 292.31 feet; thence S. 66 deg. 29' 15" E. 25.22 feet; thence N. 69 deg. 44' 30" E. 107.05 feet; thence S. 20 deg. 15' E. 108.74 feet to the point of beginning, containing 1.709 acres. 5. 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. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: 2 AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Robers, Johnson, Nickens NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor McGraw A COPY TESTE: Mary H. llen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & lnspeczions Terry Harrington, Director, Planning & Zoning John Willey, Director, Real Estate Assessment Paul Mahoney, County Attorney 3 ~9r-l PETITIONER: A.J. EVERETT, LYNWARD TWINE AND CLINE CONNER CASE NUMBER: 13-7/91 Planning Commission Hearing Date: July 2, 1991 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: July 23, 1991 A. REQUEST Petition of A. J. Everett, Lynward Twine and Cline Conner to rezone 1.709 acres from A- 1 to R-3 to construct townhouses, located in Emerald Court Subdivision, Reservoir Road, Hollins Magisterial District. B. CITIZEN COMMENTS None. C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION The Commission asked that the proffer pertaining to lighting be deleted since it is a requirement in the Public Street and Parking Design Standards and Specifications. They inquired about the landscaping and were told by Carolyn Bolton that landscaping will incorporate the existing trees insofar as possible. D. PROFFERED CONDITIONS 1) Permitted uses on this 1.709 acre tract shall be townhouses or lower density uses in accordance with 21-22-4A(1-3). 2) The height of the proposed structures shall not exceed 35 feet. 3) Type B screening shall be installed along the property lines adjoining lesser density zoning in accordance with Section 21-92 of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance. 4) The density of the proposed development shall not exceed 12 units per acre. E. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Mr. Massey moved to recommend approval of the petition with proffered conditions. The motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Massey, Witt, Gordon, Robinson NAYS: None ABSENT: Chappelle F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. G. ATTACHMENTS: _ Concept Plan _ Vicinity Map _ Staff Repo~,t _ ~ er ~ r~ ,~,~ ~ Terrance Ha gton, ecretary Roanoke unty Pl nning Commission STAFF REPORT CASE NUMBER: 13-7/91 REVIEWED BY: ANITA MCMILLAN PETITIONER: EMERALD COURT DATE: JULY 2, 1991 Petition of A. J. Everett, Lynward Twine, and Cline Conner to rezone 1.709 acres from A-1, Agricultural to R-3, Residential to construct townhouses, located in Emerald Court Subdivision, Reservoir Road (Route 648), Hollins Magisterial District. NATURE OF RE IIO EST a. Conditional request to rezone 1.709 acre parcel of land, a portion of 3.104 acre tract from agricultural district, A-1 to multi-family residential district, R-3, for the stated purpose of building 19 two and three bedroom unit townhouses. The original 3.104 acre tract has been subdivided into eight lots. Lot 1-7 will have single family or duplex homes constructed on them in accordance with the A-1 zoning requirements. The proposed rezoning from A-1 to R-3 will be on the remaining 1.709 acres, known as Lot 8. b. Attached concept plan and zoning vicinity map describe the project in more detail. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS a. The R-3, Multi-family Residential District, permits a variety of residential uses including multi-family dwellings, duplexes, townhouses and high-rise apartments. Churches, day. care centers and nursery schools are also permitted within the R-3 district. Petit- ioners have indicated in the letter of application that they propose a townhouse development for this section of the property. Petitioners have proffered that permitted uses on this 1.709 acres shall be town- houses or lower density uses in accordance with 21-22-4 A (1-3). b. Height limitations range from three stories or thirty-five (35) feet for townhouses to twelve (12) stories or one-hundred twenty-five feet for high-rise apartments. No proffered conditions have been submitted which would limit height. c. Site plan review will be required to ensure compliance with all County development regulations. d. An entrance permit will be required from the VA Department of Trans- portation (VDOT). Petitioners propose access to be via Reservoir Road feeding into a private road that will serve development. SITE CHARACTERISTICS TOPOGRAPHY: Gently sloping upward from Reservoir Road towards the proposed townhouse development. GROUND COVER: Some of the site is heavily wooded with mature tree cover such as locust, black cherry, ash and Virginia pine. Shrub stage vegetation consisting primarily of blackberry. AREA CHARACTERISTICS FUTURE GROWTH PRIORITY: Situated within the Peters Creek Community Planning Area. The Comprehensive Development Plan indicates that, growth should be encouraged in this area. Urban services are available. 7~~-~ GENERAL AREA is developed with single family and manufactured home residential, recreational and commercial uses. Very limited undeveloped wnnr3land acreage remains. 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 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: 1985 Comprehensive Development Plan has placed this area within a Development land use category. Under Development designation, a mix of housing types and densities is encouraged. This designation encourages development of low to middle density (1- 6 units per acre) and to limit middle-high density (6-12 units per acre). Proposed density of development for portion to be rezoned is 11.1 units per acre and 10.6 units per acre for the whole tract (including the single family/duplexes subdivision). 3 SURROUNDING LAND: Reservoir Road and heavily traveled primary highway (Peters Creek Road/U.S. Route 11). Single family and manufactured home residential surround the proposed development. Saddler Park to the south and Webb Oil Company to the west of the proposed development. 2 NEIGHBORING AREA: Single family and manufactured home residential, commercial and developed recreational areas. 3 SITE LAYOUT: Proposal includes 5 buildings containing 19 two and three bedroom units. Townhouse development must comply with the site plan design criteria contained within Section 21-41-2, paragraph B, of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance. Concept plan shows that the existing Appalachian Power Company (APCO) easement will be relocated along Reservoir Road and Emerald Lane by APCO, away from proposed townhouse units. Additionally, units 6, 10, and 11 must be moved forward to accommodate the County's minimum 40 feet rear yard. The proposed townhouse complex will be accessed by way of Reservoir Road. 3 ARCHITECTURE: Concept plan calls for varied front setbacks. Facades, roof lines and exterior building materials not specified. 2 SCREENING AND LANDSCAPING: As part of the site plan review process, petitioner will be required to comply with the screening and buffering provisions of the County's Zoning Ordinance. Concept plan calls for Type B, Option 2 screening and buffering around the proposed development. 4 AMENITIES: Adequate parking spaces have been proposed for the townhouse development (ordinance requires 38 parking spaces; 40 parking spaces have been proposed - Section 201.13-C). Roanoke County Parking Design Standards and Specifications requires parking stall with a dimension of 9 by 20 feet - Section 207.08. r ~- ~ Under Section 201.06.2, "where parking spaces lie adjacent to landscaped areas, the paved depth of all stalls may be decreased by 2 feet to provide for overhang area". It further indicates that the vehicular overhang area may not encroach into required landscaped area or sidewalk. Concept plan showed the dimension for the parking stalls as 9 by 18 feet, with 2 feet overhang, therefore the sidewalk may have to be widen. Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance Section 21- 41-2-J, states that "open off-street parking bays adjacent to streets provided for the townhouse units have to be within 150 feet of the group served". No on-site recreational facility is proposed. 3 NATURAL FEATURES: Site is covered with mature trees and shrub stage vegetation. TRAFFIC STREET CAPACITIES: The 1988 Average Daily Traffic (ADT) on U.S. Route 11, between Route 601 (Hollins Road) and Route 115 (Plantation Road) was 15,850. 1989 ADT on Route 117 (Peters Creek Road) and Route 601 was 21,985. Based on 1989 Traffic Accident Information, 149 accidents occurred along Peters Creek Road/Route 11 between Roanoke City Limit and Route 601. VDOT reserves the right to require a traffic impact study upon application for an entrance permit. 3 CIRCIILATION: Adequate. The proposed townhouse development will be served by an internal street that will be extended to Reservoir Road as immediate access. Proposed parking stalls, vehicular overhang, and parking bays distance will have to meet Roanoke County standards. Proposal will have to meet all County requirements for fire and rescue services. VDOT inquired about the adequacy of sight distance along Route 648 for a commercial entrance. UTILITIES 2 WATER: Adequate source and distribution for domestic purposes anticipated. Department of Utility indicates that public water can be provided by the six inch water line located along Emerald Lane and Reservoir Road. 2 SEWER: Adequate treatment and transmission anticipated. Service can be provided by extending the existing sewer line 500 feet from manhole located on Reservoir Road. DRAINAGE 3 BASIN: Tinker Creek. County stormwater management regulations will be in effect. 2 FLOODPLAIN: Not located within FEMA flood hazard zone. PUBLIC BERVICEB 2 FIRE PROTECTION: Within established service area. 2 RESCUE: Within established service area. 2 PARRS AND RECREATION: Petitioners are not proposing any on-site park facilities. The County's Hollins park district provides for Peters Creek planning area. The proposed townhouse will utilize Saddler Park, developed as part of the Hollins Community Development Block Grant, which is located across the proposed development. ~'~ 2 SCHOOLS: If 19 two and three bedroom townhouse units are constructed, it is anticipated that there would be 9 school age residents (based on regional demographic multipliers for two and three bedroom townhouse). The elementary, junior high, and high school facilities serving the North District have adequate capacity to accommodate these students. The estimated cost of educating one child in Roanoke County is approximately $4,740.40, of which $2,317.80 is locally funded, based on 1990-91 Fiscal Year figure. Using this figure, staff estimates that this project could require an additional $20,860 of county educational services annually. TAX BASE LAND AND IMPROVEMENT VALUE: $673,734 TAXABLE GRO88 SALES/YEAR: 0 TOTAL EMPLOYEES: 0 TOTAL REVENUE TO THE COUNTY/YEAR: N/A ENVIRONMENT 2 AIR: 2 WATER: 2 SOILS: 2 NOISE: 2 SIGNAGE: In accordance with Roanoke County Sign Ordinance. PLAN CONSISTENCY This area is designated as Development. Petitioners' request is consistent with the Land Use Plan map with Policy D-1 (manage new residential growth according to the capacity and availability of public services and facili- ties, particularly water, sewer, streets, and schools) and Policy D-9 (provide direct access onto a collector or arterial street where a residen- tial project has a significant increase in density from the surrounding neighborhood). In dealing with Policy D-8, (permit attached and multi- family development, provided exceptional housing design and site planning are employed to achieve compatibility), petitioners propose adequate parking, and screening and buffering per ordinance. STAFF EVALIIATION STRENGTHS: 1) Consistency with Policy D-1 (residential growth management through public service capacity and availability). 2) Consistency with Policy D-9 (providing direct access onto major collector street). 3) The density (11.1 units/acre) of the proposed townhouse development is moder- ately compatible with recommended densities in the Development land use designation. WEAKNESSES: 1) The vehicular overhang for proposed parking encroaching the sidewalk. 2) Under existing APCO easement, four of the proposed townhouse are located under and within the easement. 3) No on-site recreational facility is proposed. 4) Lack of specific proffers related to proposal. 5) Units 6, 10, and 11 do not provide for minimum 40-foot rear yard. PROFFERS SUGGESTED: 1) Petitioners should proffer the use as only town- house, or in lieu of this proffer, proffer a height not to exceed two and one half stories or 35 feet. 2) Petitioners should proffer conditions which ensure that site and parking area lighting does not adversely impact neigh- boring residences. 3) Installation of Type B Option 2 screening and buffer- ing along all borders. 4) Proffer density that will not exceed 12 houses per acre. JL~L- 3-'~ 1 WE L 1 3 45 E~F+L LER & ASSOC I t=+T E = F'rJAN F' 62 ~~~ June 28, 1991 Ms. Anita McMillan Roanoke County Planning Department P. 0. Box 29800 Roanoke, Virginia 24018-0798 RE: Emerald Court, Phase II Rezoning Dear Ms. McMillan: In consideration of approval of our request to rezone a 1.709 acre portion of Tax Map Number 27.08-2-29, known as Lot 8, Emerald Court, from the current A-1 zoning to R-3, Multi-family Residential, we would like to proffer the following: 1) Permitted uses on this 1.709 acre tract shall be townhouses or lower density uses in accordance with 21-22-4 A (1'3). 2) The height of the proposed structures shall not exceed 35 feet. 3) Type B screen~.ng shall be installed along the property lines adjoining lesser density zoning in accordance with 5eotion 21' 92 of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance. P~'~-~ page 2 June 28, 1991 Anita McMillan 4) The density of the proposed development shall not exceed 12 units per acre. Sincerely, ~. , ~~.~ A. Everett, Owner r 7-~ - 9/ Twine, Owner ~, ~ / line Conner, owner cc: Carolyn C. Bolton, Balzer and Associates, Inc. 4 z V>N 2 ~ N ; C~~ ~ J Vr r~ N O OTC J CFO V ~\ 3 ~~ F~a p/ V~"~ O_ h - . X J 1- { 90 ~; fil I I ., 'I °N~ / c„a ~.e oi8e<_ az~a~ (aa~~ i~H ON as ~ ~ .+ g l .+ ~ U v H N .7 WOpz.OiH ,x N HH ~ M.~ Mm „~[Nr O vl ul .W W ~z0 V mOF 4F.~ ~HxO 6 .' n ,~" tq0 . vtPPpW76GG V~'I'~ nip€j! ~. u~ .Ori> mn0. U•~aU~ OT ` Np~oi/ O~ pZW iq0~ .. V~ WL•O .2 7n .. .. > I ono o Mt p~ 4~ 4~ 7. •n .tµ~ m o ~ T I n ~o .. O~N.+F SyL ZX .• h~14 .+ xfv .fir .-1T (v ~N ~N~~t• « U •• H .~ y .t o .~ O U R~ N ~ .. 4 h ffp~y~ ~+ ~ •• dG t'~ ~ ~ rmi (K a W ..~ WP ~.. rv O F 4 4 (~+T. ,•O ~H U {y p~ O I 7' - \ \ pHy.~ ~ ! O x kk ~O= 4 m y 4 4 N zN p~+ !p~~~~yy{{ pyp'~0(~ N ~ a n ~ 4 WF ~ • U NP. ~ R~E+~V10 .. ,. ,~A ~O6fD ~ 1 1 R) ~ if~fi I /~ ~. 09.+,~ I I . , ~ /1 . \ ~ 4~~0 \ \~ baa ~1 ~~ / ~ ~\ /r ' jw° o - ;;~~. ~a• -~ ~=~ O i ~~ ?~/ ' / I ~ I i i \ ~ } I ~ /~ I ~V~ ~ ~'f I .I it li{ !Iii ~I ~. ~~~~I ~~, //~ .. ~~• ~~~ • b ~.n .. _ .. , ..~ ~,.. - ~" . -~~ ... .... ... ..... . . I s ~ ... rC ,~ ? ~ ., ~o, f ~e M`J~ e`d~ tf' 8 ~° ~ ' ~o is ruvcr \ ~' ~~ ~~~ ~ VIL"lJV~1?Y ,~ '~4~i-C NORTB e °~~ A~ ~0~~i ~ nO4e e~ ~ :.~,~ \ . ~o~ i may, ~ ~o ~, ~92~c ` ~03Ac s~, "+. ~ e 2 ~ z .~ O ~ ~ ` Q \ 3 6 o a k° ~' ,,, ~ / ~i ~ ~ 3 r c _ „~ S i i 13 S b v ~ ~ ~ ~ "- p 3 N r 29 v `. ~~ ., A, ~ / s'~ ~/ ~ ~ •d, ' j 29 ~ 2S \ Z~ ` i b ~ ]e~AC C) i~ t ~t 23 • ~ u 2 rk '-, + \ Rces ~ 2I - ~f; :` \ „+s zo ~ ~ / I ~ ~ ~er~~ \9 \~ ~ ~ ~ !9 ~ „~ auk ie ~ ~ ook~o ~ o e»~ ~cr ~ B~ COMINUNII'Y SBRYICBS Everett, Twine, and Conner ANDDBYBLOPMBNT ~ Emv,Jca,~d Cowct II CO.RA .a~ ~ ~ {~ ~, .lUL ~ ~ ~ ~ P.O. Box 7098 O p~.~~~, ~0~~ ~ ~~~` ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24019 ~ ~~-~ ~~ (703) 362-3795 July 11, 1991 Mr. Terrance Harrington Director of Planning County of Roanoke P. 0. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 2018 Re: bnerald Court Subdivision Dear Terry: I appreciate your taking time to talk with me this morning regarding the proposed Ilnerald Court Subdivision on Reservoir Road. As we discussed, we are located on Reservoir Road and our company operates tankers hauling both gasolines and fuel oils. Reservoir Road is a second- ary road which does not meet current state standards. Also, approximately 30 feet from our truck entrance is a sharp right hand curve in the road, which is just below the proposed site of the townhouses. Due to the nature of our business, we are constantly concerned with safety, and we feel the additional traffic produced by these townhomes will create increased opportunities for accidents on Reservoir Road as it exists now. The Virginia Department of Transportation, The Roanoke County Planning Commission, and the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors do an excellent job of reviewing proposed sites for safety and we feel the factors involved in this area could potentially be unsafe if traffic flow is increased on this road. Thanking you for the opportunity to talk with you, we remain: Sincerely, WE ' OIL CORPORATION Janice M.~ti~~b JMW/vgh ~" AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, JULY 23, 1991 ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A 1.709 ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED IN EMERALD COURT SUBDIVISION, RESERVOIR ROAD, (PORTION OF TAX MAP N0.27.08-2-27) IN THE HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A-1 TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF R-3 WITH CONDITIONS UPON THE APPLICATION OF A. J. EVERETT, LYNWARD TWINE AND CLINE CONNER WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on June 25, 1991, and the second reading and public hearing was held July 23, 1991; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on July 2, 1991; 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 1.709 acre, as described herein, and located in Emerald Court Subdivision, Reservoir Road, (Portion of Tax Map Number 27.08-2-27) in the Hollins Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of A-1, Agricultural District, to the zoning classification of R-3, Multi-Family Residential District. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of A. J. Everett, Lynward Twine and Cline Conner. 3. That the owner has voluntarily proffered in writing the following conditions which the Board of Supervisors hereby accepts: ~9~-I (a) Permitted uses on this 1.709 acre tract shall be townhouses or lower density uses in accordance with 21-22-4A (1-3). (b) The height of the proposed structure shall not exceed 35 feet. (c) Type B screening shall be installed along the property lines adjoining lesser density zoning in accordance with Section 21-92 of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance. (d) The density of the proposed development shall not exceed 12 units per acre. 4. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: BEGINNING at the point common with the right- of-way of Reservoir Road (Route 648) and the northernmost property corner of Tax Parcel 27.08-2-26; thence S. 01 deg. 49' 30" W. 26.60 feet to the point of beginining of Lot 8, Emerald Court Subdivision; thence S. 01 deg. 49' 30" W. 217.29 feet; thence S. 67 deg. 30' 00" W. 207.43 feet; thence N. 37 deg. 26' 19" W. 130.39 feet; thence N. 23 deg. 30' 45" E. 292.31 feet; thence S. 66 deg. 29' 15" E. 25.22 feet; thence N. 69 deg. 44' 30" E. 107.05 feet; thence S. 20 deg. 15' E. 108.74 feet to the point of beginning, containing 1.709 acres. 5. 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. f + i r ~, AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, JULY 23, 1991 ORDINANCE 72391-7 TO AMEND PROFFERED CONDITIONS ON THE REZONING OF A 3-ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED ON FALLOWATER LANE (TAX MAP NOS. 77.19-1-34 AND 77.19-1-33) IN THE CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF B-2, CONDITIONAL, TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF B-2, CONDITIONAL (AMENDMENT TO PROFFERS) UPON THE APPLICATION OF THE WILRINSON GROUP INC. WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on June 25, 1991, and the second reading and public hearing was held July 23, 1991; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on July 2, 1991; and, WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law; and WHEREAS, this property was rezoned from part R-3, Multi- Family Residential District, and M-1, Light Industrial District, to B-2, General Commercial District, with proffered conditions, on December 12, 1986. 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 3 acres, as described herein, and located on Fallowater Lane (Tax Map Nos. 77.19-1-34 and 77.19-1-33) in the Cave Spring Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of B-2, General Commercial District, to the zoning classification of B-2, General Commercial District, with amended 1 r proffered conditions. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of The Wilkinson Group Inc. 3. That the owner has voluntarily proffered in writing the following amendments to proffered conditions approved by the Board of Supervisors on December 16, 1986, which the Board of Supervisors hereby accepts: (a) ~s-5-~Teagw , ., ~~~~ .g ~ a 1 i ~-a.xa . .., ae-~9-uzt-crErrEa--~r9 E~sir-r~-sz-Zf Any development on the subject property will not include the uses itemized in paragraphs 5 through 8 and paragraphs 11 and 12, inclusive, of Section 21-23-2 of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance. (b) The new street which will extend through the subject property, will be constructed to state standards and will be state maintained. (c) No more than 100 residential units will be built on the subject property. 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 Fallowater Lane, being the northeasterly corner of Lot 3 and the southeasterly corner of Lot 4, Map of Tanglewood Executive Park, recorded in Plat Book 10 page 112; thence N. 86 deg. 34' 53" W. 347.41 feet to a point; thence N. 37 deg. 23' 23" W. 19.89 feet to a point; thence N. 2 deg. 10' 52" W. 238.26 feet to a point, being the northwesterly corner of Lot 4; thence N. 55 deg. 57' S0" E. 106.79 feet to a point; thence N. 48 deg. 20' S0" E. 97.26 feet to a point; thence N. 43 deg. 23' 35" E. 62 feet to the center of a 15' drainage easement; thence with the center line of the drainage easement S. 41 deg. 05' 57" E. 97.22 feet to a point; thence continuing with the center line of the drainage easement S. 44 deg. 07' 55" E. 125.00 feet to a point; thence continuing with the center line of the drainage easement S. 67 deg. 19' 49" E. 62.51 feet to a point on Fallowater Lane, point being 7.5 feet from the northeast corner of Lot 4; thence with a curve following 2 Fallowater Lane with a radius of 285.00 feet, an arc distance of 75.00 feet, a chord bearing S. 38 deg. 19' 45" W. for a distance of 7.5 feet; thence with a curve following Fallowater Lane with a radius of 285.00 feet, an arc distance of 153.16 feet, a chord bearing S. 15 deg. 23' 42" W. for a distance of 151.32 feet; thence S. 0 deg. 00' 00" E. 104.34 feet to the point of beginning. 5. 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 shall be, and the same hereby are, repealed. On motion of Supervisor Robers to adopt ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Robers, Johnson, Nickens NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor McGraw A COPY TESTE: Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Terry Harrington, Director, Planning & Zoning John Willey, Director, Real Estate Assessment Paul Mahoney, County Attorney 3 _ ~ ' THE WILKINSON GROUP TEL No .7033452439 Ju1.19,91 16:06 P.(]1 THE WILKINSON GROUP TEL No .7033452439 Ju1.19,91 16:07 P.02 ~W~II ~1~1N~(:)N Jr.rly l9, i991 Mr. "Terri Ilarringi.on Director of Planning and Zoning Roanoke County 3738 Bramblcton AvcnuC Roarroke, virgirria Dear Mr. Ilarrington: This t~pcUmin~s 'T~resday evening ~luiy 23 I. have requested that the Roanoke f County Board of Supcrr-isors considrr our pCtiLion to rc~a>1e a p~rrce.l of ~` property on Fallovvater Lane from 13 2C to 13 2C with different, praffrra. Yreviouely, the. Roanoke County Ylannir~g (:ortrrntFSion h;rd rec~or,~n,ended i approval of this regtaest, known as Elizabeth IIouse and Gardens. I have a scheduling problem wiU:~ the meeting for 'I~aesday eveninb. i must attend an emergency meeting in jtichmond at that sarnc time. • m askin ~ that our petition remain on the agenda far the I3oord of I a k St,I~ervistrrs ft~r that evetzing, with the further request that sllo~tld any particular issues arise in ttie discussion of same that cannot, he ,fully. answerer] to the satisfaction of the Tioard that the petition be tabled until ille next availaUie time slot for their rev[ew, I sincerely apologize for any inconvcnicnce ibis has c.ausecl you. your staff or the Hoard of Supervisors. 'i'hanlc you iu advance far your assislrtrrce to this matter, Sincerely, ..r E. Wilkinson Pi c`fiidr,nl 1)I:W/sls 960 Websre~ Hued, Roanoke. Vfrgtnta 240x2 {703} q77-0005 ~~1~ PETITIONER: THE WILKINSON GROUP INC. CASE NUMBER: 14-7/91 Planning Commission Hearing Date: July 2, .1991 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: July 23, 1991 A. REQUEST Petition of The Wilkinson Group Inc. to amend proffered conditions on 3 acres zoned B- l and obtain a Special Exception Permit to operate a home for the elderly, located on Fallowater Lane, Cave Spring Magisterial District. B. CITIZEN COMMENTS None. C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION The Commission asked about the proposed density and staff replied that the impact of 33 units per acre of homes for adult housing may be comparable to that of 24+ multifamily development. Mr. Wilkinson's response to questions from the Commission are as follows: the facility will provide assistance with daily living and there will be around the clock nursing staff on site as well as security, maintenance, transportation, and housekeeping personnel; the average age of residents is a little greater than 80; about one out of every five drive; it will be a 3-story facility. D. PROFFERED CONDITIONS 1) Any development on the subject property will not include the uses itemized in paragraphs 5 through 8 and paragraphs 11 and 12, inclusive, of Section 21-23-2 of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance. 2) No more than 100 residential units will be built on the subject property. E. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Mr. Witt moved to recommend approval of the petition with proffered conditions. The motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Massey, Witt, Gordon, Robinson NAYS: None ABSENT: Chappelle F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. G. ATTACHMENTS: _ Concept Plan _ Vicinity Map _ Staff Re~rt C)ther ~._ .%~ , . Terrance Roanoke Commission ~q~~.~ STAFF REPORT CASE NUMBER: 14-7/91 PETITIONER: THE WILRINSON GROUP REVIEWED BY: LYNN DONIHE DATE: JULY 2, 1991 Petition of The Wilkinson Group to amend proffered conditions on 3 acres zoned B-2C and obtain a Special Exception Permit to operate a home for the elderly, located on Fallowater Lane, Cave Spring Magisterial District. NATURE OF REOIIEST a. This site was rezoned in 1986 with conditions that prohibit the establishment of funeral homes, public amusements, public utilities, animal hospitals/clinics and commercial kennels, homes for adults, clinics/hospitals and nursing homes, flea markets, and public dance halls. Petitioner requests that the conditions be amended so that homes for adults, clinics/hospitals and nursing homes will be permitted uses of the property. b. Petitioner proposes a 100-unit assisted living home for adults. A maximum of 100 units has been proffered. c. Concept plan and vicinity map describe project further. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS a. B-2 zoning district permits homes for adults, provided a Special Exception Permit is acquired. The ordinance defines a home for adults as a facility that provides shelter and services which may include meals, housekeeping, and personal care assistance primarily for the elderly. Residents are usually functionally impaired and socially isolated but otherwise in good health and able to maintain a semi-independent lifestyle, not requiring the more extensive care of a nursing home. b. Commercial entrance permit required from VDOT. c. Site plan review will be required to ensure compliance with County regulations. SITE CHARACTERISTICS TOPOGRAPHY: Site is level with a steep embankment at the southwest property line and steep slope at northwest property line. GROUND COVER: Cleared with grasses. AREA CHARACTERISTICS FUTURE GROWTH PRIORITY: Situated within the Cave Spring Community Planning Area. Designated as an area in which growth should be stabilized, currently receiving urban services. GENERAL AREA is developed with offices, a multi-family development, and general retail uses. ~~ 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 IISE COMPATIBILITY 2 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: 1985 Comprehensive Development Plan and the 419 Frontage Development Plan have placed this area within a Core designation. Policy C-1 encourages the development of intensive., mixed-use urban development (including very high density multi- family residential) in designated core areas and recognizes the suitability of multifamily housing to coexist with commercial uses. Petitioner proposes 100 units on approximately 3 acres, about 33 units per acre, and the plan suggests 12-24+ units per acre as compatible in the core designation. Policy C-6 encourages the development of high density residential in core areas to provide market support for nearby retail centers. See also Site Layout. 2 SURROUNDING LAND: Offices, multi-family development, undeveloped commercial (B-2) property. Site bordered on the west by railroad tracks. 2 NEIGHBORING AREA: VA Rt.419 corridor area densely developed with office buildings, shopping centers, retail and general commercial uses, apartment complexes, and institutional uses. 3 SITE LAYOIIT: Concept plan is not proffered; however, it applies several development guidelines recommended in the Frontage Development Plan: residential building oriented toward streetfront (administrative building located toward the rear of the site); service area is located at the rear of the building and not prominent to the street front; parking is located toward the sides and rear of the building and not lined up across the front of the site; there is one entrance/exit onto street; front yard is heavily landscaped. 3 ARCHITECTURE: No rendering submitted. 3 SCREENING AND LANDSCAPING: Concept plan indicates several landscaped garden areas on the site. In addition, screening and buffering per the ordinance will be required on the western border adjacent to the R-3 zoning and between parking areas and Fallowater Lane. 3 AMENITIES: Parking shown on the concept plan appears adequate. One space per two dwelling units is required for homes for adults plus one space per employee on a major shift. 2 NATURAL AMENITIES: TRAFFIC 3 STREET CAPACITIES: Estimated traffic generation is 330 vehicles per day (3.3 per unit at 100 units). Traffic counts are not available for Fallowater Lane between Bernard Rd. and Starkey Rd. 1986 ADT for Starkey Road between Rt. 419 and Ogden Road was 3459. The County and VDOT are currently working to upgrade the portion of Fallowater Lane at/near its intersection with Bernard Drive to state standards. ~~-. ~~qA 3 CIRCULATION: Concept plan indicates one divided entrance/exit for the property and shows travel lanes and parking surrounding the buildings. Traffic traveling north on Fallowater from the site can reach Rt. 419 through signaled intersections at Ogden/Starkey and Starkey/419. Traffic traveling south must enter through unsignaled intersections at Bernard/Fallowater and Bernard/419. UTILITIES 2 WATER: Adequate source and distribution. 2 SEWER: Adequate treatment and transmission. DRAINAGE 2 BASIN: Murray Run N/A FLOODPLAIN: PUBLIC SERVICES 2 FIRE PROTECTION: Within established service standard. 2 RESCUE: Within established service standard. 2 PARRS AND RECREATION: Petitioner has indicated that there will be landscaped garden and patio areas on the site for the residents, along with several areas within the building designed for a library, game room, tv room and other gathering areas. N/A SCHOOLS: TAR BASE 1 LAND AND IMPROVEMENT VALIIE: $2,000,000 TAXABLE GROSS SALES/YEAR: TOTAL EMPLOYEES: TOTAL REVENUE TO THE COUNTY/YEAR: Approximately $22,000 (real estate taxes only) ENVIRONMENT 2 AIR: 2 WATER: 2 SOILS: 2 NOISE: 2 SIGNAGE: Concept plan indicates a 3' x 8' sign located at the entrance to the site. Concept plan indicates approximately 275 feet of frontage and B-2 permits 1.5 square feet of signage per linear foot of frontage = 412 square feet of signage permitted. PLAN CONSISTENCY This area is designated as Core. Petitioner's request is consistent with core policies C-1 and C-6 encouraging very high-density residential development in core areas. Concept plan (although not proffered) is consistent with 419 Frontage Development Plan guidelines for site layout. STAFF EVALUATION STRENGTHS: (1) Request is consistent with Comprehensive Plan. (2) Maximum number of units has been proffered. .- ROANORE COUNTY APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION OSE 1. Applicant's Name: The Wilkinson Group, Inc. ~79t~-~ Phone: 703-977-0005 Address: 960 Webster Rd. Roanoke, Va. 24012 Zip: 2 . Property owner' s name Lv nn Brae Farms , Inc . Address: 3959 Elecric Rd. 24018 Phone: Zip: 3. Location of Property: Fallowater Lane Size of property 3 acres/sq.ft. Size of proposed special exception use 3 4 . Tax Map # :. ? ~ ~ ° - ~ - `~ 3 Old Tax Map # acres/sq.f t. 5. Zoning Classification: ~ z,, 6. Magisterial District Location: Cave Spring Magisterial 7. Existing Land Use: vacant 8. Proposed Special Exception Use: Home for the Elderly 9. Comprehensive Plan Designation: Core area 10. Proposed Annual Gross Revenue: 1.25 million Value of Land 300,000 Value of Proposed Buildings 1.7 million Value of Machinery ~ Tools ' Number to be Employed 25 11. Check Completed Items: X 8}" x 11" plot plan x Consultation x List of adjacent property owners x Letter of Application x Filing fee made payable to "County of Roanoke" $20 Special Use Permit for sanitary fill method garbage and refuse site, commercial amusement park, or airport $40 All other Special Exception Uses 12. Date of Application: May 23, X1991 13. Applicant's Signature: ~~,.~ ELIZABETH HOUSE and GARDENS at Tanglewood The intent of this letter is to provide an overview of our proposed assisted care project as it relates to our request for a special exception to the present zoning. We intend to develop, construct and operate a form of housing for the elderly which provides assistance with the activities of daily living to the residents of the facility. The building will be constructed and operated in accordance with all applicable regulations and standards called for in this type of structure. The land on which we would like to develop this facility is presently vacant. Immediately surrounding this site is office development, multi-family housing and another vacant parcel. In close proximity is other more-intense retail use, as well as a building which services the elderly through programs and activities. We are requesting this special exception as the normal course of business for any such facility located in the County of Roanoke. This special exception application is being applied for in conjunction with a rezoning request from a present B-2-C status to a B-2-C with different proffered conditions, namely the allowance of home for adult facilities. We agree to abide by all previously proffered conditions from the previous rezoning, except that proffer which restricts the land use for a Home for the Elderly. The property is located in the Core area of the County Plan for Development, which seems to indicate a more intense use than that which we propose. We believe the use of the property in this fashion will be an appropriate transitional use between the existing adjacent multi-family property and the existing office and retail located across the street. Our intent in developing this assisted care facility is to begin to address the vast market in need of care but find the cost and environment of nursing homes unappealing. This facility will be a state of the art structure that is residential in appearance, yet fully equipped to serve a population in need of specific services. The building will exceed all fire and safety codes and requirements. PROFFER OF CONDITIONS Subject Property: Property submitted for rezoning on Fallocvater Lane ~Ve agree to proffer the following conditions in our petition for rezoning: ~~~"~~ I. Any develupmeni on the subject property will not include the uses itemized in paragraphs 5 through 8 and paragraphs 11 and 12, inclusive, of Section 21-23-2 of the Roanoke County Code. A copy of said ordinance is attached as Exhibit A. 2. No more than 100 residential units will be built on the subject property. Lynn Brae Farms, Inc. By .~ Owner and The Wilkinson Group, Inc. (Purchaser) By Press ent ~F~~~' 23-2 B-2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT A. Permitted uses. In the B-2 General Commercial District, any buildings to be erected or land to be used shall be one or more of the following uses: (t) Any use permitted in the B-1 District, except residential; {2) Commercial uses serving the needs of a community such as banks, retail drug stores, food sales, wearing apparel shops, home appliance sales and sen~ices, barber and beauty shops, offices, hotels, motels, theaters, assembly halls, coin-operated laundries and small dry cleaning and laundry establishments, new car dealerships (which may include service facilities and used car tots), and personal and professional services. Only merchandise intended to be sold at retail on the premises shall be stocked. Restaurants, all types except restaurants/on premises consumption/dancing; in all types shopping centers, and all types restaurants/on premises consumption/dancing, when accessory to a hotel and motel operation, pursuant to Article II, Chapter 4 of the Roanoke County Code; (3) Public and private off-street parking lots; (4) Public and nonprofit organization uses such as churches, libraries, schools, playgrounds and parks; (5) Undertaking establishments and funeral homes; (6) Public billboard parlors and poolrooms, bowling alleys, golf driving ranges and similar forms of public amusement only after a public hearing shall have been held by the governing body on an application submitted to the body for such use. The governing body may request that the Commission submit a recommendation to them concerning such application. In approving any such application, the governing body may establish such special requirements and regulations for the protection of adjacent property, set the hours of operation, and make requirements as they deem necessary in the public interest; (7) Public utilities; (8) Animal hospitals or clinics and commercial kennels provided they are fully enclosed without exterior runs and yards for animals; (9) Home for adults provided a special exception has been granted by the Board of Supervisors; (10) Clinic, hospital, hospital special care, and nursing home; (11) Flea markets -outside or inside a structure - provided a special exception has been granted by the Board of Supervisors; and (12) Public dance halls, subject to the provision of Article II, Chapter 4 of this Code and upon a special exception being approved by the Board of Supervisors. Exhibit A 31 I~ ~ ~ ~ N ~~ r.=u,b I~ 'i ll Qu ~~?~ ~ ~ .. '~ I1~~~ zu 3 a~ ~ . ~j Y ~,,~f ~,~~, l ~ ~ ~ ~ \ y + ~ ~ / ~~\\i 4 / i~ ~ ~ \'~ /1V / / ~ / / / V ~\ y~ ~ U ~ / / _ ~ ~ / \ / / ~ ' .r ~~ / ~ \ i w \ ~ / ~ / ~ \ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~~ ~ , ~~ i ~ ~ `~~,. i/ ~ ~'a ~ ~ ~ •~'` ~ Q F / ~ r.,~ ~ _ r 7 " / ~ « / h. `w / 1 \ x ~ ~ ~ \ h Q 1 ~l ~ ~ \~ .; ~ ' ~ ~ f.n,.,ct ~.// > N ) _~ ~ ! I I , \ r 44' ~~ 1 , ifs ~ ..~ ~ .~ QQQ r~ -~ _J ~ ~, lad `~ ~ I x" ~` , _ \ _ ~~ ~~ Y ~~ ~ _ ~ \ ' l d ~ ~C:. _' _ . _ - r.~a HH -- . • ~4~~ d W ~_ O x Z 9 ~ ~. a Li ~. // °F `(~ s w Diu ~~-~ '+,~y ~! {(r/p~r - ,A ~ ~~; i`~ !~M ~I• T~~!~/••W ~iMAr .f Ywa ~•Y. ~UWI is /VQU ~aw~w~ ! KK+ ~~4~ ' ~~"", ~ ~•~."~ • VICINITY blAP ~~ ~~ °~ ~ •D •~ : - 12 ~ N j ,. .~ 0 • _ ~••••~ ~+ ~+ ' • yy • `• +, n, ' ~ ~6 3, .. ~• • i.s-' ~ ~ r~ 1~li / .,` • n 1~ f ~ • ~ ~ 33 y ~ '79/ a NORTB o~~ / ~ o~ o, ~. .• .-' ~ -; 30 + ~. ~: . . - ~ . • r .i ~o ~ ~~ 20 3 ~ ~~ -c S•R 4 • ~~J-~, AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, JULY 23, 1991 ORDINANCE TO AMEND PROFFERED CONDITIONS ON THE REZONING OF A 3-ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED ON FALLOWATER LANE (TAX MAP NOS. 77.19-1-34 AND 77.19-1-33) IN THE CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF B-2, CONDITIONAL, TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF B-2, CONDITIONAL (AMENDMENT TO PROFFERS) UPON THE APPLICATION OF THE WILKINSON GROUP INC. WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on June 25, 1991, and the second reading and public hearing was held July 23, 1991; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on July 2, 1991; and, WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law; and WHEREAS, this property was rezoned from part R-3, Multi-Family Residential District, and M-1, Light Industrial District, to B-2, General Commercial District, with proffered conditions, on December 12, 1986. 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 3 acres, as described herein, and located on Fallowater Lane (Tax Map Nos. 77.19-1-34 and 77.19-1-33) in the Cave Spring Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of B-2, General Commercial District, to the zoning classification of B-2, General Commercial District, with amended proffered conditions. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of The Wilkinson Group Inc. 3. That the owner has voluntarily proffered in writing the following amendments to proffered conditions approved by the Board of Supervisors on December 16, 1986, which the Board of Supervisors hereby accepts: a ~ a .... a„ .., ~_eii-~e~~~-ee~l~e~...,~-, ~.zz-r-ire~~--rrre~~e }-~e-Q~-~e~rt-i-~-ed~~ga~ag~aphs~-~~-e~g'~; ~e~ , s a~~e~d~a~ree~s-e-t-ta ~ a ~' ~ iH i~--~r~ Any deve 1 opment on the subject property will not include the uses itemized in naraaraphs 5 through 8 and paragraphs 11 and 12, inclusive, of Section 21-23-2 of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance. (b) The new street which will extend through the subject property, will be constructed to state standards and will be state maintained. (c) No more than 100 residential units will be built on the subject prot~erty. 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 Fallowater Lane, being the northeasterly corner of Lot 3 and the southeasterly corner of Lot 4, Map of Tanglewood Executive Park, recorded in Plat Book 10 page 112; thence N. 86 deg. 34' 53" W. 347.41 feet to a point; thence N. 37 deg. 23' 23" W. 19.89 feet to a point; thence N. 2 deg. 10' S2" W. 238.26 feet to a point, being the northwesterly corner of Lot 4; thence N. 55 deg. 57' S0" E. 106.79 feet to a point; thence N. 48 deg. 20' 50" E. 97.26 feet to a point; thence N. 43 deg. 23' 35" E. 62 feet to the center of a 15' drainage easement; thence with the center line of the drainage easement S. 41 deg. 05' 57" E. 97.22 feet to a point; thence continuing with the center line of the drainage easement S. 44 deg. 07' 55" E. 125.00 feet to a point; thence continuing with the center line of the drainage easement S. 67 deg. 19' 49" E. 62.51 feet to a point on Fallowater Lane, point being 7.5 feet from the northeast corner of Lot 4; thence with a curve following Fallowater Lane with a radius of 285.00 feet, an arc distance of 75.00 feet, a chord bearing S. 38 deg. 19' 45" W. for a distance of 7.5 feet; thence with a curve following Fallowater Lane with a radius of 285.00 feet, ~{ an arc distance of 153.16 feet, a chord bearing S. 15 deg. 23' 42" W. for a distance of 151.32 feet; thence S. 0 deg. 00' 00" E. 104.34 feet to the point of beginning. 5. 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 shall be, and the same hereby are, repealed. r ~` ds AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JULY 23, 1991 ORDINANCE 72391-8 AMENDING THE ROANORE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW SECTION NUMBERED 21- 25-1, EXPLORE PARR DISTRICT (EPD) TO PROVIDE FOR A ZONING DISTRICT DESIGNATED AND RESERVED SOLELY FOR ACTIVITIES ASSOCIATED WITH THE EXPLORE PARR WHEREAS, in order for the Explore Park to obtain local land use approvals it is necessary for the Board of Supervisors to amend the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance to include standards and procedures for use in evaluating this project and issuing the required zoning approvals; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on June 25, 1991; and the second reading and public hearing was held on July 23, 1991; and BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance be amended by the addition of a new section numbered 21-25-1 and entitled Explore Park District (EPD) as follows: SEC. 21-25-1 EXPLORE PARR DISTRICT (EPD) A. Purpose The purpose of this district is to establish an area within the County that is designated and reserved solely for activities associated with the Explore Park, (hereafter referred to as the Park). These district regulations are designed to permit a wide variety of Park activities. In addition, they are designed to ensure, through adequate public review, that areas surrounding the 1 l Explore Park are afforded any protections necessitated by the Park's development and operation. They are also designed to ensure that public facilities and services are planned and are adequate to ensure the safe and efficient operation of the Park with a minimum of impact on the surrounding neighborhood and the larger community. B. Applicability These regulations shall only apply to land owned by the Virginia Recreational Facilities Authority (VRFA), and to any facilities, and/or operations on such land, after review and approval by the Board of Supervisors. C. Permitted Uses The VRFA shall have the authority to plan and propose all uses within the Park. However, approved uses and activities within the Park shall be restricted to those uses and activities planned and shown on the preliminary master plan, reviewed and approved by the Board of Supervisors under the provisions of this ordinance. D. Relationship to Existing Development Regulations All zoning related site development regulations shall apply to the development of the park, unless such regulations are modified as a condition of the approved preliminary master plan. E. Application Process (1) Prior to submitting a formal application for review and approval under these provisions, the applicant and county staff shall confer to discuss the requirements of this section. The purpose of the meeting is to obtain a mutual understanding of the application requirements and process. 2 (2) Any application to rezone land to the EPD designation, shall constitute an amendment to the zoning ordinance pursuant to Section 21-105. The written and graphic information submitted by the VRFA as part of the application process shall constitute proffers pursuant to Section 21-105 E of this ordinance. Once the preliminary master plan is approved by the Board of Supervisors, all accepted proffers shall constitute conditions pursuant to Section 21-105 E. (3) To initiate an amendment, the applicant shall complete an rezoning application packet. This information shall be accompanied by graphic and written information, which shall constitute a preliminary master plan. All information submitted shall be of sufficient clarity and scale to clearly and accurately identify the location, nature, and character of the proposed district. At a minimum this information shall include: (a) A legal description of the proposed site. This may be a metes and bounds description and plat, or a tabular summary of all tax parcels proposed for rezoning. If tax parcels are used, a composite plan shall be submitted, showing the limits of the proposed district, and the location of each parcel within the district. (b) Current information on the existing zoning and land use of each parcel proposed for the district. (c) If future additions to the district are envisioned, a concept plan showing their location shall be submitted. This 3 concept plan shall show the relationship of these parcels to the proposed district, and their intended use, if known. (d) A description and analysis of existing site conditions, including information on topography, archeological and historic resources, natural water courses, floodplains, unique natural features, tree cover areas, etc. A general statement of planning objectives is to be included indicating how the development and use of the site will address the management and preservation of these features. (e) A generalized land use plan. This plan shall in schematic form show the proposed location of all major land use or activity areas. For each area designated, information shall be provided in written and/or graphic form that describes the nature and character of the improvements or activities proposed. This information shall be of sufficient detail to clearly portray the intended use and design objectives. (f) For planned activity areas devoted to office, retail, restaurant, lodging, education, conference, or other similar types of commercial activities, information shall be provided on the maximum intensity, size or number of such activities, their generalized location and operating characteristics, and a generalized phasing plan for their construction. The size and scale of all retail, restaurant and lodging facilities shall be limited to serve a support function to the larger purposes of the Park. (g) Generalized statements pertaining to architectural 4 and community design guidelines shall be submitted in sufficient detail to provide information on building designs, orientations, styles, heights, lighting plans, treatment of outside storage areas etc. (h) The general arrangements envisioned for the management and control of uses and activities not directly owned by VRFA shall be included. This information shall address the general nature of such uses, and the nature of any control proposed to be exercised. (i) A description of vehicular transportation and circulation objectives. This information should include information on proposals and limitations on parking areas, and public, emergency, service, and construction access. General information on the proposed construction standards for these facilities should be included. The generalized location of all existing or proposed major roads within the district should be shown, and information concerning their specifications provided. All points of connection to existing state maintained roads should be designated along with the intended use of each access point. Where access to existing state maintained roads is proposed to be limited, design and operational characteristics intended to limit use should be described. (j) Information on expected vehicle trip generation shall be included. Trip information shall be presented by phase of construction, and type of trip, i.e., public, employee, service, etc. 5 (k) Planning objectives for on-site pedestrian or bicycle circulation should be included, with a generalized location for external points of connection. Generalized time frames for the construction of such facilities, if any, should be included. (1) Statements of planning objectives and conceptual designs for perimeter areas of the district. If buffer yards are proposed at specific points, the design and location of these buffer areas shall be included. Specific activities for all buffer areas shall be included. (m) Information on all proposed plans for public utilities, including their conceptual design, location, and areas to be served. If public utilities are to be provided in phases, each phase should be indicated, with an envisioned time frame for its design and construction. (n) General information on employment levels within the district by phase, should be provided indicating the expected number and type of employees. (o) Information on any anticipated noise, odor, air pollution, water pollution, or other environmental impacts of the district, and a plan to address these impacts. (4) The completed rezoning application and supporting preliminary master plan materials shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for review and analysis. The Commission shall review this information and make a report of its findings to the Board of Supervisors. The Commission shall as part of its review hold a public hearing pursuant to section 15.1-431 of the Code of 6 Virginia, as amended. The proposed district shall be posted with signs indicating the date and time of the Commission public hearing. (5) The Commission shall make a report of its findings to the Board of Supervisors within ninety (90) days of the receipt of the materials, unless the VRFA requests, or agrees to an extension of this time frame. The Commission's report shall recommend approval, approval with modifications, or disapproval of the preliminary master plan for the Park. Failure of the Commission to make a report of its findings to the Board of Supervisors within this period shall constitute a Commission recommendation of approval. (6) If the Commission recommends denial of the preliminary master plan, or approval with modification, the applicant shall, if requested, have 60 days to make any modifications. If the applicant desires to make any modifications to the preliminary master plan, the Board of Supervisor's review and action shall be delayed until such changes are made and submitted for review. (7) The Board of Supervisors shall review the preliminary master plan, and act to approve or deny the plan within ninety days. Approval of the preliminary master plan shall constitute acceptance of the plan's provisions and concepts as proffers pursuant to Section 21-105 E. of this ordinance. The plan approved by the Board of Supervisors shall constitute the final master plan for the park. Once approved by the Board of Supervisors, the Zoning Administrator shall authorize the revisions to the official zoning map to indicate the establishment of the EPD district. 7 F. Revisions to Final Master Plan (1) Major revisions to the final master plan shall be reviewed and approved following the procedures and requirements of Section 21-105 E, above. Major revisions, as determined by the Zoning Administrator may include, but not be limited to changes such as: (a) Either (i) the addition of major new land uses or activities not planned at the time of the approval of the final master plan, or (ii) the substantial relocation of uses or activities shown on the approved final master plan. (b) The acquisition of property by the VRFA, if such property is intended to be incorporated and used as part of the Park activities. (c) Any transportation or road alignment changes resulting in any change in the location of public access to the Park, or substantial changes in the location or number of service and employee access locations. G. Approval of Preliminary and Final Site Development Plans (1) Following the approval of the final master plan, the VRFA or its authorized agent, shall be required to submit preliminary and final site development plans for approval. Final site development plans for any phase or component of the Park that involves the construction of structures or facilities, shall be approved prior to the issuance of a building and zoning permit, and the commencement of construction. Standards for preliminary and final site development plans are found in a document entitled Land 8 Development Procedures, available in the Department of Engineering and Inspections. (2) Preliminary and final site development plans submitted for review shall be substantially in accord plan approved by the Board of Supervisors. review and approve or disapprove any Final within sixty (60) days of its submittal. of these plans shall ensure compliance wi master plan. H. Failure to Beqin Development with the final master Roanoke County shall Site Development Plan Administrative review th the approved final Failure of the VRFA to submit a preliminary site development plan for at least one portion of the park within five (5) years of the approval of the final master plan, shall constitute an application on the part of VRFA to rezone the EPD to the district designations in effect prior to the approval of the final master plan. On motion of Supervisor Robers to adopt ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Robers, Johnson, Nickens NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor McGraw A COPY TESTE: Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Terry Harrington, Director, Planning & Zoning John Willey, Director, Real Estate Assessment Paul Mahoney, County Attorney Tim Gubala, Director, Economic Development 9 ~ ~~° PETITIONER: ROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION CASE NUMBER: 15-7/91 Planning Commission Hearing Date: July 2, 1991 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: July 23, 1991 A. REQUEST Proposal of the Roanoke County Planning Commission to amend the text of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance to include Section 21-25-1 pertaining to standards and provisions for the review of the proposed Explore Park. B. CITIZEN COMMENTS Cecil Bollinger expressed concern with commercial development in this area and stated that when the project was first introduced, the County agreed that there would be no commercial development. C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION In response to the Commission, staff said that once the Explore Park has gone through the rezoning process, any additional acquisition of land for the park must then go through the rezoning process. Mr. Robinson asked that item 6 on page 3 include a statement to the effect that the commercial development is there to support the intent of the park. D. PROFFERED CONDITIONS None. E. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Mr. Witt moved to recommend approval of the regulations as amended. Mr. Massey concurred with Mr. Witt's recommendation and said that considerable time was spent in reviewing the text. The motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Massey, Witt, Gordon, Robinson NAYS: None ABSENT: Chappelle F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. G. ATTACHMENTS: _ Concept Plan _ Vicinity Map Staff Report Other =~ J ~~._~ Terrance Ham on, Sec ary Roanoke Co ty Planni g Commission ~qi-3 21-25-1 EXPLORE PARR DISTRICT (EPD) A. Purpose (a) The purpose of this district is to establish an area within the County that is designated and reserved solely for activities associated with the Explore Park, (hereafter referred to as the Park). These district regulations are designed to permit a wide variety of Park activities. In addition, they are designed to ensure, through adequate public review, that areas surrounding the Explore Park are afforded any protections necessitated by the Park's development and operation. They are also designed to ensure that public facilities and services are planned and are adequate to ensure the safe and efficient operation of the Park with a minimum of impact on the surrounding neighborhood and the larger community. B. Applicability (a) These regulations shall only apply to land owned by the Virginia Recreational Facilities Authority (VRFA), and to any facilities, and/or operations on such land, after review and approval by the Board of Supervisors. C. Permitted Uses (a) The VRFA shall have the authority to plan and propose all uses within the Park. However, approved uses and activities within the Park shall be restricted to those uses and activities planned and shown on the preliminary master plan, reviewed and approved by the Board of Supervisors under the provisions of this ordinance. D. Relationship to Existing Development Regulations (a) All zoning related site development regulations shall apply to the development of the park, unless such regulations are modified as a condition of the approved preliminary master plan. E. Application Process (a) Prior to submitting a formal application for review and approval under these provisions, the applicant and county staff shall confer to discuss the requirements of this section. The purpose of the meeting is to obtain a mutual understanding of the application requirements and process. (b) Any application to rezone land to the EPD designation, shall constitute an amendment to the zoning ordinance pursuant to Section 21-105. The written and graphic information submitted by the VRFA as part of the application process shall constitute proffers pursuant to Section 21-105 E of this ordinance. Once the 1 'J9r-3 preliminary r..aster plan is approved by the Board of Supervisors, all accepted proffers shall constitute conditions pursuant to Section 21-105 E. (c) To initiate an amendment, the applicant shall complete an rezoning application packet. This information shall be accompanied by graphic and written information, which shall constitute a preliminary r..aster plan. All information submitted shall be of sufficient clarity and scale to clearly and accurately identify the location, nature, and character of the proposed district. At a minimum this information shall include: 1. A legal description of the proposed site. This may be a metes and bounds description and plat, or a tabular summary of all tax parcels proposed for rezoning. If tax parcels are used, a composite plan shall be submitted, showing the limits of the proposed district, and the location of each parcel within the district. 2. Current information on the existing zoning and land use of each parcel proposed for the district. 3. If future additions to the district are envisioned, a concept plan showing their location shall be submitted. This concept plan shall show the relationship of these parcels to the proposed district, and their intended use, if known. 4. A description and analysis of existing site conditions, including information on topography, archeological and historic resources, natural water courses, floodplains, unique natural features, tree cover areas, etc. A general statement of planning objectives is to be included indicating how the development and use of the site will address the management and preservation of these features. 5. A generalized land use plan. This plan shall in schematic form show the proposed location of all major land use or activity areas. For each area designated, information shall be provided in written and/or graphic form that describes the nature and character of the improvements or activities proposed. This information shall be of sufficient detail to clearly portray the intended use and design objectives. 6. For planned activity areas devoted to office, retail, restaurant, lodging, education, conference, or other similar types of commercial activities, information shall be provided on the maximum 2 +f' ~ `" intensity, sze or number of such activities, their generalized '_~~ation and operating characteristics, and a generalized phasing plan for their construction. The size and scale of all retail, restaurant and lodging facilities shall be limited to serve a s~.:pport function to the larger purposes of the Park. 7. Generalized statements pertaining to architectural and community design guidelines shall be submitted in sufficient detail to provide information on building designs, orientations, styles, heights, lighting plans, treatment of outside storage areas etc.. 8. The general arrangements envisioned for the management and control of uses and activities not directly owned by VRFA shall be included. This information shall address the general nature of such uses, and the nature of any control proposed to be exercised. 9. A descripticn of vehicular transportation and circulation objectives. This information should include information on proposals and limitations on parking areas, and public, emergency, service, and construction access. General information on the proposed construction standards for these facilities should be included. The generalized location of all existing or proposed major roads within the district should be shown, and information concerning their specifications provided. All points of connection to existing state maintained roads should be designated along with the intended use of each access point. Where access to existing state maintained roads is proposed to be limited, design and operational characteristics intended to limit use should be described. 10. Information on expected vehicle trip generation shall be included. Trip information shall be presented by phase of construction, and type of trip, i.e., public, employee, service,-etc. 11. Planning objectives for on-site pedestrian or bicycle circulation should be included, with a generalized location for external points of connection. Generalized time frames for the construction of such facilities, if any, should be included. 12. Statements of planning objectives and conceptual 3 ~~ designs for perimeter areas of the district. If buffer yards are proposed at specific points, the design and location of these buffer areas shall be included. Specific activities for all buffer areas shall be included. 13. Information on all proposed plans for public utilities, including their conceptual design, location, and areas to be served. If public utilities are to be provided in phases, each phase should be indicated, with an envisioned time frame for its design and construction. 14. General information on employment levels within the district by phase, should be provided indicating the expected number and type of employees. 15. Information on any anticipated noise, odor, air pollution, water pollution, or other environmental impacts of the district, and a plan to address these impacts. .(d) The completed rezoning application and supporting preliminary master plan materials shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for review and analysis. The Commission shall review this information and make a report of its findings to the Board of Supervisors. The Commission shall as part of its review hold a public hearing pursuant to section 15.1-431 of the Code of Virginia, as amended. The proposed district shall be posted with signs indicating the date and time of the Commission public hearing. (e) The Commission shall make a report of its findings to the Board of Supervisors within ninety (90) days of the receipt of the materials, unless the VRFA requests, or agrees to an extension of this time frame. The Commission's report shall recommend approval, approval with modifications, or disapproval of the preliminary master plan for the Park. Failure of the Commission to make a report of its findings to the Board of Supervisors within this period shall constitute a Commission recommendation of approval. (f) If the Commission recommends denial of the preliminary master plan, or approval with modification, the applicant shall, if requested, have 60 days to make any modifications. If the applicant desires to make any modifications to the preliminary master plan, the Board of Supervisor's review and action shall be delayed until such changes are made and submitted for review. (g) The Board of Supervisors shall review the preliminary master plan, and act to approve or deny the plan within ninety days. Approval of the preliminary master plan shall constitute 4 '~ acceptance of the plan's provisions and concepts as proffers pursuant to Section 21-105 E. of this ordinance. The plan approved by the Board of Supervisors shall constitute the final master plan for the park. Once approved by the Board of Supervisors, the Zoning Administrator shall authorize the revisions to the official zoning map to indicate the establishment of the EPD district. F. Revisions to Final Master Plan (a) Major revisions to the final master plan shall be reviewed and approved following the procedures and requirements of Section 21-105 E, above. Major revisions, as determined by the Zoning Administrator may include, but not be limited to changes such as: 1. Either (a) the addition of major new land uses or activities not planned at the time of the approval of the final master plan, or (b) the substantial relocation of uses or activities shown on the approved final master plan. 2. The acquisition of property by the VRFA, if such property is intended to be incorporated and used as part of the Park activities. 3. Any transportation or road alignment changes resulting in any change in the location of public access to the Park, or substantial changes in the location or number of service and employee access locations. G. Approval of Preliminary and Final Site Development Plans (a) Following the approval of the final master plan, the VRFA or its authorized agent, shall be required to submit preliminary and final site development plans for approval. Final site development plans for any phase or component of the Park that involves the construction of structures or facilities, shall be approved prior to the issuance of a building and zoning permit, and the commencement of construction. Standards for preliminary and final site development plans are found in a document entitled Land Development Procedures, available in the Department of Engineering and Inspections. (b) Preliminary and final site development plans submitted for review shall be substantially in accord with the final master plan approved by the Board of Supervisors. Roanoke County shall review and approve or disapprove any Final Site Development Plan within sixty (60) days of its submittal. Administrative review of these plans shall ensure compliance with the approved final 5 ~"~ master plan. H. Failure to Beqin Development (a) Failure of the VRFA to submit development plan for at least one portion of (5) years of the approval of the final constitute an application on the part of VRFA the district designations in effect prior to final master plan. a preliminary site the park within five master plan, shall to rezone the EPD to the approval of the 6 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JULY 23, 1991 ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ROANOKE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE BY THE ADDITION OF A NEW SECTION NUMBERED 21-25-1, EXPLORE PARK DISTRICT (EPD) TO PROVIDE FOR A ZONING DISTRICT DESIGNATED AND RESERVED SOLELY FOR ACTIVITIES ASSOCIATED WITH THE EXPLORE PARK WHEREAS, in order for the Explore Park to obtain local land use approvals it is necessary for the Board of Supervisors to amend the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance to include standards and procedures for use in evaluating this project and issuing the required zoning approvals; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on June 25, 1991; and the second reading and public hearing was held on July 23, 1991; and BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance be amended by the addition of a new section numbered 21-25-1 and entitled Explore Park District (EPD) as follows: SEC. 21-25-1 EXPLORE PARR DISTRICT (EPD) A. Purpose The purpose of this district is to establish an area within the County that is designated and reserved solely for activities associated with the Explore Park, (hereafter referred to as the Park). These district regulations are designed to permit a wide variety of Park activities. In addition, they are designed to ensure, through adequate public review, that areas surrounding the 1 ~~ Explore Park are afforded any protections necessitated by the Park's development and operation. They are also designed to ensure that public facilities and services are planned and are adequate to ensure the safe and efficient operation of the Park with a minimum of impact on the surrounding neighborhood and the larger community. B. Applicability These regulations shall only apply to land owned by the Virginia Recreational Facilities Authority (VRFA), and to any facilities, and/or operations on such land, after review and approval by the Board of Supervisors. C. Permitted IIses The VRFA shall have the authority to plan and propose all uses within the Park. However, approved uses and activities within the Park shall be restricted to those uses and activities planned and shown on the preliminary master plan, reviewed and approved by the Board of Supervisors under the provisions of this ordinance. D. Relationship to Existing Development Regulations All zoning related site development regulations shall apply to the development of the park, unless such regulations are modified as a condition of the approved preliminary master plan. E. Application Process (1) Prior to submitting a formal application for review and approval under these provisions, the applicant and county staff shall confer to discuss the requirements of this section. The purpose of the meeting is to obtain a mutual understanding of the application requirements and process. 2 79t-3 (2) Any application to rezone land to the EPD designation, shall constitute an amendment to the zoning ordinance pursuant to Section 21-105. The written and graphic information submitted by the VRFA as part of the application process shall constitute proffers pursuant to Section 21-105 E of this ordinance. Once the preliminary master plan is approved by the Board of Supervisors, all accepted proffers shall constitute conditions pursuant to Section 21-105 E. (3) To initiate an amendment, the applicant shall complete an rezoning application packet. This information shall be accompanied by graphic and written information, which shall constitute a preliminary master plan. All information submitted shall be of sufficient clarity and scale to clearly and accurately identify the location, nature, and character of the proposed district. At a minimum this information shall include: (a) A legal description of the proposed site. This may be a metes and bounds description and plat, or a tabular summary of all tax parcels proposed for rezoning. If tax parcels are used, a composite plan shall be submitted, showing the limits of the proposed district, and the location of each parcel within the district. (b) Current information on the existing zoning and land use of each parcel proposed for the district. (c) If future additions to the district are envisioned, a concept plan showing their location shall be submitted. This concept plan shall show the relationship of these parcels to the 3 ~'"' «~ ..~ proposed district, and their intended use, if known. (d) A description and analysis of existing site conditions, including information on topography, archeological and historic resources, natural water courses, floodplains, unique natural features, tree cover areas, etc. A general statement of planning objectives is to be included indicating how the development and use of the site will address the management and preservation of these features.. (e) A generalized land use plan. This plan shall in schematic form show the proposed location of all major land use or activity areas. For each area designated, information shall be provided in written and/or graphic form that describes the nature and character of the improvements or activities proposed. This information shall be of sufficient detail to clearly portray the intended use and design objectives. (f) For planned activity areas devoted to office, retail, restaurant, lodging, education, conference, or other similar types of commercial activities, information shall be provided on the maximum intensity, size or number of such activities, their generalized location and operating characteristics, and a generalized phasing plan for their construction. The size and scale of all retail, restaurant and lodging facilities shall be limited to serve a support function to the larger purposes of the Park. (g) Generalized statements pertaining to architectural and community design guidelines shall be submitted in sufficient 4 `7 f1~-,~ detail to provide information on building designs, orientations, styles, heights, lighting plans, treatment of outside storage areas etc. (h) The general arrangements envisioned for the management and control of uses and activities not directly owned by VRFA shall be included. This information shall address the general nature of such uses, and the nature of any control proposed to be exercised. (i) A description of vehicular transportation and circulation objectives. This information should include information on proposals and limitations on parking areas, and public, emergency, service, and construction access. General information on the proposed construction standards for these facilities should be included. The generalized location of all existing or proposed major roads within the district should be shown, and information concerning their specifications provided. All points of connection to existing state maintained roads should be designated along with the intended use of each access point. Where access to existing state maintained roads is proposed to be limited, design and operational characteristics intended to limit use should be described. (j) Information on expected vehicle trip generation shall be included. Trip information shall be presented by phase of construction, and type of trip, i.e., public, employee, service, etc. (k) Planning objectives for on-site pedestrian or 5 ! ,/~" ,~ bicycle circulation should be included, with a generalized location for external points of connection. Generalized time frames for the construction of such facilities, if any, should be included. (1) Statements of planning objectives and conceptual designs for perimeter areas of the district. If buffer yards are proposed at specific points, the design and location of these buffer areas shall be included. Specific activities for all buffer areas shall be included. (m) Information on all proposed plans for public utilities, including their conceptual design, location, and areas to be served. If public utilities are to be provided in phases, each phase should be indicated, with an envisioned time frame for its design and construction. (n) General information on employment levels within the district by phase, should be provided indicating the expected number and type of employees. (o) Information on any anticipated noise, odor, air pollution, water pollution, or other environmental impacts of the district, and a plan to address these impacts. (4) The completed rezoning application and supporting preliminary master plan materials shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for review and analysis. The Commission shall review this information and make a report of its findings to the Board of Supervisors. The Commission shall as part of its review hold a public hearing pursuant to section 15.1-431 of the Code of Virginia, as amended. The proposed district shall be posted with 6 ~f ~" " signs indicating the date and time of the Commission public hearing. (5) The Commission shall make a report of its findings to the Board of Supervisors within ninety (90) days of the receipt of the materials, unless the VRFA requests, or agrees to an extension of this time frame. The Commission's report shall recommend approval, approval with modifications, or disapproval of the preliminary master plan for the Park. Failure of the Commission to make a report of its findings to the Board of Supervisors within this period shall constitute a Commission recommendation of approval. (6) If the Commission recommends denial of the preliminary master plan, or approval with modification, the applicant shall, if requested, have 60 days to make any modifications. If the applicant desires to make any modifications to the preliminary master plan, the Board of Supervisor's review and action shall be delayed until such changes are made and submitted for review. (7) The Board of Supervisors shall review the preliminary master plan, and act to approve or deny the plan within ninety days. Approval of the preliminary master plan shall constitute acceptance of the plan's provisions and concepts as proffers pursuant to Section 21-105 E. of this ordinance. The plan approved by the Board of Supervisors shall constitute the final master plan for the park. Once approved by the Board of Supervisors, the Zoning Administrator shall authorize the revisions to the official zoning map to indicate the establishment of the EPD district. F. Revisions to Final Master Plan 7 ~~.~ (1) Major revisions to the final master plan shall be reviewed and approved following the procedures and requirements of Section 21-105 E, above. Major revisions, as determined by the Zoning Administrator may include, but not be limited to changes such as: (a) Either (i) the addition of major new land uses or activities not planned at the time of the approval of the final master plan, or (ii) the substantial relocation of uses or activities shown on the approved final master plan. (b) The acquisition of property by the VRFA, if such property is intended to be incorporated and used as part of the Park activities. (c) Any transportation or road alignment changes resulting in any change in the location of public access to the Park, or substantial changes in the location or number of service and employee access locations. G. Approval of Preliminary and Final Site Development Plans royal of the final master plan, the VRFA (1) Following the app or its authorized agent, shall be required to submit preliminary and final site development plans for approval. Final site development plans for any phase or component of the Park that involves the construction of structures or facilities, shall be approved prior to the issuance of a building and zoning permit, and the commencement of construction. Standards for preliminary and final site development plans are found in a document entitled Land Development Procedures, available in the Department of Engineering 8 ~ ~y~ and Inspections. lans submitted ~2) Preliminary and final site development p for review shall be substantially in accord with the final master shall lan approved by the Board of Supervisors. Roanoke County P eview and approve or disapprove any Final Site Development Plan r within sixty (60) days of its submittal. Administrative review o these plans shall ensure compliance with the approved final master plan. g. Failure to Begin Development ilure of the VRFA to submit a preliminary site development Fa ears of plan for at least one portion of the park within five (5) y the approval of the final master plan, shall constitute an lication on the part of vRFA to rezone the EPD to the district app desi nations in effect prior to the approval of the final master g plan. 9 ACTION # ITEM NUMBER AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: July 23, 1991 AGENDA ITEM: Second Reading of Ordinance Amending Article IV, Sewer Use Standards, of Chapter 18 of the Roanoke County Code of 1985 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~~ BACKGROUND• The 1972 Sewage Treatment Agreement between Roanoke City and Roanoke County requires the County to adopt such ordinances and regulations that conform to those adopted by the City of Roanoke as they pertain to Sewer Use Standards. The County of Roanoke adopted Ordinance 62486-146 on June 24, 1986 and Ordinance 91289-14 amending Ordinance 62486-146 on September 12, 1989 in order to meet the above requirements. Recent requirements of the State Water Control Board and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency have required the City of Roanoke to amend their Sewer Use Standards. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Attached is the proposed amendment to the Roanoke County Sewer Use Standards that are required so that our Ordinance conforms to the form and intent of the City of Roanoke Ordinance. The amendments are minor in nature and will not have a significant effect on sewer use within Roanoke County. The first reading of this Ordinance was held on July 9, 1991. ALTERNATIVES AND IMPACTS: There is no practical alternative to adopting this Ordinance. Adoption is required by the 1972 Sewage Treatment Agreement. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Ordinance be adopted after the second reading and public hearing with an effective date of August 1, 1991. /S~- ~ nor shall such notification relieve the user of any fines, civil penalties, or other liability which may be imposed by this article or other applicable law. A notice shall be permanently posted on the user's bulletin board or other prominent place advising employees whom to call in the event of a dangerous discharge. Employers shall insure that all employees who may cause or suffer such a dangerous discharge to occur are advised of the emergency notification procedure. (g) In the event of an emergency, as determined by the approving authority, the approving authority shall be authorized to immediately halt any actual or threatened discharge. (h) A person discharging in violation of the provisions of this article, within thirty (30) days of the date of such discharge, shall sample, analyze and submit the data to the approving authority unless the approving authority elects to perform such sampling. Sec. 18-153. Prohibited Discharges Generally. (a) No person shall discharge into public sewers any waste which, by itself or by interaction with other wastes, may: (i) Injure or interfere with wastewater treatment processes or facilities; (2) Constitute a hazard to humans or animals; or (3) Create a hazard in receiving waters of the wastewater treatment plant effluent. j4)_ Generate heat in amounts which will inhibit biological activity in the plant resulting in interference, and in no case heat in such quantities that the temperature at 12 f~-~ the plant exceeds forty (40) dectrees Celsius (one hundred four (104) decrees Fahrenheit) unless the anurovinct authority approves alternate temperature limits. (b) Discharges into public sewers shall not contain: (1) Antifreeze. (2) Fluoride other than that contained in the public water supply greater than 10.0 mct/1. (3 ) ~~-ei~i~~E3~r~cvrrccrc~r~~,..~ """Eu cc= ~~.~~,.~ '~~. _ Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene and Xvlene (BTEX) greater than 5.0 mg/1. crz~crr~raprrcriu~u • ~ Flammable or explosive liquid solid or gas in hazardous amounts. (5) Substances causing a chemical oxygen demand (COD) greater than 1,500 mg/1 in the wastewater. (6) Strong acid or concentrated plating solutions, whether neutralized or not. (7) Fats, wax, grease or oils, whether emulsified or not, in excess of 100 mg/1 or containing substances which may solidify or become viscous at temperatures between thirty-two (32°) degrees and one hundred fifty (150) degrees Fahrenheit (0~ and 65° Centigrade). (8) Obnoxious, toxic or poisonous solids, liquids, or gases in quantities sufficient to violate the provisions of subsection (a) of this section. 13 Kl (9) Waste, wastewater or any other substance having a Ph lower than 5.5 or higher than 9.5, or any other substance with a corrosive property capable of causing damage or hazard to structures, equipment or personnel at the wastewater facility. (10) Substances which cause a COD to BOD ratio greater than 5. (11) Waste, wastewater or any other substance containing phenols, hydrogen sulfide or other taste-and-odor producing substances that have not been minimized. After treatment of the composite wastewater, effluent concentration limits may not exceed the requirements established by state, federal or other agencies with jurisdiction over discharges to receiving waters. Sec. 18-154. Technical based local limits. (a) Discharges shall not contain concentrations of heavy metals greater than amounts specified in subsection (b) of this section. (b) The maximum allowable concentrations of heavy metals and toxic materials stated in terms of milligrams per liter (mg/1), determined on the basis of individual sampling in accordance with "Standard Methods" are: (1) Arsenic: (2) Barium: (3) Boron: (4) Cadmium: (5) Chromium, Total: ^.^~ ~ " .25 mq/1 5.0 mg/1 ^~ = 1.0 mg/1 0.02 mg/1 ~~~= 2.0 mgfl 14 -~ (6) Chromium VI: .011 mg/L. -F6-} ~ Copper: 1.0 mg/1 {-~-j- ~_ Lead : ~ . 2 mg/ 1 fg-~ ~_ Manganese: 1.0 mg/1 f4} 10 Mercury: 0.005 mg/1 {~~ 11 Nickel: '~~= 2.0 ma/1 {}~} 12 Selenium: 0.02 mg/1 {}~}- 13 Silver: 0.1 mg/1 {~.3} 14 Z inc : 2.0 mg/ 1 {-~4} 15 Cyanide: 1.0 mq/1 In addition, if it is determined that any one of these parameters exceeds the state effluent requirements for the wastewater treatment plant, an adjustment in the given parameter concentration limit will be required. To accomplish this, the industrial discharge permits for industries discharging the particular compound will be adjusted to insure compliance. (c) No other heavy metals or toxic materials shall be discharged into public sewers without a permit from the approving authority specifying conditions of pretreatment, concentrations, volumes and other applicable provisions. (d) Prohibited heavy metals and toxic materials include, but are not limited to: (1) Antimony. (2) Beryllium. (3) Bismuth. (4) Cobalt 15 ~-1 (5) Molybdenum. (6) Uranium ion. (7) Rhenium. (8) Strontium. (9) Tellurium. (10) Herbicides. (11) Fungicides. (12) Pesticides. Sec. 18-155. Discharge of garbage. (a) No person may discharge garbage into public sewers, unless it is shredded to a degree that all particles can be carried freely under the flow conditions normally prevailing in public sewers. Particles greater than one-half inch in any dimension are prohibited. (b) The approving authority shall have the right to review and approve the installation and operation of any garbage grinder equipped with a motor of three-fourths horsepower (0.76 hp metric) or greater. Sec. 18-156. Discharge of storm water and other unpolluted drainage. (a) No person shall discharge into public sanitary sewers: (1) Unpolluted storm water, surface water, groundwater, roof runoff or subsurface drainage. f4}j~ Other unpolluted drainage. (b) The approving authority shall designate storm sewers and other watercourses into which unpolluted drainage described in subsection (a) of this section may be discharged. 16 f~- ~ Sec. 18-157. Temperature of discharges. No person shall discharge liquid or vapor having a temperature higher than one hundred fifty (150) degrees Fahrenheit (65° Centigrade), or any substance which causes the temperature of the total wastewater treatment plant influent to increase at a rate of ten (10) degrees Fahrenheit or more per hour, or a combined total increase of plant influent temperature to one hundred four (104) degrees Fahrenheit. Sec. 18-158. Discharge of radioactive wastes. (a) No person shall discharge radioactive wastes or isotopes into public sewers, without the permission of the approving authority. (b) The approving authority reserves the right to establish, in compliance with applicable state and federal regulations, regulations for discharge of radioactive waste into public sewers. Sec. 18-159 Discharge of substances capable of impairing, etc. facilities. (a) No person shall discharge into public sewers any substance capable of causing: (1) Obstruction to the flow in sewers; (2) Interference with the operation of treatment processes or facilities; or (3) Excessive loading of treatment facilities. (b) Discharges prohibited by subsection (a) of this section include, but are not limited to, materials which exert or cause concentrations of: (1) ~~ Inert suspended solids greater than 250 mg/1 17 Ri including, but not limited to Fuller's earth, lime slurries and lime residues. (2) Dissolved solids greater than 500 mg/1 including, but no limited to sodium chlorine and sodium sulfate. (3) Excessive discoloration including, but not limited to dye wastes and vegetable tanning solutions. (4) Wastes having a COD to BOD ratio greater than 5 to 1. Industries having wastewater of this nature shall provide pretreatment as required by the approving authority. (c) No person shall discharge into public sewers any substance that may: (1) Deposit grease or oil in the sewer lines in such a manner as to clog the sewers; (2) Overload skimming and grease handling equipment; (3) Pass to the receiving waters without being effectively treated by normal wastewater treatment processes due to the nonamenability of the substance to bacterial action; or (4) Deleteriously affect the treatment process due to excessive quantities. (d) No person shall discharge incompatible waste into public sewers which: (1) Is not amenable to treatment or reduction by the wastewater treatment processes and facilities employed; or (2) Is amenable to treatment only to such a degree that the 18 R-~ treatment plant effluent cannot meet the requirements of other agencies having jurisdiction over discharges to the receiving waters. Subsection (b) (3) of this section illustrates the types of substances intended to be regulated by this subsection. (e) The approving authority shall regulate the flow and concentration of slugs when they may: (1) Impair the treatment process; (2) Cause damage to collection facilities; (3) Incur treatment costs exceeding those for normal wastewater; or (4) Render the waste unfit for stream disposal or industrial use. Industrial operations which, on occasion, release sludges of waterborne wastes into the sewers, or which, on occasion, release any significant quantities of materials which adversely influence the effectiveness of treatment in the wastewater treatment plant shall notify the plant in advance of their release, and shall control, at the discretion of the approving authority, the rate of release of these wastes. Permission for such planned releases shall not be unreasonably withheld. Persons failing to comply with these requirements shall be subject to a fine of not more than five thousand dollars ($5,000) per incident, and shall also be liable for the payment of any damages caused, either directly or indirectly, by the unapproved discharge. (f) No person shall discharge into public sewers solid or viscous substances which violate subsection (a)of this section, if present in 19 k-~ sufficient quantity or size, including but not limited to: (1) Ashes. (2) Cinders. (3) Sand. (4) Mud. (5) Straw. (6) Shavings. (7) Metal. (8) Glass. (9) Rags. (10) Feathers. (11) Tar. (12) Plastics. (13) Wood. (14) Unground garbage. (15) Whole blood. (16) Paunch manure. (17) Hair and fleshings. (18) Entrails. (19) Paper products, either whole or ground by garbage grinders (20) Slops. (21) Chemical residues. (22) Paint residues. (23) Bulk solids. (g) No person shall discharge into the public sewers pollutants 20 ~4~ which cause interference or pass through. (h) No person shall discharge into the public sewers pollutants with a high flow rate or concentration of conventional pollutants as to interfere with the plant. Sec. 18-160. Right to require pretreatment and control of, or to reject discharges. (a) If discharges or proposed discharges into public sewers may deleteriously affect wastewater facilities, processes, equipment or receiving waters; create a hazard to life or health; or create a public nuisance; the approving authority shall require: (1) Pretreatment to an acceptable condition before discharge into the public sewers; (2) Control over the quantities and rates of discharge; and (3) Payment to cover the cost of handling and treating the wastes, in addition to capital costs. (b) The approving authority shall reject wastes when he determines that a discharge or proposed discharge is included under subsection (a) of this section and the discharger does not meet the requirements of subsection (a) of this section. (c) No person shall utilize dilution as a means of treatment. d The a rovin authorit shall have the ri ht to determine whether a dischar a or ro osed dischar a is included under subsection (a) of this section. Sec. 18-161. Design, installation and maintenance of pretreatment and control facilities. (a) If pretreatment or control is required, the approving 21 R~ authority may, at his sole discretion, require, review and approve the design and installation of equipment and processes. The design and installation of such equipment and processes shall conform to all applicable statutes, codes, ordinances and other laws, including Federal Categorical Pretreatment Standards. (b) Any person responsible for discharges requiring pretreatment, flow-equalizing or other facilities shall provide and maintain the facilities in effective operating condition at this own expense. Sec.18-162. Requirements for traps. (a) Discharges requiring a trap include: (1) Grease or waste containing grease in excessive amounts; (2) Oil; (3) Sand; (4) Flammable wastes; and (5) Other harmful substances. (b) Any person responsible for discharges requiring a trap shall, at his own expense and as required by the approving authority: (1) Provide equipment and facilities of a type and capacity approved by the approving authority; (2) Locate the trap in a manner that provides ready and easy accessibility for cleaning and inspection; and (3) Maintain the trap in effective operating condition. Sec. 18-163. Measurement, sampling, etc., and report of discharges. (a) The owner of each facility discharging other than normal wastewater or discharging Class A wastewater shall submit monthly, or at such other frequency as may be required by the approving authority, to 22 ,P- the County, on forms supplied by the County, a certified statement of the quantities of its wastes discharged into the sewers and sewage works of the County or into any sewer connected therewith. Copies of pertinent water bills may be required to be submitted with the above statement. Such documents shall be filed with the County not later than the tenth day of the following month. A separate statement shall be filed for each industrial plant. The total quantities of wastes to be measured and certified by the person so discharging shall be established by the approving authority and shall, as a minimum, include: (1) Liquid in gallons. (2) Five-day BOD in pounds. (3) Suspended solids in pounds, on a dry solids basis. (4) Total phosphorus in pounds. (5) Total Kjeldahl nitrogen in pounds. (6) COD in pounds. (b) Unless otherwise provided, each measurement, test, sampling, or analysis required to be made hereunder shall be made in accordance with 40 C.F.R. Part 136, as amended. (c) In order to provide for accurate sampling and measurement of industrial wastes, each person discharging Class A wastewater shall provide and maintain, on each of its industrial waste outlet sewers, a large manhole or sampling chamber to be located outside or near its plant boundary line, where feasible. If inside the plant fence, there shall be a gate near the sampling chamber with a key furnished to the County. There shall be ample room provided in each sampling chamber to 23 ~-~ enable convenient inspection and sampling by the County. (d) Each sampling chamber shall contain a Parshall flume, accurate weir or similar device, with a recording and totalizing register for measurement of the liquid quantity; or the metered water supply to the industrial plant may be used as the liquid quantity, where it is substantiated that the metered water supply and waste quantities are approximately the same, or where a measurable adjustment can be made in the metered supply to determine the liquid quantity. (e) Samples shall be taken every hour, properly refrigerated and composited in proportion to the flow for a representative twenty-four (24)hours sample. For oil and grease, pH, phenols, cyanide, volatile toxic organic and other appropriate pollutants, property grab sampling shall be performed. Each sampling shall be repeated on as many days as necessary to insure representative quantities for the entire reporting period. Industrial plants with wide fluctuations in quantities of wastes shall provide an automatic sampler paced automatically by the flow-measuring device. (f) Minimum requirements for representative quantities under this section shall include re-evaluation during each twelve (12) month period. The determination of representative quantities shall include not less than seven (7) consecutive days of twenty-four (24) hour composite samplings, taken during periods of normal operation, together with acceptable flow measurements. The frequency of sampling, sampling chamber, metering device, sampling methods and analyses of samples shall be subject, at any time, to inspection and verification by the County. Sampling and measuring facilities shall be such as to provide safe 24 ~_ r access for authorized personnel of the County for making such inspection and verification. (g) Plans for sampling chambers, with their locations shown on a site plan, shall be submitted to the County for approval. (h) All owners of facilities governed by this section shall also comply with any applicable Monitoring Requirements and Regulations established by the approving authority which are hereby incorporated by reference. (i) All owners of facilities governed by this article shall comply with the applicable requirements of 40 C.F.R. 403.12 as amended, which is incorporated by reference herein, including, without limitation, the signatory, certification and record keeping requirements of 40 C.F.R. 403.12 (c),(d), (i), and (1). All records shall be retained for a minimum of three years and this retention period shall be extended during litigation or upon request of the approving authority. ~_ Sam lin for dischar e limit com liance shall be taken at the samplina chamber without any dilution factor except for uroperly classified cateaorical or sianificant users. jkl Sam lin for rohibited materials ma be collected at either the sam lin chamber or end of rocess to determine the absence of the prohibited material. Sec. 18-164. Discharge permits for industrial waste. ~ ~. z, ' ~ ~ Q Q +. ~. ~ z., ' i. ~ ~.. ~~~._ -___-a 25 R- r r i i i ~ (a) It shall be unlawful for an si nificant industrial user or other user as determined by the approving authority to discharge industrial waste into the ublic sanitar sewer s stem unless an 26 1~-1 appropriate Industrial Discharge Permit has been issued b the a ovin authorit I order to obtain an Industrial Dischar a Permit such person shall• S1~ Submit a complete application at least ninety (90) days prior to the date pro posed for initial dischara e on orms supplied by the app roving authority The approving authorit y will act up on the application within sixty ( 6 days. X21 Comply with all requirements for the discharae permit including but not limited to, provisions for payment of charctes installation and operation of pretrea ment facilities and sampling and analysis to determine quantity and strength. j.31. Provide a sampling point subiect to the provisions of this article and approval of the approving authority. Comply with the requirements of federal categorical standards where applicable including the development of any rectuired compliance schedules or the applicable provisions of this article. (b) An industrial user applying for a new discharge shall meet all conditions of subsection (a) of this section and shall secure a permit prior to discharging any waste. (c) A person not applying for a discharge permit within the allotted time and continuing to discharge an unpermitted discharge shall be deemed to be in violation of this article. (d) A permit issued under this section shall be valid for up to 27 /~-~' five (5) years from its date of issuance, after which time the industrial user shall be required to obtain a new discharge permit. (e) The approving authority shall have the right to accept or reject any increases in flow or pollutants under existing or new permits. Sec. i8-165. Waiver or modification of requirements of article. The approving authority shall have the right to waive or modify, on an interim basis to be noted in any permit issued under this article, the requirements of this article as they pertain to strength of contaminants. No such waiver or modification shall be granted contrary to any County, state or federal regulation and no waiver or modification shall be granted, if it would result in the violation of the discharge permit for the plant, as it is now issued or as such permit may be amended. Sec. 18-166. Charged generally. Persons making discharges of industrial waste shall pay a charge to cover the cost of collection and treatment in addition to capital costs. When a permit application for industrial waste is approved, the County or its authorized representative shall issue a permit stating: (a) The terms of acceptance by the County; and (b) The basis of payment. Sec. 18-167. User charges and added costs. (a) If the volume or character of the waste to be treated by the plant meets the requirements of other provisions of this article and does not cause overloading of the sewage collection, treatment or 28 ~- ~ disposal facilities of the County, the approving authority shall require that the discharger pay a charge to be determined from the schedule of charges which shall include capital costs. (b) If a proposed discharge of waste is responsible for exceeding the existing capacity of the wastewater treatment facilities and the wastewater treatment plant must be upgraded, expanded or enlarged in order to treat the wastewater, the approving authority shall require that the discharger pay in full all added costs which shall include capital costs the County may incur due to acceptance of the wastewater. (c) The schedule of charges pursuant to subsection (a) of this section shall include, but not be limited to: (1) Capital costs, including debt retirement and interest on debt, of the County's cost on all capital outlays for collecting and treating the waste, including new capital outlay and the proportionate part of the value of the existing system used in handling and treating waste. (2) Operation and maintenance costs (capitalized), including but not limited to, salaries and wages, power costs, costs of chemicals and supplies, proper allowances for maintenance, depreciation, overhead and office expense. Sec. 18-168. Schedule of charges. (a) Persons discharging wastewater shall pay a charge to cover the capital cost and the cost of collection and treatment of all wastewater discharged. (1) All Class I users discharging normal wastewater or Group B wastewater shall pay a user charge computed upon cost 29 5 ^h ~ per volume of wastewater discharged. (2) All Class II users discharging Group A wastewater shall have their user charge computed upon a cost per unit volume basis for the amount plus the unit cost of treatment for all over the base amount for volume, biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), suspended solids (SS), phosphorus (P) and total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN). In computing the contaminant loading, the parameter concentrations for normal wastewater will be considered as standard strength in determining the base amount in the effluent discharge flow. Initially, the responsibility for determining the contaminant loading for each category of establishment will be that of the approving authority. However, each establishment must verify its own contaminant loading monthly by initiating a sampling and analytical program at its own expense and with the approval of the approving authority. (b) The units costs to be used to compute the charge for Class I and II users shall be established by the approving authority. The unit costs for all users and the allowances for normal wastewater for users may be revised as necessary to correspond to current costs and experience. Revisions may be made, no more often than once a year, upon approval of the approving authority. The user charge for users shall be computed as follows: Class I Users: Cu = Vu x Vd Class II Users: Cs = Vu x Vd + VSVc + BSBc + SSSc + PSPc + NSNc 30 f~~ ~Xf And: Cu Charge for Class I users Cs = Charge for Class II users Vu = Unit cost of treatment chargeable to normal wastewater ($/1,000 gal.) Vd = Volume of wastewater from normal wastewater (1,000 gals.) V = Volume of Class II wastewater (1,000 gals.) in excess of Class I s wastewater Vc = Cost of treating 1,000 gals. of Class II wastewater ($/1,000 gal.) °~~^c=~r99 T--zi--~ru~-~ce~.rcei~B~~-~Ai~i`"~13~~i-6r~rr~e3Cv~39 v~~'39$-~ B = Class II wastewater BOD contribution in excess of Class I -s wastewater limit (lbs.) Bc = Cost of treating Class II BOD contribution ($/lb.) S =Class II wastewater SS contribution in excess of Class I wastewater s limit (lbs.) Sc = Cost of treating Class II SS contribution ($/lb.) Pe-=~e~-e€ ~~ea~~g-C-1-as~s Ps - Class II wastewater phosphorus contribution in excess of Class I wastewater limit (lbs.) N = Class II wastewater unoxidized nitrogen contribution in excess of s Class I wastewater limit (lbs.) Nc = Cost of treating Class II nitrogen contribution ($/lb.) Sec. 18-169. Adjustment of charges. 31 ~_6 (a) The county may adjust charges at least annually to reflect changes in the characteristics of wastewater based on the results of sampling and testing. This adjustment will correspond to charges established by the operating authority for the treatment plant. (b) The county shall review at least annually the basis for determining charges and shall adjust the unit treatment cost in the formula to reflect increases or decreases in wastewater treatment costs based on the previous year's experience. Sec. 18-170. Billing and payment of charges. (a) The county may bill the discharger by the month or by the quarter and shall show waste charges as a separate item on the regular bill for water and sewer charges. The discharger shall pay in accordance with practices existing for payment of sewer charges. (b) In addition to sanctions provided for by this article, the County is entitled to exercise sanctions provided for by the other ordinances of the County for failure to pay the bill for water and sanitary sewer service when due. Sec. 18-171. Right of entry to enforce article. (a) The approving authority and other duly authorized employees of the County bearing proper credentials and identification shall be authorized to enter any public or private property at any reasonable time for the purpose of enforcing this article for sampling purposes, inspect monitoring equipment and to inspect and copy all documents relevant to the enforcement of this article, including, without limitation, monitoring reports. Anyone acting under this authority shall observe the establishment's rules and regulations concerning 32 ~~ safety, internal security, and fire protection. ~~~eept-~~e~-ea~sed~~reg~ge~ee er~i~e~~t~e-e~e~pa~e w J C Y ^r ^ l l a a eta r~s a~~~e~a~ds--€e~~e~s e~t~'~-e~p-~e~~--damage - ~ ~~ ~ a arci~scr ~_ Approgriate information submitted to the apnrovina authority pursuant to these regulations excluding any information utilized in determining effluent limits may be claimed as confidential by the submitter at the time of submission by stamping the words "confidential business information" on each page containing such information If a claim is asserted the information shall be treated in accordance with applicable law. (c) No person acting under authority of this section may inquire into any processes, including metallurgical, chemical, oil refining, ceramic, paper or other industries, beyond that point having a direct bearing on the kind and source of discharge to the public sewers. fla~-i~~cv-szizxF-6i~la~i-vrr ~ yr:-aae~l-~~?~e-e6i~}cu-a-n-i~ir r SeC. 18-172. Authority to disconnect s@rv1C@. 33 ~~ ~ ; (a) The county reserves the right to terminate water and wastewater disposal services and disconnect a customer from the system and revoke any discharge permit issued under this article when: (1) Acids or chemicals damaging to sewer lines or treatment process are released into the sewer causing rapid deterioration of these structures or interfering with proper conveyance and treatment of wastewater; (2) A governmental agency informs the County that the effluent from the wastewater treatment plant is no longer a quality permitted for discharge into a watercourse, and it is found that the customer is delivering wastewater to the County's system that cannot be sufficiently treated or requires treatment that is not provided by the County as normal domestic treatment; or (3) The customer: a. Discharges industrial waste or wastewater that is in violation of the permit issued by the approving authority; b. Discharges wastewater at an uncontrolled, variable rate in sufficient quantity to cause an imbalance in the wastewater treatment system; c. Fails to pay bills for water and sanitary sewer services when due; or d. Repeats a discharge of prohibited wastes into public sewers. (4) The permittee has engaged in fraudulent reporting to the 34 R~ approval authority or failed to report adequately as required changes in discharge. (b) If the service is disconnected pursuant to subsection (a) (2) of this section, the County shall: (1) Disconnect the customer; (2) Supply the customer with the governmental agency's report and provide the customer with all pertinent information; and (3) Continue disconnection until such time as the customer provides additional pretreatment or other facilities designed to remove the objectionable characteristics from this wastes. Sec. 18-173. Notice of violations The county shall serve persons discharging in violation of this article with written notice stating the nature of the violation and requiring immediate satisfactory compliance. The approving authority shall have the authority to publish annually in the Roanoke Times and World News Newspaper or a newspaper of general circulation in the Roanoke area a list of persons which were not in compliance with the terms of this Article at least once during the twelve (12) previous months. Sec. 18-174. Penalty for violations. (a) A person who violates the provisions of this article shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor and upon conviction is punishable by a fine of one thousand dollars ($1,000) per violation per day and confinement in jail for not more than twelve months, either or both. In 35 the event of a violation, the approving authority shall also have the right to terminate the sewer and water connection. (b) In addition to proceeding under authority of sub-section (a) of this section, the County is entitled to pursue all other criminal and civil remedies to which it is entitled under authority of state statues or other ordinances of the County against a person continuing prohibited discharges, including, without limitation, injunctive relief. Lc~ Any person who knowinaly makes anv false statements, representations or certifications in anv application record,_ report, plan or other document files required to be maintained pursuant to this ordinance or wastewater permit or who falsifies tampers with, or knowinaly renders inaccurate anv monitoring device or method required under this ordinance shall upon conviction be punishable by a fine of ~1 000 00 per violation per day or imprisonment for not more than one year, or both. ld~ The approving authority shall be authorized to implement such other ro ram and enforcement mechanisms as are consistent with regulatory guidelines and are deemed appropriate. Sec. 18-175. Payment of costs for work required by prohibited deposits. In any case where a sewer main or pipe connection is stopped, damaged or choked by any materials or rubbish being deposited therein contrary to the provisions of this article, by any tenant or property owner, upon due ascertainment by the County Administrator, he shall cause the main pipe connection or manhole to be opened, cleaned, replaced or repaired, and shall cause the cost for doing such work to be collected from the property owner. The payment of such cost shall not relieve any person from prosecution for a violation of this article. 36 R-! BBC. 18-176. Pub11C aCCe38 t0 data. Effluent data complied as part of the approving authority's pretreatment program shall be available to the public. 2. That this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after August 1, 1991. 37 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 AGENDA ITEM NO. ~~ APPEARANCE REQUEST FOR _PUBLIC HEARINGORDINANCE _CITIZENS COMMENTS SUBJECT: ~~-w .~,r- ~.e~~'P ~~;-f~~ ae.~~~-S I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. I AGREE TO ABIDE BY THE GUIDELINES LISTED BELOW: ^ Each speaker will be given between three to five minutes to comment whether speaking as an individual or representative. The Chairman will decide the time limit based on the number of citizens speaking on an issue, and will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to do otherwise. ^ Speaker will be limited to a ppresentation of their point of view only. Questions 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. ^ SQeakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments with the clerk. ^ INDIVIDUALS SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF AN ORGANIZED GROUP SHALL FILE WITH THE CLERK AUTHORIZATION FROM THE GROUP ALLOWING THE INDIVIDUAL TO REPRESENT THEM. PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK NAME _~+?~----,,.'~5,.,;~ .~~- ~~sLl~ c -,~.~~--%~ ~ ADDRESS ; ~ ~ ~ ,.,;~, ~, ~. ~ ~,~ PHONE ~o~U~ ~r°. ~~~ .~ ~' ~ ~ ~. 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 AGENDA ITEM NO. ~~ APPEARANCE REQUEST FOR -PUBLIC HEARING -ORDINANCE -CITIZENS COMMENTS SUBJECT: I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, I AGREE TO ABIDE BY THE GUIDELINES LISTED BELOW: ^ Each speaker will be given between three to five minutes to comment whether speaking as an individual or representative. The Chairman will decide the time limit based on the number of citizens speaking on an issue, and will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to do otherwise. ^ Speaker will be limited to a ppresentation of their point of view only. Questions 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 with the clerk. ^ INDIVIDUALS SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF AN ORGANIZED GROUP SHALL FILE WITH THE CLERK AUTHORIZATION FROM THE GROUP ALLOWING THE INDIVIDUAL TO REPRESENT THEM. PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK NAME ADDRESS PHONE 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111 TESTIMONY OF MR. JOHN G. HANSEN ENVIRONMENTAL COORDINATOR FOR INGERSOLL-RAND COMPANY'S ROANOKE PLANT BEFORE THE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD JULY 23, 1991 Good evening. My name is John Hansen, and I am the environmental coordinator for Ingersoll Rand Company's Roanoke plant. With me is our environmental counsel, Russ Randle, who can address environmental law questions for the board if they arise. I am here to testify concerning the new sewer use ordinance, in particular the provision in section 16-47(d) which is being interpreted to ban the discharge of two metals, bismuth and molybdenum. This reading is apparently based on the same language in the City's ordinance. Ingersoll Rand asks that the County strike this language from its ordinance and request the City to do the same. IR does so because the provision is environmentally unsound, and will make it costly or impossible for IR to stop using steel alloys with harmful metals such as lead. I have a bottle of Pepto Bismol® to help me explain. Pepto Bismol® contains about 1 3/4 percent bismuth. One of the steel alloys IR uses contains less than a percent of bismuth, as a replacement for lead. A bottle of Pepto Bismol® this size will contain at least several grams of bismuth. The Food and Drug Administration allows bismuth to be used in this over-the-counter medication, and has for a long time. Indeed bismuth is primarily used in - 2 - pharmaceutical applications in this country, not for metal working. Though we have not undertaken an extensive survey, neither IR nor its alloy supplier is aware of other municipalities which ban the discharge of bismuth. EPA has not set standards for bismuth, even in drinking water. Lead, by contrast, is a major drinking water problem according to EPA. Unfortunately, this ordinance forbids users of the sewers from discharging bismuth in detectable concentrations -- a few parts per billion -- even though the rinse water from a spoon used to take Pepto Bismol® may contain far higher concentrations. This result is absurd, yet a company which discharges bismuth might be severely fined under the ordinance. Banning the discharge of bismuth, as opposed to allowing the County simply to regulate it, is environmentally unsound. One of our steel alloy suppliers wants to replace lead in its alloys with bismuth, because lead is a known hazard and bismuth is not. Yet this ordinance, which allows the discharge of lead, an acknowledged poison, would prevent this substitution. It prevents it by banning the discharge of any wastewater with detectable amounts of bismuth. The case for banning molybdenum entirely from discharges is also highly questionable. The ordinance allows the County to license and permit discharges of cyanide and a number of metals far more hazardous to people and the environment than molybdenum. EPA has not set water quality standards for molybdenum, nor has it set drinking water standards. Indeed, EPA - 3 - made a finding in early 1988 that molybdenum was not enough of a problem even to warrant development of a drinking water standard for it at that time. None has been issued since. If the County can supply water to people to drink which contains molybdenum, and some has been found in detectable concentrations in the local system, then it is absurd to ban the discharge of water containing molybdenum to the sewers. There is certainly no suggestion by EPA or the County that molybdenum is a problem at the City's sewage treatment plant or in the Roanoke River. Ingersoll-Rand wants to continue to use steel alloys which contain a small concentration of molybdenum, and believes an ordinance which forbids ~ discharge of it is environmentally unsound, and unnecessary since the County has ample authority to regulate such discharges already, and allows the discharge of far more toxic materials pursuant to permits. For these reasons, IR formally requests that these restrictions be struck from the County Ordinance, and that the County Board ask the City of Roanoke to drop these prohibitions from its Ordinance. I would be happy to respond to questions, as would Russ Randle. PATTON, BOGGS & BLOW 2550 M STREET, N. W. WASHINGTON, D. C. 20037-1350 (202) 457-6000 250 WEST PRATT STREET TELECOPIER: 457-6315 BALTIMORE, MARYLAND 21201 TRT TELEX: 197780 500 NCNB BUILDING (301) 659-5800 101 WEST FRIENDLY AVENUE GREENSBORO, NORTH CAROLINA 27401 700 RALEIGH FEDERAL SAVINGS (919) 273-1733 BANK BUILDING RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27602 SUITE 1975 (919) 832<711 1660 LINCOLN STREET DENVER, COLORADO 80284 (303) 830.1776 wnitrRS a~cr au a'J~al iQi~L~i~iJV~1 This memorandum presents Ingersoll Rand Company's (IR's) legal position that section 16-47(d) of the proposed Roanoke County Sewer Use Ordinance should be interpreted to allow regulation rather than complete prohibition of the discharge of molybdenum and bismuth to the County's sewer system. IR believes that construing the ordinace to ban such discharges misreads the ordinance because it would leave related provisions without effect. IR also believes that reading the ordinance to prohibit the discharge of bismuth and molybdenum is environmentally unsound because these substances pose little threat, and are substitutes for much more toxic metals such as lead. Section 16-47(d) appears to be based on the City's similar ordinance. The City has informally acknowledged that it had no technical basis for these limits. IR suggests that both the County and City Ordinances can and should be read to require attainable discharge limitations for the parameters of concern, especially bismuth and molybdenum, not a ban on such discharges. DISCOSSION The proposed ordinance is apparently being interpreted to require that discharges of bismuth and molybdenum be below detectable limits. Review of the County and City ordinance language, however, does not require such prohibition in ~ 16- 47(d). That provision states that "prohibited heavy metals and toxic materials include, but are not limited to: . bismuth [andj (5) molybdenum." ~ ~ (3) Section 16-47 governs the discharge of all metals and toxic materials to the sewer system. It must be read as whole in order to give effect to each subsection of ~ 16-47. It is an elementary rule of statutory construction that the County must try to give effect to each part of the ordinance. Section 16-47(a) and (b) set discharge limitations for a list of 13 metals, including several widely understood as having bad environmental effects, such as lead and cadmium. Section 16- 47(c) and (d) govern the discharge of all other heavy metals and toxic materials. Section 16-47(c) states that: PATTON, BOGGS S. BLOW Page 2 No other heavy metals or toxic materials shall be discharged into public sewers without a ermit from the approving authority specifying conditions of pretreatment, concentrations, volumes and other applicable provisions. (emphasis supplied). Thus for all other metals and toxic materials, section 16-47(c) requires that no discharge occur unless allowed by a dischar e ermit. Section 16-47(d) lists 12 substances or classes of substance (e•g. pesticides) as prohibited discharges. The list is only illustrative, however. The provision states: Prohibited heavy metals and toxic materials include, but are not limited to: [the list of 12]. Thus section 16-47(d) applies to the same class of substances as section 16-47(c): all other heavy metals and toxic materials. If section 16-47(d) set a zero discharge limitation for all these other heavy metals and toxic materials, as the proposed permit does, then section 16-47(c), which allows the county to set permit limitations for these other heavy metals and toxic materials, would be completely unnecessary. So would section 16- 51, which allows the county to regulate the discharge of radioactive materials to the public sewers, instead of simply barring any such discharge under ~ 16-47(d) which expressly bars discharges of uranium, tellurium, and strontium, which are normally concerns because of radioactivity. As the County must give effect to all provisions of the ordinance, section 16-47(d) cannot be read to require the imposition of a zero discharge limitation for bismuth and molybdenum. Instead, it requires that the County set an appropriate discharge limitation for such substances to assure protection of the sewage treatment plant and the environment. It is IR's current understanding that there is no water quality problem at the sewage treatment plant involving either bismuth or molybdenum. Likewise, the sludge quality at the plant is not affected by bismuth or molybdenum as neither metal is included in EPA's proposed standards for sewage sludge. EPA has not treated either bismuth or molybdenum as an environmental problem. Although EPA has set standards for the lead-tin-bismuth metal forming industry subcategory, 40 C.F.R. ~§ 471.10-471.15 (1990), it did not include any limitations for PATTON, BOGGS S~ BLOW Page 3 bismuth. Instead, it regulated discharges of lead and antimony from this subcategory. It is clear that EPA does not regard bismuth as a problem, perhaps recognizing that bismuth is widely used in over-the-counter pharmaceuticals such as Pepto-Bismol, and does not pose a human health threat. Likewise, in setting standards for molybdenum mining and milling, EPA did not even set a discharge limitation for molybdenum, even though it did set standards for discharges of copper, zinc, lead, cadmium, arsenic and mercury from such operations. 40 C.F.R. § 440.100-440.104 (1990). Likewise, in setting limits for the nonferrous metals forming and metals powder industry categories, EPA set pretreatment standards for molybdenum three and a half times higher than the limits set for copper and nickel. 40 C.F.R. §~ 471.54-471.55 (1990). IR suggests that a study of bismuth and molybdenum toxicity and standards be done to help the County formulate any appropriate standards. One of IR's alloy supplier, Castle Metals, has indicated a willingness to gather such information. While that information is being gathered and reviewed, IR suggests that an interim limitation for molybdenum and bismuth be set at the same level as the ordinance discharge limitation for copper, one milligram per liter. EPA regulates copper and nickel more strictly than molybdenum in the nonferrous metals forming and metal powder industry category, 40 C.F.R. § 471.54, so this proposed standard is quite conservative as an interim measure. IR submits that these interim limitations and its suggestion of a study to help assist the county in setting any technically- based limits for these substances are entirely appropriate and within the county's power under section 16-47(c) of the ordinance. Moreover, insistence on zero discharge limitations for bismuth and molybdenum ignores the language of ~ 16-47(c), contrary to basic rules of statutory construction. Consequently, IR respectfully requests that the ordinance be read appropriately to correctly reflect the ordinance language and the technical and environmental realities that neither bismuth nor molybdenum are an environmental concern serious enough to warrant regulation more stringent than copper. Respectfully submitted, Russell V. Randle Counsel for Ingersoll Rand Company .~. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JULY 9, 1991 ORDINANCE AMENDING AND REENACTING ARTICLE IV, SEWER USE STANDARDS, OF CHAPTER 18 OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE OF 1985 (formerly, Article III, of Chapter 16 of the Roanoke County Code of 1971). WHEREAS, the 1972 Sewage Treatment Agreement entered into by and between, and still binding upon, Roanoke City and the County of Roanoke requires the County to adopt such ordinances and regulations as necessary to conform to those adopted by the City of Roanoke as they pertain to Sewer Use Standards; and WHEREAS, by Ordinance # 62486-146, § 1, adopted on June 24, 1986, Chapter 16 of the Roanoke County Code of 1971 was amended to add an Article III relative to sewer use standards and by Ordinance # 91289- 14, adopted on September 12, 1989, said Article was further amended; and WHEREAS, recent regulatory requirements enacted by the State Water Control Board and the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency have necessitated changes by the City of Roanoke to its Sewer Use Standards; and WHEREAS, the operative requirements of the current Sewage Treatment Agreement between Roanoke City and the County of Roanoke requires amendment of the County's ordinances to bring them into conformity with the current Roanoke City Sewer Use Standards; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on July 9, 1991, and the second reading of this ordinance was held on July 23, 1991. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1 ~-o 1. That the amended "SEWER USE STANDARDS" be reenacted as "ARTICLE IV. SEWER USE STANDARDS" of CHAPTER 18 of the Roanoke County Code of 1985. CHAPTER 18 ARTICLE IV. SEWER USE STANDARDS Sec. 18-151 Definitions. For the purpose of this article, the words and phrases set out in this section shall have the following meanings: Act means the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, also known as the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1251, et seq., as amended. Approving Authority for purposes of this Article only shall mean the county Administrator or his duly authorized representative and shall be equivalent to control authority. BOD (biochemical oxygen demand) means the quantity of oxygen by weight, expressed in mg/1, utilized in the biochemical oxidation of organic matter under standard laboratory conditions for five (5) days at a temperature of twenty (20) degrees centigrade. Building sewer means the extension from the building drain to the public sewer or other place of disposal (also called house lateral and house connection). Categorical Standards means National Categorical Pretreatment Standards or Pretreatment Standard. Capital costs means a sum sufficient recovered by user charges computed by using the capital recover factor for the average life of all capital items including capitalized O & M charges (unless collected separately) 2 ~i''-I on which expenditures have been made or will have to be made for wastewater treatment facilities, processes or transmission lines. Capital costs may be adjusted from time to time to reflect cost experience. Categorical standards means National Categorical Pretreatment Standards or Pretreatment Standard. Class I user means any person discharging normal domestic wastewater into a sanitary sewer and any industrial user discharging Group B wastewater into the sanitary sewer. Class II user means any person discharging Group A wastewater into a sanitary sewer. COD (chemical oxygen demand) means the measure, expressed in mg/1, of the oxygen consuming capacity of inorganic and organic matter present in water or wastewater, expressing the amount of oxygen consumed from a chemical oxidant in a specific test, but not differentiating between stable and unstable organic matter and thus not necessarily correlating with biochemical oxygen demand. COD-BOD ratio means the ratio of the value of COD to BOD as these values are defined above. COD (soluble) means the COD of the filtrate from wastewater that is filtered through a gooch crucible as required by the suspended solids test in "Standard Methods." Control manhole means a manhole giving access to a building sewer at some point before the building sewer discharge mixes with other discharges in the public sewer. 3 ~`-i` Control point means a point of access to a course of discharge before the discharge mixes with other discharges in the public sewer. County means Roanoke County. Discharge means any introduction of substances into the sanitary sewer. Garbage means animal and vegetable wastes and residue from the preparation, cooking and dispensing of food, and from the handling, processing, storage and sale of food products and produce. GroupA wastewater means wastewater discharged into the sanitary sewers in which any one of the parameters below are more than the given loading: Parameter Total suspended solids (TSS) Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) Total phosphorus (TP) Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN) Average Monthly 62.5 lbs./day 62.5 lbs./day 3.75 lbs./day 4.50 lbs./day Daily Composite 75 lbs./day 75 lbs./day 4.5 lbs./day 5.4 lbs./day Group B wastewater means the discharge of permitted industrial wastewater not otherwise qualifying as Group A wastewater. Incompatible waste means a waste which is not susceptible to adequate treatment by the wastewater treatment plant. Industrial user means any user of publicly owned treatment works identified in the Standard Industrial Classification Manual, 1987, Office of Management and Budget, as amended and supplemented, under divisions A, B,D, E, and I, including governmental facilities that 4 1'~'- ! discharge wastewater to the plant. Industrial waste means waste resulting from any process of industry, manufacturing, trade or business from the development of any natural resource, or any mixture of the waste with water or normal wastewater, or distinct from normal wastewater. Inftltration means water entering a sewer system, including service connections from the ground, through such means as, but not limited to, defective pipes, pipe joints, connections or manhole walls. Infiltration does not include, and is distinguished from inflow. Inflow means water discharged into a sewer system, including service connections, from such sources as, but not limited to, roof leaders, cellar,yard and area drains, foundation drains, cooling water discharges, drains from springs and swampy areas, manhole covers, cross connections from storm sewers and combined sewers, catch basins, storm waters, surface runoff, street wash waters, or drainage. It does not include, and is distinguished from infiltration. Interference means a discharge which, along or in conjunction with a discharge or discharges from other sources, (1) inhibits or disrupts the plant, its treatment processes or operations, or its sludge processes, use or disposal; or (2) causes a violation of the plant's VPDES permit. Milligrams per liter (mg/1) means the same as parts per million and is a weight-to-volume ratio; the milligram-per liter value multiplied by the factor 8.34 shall be equivalent to pounds per million gallons of water. National categorical pretreatment standard or pretreatment standard means any regulations containing pollutant discharge limits promulgated by the EPA 5 ~_~ in accordance with Sections 307(b) and (c) of the Act (33 U.S.C. 1317) and 40 C.F.R. Subchapter N (Parts 401-471) as amended, which applies to a specific category of industrial users. Natural outlet means any outlet into a watercourse, ditch, lake or other body of surface water or ground water. Normal wastewater means wastewater discharged into the sanitary sewers in which the average concentration of total suspended solids and BOD is not more than 250 mg/1, total phosphorus is not more than 15 mg/l, total Kjeldahl nitrogen is not more than 18 mg/1 and total flow is not more than 25,000 gallons per day. Overload means the imposition of organic or hydraulic loading on a treatment facility in excess of its engineered design capacity. Pass through means a discharge which exits the plant into water of the United States in quantities which may cause a violation of the plant's VPDES permit. Person includes individual, corporation, organization, government or governmental subdivision or agency, business trust, estate, trust, partnership association and any other legal entity. pH means the logarithm (base 10) of the reciprocal of the hydrogen ion concentration expressed in grams per liter. Phosphorus (total) means the sum of the various types of phosphate expressed as elemental phosphorus found in wastewater. The various forms include ortho phosphate, condensed phosphates (pyro, meta, and poly-phosphates), and organically bound phosphates. The concentration of total phosphate is determined by the "Standard Methods" test 6 ~-~ procedure. Plant means the City of Roanoke Regional Sewage Treatment Plant, e~ Public sewer means pipe or conduit carrying wastewater or unpolluted drainage in which owners of abutting properties shall have the use, subject to control by the County. Sanitary sewer means a public sewer that conveys domestic wastewater or industrial wastes or a combination of both, and into which storm water, surface water, groundwater and other unpolluted wastes are not intentionally passed. Slug means any discharge of water, wastewater or industrial waste which, in concentration of any given constituent or in quantity of flow, exceeds, for any period longer than fifteen (15) minutes, more than five (5) times the average twenty-four (24) hour concentration or flows during normal operation. Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) means classification pursuant to the Standard Industrial Classification Manual issued by the Executive Office of , Management and Budget, 1987, as amended. Standard Methods means the examination and analytical procedures set forth in the latest edition, at the time of analysis, of "Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater" as prepared, approved and published jointly by the American Public Health Association, the American Water Works Association and the Water Pollution Control Federation. 7 ~-~' Storm sewer means a public sewer which carries storm and surface water and drainage and into which domestic wastewater or industrial wastes are not intentionally passed. Storm water means rainfall or any other forms of precipitation. Suspended solids means solids measured in mg/1 that either float on the surface of, or are in suspension in, water, wastewater or other liquids, and which are largely removable by a laboratory filtration device. To discharge includes to deposit, conduct, drain, emit, throw, run, allow to seep or otherwise release or dispose of, or to allow, permit or suffer any of these acts or omissions. Total Kjeldahl nitrogen means the combined ammonia and organic nitrogen in a given wastewater, as measured by the "Standard Methods" test procedure. It does not include nitrite and nitrate nitrogen. Trap means a device designed to skim, settle or otherwise remove grease, oil, sand, flammable wastes or other harmful substances. Unpolluted wastewater means water containing: (1) No fee or emulsified grease or oil. (2) No acids or alkalis. (3) No phenols or other substances producing taste or odor in receiving water. (4) No toxic or poisonous substances in suspension, colloidal state or solution. (5) No noxious or otherwise obnoxious or odorous gases. (6) Not more than ten (10) mg/1 each of suspended solids and BOD. (7) Color not exceeding fifty (50) units, as measured by the 8 R-t Platinum-Cobalt method of determination, as specified in "Standard Methods." User charge means the charge made to those persons who discharge normal wastewater into the County's sewage system. This charge shall include a proportionate share of any capital improvements to the system (capital costs). User surcharge means the charge made, in excess of the user charge, for all wastewater over and above the loading defined as normal wastewater. Waste means rejected, unutilized or superfluous substances, in liquid, gaseous or solid form, resulting from domestic, agricultural or industrial activities. Wastewater means a combination of the water-carried waste from residences, business buildings, institutions and industrial establishments, together with any ground, surface and storm water that may be present. Wastewater facilities includes all facilities for collection, pumping, treating and disposing of wastewater and industrial wastes. Wastewater service charge means the charge on all users of the public sewer whose wastes are treated at the plant and is the appropriate sum of the user charge and user surcharge. Wastewater treatment plant means any municipal-owned facilities, devices and structures used for receiving, processing and treating wastewater, industrial waste and sludges from the sanitary sewers. Wastecourse means a natural or man-made channel in which a flow of water occurs, either continuously or intermittently. 9 R-! Sec. 18-152. General Requirements. (a) All discharges into public sewers shall conform to requirements of this article; however, the federal categorical pretreatment standards or any standards imposed by the state water control board or its successor in authority are hereby incorporated by reference where applicable and where such standards are more stringent than those set forth in this article. (b) =T c ~ ~ ~s t-~a~-its e~-s~rai~-des e~a~g end' ,. , ~ ~- -~ ~ ~ w ~e~ ew.r s~s~e~--e~eep~a:3~i-e=idea-ix~~s ~i~re-l-e: IJo significant industrial user or other user as determined by the approving authority shall discharge industrial wastewaters into the sanitary sewer system without an appropriate industrial waste discharge permit as provided in this article. (c) Unless exception is granted by the approving authority or by other provisions of this chapter, the public sewer system shall be used by all persons discharging wastewater, industrial waste, polluted liquids or unpolluted waters or liquids. (d) Unless authorized by the State Water Control Board or its successor in authority, no person shall deposit or discharge any waste included in subsection (c) of this section on public or private property in or adjacent to any natural outlet, watercourse, storm sewer or other area within the jurisdiction of the County. (e) The approving authority shall determine, prior to discharge, that wastes to be discharged will receive such treatment as is required by the laws, regulations, ordinances, rules and orders of federal, state and local authorities, or such discharge shall not be permitted. 10 O~ ROANp~~ ti A Z Z v .. „a 1$ 150,E 8$ SFSQUICENTENN~P~' A Beauti~ul8eginning COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE Mr. Roger L. Falls 423 McGeorge Drive Vinton, VA 24179 Dear Mr. Falls: July 24, 1991 ALL~AMERIG LITY ''I I~~ 1979 1989 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS STEVEN AWBACMAGLSTERULL. DIiSTRICT HARRY G IV~NTON MAG'jSTERUIL DISTRICT LEE B. EDDY WINDSOR HIL1S MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT BOB L. JOHNSON HOWNS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT R~q~ARp W. ROBERS CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT The Board of Supervisors have asked me to express on their behalf their sincere appreciation for your previous service to the Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission. Citizens so responsive to the needs of their community and willing to give of themselves and their time are indeed all too scarce. This is to advise that at their meeting held on Tuesday, July 23, 1991, the Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to reappoint you as a member of the Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission for another three-year term. Your term will expire on June 30, 1994. State law provides that any person elected, re-elected, appointed to any body be furnished a copy of the Freedom of Informati of Athe your copy is enclosed. We are also sending you a copy Conflict of Interest Act. on behalf of the Supervisors and the citizens of Roanoke County, please accept our sincere thanks and appreciation for your willingness to accept this appointment. Sincerely, ~~ Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors MHA/bjh Enclosures cc: Steve Carpenter, Director, Parks & Recreation C~nuntg of 2Ruttnnke P.O. BOX 29800 ROAI~OKE. VIRGINIA 24018-0798 (703) 772-2004 O~ ROANp~~ > P i t` ~ Z Z o a i $ 8 150 8$ SFSQUICENTENN~P~ A Beautiful Beginning COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE (~n~tnt~ of ~n~tnnkr AllAll-AM~ ''I I ~I 1979 1989 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS STEVECATnwBA MAGISTERULDISTRIGT HARRY C. N~NTON MMAG IISTERULHDISTRICT LEE 8. EDDY WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT BOB L. JOHNSON HOLLINS MAGISTERALL. DISTRICT R~CI-IARD W. ROBERS CAVE SPRING MAGISTERAL DISTRICT July 24, 1991 The Honorable L. Douglas Wilder Governor of Virginia State Capitol Richmond, VA 2.3219 Dear Governor Wilder: Attached is a copy of Resolution No. 72391-4.h supporting the creation of the Center on Rural Development and the location of the Center in the Roanoke Valley. This resolution was adopted by the Board of Supervisors at their meeting on Tuesday, July 23, 1991. If you need further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, ~• Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors bjh Attachment cc: The Honorable Lawrence H. Framme, III, Secretary of Economic Development Mr. Neal J. Barber, Director, Department of Housing and Community Support Mr. Wayne G. Strickland, Executive Director, Fifth Planning District Commission P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE. VIRGINIA 24018-0798 <703) 772-2004 OF ROANp~~ ti p Z Z °v .. a E50 88 SFSQt11CENTEN~,P~ A BeautifulBeginning COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE (~nixn~~ of ~vttnnkn ALL~IIMERICA LITY '' I I' 1979 1989 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS STEV CATAWFiA MAGISTERICAL DISTRICT HARRY C. N~NTON MAG IISTERICAL~DISTRICT LEE B. EDDY WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT BOB L. JOHNSON HOWNS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT RICHARD W. ROBERS CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT July 24, 1991 Reverend Steven W. Harris Baptist Children's Home Salem, VA 24153 Dear Reverend Harris: On behalf of the Board of Supervisors, 1 would like to take this opportunity to let you know of our appreciation for your attending the meeting on Tuesday, July 23, 1991, 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. Sincerely, ~Z -~~= Steven A. McGraw, Chairman Roanoke County Board of Supervisors P.O. BOX 29600 ROANOKE. VIRGINIA 24018-0798 • <703> 772-2004 M E M O R A N D U M TO: Memb rs of/Board of Supervisors FROM: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator DATE: July 17, 1991 SUBJECT: Zoning Ordinance Attached is a report from Terry Harrington on the status of the Zoning Ordinance as we discussed last week. The Planning staff is ready to begin holding community meetings to discuss the zoning ordinance with the citizens and receive their comments. My concern is that with the upcoming elections, important projects such as the zoning ordinance might become politicized. This is a sensitive issue to many people and should be handled in an objective manner, as free from politics as possible. My recommendation is that the staff and planning commission continue to refine the ordinance, and that any other work be delayed until after January 1. I realize this delay will put the project further behind schedule. If the Board chooses to proceed January 1992, I hope that you can remain neutral on this issue. now rather than waiting until prevail upon the candidates to TO: Elmer Hodge FROM: Terry Harrington ~~+~ DATE: July 11, 1991 RE: Zoning Ordinance Status The Planning Commission has received the first four (of five) sections of the proposed new zoning ordinance. These sections were distributed to the Commission during May and June. The four sections are: Article I General Provisions Article II Definitions and Use Types Article III District Regulations Article IV Use and Design Standards Article V (General Development Standards) is in final preparation and will be given to the Commission at their request. The information received by the Commission is a "working first draft". Although it contains proposals for all of the important development standards, it still requires significant editorial revisions to ensure appropriate cross-references, etc. The Commission has begun a preliminary review of Articles I and II. They have not yet begun any type of review of Articles III and IV. As we discussed, Articles III and IV are the sections likely to generate the most public discussion. At their meeting on July 2nd, the Commission established a rough timetable for their review of this document. They indicated that they would like to hold a Commission hearing on the draft at their December 91 or January 92 meeting. They also agreed with a staff suggestion that significant public comment be received from the community prior to the formal public hearings. No decisions were made as to the methods by which this public comment would be received. I would appreciate any thoughts that you or the Board may have on the Commissions anticipated review schedule, or ways that the Board would like to solicit public involvement in this effort. r ~,= SPRIN HOL ~ OW RESERVOIR UPDATE. On May 29, 1991, Hayes, Seay, Mattern & Mattern was instructed to proceed with the initial grouting work to determine the magnitude of grouting needed during the construction of Spring Hollow. Preliminary work began on July 1, 1991, with the construction of the necessary roads to the grouting areas. Currently, all road work is complete and drilling has commenced. The grouting work will include the drilling of 3-inch wells to a depth just below the bottom of the reservoir. Once the wells are completed, the grouting material will be forced into the concealed limestone layers to fill any voids present. Each layer of limestone will be grouted throughout the area shown on the attached map. The amount of grouting material required to fill the voids and stop the flow of ground water will be measured and used to better define the work required in the plans and specifications for constructing Spring Hollow. A press tour will be held on July 25 to explain the operation and allow the media to experience the work first hand. You will continue to receive updates every two weeks. == ROANOKE COUNTY ` - REGIONAL WATER SUPPLY ~~ ~~~ SPRING HOLLOW RESERVOIR J `~~ i ~_ 7~ ` i` „~~ ~/ r~ ~ _ ~ '~ _ /~1 = ROANOKE COUNTY "'-' REGIONAL WATER SUPPLY M 113 . 1 ~•~ s-~ v SPRING HOLLOW ~~~~ .. o p n aW a a8 ~ -~ ~ i ~ /~ ~~ ~o// / / O W ~~w o~, a °~ \ o~ ~~ N (~o I ~ u o ii N oo>:, 0 U ~ a \ _~ o ~1~~ ~o \ ~ =' « \ 1 J ~ owr\ yr \ o~ o 0 o J W 2i C * m c -- ° o _~- "' c n. o ~ I 'gym ~~ 0 ` u E m~f ~: ~< o. ~ ~ m0~ ~~o 0 e ~ o _~ U • \\ `\ ° ~ nV ~~ i \~ 1 \ ¢ f-~i~ ~ \ ~ E ~~ ~ 0 1 0 ~ ~~{ ~ / Or/ \ R mW~ x O x~ ~~ «`_ ^ ~ o ~ or`` 6`0 ~ ~' .f or 00 i = ROANOKE COUNTY = REGIONAL WATER SUPPLY '- ~ ~ • _o }~ 90- °j / V h = ~ ~y ~ ~ N G 1 C L O L/ '~~ ! • CC9 p ~ C ~ S M (7 • c 0 N C ~\ / '. ~;\ S •, c .. u " 0 a[ o O f O Q W \ \ \>1 1 ~~~ > 1 v g w `o 8 u _ o ~ C, „ O f C ~ ~ ~`[p~ ^C J G O V w ~ J O ~ ` O ~ ~ ~ \\ j, !Iii SPRING HOLLOW RESERVOIR 1, DRILL 3' DIAMETER WELL TO A DEPTH BELOW THE B^TTDM GROUT ^F THE PROPOSED RESERV^IR. PUMP WATER LEVEL 2, MEASURE GROUND _ IN WELL, -II 3, INSERT AIR PLUGS TD CONFINE II~ GR^UT T^ LIMEST^NE LAYER, LIMESTONE -~ LAYER - --'------' '"~~ BOTTOM OF RESERV^IR ~-__ 4. PUHP GROUT INT^ CONFINED X111 LIMESTONE LAYER UNTIL ALL V^IDS ARE SEALED. GROUT I-~ IS F^RCED INT^ VOIDS AND - SPREADS UNDER PRESSURE. _-_-_____-_-_-_-__-__ 5. M^VE AIR PLUGS AND GROUT- ING EQUIPMENT UP T~ NEXT LAYER AND REPEAT GROUTING, ~---AIR PLUGS GROUT FORCED INTO VOIDS -- ~----WATER LEVEL = ROANOKE COUNTY = REGIONAL WATER SUPPLY .__ _ ,a - Fifth Plannin g District Commission - ` 313 Luck Avenue, S.VV. P.O. Box 2569 Roanoke, Virginia 24010 (703) 343-4417 July 9, 1991 MEMORANDUM T0: JChief Administrative Officials in Planning District 5 Directors of Planning Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 11, 12 Directors of Regional Economic Development Agencies in the Fifth Planning District FROM: Wayne GS Strickland, Executive Director SUBJ: Resolution Supporting the Creation of the Center on Rural Development and Encouraging the State to Locate Center in Roanoke At the June 27 meeting of the Fifth Planning District C o tsofothe Executive Committee, a resolution was adopted in supp Governor's initiative to establish a Center on Rural Development (CORD). During the discussion of CORD, Commission members expressed an interestfelt that Roanoke Os accessCtolcominunitiesthn Roanoke region. They the Shenandoah Valley, Southwest, Central and Southside Virginia would afford an opportunity for the CORD staff to experience first- hand the problems and issues confronting rural Virginians, and would show that the State, through CORD, is reaching out directly to its constituents. Commission members then Go ernorv and his staffrwilllgivescareful with the hope that consideration to the Commission's request to have the CORD office located in the Roanoke region. If you decide that this request has merit, your organization may also wish tlacementhof the Center on a similar resolution, to support the p Rural Development in the Roanoke region. If you have any questions concerning the enclosed resolution, please do not hesitate to contact me. WGS:jlp Enclosure Allegham~ County • Botetourt County • Craig County • Roanoke County City of Clifton Forge • City of Covington • City of Roanoke • Citv of Salem • Town of Vinton ~ nnin District Commission Fifth I la g 3l3 LIKE: r'wenu~~, S. W. P.O. E3ox 269 IZ~Ianoke, ~'ir~;ini~I 24010 (703) 343-4417 The 27th day of June, 1991 RESOLUTION A Resolution Supporting the Creation of the Center on Rural Development and Encouraging the State to Locate this Center in Roanoke WHEREAS,' Governor Wilder's Rural Development Conference, held in Roanoke in September 1991, pointed to the need for the State to increase its role in rural economic development, and WHEREAS, the Governm~nth throughnthe ecreationt ofe the enhance rural economic develop and Center on Rural Development {CORD), WHEREAS, the Center on Rural Development is charged leadership in developing a rural strategic with providing planning process which ti enss tos achieveeregional goalsar and an provide a vehicle for c WHEREAS, the Planning District Commissions in tin Southwest and Southside areas are pursuing, Shenandoah Valley, encies, long-range conjunction with local governments and State ag activities development planning (i•e•- strategic planning) through various projects, sank Stud t Commissional thel So~thside Council, the Biue Ridge Reglo Y Study Co.~unission, and Forward Scuthwest Virginia, and WHEREAS, the work rectuired to: (1) pursue the needs of r vide leadership in developing rural rural citizens, and (2) P Q strategic plans may best be accommodated from a location more central to rural Virginians, and the State is currently in the process of 'v~AEREAS, P wart to establishing the thiseCenterRinaa placelothertthe>a Rmchmond; consider locating THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Fifth Planning District Commission commaesleade~sh~pnoandosupp~abl~o~~graa agency that will prov .- fanning process; an communities in developing a rural strategi.. p r~jlE't'_~lcillY ~_:~t1llfC • ~~C?tefOUT't COL`Ilt~' • ~I'? ~ ~.l`•,~ t~, • I~OdIiU}.t' ~C~Ll~;lV' F.ti.., e ~~Ir~''_7Y CCA'iTl~;t0I1 • CiiV f)~l:Ud'lOhr • (~It~' J7 X91!?I.1 ° ti`~ti'I; (l~ V'1?1tCTi ~~It~' O: L Iltt('Ti ~~ ~,~~ NOW THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Governor, Secretary of Economic Development, and the Department of Housing and Community Development is strongly encouraged to locate the the office of the Center for Rural Development in the Roanoke region to enhance the Center's access to rural communities in the Commonwealth, and by this gesture, to show rural Virginians that the Center is truly intended to "reach out" to meet their long-range development needs. ATTEST: W ~. s~-...,..~ WaynZy G. Strickland Secretary to the Fifth Planning District Commission 6/10/91 Dicatphone from HCN just saw where the Glenvar High School Girls Softball team won the State Single A Championship. Might want to check with Steve McGraw and see if it is appropriate for them to be recognized at a future county board meeting. cc; Anne Marie File ,38~-~ S3 ~ l~s ~ /_3 ~~ v u ~~•"-,~ d- 'rte ~"~-0 ~~ ~~~J'+...~ %1 s VHSL STATE GROUP R S~iUN`~I~I~~' L~ ~~U~~l0~A11~10~i~~1~0~~T Set~~if il~a.ls l~ L~ ` ^ l ~:Q~ ].III. :~~~ ~).I~1. .'i a~;~ r~,~,~1~''' ~ , :.;..tire r ~~~ k• ;r:~rh; a ~t1iI~IY1~)lOf1~~11~1 June `~ 1:~~0 p.ill. Susses: ~e.ntra.l ~~~ ~~~ 1~) - 3 R~.~)~)iI.~1~.IlilOC~ `?p w Ba.t.tl' Couclt~~ ..y ~` c,~ ` . '~fi; l; ~ - `~ "~, C F ( f~., ~ ~~ ~,v :+w. , a. ~, ~ . , Y ,.. ,. ~_..~:.'a.. e ~~et1~~ ~.i' t~~ - ~~ ~., ~y "+~ r_ a "..~. n ~F :.~ .a _ ___. ~` ~ ~ ~,T iC +~~1~~ 1, .1~YYl i cat ~+~YYI, ~~ 11~ ~i1~.i~t. ACTION # ITEM NUMBER MEETING DATE: July 23, 1991 AGENDA ITEM: Authorization for the Roanoke County School Board to submit certain Literary Fund Applications COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: In accordance with discussions with the Board of County Supervisors during the past several months, the Roanoke County School Board is in the process of preparing applications for Literary Fund loans for certain new school addectsntotaa renovations to existing buildings. These proj $13,900,000 and, once the applications are received by the state, will be placed on the waiting list until fundin~~s averiodlof It is envisioned that these projects will be~'u~ing the p 1993 - 199,~`~ ~~ 5,~x ~n ~~ ff~ o~c,^h~,~l _~~~r_~~.1ir~?, In addition to the Literary Fund projects, the school board recommends that a site be procured in the Cave Spring/Sout'n County arealas A minimum ofsforty ac~esawould be required.ool or middle schoo FISCAL IMPACsentednto cthe board oftsupervisors on pJuly 9,y1991ne Hyatt and pre STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that authorization be granted t ons etocthel sbated fo~ them pr jects tdefinedund lthe applica attached resolution. ~~ ~. ayes Wilson, Superintendent Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator -2- Approved Denied Received Referred To VOTE No Yes _ Eddy _ Johnson _ McGraw _ Nickens Robers ACTION Motion by: 1 Abs cc: FROM THE MINUTES OF TH LAR SESSIONHONLJULY RD1o 199 AT 7 POMNTIN VIRGINIA MEETING IN REGU CONFERENCE ROOM B OF THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION BUILDING ANNEX, SALEM, VIRGINIA. RESOLUTION REQUESTING AUTHORIZATION BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF EAL,TOHEOFOVIRGINIAUFORTLITERARYTFOUND TO THE COMMONW LOANS. WHEREAS, the County School Board of Roanoke County has evaluated school facilities serving all areas of the county and has concurred that a need exists to commence a program of new additions and renovations to certain present facilities, and WHEREAS, said school board deems it appropriate and in the best interest of the school division to submit applications for Literary Fund loans for the following: Green Valley Elementary - kindergarten $ 1,000,000. addition and building renovations 2,500,000. Cave Spring Junior - building renovations -2- Adopted on the following recorded vote: AYES: Paul G. Black, Maurice L. Mitchell, Charlsie S. Pafford, Barbara B. Chewning, Frank E. Thomas NAYS: None TESTE: /' ~~ ~ /~~~~" C l e r k FROM THE MINUTES OF THE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA MEETING IN REGULAR SESSION ON JULY 11, 1991 AT 7 P.M. IN CONFERENCE ROOM B OF THE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION BUILDING ANNEX, SALEM, VIRGINIA. RESOLUTION REQUESTING AUTHORIZATION BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY TO SUBMIT APPLICATIONS TO THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA FOR LITERARY FUND LOANS. WHEREAS, the County School Board of Roanoke County has evaluated school facilities serving all areas of the county and has concurred that a need exists to commence a program of new additions and renovations to certain present facilities, and WHEREAS, said school board deems it appropriate and in the best interest of the school division to submit applications for Literary Fund loans for the following: Green Valley Elementary - kindergarten 1,000,000. addition and building renovations $ Cave Spring Junior - building renovations 2,500,000. William Byrd High - addition of science 2,000,000. rooms and building renovations -2- Adopted on the following recorded vote: AYES: Paul G. Black, Maurice L. Mitchell, Charlsie S. Pafford, Barbara B. Chewning, Frank E. Thomas NAYS: None TESTS: ,,~' ~~".~~-~ Clerk CIP4 ROANOKE COUNTY SCHOOLS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLANNING BEGINNING SAVINGS GREEN VALLEY CAVE SPRING WM BYRD GLENVAR NORTHSIDE FISCAL EXISTING OVER 1991-92 ELEMENTARY JUNIOR HIGH NIGH HIGH YEAR DEBT BUDGET --------- - ($1,000,000) ------------ --- ($2,500,000) ------------ ($2,000,000) ------------ ($2,500,000) ------------ (31,500,000) ------------ --------- 1991-92 ------------ 2,617,764 - - 1992-93 2,532,651 85,113 60,000 (A) 25,113 (A) 1993-94 2,447,787 169,977 50,000 (I) 119,977 (A) 1994-95 2,296,389 321,375 30,000 (D) 125,000 (I) 120,000 (A) 46,375 (A) 1995-96 2,039,875 577,889 88,000 (D) 79,910 (D) 100,000 (I) 103,625 (A) 90,000 (~ 1996-97 1,995,600 622,164 86,000 (D) 220,000 (D) 60,000 (D) 120,000 (I) 70,000 (I 1997-98 1,771,027 846,737 84,000 (D) 215,000 (D) 176,000 (D) 75,000 (D) 45,000 (C 1998-99 1,575,759 1,042,005 82,000 (D) 210,000 (D) 172,000 (D) 220,000 (D) 132,000 (C 1999-2000 1,535,337 1,082,427 80,000 (D) 205,000 (D) 168,000 (D) 215,000 (D) 129,000 (G 2000-2001 1,520,259 1,097,505 78,000 (D) 200,000 (D) 164,000 (D) 210,000 (D) 126,000 (C 2001-2002 935,186 1,682,578 76,000 (D) 195,000 (D) 160,000 (D) 205,000 (D) 123,000 (C 2002-2003 876,141 1,741,623 74,000 (D) 190,000 (D) 156,000 (D) 200,000 (D) 120,000 (D 2003-2004 789,880 1,827,884 72,000 (D) 185,000 (D) 152,000 (D) 195,000 (D) 117,000 (G 2004-2005 818,448 1,799,316 70,000 (D) 180,000 (D) 148,000 (D) 190,000 (D) 114,000 (C 2005-2006 639,981 1,977,783 68,000 (D) 175,000 (D) 144,000 (D) 185,000 (D) 111,000 (C 2006-2007 543,188 2,074,576 66,000 (D) 170,000 (D) 140,000 (D) 180,000 (D) 108,000 (D 2007-2008 486,123 2,131,641 64,000 (D) 165,000 (D) 136,000 (D) 175,000 (D) 105,000 (D 2005-2009 247,687 2,370,077 62,000 (D) 160,000 (D) 132,000 (D) 170,000 (D) 102,000 (- 2009-2010 11,957 2,605,507 60,000 (D) 155,000 (D) 128,000 (D) 165,000 (D) 99,000 (D 2010-2011 2,617,764 58,000 (D) 150,000 (D) 124,000 (D) 160,000 (D) 96,000 (D 2011-2012 2,617,764 56,000 (D) 145,000 (D) 120,000 (D) 155,000 (D) 93,000 (D 2012-2013 2,617,764 54,000 (D) 140,000 (D) 116,000 (D) 150,000 (D) 90,000 (C 2013-2014 2,617,764 52,000 (D) 135,000 (D) 112,000 (D) 145,000 (D) 87,000 (D 2014-2015 2,617,764 130,000 (D) 108,000 (D) 140,000 (D) 84,000 (D 2015-2016 2,617,764 104,000 (D) 135,000 (D) 81,000 (D 2016-2017 2,617,764 130,000 (D) 78,000 (C 2017-2018 2,617,764 2018-2019 2,617,764 KEY: (A) ARCHITECTUAL AND ENGINEERING EXPENSES TO BE PAID UP FRONT AND REIMBURSED TO THE SCHOOLS WHEN THB LOAN PROCEEDS ARE RECEIVED (I) INTEREST EXPENSE ON SHORT TERN BORROWING (D) DEBT SERVICE ON THE LITERARY LOAN NOTES: THB 31,000,000 NEEDED TO PURCHASE LAND FOR THB NEW CAUE SPRING HIGH SCHOOL CANNOT BE FINANCED WITH LITERARY LOANS AND THEREFORE IS NOT INCLUDED ABOUB. 1 1 March 26, 1991 County staff requests the Board to adopt a motion to enter into executive session within the provisions of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act as follows: (a) to discuss a specific legal matter requiring the provision of legal advice by the County Attorney and briefings by staff members concerning legal matters with respect to potential litigation and violation of zoning ordinances in accordance with Section 2.1-344 A 7 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended. (b) to discuss a specific legal matter requiring the provision of legal advice by the County Attorney and briefings by staff members concerning negotiations with respect to a landfill use agreement in accordance with Section 2.1-344 A 7 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as --.,, amended . (c) to discuss a specific legal matter requiring the provision of legal advice by the County Attorney and briefings by staff members concerning Item T. 391-4 on the March 26, 1991, Board's agenda in accordance with Section 2.1-344 A 7 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended. ~, ~~_~' M E M O RAN D U M To: Public Safety Team (John H. Cease; Thomas C. Fuqua; Kenneth L. Hogan; Terrance L. Harrington; O. Arnold Covey; Michael F. Kavanaugh; Dr. Margaret L. Hagan; Francis W. Burkart, III; Anne Marie Green; Paul M. Mahoney; and Oscar D. Bryant) C ~, . From: Elmer C. Hodge `~- Date: June 26, 1991 Subject: Adequate display of street address numerals At last night's Board meeting, Supervisor Eddy asked for a report addressing a complaint from Chief Cease regarding inadequate display of street address numerals on buildings. I would appreciate your reviewing this issue at your next team meeting. If there is a problem that cannot be resolved via enforce- ment of the existing County Code, I would like the team to recommend a solution. If enforcement of the Code is needed, then I would like your suggestions on how and by whom that can be accomplished. I would appreciate your response by no later than July 15 so the matter can be placed on the July 23 agenda for the Board's information. meh ,, . ECH: Don Myers and I discussed the attached board report. Neither of us thinks it should go to the Board at this time. The deed states construction must begin by June 30, 1993. The letter states that they plan to complete construction by December 1994. The letter also states that they will know in March 1992 whether they have funding for the project. That's when it should be brought to the Board. Mary Allen ~ _ ~ 5 ' `1 t ~ 3 ~ ,~ S _ ,pD`:A•n ~,Q~' ~ ~ ~~~ '2~ a -M l-~ ~,,.e-`r ~~ r-- rHE REGIONAL CHAMBER ROANOKE REGIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE July 5, 1991 Mr. Elmer Hodge County Administrator County of Roanoke 3738 Brambleton Avenue Roanoke, VA 24018 Dear Elmer~~,~~+.~~ 310 First Street, SW FO. Box 0700 Roanoke, VA 24004-0700 (703) 983-0700 SW It was delightful meeting with introduction to staff members. appreciate his insight into the great team of people working with ~u and deeply appreciated your I had already met Tim and area. It appears you have a you. I look forward to meeti m. w Tha k youl foremakingkthisnposs ble. July 23~ 1991, at 5:30 p. This is certainly a great place to live and I look forwale of working with you to achieve the aspirations of the peop this area. Sincerely, ~' '~OUd Ex utive Vice President /ab LEGAL NOTICE ROANORE COIINTY BOARD OF SOPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, July 23, 1991, in the Community Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 3738 Brambleton Avenue, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of The Wilkinson Group Inc. to amend proffered conditions on 3 acres zoned B-2 and obtain a Special Exception Permit to operate a home for the elderly, located on Fallowater Lane, Cave Spring Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Planning and Zoning, 3738 Brambleton Avenue, Roanoke, VA. Dated : July 3 , 19 91 y.~^ ~ ~ r ~l i / ~ ,Mary/ H. Al en, Clerk Please publish in the Roanoke Times & World-News Tuesday, July 9, 1991 Tuesday, July 16, 1991 Direct the bill for publication to: The Wilkinson Group Inc. 960 Webster Road Roanoke, VA 24012 (703) 977-0005 SEND AFFIDAVIT OF PIIBLICATION TO: ROANORE COIINTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT P.O. BOB 29800, ROANORE, VA 24018 LEGAL NOTICE ROANORE COIINTY BOARD OF SOPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, July 23, 1991, in the Community Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 3738 Brambleton Avenue, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of A. J. Everett, Lynward Twine and Cline Conner to rezone 1.709 acres from A-1 to R-3 to construct townhouses, located in Emerald Court Subdivision, Reservoir Road, Hollins Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Planning and Zoning, 3738 Brambleton Avenue, Roanoke, VA. Dated: July 3, 1991 ~ ~~ ~~,~ Mary H. len, Clerk Please publish in the Roanoke Times & World-News Tuesday, July 9, 1991 Tuesday, July 16, 1991 Direct the bill for publication to: A. J. Everett, Lynward Twine and Cline Conner c/o Balzer and Associates 1208 Corporate Circle Roanoke, VA 24018 (703) 772-9580 SEND AFFIDAVIT OF PIIBLICATION TO: ROANORE COIINTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT P.O. BO8 29800, ROANORE, VA 24018 r LEGAL NOTICE ROANORE COUNTY BOARD OF BUPERVISORB Board of Supervisors will hold a public The Roanoke County hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, July 23, 1991, in th373 ~Brambleton of the Roanoke County Administration Center, Avenue, Roanoke, VA, on the proposal of the Roanoke County Planning Commission to amend the text ertaining to standardsoand poovisions to include Section 21-25 losed Explore Park. for the review of the prop A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Planning and Zoning, 3738 Brambleton Avenue, Roanoke, VA. Dated: July 3, 1991 ~~ Mary H. Al n, Clerk Please publish in the Roanoke Times & World-News Tuesday, July 9, 1991 Tuesday, July 16, 1991 Direct the bill for publication to: Roanoke County Board of Supervisors PO Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 (703) 772-2005 SEND AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: ROANORE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT P.O. BOX 29800, ROANORE, VA 24018