The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2/11/1992 - Regularo~ aoaru„~~ ~. ; Z ~ A ~ ~ o a ~$ ~uw, 8a S~S~U~CENTENN~P`' -1 B~aun/w8e¢rmemg ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ~IIltl~ III ~IIFIITII~2P 1 x•9.8 ~9 ACTION AGENDA FEBRUARY 11, 1992 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. ALL PRESENT AT 3:05 P.M. 2. Irnocation: The Reverend Branan G. Thompson Colonial Avenue Baptist Church 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag. B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS LBE -ITEM I-2 DELETED, ITEM I-5,6 TO BE DISCUSSED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. DIXIE CAVERNS TO BE DISCUSSED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. BI;T -ITEM D-5 DISCUSSION OF VIRGINIA AMATEUR SPORTS i C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND AWARDS NONE D. NEW BUSINESS 1. Consideration of County Position on the Appalachian Power Line. (ELMER C. HODGE, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR) A-21192-1 HCN MOTION TO WITLIDRAW NOTICE OF PROTEST TO SCC AND REMAIN NEUTRAL AYES-BI`T.EGK.HCN NAYS-HOM~LBE 2. Request for Adoption of Goals and Policies for Fiscal Year 1992-93. (ELMER C. HODGE, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR) CONTINUED TO MARCH 10 - ECH TO DISCUSS WITH CHAI',RMAN 3. Request from Transportation and Safety Commission to Amend Bylaws and Appointment Expiration Dates. (WILLIAM G. ROSEBRO, CHAIRMAN) A-21192-2 HCN MOTION TO APPROVE BYLAWS AND AMEND EXPIRATION DATES- URC LBE ASKED FOR COPIES OF COMII~IISSION 11~LiNUTES 4. Request for Authorization to Pay Certain Legal Fees. (PAUL M. MAHONEY, COUNTY ATTORNEY) A-21192-3 EGK MOTION TO APPROVE - URC 5. Request for Support for Virginia Amateur Sports 2 BIT ASKED AND STAFF TO CONTACT THE VAS BOARD OF DIRECTORS TO DISCUSS HOW BOARD CAN ASSIST IN KEEPING VAS IN ROANOKE VALLEY. E. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS WORK SESSION ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY - 3 092 F. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS NONE G. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES NONE IL SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. An Ordinance authorizing the Corneyance of a Well Lot located in the LaBellevue Subdivision of Roanoke County to Lawrence E. McMahon. (CLIFFORD CRAIG, UTILITY DIRECTOR) 0-21192-4 BI;T MOTION TO ADOPT ORD URC 2. An Ordinance amending and reenacting Section 9-21, Article II, Virginia Statewide Fire Prevention Code , Chapter 9, Fire Prevention and Protection relating to the Marking of Fire Lanes. (MARK LIGHT, DEPUTY FIRE AND RESCUE CHIEF) 0-21192-5 HOM MOTION TO ADOPT ORD URC 3. Ordinance authorizing the Lease of Real Estate, a 3 Portion of the Old Starkey Sewage Treatment Plant Property to the Valley Soccer Club. (CONTINUED FROM NOVEMBER 19, 19911 (PAUL MAHONEY, COUNTY ATTORNEY) 0-21192-6 EGK MOTION TO ADOPT ORD URC I. APPOINTMENTS 1. League of Older Americans Advisory Council 2. League of Older Americans Board of Directors DELETED 3. Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission BDT NOMINATED RITA WATSON TO THREE-YEAR UNEXPIRED TERM. 4. Planning Commission EGK ASKED FOR RESO OF APPRECIATION FOR MARIAN CHAPPELLE. 5. Roanoke Valley Regional Solid Waste Management Board 6. Roanoke Valley Resource Authority 7. Transportation and Safety Commission 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 4 DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. R-21192-7 BLT MOTION TO ADOPT RESO WITH ITEM 2 REMOVED FOR SEPARATE VOTE URC 1. Confirmation of Committee Appointments to the Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals, the Grievance Panel, and the Library Board. A-21192-7.a 2. Adoption of a Resolution requesting the Virginia Department of Transportation to abandon a portion of Route 601. R-21192-7.b HCN MOTION TO APPROVE AYES-EGK,HOM,HCN,LBE ABSTAIN-BLOT 3. Request for Acceptance of Huntridge Road and Golden Circle into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. R-21192-7.c 4. Acceptance of Sanitary Sewer Facilities serving the Orchards. A-21192-7.d 5. Adoption of a Resolution requesting that the Virginia Department of Transportation decrease the speed limit and prohibit tractor-trailers on portions of Colonial Avenue. R 21192-7.e 5 6. Adoption of a Resolution of Appreciation to Lingerfelt Associates for supporting the Easter Seal Summer Concerts at Valleypointe Park. R-21192-7.f K. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS SUPERVISOR NICKENS: RECEIVED LETTER FROM BETTY LUCAS REGARDING TWO SOCIAL SERVICE CATEGORIES THAT WILL BE CUT WITHOUT FURTHER FUNDING. ECH WILL WORK WITH SOCIAL SERVICES AND REPORT BACK ON 2/25/92. SUPERVISOR TOHNSON: (11 1'IIANI~NG TERRY HARRINGTON FOR ZONING ORDINANCE DRAFT, (21 ASKED THAT THE DON TERP LETTER REGARDING COX CABLE AND THE POTENTIAL SALE OF SATELLITE DISHES BE REFERRED TO STAFF FOR STUDY. (3) ASKED ABOUT THE EMPLOYEE SURVEY. ECH WILL HAVE RESULTS AT MARCH 10 MEETING. SUPERVISOR KOHINKE• (1) THANKED TERRY HARRINGTON AND PI~I-NNING STAFF FOR ATTENDING CO MEETINGS WITH HIM. (2) 1'HAIVI~D TIM GUBALA FOR TOUR OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SITES; (3) THANKED EAC FOR LUNCHEON. SUPERVISOR EDDY: (1) ANNOUNCED HE WILL ATTEND LEGISLATIVE DAY ON THURSDAY. (2) ANNOUNCED THAT SALEM WILL BE TOINING THE RESOURCE AUTHORITY L. CITIZENS' CO1VIlI~NTS AND COMIVIiJNICATIONS NONE M. REPORTS BT;T MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FII,E AFTER DISCUSSION OF ITEM 6 UW 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Proclamations Signed by the Chairman 5. Accounts Paid -January 1992 6. 1991 Economic Activity Report N. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.1-344 A (7) TO DISCUSS SPECIFIC LEGAL MATTER CONCERNING DIXIE CAVERNS LANDFILL AND EPA; (1) TO DISCUSS ASSIGNMENT OR APPOINTMENT OF SPECIFIC PUBLIC OFFICERS, APPOINTEES OR EMPLOYEES. EGK MOTION AT 5:40 P.M. URC WHOM LEFT AT 5:41 P.M.I O. CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE SESSION R-21192-8 BI.~T MOTION AT 630 P.M. AYES-BLJ,EGK,HCN,LBE ABSENT-HOM P. ADJOURNMENT AT 6:31 P.M. o~ ROAN kF z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~n~~~ ~ ,~ a C~~~n~ ~ ~a~, s8 SFSQUICENTENN,P~ ~ Bcaan(ul8cginnmg ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FEBRUARY 11, 1992 ALL-AM~I~A C j i ~~9 ~8 ~9 Re lar Welcome to the Roanoke County Board of Supeh fourth Tuesday atg3.00 meetings are held on the second Tuesday and t m on the fourth Tuesday of each p.m. Public hearings are his schedule will be announced. month. Deviations from A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 P.M.) 1, Roll Call. 2, Irnocation: The Reverend Branan G. Thompson Colonial Avenue Baptist Church 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag. B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS C. PROCIAMAZ'IONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND AWARDS i D, NEW BUSINESS Position on the Appalachian 1, Consideration of County COUNTY Power Line. (ELMER C. HODGE, ADMINISTRATOR) 2, Request for Adoption of Goals and PoliciUrf~ Fiscal Year 1992-93. (ELMER C. HODGE, CO ADMINISTRATOR) 3, Request from Transportation and Safet3'lo ° Dates,ion to Amend Bylaws and Appointment Explra (WILLIAM G. ROSEBRO, CHAIRMAN) 4, Request for Authorization to Pay Cert ORNE al Fees. (PAUL M. MAHONEY, COUNTY ATT ~ E, REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS F, REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS G, FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES H. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1, An Ordinance authorizing the Corneyance of a Well Lot located in the LaBellewue Subdivision of Roanoke County a to Lawrence E. McMahon. (CLIFFORD CRAIG, UTILITY DIRECTOR) 2. An Ordinance amending and reenacting Section 9-21, Article II, Vir inia Statewide Fire Pre Lion relating Ito the Chapter 9, Fire Preventio ~~ LIGHT, DEPUTY FIRE Marking of Fire Lanes. AND RESCUE CHIEF) 3. Ordinance authorizing the Lea a e Treatment Plant Portion of the Old Starkey Sew g Property to the Valley Soccer Club. (CONTINUED FROM NOVEMBER 19, 19911 (PAUL MAHONEY, COUNTY ATTORNEY) I. APPOINTMENTS 1. League of Older Americans Advisory Council 2. League of Older Americans Board of Directors 3. Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission 4. Planning Commission 5. Roanoke Valley Regional Solid Waste Management Board (. Roanoke Valley Resource Authority 7. Transportation and Safety Commission J. CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSE ~E AND ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO BE R 3 WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION IN LITHE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW ~ DIS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WII.L BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILI• BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. 1, Confirmation of Committee Appointments to the Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals, the Grievance Panel, and the Library Board. 2. Adoption of a Resolution requesti abandon a lportion of Department of Transportation to Route 601. 3. Request for Acceptance of Huntridge Road and Golden Circle into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. 4, Acceptance of Sanitary Sewer Facilities serving the Orchards. 5. Adoption of a Resolution requesting that the Virginia Department of Transportation decrease tof Colonia mit and prohibit tractor-trailers on portions Avenue. reciation to Lingerfelt 6. Adoption of a Resolution of App Associates for supporting the Easter Seal Summer Concerts at Valleypointe Park. B. REPORTS AND ~TQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS I„ CITIZENS' CO11~~NTS AND COINIlVIUNICA1'IONS 4 M. REPORTS 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Proclamations Signed by the Chairman 5. Accounts Paid -January 1992 6. 1991 Economic Activity Report N. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.1-344 A O. CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE SESSION p. ADJOitRNMENT s A-21192-1 ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER AT A REGULAR MEETING OF T OANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION C NTER COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE R February 11, 1992 MEETING DATE: Consideration of County Position on Proposed AGENDA ITEM: Transmission Line Appalachian Power Company COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND the Board of Supervisors directed At their November 19 meeting, the APCO proposal staff to prepare a notice of protest regarding to site a 765 kv power line within a 300 meter corridor th hlgoard Catawba Magisterial anninlcstaff and Planni ng Commission review requested that the P1 g the APCO proposal. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION Commission meeting the staff At the February 4, 1992 Planning presented to the Commission a brief overvfrom the power line anThe summary of the expected impacts resulting staff discussed the power line's expected impact on the Pa°p°the Catawba Rural Historic District, the Route 785 Scenic Byw y, Smith Gap Landfill and the residences within the proposed corridor. Several members of the public also spoke to the Commission on this issue. A transcript of the Commission's comments is attached. Staf f has worked with APCO nt twould s have otoa inc ude o both tthe An overall staff assessme roblems associated with the APCO potential benefits as well as p proposal. Staff has not anaaddress that eissuer the transmission line and our concerns do not Potential benefits include (1) APCO's contention that there is a strong need for the transmission line; (2) the potential economic development benefit from the additional electricity; (3) the proposed line would provide a backup in case of power outages. There are several serious concerns associated with the project. 1 the proposed route adjacent to the present They include: ( ) (3) transmission line; (2) the impact to the Catawbaa Rur 1f Historic the impact to the community including ...,v -~ the Route 785 Scenic Byway, and residences within the District, the existing line, both lines could corridor; (4) by paralleling go out in instances such as a natural disaster. The Board of Supervisors may consider several alternatives: Appalachian Officials have been helpful in trying to minimize the impact to Roanoke County. They will be present at the February 11 meeting to make a presentation and answer questions the Board of Supervisors may have. Citizens from the community are also planning to attend. 1. Full support of the project 2. Take no position and remain neutral 3, Oppose the project by registers nge~~e~ eof protest and legal 4. Fully oppose the project by action If alternative 4 is chosen documentation ttor prese t our positions to prepare the necessary This action will take wasbFebruary 17 t 1992t1 Howeverhean article deadline for oppositio in the February 7 edition of The Roanoke Times and World News stated that the deadline has been extended to May 18, 1992. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: This is a difficult issue and APCO is a good corporate citizen. However, I am asking the Board to insist that there be no impact on either the citizens or the landfill. ~~~ ~° Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ------------- ------------------------------- VOTE cc: ACTION Approved (x) Motion by' "~~'""' ~' N~ ckens motion To with'--"' "'^+"'P of Protest Eddy Denied ( ) - Johnson Received ( ) to SCC and remain neutral gohinke Referred ( ) Minnix To ( ) Nickens File Paul Mahoney, County Attorney Don Myers, Assistant County Administrator John Hubbard, Assistant County Administrator Terrance L. Harrington, Director, Planning & Zoning No Yes Abs X x x x x ~~ Discussion of APCO Power Line Proposal Ms. Chappelle: My personal comment is that I would like to solicit the help of those of you who know more since we need a good recommendation f er toh asko ou tof help me smake the certainly not versed as some of you are and I would dust hk Y best recommendation to the Board. Mr. Robinson: Quite honestly Mr. Chairman, the few questions that have been answered has generated so many questions that are unanswered that any co~m n t ~ amaking anyacomment for or against, would be both arbitrary and uneducated so I Mr. Gordon: First of all APCO is a business which miPpbenefit from what1SI'vel seen tof other needed resource and has done so at a very econo power companies, so I commend them on that. This day and age you tonl ehave to notibce170 as sensitive as it is and we're all seeing change in our environment, y Y degree weather in February to notice dramatic weather ri rings wa be and my comprehension. relationship is with the environment and how that s happe g Y Y I feel very strongly about trying to protect the environm en benefit is not worth the cost that impact on this power line to me is not justified--being th will be incurred upon Roanoke County citizens; that cost isbelieve the tech ololgy n the future one of the people termed it as the rape of the land. I will probably advance far enough that we'll see things far asttear n wup the landtthat we've got back down to earth stations with a lot less impact a g here already. I believe that that would be a beteeCounnCe I seeano actual benefith1I woupld be line across and tearing up the land m Roanok ty extremely opposed to another power line that would beret the visual viewshed of the valley we live in. I simply don't see a need; the value is not t Mr. Witt: I've got some real concerns about a whole e wateroshed at ~Carvins Coveno~ I educated on this, but so what. One, the concern with th understand it, the towers are going right by Carvins Cove• tervsuh tl e I don'ts ee how that can no way that they can keep the herbicides out of the city wa pp Y~ be done. The second thing is, and this is relative to the nto the wholehvalley, and one of lthe in this County to try to get business into this County, or best marketing tools that we have in this valley is the beauty of the valley. And now we are asked to sacrifice one of the major marketing tools thaalachian Power.1nIt doesn't make sense of attracting people into this area, to hand over to App 000 foot corridor through our landfill. If to me. I have a lot of concern about the 1, Appalachian Power makes the selection of where it goes, itffect d and I'm rsurde tthe Boa d of landfill in its function. The fill area certainly could be a Supervisors and the engineering folks in the County are going to address that in more detail. 2 ~-i The other concern I have is the conservation factor. ~ Bac Venthe o ls, ee didn't ha~er the fuel program for energy conservation because we didn t ha resources; there were threatened brownouts and blac eou le care about energy conservat on asI coast. Gradually that went away and now very few p p don't see a whole lot of programs in that area. And b e iceastoral a ndgother techniques of energy consumption, especially in the summer cycles, y g utilizing electricity over in the evening hours, and th electrical l nes, youlcan'ttstore electricity. reduce your demand which is the biggest problem wi So again, Roanoke County is being asked to subsid ittlehmoresenergy conseervationtriThope are demands. And I think the best solution to this is a 1 the comments I have. Mr. Massey: From my perspective, I'm very much pro-economic development and control development. I work in an industry that uses a l et used lthatl way. II know we'veugone though to Roanoke has a lot of positives, if rt s going to b power outages in our area that have been detrimen~ai a° a land usei mpact ashwelllt Ifaany positive economic impact for future use, I also look a other company was coming in with a proposal for this ttypook ttthat anddtreat it as a land use we would throw them right out the door. So we need if at all possible. In that respect, I am very much opposed meone lse's benefrt~ I agreeawith "raping the earth," and particularly Roanoke County for so Mr. Gordon about future technology; there should be a way to generate this type of power without stringing this type of eyesore across the country. Ada be' mademmandat ry nwith n lthe I think they are very appropriate, and if all possible, sho Roanoke Valley. Our company recently installed the iceri m co menu. o Marianm anythingl elses a very positive impact on electrical usage. Those are y Don? Mr. Witt: One other comment, if the major reason to runt rel that lin a has so little rimpact because of the fact that there is another line going along , compared to what is being proposed, that I don't think that's a valid reason. Appalachian Power Company PO Box 2021 Roanoke. VA 24022-2121 03 985 2300 ~/ APPALACHIAN POWER Mr. Elmer L. Hodge County Administrator County of Roanoke P.0. Box 29800 Roanoke, Virginia 24018-0798 February 11, 1992 Dear Mr. Hodge: Smith Gap Landfill This is to advise you that based upon the results of the preliminary studies completed by Roanoke County's consultant, Olver, Inc., and Appalachian Power Company's staff, there appears to be a line route within the preferred corridor of the proposed 765KV Wyoming-Cloverdale project that will cause very little impact, if any, to the life of the Smith Gap land- fill. Assuming that the Virginia State Corporation Commission certifies the preferred corridor as proposed, Appalachian is prepared to fully support construction of the proposed 765KV line through the properties of the Smith Gap landfill as indi- cated in our February 11, 1992, meeting with Roanoke County's staff and Olver, Inc. As I and my staff have verbally stated, Appalachian stands ready to cooperate to the fullest extent possible with Roanoke County before the SCC to ensure that the 765KV Wyoming- Cloverdale project will have minimal impact on the Smith Gap landfill project. Sincerely, -=---~_ C. A. Simmons Vice President CAS:et J-/ POWERLINE PRESENTATION FEBRUARY 11, 1992 ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS overview American Electric Power, (Appalachian Power Company's parent), plans to build a 765,000 volt power line from Wyoming Station, near Oceana, West V Thislpower 1 ne r will Station, near Roanoke, Virginia. enable AEP to sell electricity to Virginia Power Company for use on the eastern seaboard. AEP has no mandate to sell electricity in eastern Virginprofithforr AEPlstockho ders is entirely different utility. the sole motive behind this project. According to the AEP Report to Shareowners for 1990, the most rapidly growing segment of American Ewhereby Power's market is that of wholesale energy, electricity is sold at a special rate to other utilities. AEP's sales to unaffiliated utilities have increased by 20 billion kilowatthours since 1987. But in 1990, several wholesale contracts with unaffilia an Aannual n loss C in dAEP utilities expired, representing to the Report, "The revenue of $183 million. According Company [AEP] is attempting to replace the terminated sales with new transactions with unaffiliated utilities." "If the above terminated long-term and short-term sales are not replaced, the Company' s~~ re For s f°scale 1991,n AEP rreportedl an be adversely impacted. increase in net profits of 0.3 percent. Vepco), is a state-regulated Virginia Power Company, Vepco announced utility serving eastern Virginia. In 1988, that it would buy electricity from other producers whenever it was cheaper than building its own generating fespecially Utility building programs are considered risky, when faced with high demand growtohWerafromfpre-existing marginal rate of return. Buying rofits by reducing the generators can maximize utility P financial risk associated with such facilities. In the summer and winter of 1989, Virginia Power faced critical load levelortales weredet etsresultatofg climactic Although these sh g anomalies, the State Corporation Commission censured the management of Vepco for poor planning, citing the company's inadequate contingency plans for abnormal situations. Accordingly, Vepco decided to purchase ever-increasing amounts of eleeasecits reliance on suchcpower from 16%ain expects to incr 1990 to 27o in 2010. In March 1990, Apco and Vepco announced an agreement to jointly construct new transmission facilities which will reinforce Apco's ability to transfer power to the eastern part of the state. The entire project consists of a 110- mile, 765 kv line between Wyoming Station in We 500Vkvgline and Cloverdale Station in Virginia, an 88-mile, from the Joshua Falls Station to Vepco's North Anna Station, and a 14-mile, 500 kv line between the North Anna and Ladysmith stations. The%cost of the project is est Am coed the $450 million dollars, 580 of which will be paid by p rest by Vepco. Clearly, the claim by Apco that this project will enhance its ability to serve southwest Virginia is Minerals In fact, in 1991 the Virginia Department of Minpatterns and and Energy issued a survey, Virginia Energy Trends, that refutes this claim. In a detailed disc While of the Wyoming-Cloverdale project, the report states, the new lines will not directly serve Apco greatlye improve area in southwest Virginia, they transfer capability from the west." It should come as no surprise that American Electric Power is eager to increase its transmission capability to eastern Virginia. Electricity is a $4.5 billion business in the Old Dominion. Vepco customers account for 710 of it. Energy Conservation It should come as no su conservation. AWhilesmajor particularly interested in energy ressive utilities across the country are instituting agg conservation programstion t e1 REP atl t planningfoa radical power line construc , expansion of its transmios r ms ~c AEP Would shave yno nreasonl to similar conservation p g expand. But then~of its servicesarea, on lucrative sales to utilities outside For example, both Vepco and Apco offer residential audits. Such audits are performed by utility energy technicians, who Dur°nge the mperioda 1981 to 11989PrVepco energy savings conducted 16,000 of these audits. Apco conducted 126. Successful conservation programs currently in use center around utility-sponsored sales of energy-efficient light bulbs, and rebates to customers who purchase approved energy efficient appliances. Such programconsumptionh of effective, resulting in decreases in energy up to 30 0. Obviously, the energy resources of our region are too important to be mismanaged royerlyc managi g ourb energy, the expanding its market. BY P P construction of new generation and transmission facilities can be held to a minimum. Economic Benefits Apco has stated that the Wyoming-Cloverdale project will be beneficial to the economy of this region. BY building this transmission line, Apco claimsto t build n new Independent Power Producers, (IPP's), generating facilities in southwest Virginia. These IPPS will generate electricity for sale to Theerconstructionusand Apco's transmission capability. operation of these coalnindustry result in high-paying jobs and will boost the Coastal Power Productions, a Roanoke-based IPP, recently received permission from the Department Virg niay to build a generating fcannot be constructed without a However, the facility uaranteeing transmission access-a contract with Apco g to R. guarantee which Apco refuses to ma the power rcompany can Daniel Carson, a spokesman for Apco, foresee no need for power generation in southwest Virginia. Health Risks Much has been written concerning the health risks associated with exposeSe t Currentlepidemiologicalast d es emitted by power lin indicate that children who live near power lines deve the leukemia at twice the national recommendedt t at ~ low- Environmental Protection Agency frequency electromagnetic radiation be classified a "probable carcinogen." While medical research has not yet identified the causal le statisti a 1 data exz.st ttomjustify fields and cancer, amp dean of Public Heart alarm. Indeed, Dr. David Carpenter, compares the at the State University of New York at Albany, study of electromagne30 earsaago. and cancer with that of cigarettes and cancer Y Summary AEP estimates that r he Of mcourse~vitdplansr toe recover cost $450 million dolla this cost by increasing Forest, Appalachian1Trai111andpNew the Jefferson National River, natural treasures symbollic of the quality oin revery southwest Virg h Which tit passese There isoevery indication community throug that this project wilt b ed etrimental to the people of t is region. It must be PP ., BIBLIOGRAPHY American Electric Power Company. 1990. 1990 Report to Shareowners. Columbus, Ohio Randolph, J. 1991. Virginia Ener Patterns'aDdvisionsofVEnergya Richmondnt of Mines, Minerals, and Energy (DMME) Virginia Appalachian Power Company. 1991. Illuminator magazine. Roanoke, Virginia Illllllllilillllllilllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllillilllllllllilllllllillll AGENDA ITEM NO. ~ -~ ~ APPEARANCE REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE / CITIZENS COMMENTS SUBJECT: ~~P~ C /"70 ~ O t ~G S ~ . y . ~o uJ~iC. L /~ ~ 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 1'~IE LECTERN, I WII.L GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR TIC 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 vnth 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 NAIVE ~ o v ADDRESS Q Gs ~D~v T PHONE / ~.Z ? ~.~ _S t, S' ~vt I1111111111111111111111111111111~111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111~11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 AGENDA ITEM NO. APPEARANCE REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARING -ORDINANCE CITIZENS COMMENTS SUBJECT: ~ 01,t) ~.~-at 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. WI-~N CALLED TO THE LECTERN, I WII.L GIVE MY NAIVIE 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 ADDRESS PHONE I1111111111111111111111111111111~11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 AGENDA ITEM NO. ~ -' / APPEARANCE REQUEST FOR -PUBLIC HEARING -ORDINANCE -CITIZENS COMMENTS SUBJECT: ~o ~ ~ R ~,~ ~v ~ 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 WII.L 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 _ i~a/~ ~Q~T k . ~ ~'~~ ~. < ADDRESS 3 5- ~ A ~ , s ,L ~ dvt,~sa~~,. PHONE 3 ~ y~~- ~ ~~~ ~ G ~ ~ 11111111111111111111111111111111~111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 iiii~iiiir~ii~ii~~~~i~~i~iiii~iiiiii~i~iiii~i~ii~iiiii~iiiiii~i~iiiiii~ii~iiii AGENDA ITEM NO. , -~- I APPEARANCE REQUEST FOR _PUBLIC HEARING _ORDINANCE_CITIZENS COMMENTS ,-, SUB ECT: ~' Cr'~ J 1 ~'~~~ ~~ .~. - ~ ; r i 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 TIC RECORD. I AGREE TO ABIDE BY TIC GUIDELINES LISTED BELOW: ^ Each speaker will 6e 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 GNE TO THE CLERK NAME ADDRES S PHONE 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111! AGENDA ITEM NO. ~ ~ APPEARANCE REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE i/ CITIZENS COMMENTS ~~~~ _ ~ - ,~ ~ .~ ~~ r ~, SUBJECT. r ~,~ ,_ -~ ~_~_ ~ , ,, ~-_.~ ~ . ~. -~_ 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. VV~IEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, I WII.L 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 wilt 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 vv~th 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 11111111111111111111111111111111~111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 I11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 AGENDA ITEM NO. "~- APPEARANCE REQUEST FOR -PUBLIC HEARING -ORDINANCE -CITIZENS COMMENTS SUBJECT: ~'-~~,~ t~:=u~~, :~,, 1°~~~~..~~ -- /~;:±~r~ ~~-~- ~~ 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. W~IEN CALLED TO T'HE LECTERN, I WII.L GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR TIC 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 ADDRESS PHONE __ ;~ j1° 11111111111111111111111111111111~111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111'illllllllllllllllllllllllillllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll AGENDA ITEM NO. APPEARANCE REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE `/ CITIZENS COMMENTS _-~ t , ,_ -_ ., SUBJECT: ~~`~~~' ~ l' ~T~~~~~;-~,~ ~, 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 1'HE LECTERN, I WII.L 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 vnth 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 L-~-- ~ 11111111111111111111111111111111~111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 r ill~llllllllllllllilllllllllllllllilllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllillllll AGENDA ITEM NO. APPEARANCE REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARING -ORDINANCE e CITIZENS COMMENTS SUBJECT: r> (~ti ~~ 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 WII..L GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR TIC 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 o*~ aaj issue, and will enforce the rule u less 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 n~o ~ ~~ ADDRESS ~ ~-~-- ~~-~ PHONE ~g~ - 4r~~ 11111111111111111111111111111111~111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 SUMMER 1990 ]ohn M. Mathis, M.D., M.5 (Radiologic Physics) Radiology Lewis-Gale Clinic, Inc. MEDICAL PROCEEDINGS/LFWIS-GALE CLINIC , HEALTH S ASSOCIATED MAGNETIC FIELDS Electric and magnetic fields, common at home and work, have now been added to the list of poten- tiallyharmfulagents. Epidemiological studies show reproducible statistical evidence of an increased incidence of leukemia in children who live in close association with power line transformers and adults who have work related electric and magnetic field exposure. Research data has slowly accumulated that reveal cellular responses to electric and magnetic fields once thought too weak to be of significance. Our economic, industrial and social dependence on electrification seems to be approaching a showdown with the potential health hazards and their attendant legal ramifications. .~ - / WITH ELECTRIC AND Possible biologic and health affecu of electromag- neticfields have been postulated for many years (at least since the 1950's). Awareness has been relatively slow in developing for a number of reasons. First, the energy associated with the electric and magnetic fields produced by natural and man-made sources are relatively low level. They are unable to break chemical bonds or ionize molecular strucrures as are x-rays, gamma rays, or cosmic rays. Therefore they do not alter DNA and are, under most circumstances, unable to create permanent cellualr damage or change. Because these electric and magnetic fields are "nonionic", health affects were believed to be related'to simple tissue heating. The Navy, being aware of this potential, set an allowable upper limit of exposure at 10 tnilliwatu per square centimeter in the mid 1950's.z This level of exposure was subsequently Public awareness and concern about the health adopted by the American National Standards Institute hazards associated with electric and magnetic fields has (ANSI) and has been utilized as an acceptable upper limit grown in this country over the last decade. Recently the of exposure since that time.' This level of exposure Office of Technology Assessment of the United States remains controversial and is between 10 and 1,000 times Congress issued a paper on the biologic effecu of electric higher than allowable in many Soviet Bloc countries.' As there are no measurable direct side effects from and magnetic fields which contained the following the exposure to low level electric and magnetic field opening statement: "Electric and magnetic fields pro- energy, information about biologic effects and their duced by electric power systems have recently been otenttal hazards has been slowly obtained. Additionally, added to the list of environmental agents that area there are obvious economic interests by the power potential threat to public health."' With the growing tom anies as well as manufacrurers of electrical devices awareness of a possible health risk, it behooves each of such as televisions and video dis la terminals. The P y us to be more aware of the medical and biologic data that military ~ numerous radar and transmittor installations has been accumulated concerning this topic. which produce quite strong electric or magnetic fields An electric field is simply a description of the force at various sites in the United States. These could also be produced on a charged object by other charges in its adversely affected by changes in allowable exposure or vicinity. The intensity of the electric field is proportional roof of definite health risk to low level field a osure. ma etic P ~ 16 to the magnitude of the force. In a like manner, a gn field describes the force produced on a charged object by moving charges. The intensity of both types of fields increases with increasing charge quantity and is inversely proportional to the distance between the charged objecu or conductors carrying charge. Electric and magnetic fields are commonly found in our environment. Some are narurally occurring and many are man-made. We all are aware of the steady magnetic field that exists about the earth due to the composition of its core. This is easily demonstrated through the use of the common compass which allows us to determine north -south directions. The sun also contributes to naturally occurring electric and magnetic fields as do local thunderstorms with their attendant lightning and heavy electrical discharges. Common man- made sources of electric and magnetic fields include power transmission lines, housewiring and numerous electric appliances (electric drills, mixers, hair dryers, etc). Additionally, there are electric and magnetic fields produced by electric blankeu, waterbed heaters, tele- visionsandthe video display terminals of our computers. Television and radio stations are also a source of electro- magnetic radiation. Power Fields The term power fields is used to describe electric and magnetic fields associated with power distribution networks. These may represent the extremely high voltage networks (up to 750 kv) which are found criss- crossing the United States on huge metallic support structures. However, electric and magnetic fields are also produced by the smaller distribution systems on tele- phone poles that traverse every neighborhood and by electrical wiring that is found in each of our homes and businesses. The first strong clues that indicated that there might be risks associated with electric and magnetic fields came from the study of epidemiology. In 1974 in Boulder, Colorado, Nancy Wertheimer began to study factors that might possibly be linked to the cause of childhood leukemia. She explored the homes and neighborhoods of children known to have leukemia to the greater Denver and Boulder areas. She forruitously noted that a number of the homes were closely associated with large power transformers (the cylindrical metallic cannisters that hang from power poles in most neighborhoods). Eval- MEDICAL PROCEEDINGS/LEWIS-GALE CllNIC I SUMMER 1990 uation of available data ultimately sho[wec~~en who that he had confirmed the in tial work b Dr Nancy was a 2-3 times increased leukemic rate lived in the houses immediately aond house immedia ely leukemia in children due toamcreased exposure to elec- transformers.Onlythe first or sec adjacent to the transformers seemed to carry the tric and magnetic fields." increased risk. It was ultimatelormer had t r lr es ivey with electr c andamagnetic fieldrexposure dealt wi h ing from the step-down transf P °gr diminishing current as each ho and second houses were several as ides during this kim period that also revealed wires from the circuit. The firs in the zone where there ""e eforewere subject to the c 1 workers asswelil. Thomas,f et~al found 3 times distribution wires and th maximum magnetic fields. These idem oloTe pn 979a manufacturebor repairoof electronic equipment. The in the American Journal of Ep SY Dr. Wertheimer and her colleag uL, De~mLlicai ons the general population if the workdexpos0urenw Ot or physicist) were concerned abo P regarding the association of increased leukemic rates in more years.u It was a osuret to various chemicak includ- children with the power distribution systems found in a wide variety of exp the greater Denver area. In an attempt is Publ c Health fgtm and ead and con ains a pine resin (colophony) her findings, she reviewed a 1950 U Service report correlating th ie ors between 20 and chemi al solvents commo ly usedein electronic indus- occupation in men in the age ca g y 65 years. She again found a n i current ma n etic fields. These two materials are known to cause cancer in ani- workers exposed to alternat g ~ This included workers in p°`~'ene lectraciansswelders evidence of increased risk to the exposure of le tgcal telephone linemen, power linem , and subway motormen.b and magnetic fields than did other reports wit out The information provided by D hWmedicial literature ~SODurmg the tune that epidemiologic data was being to be little discussed or noted in t until 1982. At that time Dr. Samuel o Smote De arstment States and abroad who were evaluating theibiologic and epidemiologist in the Washing[ P land effecu of electric and magnetic fields on cell and animal of public Health) published a report in the New Eng Journal of Medicine that indicated again fields and the (an orthopaedic surgeon and resear hr s~entistBat the association between electric and magn incidence of leukemia as compared with the general VA Medical Center in Syracuse, Ne osure)toeeectrical population.' Dr. Milham reported that 10 of 11 occupa- correlation between healing and exp [ions which had potential increase a` d°at rof leukemia fieldslcoulld induce deep aneschesiain salama~ndersl" and magnetic fields also had an ele in comparison to the gener ~lp °and tele hone linemeny hart fracture healing in humans could be promoted with included electricians, po P and motion picture projecth n~ c (Mnt ° rPu~tms Wh ~h the arppliRot1° Adey and his colleagues at the Brain jectionists are exposed to g are used to develop the light necessary in the projection Angeles demonstrated that weak ectromagnet c fields apparatus.) In the same year a gro forn~P ublished in Ian et magneticf fieldsewere varied or modulated at extremely University of Southern Cah p cles er second). that they had found ~up~°iatt d with electric and mag- The frequency range vused in th r exPerun nis includes leukemia in work e 1982 and the frequency used in power distribution fields (60 l~ netic fields in Los Angeles County. Between 1985, there were reports of increased incidence of hryade reviouslobee held nlikely than wf eak lect csor leukemia in electrical workers in New Zealand, Canada, P y and England. A similar increased inciden re inrimate 1 membraneedue tooth large static membrane potential in coal miners n the United States whoa y associated with electric and magnransforlmeas iin the o ogy, however~relvealeed thahtherelwere small protesm large number of power lines and t tunnek.° i0 By 1986, ~ ° al and electronic workers~Dr. into hetextracellular fluid. f These protein sitands are risk of cancer in electric SUMMER 1990 18 MEDICAL PROCEEDINGS/LEVJIS-GALE CLINIC coated with glycoproteins and act as receptors for weak electrical and chemical stimuli chat are ultimately transmitted through the cell membrane to the interior of the cell. Dr. Adey's work revealed that extremely low fre- quency fields (or radio frequency fields between 150 and 450 megahertz which were modulated in the extremely low frequency range) created numerous effects on and within cellular systems. This included: 1. Increased calcium flow across the cellular mem- brane (chemical transmitter action). Z Altered protein kinase activity within the cell. (Energy transport system) 3. Disrupted gap junctions. (Intercellular communica- tion and regulation) 4. Decreased T-lymphocyte cytotoxiciry. (Immunologic competence) 5. Increased ornithine decarboxylase activity. (Often elevated in tumors) Several of the cellular effects described above have potential for cancer promotion. The possibility of cancer promotion (allowing cancer cells to grow more easily) as opposed to cancer initiators (those things that may alter chemical structure of DNA within the cells them- selves) fits the changes that would be expected with low energy electromagnetic fields. Disruption of gap junctions diminish the ability of celk to communicate with neighboring cells resulting in cell autonomy and potential cancer promotion. Decreased T-lymphocyte cytotoxiciry is an alteration of the immune system which also might allow easier cancer growth. Ornithine decarboxylase is an enzyme which is found elevated in cancer cells. It tnayalso beelevated attunes innon-cance cells but its presence is always viewed with suspicion To this point, the discussion has primarily deal with the electric and magnetic fields associated wit power distribution systems or research studies whit have looked at fields chat vary at extremely low fre quencies similar to chose found in our 60 cycle Curren It should be noted that there are numerous other source of electric and magnetic fields found in our everyda environment. Television sets and video display cermina used in computers are ubiquitous with millions no present both in the home and in most workplaces. The produce electric and magnetic fields which are due t the internal mechanisms that create picture produccio An electron beam which is focused on the surface either the television or the video display terminal sore is guided by electric and magnetic fields which vary the horizontal direction at approximately 15 kiloher (15,000 cycles per second) and in the vertical directi at 60 hertz. In the past decade multiple reports ha come forward relating increased numbers of mist ranges in those women who have heavy daily exposu to video display terminals. Though most of these repor have been sporadic, the Kaiser Permanence HMO in California evaluted 1,583 pregnant women between the years of 1981 and 1982 and found a 2 times increased incidence of miscarriage in women who worked in areas where there was a 20 hour per week or more exposure to video display terminals." Looking for associations of electric and magnetic fields to abortion, Nancy Wertheimer evaluated the rate of abortions associated with the use of electric blankets and waterbed heaters. She also found an increased incidence of abortion in the individuals using these devices.' Noting that there can be increased numbers of miscarriages with elevated body temperatures, she again looked in the Colorado area at women living in houses heated with ceiling cable heating devices. (This was a common heating method employed in the 50's and 60's when electric heating was inexpensive.) Pregnant women living in these situations also showed an increased number of abortions through the months when the cable heating would have been expected to have been employed (October through March).t9 Another common source of electric and magnetic field production is from local radio and television stations. A person standing outside in a suburban neighborhood (away from power distribution lines) will experience an ambient field of between 1 and 4 micro- wactsper square centimeter due to these emissions. The microwave ranges that we find in our kitchens have a permitted leakage at the surface of the microwave oven of 5 milliwatts per square centimeter. This is 50% of the allowable level set by the American National Standards Institute for tissue heating. Other common sources of electric and magnetic fields include portablehand-held telephones. The cellular telephones now in common use r operate in the 800 megahertz range and can produce between 5 and 10 milliwatts per square centimeter t power deposition in the region of the head. In 1989 h the Federal Communications Commission Office of h Engineering and Technology evaluated hand-held tele- - phones with 1-2 watt output.20 They found that none of c. the hand-helds studied exceeded the maximum limits s of 10 tnilliwatts per square centimeter. Based on these y data, exposures over the 10 milliwatt per square centi- ls meter level would be expected if power levels much w exceeded the 2 watt range. Maximum exposure with y the hand-held in a vertical position in front of the face o was noted along the surface of the eye. Recommenda- n. tions which came out of the study included the use of of the lowest possible power necessary for cotnmunica- en tion, operating with a remote antenna or hand micro- tn phone when possible, and tilting the radio away from u the face to remove the antenna from the immediate jux- on caposition with the eye. Cataract production is a known ve potential risk with exposure to high levels of radio ar- frequency energy (usually in the microwave range). re Cataracts have not been reported to be produced at the rs low field levels found with cellular telephone use. The Governments Role No new guidelines concerning energy levels or C definite risks have been established by governmental th agencies. A relatively slow involvement by governmental ul agencies can be expected for multiple reasons. First, it to is hard to produce and confirm data involving low o energy electric and magnetic fields. Some of the data S previously obtained is conflicting and many well known i scientists still support the idea that the only real risk li associated with electric and magnetic fields involve a i thermal or heating effect. The government has justly not wanted to over-react without appropriate evidence. r However, there are economic interests and legal implications which are also at work. A good example a involves the Houston Lighting and Power Company f which found itself in suit with the Klein independent school district over the construction of a 345 kilovolt power line which was to cross school property. The school board refused to grant Houston Lighting and Power Company aright-of-way and a suit resulted. The trial extended from 1981 to 1985. The trial ended with the jury awarding the Klein independent school district a total of approximately $42 million in damage and restoration fees and $25 million in punitive damages. The $25 million award was ultimately reversed by an appeals court which found that the power company was not trespassing while they were erecting the power line. Houston Lighting and Power Company ultimately had to reroute this line at a cost of an additional $8.5 million. Since the rerouting, a second suit was brought against Houston Lighting and Power Company by a family who lived on the power line right-of-way. The suit alleges a casual relationship between the power line and the development of a brain tumor in one of the family mem- bers. From this one example alone you can see that the economic and legal implications will be far reaching. Government regulations chat would affect allowable exposure to electric and magnetic fields would have adverse effect on the military. Two major examples of this include Project Sanguine and Project Pave Paws. In 1972 the Navy initiated Project Sanguine in Clam Lake, Wisconsin. This was an experiment in building an ELF (Extremely Low Frequency) antenna system to communicate with underwater submarines. Twenry- eight miles of conducting cable was buried underground in the Clam Lake region for this test project. If the tests were successful the Navy planned to bury 6,000 miles of cable in the northern Wisconsin region as final con- struction of the antenna system. This ELF antenna mechanism operated at a frequency of 72 hertz. In 1979 the Navy established a project by the name of Pave Paws in the upper Cape Cod, Massachusetts region. This is an over-the-horizon radar system which operates at a 450 megahertz carrier frequency. The 450 megahertz carrier is modulated at 18.5 hertz. Both of the above described Navy projects create MEDICAL PROCEEDINGS/LEWIS-GAI-E CLINIC ;h intensity electric and magnetic fields which are adulated in the extremely low frequency range (ELF). onsiderable public outcry was voiced when both of ese projects were attempted. Project Sangu~ enawmae timately scrapped with the Navy changing Project Seafarer. This antenna system was placed into peration late in the 1970's in the southwestern United tares. Project Pave Paws was not blocked and is today n operation. Some scientists belietndeed be utnknow- ving near these two systems may ngly participating in one of the largest biologic experi- ments concerning health hazards associates with ELF adiation. At any rate, it is quite obvious that govern- mental restrictions on the allowable limits for electric nd magnetic fields would have significant implications or the military. Conclusion SUMMER 1990 Numerous aspects of the possible health hazards related to electric and magnetic fields have been reviewed. Although there is considerable potential for error in the epidemiologic studies, it would seem that there has been reproducible evidence of increased levels of leukemia in children who live in close association with electric and magnetic fields created by power distribu- tion systems. The risk has been estimated at 2-3 times the normal incidence of leukemia (approximately 1 in 10,000). The preponderance of data concerning risks in adults also seems to weigh in favor of some increased risk, particularly in those individuals who have work exposure of electric and magnetic fields. It seems again that leukemia is the most common associated malig- nancy found with this exposure. Relative risks appear to be slightly lower in adults than they are in children. Additional promoting factors in the work environment such as chemical exposures are hard to factor out of the data involving adults making their estimate of risk less conclusive on epidetniologic grounds. Other risks associated with the exposure to electric and magnetic fields includes the potential for increased abortion. That is even harder to interpret than chat involving increased risk of cancer. Though there may be some real detectable risks, it is obviously small with reports indicating only scattered and isolated occurrences. Cataract production is also a known health hazard associated with radio frequency field exposure. At the present this can be tied only to high energy radio fre- quency fields which are not experienced in common or everyday work situations. Biologic research to date definitely confirms that there is a cellular sensitivity to low level electric and magnetic fields. Considerable additional research is needed to determine the significance of these cellular changes. We should expect, however, because of the 19 SUMMER 1990 zo MEDICAL PROCEEDINGS/LEVJIS-GALE CllN1C economic, legal and military implications that govern- ment funding of this research will be either scant or nonexistant. References 18. Wertheimer N, Leeper E: Possible effects of electric blankets and heated waterbeds on fetal develop- ment. Bioelectromagnetics 1986;7:13-22. 19. Wertheimer N, Leeper E: Fetal loss associated with two seasonal sources of electromagnetic field exposure. Am J Epidemiology 1989;129:220-224. 1. Biological Effects of Power Frequency Electric and 20. Cleveland RF, Athey TW: Specific absorption rate Magnetic Fields. Congress of the United States - (SAR) in models of the human head exposed to Office of Technology Assessment. May 1989. hand-held UHF portables radios. 2. Schwan HP: The absorption of electromagnetic energy in body tissue. Am J Phy Med 33, 370-404. 3. ANSI. American National Standards safety levels with respect to human exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (300 khz to 100 Ghz). New York, NY, IEEE, 1982. 4. Shandala MG, et. al.: Biological effects of electro- magnetic waves as the basis of standard setting for the general population in the USSR. ln: Prot 19th Gen Assembly Int Union Radio Sci Symp. Helsinki 1978, p 6. 5. Wertheimer N, Leeper E: Electrical wiring config- urationsand childhood cancer. Am J Epidemiology 1979;109:273-2.84. b. Wertheimer N, Leeper E: Adult cancer related to electrical wiring. Int J Epidemiology 1982;11:345- 355. 7. Mitham S: Mortality from leukemia in workers exposed to electrical and magnetic fields. N Engl J Med 1982;307:249. 8. Coleman M, Bell J, Sheet R: Leukemia incidence in electrical workers. Lancet 1983;1:982-983. 9. McDowell ME: Leukemia in electrical workers in England and Wales. Lancet 1983;1:246. 10. Pearce NE, Shepard RA: Leukemia in electrical workers in New Zealand. Lancet 1985;1:811-812. 11. Sauitz DA, et. al.: Case Control Study of Childhood Cancer and Exposure to 60 Hz Magnetic Fields. Am J of Epidemiology 1988;128:21-38. 12. Thomas TL, et. al.: Brain tumor mortality risk among men with electrical and electronic jobs. J Nat Ca Inst ~~1987;79:233-238. r 13./Brodeur P: Annals of Radiation -The Hazards of ~ Electromagnetic Fields. The New Yorker. June 12, 1989, pp. 51-85. 14. Adey WR: Biological effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation. In: Lin, JC (ed.) Inter- action of Electromagnetic Waves with Biological Systems. New York: Plenam Press, 1988. 15. Adey WR: Tissue interaction with nonionizing elec- tromagnetic fields. Physiol Rev 1981;61:435-513. 16. Adey WR: Cell membrane: The electromagnetic environment and cancer promotion. Neurochem Res 1988;13:671-677. 17. Coldhaber MK, et. al.: The risk of miscarriage and birth defects among women who use visual display terminals during pregnancy Am J Indust Med 1988; 13:695-706. ,:~ FORTUNE •, ~., ~, ,. , , Dec. 31, 1990, pp. 80-85 Reprinted by permission from FORTUNE Magazine: (l~ r ` ~ . ~ (c) 1990 The Time Inc. Magazine Company. All rights reserved. tttttti ^ thaw ~` ^ The returns aren't in on possible risks from common electromagnetic fields, but utilities and VDT makers are responding. A few precautions may be worth taking. ^ Uy David Kirkpatrick N NOVEMBER, 65% of the voters in Washington's Whatcom County ap- proved ameasure limiting construction of new high-voltage power lines. Last summer a citizens' group in Monmouth County, New Jersey, forced a utility to table plans for an electric transmission line. School boards in Florida and elsewhere with buildings near power lines are closing off parts of their grounds to protect their kids. What's behind all this?Arising national fear of possible risks to health from the magnetic fields generated by electric cur- rents. It's a concern that has also renewed debate over the safety of the ubiquitous vid- eo display terminal (VDT). Other corpora- tions besides utilities are listening up: IBM recently told FoRrurve that it will reduce the strength of extremely low frequency (ELF) fields in all new-model VDTs after the end of ]991. The issue could also hurt property values near power lines and sidetrack high- tech advances like magnetic levitation trains that create strong fields. A growing body of evidence suggests that ELF electromagnetic fields-those with very long wavelengths-are worth worrying about, though utilities and computer mak- ers insist there is no proof that they do harm. (IBM executives say they believe that all their existing terminals are safe and that the company is merely responding to cus- tomers' wishes.) But epidemiologists, who study the incidence of disease, are finding more and more situations where people ex- posed to ELF fields apparently have elevat- This 345-kilovok line in Middletown, New York, emits a field strong enough to light up fluorescent tubes-and landowner John Flipowski's anger. cancer. Epidemiology only identifies associ- ations between exposure and disease-nol ed rates of cancer, especially hrain cancer and leukemia. In several studies, higher rates seem to be associated with exposure levels not greatly different from those near some VDTs or many types of power fines. ELF fields have not been proved to cause 5lRS SCIENCE - 1991 Article #49 cause and effect An apparent correlation may be mere coincidence, the result of something else entirely. While laboratory work has shown that ELF fields can have biological effects, no conclusive evidence exists that those effects are dangerous. But despite enormous gaps and uncer- tainties in the data, even utility industry spokesmen like Ur. Leonard Sagan call the evidence "inconclusive but suggestive." Sa- gan, aphysician, heads electromagnetic field studies for the Electric Power Research In- stitute (EPRI), a group funded by utilities. An overview of ELF fields prepared for the congressional Office of Technology Assess- ment last year concluded, "The emerging evidence no longer allows one to categori- cally assert that there are no risks." Says Imre Gyuk, who supervises the Department of Energy's modest research effort into ELF fields: "There is clearly cause for concern but not for alarm." Some go further. Dr. David Carpenter, dean of the school of public health at the State University of New York's Albany campus, was once a skeptic. Now he says, "This is really harming people. In my judgment the present state of affairs is like the correlation between smoking and lung cancer 30 years ago." The causal relation- ship between smoking and cancer was clearly demonstrated only with extensive cellular and animal studies of the kind that have yet to be carried out with ELF fields. Those fields are created by AC current as it alternates back and forth 60 times a sec- ond in the circuits that carry it. (Direct cur- rent, produced by batteries, sets up negligible fields.) The more current flowing through a wire, the stronger the magnetic field. ELF fields arc so named because they fall at the low end of the electromagnetic spectrum. They carry much less energy than X-rays or even microwaves and cannot break chemical bonds or heat living tissue. NTIL RECENTLY physicists as- sumed that the infinitesimal amounts of energy in ELF fields couldn't affect the human body. Yet for years some orthopedic surgeons have used pulsed ELF fields to speed the healing of broken bones, though scientists do not fully understand why that works. They still believe that the fields are probably too weak to initiate cancer, but they are starting to examine the possibility that fields-especially their magnetic compo- nent-may encourage the growth of cancers actually caused by something else entirely. Are you being zapped? Even the most alarmist experts think that if there is any danger, it most likely comes from chronic exposure to ELF fields above levels routine- ly found almost anywhere (see box). Only measurements in your home or workplace will reveal your exposure, but you probably IieroRrea Assoc~nre Rick Teneli need not worry unless ahigh-current power line passes very near your home or your child's school, or you work in a room full of closely spaced VDTs-or you're a tele- phone or power company lineman. Paul Brodeur, a journalist whose books and arti- cles have played a major role in bringing this issue to public attention, advocates interim protective measures like rewiring, rerout- ing, or burying power lines near schools and beginning a national program to measure intensities in homes around the country. While many household appliances like hair dryers and electric can openers emit strong fields over a few inches, people use these devices only briefly and the fields drop off rapidly with distance. However, sleeping under an electric blanket is proba- bly imprudent-at least if you're pregnant. One study of 474 children in Denver, pub- lished in May, found that those whose mothers used the blankets during pregnan- cy were 2.5 times more likely to contract brain tumors than children whose mothers did not. While epidemiologists consider the more than doubled risk in this study significant, the absolute overall risk that a child will get cancer because its mother used an electric blanket remains minus- cule. (Some manufacturers have recently introduced blankets with reduced fields.) The risk from ELF fields appears much lower than from many already known car- cinogens. For children living within 130 feet of high-current power lines, the most worri- some studies put the risk of cancer at two to three times that for other children. The risk of lung cancer is 20 times greater for chain smokers than for the public at large. Epidemiologists have conducted 50 to 60 studies of human exposure to ELF fields and cancer. The majority have found at least some increased risk, albeit usually small. Nancy Wertheimer was the first to identify the possible problem in a study published in 1979. She examined the homes of 344 chil- dren in Denver who died of cancer before age 19 from 1950 to 1973 and compared them with the homes of 344 other children of similar ages from similar neighborhoods. Wertheimer noticed power distribution lines near the homes of a number of cancer victims. She classified those homes as high current or low current, depending on the way power was distributed in the immediate vicinity. She found that children in the high- current houses were two to three times as likely as the others to die of lymphomas, nervous system tumors, or leukemia. Expecting to discredit Wertheimer's re- sults, agroup set up by the New York State Public Utilities Commission hired another epidemiologist, David Savitz, to conduct a similar but more rigorous study. His report, published in 1988, in fact confirmed Werth- eimer's results, although the risks were slightly lower. The background level of ELF magnetic fields in most homes and offices is roughly one milligauss (mG). He reported a doubling of risk for leukemia and a 50% in- crease in all cancers among children who lived in homes where ELF fields, presum- ably from the nearby distribution wires, measured above 2 mG. He found that level in about 20% of the homes in the study. His results were what convinced David Carpenter of SUNY Albany. He oversaw the group that commissioned Savitz's re- search, and he fully expected a negative re- sult. Says Carpenter: "The Savitz study changed my entire view of the field, and it has enormous implications." Based on those results, he estimates that up to 30% of all childhood cancers may be attributahlc to ELF fields. "That's conservative," he adds. Newer data suggest that the hazards of working near ELF fields could be even greater. A 1988 study found that utility workers in East Texas were 13 times more likely to develop brain cancer than the gen- eral public. The researchers compared the occupations of 202 men who died from brain tumors in 40 East Texas counties be- tween 1969 and 1978 with a control group. The study lumped all utility workers togeth- er and did not classify them according to their actual exposure to ELF fields. Epidemiologists from the University of Southern California published a study this year showing that men with occupations like electrician and electrical engineer are ten times more likely to contract astrocytoma, a type of brain tumor. They interviewed virtu- allyall Los Mgcles men diagnosed with the two most common types of primary brain tumors from 1980 to 1984-272 in all. They found that electrical workers with ten years on the job had a higher risk of astrocytoma than those with only five years' experience. But they noted no increased risk for several other types of brain tumors. Perhaps the most disturbing occupational study was done by epidemiologists from Johns Hopkins University. In late 1989 they said they found a sevenfold in- crease in leukemia risk among young New York Telephone Co. cable splicers, who work inclose proximity to electric power lines. A team led by Genevieve Matanoski evaluated cancers among 51,000 linemen who worked at the company be- tween 1976 and 1980. The splic- erswere exposed to surprisingly weak fields-only 4.3 mG. Ear- ly data from an even larger na- tionwide study of linemen the team had conducted showed no such strong pattern. The New York work has not been com- pleted or published, partly for lack of funds. Representatives of the elec- tric power industry do not dis- miss these results. Says Sagan of EPRI: "In my mind the occu- pational data support the child- hood data, and that is what makes it necessary for us to take the whole thing seriously." But, he cautions, "to say an ac- tivity is associated with cancer doesn't prove anything about what the electromagnetic fields might be do- ing." Sagan, who will supervise $6 million in EPRI medical research on the subject in 1991, admits he is "befuddled." At the federal Environmental Protection Agency, Martin Halper doesn't feel so con- fused. He is the director of the analysis and support division in the Oflicc of Radiation Programs and spent many years in the Of- fice of Toxic Substances. Says he: "In all my years of looking at chemicals, I have never seen a set of epidemiological studies that re- motely approached the weight of evidence that we're seeing with ELF electromagnetic fields. Clearly there is something here." Sagan and others suggest that other so- called confounding factors could be causing the cancers in the epidemiological studies. Carcinogenic solvents, for example, might be acting on electricians, or PCBs on utility workers, or fumes from traffic sickening children who live near power lines. Replies Halper: "If people want to be naysayers, they'll never talk about the 60-some studies together. They'll pick out each one and fault it individually. But when you have this num- ber of studies, it's improbable, if not impos- sible, that a confounding factor could have invalidated all of them." So much for correlations, but what about causes? Cell biologists and others trying to figure out how fields might induce cancer have run up against layers of mysteries. Notes the Office of Technology Assessment report: "ELF fields appear to be an agent to which there is no known analogue." While scientists have shown that fields can have biological effects, they can find no clear re- lation of dose to response. A number of ex- periments with ELF fields have found so- called "windows of effect," ranges of frequency or intensity where an effect oc- curs-but at both lower and higher frequen- cies or intensities, it seems to disappear. S IF THE "windows" problem weren't enough, the relation be- tween exposure and the direction and intensity of the earth's static magnetic field also seems significant. The earth's field can vary tremendously even within a single room. Another rapidly devel- oping area of research is intermittency: Some data show that fields have a greater biological effect when exposure is not con- tinuous but instead switches on and off, as in an electric blanket adjusting its tempera- ture during the night. Other factors that may affect risk include duration of expo- sure, time of day, age, the shape of the waves in the field, the angle of the field, and the subsidiary fre- quencies that accompany a main frequency. Says Carl Blackman, an EPA research biophysicist whose pioneering work helped identify some of these variables: "It gets so com- plex, you just want to throw up your hands." Even so, Blackman and oth- ers are making discoveries that may be of tremendous signifi- cance. Much of their research points to the importance of the cell membrane, the barrier that separates the cell from the out- side world. Says Dr. Ross Adey, a neurologist whose work has fundamentally altered the ELF debate: "We have found that the cell membrane is indeed a very powerful amplifier of the energy in these very weak fields. It's a physical, not chemical, pro- cess." Adey speculates that dis- ruption of interaction between cells by ELF fields may be what contributes to some cancers. One possibly related effect, well established in experiments with animals: a reduction in the brain's production of mela- tonin, ahormone that seems to inhibit growth of some tumors. Until recently it was not widely known that VDTs, too, could be a source of expo- sure to ELF fields. In fact the ELF fields emitted by a VDT are produced not only by the flow of electric current but also by the electron gun that creates the image on the screen. The 40 million VDTs in the U.S. represent a significant source of exposure. A QUICK COURSE IN WHAT THEY CALL PRUDENT AVOIDANCE ^ Though it's still unclear whether extremely low frequency (ELF) fields contribute to cancer, you may want to play extra safe and not take un- necessary chances. Granger Morgan, a professor of engineering and public pol- icy at Carnegie-Mellon University, coined the term "prudent avoidance" to describe ways to limit ELF exposure without great cost or inconvenience. Most people move in and out of fields of varying intensity all day (see chart). Scientists believe that routine brief ex- posures, even if intense, probably do not put anyone at risk. However, it may be wise to avoid prolonged periods within a field. Studies have correlated cancer with long-term exposures above two to three milligauss. The background level in most homes is around one milligauss. After Morgan used a gauss meter to measure fields in his own house, he moved his son's bed to a different part of the boy's room. In general, the young seem more susceptible than grownups. Here are a few steps to take that may cut down on risk: ^ Keep your VDT at arm's length. Stay at least 28 inches from the front of it, and don't sit within three feet of the sides or back of anyone else's. The fields are more intense there. ^ Keep the kids a good three feet from the color TV, which creates the same kind of fields that VDTs do. ^ Reduce the use of electric blankets, especially during pregnancy. Try turning on the blanket only to heat up the bed and unplugging it before getting in. ^ Move electric clocks, radios, answer- ing machines, and other electrical de- vices that stay on continuously several feet away from your head when you are sleeping. Or use battery-operated ma- chines, which don't emit ELF fields. ^ Don't stand in front of the dishwasher or microwave oven while il's on. ^ As a very rough guideline, if you have small children or expect to get pregnant, don't buy a house within 150 feet of a local high-current line or 400 feet of a long-distance high-tension line. ^ Measure the fields in your home (or 40 30 20 10 In one day this man was exposed to fields from (l) a desktop computer,l2) a TV set,13) an ek3eMe blanket, (4- an ek~eMe razor,l5) a mkcrowave oven, I6) a heath~g/cooling emit, p) a power Nne and substation he walked past. prospective home). Some utilities will do this, or you can buy or rent an easy- to-operate gauss meter. For a price list with ordering information, send aself- addressed stamped envelope to Micro- wave News, P.O. Box 1799, Grand Central Station, New York, N.Y. 10163. 3 P.M. 12 MIDNIGHT 12 NOON 4 P.M .. g 0 g LL Color monitors generally emit higher fields than black and white ones do. The idea that VDT use might be danger- ous is not new. Clusters of miscarriages and other pregnancy problems have been report- ed for years among women using VDTs. In the mid-1980s, several lab experiments showed increased rates of malformation in mouse fetuses exposed to higher-frequency fields also associated with VDTs. Then a 1988 epidemiological study of a group of 1,583 California women found that clerical workers who used terminals more than 20 hours a week had a 2.4 times greater risk of miscarriage than women who didn't use the machines. The researchers, who worked for a big health maintenance organi- zation in Northern California, conceded the possibility that other factors such as job-re- latcd stress might account for the results. Soon thereafter, IBM helped fund alarge- scale investigation in Toronto of the effects of the higher-frequency fields on pregnant mice. The results, released in late 1989, as- suaged many fears. Scientists found no sta- tistically significant malformations. Other epidemiologists reported no increase in mis- carriages among VDT operators. Then, last summer, MacWorld magazine published the results of tests showing that some color monitors emit ELF ticlds of over 4 mG one foot in front of the screen and at higher Icvcls at the sides and back. In an ac- companying article, Paul Brodeur drew at- tention to disturbing research about ELF fields, including the Johns Hopkins study of Ncw York Telephone workers. The effects of the Mac World measurements have been dramatic. Apple Computer announced it will sponsor research to help assess risks. The Food and Drug Administration began testing field levels near VDTs. Besides IBM, some small VDT makers, including Sigma Systems and Tandberg Data, said they would soon sell monitors with reduced ELF emissions. Though many think her data suggest dan- ger for VDT users, Genevieve Matanoski, who conducted the Johns Hopkins study, still works with a personal computer and thinks it's too early to start worrying. "We're a long way from saying that VDT- type fields can be a health problem," she says. "Wc still don't know what kinds of ex- posures really matter." No studies have cx- plored whether any association exists between VDT's and cancer. OMPUTER COMPANIES can rnodify new VDTs at relatively lit- tle cost, but rising public fears could force utilities to spend bil- lions redesigning their distribution systems. Already two states, Florida and Ncw York, have adopted a 200 mG exposure maximum at the edge of power-line rights of way. While that level poses little obstacle for util- ities, Florida's Elillsborough County is fight- ing the state to force it lower. Onc study calculated that to bring transmission line ticlds down to a maximum of 100 mG at the edge of rights of way would cost $5 billion in Florida alone. But with all the uncertainties, science cannot now say, "Here you are in danger, and here you arc not," so money spent on reducing exposure Icvcls might he wasted. Says Louis Slesin, publisher of Microwave News, the most authoritative journal on ELF fields and health: "1'mrympathctic to the power companies not wanting to act now. We really don't know which variable we'd most want to control." 1Ie thinks mon- ey would be better spent on research into the basic mechanisms that cause biological effects. However, Slesin urges utilities to re- duce fields wherever it is not enormously ex- pensive. New power-line configurations can cut emissions up to 50°Jo. Not for at (east five and maybe ten years will scientists know enough to guide policy effectively for regulators and business. After parents sued t~ecause they believed nearby power lines endangered children, a judge ordered this school in Boca Raton, Florida, to keep kids from getting too close to the lines and to Mstall special monitors to measure magnetic field krvels. That's no consolation to the school board of Florida's Palm Beach County. In 1988 parents of children attending Sandpiper Shores Elementary School in Boca Raton sued to have the school closed because the parents believed it was dangerously close to power lines. The case is still not re- solved, and the board has spent about $175,000 so far to defend itself. Some school systems in situations like that in Boca Raton have turned around and sued power companies. In 1987 a Houston school district forced a utility to remove a transmission line that ran within 300 feet of three schools. Cost: $8 million. Good old market considerations may eventually create the strongest pressures to resolve the scientific uncertainty. Says Slesin of Microwave News: "The battleground is going to be property values." David Lewis, a real estate consultant in Houston, esti- mates that houses near transmission lines there have dropped about 25% in value over the past 18 months. He says living near pow- er lines is starting to seem as undesirable to buyers as living near a freeway. In Manhat- tan, areal estate risk advisory service has begun offering investors information about the location of electrical substations so they can avoid nearby property. Given the uncertainty about what is safe, managers ought to keep themselves and their employees informed. At this point workplace changes need not be dramatic. Even Dr. Robert Becker, a pioneer in re- search into the biological effects of ELF ticlds who has spoken out for years about possible dangers, wouldn't take draconian steps. Says he: "lf 1 were running a business where women operated PCs, I would at least have the ELF emissions measured. I'd make sure workers sat far enough back from the machines so they were below the 3 mG level. If a woman became pregnant, I'd take her off the machine for the duration of her preg- nancy. Further than that I would not go." ~ ~~~ 3 N ~ 'O ~ c ~ c > ~ 7 jp m~ t o 0 0 0 o C m~ ~ fl H > A a< a~ 1~ f~ tD M M v v r~ co N ~ C ` m y ' ~ io 7 > ~ _ ~ ~ L ~a m0 ~, y 0> cmva ~ m m o L Z ~ c W _ E ~ . ~ V N _C ~ ~ ~ C _C ~ Ohm ~ ~ d t~ p3 E -- a 2 - V jp O ~ an r ~ c ~ W M co ~ ° r. a> ~ =p >.`p `m .C v m Q v ~ ~ -o o ~ ~ C . i m W Z ~ v a ~ c 7 m h V _ m 3 ~ O ~ V U _ W OC1m ~ C ~ ' ~" `~° ~v ~m G Q m >. V~ Q~ O Q r ~ t9 m 0 ~ m O m Q i• O O O W m> ; p ~ Wiz ~ a ~ r m m;, ~ ~ C `o U ~ t0 7 o Ea Rm E m c w V m V M ~ a0 Q t0 t7 ~ c C O V .~ pf> O C d C` m r, O ~ ^ O O O ~ m ~ ~ rn i C 'd m .- O ._ 4 'J VN ~ y W ~ a 0 !~ 3 °~ ° G C1 ~ ~ W ~ m `°a_ ~ ~ ~ OC 3 0 0 0 2 ~ O L 1 0 ` C ^L ~~ j O L v fZ ~ c .o ` U ~ - L a C ,,1 ~ ~° ;c e O O c m~ E ~ L W LL lL ~ m >` O _a m 0 .~ m C r V ~ ~ ~ W ~ W W LL Q w ~ C C tC 7 ~ ;,, ~. m tat O x~ a•~ Z O ^~ f; W aA ~ is m m ~ ~ `o ~ d .~ ~` ~~- O -~-~ ~ .E W y L C y w ~ tW ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~~a ° o a m E~ m~ ~ ~m a m m ~ ~ V m ~ ~ d m ~ >. C .m D! ea ~ C L m O) ~ ~ m ~ O a f- Ip U d O m ~yw L •- C W ~N ~o r l0 V H t d ~` L ' m W C N G O W ~ m ~ i >, ~ ~« I ~ V ~ m = mio CQUW.O~~~~ WZ O ~ ~ ~ ~ d ~o mad ~ ui~ e`p Q 3 ~ m u a m E rn a io m• E vl c ~ ~ '~ m ep v ~ 3 a N ma , II ~'W~~II ~E ~` LL 'C c ca C V N N 7 r, ~ t9 p W O~ II y p W w 'A ~ m ~ m V m W R ~ t0 ~ C m W2 LL m LL ~ O> {y ~ 0 QiaW v cpNmL (n :n ~ c L t E m s ~g~~~ N N 0 ~ ? ~~ y H i/f H N ~ X J V d ~ y W a! _ C ~ C ~ q ~ ~ N L rn m L v C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ LL O ~ m ~ rv~~c ~OtO f7N vs 1ff 5 NL ''' p V m c °`~° ~oooov O H V!H v H . ~ • c~ v N ~p QC ~ yo - ro ~ -- U O ~+ o U m WA m _~A ti C Q a '° c ti t ~ a ~ ~ ~ . z ` ~ U m ~ c m a a~ ~ 0o o ~ ° a 'a ~ a m ~ _ o O ao ~ 0 0` O N m W U1 Z' _ y y O rn m ~ E UU a V 10 a~ ~ 7 ~ ~ ~ > ~ c4 m =~ ~Jmm p O O m W d 7 mQ J W F- N U_~ ~ N~ ~ O 0 0 ~ a cQ~~Q~...~~ '~aee V O O7 O O C ~ ~ .i4 ." V C ~ ~ ~ R ~ L O O L V ~ >, O> L VJ t E~ aa.a~M ~o~v cs.°_~~ c ~--~~-~0 a1 L L cp ~ ~ ~ C ~C w' ~ U _ ~ U L L L L C L V rL-. O O~ ... ~+ O ~. cp U N O. Q N w ... R N~ O V O C O Q ~~ C O L C~ ~ _ V y O) O~ N~ N O~ ~~ ~ O~ a~ °a~~ c 3t ~ L ~~ L ~ ~ ~ - aa~ts 3 m ~~ aci °>> O O N ~ L ~ O .C "' O ~~~ .~~ ~ ~ 0 0 •~ N C U O ~ 'Q ~ U ti~ ~ O U~ N c C N cQ ~ ~ O ~ C C ~ O O O ~ ~ .- O~ N C~ V w t L y w 01 0 O ~ L ~ _~' L ~ O C O ~ ~ i~ i. O ~- p c0 R= N h~ 0 0~ 0 ~ >' r O ._ _o cv c~w.c~ vy00..c L V •• c L ~ U a V Y~ C O ~y l4 ~~'~'- ~y C O aT~ J U a~ w c0 C C U O~ cp .'_' Q~ APCo files request for powerline with SCC Appalachian Power Company on August 15 filed a request with the Vir- ginia State Corporation Commission for approval to build a 765,000 volt powerlinefrom its Wyoming Station near Oceana, West Virginia, to its Cloverdale Station near Roanoke, Virginia. A similar request will be filed in West Virginia later this year. Charles A. Simmons, Appalachian's vice president-construction and main- tenance, said the company needs the powerline to meet its customers' growing demandsforelectricity. "We're faced with the need to serve an in- creasing number of customers in Vir- ginia and West Virginia while, at the same time, the uses of electric power are growing," he stated. "In spite of energy conservation and load management efforts over the years and despite projections for future con- servation,the demand for electricity by the mid-to-late 1990s will outgrow the ability of our transmission system to reliably meet our customers' needs. Since the last major reinforcement of Appalachian's west to east transmis- sion capabilitywas completed in 1973, our customers' demands have in- creased by over 80 percent. This line will help us make sure continued cus- tomer growth and increased energy use will not cause future wide-area power interruptions," he stated. Simmons said the proposed powerline will contribute to economic develop- ment efforts in southwestern Virginia and southern West Virginia. "While the line is necessary to meet our custom- ers'needs, italsowill helptheeconomy by providing transmission capacity to independent power producers (IPPs), enabling them to build power plants in our service area to serve other utility companies. Virginia Power, for ex- ample, has actively sought such sup- pliers, but the transmission capacity has not been available. The construc- tion of generating plants by IPPs will mean good paying jobs in construc- tions,plant operation, and coal mining, among other economic benefits." The powerline's proposed 1,000 foot wide corridors, within which a 200 foot right-of-way will ultimately be located, were selected by a joint study team from Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University and West Virginia Uni- versity. "We're pleased that the team successfully met its goal of determin- ingthe most favorable corridor, using a rigorous set of regulatory, environ- mental,economic, social, and aesthetic criteria," Simmons said. The filing for a certificate of public convenience and necessity in Virginia included the company's application, written testimony, a description of the company's proposed powerline con- /G struction and maintenance practices, and maps showing the preferred and alternate routes for the line. Supple- mental data, including detailed docu- mentation ofthe exhaustive study con- ducted by the joint study team, will be filed with the Virginia SCC later this year. People who registered at public workshops concerning the line or who otherwise expressed interest were no- tified about the filing by mail. Detailed maps and copies of the company's application to the SCC are available for inspection at several loca- tions in Virginia. The filing with the West Virginia Public Service Commission will be delayed until latethisyearsincethe WestVirginia procedures require that Appalachian include the supplemental data when the request is filed. Simmons said, "We feltthat people in both stateswould like the opportunity to inspect the corridor maps now. Consequently, we made them available in West Virginia at the same time as in Virginia." Barring unforeseen delays, construc- tion of the project will require three or four years after approvals have been received. ^ Illuminator September, 1991 This map shows the 1,000 foot wide corridors within which a 200 foot right-of-way will ultimately be selected for Appalachian Power's proposed 765 kV powerline from the Wyoming Station near Oceana, W. Va., to Cloverdale Station near Roanoke, Va. t ntence.) Then, starting in 1993, con- tric-growth needs through the aggres- " August 199U, approving regulatory I Chan es that made it possible for util- >] over all ~volyes except those in na- sine pursuit ofefficiencies. g arn a handsome profit by say- ! hi mal parks would fall to the individual The company backs up its talk with i es to e ' rtes-all of ~yhich are dead sec against a promise to sprnd S2_billion during the ing energy . Gas and Electric was the first if P e animals. Tom Dougherty, who d the National Wildlife t next decade-more than any other utility-crusading for efficiency. U S ic ac to take advantage of the ne«• policy. ~ presen e deration on the committee, called its . . The money ~yill buy rebates for ever- I The formula it worked out, ~;•ith the allo«•s it to pocket 1S per- 'i i i tal recommendation "the most de- gy'-efficient appliances, not only for on ss comm dollar saved through its ~ f •essing piece ofwildlife-management d " i homeowners and businesses but for It and dealers le sales eo ntractors every cent o efficiency et~orts. The savings are fig- tnesse . arming I have ever w Luckily for the lobo, this depreda- . , p p , co kill buy S1U million worth of research. ured by subtracting what PGS:E I ~n against the Endangered Species seeking energy--efficiency improve- spends on a conservation program t it ~yould have paid to gen- h f ct ryas summarily rejected by the menu of 7S percent or more in build- illi h ' a rom w o~ti•er conserved. The com- crate the ouse. The ~yolf is nosy back at the on e S .S-m ings. It will construct t p e out ahead ~ x~:- ofthe Senate Em•ironment Com- Pacific Energy Center. where conser- pang expects to com ending three or tour tently: By s i tittc'e. ~yhere Western ranching inter- ration techniques ~yill be showcased p s cons save akilowatt-hour. it avoids t as have consistently blocked funding ~r ~yolfrecoyen-.-PaulRauber and demonstrated. And it ~yill finance a multitude of other energy-saying o cents having to spend more than six cents to ,I Far more information, set "Resources,"p. 124 schenus aimed at modernizing homes generate the same amount. i Though the public pays a bit more I. and businesses. Why has PGR E embarked on this to finance the new efficiency programs !~ ' unlikely crusade% Energy--conservation (PG&E estimates a rate increase of 1 or Saving Energy for manager John Fox replies that the util- 'percent per kilowatt-hour). its ener- ds arc met more cleanly and i f d P f ity and its customers share a deep con- l gy nee overall l chea it ro are an Fan east tern for the environment-at chat's thc~rirnarl~ reason. Southern Cal- . y p Some activists think that po«-cr The uray [0 a Hllll!)~ S 11ea1'f ifomia Edison and the Los Angeles De- companies are gro~~•tng coo devoted to ~ 1~ l111'Oll~Th 1!~ ctOCkh0ldetS. partment of Water and Power explain the cause. No«• that utiliucs hart rottt from conserva- r d h similar efficiency blitzes ~~•ith a Yana- ow to p learne or Californians ~•ho'ye fought Lion on that theme: Their programs, i i i i d i ~ tion, they could begin jousting for mo- oly rights. Southern California no utilities in the past, the latest deyel- m z- n part at m n me they say: are a i p iven some credence to this I Edison has opments arc hard to get used to: s- ing global warming by reducing em g i heir energy-company executives arc sons of carbon dioxide. tear by trying to quash a state energy- efficiency bill that promotes tighter pouting maxims straight out of Soh Since the utilities are doing a good building standards. Utility exccuttves ~rrer~y Paths, sounding more like that turn for the environment, they might that if the state requires better- gook's gentle author. Amory Lovins, be allowed to bask in their right- worry insulated buildings, for instance, some han like industrialists. They regularly eousness. But ifthe truth were told, the of "their" energy-saving opportunities rmind their customers to use as little ston• behind their conversions began •f their product as possible, boast tvti'o years ago with a group of state, will be lost. Good state legislation and utility in- tbout not needing to build ne~y power consumer, environmental, and utility s should work in tandem, says iv ~lants, and quibble over whose kilo- interests called the California Collab- e ccnt director ofthe Natu- h h Cavana l R watt-cutting program is biggest, oraave. Set up by the California Public , g p a al Resources Defense Council's ener- brightest, and boldest. Utilities Commission (PUC) in 1989, " c y' program and a principal architect of One of the leaders of this curious the Collaborative tried to figure out a g the California Collaborative report. movement is Pacific Gas and Electric, ~ : way to inspire greater interest in ener- ~ He admits that dangling dollars in the nation's largest privately owned gy-saying among utilities at a time front of utilities would have raised his energy utility. Once vilified for sham- when most were slashing their conser- "l used to pruning the Diablo Canyon nuclear nation budgets. hackles a few years ago: ' poy,•er plant, today the utility is praised After six months of haggling, the s mter- think that stnce it was in society ests for utilities to promote efficiency, hy former foes for its commitment to Collaborative published .9n Energy we should just make them do it," he conservation. Although the popula- ' Blueprint for Califonaia. Therein lay the Ex erience has convinced him, I says P s northern- and central- non in PGR E key to all the conservation initiatives . that in some cases financial in- ~ though Cjalifornia service area is growing that followed: if you want the utilities , ccntives can achieve what regulaton•' r,rpidly, Senior Vice-President Grrg to be champions of et~iciency, the re- 1 eons cannot. Joan Hamilton blud M. Rugger told a Senate committee in• port said, make it worth their financial g i -Formorr in~ormation• set "Rrsowrns,"p. 124 ~ Februar•,~ that "we can meet our elec--' while. The PUC embraced the idea in Legislators meet with power line opposition Influential Virginia legislators and coal people heazd arguments from ARCs Inc. in relation to the proposed high voltage power line across Craig County last Thurs- day, January 2, in Abingdon at a meeting of the Coal Subcommittee of the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission. Bob Zacher and Jim McNeely outlines why ARCs be- lieves this power line is bad busi- nessfor Virglniaand West Virginia coal and allied interests. U Eazlier Horst Meinecke, speak- ing for Costal Power Productions Co. of Roanoke, stated his concern lz~+ about getting Appalachian Power ~ Company to transmit the electric- x ity Costal expects to generate at a E.., mal gasification plant and co-gen- ~ eratlon facility planned near W Coeburn in Wise County. Last V summer Costal was awarded a ~ 110 million dollar federal grant to LL help construct this plant which would utilize new technology to increase efficiency and decrease pollution. Meinecke indicated the grant and the generation facility itselfwill be lost ifAPCO/AEP con- tinues to refuse to carry the 100 megawatts of power to be pro- duced. R Daniel Carson, speaking for APCO, said his company has not ruled out power generation from Southwest Virginia but sees no need for it there. Zacher and McNeely argued that the line APCO/AEP proposes across Craig, which would carry 2500-3500 megawatts is prima- rily totransmit electricity the com- panyproposes towholesale to Vir- ginia Power, Carolina Power and Light and Duke Power, and that such sales work directly against the interests of Virginia coal and rail industries and independent powerproducers like Costal Power, since like much of the power AEP already sells to the east coast utili- ties, this would be electricity gen- erated with coal from the State of Wyoming. AEPs figures indicate they consider this western coal cheaper by athird /per million BTU than West Virginia low sulphur coal. RoanokeTimes ~' World-News PAGE A3 ~~~INESS Coal plant backers ask for Apco transmission By PAUL DELLINGER STAFF WRITER ABINGDON -Coastal Pow- er Production Co. of Roanoke said Thursday that its $ l ! 0 million fed- eral grant to build a coal gasifica- tion plant and cogeneration facility in Southwest Virginia's coalfields depends on getting Appalachian Power Co.'s interest in relaying the electricity to urban areas. Horst Meinecke, Coastal's marketing and development direc- tor, told the Coal Subcommittee of the Virginia Coal and Energy Com- missionthat the project depends on Apco allowing energy from South- west Virginia to be transmitted over its lines. Otherwise, the grant will be lost, Meinecke said. "We cannot do it without them." Apco spokesman R~ Daniel Carson said the company has not ruled out power generation from Southwest Virginia but sees no need for it there. "We're going to need to recapture the capacity we're selling to Virginia Power ...just to handle our growth," he said. Del. Ford Quillen, D-Gate City and a member of the coal subcom- mittee, said a successful generating facility near Coeburn in Wise County could supply power for new industry and help the region be- come less dependent on the rest of the state. Quillen asked representatives of Virginia Power, a subsidiary of Richmond-based Dominion Re- sources Inc., to consider asking Ap- co to make the transmission line available. Southwest Virginia is in a defi- cit situation in the amount of taxes it pays, educational disparities and in many other ways, Quillen said, which could be helped by the tax base that would be created by Coastal's project. "There's a good governmental reason for you all to direct things down this way," Quillen told a State Corporation Commission speaker. Apco has proposed building a 765,000-volt line from West Vir- ginia to Cloverdale. Representa- tives of Common Ground, a citi- zens group that opposes the line, suggested that it is a way for Ameri- can Electric Power Co., Apco's par- ent company, to use cheaper coal from Western states instead of Ap- palachian coat. Apco representatives denied that and said there are no plans - as asserted by Common Ground speakers - to close the Glen Lyn power plant in Giles County and replace it with nuclear power after the turn of the century. Carrie Crawford arranged for ARCS Inc., the coalition of power line opposition from nine counties in Virginia and West Virginia, to be heard at this forum. CPCC wW meet at 7:30 Thurs- day,January 9 in the Court House to plan work for the next three months. April 9, f991 - Dugspur, VA It is eery difficult For me to involve myself in anything relating to a high voltage powet• line. Any involvement brings about feelings of anger, contempt, despair, sadness and anxiety. In order to cope with the reality of the power line beside my home, I quit talking about it, readirlg~ about power lines, opposing lines, watching TV or even reading about r-ew Deal th studies. t is very ~.rnpleasatit to Live beside a 765kv lure. Tyre noise is very Lad. Ttte APCo erigirteers admitted the noise is bad, grid made an effort to lower the noise Level wilho~.rt much success. We have had to replace all windows, so we could get some sleep. This cost us several thousands of dollars. During some chatrges in weather and wi tli all windows closest, the noise still awakens me and keeps me awake. It is very difficult to ~lPep durir3g summer with windows open. Relaxing on the patio is seldom possible. We have been told that the noise isn't at a level to cause hearing loss'. APGo and AEP act as ii' they are doing landowners a favor by putting a bleb voltage power line on their land. I was told "that afler the line ;gas eriergi:;ed for about 30 days, I wouldn't know it was there", and "that it would blend right into the environment This has not hai~peried. I've liad to learn to try to ignore it„and live with it to the best of my ability. I stay inside my home more, do not walk on the i'arm as I halt 1'or many years or go sit by the branclr in the meadow. lte have been shocked t'eeding cattle. The cat was shocked trying to sit on a yard i'ence post. I was shocked numerous times during spring of 199(!- trying to paint the yard fence posts. Shortly after the line was energized, I tried to walk on the farra with the collie who became very .agitated ~.rnder or near the line. I have not observed the behavior of tY~e cattle for years, but in the winter oY 1985, I found several cows curing a Light snow standing stunned near kYte tower. I had to drive them av.ay Yrom it. s:'isi tors to our riome dut•ing inclement weather are astoundr:d by the level. oi' noise. Many have asked "what in tYie world is that noise?" After they are told that the noise comes from the power line, they ~:orr3er aloud how we stand it. When I learned that the high voltage payer line :gas to go through the middle of our 92 acres, I told APCo !hat they did not have enough money to buy i_he right-of-way. I still Peel the same ~~ay. We did not accept their ot'fer and went to condemnation court. My only regret about this is that I wish the Judge and GorlllllsslUllerS who came to the Farm iii a s torte would have seen and Beard tl,e power line instead of a bunch of survey ribbons. V1 her. AP~o cleared the right-of-way oti the north side of o~.rr home, klley cut. all. trees set•virtg as a windbreak. Now the wind is terrible. It is difficult to even set out small vegetable plants and keep them alive if file wiria starts blowing. I do r-ot irrtend to be radical about airy of tYiis. gut I have a right to have questions. I v~i~h you much success in your opposition. You are up against a company with much po,4er, plenty of money, and fancy lawyers. Joyce :. Goad, Rt . 1 Box 161 , Dttg~spur , VA 24325 A sign of the times is that any major consrrmoreon artiesct That posed today will encounter opposition from one o P is true whether the item being considered is a power plant, highway, water reservoir, recreation area, or in the case of Appalachian Power ro ect - a transmission line. While opposition Company's latest p j on the part of people directly affected is understandable, it is extremely important that the project be considered on a factual basis. Reinforcement of APCo's transmission system is ne;ee su biy tof late 1990s if we are to maintain an adequat ainderrofit a decade and el ectri c energy to our customers for the rem Providin such a supply at a reasonable cost into the next century. g seriousl is our public service obligation and one that d b akbothrthe Virginia ro ram must be approve y Since the reinforcement p g State Corporation Commission and the West Virginia thoutc the rneed Commission, we would not have proposes orltransmission reinforcement being clearly evident. The last m ~ into the eastern APCo area was in 1973 while our Gusto hose' with nno have increased by over 80~ since that time. While t responsibility for meeting the need for electricity can always suggest the easy answer, we must deal with the real facts of operating a com- plex system in a reliable manner. One of the points on which there has been confusio ch s reaterlthan tion that APCo presently has transmission capacity mu g its peak load. Statements have also been made that ion a eo ple atiWe of APCo's entire service area is less than one mill p P would agree that if our service area population Thesfacts, howevere million, the proposed line would not be needed. are that our opponents have confused the number of APCo customers with the number of people in the service area. APCo serves over 800,000 customers but the population in that servifora example over 2.1 million people. Craig-Botetourt Co-operative, -2- the City of Salem, the City one customer as is West Virginia Power, their estimates of Danville, the City of Bedford, and others. Also, completely ignore the electrical requirements of all oerth bas S~nesaee and industries which, on an individual custom significantly higher than that of individual households. onents arrive at their conclusions without any considera- Line opp tion of transmission line outages which, unfortunately doneed uto abe for which we must make provision. Them bss ton line without it causing able to withstand the loss of one trans a wide area blackout. The present system is capable of fe not r eine existing need but is projected to be inadequate by 1998 ~ forced. This is despite existing and planned conservation programs. A lot of attention has been directed at the fact that ASC somehow estion that this wholesale to other utilities with the Bugg fall wrong. APCo and the AEP System do make wholesale sales and they into three basic categories. They are: Firm Wholesale Customers - These include customers such West Virginia Power, City as: Craig-Botetourt Co-operative, of Salem, City of Danville, etc. as well asdKiothers t PThese City of Martinsville, City of Radford, an customers are treated in essentially the same manner as our retail customers in terms of our obligation to serve them reliably. Craig-Botetourt Electric and West Virginia Pferred r service tively new wholesale customers which trans Tiers. to Appalachian Power Company from higher cost supp There has been no indication to date that these customers including the line opponents are interested in changing power suppliers. Craig-Botetourt Co-operative incidentally has been one of our fastest growing customers with an increase in demand of nearly 70~ between winter 1985/86 and winter 1989/90. -3- If we are to continue to provide wholesalel sercannot o refuse two relatively new accounts, we certain y service to other firm wholesale customers who haov~ morePed to pay for our facilities over periods of 40 years Short Term or 0 ortunit Sales to O a ereriodstlfor AEP/APCo, During periods other than peak loa p we are able to sell to other utilitif t ecaother eutility lower cost producer. The customers o benefit by this lower cost and our customers also benefit. The profits we make from these sales are used t customersy offset costs that would otherwise bow ratesy o Additionally, This is one of the reasons for our these energy sales create additional coal markets with eco- nomic benefits to the mining portion of our service area. Sales of this type do not require any to be constructed as they are made result in lower costs to our own c the economy of our service area. I with knowledge of these facts would sale be stopped. additional facilities in off-peak periods, ustomers, and benefit don't believe anyone suggest this type of Lon Term Sales to Other Utilities The long term sales by AEP to other utilities presently These total 850 MW or slightly over 3~ of AEP capability. contracts allow us to transfer costs of temporaji~i s uwhich generating capacity from our customers to ut needed the capacity. This has reduced costs for our customers while allowing us to recall the generate ngustomersy for future use when ~t is needed to meet ou needs. Again, I don't believe any of our c ~„ h helped are aware of the facts would object to a sale hold down their own electric rates. -4- Line opponents, in referring to the sales to other utilities, have described the AEP/APCo reserve margin as 35% or even in some cases as 50%. The correct figure is 31%, but what is important is the fact that a 20% reserve is considered the minimum prudent margin. (APCo and AEP have one of the best records on plant availability and efficiency in the nation but our plants are down for scheduled or forced outages approximately 20% of the time.) Because of growth in usage by our own customers, the 31% current reserve margin is projected to be just below the 20% minimum level in the 1998/1999 winter following completion of the proposed line. At that point we will reclaim the generating capacity which had been the subject of a long term contract with Virginia Power. It needs to be emphasized that the profits from opportunity sales and long term contracts with other utilities are used to offset the costs to our retail and firm wholesale customers. A recent article on behalf of a Craig County opposition group described ways that conservation could reduce the need for additional facilities. What may be surprising is that virtually all the items mentioned were programs that APCo has been involved in for years. For example, the article mentioned energy efficient technologies and AEP has been a leader in this field. A few examples are: P1 ants - The AEP System power plants have since the 1940s been among the most efficient in the nation and presently are 10% better than the national average. Transmission - 765 kV transmission lines developed in the 1960s are the most efficient in the nation. Placing the proposed line into service will reduce generating requirements in APCo by over 60 MW. That savings is the equivalent of the generating capacity required to meet the needs of a city the size of Salem. -5- Pumped Storage - Smith Mountain was developed in the 1960s to make better use of existing coal-fired plants while reduc- ing the need for both new power plants and transmission lines. The article also mentioned the need to retrofit old buildings The facts are that APCo has been promoting to conserve energy. insulation in homes since the 1950s. We offer home energy audits to .our customers, specify proper insulation ratings and offer a residential insulation financing program. We have made over 3,200 loans to customers for a total of nearly $2 million for the purpose of installing insulation. APCo has long been a promoter of efficient energy use and has worked with manufacturers to both .develop and increase the efficiency the average electric of heat pumps over the years. As a result, heating customer now uses approximately 12~ less electricity than 10 years ago. It was suggested that APCo should integrate peak load management into our plans. Again, the intervenor group does not seem to be aware that APCo has had interruptible rates since the late 1940s; Time-of- Day rates for large industrial customers in West Virginia since the early 1980s; experimental Time-of-Day rates for residential and commer- cial customers in Virginia since the last rate case; energy thermal storage Time-of-Day rates since the late 1970s and an experimental variable spot pricing program for over a year. All of these programs are aimed at peak load management. APCo is supportive of conservation efforts and our projections for the future include further gains from conservation initiatives. Conservation has slowed the need for new facilities but conservation alone cannot meet the growing need. APCo cannot control customer usage but can only encourage wise use. -6- Opponents of the project have maintained that the proposed power line would hurt the coal industry in our service area. In support of that position, we have been accused of having plans to use "cheap" coal f rom Wyoming. This type of misinformation is particularly troubling since this line will, in fact, help the coal mining portion of our service area where an economic boost is needed. Construction of the proposed transmission line is necessary to provide for APCo's internal load. A secondary benefit, however, is that 25% of the capacity of the line will be made available for the transmission of power by independent power producers (IPPs). That commitment was made in 1990 by Appalachian Power Company and enacted into law in 1991. It will permit IPPs in both states which have indicated their willingness and ability to build power plants in southwest Virginia and southern West Virginia to proceed with their plans. Virginia Power, for example, has actively sought such suppliers but the transmission capacity has not been available. The ability of these IPPs to construct generating plants means good paying jobs in construction, plant operation and coal mining, among other economic benefits. The only plant in the entire AEP System that burns western coal is in western Indiana and this line will not increase the Wyoming coal usage one bit. Opponents of the line, while stating that Wyoming coal is cheap to mine, ignore the high transportation costs to move it to the east. They have even circulated materials that say we plan to switch existing plants to western coal to meet the new Clean Air Act standards. This is totally untrue. In fact, a filing by Ohio Power (a sister AEP company) with the Ohio Public Utility Commission in May of this year, made clear that Ohio Power considered switching to eastern low sulphur coal as the least expensive method of compliance at Ohio's Gavin Plant. -7- APCo' s record of using coal from i is servi ce area i s one of 1 ong standing and one that has made us one of the lowest cost energy producers in the nation. We see no reason to change. The one remaining item we would like to address is the depicting of this 765 KV line as being something that would totally destroy the area either by its construction or operation. APCo has over 600 miles of 765 KV lines in service and the AEP System has over 2,000 miles in service. These lines have not created any health problems for people, animals or crops in the 20 plus years they have been in service. There are approximately 50 miles of 765 KV within a 20 mile radius of Roanoke which provide a basis for people to make their own informed judgment on the magnitude of the impact. We feel we have demonstrated over the years that, while power lines may not be aesthetically pleasing to everyone, we can construct, operate and maintain them without any major disruption to the area. If we are to continue to provide reliable electric service, trans- mission reinforcement is required. We feel the proposed 765 KV line is the most environmentally responsible way to meet that need. ACTION NO. .. ITEM NUMBER AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 11, 1992 AGENDA ITEM: Request for Adoption of Goals and Policies for Fiscal Year 1992-93 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: At the January 18, 1992 planning retreat, Chairman Lee Eddy presented a list of suggested long-range goals and policies. The Board expressed general support for his suggestions, but directed staff to review them, make additional recommendations, and bring them back for formal adoption. Attached is a copy of Chairman Eddy's proposals (Attachment A). SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Staff has reviewed Chairman Eddy's proposed goals and policies, and agrees with the high priority established on delivery of services to citizens. Many of these suggestions have already been implemented during the past several years. For example: 1. Schools: The County schools are among the highest quality in the State as evidenced by the consistently high scores received by our students. 2. Law Enforcement: With the establishment of the Police Department in 1990, Roanoke County began a fully professional law enforcement service. The department has one of the highest clearance rates in the state. 3. Fire and Rescue: The County already utilizes a combination of career and volunteer personnel which results in a professional staff at a substantial cost savings to the taxpayers. 1 .~ -~ 4. Solid Waste: Roanoke County provides one of the most comprehensive solid waste programs in the state of Virginia and was among the first to institute a recycling program which has received several awards. Last year the County was the recipient of a state award for its public-private partnership project which eliminated the illegal dump at Crowell's Gap. 5. Communication: Roanoke County Today was an excellent communication tool that unfortunately has been eliminated because of budget constraints. Staff meets on an ongoing basis with civic leagues and has established quarterly meetings with Civic League Presidents. The Planning and Zoning Department sets frequent community meetings to address neighborhood concerns. There has been a Customer Service Resource Committee in place for several years to encourage outstanding customer service by our staff. While Chairman Eddy's suggested goals and policies are excellent, the County staff is pleased to advise they are goals that have been in place for many years. The staff identified several additional goals and policies that we would like to present for your consideration. They are as follows: 1. Provide salaries, training and benefits for county and school employees sufficient to maintain a high level of employee morale and minimize turnover. Support equity for both school and county staff. 2. Encourage enhanced customer service skills to assure good communication with citizens. 3. Promote regional cooperation through continued dialogue and support of programs that will benefit all Roanoke Valley localities. 4. Promote economic development in order to maintain or improve the current residential/business tax ratio. 5. Provide resources for an ongoing program of building maintenance to County and School facilities and equipment. Regarding the proposed fiscal policies, the Board of Supervisors adopted a financial plan on February 14, 1989. This policy outlines specific objectives for the staff and Board of Supervisors. A copy of the 1989 report is attached. (See Attachment B) Attached for your review is a list of proposed goals and policies that combines both Chairman Eddy's suggestions and recommendations 2 ~ -~ identified by the staff (Attachment C). This is not prioritized, but lists those areas which should be a high priority by both the Board of Supervisors and County staff during fiscal year 1992/93. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Attachment C be adopted by the Board of Supervisors as the Goals and Policies for the 1992-93 fiscal year. The staff further recommends that the Board reaffirm their support of the Financial Improvement Plan (A-21489-5) adopted on February 14, 1989. Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator --------------------------------------- Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Ref erred ( ) To ( ) Motion by: ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy Johnson Kohinke Minnix Nickens 3 ATTACHMENT A SUGGESTED LONG-RANGE GOALS AND POLICIES ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS - 1/18/92 A. SERVICES TO CITIZENS -------------------- 1. Schools: Provide the highest quality public school system consistent with residents' willingness to fund the system with local taxes. 2. Law Enforcement: Provide a professional law enforcement service to the extent necessary to achieve good rates of crime deterrence, apprehension and conviction, and to achieve a high level of public safety. 3. Fire and Rescue: Provide a high-level public fire and rescue service utilizing a combination of career and volunteer personnel. Provide good quality facilities and equipment as necessary to enhance the safety, effectiveness and spirit of the County's fire and rescue organizations. 4. Solid Waste: Provide consistent, efficient and service-oriented collection and disposal of solid wastes generated by residents and small commercial organizations. Emphasize recycling and waste minimization by residents and commercial organizations, consistent with available public funds. Discourage illegal dumping, especially in rural areas. 5. Infrastructure: Cooperate with state agencies to provide a safe and convenient system of public roads and highways. Utilize the state's revenue sharing program for road construction funds whenever economic conditions will permit. Expand and improve public water and sewer facilities consistent with residential and commercial needs and in recognition of the economies of promoting growth close to existing developed areas. 6. Libraries, Parks, Recreation: Provide library, park and recreational facilities and services as appropriate for the needs and desires of County citizens. Emphasize programs for minors. Provide a reasonable level of services for senior citizens. Avoid competing with commercial organizations for adult services. 7. Land Use: Provide professional and citizen-oriented land-use policies. Achieve a reasonable balance between the interests of residents and commercial developers. Encourage appropriate commercial and multi-family development, consistent with community needs. Recognize that residential construction is likely to dominate future growth, as it has in the past. Provide a wide range of housing suitable for all income groups. Develop a concise, workable comprehensive plan and be consistent in implementing its guidelines. 8. Communications: Develop effective two-way communications between all segments of County government and its citizens. 9. Planning: Develop lang-range plans to enhance the efficient, effective and convenient delivery of public services for all residents. ATTACHMENT B .D -.~ ACTION NO. A-21489-5 ITEM NUMBER D-4 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 14, 1989 AGENDA ITEM: Adoption of Financial Improvement Plan COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS.: BACKGROUND: The Board has requested that an on-going program be instituted in order to improve the financial position of the County. Since the County is anticipating going to the bond market during the 1989-90 fiscal year to sell water reservoir bonds, this would be an ideal time to formalize a financial improvement plan and to _ begin the implementation. The goals and objectives of this program would be as follows: a. Reduce or eliminate short-term borrowing. b. Improve bond rating to AA+ or AAA. r The following report outlines some of the things we will need - to consider in order to meet these goals: W _ Si7MMARy OF INFORMATION: For the past three years, the County has found it necessary to borrow in anticipation of tax revenues as follows: Amount Dates $10 Million February-August, 1987 $ 8 Million March-June, 1988 $ 2 Million October-December, 1988 -, Prior to this time, the County was allowed to use availaDue unspent bond proceeds to supplement the cash flow shortage. to the changes in the Federal Tax Laws, the County is no longer able to do this. i J .~-a. Even though the County has a balanced budget for the year, our revenue collection cycle does not correspond with our expenditures.. Revenues peak in late May when personal property, decals, and the first half of real estate taxes are collected. A smaller peak occurs in early December when the second half of real estate taxes are due. The majority of 'business licenses are collected in January. County expenditures also experience highs and lows. A large portion of the County's debt payments are due in December, and a smaller concentration of debt payments are due in June. Payment of school salaries are greatly reduced in July and August. Many large capital items are purchased at the beginning of each budget year. Part-time help is higher in the summer months and around election time. In addition, the County's cash flow is affected by bond projects, grants, and Literary Loans. Under the Federal tax laws, the County must deposit bond proceeds with an escrow agent (usually a bank). The County must then expend funds from its own bank account and file for reimbursement against its bond proceeds. Grants are usually awarded on a reimbursement basis. Literary Loans also require the County to spend its own money and then file for reimbursement with the Literary Loan program. All of these instances place an added strain on the cash flow of the County. During the 1987-88 fiscal year, the County spent $275,000 on interest for short-term borrowing. This was interest on the $10 million and $8 million borrowings which both became due during this fiscal year. Also, additional expenses were involved for bond council fees and financial advisor fees. The following suggestions should be considered as a means of reducing short-term borrowing: 1. Increase Fund Balance-The greater the fund balance, the greater the cushion the County will have during the lean revenue months. The County would need an additional $10 million in fund balance to completely eliminate short- term borrowing. However, even if this goal may not be feasible, every dollar we can increase fund balance will decrease the amount we need to borrow. 2. The Board should keep in mind when approving grants and Literary Loan applications that there will be a temporary effect on cash flow. 3. The County should file for reimbursement on grants, loans, and bond projects as expeditiously as possible, rather than accumulate expenses. 4. When the County issues long-term debt in the future, we should keep in mind the annual cash flow picture when establishing pay dates, if possible. *" ~. 5. Schedule larger purchases and construction projects in certain quarters of the year to correspond with normal tax collection periods. 6. Reduce Lease Purchases-The County increased the amount of lease/purchases over $2 million last fiscal year and will probably increase another $2 million this year. We have more flexibility for cash planning if we buy less, schedule the time of the purchase, and pay for the item in the year of the purchase. We should not get in the habit of lease/purchasing vehicles that could be replaced evenly on an annual basis with a well-conceived replacement program. 7. Additional revenue could be generated during lean revenue months by actively pursuing delinquent accounts. The Treasurer's Office currently does not have sufficient staff to pursue these delinquent taxes. One additional staff person in this area could generate $140,000 annually. 8. A user fee study would pinpoint sources of additional revenue which would be collected at the same time that the expenditure of County fun enditures~ isT the tideal matching of revenues and exp situation for cash flow purposes. The second of the County'slbond rating ro The County currently the improvement enjoys these ratings: Moody's Investors Service Aa Standard and Poor's ~ In order to improve its ratings, the County should try to accomplish the following: 1. Improve the current economic mix to increase the commercial tax base. 2. Increase the fund balance to 8-10 percent of General Fund expenditures. Stability of the fund balance is also important, and we have been maintaining a stable balance. However, we need to start increasing the balance each year to attempt to accumulate approximately $5 million. 3. Previously, the rating agencies noted that our assessed values on real estate did not increase evenly from year to year. Annualized reassessment should alleviate this concern. 7J-.~ 4. Prior to our next bond sale, we should invite the rating agency analyst to come to Roanoke County for a site visit so that he or she can see firsthand the developments in the County. Staff recommends that the Board adopt a Five-Year Financial Improvement Plan which consists of the following: 1. Increase the Unappropriated Fund Balance of the County to 8 percent of the General Fund expenditures. This would be accomplished by increasing Fund Balance 1 percent per year for the next five years . Based upon the current General Fund expenditures, 1 percent would amount to a $625,000 increase in Fund Balance in the 1989-90 budget. 2. Limit the use of lease/purchase financing, particularly for the annual replacement of vehicles. Instead, a consistent number of vehicles should be replaced each year and paid for during a time of year when the County has a positive cash flow. 3. Add one position to the Treasurer's Department to actively pursue delinquent accounts. This position should be added to the 1989-90 budget. We will attempt to get Compensation Board funding for this position. 4. A user fee study should be funded in the 1989-90 budget to identify new sources of revenues. This will cost approximately $25,000 and could generate $1 million to $2 million. 5. Invite the rating agencies to visit Roanoke County in conjunction with our water revenue bond sale so that they can see the growth and development of the County. Respectfully submitted, Approved by, ~~~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ Diane D. Hyatt Elmer C. Hodge Director of Finance County Administrator ~_2 ----- ---------------------------------------- VOTE ACTION No Yes Abs Approved (x ) Motion by: Harrv C Nickensl Denied ( ) Steven A. McGraw-See Below Garrett ~L_ Received ( ) Johnson ~ Referred ( ) McGraw ~ Nickens ~L_ To Robers ~L. Nickens/McGraw moved to adopt a financial improvement plan incorporating staff recommendations in report and board suggestions listed below, and that any savings realized from this plan be allocated to the unappropriated fund balance. 1. Add one person to handle delinquent accounts for a one-year period and compare savings to assess need for position in the future . 2. That this report be considered a goal statement rather than a policy. 3. That interest saved by not borrowing additional monies be allocated to fund balance. cc. File Diane Hyatt, Director, of Finance Reta Busher, Director, of Management & Budget Assistant County Administrators Alfred C. Anderson, Treasurer Dr. Bayes Wilson, Superintendent, Roanoke County Schools ~ -a ATTACHMENT C LONG-RANGE GOALS AND POLICIES ROANORE COUNTY BOARD OF SIIPERVISORS FISCAL YEAR 1992-93 o Within the current tax structure, provide professional, consistent, efficient, high quality delivery of services to the citizens with emphasis on the following programs: - Schools - Law Enforcement - Fire and Rescue - Solid Waste - Libraries - Parks and Recreation o Provide salaries, benefits and training for county and school employees sufficient to maintain a high level of employee morale and minimize turnover. Support equity among school and county staff. o Encourage enhanced infrastructure by: - cooperating with state agencies to provide a safe and convenient system of roads and highways. - expanding and improving public water and sewer facilities consistent with residential and commercial needs. o Provide professional and citizen oriented land use policies while achieving a reasonable balance between the interests of residents and commercial developers. o Promote economic development in order to maintain or improve the current residential/business tax ratio. o Provide resources for an ongoing program of building maintenance to County and School facilities and equipment. o Develop effective, customer oriented, two-way communications between all segments of County government and its citizens. o Promote regional cooperation through continued dialogue and support of programs benefitting all Roanoke Valley localities. 4 ACTION NO. A-21192-2 ITEM NUMBER AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 11, 1992 AGENDA ITEM: Request from the Transportation and Safety Commission to Amend their Bylaws and Appointment Expiration Dates COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Attached is a letter from William G. Rosebro, Chairman of the Roanoke County Transportation and Safety Commission. The commission is requesting approval of their proposed bylaws amendments. They are also asking that the all term expiration dates for their members be changed to June 30 to coincide with their fiscal year. Additionally, the expiration dates are not consistent. Currently there are two members whose terms expired January 1, 1992 and these terms would be extended to June 30, 1992. Also attached is a copy of the resolution establishing the Transportation and Safety Commission and relevant state statutes. Mr. Rosebro will be present at the meeting to address any questions the Board of Supervisors might have. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of the amendments to the bylaws and changing of term expiration dates for their members to June 30. Elmer C. Hodg County Administrator ---------------------------------------------------------------- Approved (x) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) ACTION Motion by: Harry C'__ Nic-~kPnG motion to approve bylaws anr7 amend expiration datP~ VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy x Johnson x Kohinke x Minnix x Nickens x cc: File William G. Rosebro, Chairman Transportation & Safety Commission File ~_3 William G. Rosebro 4712 Easthill Drive Roanoke, Virginia 24018 January 24, 1992 Clerk to Board of Supervisors 3738 Brambleton Avenue S. W, Roanoke, Virginia 24018 Attention: Elmer Hodge Dear Mr. Hodge: Enclosed are the by-laws of the Roanoke County Transportation and Safety Commission. I ask that you have the issue of approval of these by- laws put on the agenda for the next meeting of the Board of Supervisors and ask that you submit them for the Board's approval at that time. I also ask that the issue of changing to June as the end of the terms of Commission members and extending to June the terms of those members whose terms expired January 1, 1992 be added to this same agenda. Those members whose terms have expired are: Ms. Charlotte Lichtenstein Mr. Leo B. Trenor If you have any questions about these matters, please don't hesitate to call me at 387-8408 (work). Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, ~ ~ _--, , William G. Rosebro Chairman Roanoke County Transportation and Safety Commission ,, ~ -3 BYLAWS OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION SAFETY COMMISSION ARTICLE I CREATION Section 1.1 The Roanoke County Highway and Transportation Safety Commission was created by action of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors as set forth in Resolution No. 84-37 and adopted by the Board of Supervisors by unanimous vote on February 14, 1984. ARTICLE II MEMBERSHIP Section 2.1 The Commission shall consist of eleven regular members and at least one representative appointed by the Board of Supervisors from the student body of any high school located in the County of Roanoke. The members shall be residents of the County of Roanoke appointed by the Board of Supervisors on recommendation of the County Administrator. Section 2.2 Members shall be appointed to represent various geographic areas of Roanoke County and other interests. Section 2.3 The representative shall be selected from a different high school each year rotating the position among all the high schools located within the County of Roanoke. ARTICLE III TERMS OF MEMBERS AND VACANCIES Section 3.1 Terms of the eleven regular members shall be four years, with no member serving more than _ two (2) successive terms. New members shall be appointed two months prior to the expiration of any member's term. Representatives from the student body of any high school located in ~ ) s~ Page 2 Roanoke County shall be appointed annually and serve the Commission during the school year. ARTICLE III cont'd Section 3.2 Should mid-term vacancies occur among regular member positions, or when terms expire as provided herein, the Commission as a whole and/or as individuals shall be entitled to submit nominations for Roanoke County Board of Supervisors' consideration in appointing replacements. ARTICLE IV OFFICERS Section 4.1 The officers shall be the Chairman and the Vice-Chairman. The Chairman and Vice-Chairman shall be elected for a one-year period. The Chairman shall serve not more than two consecutive terms. In the event of a vacancy in either office, an election to fill the vacancy shall be held at the next meeting of the Commission or as soon thereafter as practicable. Section 4.2 The Chairman shall cause an agenda to be prepared for each meeting and shall preside at each meeting. The Chairman shall also appoint such ad hoc or standing committees from the membership of the Commission as are deemed necessary. The Chairman shall sign correspondence, reports and recommendations on the part of the commission and shall otherwise represent the Commission in its proper relationships with the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, County Administrator, State and Federal agencies and the public. Section 4.3 The Vice-Chairman shall serve in the absence of the Chairman. Section 4.4 A Recording Secretary shall be selected by the Chairman of the Commission, at his discretion, to assist the Chairman in development and ~]~- 3 Page 3 dissemination of the agenda and in recording accurate minutes of all meetings. Minutes of each meeting shall be forwarded to Commission members upon request with the next regularly scheduled Commission meeting agenda and to members of the Board of Supervisors upon request following the next regularly scheduled meeting of the Commission. ARTICLE V MEETINGS Section 5.1 The Commission shall meet a minimum of four (4) times per year at a time, day and location agreed on in advance by the Commission, or at the call of the Chairman. The annual awards banquet for persons excelling in the application of safety measures and procedures shall constitute one such meeting. Section 5.2 Meetings shall convene at the appointed time, except when members are specifically notified otherwise. ARTICLE VI QUORUM AND ATTENDANCE Section 6.1 No business of the Commission can be conducted at any meeting thereof without the presence of a quorum, consisting of at least six (6) regular members. Section 6.2 Members are expected to attend all regularly scheduled meetings. Any member having missed` two (2) regularly scheduled meetings in a calendar year shall be so notified in writing by the Chairman. A copy of the Bylaws shall accompany this notification. Failure by a member to attend three (3) consecutive regularly scheduled meetings during a calendar year shall be cause for the Chairman to report such fact to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, who may determine the necessity of replacing such member. .]~ . 3 Page 4 ARTICLE VII GOALS FUNCTIONS AND PROGRAMS Section 7.1 The goals of the Commission shall be as follows: a. to serve as a forum for various community groups and interests whose concerns include safer streets and highways; b. to provide active leadership and to solicit increased citizen participation in all aspects of transportation safety; c. to consistently reduce each year the total number of transportation accidents, with special emphasis on avoidance of those accidents resulting in serious bodily injury and death. d. to sponsor a project each year which meets the specific transportation needs of the community . Section 7.2 The duties and responsibilities of the Commission shall include, but not be limited to the following: a. review, examine, and approve all highway safety grants and recommend same to the Board of Supervisors for submission; b. promote all highway and transportation safety programs, i.e. highway, rail, water, and air safety; c . make recommendations through the Board of Supervisors to the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation regarding signs, road improvements, and engineering improvements; and. d. develop and establish through the Board of Supervisors a safety program for the County and sponsor an annual awards banquet for persons excelling in the application of safety measures and procedures. ~-3 Page 5 ARTICLE VIII AMENDMENTS Section 8.1 These Bylaws may be amended by a two-thirds vote of the Commission in attendance, provided that a quorum is present and further provided that written notice of proposed amendments are first given to each member not less than ten days prior to the regular or called meeting at which such amendments are to be considered. Section 8.2 Amendments so adopted shall not become effective until duly ratified by Roanoke County Board of Supervisors. -~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 14, 1984 RESOLUTION NO. 84-37 ESTABLISHING THE ROANOKE COUNTY HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION SAFETY COMMISSION AND PROVIDING FOR THE MEMBERSHIP ON SAID COMMISSION WHEREAS, by act of the General Assembly, §33.1-398 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, providing authority for localities to establish Highway and Transportation Safety Commissions, was repealed in 1981 and no substitute enabling legislation was enacted to continue such authority in local governments; and WHEREAS, the Board of Transportation Safety, a state agency responsible for processing applications for highway and transportation safety grants has refused to process such grants unless same are approved by the local commission. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That there be, and hereby is, established from and after April 1, 1984, and until further order of the Board, the Roanoke County Highway and Transportation Safety Commission, which commission shall have the duty and responsibility to (a) review, examine, and approve all highway safety grants and recommend same to the Board of Supervisors for submission, (b) promote all highway and transportation safety programs, i.e. highway, rail, water, and air safety, (c) make recommendations through the Board of Supervisors to the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation regarding signs, road improvements, and engineering improvements, and (d) develop and establish through the Board of Supervisors a safety program for the County and sponsor an annual awards banquet for persons excelling in the application of safety measures and procedures; and 2. That there shall be eleven (11) members of the Commission who shall be residents of Roanoke County appointed by the Board of Supervisors on recommendation of the County Administrator. The members of the Commission shall serve for terms of four (4) years, but no member shall serve for more than two (2) full successive terms. Initial appointments to the A Commission shall be made as follows: two (2) shall be for terms of one (1) year, three (3) shall be for terms of two (2) years, three (3) shall be for terms of three (3) years, and three (3) shall be for terms of four (4) years, and thereafter all appointments shall be for terms of four years and the members of the Commission shall annually elect its own chairman. The members of the Commission shall be reimbursed for their necessary and actual expenses incurred in the performance of their duties. 3. That there shall be such advisory members of the Commission as shall from time to time be determined appropriate by the Board of Supervisors. On motion by Supervisor Minter and adopted by the following roll call vote: AYES: Supervisors McGraw, Minter, Brittle, Burton, Nickens NAYS: None A Copy - Teste: n R. 1 n e , Clerk County Board of Supervisors 3-5-84 Members of Transposrtation & Safety Commission Transportation & Safety Commission File. County Attorney File CODE OF VIRGINIA ~ 3 1950 1991 Cumulative Supplement ANNOTATED Prepared under the Supervision of The Virginia Code Commission BY The Editorial Staff of the Publishers Under the Direction of ` A. D. KOWALSKY, S. C. WILLARD, W. L. JACKSON, M. A. SANCILIO, S. B. LYONS AND T. R. TROXELL VOLUME ~~ 1989 REPLACEMENT Annotated through South Eastern Repol•ter, 2d Series, through Volume 400, page 617. Place in Pocket of Corresponding Volume of Main Set. THE MICHIE COMPANY Law Publishers CxARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA § 46.2-224 MOTOR VEHICLES J.~' ~ § 46.2-224 8. To develop, implement, and review, in conjunction with relevant state and federal entities, a comprehensive highway safety program for the Commonwealth, and to inform the public about it; 9. To assist towns, counties and other political subdivisions of the Common- wealth in the development, implementation, and review of local highway safety programs as part of the state program; 10. To review the activities, role, and contribution of various state entities to the Commonwealth's highway safety program and to report annually and in writing to the Governor and General Assembly on the status, progress, and prospects of highway safety in the Commonwealth; 11. To recommend to the Secretary of Transportation, the Governor, and the General Assembly any corrective measures, policies, procedures, plans, and programs which are needed to make the movement of passengers and property on the highways of the Commonwealth as safe as practicable; 12. To design, implement, administer, and review special programs or projects needed to promote highway safety in the Commonwealth; and 13. To integrate highway safety activities into the framework of transpor- tation safety in general. (1984, c. 778, § 46.1-40.4; 1989, c. 727; 1990, cc. 1, 317.) The 1990 amendments. - The 1990 amendment by c. 1, effective Feb. 22, 1990, and the 1990 amendment by c. 317, effective March 30, 1990, are identical, and substituted "Secre- tart' of Transportation" for "Secretary of Transportation and Public Safety" in subdivi- sions 5 and 11. § 46.2-224. Board of Transportation Safety. -There is hereby estab- lished within the Department of Motor Vehicles a Board of Transportation Safety, hereinafter referred to in this section as "the Board," to advise the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles, the Secretary of Transportation, and the Governor on transportation safety matters. The Board shall elect a chairman and meet at his call, and shall seek to identify the elements of a comprehen- sive safety program for all transport modes operating in Virginia. In addition, the Board may consider, study, and report on the following issues: (i) the identification of the unique safety needs of each particular mode of transpor- tation; (ii) the identification of the common elements of safe transportation operation, regardless of mode of transportation; (iii) the adoption of proven safety practices and technology in use in one mode to other modes of transportation; (iv) the identification of the common elements of accident situations; and (v) the allocation of grant funds made available to the Department. The Board shall consist of eleven members appointed by the Governor, subject to confirmation of the General Assembly. Seven members of the Board shall represent the seven geographic districts of the Commonwealth utilized by the Department of Motor Vehicles and designated by the Commissioner as operating districts. Each member shall reside in the district he represents. The remaining four members shall be at-large members representing transportation safety interests in the areas of air, rail, water, and mass transit. Members shall serve for terms of four years, and no member shall serve for more than two full consecutive terms. Appointment and confirma- tion of Board members under this section shall occur only as the terms of the current members of the Board expire under prior law. Board members shall be reimbursed for their necessary and actual expenses incurred in the performance of their duties. (1984, c. 778, §§ 46.1-40.5, 46.1-40.6; 1989, c. 727; 1990, cc. 1, 317.) 52 §Y 46.2-216.1 DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES § 46.2-223 section shall be paid into the state treasury and shall be set aside as a special fund to be used to meet the expenses of the Department. (1976, c. 505, § 46.1-31.2; 1989, c. 727; 1991, c. 167.) The 1991 amendment, effective March 12, 1991, substituted "this title" for "§§ 46.2-209 through 46.2-214" in the first sentence. § 46.2-216.1. Acceptance of electronic filing in lieu of written docu- means. -Whenever this title provides that a written certificate or other document is to be filed with the Department, the Commissioner may establish. procedures for and accept in lieu of such paper document a filing made by electronic means. Such filing by electronic means shall be accepted only if the content of the filing satisfies all of the requirements of the statute which provides for the written document and the Commissioner has made a written, affirmative finding that the lack of a paper document will not compromise or reduce the effectiveness of the record-keeping system established by the statute. The Commissioner shall develop a method to ensure that the electronic filing is received and stored accurately and that it is readily available to satisfy the requirements of the statutes which call for a written document. (1991, c. 115.) ARTICLE 2. Powers and Duties of Department Related to Transportation Safety. § 46.2-223. Additional powers and duties of Commissioner. -The Commissioner shall have the following powers and duties related to transpor- tation safety: 1. To evaluate safety measures currently in use by all transport operators in all modes which operate in or through the Commonwealth, with particular attention to the safety of equipment and appliances and methods and procedures of operation; 2. To engage in training and educational activities aimed at enhancing the safe transport of passengers and property in and through the Commonwealth; 3. To cooperate with all relevant entities of the federal government, including, but not limited to, the Department of Transportation, the Federal Railway Administration, the Federal Aviation Administration, the Coast Guard, and the Independent Transportation Safety Board in matters concern- ing transportation safety; 4. To initiate, conduct, and issue special studies on matters pertaining to transportation safety; 5. To evaluate transportation safety efforts, practices, and procedures of the agencies or other entities of the government of the Commonwealth and make recommendations to the Secretary of Transportation, the Governor, and the General Assembly on ways to increase transportation safety consciousness or improve safety practices; 6. To assist entities of state government and political subdivisions of the Commonwealth in enhancing their efforts to ensure safe transportation, including the dissemination of relevant materials and the rendering of technical or other advice; 7. To collect, tabulate, correlate, analyze, evaluate, and review the data gathered by various entities of the state government in regard to transporta- tion operations, management, and accidents, especially the information gathered by the Department of Motor Vehicles, the Department of State Police, and the State Corporation Commission; 51 ACTION NO. /~, ITEM NO. ` AT A VIRGIN A HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY RADMINISTRATION C LATER COUNTY, MEETING DATE: February 11, 1992 AGENDA ITEM: Authorization to Pay Certain Legal Fees COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY' The County agreed to share with the Town of Vinton the legal expenses for the litigation with Grumman Emergency Products Inc. over the defective ladder on the aerial fire truck. BACKGROUND' In November of 1991, the Board agreed to join with the Town of Vinton in legal action against Grumman Emergency Products, Inc. and other possible defendants over the defective ladder on the aerial fire truck which the County had jointly funded with the Town. Since this vehicle is titled to the Town of Vinton it was agreed that the Town Attorney should handle this litigation. The lawsuit was filed the end of December of 1991. Attached you will find a copy of the billing statement from the Town of Vinton in the amount of $1,151.95. It is anticipated that future billings shall occur on a regular basis in the future. FISCAL IMPACTS' $1,151.95 at this time, plus future billings. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board of Supervisors authorize the payment of this invoice from the Board's contingency fund. 1 ~~ Respectfully submitted, ~ V L ~ .~~~ Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney Action Approved (x) Motion by Edwar~ r unhink Eddy Denied ( ) Johnson Received ( ) Kohinke Referred Nickens Minnix to cc: File c;\~+p51\agenda\general\legal.fee Paul Mahoney,County Attorney Diane Hyatt, Director, Finance Reta Busher, Director, Management & Budget Vote No Yes Abs X x x x X 2 TOWN OF VINTON P. O. BOX 338 VINTON, VIRGINIA 24179 PHONE (703) 983-0608 FAX (7031 983-0621 January 27, 1992 TO: Joe Obenchain, Senior Assistant County Attorney County of Roanoke POB 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 STATEMENT Statement From Natkin, Heslep, Siegel and Natkin, PC For Professional Services Rendered Regarding Litigation With Grumman Aircraft Company December 18, 1991 Statement -- $623.89 Fifty Percent (50%) Due From Roanoke County To Town of Vinton -Balance Unpaid January 21, 1992 Statement -- $1,680.00 Fifty Percent (50%) Due From Roanoke County To Town of Vinton DUE UPON RECEIPT ~' JOAN B. FURBISH FINANCE DIRECTOR/TREASURER $311.95 840.00 1$ •1 ~r~ NATKIN, HESLEP, SIEGEL & NATKIN, PC 13 SOUTH MAIN STREET P.O. BOX 4205 LEXINGTON, VIRGINIA 24450 JANUARY 21, 1992 BRAD CORCORAN VINTON TOWN MANAGER 311 S. POLLARD STREET P. O. BOX 338 VINTON, VA 24179 LITIGATION WITH GRUMMAN AIRCRAFT CO. - REs FIRETRUCK 12/12/91 REVISE DROFFLIMITATIONS FOR BREACHNOF CONTRACT ISSUE OF STATUTE 12/16/91 TELEPHONE CONFERENCE WITH WAYNE HESLEP REs PREPARATION. OF SUIT TELEPHONE CONFERENCE WITH STEVE GRIST REs PREPARATION OF SUIT 12/17/91 TELEPHONE CONFERENCE WITH BANK CONVERSATION WITH CHIEF FUGUA MEET WITH CHIEF FUQUA 12/18/91 TELEPHONE CONFERENCE WITH BUCK; CONFERENCE WITH STEVE 12/19/91 CONFERENCE WITH MR. HEARTAS~LLAND SETTLEMENTRCONFERENCEFOR JUDGMENT, STRATEGY FOR C , TARGETED FOR JANUARY; REVISE MOTION FOR JUDGMENT; LETTER TO MR. OBENSCHAIN TRANSMITTING SAME WORK ON MOTION FOR JUDGEMENT WITH STEVE 12/20/91 REVISE MOTION FOR JUDGMENT AND FAX SAME TO MR. OBENSHAIN 12/23/91 TELEPHONE CALL TO MR. OBENSHAIN REs MOTION FOR JUDGMENT; TELEPHONE CALLCORPORATEECOUNTYROF ROANOKEEASSPARTLYOPLAINTIFF JUDGMENT TO IN BRAD CORCORAN 12/23/91 CRONFEROANOKEICOUNTYDPARTICIPATION CONFERENCE WITH STEVE GRIST MOTION FOR .JUDGEMENT ' ) r PAGE 2 CONFERENCE WITH WAYNE HESLEP MOTION FOR JUDGEMENT AND SETTLEMENT 91 PREPARE AFFIDAVITS FOR SERVICE OF PROCESS ON OUT OF STATE 12/26/ DEFENDANTS 12/30/91 REVIEW AND REVISE AFFIDAVWITHFOEGALRASSISTANTEREETFILING; COMMONWEALTH; CONFERENCE TELEPHONE CALL TO CLERK RE: SAME 01/02/92 TELEPHONE CALL TO MR. FETDNGNREVISEDTAFFrIDAVITSNFORESERVICE LETTER TO CLERK TRANSMIT ON SECRETARY OF THE COMMONWEALTH CONFERENCE WITH STEVE GRIST COSTS ADVANCED 12/30/91 ROANOKE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT HENRICO COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT 01/02/92 SECRETARY OF THE COMMONWEALTH CWC TRAVEL REIMBURSEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES RENDERED COSTS (See Page 3 for Itemization) Previous Balance 01/08/92 Payment - Thank you/Costs 01/08/92 Payment - Thank You Hours 15.20 Amount --- $1,444.00 $236.00 $623.89 ($6.39) ($617.50) Total Payments Balance Due ($623.89) $1,680.00 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRIIARY 11, 1992 ORDINANCE 21192-4 AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYANCE OF A WELL LOT LOCATED IN THE LA BELLEVUE SUBDIVISION OF ROANORE COUNTY TO LAWRENCE E. MCMAHON WHEREAS, the County has ceased to use the well located on a certain well lot and the subject parcel will no longer be used for this specified purpose; and WHEREAS, the County has received an offer to purchase this well lot for a price that reflects the fair market value of the property. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That pursuant to the provisions of § 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter, the acquisition and disposition of real estate can be authorized only by ordinance. A first reading of this ordinance was held on January 28, 1992; a second reading was held on February 11, 1992; and 2. That pursuant to the provisions of § 16.01 of the Charter of Roanoke County, the remaining rights in the subject parcel of real estate are hereby declared to be surplus and the condition applicable to the property renders it unacceptable and unavailable for other public uses; and 3. That the offer of Five Hundred Dollars ($500) from Lawrence E. McMahon for this well lot is hereby accepted and all other offers, if any, are rejected. 1 4. That the sale and conveyance of the subject parcel, described as a well lot located in the La Bellevue Subdivision (Tax Map No. 39.02-3-24) of the Hollins Magisterial District of Roanoke County, Virginia, to Lawrence E. McMahon is hereby authorized. That the proceeds from the sale of this well lot shall be paid into the capital facility account of the Utility Fund. 5. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions as may be necessary to accomplish this conveyance, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy, NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: /~ • C.~ Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Clifford Craig, Dirctor, Utility Paul Mahoney County Attorney John D. Wiley, Director, Real Estate Assessment Diane H. Hyatt, Director, Finance 2 ACTION # ITEM NUMBER /7 ~' AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 11, 1992 AGENDA ITEM: Second Reading of Ordinance Authorizing the Conveyance of a Well Lot to Lawrence E. McMahon COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND' A well lot located in the LaBellevue Subdivision and identified by Tax Map Number 39.02-3-24 has been previously declared surplus property. The well located on this property was abandoned due to low water production. The well has been sealed to protect the ground water. Lawrence E. McMahon, an adjacent property owner, has offered to purchase this well lot for $500. The County Director of Real Estate Assessment has determined that $500 reflects the fair market value of the property. Mr. McMahon will incorporate the well lot into his existing property to prevent the well lot from becoming a non-conforming parcel. The first reading was held on January 28, 1992. STAFF RECOMMENDATION' Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors adopt the Ordinance after the second reading authorizing the conveyance of this parcel to Lawrence E. McMahon. ~-i SUBMITTED BY: Cliffor a'g, P.E. Utility Director ACTION VOTE Approved ( ) Motion by: No Denied ( ) Eddy _ Received ( ) Johnson _ Referred Kohinke _ to Minnix _ Nickens APPROVED: C~~~~ ~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator Yes Abs ~-i AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 1992 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CONVEYANCE OF A WELL LOT LOCATED IN THE LA BELLEVUE SUBDIVISION OF ROANOKE COUNTY TO LAWRENCE E. MCMAHON WHEREAS, the County has ceased to use the well located on a certain well lot and the subject parcel will no longer be used for this specified purpose; and WHEREAS, the County has received an offer to purchase this well lot for a price that reflects the fair market value of the property. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That pursuant to the provisions of § 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter, the acquisition and disposition of real estate can be authorized only by ordinance. A first reading of this ordinance was held on January 28, 1992; a second reading was held on February 11, 1992; and 2. That pursuant to the provisions of § 16.01 of the Charter of Roanoke County, the remaining rights in the subject parcel of real estate are hereby declared to be surplus and the condition applicable to the property renders it unacceptable and unavailable for other public uses; and 3. That the offer of Five Hundred Dollars ($500) from Lawrence E. McMahon for this well lot is hereby accepted and all other offers, if any, are rejected. 1 A" l }1~ t`~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF sUPERVI80R8 OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINITA R ON TUESDAY RFEBRUARY 1~1 T 199D2 INISTRATION CEN ORDINANCE 21191-5 AMENDING AND REENACTING SEC. 9-21, AMENDMENT OF ARTICLE II, VIR_ GINIA STATEWIDE FIRE PREVENTION CODE OF CHAPTER 9, FIRE PREVENTION AND PROTECTION RELATING TO THE MARRING OF FIRE LANES WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, has adopted the Virginia Statewide Fire Prevention Code, 8th edition, with amendments, as the Fire Prevention Code of the County of Roanoke; and WHEREAS, questions have arisen regarding the interpretation of such code as to the proper requirements for designating fire lanes; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on January 28, 1992; and the second reading was held on February 11, 1992. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, as follows: 1. That Article II, "Virginia Statewide Fire Prevention Code" of Chapter 9 of the Roanoke County Code is hereby amended and reenacted as follows: Sec. 9-21. Amendments. The Virginia Statewide Fire Prevention Code is hereby amended and changed pursuant to section 27-97 of the Code of Virginia in the following respects: (14) F 313 5 Specifications. Add section F-313.5 as follows: "Fire lanes shall conform to the following specifications: .- r observant person. * ~ (E) . Any existing marking in the area designated as afire lane shall be obliterated or painted over in a manner approved by the fire marshal." 2. This ordinance shall be effective from and after February 1, 1992. On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy, NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: 7~~~ ~- ~ Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Circuit Court C. O. Clemens, Judge Kenneth Trabue, Judge Steven A. McGraw, Clerk Family Court Services J&D Relations Court Philip Trompeter, JudChief Judge Joseph M. Clark, II, Peggy H. Gray, Clerk Intake Counsellor Michael Lazzuri, Court Services General District Court John L. Apostolou, Judge George Harris, Judge Theresa A. Childress, Clerk Skip Burkart, Commonwealth Attorney Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney Magistrates Sherri Krantz/Betty Perry Main Library John H. Cease, Police3151Church Avenue, S.W., Rke 24016 Roanoke Law Library, Roanoke County Code Book Gerald S. Holt, Sheriff John M. Chambliss, Jr., Assistant County Administrator Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance O. Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections ctor Planning & Zoning Terrance L. Harrington, Dire , Kenneth L. Hogan, Chief Animal Control Officer Thomas C. Fuqua, Chief, Fire & Rescue Mark W. Light, Deputy Chief, Fire & Rescue .s- ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER f7wp~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANO E COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 11, 1992 SUBJECT: Ordinance amending and reenacting Sec. 9-21, Amendment of Article II, Virainia Statewide Fire Prevention Code of Chapter 9, Fire Prevention and Protection relating to the marking of Fire Lanes COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: - Q BACKGROUND: Roanoke County adopted the Virginia Statewide Fire Prevention Code, 8th edition, in September of 1991. At the time the Code was adopted there were no changes to the amendment section that specifically addresses situations in Roanoke County. Since the adoption of the Fire Prevention Code of the County of Roanoke, situations have occurred that question the proper application of the code as it relates to fire lanes. SUNIlKARY OF INFORMATION The current code states: The curb or pavement edge of all fire lanes shall be painted yellow. The intent of the fire marshals office was that if a curb existed the curb would be painted; in the event that no curb existed then the pavement edge would be painted. Developers and business owners regularly question the code and proceed to paint the pavement even in cases where curbs exist. For a fire lane to be easily identified and legally defensible, the General District Court Judges in Roanoke County require that curbs be marked if a curb exists. Additional markings are considered to be an enhancement of the basic curb marking; however, failure to at least have the curbs marked results in parking in the fire lanes and dismissal of court cases. The second item to be addressed is adding the requirement that a fire lane sign be erected at the beginning and the end, as well as every one hundred (100) feet of a fire lane. Current code only specifies a sign every 100 feet; thus, it is often difficult for citizens to actually determine where a fire lane begins and ends. A combination of signage and proper markings will give clear indications to vehicle operators where fire lanes are located. FISCAL IMPACT• None ~'~ STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The first reading of this ordinance was held January 28, 1992. Staff recommends adopting the ordinance as prepared to change the Fire Prevention the existe and trequireoasignage be placed uatsthe be marked where y beginning and end of every fire lane. SUBMITTED BY: Mark W. Light Deputy Chief APPROVED: ~~ Elmer C. Hodge, Jr. County Administrator _______________ -------------- VOTE ACTION Approved ( ) Motion by: Denied ( ) Received ( ) Ref erred To No Yes Abs Eddy Johnson Kohinke Minnix Nickens t • f{-~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 1992 ORDINANCE AMENDING AND REENACTING SEC. 9-21, AMENDMENT OF ARTICLE II, VIRGINIA STATEWIDE FIRE PREVENTION CODE OF CHAPTER 9, FIRE PREVENTION AND PROTECTION RELATING TO THE MARKING OF FIRE LANES WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, has adopted the Virginia Statewide Fire Prevention Code, 8th edition, with amendments, as the Fire Prevention Code of the County of Roanoke; and WHEREAS, questions have arisen regarding the interpretation of such code as to the proper requirements for designating fire lanes; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on January 28, 1992; and the second reading was held on February 11, 1992. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, as follows: 1. That Article II, "Virginia Statewide Fire Prevention Code" of Chapter 9 of the Roanoke County Code is hereby amended and reenacted as follows: Sec. 9-21. Amendments. The Virginia Statewide Fire Prevention Code is hereby amended and changed pursuant to section 27-97 of the Code of Virginia in the following respects: (14) F-313.5, Specifications. Add section F-313.5 as follows: "Fire lanes shall conform to the following specifications: ~• observant person. ... .::. a l l F' 1 L... I t 11 uaa ~~ ~ ~•~ l Any existing marking in the area designated as a fire lane shall be obliterated or painted over in a manner approved by the fire marshal." 2. This ordinance shall be effective from and after February 1, 1992. c:\wp51\agenda\code\firelane.ord r ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BORECOUNTYPADMINISTRATIONACENTER ONTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11,1992 ORDINANCE 21192- E AOLDO STARREY HSEWAGEE TREATMENT $PA~T A PORTION OF TH PROPERTY, TO THE VALLEY SOCCER CLUB, INC. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That pursuant to the provisions of § 18.04 of the Charter of Roanoke County, a first reading concerning the lease of a portion (Area 2) of the Old Starkey Sewage Treatment Plant as shown on Exhibit "A" attached to this ordinance was held on October 22, 1991. The second reading on this matter was held on February 11, 1992. 2. That it is in the County's best interests to lease this property to the The Valley Soccer Club, Inc., a Virginia corpora- tion, in order to assist the Club by providing facilities for its athletic activities. In exchange for the authorization to utilize a portion of the Old Starkey Sewage Treatment Plant, The Valley Soccer Club, Inc. has indicated its willingness to construct several soccer fields on the property. 3. That the County Administrator is authorized to execute such documents and take such actions on behalf of Roanoke County as are necessary to accomplish this transaction, all of which shall be upon a form approved by the County Attorney. On motion of Supervisor Kohinke to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy, 1 NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Mary H. llen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File John Chambliss, Interim Director, Parks & Recreation Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney John D. Willey, Director, Real Estate Assessment Clifford Craig, Director, Utility 2 ~~ 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: February 11, 1992 AGENDA ITEM: ORDINANCE AOTHORIZING THE LEASE OF REAL ESTATE, A PORTION OF THE OLD STARREY SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT PROPERTY, TO THE VALLEY 8000ER CLIIB COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: EXECUTIVE SUNIlKARY This ordinance would authorize the lease of a portion of the Old Starkey Sewage Treatment Plant property to the Valley Soccer Club. BACKGROUND• Over the past several months, County staff has been discussing the utilization of the Old Starkey Sewage Treatment Plant property as a soccer facility with representatives of the Valley Soccer Club. As a result of these discussions, this ordinance is submitted to the Board of Supervisors for its consideration. On October 22, 1991 the Board approved the issuance of a special exception permit to construct recreational soccer fields on this site in accordance with the County's Zoning Ordinance. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: § 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter requires that the granting of a lease to use public property be accomplished only by ordinance. The first reading of this ordinance will be held on October 22, 1991; the second reading will be held on February 11, 1992. This lease agreement identifies that portion of the Old Starkey Sewage Treatment Plant property which shall be leased to the The Valley Soccer Club, Inc. until December 31, 2002 (a ten- year lease). This lease provides that the tenant shall have the option to extend this lease for two (2) additional five (5) year terms. The lease limits the use of this property for recreational purposes, namely for youth soccer activities. The Roanoke County Parks and Recreation Department shall be permitted to utilize this property for its programs at no charge when not in conflict with 1 ... ~-3 The Valley Soccer Club, Inc. activities. The long delay between the first and second readings was caused by the tenant's petition to the State Corporation Commission for a corporate charter. The Valley Soccer Club, Inc. was granted its' charter on January 10, 1992. FISCAL IMPACTS• The Valley Soccer Club, Inc. shall be responsible for maintaining the property in compliance with the written County maintenance standards. Any improvements that The Valley Soccer Club, Inc. may make to this property shall revert to the County upon the termination of the lease. The Valley Soccer Club, Inc. has indicated its willingness to construct several soccer fields on the property. It appears that this could be a valuable addition to the County and could provide valuable recreational and park improvements for the use of the public. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board favorably consider the adoption of the attached ordinance. Respectfully submitted, ~ .~a:~~ ohn M. Chambli s, Jr. Interim Director of Parks & Recreation Approved by, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator Action Vote No Yes Abs Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Motion by cc: Paul Mahoney Jim McAden, Balzer & Associates c:\wp51\agenda\reales[\soccer.rpt Eddy Johnson Kohinke Minnix Nickens 2 •~ ~{-3 A'I' A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11,1992 ORDINANCE AOTHORISING THE LEASE OF REAL ESTATE, A PORTION OF THE OLD STARREY SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT PROPERTY, TO THE VALLEY SOCCER CLOB, INC. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That pursuant to the provisions of § 18.04 of the Charter of Roanoke County, a first reading concerning the lease of a portion (Area 2) of the Old Starkey Sewage Treatment Plant as shown on Exhibit "A" attached to this ordinance was held on October 22, 1991. The second reading on this matter was held on February 11, 1992. 2. That it is in the County's best interests to lease this property to the The Valley Soccer Club, Inc., a Virginia corpora- tion, in order to assist the Club by providing facilities for its athletic activities. In exchange for the authorization to utilize a portion of the Old Starkey Sewage Treatment Plant, The Valley Soccer Club, Inc. has indicated its willingness to construct several soccer fields on the property. 3. That the County Administrator is authorized to execute such documents and take such actions on behalf of Roanoke County as are necessary to accomplish this transaction, all of which shall be upon a form approved by the County Attorney. c:\wp57~agenda~realest~soccer.ord 1 ACTION NUMBER ITEM NUMBER AT A REGULAR HELDIAT THE ROANOKER COUNTY ADMINISTRP,TIONRC LATER COUNTY, VIRGIN MEETING DATE: February 11, 1992 SIIBJECT: Appointments to Committees, Commissions and Boards COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: 1 League of Older Americans Advisory Council One year term of Frances R. Holsinger will expire March 31, 1992. 2. Lea ue of Older Americans Board of Directors One year term of Murry K. White will expire March 31, 1992. 3 Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Three-year unexpired term of Karen Padgett, Hollins Magisterial District. Ms. Padgett has resigned, effective January 30, 1992 because she will no longer be living in Roanoke County. 4 Planning Commission Four-year unexpired term of Marian Chappelle, Catawba Magisterial District. Her term expires December 31, 1993. Ms. Marion Chappelle is resigning effective March 1, 1992. 5 Roanoke Valley Regional Solid Waste Management Board Four-year unexpired term of John Hubbard. Mr. Hubbard has resigned following his appointment as Chief Executive Officer of the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority. His term will expire July 31, 1995. 6 Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Two-year initial term of John Hubbard. Mr. Hubbard has resigned following his appointment as Chief Executive Officer of the Authority. His term will expire December 31, 1993. ~ ~- 7 7 Transportation and Safety Commission Four-year terms of Leo Trenor, Member at Large and Charlotte Lichtenstein, Neighborhood representative expired January 1, 1992. These appointments are made by area of expertise or interest, not magisterial district. Ms. Lichenstein and Mr. Trenor have served two terms and are not eligible for reappointment theirvtermshbeTextendedato Juned30af1992Commission has asked tha Please see the attached for information on these committees, commissions and boards. SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: Mary H. Allen Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator Clerk to the Board ----- -------- ---------- ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved ( ) Motion by: Edd y Denied ( ) Johnson Received ( ) Kohinke Referred ( ) Minnix To ( ) Nickens ~' ~~~ L-1 LEAGIIE OF OLDER AMERICANS: ADVISORY COIINCIL AND BOARD OF DIRECTORS A. COMPOSITION' To consist of nine (9) members on the Board of Director, representing the entire 5th Planning District. ADVISORY COIINCIL: To consist of twenty-seven (27) members; one (1) Roanoke County appointee; to serve a one (1) year term, and may be re- appointed. B. DIITIEB: To assure that a system of services for the aging be developed; To coordinate and evaluate existing services; To identify unmet needs of older persons; To serve as a strong advocate for the aging population; To educate the general public of the conditions of the elderly citizenry; To advise local planning bodies on all aging issues; Act as grantee and the the administering agency for programs and services. Serve as the Area Agency on Aging: Provide elderly persons and handicapped persons with housing facilities, and services specially designed to meet their physical, social and psychological needs. To buy, own, sell, assign, mortgage or lease any interest in real estate and personal property and to construct, maintain and operate improvements thereon necessary or incident to the accomplishments of the purposes set forth in the Articles. The Board of Directors shall: Carry out the policies and instructions of the League in a manner consistent with the Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws. Create committees and delegate authority to the committees for carrying out the objectives of this organization. C. MEETING SCHEDIILE: Board and Advisory Council meet on alternate months. ~- ~=- 3 PARRS & RECREATION ADVISORY COMMISSION A. COMPOSITION: (Resolution 85-151.N, September 10, 1985) To be composed of two t2) members from each magisterial district and one (1) member at large from the County. All members to be appointed by the Board of Supervisors. Original terms shall be staggared. Upon expiration of their original terms, each succeeding term shall be for three (3) years, expiring on June 30th. B. DUTIES: The Commission shall serve as the advisory body to the Director of Parks and Recreation of Roanoke County; the Commission shall suggest policies to the County Administrator and the Board of Supervisors through the Director of Parks and Recreation, within its powers and responsibilities as stated in this resolution. The Commission shall serve as a liaison between the Department of Parks and Recreation, the Board of Supervisors, and the citizens of the community. The Commission will work through the Parks and Recreation staff on all related matters. The Commission shall consult with and advise recreation policies, programs, personnel, finances, and the need for acquiring and disposing of lands and properties related to the total community recreation program, and to its long-range, projected program for ' recreation. The Commission shall assume duties for the recreation purposes as follows: Make recommendations (1) for the establishment of a system of supervised recreation for the County; (2) to set apart for use as parks, playgrounds, recreation centers, water areas, or other recreation areas and structures, any lands or buildings owned by or leased to the County and for approval by the Board of Supervisors and may suggest improvements of such lands and for the construction and for the equipping and staffing of such buildings and structures as may be necessary to the recreation program within those funds allocated; (3) and advise in the acceptance by the County of any grant, gift, bequest or donation, any personal or real property offered or made available for recreation purposes and which it judges to be of present or possible future useanr rrantatdevise Any gift, bequest of money or other property, y g of real or personal property so acquired shall be held, by the County, used and finally disposed of in accordance with the terms under which such grant, gift or devise is made and accepted; (4) and advise in the construction, equipping, operation and maintenance of parks, playgrounds, recreation centers and all buildings and structures necessary or useful to the Department function, and will advise in regard to other recreation facilities which are owned or controlled by the unit or leased or loaned to the unit. `5_~_ /^~ / _ ~ ~ ~ 1 ( i ~'- ~ ~ '~ -~ p ;~ C+ ~T c~ ~. 2 ~ ~-% v ~ ~l ~ !a •'~ G1 1~.~ ~ l ~ n O ~ (_ •~l c `~2 'J C.. ~ -1-~1 T L.J l_ ~l ~1 ~ ~ 1 ~ I I..~ 'a./ ~' 1 I~ .l~ ~.~ Ro~.~~~~ ~~~ . -~ T-~ ROANORE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION A. COMPOSITION: (Summarized from State Code 15.1-437) To consist of not less than five (5),nor more than fifteen (15) members, appointed by the Board of Supervisors; all shall be residents of the county or municipality, qualified by knowledge and experience to make decisions on questions of community growth and development. One members may be a member of the governing body, and one may be a member of the administrative branch. B. DUTIES: To exercise general supervision of, and make regulations for the administration of its affairs; Prescribe rules pertaining to its investigations and hearings; Supervise its fiscal affairs and responsibilities, under rules and regulations prescribed by the governing body; Keep a complete record of its proceedings and be responsible for the custody and preservation of its papers and documents; Make recommendations and an annual report to the governing body concerning the operation of the commission and the status of planning within its jurisdiction; Prepare, publish and distribute reports, ordinances and other material relating to its activites; Prepare and submit an annual budget in the manner prescribed by the governing body of the county; If deemed advisable, establish an advisory committee or committees . C. MEETING SCHEDULE: Third Tuesday of each month at 7:30 p.m., Roanoke County Administration Center. .r- y February 4, 1992 Mr, Terry T. Harrington, Secretary Roanoke County Planning Commission Roanoke, Va. Dear Mr. Harrington: I am writing this letter to resign my position as a Planning Commissioner for Roanoke County, effective March 1, 1992. However, I sincerely regret that I am unable to completdO notthave enough I find that with my many responsibilities fanning commissioner. time to effectively do what is necessary as a p I hope this will be a producei~eofeRoanokeoCounty,to guide the economic growth and developm n With deepe r ect, Marian F. Chappel e cc: Ed Kohinke Catawba District ~~~ ROANORE VALLEY REGIONAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD A. COMPOSITION (Summarized from Contract of July 29, 1975) The Board makeup shall consist of six (6) members; two (2)members from the County; three (3) members from Roanoke City and one (1) member from the Town of Vinton; to serve four year terms; appointed or elected by the respective governing bodies, none of whom shall be elected officials of the political subdivision. The local governing body within whose jurisdiction the facilities are located shall be authorized to appoint one additional ex-officio member, who may or may not be a member of such governing body, nor shall be entitled to a vote. At intervals of five years the composition and size shall be redetermined and there shall be one member from each political subdivision owning an interest in the real estate used as a landfill, but at no time shall the Board consist of more than eleven (11) members excluding the ex-officio member. B. DUTIES The Board shall administer the operation of a regional landfill and make policy. The Board shall hire or employ all persons necessary to operate the landfill; all employees shall be under direct control of the Board for all matters except for the payment of wages, salaries, workmen's compensation benefits and other fringe benefits which shall be contracted. The Board shall have the responsibility of purchasing all supplies, materials and equipment necessary for the proper operation of the landfill. C. MEETING SCHEDULE Second Wednesday of each month at 8:30 a.m.;held at the Sewage Treatment Plant Conference Room. Z~~r ROANORE VALLEY RESOIIRCE AIITHORITY A. COMPOSITION (Summarized from Resolution RA91-13, Articles of Incorporation) The Governing Body of each participating political subdivision shall appoint the number of members who may be members of the governing body set forth as follows: County of Roanoke - f our City of Roanoke - two Town of Vinton - one The governing body of the County of Roanoke shall always appoint a majority of the members, whenever an additional political subdivision shall join the Authority, Roanoke County shall be entitled to appoint one or more additional members to maintain the majority. B. TERMS After staggered initial terms, each member shall be appointed for a four-year term. The governing body may remove at any time, without cause, any member appointed by it and appoint a successor member to fill the unexpired portion of the removed members' s term. C. DIITIES The Authority will exercise all the powers granted to the Authority to acquire, finance, construct, operate, manage and maintain a garbage and refuse collection and disposal system and related facilities. The Authority will fulfill other requirements outlined in the official documents establishing the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority on October 23, 1991. D. MEETING SCHEDIILE The Resource Authority will meet on the third Thursday of the month at 9:30 a.m. and will establish future meeting dates at their organizational meeting in January. ~. -5 , to AOANp~.~ 0 ~. .~ Z z v a 1$ E50 $8 SFSQUICEN7ENN~P~ ABeautifulBeginning JOHN R. HUBBARD. P.E. ASSISTANT COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR C~nunf~ of ~nttnnk~e February 7, 1992 Members of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors ALL•AMERIG CITY '~Ii~' 1979 ~9a9 COMMUNITY SERVIGEES AND DEVELOPMENTi Gentlemen: This is to request acceptance of my resignation from the Roanoke Valley esource Authority effectivegMarch 1o 1992 and the Roanoke Valley R I appreciate the confidence you have placed in me with my appointments to these Boards over the past years. Sincerely, ~/~ John R Hubbard, P.E. Assist nt County Administrator JRH:wr P.O. BOX 29800 • ROANOKE. VIRGINIA 24018-0798 • (703) 772-2071 TRANSPORTATION AND SAFETY COMMISSION ROANORE COUNTY A. COMPOSITION• (Section 33.1 - 398, Code of Virginia) (Resolution 84-37 approved February 14, 1984) To consist of eleven (11) members of the Commission appointed by the Board of Supervisors. Terms shall be four years, but no members shall serve for more than two (2) full successive terms. Initial appointments to be staggered B. DUTIES: The Commission shall have the duty and responsibility to: (a) review, examine, and approve all highway safety grants and recommend same to the Board of Supervisors; (b) promote all highway and transportation safety programs; (c) make recommendations through the Board of Supervisors to VDH&T regarding signs, road improvements, and engineering improvement; and (d) develop and establish through the Board of Supervisors a safety program for the County and sponsor an annual awards banquet for persons excelling in the application of safety measures and procedures. C. MEETING SCHEDULE: Minimum of 4 meetings per year. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 1992 RESOLUTION 21192-7 APPROVING AND CONCIIRRING 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 February 11, 1992, 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 6, inclusive, as follows: 1. Confirmation of Committee Appointments to the Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals, the Grievance Panel, and the Library Board. 2. Adoption of a Resolution requesting the Virginia Department of Transportation to abandon a portion of Route 601. 3. Request for Acceptance of Huntridge Road and Golden Circle into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. 4. Acceptance of Sanitary Sewer Facilities serving the Orchards. 5. Adoption of a Resolution requesting that the Virginia Department of Transportation decrease the speed limit and prohibit tractor-trailers on portions of Colonial Avenue. 6. Adoption of a Resolution of Appreciation to Lingerfelt Associates for supporting the Easter Seal Summer Concerts at Valleypointe Park. 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 to adopt the resolution with Item 2 removed for a separate vote, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy, NAYS: None On motion of Supervisor Nickens to adopt the resolution in Item 2, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Kohinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy, NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Supervisor Johnson A COPY TESTE: • ~~~.C.Q e~c~ Mary H. len, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Cliff Craig, Director, Utilities ACTION NO. A-21192-7.a ITEM NUMBER si AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February il, 1992 AGENDA ITEM: Confirmation of Committee Appointments to the Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals, Grievance Panel and Library Board COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: At the January 28, 1992 meeting, the Board of Supervisors made the following nominations: Buildinct Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals Supervisor Nickens nominated Thomas Darnall to another four-year term expiring January 22, 1996. Grievance Panel Supervisor Eddy nominated Kenneth Lussen to another two-year term expiring February 23, 1994. Library Board Supervisor Eddy nominated Charlotte Lavinder to a four year term expiring December 31, 1995. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the above nominations be confirmed by the Board of Supervisors. Mary H. Allen Clerk to the Board ~~~ ~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ~"" ACTION VOTE Motion b Bob L. Johnson No Yes Abs Approved (x) y• Eddy x Denied ( ) Johnson x Received ( ) Kohinke x Referred ( ) Minnix x To ( ) Nickens x cc: File Building Code Board of Adjustments & Appeals File Grievance Panel File Library Board File 2/20/92 CORRECTED ~PORD ~~GRAY~~ TO ~~BLUE~~ 4TH PARAGRAPH AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 1992 RESOLUTION 21192-7.b REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF THE ABANDONMENT OF A PORTION OF ROUTE 601 BY THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY ROAD SYSTEM BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: WHEREAS, Secondary Route 601, from 0.22 MN NCL Roanoke to Route 11, a distance of 2.135 miles, has been altered, and a new road has been constructed and approved by the State Transportation Commissioner, which new road serves the same citizens as the road so altered; and WHEREAS, certain sections of this new road follow new locations, these being shown on the attached sketch titled, "Changes in Secondary System Due to Relocation and Construction on Route 601, Project 0601-080-119,C501 dated at Richmond, Virginia, May 26, 1967." NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the sections of old location, i.e., Section 1, shown in blue on the aforementioned sketch, a total distance of 0.17 miles, be, and the same hereby is, abandoned as a public road, pursuant to Section 33.1-155 of the Code Virginia, as amended; On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Kohinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy, NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Supervisor Johnson 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 Certified Copy for Virginia Department of Transportation ... NORTB .. ~y toy, a;o ~) .. t~q^ 7 i>j ~ al...r n91 ca,,.l 6 •-. ~ ~ w m II S• " ~ ~ l I / • r j» ]~] np~ 1 ~I: `" ~y w SI ~ I ~ I r 9 ~/ D ` I n~ rw: ~ n~= iM li? a i.s .. '! ~ fnrw '~ J/~ f ¢ p. Il. F -' .Ili yb. f pi N} f S 9 " -~i Y N ~1/, 1 '! \ I r _ \ I'1 y \~ ~ \ I~ I ~~\ \` ~ \ . ] \ - ~ - \ II - \ ~ \\ . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, o ~ ~ __, J~ ~/~ /\ .+~ '~ COMMUNITY SSRVICBS CHANGES IN SECONDARY SYSTEM DUE TO RELOCATION li AND CONSTRUCTION ON ROUTE 601, AND DBVBLOPMBNTf PROJECT 060 ] -080-1 19 , C501 , B615 3 .. f .. .+' ,.i• ) ] ice. ~i ACTION # ITEM NUMBER AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 11, 1992 AGENDA ITEM: Adoption of a Resolution to request the Virginia Department of Transportation to abandon a portion of Route 601 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~~ ~'~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: County staff is requesting the Board of Supervisors to adopt the attached Resolution, which requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to abandon a portion of Route 601 due to relocation and construction. BACKGROUND In 1978, the Virginia Department of Transportation discontinued maintenance of approximately .17 miles of old Route 601 (presently numbered Route 115 and named Plantation Road) between Vista Avenue (Route 1855), and Hershberger Road (Route 625) due to the relocation and construction. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION Heritage Investments and Townside Construction Company, Inc. are requesting the abandonment because the former road places an encumbrance on the development of their property, and the abandonment will enable them to secure the right-of-way from illegal dumping. STAFF RECOMMENDATION County staff recommends that the~Board of Supervisors adopt the attached Resolution to discontinue and abandon approximately .17 miles of old Route 601 as shown on the attached map. ~~~ SU, ITTED BY: ~ APPROVED BY: ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ Arnold Covey, Directo~ Elmer C. Hodge of Engineering & Inspections County Administrator --------------------------------------------------------------- Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Ref erred To Motion by: ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy Johnson Kohinke Minnix Nickens pc: Paul Mahoney, County Attorney John D. Willey, Director of Real Estate Assessment Virginia Department of Transportation . "~~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 1992 RESOLUTION REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF THE ABANDONMENT OF A PORTION OF ROUTE 601 BY THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY ROAD SYSTEM BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: WHEREAS, Secondary Route 601, from 0.22 MN NCL Roanoke to Route 11, a distance of 2.135 miles, has been altered, and a new road has been constructed and approved by the State Transportation Commissioner, which new road serves the same citizens as the road so altered; and WHEREAS, certain sections of this new road follow new locations, these being shown on the attached sketch titled, "Changes in Secondary System Due to Relocation and Construction on Route 601, Project 0601-080-119,C501 dated at Richmond, Virginia, May 26, 1967." NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the sections of old location, i.e., Section 1, shown in gray on the aforementioned sketch, a total distance of 0.17 miles, be, and the same hereby is, abandoned as a public road, pursuant to Section 33.1-155 of the Code Virginia, as amended; 4 _.~ ~. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRIIARY 11, 1992 RESOLUTION 21192-7.b REQUESTING ACCEPTANCB OF THE ABANDONMENT OF A PORTION OF ROUTE 601 BY THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY ROAD SYSTEM BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: WHEREAS, Secondary Route 601, from 0.22 MN NCL Roanoke to Route 11, a distance of 2.135 miles, has been altered, and a new road has been constructed and approved by the State Transportation Commissioner, which new road serves the same citizens as the road so altered; and WHEREAS, certain sections of this new road follow new locations, these being shown on the attached sketch titled, "Changes in Secondary System Due to Relocation and Construction on Route 601, Project 0601-080-119,C501 dated at Richmond, Virginia, May 26, 1967." NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the sections of old location, i.e., Section 1, shown in gray on the aforementioned sketch, a total distance of 0.17 miles, be, and the same hereby is, abandoned as a public road, pursuant to Section 33.1-155 of the Code Virginia, as amended; On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Kohinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy, NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Supervisor Johnson i e .~ .+~ CORRECTED 2/14/92 TO ADD MAP IN PARAGRAPH 2 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SIIPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 1992 RESOLUTION 21191-7.C REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF HUNTRIDGE ROAD AND GOLDEN CIRCLE INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY ROAD SYSTEM BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That this matter came this day to be heard upon the proceedings herein, and upon the application of Huntridge Road, from the end of state maintenance to the intersection of Rome Drive, for a distance of 0.19 miles and Golden Circle, from the intersection of Huntridge Road to the cul-de-sac, for a distance of 0.06 miles to be accepted and made a part of the Secondary System of State Highways under Section 33.1-229 of the Virginia State Code. 2. That it appears to the Board that drainage easements and a fifty (50) foot right-of-way for said roads have heretofore been dedicated by virtue of a certain map known as The Orchards Applewood, Sections 6 and 7, Subdivision which maps are recorded in Plat Book 11, Page 130, and Plat Book 13, Page 73, of the records of the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, on April 5, 1989, and March 22, 1991, respectively, and that by reason of the recordation of said maps no report from a Board of Viewers, nor consent or donation of right-of-way from the abutting property owners is necessary. The Board hereby guarantees said drainage easements and a right-of- ~- ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING HELD HAT THER OANORE ECOUNTY ADMINISTRATION COIINTY, VIRGINIA, 1992 CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, RESOLUTION 21191-7.c REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF HUNTRIDGE ROAD AND GOLDEN CIRCLE INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY ROAD SYSTEM BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That this matter came this day to be heard upon the proceedings herein, and upon the application of Huntridge Road, from the end of state maintenance to the intersection of Rome Drive, for a distance of 0.19 miles and Golden Circle, from the intersection of Huntridge Road to the cul-de-sac, for a distance of 0.06 miles to be accepted and made a part of the Secondary System of State Highways under Section 33.1-229 of the Virginia State Code. 2. That it appears to the Board that drainage easements and a fifty (50) foot right-of-way for said roads have heretofore been dedicated by virtue of a certain map known as The Orchards Applewood, Section 6, Subdivision which map was recorded in Plat Book 11, Page 130, of the records of the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, on April 5, 1989 and that by reason of the recordation of said map no report from a Board of Viewers, nor consent or donation of right-of-way from the abutting property owners is necessary. The Board hereby guarantees said drainage easements and a right-of-way for the street. 3. That said roads known as Huntridge Road and Golden Circle and which are shown on a certain sketch accompanying this Resolution, be, and the same are hereby established as public roads to become a part of the State Secondary System of Highways in Roanoke County, only from and after notification of official acceptance of said streets or highways by the Virginia Department of Transportation. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy, NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: 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 ITEM NUMBER .~ -3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 11, 1992 SUBJECT: Acceptance of Huntridge Road and Golden Circle into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ,/~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: F & W Community Development Corporation, the developer of the Orchards Applewood, Section 6, requests that the Board of Supervisors approve a resolution to the Virginia Department of Transportation requesting that they accept Huntridge Road, from the end of state maintenance to the intersection of Rome Drive, for a distance of 0.19 miles and Golden Circle, from the intersection of Huntridge Road to the cul-de-sac, for a distance of 0.06 miles. The staff has inspected these roads along with representatives of the Virginia Department of Transportation and finds the roads are acceptable. FISCAL IMPACT: No county funding is required. RECOMMENDATIONS: The staff recommends that the Board approve a resolution to VDOT requesting that they accept Huntridge Road and Golden Circle into the Secondary Road System. MITTED BY: APPROVED: & n _.ti^•n 0 giJ Arnold Covey, Direct Elmer C. Ho ge of Engineering & Ins ections County Administrator ~-3 Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Motion by: ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy Johnson Kohinke Minnix Nickens 2 tHE pWiOS ~ t ~ \ I "~ ., \ ~ .~ ~ 4., ~ ~ cups ~ ~ °° \ ~~ ~' 4k NTHi '~ bON CK ~ . vrClNrrY MAP _ - -- _ > \\ _ ~~~~. t J 3 NORTS PROPOSED ADDITIION SHOWN IN GREY DESCRIPTION: 1) Extension of Huntridge Road (Route 1220) from the end of state maintenance to the intersection of Rome Drive. 2) Golden Circle from the intersection of Huntridge Road to the cul-de-sac. LENGTH: (1) 0.19 MILES (2) 0.06 MILES RIGHT OF WAY: (1) 50 FEET (2) 50 FEET ROADWAY WIDTH: (1) 34 FEET (2) 26 FEET SURFACE WIDTH: (1) 38 FEET (2) 31 FEET SERVICE: (1) 13 HOMES (2) 8 HOMES ACCEPTANCE OF HUNTRIDGE ROAD AND GOLDEN CIRCLE INTO THE BNGINBBRING VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY SYSTEM 3 ~"-3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 1992 RESOLUTION REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF HUNTRIDGE ROAD AND GOLDEN CIRCLE INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY ROAD SYSTEM BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That this matter came this day to be heard upon the proceedings herein, and upon the application of Huntridge Road, from the end of state maintenance to the intersection of Rome Drive, for a distance of 0.19 miles and Golden Circle, from the intersection of Huntridge Road to the cul-de-sac, for a distance of 0.06 miles to be accepted and made a part of the Secondary System of State Highways under Section 33.1-229 of the Virginia State Code. 2. That it appears to the Board that drainage easements and a fifty (50) foot right-of-way for said roads have heretofore been dedicated by virtue of a certain map known as The Orchards Applewood, Section 6, Subdivision which map was recorded in Plat Book 11, Page 130, of the records of the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, on April 5, 1989 and that by reason of the recordation of said map no report from a Board of Viewers, nor consent or donation of right-of-way from the abutting property owners is necessary. The Board hereby guarantees said drainage easements and a right-of-way for the street. 4 ~../"~ 3. That said roads known as Huntridge Road and Golden Circle and which are shown on a certain sketch accompanying this Resolution, be, and the same are hereby established as public roads to become a part of the State Secondary System of Highways in Roanoke County, only from and after notification of official acceptance of said streets or highways by the Virginia Department of Transportation. 5 ACTION # A-21192-7.d ITEM NUMBER ~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 11, 1992 SUBJECT: Acceptance of Sanitary Sewer Facilities Serving The Orchards (Applewood), Section 6 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Developers of The Orchards (Applewood), Section 6, F & W Community Development Corporation, have requested that Roanoke County accept the Deed conveying the sanitary sewer facilities serving the subdivision along with all necessary easements. The sewer facilities are installed, as shown on plans prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C. entitled The Orchards (Applewood), Section 6, dated January 17, 1991, which are on file in the County Engineering Department. The sanitary sewer facility construction meets the specifications and the plans approved by the County. FISCAL IMPACT' The value of the sanitary sewer construction is $66,000. RECOMMENDATION' Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors accept the sanitary sewer facilities serving The Orchards (Applewood), Section 6 along with all necessary easements, and authorize the County Administrator to execute a Deed for the transfer of these facilities. • ~, + SUBMITTED BY: Cliffor aig, P.E. Utility Director APPROVED: v~/~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ACTION VOTE Approved (x) Motion by: Bob L. Johnson No Denied ( ) Eddy Received ( ) Johnson Referred Kohinke to Minnix _ Nickens Yes Abs x x x x x cc: File Clifford Craig, Utility Director Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections s -, •, S- `~ DEED QF EASEMENT AND ASSIGNMENT THIS DEED, DEED OF EASEMENT AND ASSIGNMENT, made this 13th day of .January , 1992, by and between: F & W Community Deveiopment Corporation hereinafter referred to as the "Developer," party of the first part; the BOARD OF StlPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, hereinafter referred to as the "Board," party of the second part; and ELMER C. HODGE, County Administrator of Roanoke County, VIRGINIA, party of the third part. W I T N E S S E T H THAT FOR AND IN CONSIDERATION of the mutual benefits to accrue, the Developer does hereby GRANT, CONVEY, ASSIGN AND TRANSFER, with the covenants of GENERAL WARRANTY OF TITLE, in fee simple unto the Board all water and/or sewer lines, valves, fittings, laterals, connections, storage facilities, sources of water supply, pumps, manholes and any and all other equipment and appurtenances thereunto, in and to the water and/or sewer systems in the streets, avenues and public uti 1 ity, water and/or sewer easement. areas that have been or may hereafter be installed by the Developer, along with the right. to perpetually use and occupy the easements in which the same may be located, all of which is more particularly shown and described and designated as follows, to wit: As shown on the plan entitled The Orchards (Ar~r~lewood), Section 6 dated January 17 1991 made by LumGden Associates, P.C. and on file in the Roanoke County Engineering Department. Page 1 of 3 2 S~ The Developer does hereby covenant and warrant that it will be responsible far the proper installation and construction of the said water and/or sewer systems including repair of surface areas affected by settlement of utility trenches for a period of one (1) year after date of acceptance by the Board and will perform any necessary repairs at its cost. Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator of Roanoke County, Virginia, party of the third part, hereby joins in the execution of this instrument to signify the acceptance of this conveyance pursuant to Resolution No. adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. WITNESS THE FOLLOWT_NG signatures and seals: Developer: F & W ~Communit~ Development Corporation By ~ Ki due 'c By: "C As: State of: Virginia (}ocx~(City of: Roanoke t~ w1t: The foregoing deed was acknowledged before me this: 14th day of January 19 92 , By: Richard S Whitney, Jr. as Executive Vice President Duly authorized officer Title on behalf of F & W Community Development Corporation n ,., . _ ry Public My Commission expires: October 24, 199 Page 2 of 3 t ~~ Approved as to form: County Attorney State of: County/City of: Elmer C. Hodge . to wit: The foregoing deed was acknowledged before me this: day of 19 by Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator, on behalf of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. Notary Public My Commission expires: Revised 10/16/90 County Administrator of Roanoke County, Virginia Rv Page B of B J ~' NORTH O*• . ~~~ ~~ ~`iu• _ 7~ :i+LL l l ~ i~`4'y4 ~` ` so^• ~J' ~ ~~~ ~ ~I r`; i ~ a I. ~~t ' \Q. ~~• y 1_.~ I ~- -- --- ~•.,:.- wT~ 1 ~i ~. $NGINBSRIlYG ACCEPTANCE OF SEWER FACILITIES SERVING THE ORCHARDS SECTION 6 ~• ~ ..~- _~, ..:~; AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 1992 RESOLUTION 21192-7.e REQUESTING THAT THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DECREASE THE 8PEED LIMIT AND PROHIBIT TRACTOR TRAILERS ON PORTIONS OF COLONIAL AVENUE WHEREAS, on January 28, 1992, citizens residing near the intersection of Colonial Avenue and Hazel Drive presented petitions to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia requesting that road improvements in their community begin as soon as possible, and WHEREAS, the residents also expressed concern about the speed limit in that area and the increase in tractor trailers traveling on Colonial Avenue towards Route 221, and WHEREAS, at the January 28, 1992 meeting, by unanimous vote, the Board of Supervisors directed that notification be sent to the Virginia Department of Transportation advising them of the residents request. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia hereby requests that the Virginia Department of Transportation investigate the possibility of decreasing the speed limit on Colonial Avenue to 25 miles per hour, and that tractor-trailers be prohibited from traveling on Colonial Avenue. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors supports these residents in their efforts to address the current dangerous situation on Colonial Avenue near the Hazel Drive intersection. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: a AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy, NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: l~ CiL-y ~o iu~ Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Steve Buston, Virginia Department of Transportation Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections George Simpson, Assistant Director, Engineering & Inspections ~~ ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER ~- AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 11, 1992 AGENDA ITEM: Adoption of Resolution requesting that VDOT Decrease the Speed Limit and Prohibit Tractor- trailers on portions of Colonial Avenue. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: At the January 28, 1992 meeting, several citizens residing on or near the Colonial Avenue/Hazel Drive intersection presented petitions requesting road improvements on Colonial Avenue as soon as possible. The residents also requested a lower speed limit and the elimination of tractor-trailers on Colonial Avenue. By unanimous vote, the Board directed that notification be sent to the Virginia Department of Transportation supporting their request. A letter has been sent to the VDOT District Engineer notifying him of the Board's concern. Supervisor Eddy asked that the resolution be placed on the Consent Agenda before spreading in the minutes as directed at the January 28 meeting. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the attached resolution be adopted and forwarded to the Virginia Department of Transportation. Submitted by ~~ Mary H. Allen Clerk to the Board Approved By: Elmer C. Hodg County Administrator +..~~ ---------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved ( ) Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied ( ) Eddy Received ( ) Johnson Referred ( ) Kohinke To ( ) Minnix Nickens AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 1992 RESOLUTION REQUESTING THAT THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DECREASE THE SPEED LIMIT AND PROHIBIT TRACTOR TRAILERS ON PORTIONS OF COLONIAL AVENUE WHEREAS, on January 28, 1992, citizens residing near the intersection of Colonial Avenue and Hazel Drive presented petitions to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia requesting that road improvements in their community begin as soon as possible, and WHEREAS, the residents also expressed concern about the speed limit in that area and the increase in tractor trailers traveling on Colonial Avenue towards Route 221, and WHEREAS, at the January 28, 1992 meeting, by unanimous vote, the Board of Supervisors directed that notification be sent to the Virginia Department of Transportation advising them of the residents request. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia hereby requests that the Virginia Department of Transportation investigate the possibility of decreasing the speed limit on Colonial Avenue to 25 miles per hour, and that tractor-trailers be prohibited from traveling on Colonial Avenue. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors supports these residents in their efforts to address the current dangerous situation on Colonial Avenue near the Hazel Drive intersection. ,... ~ '~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 1992 RESOLUTION 21192-7.f OF APPRECIATION TO LINGERFELT ASSOCIATES FOR SUPPORTING THE EASTER SEAL SUMMER CONCERTS AT VALLEYPOINTE PARR WHEREAS, for the past three years, the Easter Seal Society of Virginia has held fund raising activities at Valleypointe; and WHEREAS, "Valleypointe After Hours" has raised significant funding for the Easter Seal Society; and WHEREAS, Lingerfelt Associates, the developer of Valleypointe, has been instrumental in the success of this endeavor, and has demonstrated the Spirit of corporate generosity in allowing this event to take place at the complex. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors does hereby extends its appreciation and gratitude to LINGERFELT ASSOCIATES for their support of "Valleypointe After Hours" for the enjoyment of the citizens of Roanoke Valley and for the benefit of the Easter Seal Society of Virginia. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Minnix, Nickens, Eddy, NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: J~` Mary H. len, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Resolutions of Appreciation File ,~. s ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER ~"" AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SIIPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 11, 1992 AGENDA ITEM: Resolution of Appreciation to Lingerfelt Associates for hosting "Valleypointe After Hours" COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: At the January 28 Board of Supervisors meeting, Supervisor Johnson asked that a resolution of appreciation be adopted recognizing the contributions of Lingerfelt Associates for hosting "Valleypointe After Hours", a summer concert series sponsored by the Easter Seal Society. This event has been highly successful and has raised significant funds for this worthy organization. The County has also benefitted from the tax revenues generated at the concerts. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the attached resolution be adopted by the Board of Supervisors and that the resolution be presented to Mr. Lingerfelt when he is in the Roanoke Valley. Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) Motion by: ACTION Eddy Johnson Kohinke Minnix Nickens VOTE No Yes Abs t ~~ AT A REGIILAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SIIPERVISORS OF ROANORE COIINTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TIIESDAY, FEBRIIARY 11, 1992 RESOLIITION OF APPRECIATION TO LINGERFELT ASSOCIATES FOR HOSTING "VALLEYPOINTE AFTER HOIIRS" WHEREAS, for the past three years, the Easter Seal Society of Virginia has held fund raising activities at Valleypointe; and WHEREAS, "Valleypointe After Hours" has raised significant funding for the Easter Seal Society; and WHEREAS, Lingerfelt Associates, the developer of Valleypointe, has been instrumental in the success of this endeavor, and has demonstrated the spirit of corporate generosity in allowing this event to take place at the complex. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors does hereby extends its appreciation and gratitude to LINGERFELT ASSOCIATES for hosting "Valleypointe After Hours" for the enjoyment of the citizens of Roanoke Valley and for the benefit of the Easter Seal Society of Virginia. /i~""~ COIINTY OF ROANORE~ VIRGINIA GENERAL FIIND IINAPPROPRIATED BALANCE Amount Audited Balance at $5,060,731 July 1, 1991 January 28, 1992 Mid-year budget review (771,314) Balance as of February 11, 1992 $4.289,417 Submitted By Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance 6.12 Note: On December 18, 1990 the Board of Supervisors adopted a goal statement to maintain the General Fund Unappropriated Balance at 6.25$ of General Fund expenditures ($70,036,927). ~ of General ~ 1 ~ Fund Expenditures 7.23 ~~ COUNTY OF ROANORE~ VIRGINIA CAPITAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE Beginning Balance at July 1, 1991 $ 6,097 August 15, 1991 Sale of Shamrock Park (Board approved sale on March 26, 1991, Sale Finalized August 1, 1991) 34,914 November 19, 1991 County Share of Traffic Light at Northside High School and Peters Creek Road (12,500) December 17, 1991 Roanoke County Career Center Ball Field Lights - Emergency Repairs (10,000) December 17, 1991 Green Hill Park Playground Equipment (10,000) Balance as of February il, 1992 $ 8,511 Submitted by Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance I11- 3 COIINTY OF ROANORE, VIRGINIA RESERVE FOR BOARD CONTINGENCY Beginning Balance at July 1, 1991 $ 50,000 Additional funds for Alleghany Health July 9, 1991 (8,000) District July 9, 1991 Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors (3000) Bureau (10,000) November 19, 1991 Transitional Living Center December 17, 1991 Vinyard Park Addition - Environmental (10,000) Assessment $ 19,000 Balance as of February 11, 1992 Submitted by Diane D. Hyat Director of Finance ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER _~=~- AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 11, 1992 AGENDA ITEM: Proclamations Approved by the Chairman COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Throughout the year, the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors signs various proclamations. These proclamations are not presented at a Board of Supervisors meeting unless the sponsoring organization requests this action. The Clerk's Office prepares the proclamations, the Chairman and the Clerk sign them, and they are sent to the organization. Chairman Eddy has requested that these proclamations be added to the agenda under Reports so the Board of Supervisors is aware of them. Attached is a Proclamation declaring the month of February as American Music Month. Submitted by: Mary H. Allen Clerk to the Board ---------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE ,.,.. ~„~ Tti,~ Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) Approved by: G~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator Motion by: Eddy Johnson Kohinke Minnix Nickens I ~~ C ~~~ a t ~ o PROCLAMATION DECLARING THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY, 1992 AS AMERICAN MUSIC MONTH WHEREAS, Music, the universal language of peace, is one of the great arts and an outstanding feature of our culture; and WHEREAS, The National Federation of Music Clubs, having as a foremost objective the promotion of American Music, will stage its annual 'Parade of American Music' throughout the month of February; and WHEREAS, the Thursday Morning Music Club, a member of the Virginia Federation of Music Clubs, joins in encouraging and stimulating interest in American Music and the enjoyment and appreciation thereof; and WHEREAS, the "Parade of American Music" is designed to glue our own worthy United States composers recognition, encouragement, and support, and to impress upon the public of the United States that it has creative as well as pertorming musical artists and a musical culture equal to that of other countries. NOW, THEREFORE, 1, Lee B. Eddy, Chairman of the Boa-d of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Vlrg/nla, In recognition of the American Composer and In order to encourage native creative musical arts, do hereby proclaim the month of February, 1992, as AMERICAN MUSIC MONTH In Roanoke County; and urge all citizens to join in the observance and share the Joy of music. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Seal of the County of Roanoke to be aHbted this the 24th day of January, 1992. Lee B. Eddy, Chairman ATTEST: Mary H. Allen, Clerk ACTION NO . ~ .w ITEM NUMBER AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE ~~ COUNTYEADMINISTRp,TION CENTER COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE R MEETING DATE: February 11, 1992 AGENDA ITEM: Accounts Paid - January 1992 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: S~p,RY OF INFORMATION: $3,943,181.31 payments to Vendors: Payroll: 1/3/92 $ 437,082.51 1/17/92 472,414.72 1/31/92 496 700.71 1 406 197.94 $1,406,197.94 $5 349.379.25 A detailed listing of the payments is on file with the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors. submitted, Approved by, Respectfully ~~ ti/1 T . ~ ~ fLX ~ C.L.7 Diane D. Hyat Director of Finance ~~~ ~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator __ --------------------- VOTE -- ACTION No yes Abs Motion by: Approved ( ) Eddy Denied ( ) Kohinke Received ( ) Johnson Referred ( ) Minnix To - Nickens Item No.~~_ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER IN ROANOKE, VA ON TUESDAY, MEETING DATE: February 11, 1992 AGENDA ITEM: 1991 Economic Activity Report COIINTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS This is an excellent report. I would like to schedule a work session on March 10 to review this report and the strategic plan that is being prepared. We will ask the Board to establish economic development priorities for the next year. There are two excellent candidates - Explore and the development of the Glenvar ~Ilied) site. I would also appreciate your comments and priorities at that time. BACRGROIIND: The Economic Activity Report is prepared annually to inform the Board of Supervisors of economic development in Roanoke County. The report describes inquiries and prospects, location decisions, site inventory, permits and construction trends and the existing industry retention program. This 1991 report provides a record of the previous year's activities and serves as a framework and beginning point for designing the 1992-94 Economic Development Strategy. FISCAL IMPACT: None Respectfully submitted: Approved: y !,~ Timothy W. bala, Director Elmer C. Hodge Economic Development County Administrator Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to ACTION Motion by: _ No Yes Abs Eddy Johnson Kohinke Minnix Nickens Attachment /~--b 1991 ECONOMIC ACTIVITY REPORT DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FEBRUARY 1992 /~-G I. INTRODUCTION The national recession affected the Roanoke Valley during 1991. Unlike other downturns in the economy, this one has lasted longer and has been harder to overcome. Low consumer confidence, cutbacks in the state budget, corporate restructuring (layoffs) and business failures have had noticeable impacts in the Valley. Commercial and industrial projects have been delayed or canceled because of the tightening of available credit. Small and medium sized businesses continued planning for expansions. Construc- tion continued but at a lower level than previous years. Out of area inquiries continued but those developing into prospects were less than in 1990. The area's diverse economic base has minimized the effects of the recession. All economic sectors seem to have been equally affected. Manufacturing employment is down but so is the service sector. National events such as the rise in the stock market and local economic activity with a strong level of inquiries and prospect visits seem to forecast a better 1992. Opportunities for local economic development have been identified and will be addressed in a separate 1992-94 Economic Development Strategy. II. Major Economic Development Accomplishments - 1991 • Location of three "hi-tech" manufacturing companies in Roanoke County. (See details, Table 3) -Magnetic Bearings, Inc. (MBI) - frictionless bearings -Medeco Security Electronics - electronic locks -Noble-Met - small, precious metal tubing manufacturing • The construction of the Hofauger Farmhouse marks the initial building in Blue Ridge Town in Explore. Plans are progressing for the location of the Parkway Spur connecting the Blue Ridge Parkway with the project. • A future water supply for the Roanoke Valley was ensured with the awarding of a construction contract for the $70 million Spring Hollow Reservoir. This project and the new Regional Landfill are significant public expenditures that will lead to additional development in western Roanoke County. 1 m-~ • Allied Signal Corporation canceled plans for location of a $21 million manufacturing facility on the 177 acre Glenvar site. However, the property was returned to Roanoke County at the end of 1991 with added value from grading, environmental assessment and additional acreage. This property is the prime industrial site in the Roanoke Valley. A County sewer extension is under construction to the site. Plans are being prepared for the development of the property as an industrial site. III. "Selling" Roanoke County Roanoke County initiated an aggressive selling campaign during 1990-91 to reach potential companies that may be interested in expanding or relocating their business. Markets in the Northeast United States and particularly New York City, were targeted with advertising, direct mail and staff prospect visits. An advertising schedule was established during 1990 in conjunction with assistance from the Department's advertising consultant, Bolt Advertising. Placement of ads were targeted towards four prospect magazines and six general marketing pieces, brochures or publications. The County's effort supported the Regional Partnership's external advertising program. The staff updated the Community Profile, an informative data brochure, during the year and purchased an eight minute Quality of Life video to send with information packets in response to inquiries. Staff "person to person" selling efforts occurred on visits to prospects while on marketing trips, attendance at selected trade shows and handling prospects that visited the Roanoke Valley. Staff recently assisted Hancock International by introducing Japanese businessmen to the Roanoke Valley. This was part of a joint venture with a Roanoke County company. 2 m-~ IV. BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT The Economic Development Department continues to aggressively promote our community to individuals and organizations ranging from local growth companies to marketing representatives of the State of Virginia. Most of the efforts were spent on small to medium size companies. This was dictated by the economy as well as a wealth of new technologically advanced products coming to market after their initial research and development period. The Roanoke Valley experience was the same as the experience nationally in regards to inquiries, prospects, and locations. Currently, the staff has recognized pent-up expansion needs regarding manufacturing as well as markets. Projects put on hold as early as 1989 are resurfacing and County residents should continue to be offered new employment opportunities in the Roanoke Valley. The experience in the Roanoke Valley sees most of the inquiries and prospects coming from four areas. As noted in Table 1, the New York-New Jersey, Local-Regional, Southern and Virginia/ District of Columbia regions represent over 65% of our 1991 inquiries. Noted in Table 1 is the organizational origin of the inquiries and prospects. While inquiries and prospects come from a wide variety of sources, the County staff efforts generated nearly 40% of all activity. The second largest number of inquiries and prospects came from realtors and developers. Table 2 provides a glimpse at the year-end status of the 281 inquiries and prospects. Of those companies, approximately 21% remain active and have been transferred to 1992 files. Location decisions finalized during 1991 are shown on Table 3. Impacts of project costs, jobs anticipated or capital investment are provided by the company in the details available. 3 m-~ TABLE 1 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY REPORT JANUARY 1, 1991 TO DECEMBER 31, 1991 GEOGRAPHIC-ORGANIZATIONAL ORIGIN OF INQUIRIES AND PROSPECTS Total Inquiries 281* Total prospects 57** Geographic Origin of Inquiries Organizational origin of and Prospects Inquiries and Prospects t Organization r age Area Percen Local-Regional 18.9% State 7 VA/DC 10.7% Partnership 7 NY NJ PA DE MD 23.1% County 75 South 12.4% Through County ads 53 Northeast 6.8% Recontacts-County 109 Great Lakes 7.8% Realtors/developers 25 Midwest 8.5% Other governments 1 West 3.6% Chamber of Commerce/ International 9.3% Railroad/utilities 3 N/A 3.9% George Mason University 1 TOTAL 281 *Inquiries are those companies who contact this office through a variety of ways. (This is the first step.) **Prospects are those companies that have gone beyond inquiry status. This office has either visited (upon request), the prospects present facility or the prospect has visited available sites and/or buildings in the Roanoke Valley. 4 ~?I-t, TABLE 2 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY REPORT January 1, 1991 to December 31, 1991 End-of-Year Status Active (transferred to '92) 56 Inactive (transferred to '92) 7 Dead (Project terminated) 201 Located elsewhere 8 Sold/closed/located in County 9 TOTAL 281 5 ~-~ TABLE 3 1991 LOCATION AND EBPANSION DECISION CARILION Carilion announced the relocation and merging of its Medicenter North and North Roanoke Family Physicians office into a Communicare Urgent Care Center on Peters Creek Road. The 10,000- 15,000 square foot facility should open in 1993. The estimated new investment is over $1 million. CERTIFIED MEDICAL REPRESENTATIVES, INC. (CMRI) CMRI provides and administers a complete educational and professional development curriculum for representatives of various pharmaceutical companies in the United States. CMRI purchased 5,400 square feet of office facilities on Route 221. Current employment is six. With the assistance of $300,000 of industrial revenue bonds, CMRI opened in August 1991. DOMINION FORMS Due to increased business in business forms, paper and computer supplies, Dominion Forms would have to rezone land adjacent to its Starkey Road facility for warehousing purposes. Expansion plans include an additional 12,000 square foot facility and construction. of Willow Dell Drive. The projected date of completion for the addition is March 1992. HYDRAULIC AND PNEUMATIC 3YSTEMB, INC. HPS sells and provides service to its manufacturing customers. Located in existing space in the Southwest Industrial Park, expansion plans include moving into their own facility within two years. MAGNETIC BEARINGS INCORPORATED MBI consolidated its Radford, Chicago and Connecticut operations into a 17,000 square foot facility in Valleypointe. The leader of a growing new technology consortium that manufactures a device to control the movement of liquids in items such as pipelines and large manufacturing processes. Current employment is 35. Total project impact is $2 million in real estate and machinery and tools. 6 ~ r ! -~ MEDECO SECURITY ELECTRONICS Medeco expanded into the fast growing electronic lock field with its opening of a 5,000 square foot engineering and manufacturing facility valued at $300,000 in the Shamrock Park. This new division applies Medeco's traditionally strong understanding of security with computer technology in order to inhibit entrance into secured areas. Projected employment is 15. NOBLE-MET, LIMITED Noble-Met, a biomedical and company, relocated its manufacturing the Southwest Indus- trial Park. optional land for expansion) should 25-35 employees over the next three the company has grown from $50,000 i in 1992. electronic specialty tubing and engineering operations to The 6,000 square foot (and allow the company to grow to (3) years. Sales volume for n 1988 to a projected $800,000 TYLER-ROSE Tyler-Rose is a major wholesale greenhouse operation selling directly to Wal-Mart and K-Mart throughout the East Coast. Tyler- Rose will retain its existing facility and expand its plant varieties through the purchase of seven (7) acres in the Dixie Caverns area. VITO DE MONTE Vito DeMonte purchased the existing Bob Bell building on Route 419 for the purpose of operating a major European collision repair facility. The $2.5 million project includes the latest technology. The road frontage portion of the property will be used for retail purposes. The opening date for the project is late spring, 1992. 7 m-c, V. PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT One of the advantages of a location in Roanoke County is the availability of land. The 1985 Comprehensive Plan identified 64,000 acres of developable land in Roanoke County. The previous Economic Development Strategy (1989) determined that there was a deficiency of industrially zoned and developable land because of site conditions of either a floodplain or steep topography. The Board of Supervisors acted on the recommendations of the Economic Development staff and rezoned eight (8) potential sites from residential or agricultural to an industrial classification. This action resulted in the County having 29 sites of about 923 acres in the site inventory. (Table 4) Rezoning was one strategy used to improve the economic development product. Another strategy was the creation of several public-private partnerships to develop industrial sites. Since 1986, the Board of Supervisors has committed over $2.6 million, for water and sewer, road improvements and land acquisition to develop 179 acres of industrial land upon which twenty (20) companies have located. The County's existing industrial building inventory includes two buildings in Vinton, one 40, 000 square feet and one 20, 000 square feet, and several smaller properties with an area less than 5,000 square feet. Office space availability changes constantly as leases are renegotiated or terminated. During 1991, property files were expanded to include available sites for office, hotel, retail and commercial uses. Close contact with commercial/industrial realtors enables the Economic Development staff to keep track of available commercial and office space. 8 /Y--G TABLE 4 ROANOKE COUNTY SITE INVENTORY LITY SITE ACREAGE LOCA AMP 7.0 R. County Austin 4.5 R. County Dallas Byrd 4.06 R. County Fort Lewis, Tract A 5.15 R. County Fort Lewis, Tract B 5.91 R. County Friendship Manor 54.15 R. County Glenvar Site (Roanoke County IDA) 177• Hollins College 163 Household of Faith Huffman (Friendship Lane) Huffman (Lila Drive) Krueger Lemon Leonard Hill Nicholas Munger Roanoke Ready Mix 35.11 6.6 11.3 11 21 10.24 4.25 17 R. County Roanoke/ Botetourt Co. R. County R. County R. County R. County R. County R. County R. County R. County 9 ZONING M-1 M-2 M-1 M-2 M-2 M-1 C M-1 C, M-2 M-1 /A-1 B-2C M-1 C M-1 C M-1 M-1 M-2 M-1 M-1 C/M-2 /7i-L SITE Shamrock Indus. Park Shimchock Jack Smith Indus. Park Southwest Indus. Park Starkey Road Valleypointe Phase I Phase II Valley Gateway (former F&W/Lowe) Roanoke Valley Development Foundation Corp. Vinton Industrial Park TOTAL ACRES ROANOKE COUNTY SITE INVENTORY ACREAGE LOCALITY ZONING 3.21 R. County M-1 C 7.168 R. County M-1 C 15.2 Roanoke/Botetourt M-1 3.73 R. County M-2 5 R. County B-2 g M-2 38 R. County M-1 C 180 R. County M-2/M-3 105 R. County M-1 C 8.89 R. County M-1 C 2.1 Vinton M-2 5 Vinton M-2 4.6 Vinton M-2 923.168 10 ~ -G VI. COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL PROJECTS Construction of new commercial and industrial projects is a measure of the effectiveness of local economic development in Roanoke County. New construction, building expansions and interior remodeling projects contribute to the tax base and are indications of the health of the local economy. Forty-two (42) new projects were tracked in Roanoke County in 1991, totaling 562,261 square feet. By the end of the year, two-thirds of the projects were completed, with the remaining 185,123 square feet either under construction or scheduled for construction. (See Table 5) Of 17 industrial projects, two new divisions of existing industries (Medeco Security Electronics and Ingersoll-Rand), located in Shamrock Industrial Park. A new company (Magnetic Bearings, Inc.), located in Valleypointe. Hydraulics and Pneumatic Systems located in Southwest Industrial Park. The remaining projects were expansions at their present locations outside of industrial parks, primarily in the southwest and northern areas of the County. Office construction was the second largest category of new construction. Dominion Bank's operation center addition accounted for the majority square footage (146,080), of the total 234,955 square feet for the 13 office projects tracked in 1991. Two projects were remodeling. These projects followed a similar location pattern as industrial projects by locating in the northern and southwest areas of the County. Commercial and retail development followed office construction with 13 projects totaling 74,168 square feet, two of which were remodeling. These projects followed a similar trend of location in either north or southwest County. Total projects for 1991 were down slightly in number from 1990, 45 projects/43 projects respectively. Sizes of the projects were down noticeably in 1991 compared to 1990--841,970 square feet/562,261 square feet respectively, or 33.2% less square footage in 1991, the greatest area of difference being industrial projects. These numbers seem to reflect the cautious economy of 1991. 11 I`~ `' H ~g~g ~~~g~~~~~ ~ w pp •~ O ~ ~p N N M~ N O ,,...i ~ N M C~ •--i ~p N O O K ~ F, O ~-. .-~ Q .-. a _ ~ ~ •, ~ v c~ v O ~ ~ Vo `a3 d~ +rQ °~~ ~ ~ ~ '~ v ~ .-. Wit". ~ O ~' U ~"" h c~ ~ Q"'T' ~ ~" r.~"i t6 d O p c~ b cd 4? ~ tip.. ra~~a Ux ~c7aaa°d>O y~~ 0,~.~ O MO~~~D ggpppp V1pp~OOggO~ 'n w p.~~ ~ ~~ oM0^~M~N ~ONSOOMOO~ ~ ~ ~ •--i~~ •--i~p Off.-~~MI~N~~~ M ~ W ~ ~ ~-. ~ N v~ d b .~ N ~, ~ d o w •oaa ~~ ~~a~ aVO~ $ U F-i B~SS~OO~N~ ~OSS~~~~ S~N M ~i,~ ~O N ~/'~ 00 M •--~ M1 O N ~/7 l~ 00 O M ~ •--~ ^ i Q~.-i~O~[~~~ ~•--~MN•--~NV100 ~~ M ~ M .-~ ~ ~ ~ .-~N-r N z o ~ ~ ~ o ~ ..~ F+ ~ ~ ~ d ~ an -~ '';' 3 ~ °~ a bn U~~ op43r~ ° dd d o ~~ ~ ~ '~, '~ o ~a~ .~ a3 bb "~ o v~ ~ ~ ~ b ~ ~ ~ a~i ~ own y ca ~ p ~ ~ V Z ~ o ~ ~ •°, to ~ d a a~ ~d~3~x~~ U xx~¢~aaLl~ax ,.-~ "..~ N /~'j-J+ VII. EXISTING BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY RETENTION National figures quoted by economic developers indicate that between 50-750 of all new jobs come from within the community from businesses and industries already in existence. The County's existing industry and business retention program is an essential component in economic development and future growth. Visitation with chief executive officers or managers of major employers has kept the department well informed about the economic health and employment status of various companies, as well as their products, markets, and satisfaction with County services and opportunities for assistance and/or expansion. Along with the visitation program, data bases have been maintained, providing valuable resources about the community; i.e. labor market trends, state and local taxes, industrial sites and buildings, and state and federal programs to assist businesses. The recognition program has continued to highlight positive growth in the County. This has allowed the County to celebrate with companies when they locate or expand within the community. A presentation of a Certificate of Appreciation is made by a member of the Board of Supervisors or Constitutional Officer to signify the company's contribution to economic development in Roanoke County. Retention Assistance In 1991, the Economic Development Department implemented a customer service system to track retention assistance to complement the ombudsman program already in place. Requests for assistance were initiated by the businesses. A summary of data collected indicates that 38 Retention Assistance contacts were made throughout the year in the following categories: 10 Research/referral [i.e. traffic data] 8 Site related [identification/water/sewer] 5 Development review/rezoning/permits/C.O. 5 Signage 4 Tax/license concerns 4 Other problem solving 2 Transportation 38 Since it a new system, more data is expected to be collected in the coming year. The intention of this program is to respond to business concerns that might cause a relocation from the area and to counter dissatisfaction or misunderstanding with County development policies or procedures. 13 j/~"' Explore Liaison Economic Development has also served as a liaison to the Explore Project, including: (a) coordination of the Explore Advisory Committee (EAC) , a citizen committee comprised of Board of Supervisor-appointed members and a volunteer representing Explore--the Committee completed its work and gave a report with recommendations to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors in the Summer of 1991. The Committee is interested in continuing to be active, if desired by the Board. (b) working with Explore staff and planning staff in relation to rezoning requests and compliance with the comprehensive plan. (c) keeping current with information affecting the project and briefing County staff as needed. (d) acting as mediator on parkway and visitor center issues to encourage continued progress toward project completion. (e) negotiation of land acquisition, as needed. OUTLOOR FOR 1992 During 1991, the Economic Development staff has noted day to day economic activities and sees the following trends and patterns for 1992. • Prospect leads have become more diverse. About 25% of the 1991 prospects were commercial. This included medical, retail, hotel, restaurants and offices. • Joint development projects, such as the County's Public- Private Partnerships are viewed positively by the financial community in lending decisions and local developers in locating companies into the County. • The County's relationships with commercial/industrial realtors and County businesses are an essential ingredient in making the existing industry retention program successful. • Due to its diversified base, the Roanoke Valley usually feels the effects of a slowed economy less severely, and, 3-6 months after the effects are felt in the nation. Consequently, it is likely to feel the effects of economic recovery 3-6 months after other parts of the Country. • The 1991 Economic Development Report provides statistics of the previous year and serves as a framework and beginning point for designing the recommendations, projects and policies in the 1992-94 Economic Development Strategy. 14 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, ON TUESDAY,RFEBRII YO11TY1992INISTRATION CENTER RESOLUTION 21191-8 CERTIFYING EgECUTIVE 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. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Nickens, Eddy, NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Minnix A COPY TESTE: ~• Mary H. Allen, Clerk cc• File Roanoke County Board of Supervisors • Executive Session 0~ p,OAN ,I-~ L z ~ az (~~~xx~~ ~~ ~~xx~~ ~ 1 38 P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24015-0798 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE (703) 772-2004 February 12, 1992 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS t~E B. EDDY. CHAIRMAN WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT EDWARD G. KOCH~ITAKE~S~R Gvj51TCERUL DIISTRICT BOB L JOHNSON HOW NS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT H. ODELL'FUZZY MIN NIX CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT (703) 772-2005 Dr. Paul M. Zeis 1909 Pelham Drive, SW Roanoke, VA 24018 Dear Dr. Zeis: The members of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors have asked me to express thBoardinc Allow me totpersonally thank you for the on the Library time you served on this Board. Citizens responsive to the needs of their community and willing to give of themselves and their time are indeed all too scarce. Roanoke County is fortunate indeed to have benefited from your unselfish contribution to our community. As a small token of appreciation, we enclose a Certificate of Appreciation for your service to Roanoke County. Sincerely, Lee B. Eddy, Chai n Roanoke County Board of Supervisors LBE/bjh Enclosure cc: Library Director ® Fiecrdsd Papsr O~ ROANp,I.~ L i a C~~~~~ ~~ ~~x~~ ~ 1 38 P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE (703) 772-2004 February 12, 1992 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS LEE B. EDDY. CHAIRMAN WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT EDWARD G. KOCHAIT,KI~Sj„IRAgvjSITCERIAL DIISTRICT BOB L. JOHNSON HOWNS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT H. ODELL "FUZZY MIN NIX CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS VINTON MAGISTERAL DISTRICT (703) 772-2005 Mrs. Charlotte Lavinder 7664 Mount Chestnut Road Roanoke, VA 24018 Dear Mrs. Lavinder: I am pleased to inform you that, at their meeting held on Tuesday, February 11, 1992, the Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to appoint you as a member of the Library Board for a four-year term which began December 31, 1991, and will end December 31, 1995. State law requires that you take an oath of office before the Clerk of the Roanoke County Circuit Court. This oath must be administered prior to your participation on this Board. Please telephone Steven A. McGraw, at 387-6205, to arrange to have the oath administered and Mr. McGraw has requested that you bring this letter with you at that time. State law provides that any person elected, re-elected, appointed, or re-appointed to any public body be furnished a copy of the Freedom of Information Act. Your copy is enclosed. We are also sending you a copy of the Conflicts of Interest Act. On behalf of the Supervisors and the citizens of Roanoke County, please accept our sincere thanks and appreciation for your willingness to accept this appointment. Very truly yours, Lee B. Eddy, Chairman Roanoke County Board of Supervisors LBE/ bj h Enclosures cc: Library Director Steven A. McGraw, Clerk of Circuit Court ® R~.yebd Pavsr ~F ROANp,I.~ L z a= C~~~xxY# ~~ ~~xxr~ ~ 1838 P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE. VIRGINIA 24018-0798 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR EL1dER C. HODGE (703) 772-2004 February 12, 1992 LEE B. EDDY, CHAIRMAN WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT EDWARD G. KO`H~IN1W~ AG vbTERI~ALHDAllS RIACNT BOB L. JOHNSON HOW NS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT H. ODELL'FUZZY MIN NIX CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT (703) 772-2005 Mr. Kenneth W. Lussen 3154-73 Bey Lane Roanoke, VA 24018 Dear Mr. Lussen: The members of the Board of Supervisors wish to express their sincere appreciation for your previous service to the Grievance Panel. Citizens so responsive to the needs of their community and willing to give of themselves and their time are indeed all too scarce. I am pleased to inform you that, at their meeting held on Tuesday, February 11, 1992, the Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to reappoint you as a member of the Panel for a two-year term, beginning February 23, 1992. Your new term will expire on February 23, 1994. State law provides that any person elected, re-elected, or appointed to any public body be furnished a copy of the Freedom of Information Act. Your copy is enclosed. We are also sending you a copy of the 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, Lee B. Eddy, Cha rman Roanoke County Board of Supervisors LBE/bj h Enclosures cc: D. Keith Cook, Director, Human Resources BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ® Raoyuaa Paps p~ ~ AN '~R 2 9 a2 ~~~~~ ~~ ~~~~~.~ 1 38 P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE (703) 772-2004 Mr. Thomas A. Darnall 1010 Halliahurst Avenue Vinton, VA 24179 Dear Mr. Darnall: February 12, 1992 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS LEE B. EDDY, CHAIRMAN WINDSOR HIUS MAGI$TERULL. DISTRICT EDWARD G. KOHINKE. SR., VICE-CHAIRMAN GTAWBA MAGISTERW. DISTRICT BOB L JOHNSON HOW NS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT H. ODELL FUZZY MIN NIX GVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT (703) 772-2005 The members of the Board of Supervisors wish to express their sincere appreciation for your previous service to the Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals. Citizens so responsive to the needs of their community and willing to give of themselves and their time are indeed all too scarce. I am pleased to inform you that, at their meeting held on Tuesday, February 'll, 1992, the Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to reappoint you as a member of the Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals for a four-year term which began January 22, 1992. Your new term will expire on January 22, 1996. State law requires that you take an oath of office before the Clerk of the Roanoke County Circuit Court. This oath must be administered rp for to your participation on this Board. Please telephone Steven A. McGraw, at 387-6205, to arrange to have the oath administered and Mr. McGraw-has requested that you bring this letter with you at that time. State law provides that any person elected, re-elected, or appointed to any public body be furnished a copy of the Freedom of Information Act. Your copy is enclosed. We are also sending you a copy of the 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, Lee B. Eddy, Cha rman Roanoke County Board LBE/bj h Enclosures cc: Steven A. McGraw, Donald Ford, Dev. Clerk of Circuit Court & Inspections ®~ of Supervisors O~ FtOANp~.~ L z cpi az ~~~~ ~~ ~~~~~.~ 1838 P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE (703) 772-2004 February 12, 1992 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS LEE B. EDDY. CHAIRMAN WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT EDWARD G. KOCATAWBA MAGI /STERIALHO IISTRICT BOB L» JOHNSON HOWNS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT H. ODELL "FUZZY PAINNIX CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT (703) 772-2005 Rev. Branan G. Thompson Colonial Avenue Baptist Church 4165 Colonial Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, VA 24018 Dear Reverend Thompson: On behalf of the Board of Supervisors, 1 would like to thank you for offering the invocation at our meeting on Tuesday, February 11, 1992. We believe if is most important to ask for divine guidance at these meetings and the Board is very grateful for your contribution. Thank you again for sharing your time and your words with us. Sincerely, LBE/bjh ~~~ Lee B. Eddy, Chairman Roanoke County Board of Supervisors ®Re~ycisa P>~ F~ AN,~~ ~ A ~ 2 o~ a~ Z ~~~~~ ~~ ~~Y~'C~~ f 38 P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE (703) 772-2004 February 12, 1992 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS LEE B. EDDY, CHAIRMAN WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT EDWARD G. KOHINKE, SR.. VICE-CHAIRMAN CATAWBA MAGISTERW-DISTRICT BOB L. JOHNSON HOWNS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT H. ODELL'FUZZY MINNIX CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT (7os) 772-loos Mr. Steve Buston Virginia Department of Transportation P. O. Box 3071 Salem, Virginia 24153 Dear Mr. Buston: Attached is a copy of Resolution No. 21192-7.e requesting that the Virginia Department of Transportation decrease the speed limit and prohibit tractor-trailers on portions of Colonial Avenue. This resolution was adopted by the Board of Supervisors at their meeting on Tuesday, February 11, 1992. If you need further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, m~~, ~ Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors bjh Attachment cc: Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections ®Recycka ~- O~ ~ AN ~F ti ' OJ a~ Z ~ ~~~~~ ~~ ~~~~.~.~ 7 Z 1 38 P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE (703) 772-2004 February 12, 1992 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS LEE B. EDDY, CHAIRMAN WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT EDWARD G. KOHINKE. SR., VICE-CHAIRMAN CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT BOB L. JOHNSON NOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT H. ODELL'FUaY' MIN NIX CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS VINTON MAGISTERW- DISTRICT (703) 772-2005 Mr. William G. Rosebro, Chairman Transportation & Safety Commission 4712 Easthill Drive Roanoke, VA 24018 Dear Mr. Rosebro: Attached is a copy of Board Action 21192-2 which approves the bylaws of the Roanoke County Transportation & Safety Commission as requested by you. The Board also voted to amend the expiration dates for the terms of members to June 30, to coincide with your fiscal year. This action was taken by the Board of Supervisors at their meeting on Tuesday, February 11, 1992. By copy of this letter, I am notifying Ms. Lichtenstein and Mr. Trevor, whose terms expired January 1, 1992, that their terms have been extended until June 30, 1992. 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: Ms. Charlotte Lichtenstein Mr. Leo B. Trevor ® Fiecycwd Pspsr ~" ` ;; February 7, 1992 Mr. Lee Eddy Chairman, Board of Supervisors P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 Dear Mr. Eddy, This letter is in regard to the proposed APCO power line. I want to reconfirm the Fort Lewis Civic League's position on this issue. We voted against it in 1991. We are against this power line for the following reasons 1• Known and yet unknown health hazards; 2. The environmental damage it will cause; 3. Property devaluationy Furthermore, Roanoke County does not need this power line. The power it will produce will be sold to other localities. We hope the Board of Supervisors will support our position on this issue that will affect our health, environment, and our property values. Sincerely, Winton Shelor, President Fort Lewis Civic League 4348 Shelor Farm Lane Salem, VA 24153 WWS/dms cc: Mr. Elmer Hodge February il, 1992 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 the Digie Caverns Landfill and the $PA in accordance with § 2.1-344 A 7 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended. (b) to discuss the assignment or appointment of speaifia public officers, appointees, or employees in accordance with § 2.1-344 A 1. Mr. Eddy: I didn't run copies of this resolution because the change was so minimal. You may want to announce the changes. Mary Allen AT A REGIILAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SIIPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 1992 RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION TO LINGERFELT ASSOCIATES FOR SUPPORTING THE EASTER SEAL SUMMER CONCERTS AT VALLEYPOINTE PARR WHEREAS, for the past three years, the Easter Seal Society of Virginia has held fund raising activities at Valleypointe; and WHEREAS, "Valleypointe After Hours" has raised significant funding for the Easter Seal Society; and WHEREAS, Lingerfelt Associates, the developer of Valleypointe, has been instrumental in the success of this endeavor, and has demonstrated the spirit of corporate generosity in allowing this event to take place at the complex. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors does hereby extends its appreciation and gratitude to LINGERFELT ASSOCIATES for their support of "Valleypointe After Hours" for the enjoyment of the citizens of Roanoke Valley and for the benefit of the Easter Seal Society of Virginia. ,:.~ ~..e....- ~~ ~~ . ,~ 7~ ~ ~ - ~~ ~~~~ ~~ ~, ,.. ._ _. ~~-~~ W- =-,r ,.., ~. Offices. (JOHN CHAMBLISS, ASSISTANT COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR) 0-12892-10 HCN MOTION TO ADOPT ORD FOR ONE YEAR AT $9.50 PER SQUARE FOOT AYES-B T.EGK,HCN,LBE NAYS-NONE ABSTAIN-HOM J. APPOINTMENTS C.,..p -'l~) Y ~ 1. Buil ing Code o_ar o djustments and Appeals 0~'"1~ HCN NOMINATED THOMAS DARNALL TO ANOTHER FOUR TERM EXPIRING 1/22/1996. ~- 3. ~ Library Board ~. ~ ~_ LBE NONIINATED CHARLOTTE IAVINDER TO A FOUR-YEAR TERM EXPIRING DECEMBER 31, 1995. 4. Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission B ASKED FOR SUGGESTIONS FROM PARKS AND RECREATION DEPT. 5. Transportation and Safety Commission COr1TIN[JE UNTIL NEW BYLAWS ARE BROUGHT TO BOARD OF 6 2. Grievance Panel 0~ POAN ,F~ ti p v a~ 1838 (~~ixx~#~ ~~ ~Z~~x~~~E P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE (703) 772-2004 January 31, 1992 Mr. Fred Altizer, District Engineer Virginia Department of Transportation P. O. Box 71 Salem, Virginia 24153 Dear Mr. Altizer: BOB L. JOHNSON HOWNS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT H. ODELL "FUZZY" MINNIX CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT (703) 772-2005 At their meeting on January 28, 1992, The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors received petitions from residents living near the intersection of Colonial Avenue and Hazel Drive asking that road improvements begin as soon as possible. Attached is a copy of the petitions. The residents also expressed concern about the speed limit. in that area and the increase in tractor-trailers traveling the road. The Board, by unanimous vote, directed that notification be sent to the Virginia Department of Transportation requesting that the speed limit be lowered to 25 miles per hour, and that tractor trailers be prohibited from using that portion Colonial Avenue. A resolution officially making this request will be placed on the February it Board of Supervisors agenda. Sincerely, Mary H. Allen Clerk to the Board CC: Arnold Covey, Director of Engineering & Inspections Tom and Cindy Webster, 4714 Colonial Avenue S. W., Roanoke Board Reading File BOARD OF SUPERVISORS LEE B. EDDY, CHAIRMAN WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT EDWARD G. KOHINKE, SR., VICE-CHAIRMAN CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT ®R~yded P~ Ii, FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1, An Ordinance authorizing the Coriveyanc RoanokeeCounty located in the LaBellevue Subdivision of 4 to Lawrence E. McMahon. (CLIFFORD CRAIG, UTILITY DIRECTOR) BLJ MOTION TO APPROVE 1ST READING 2ND - 2/11/92 - URC 2. An Ordinance amending and reenacting Section 9-21, Article II, Virginia Statewide Fire Prevention Code , Chapter 9, Fire Prevention and Protection relating to the Marking of Fire Lanes. (MARK LIGHT, DEPUTY FIRE AND RESCUE CHIEF) HCN MOTION TO APPROVE 1ST READING 2ND - 2/11/92 - URC I. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance Authorizing the Acquisition of a 0.303 Acre Parcel of Land from Mary Viola Bush and a 0.127 Acre Parcel of Land from George and Helen H. Cyphers for the Bushdale Road Rural Addition Project. (PAUL MAHONEY, COUNTY ATTOPNEY) 0-12892-8 HCN MOTION TO ADOPT ORD - URC 2. Ordinance Authorizing the Execution of a Lease with Appalachian Power Company for Storage Site for Spring Hollow Reservoir Construction. (JOHN HUBBARD, ASSISTANT COUNTY AD1ViINISTRATOR) 0-12892-9 EGK MOTION TO ADOPT ORD - URC 3. Ordinance Authorizing the Execution of a Lease for Real Estate, Office Space for Roanoke County Administrative s BL.T MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILE - UW 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Accounts Paid -December 1991 N. BU ~ ET WORK SESSION ~ ~ ~~ °~ ~(~ ,/-~_ ~~~ BLJ REQUESTED THAT (1) STAFF BRING BACK A -- ''"~ y PRIORITIZED LIST OF CUTS IN SERVICES; ~) BRING BACK THE '~`~~~~ NUMBER OF POSITIONS OF COUNTY AND SCHOOL EMPLOYEES FOR 1989 THROUGH 1992 (3) NOT UNALTERABLY OPPOSED TO USING THE FUND BALANCE TO BAIL OUT SERVICES. ECH REQUESTED THAT IF THE BOARD WANTED TO CONVERT MORE TO FEE STRUCTURE, THIS COULD BE COVERED IN A WORK SESSION SETTING OBJECTIVES, EXEMPTIONS, COVERAGE, ETC. HCN STATED THAT NO NEW SERVICES SHOULD BE ADDED OR EXPANDED. BLJ WAS CONCERNED THAT THE CONSTITUTIONAL OFFICES SHOWED ZERO IN THE 5°rb DEPARTMENTAL BUDGET CUTS ATTACHMENT. HCN REQUESTED THAT DR. WII.SON PROVIDE A LIST ii OF 5% BUDGET CUTS FOR THE SCHOOLS, LBE FELT THE POLICY OF USING SURPLUS SCHOOL FUNDS ONLY FOR CAPITAL AND NOT IlVIPROVEMENTS MIGHT BE CHANGED. BLT ADVISED THAT THIS COULD BE A ONE-TIlVII; CHANGE AND NOT POLICY CHANGE, AT 5:45 P.M.. B ~T MOVED TO GO BACK INTO SESSION. UW O. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section as follows: 1. 2.1-344 A (7) for consultation with legal counsel pertaining to actual or probable litigation: 301 Gilmer Associates; 2. 2.1-344 A (7) for consultation with legal counsel pertaining to actual or probable litigation: Contract with City of Roanoke. 3. 2.1-344 a (7) for consultation with legal counsel pertaining to actual or probable litigation: Dixie Caverns Landfill BI;T MOTION AT 5:45 P.M. URC P. CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE SESSION R-11492-12 BL.T MOTION AT 6:15 P.M. ITEM 0.2 POSTPONED Q• ADdO TO 8:30 A.M. ON SATURDAY, TANUARY 18. 1992 AT THE ADIVIINISTRATION CENTER FOR THE PURPOSE OF A PL,ANNIIVG RETREAT. BLJ MOTION AT 6:17 P.M. - URC 12 a COMMITTEE VACANCIES IN 1992 JANIIARY BIIILDING CODE BOARD OF ADJIISTMENTS AND APPEALS Four year term of Thomas A. Darnall, Vinton District, will expire 1/22/92. SOCIAL SERVICES BOARD Four year term of William P. Broderick will expire 1/1/92. TRANBPORTATION AND SAFETY COMMISSION Four year terms of Leo Trenor, Member at Large; Charlotte Lichtenstein, Neighborhood Representative; and Henry Gregory, Member at Large, will expire 1/1/92. FEBRIIARY ELECTORAL BOARD (APPOINTED BY THE COIIRTS) Three year term of Wilton B. "Webb" Johnson will expire 2/28/92. GRIEVANCE PANEL Two year term of Kenneth W. Lussen will expires 2/23/92. MARCH LEAGIIE OF OLDER AMERICANB ADVISORY COIINCIL One year term of Frances R. Holsinger will expire 03/31/92. LEAGIIE OF OLDER AMERICANS-HOARD OF DIRECTORS One year term of Murry K. White will expire 03/31/92. APRIL BIIILDING CODE BOARD OF ADJIIBTMENTB AND APPEALS Four year term of Robert A. Williamson, Jr., Hollins District, will expire 4/13/92, and Jon Walp, Windsor Hills District, will expire 4/27/92. MAY 1 TAP BOARD OF DIRECTORS Two year terms of Elizabeth M. Stokes, and E. Cabell Brand, Joint Appointee, will expire 5/5/92. JUNE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Five year term of Carlton W. Wright, Hollins District, will expire 06/30/92. "CA'!'V" ROANORE VALLEY REGIONAL CABLE TV COMMITTEE Initial one year term of Don Terp, Member at Large, will expire 6/11/92. The subsequent term will be for three years. FIFTH PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION Three year terms of Richard W. Robers, Elected Representative, Alfred C. Anderson, Elected Representative, and Mrs. Pat Dean, Citizen Representative and Executive Committee will expire 6/30/92. PARRS & RECREATION ADVISORY COMMISSION Three year terms of Vince Joyce, Cave Spring District; Karen Padgett, Hollins District; and Thomas Robertson, Vinton District; will expire 6/30/92. ROANORE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD - APPOINTED BY SCHOOL BOARD SELECTION COMMITTEE Four year terms of Maurice Mitchell, Cave Spring District and Paul Black, Hollins District, will expire 6/30/92. JULY ROANORE VALLEY REGIONAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD Four year term of Mrs. Mikeiel T. Wimmer will expire 07/31/92. SOCIAL SERVICES BOARD Four year term of Betty Jo Anthony will expire 7/19/92. AUGIIST COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS RESOURCES BOARD One year terms of Edmund J. Kielty, and Mrs. Chris Pickard, 2 Alternate, will expire 08/31/92. SEPTEMBER GRIEVANCE PANEL Two year term of R. Vincent Reynolds will expire 9/10/92. INDIISTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AIITHORITY Four year term of J. Richard Cranwell will expire 9/26/92. OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER LIBRARY BOARD Four year term of Carolyn Pence, Vinton District, will expire 12/31/92. MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES OF THE ROANORE VALLEY COMMIINITY SERVICES BOARD Three year terms of Sue Ivey, Cheri Hartman, Member at Large, and Harriette Shivers, Member at Large, will expire 12/31/92. ROANORE PLANNING COMMISSION Four year term of Michael J. Gordon, Windsor Hills District, will expire 12/31/92. 3 APPOINTMENTS/VACANCIES TO BE FILLED FOR 1992 DISTRICT TERM BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Carlton W. Wright Hollins 5 yrs BIIILDING CODE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS E%PIRES 06/30/92 Thomas A. Darnall Vinton 4 yrs 01/22/92 Robert A. Williamson, Jr. Hollins 4 yrs 04/13/92 Jon Walp Windsor Hills 4 yrs 04/27/92 ROANORE VALLEY REGIONAL CABLE TV COMMITTEE "CATV COMMITTEE" Don Terp At Large 1 yr 06/11/92 (Subsequent term 3 yrs) COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS RESOIIRCES BOARD Edmund J. Kielty 1 yr 08/13/92 Mrs. Chris Pickard, Alternate 1 yr 08/13/92 ELECTORAL BOARD (APPOINTED BY THE COURTS) 3 rs 02/28/92 Wilton B. "Webb" Johnson y FIFTH PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION Richard W. Robers, Elected Rep 3 yrs 06/30/92 Alfred C. Anderson, Elected Rep 3 yrs 06/30/92 Mrs. Pat Dean, Citizen Rep & Exe. Com. 3 yrs 06/30/92 GRIEVANCE PANEL R. Vincent Reynolds 2 yrs 09/10/92 Kenneth W. Lussen 2 yrs 02/23/92 Ir1DIISTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AIITHORITY J. Richard Cranwell 4 yrs 09/26/92 1 LEAGIIE OF OLDER AMERICANS-ADVISORY COUNCIL Frances R. Holsinger 1 yr 03/31/92 LEAGUE OF OLDER AMERICANS-BOARD OF DIRECTORS Murry K. White 1 yr 03/31/92 LIBRARY BOARD Carolyn Pence Vinton 4 yrs 12/31/92 MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES OF THE ROANORE VALLEY COMMUPtITY SERVICES BOARD 3 yrs 12/31/92 Sue Ivey 3 yrs 12/31/92 Cheri Hartman, Member at Large Harriette Shivers, Member at Large 3 yrs 12/31/92 PARRS & RECREATION ADVISORY COMMISSION Vince Joyce Cave Spring 3 yrs 06/30/92 Karen Padgett Hollins 3 yrs 06/30/92 Thomas Robertson Vinton 3 yrs 06/30/92 ROANORE PLANNING COMMISSION Michael J. Gordon Windsor Hills 4 yrs 12/31/92 ROANOICE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD - APPOINTED BY SCHOOL BOARD SELECTION Maurice Mitchell Paul Black Cave Spring 4 yrs 06/30/92 Hollins 4 yrs 06/30/92 ROANORE VALLEY REGIONAL SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD Mrs. Mikeiel T. Wimmer 4 yrs 07/31/92 SOCIAL SERVICES BOARD William P. Broderick 4 yrs 01/01/92 Betty Jo Anthony 4 yrs 07/19/92 2 TAP BOARD OF DIRECTORS Elizabeth W. Stokes E. Cabell Brand, Joint Appointee TRANSPORTATION AND SAFETY COMMI88ION Leo Trenor At Large Charlotte Lichtenstein Neighborhood Henry Gregory At Large 2 yrs 05/05/92 2 yrs 05/05/92 4 yrs 01/01/92 4 yrs 01/01/92 4 yrs 01/01/92 3 1991 IINFILLED COMMITTEE APPOINTMENTS LIBRARY BOARD Jane Bryant Catawba 4 yrs Dr. Paul Zeis Windsor Hills 4 yrs MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES OF THE ROANORE VALLEY COMMIINITY SERVICES BOARD 12/31/91 12/31/91 Dr. Joseph Duetsch, at large, joint 3 yrs 12/31/91 OQ ~ AN kF ~ ~ ~~ az ~~~~ ~~ ~~Y~~~2.~ 1 38 P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE (703) 772-2004 Mr. William G. Rosebro 4712 Easthill Drive Roanoke, Virginia 24018 Dear Bill: January 29, 1992 (703) 772-2005 County Administrator Elmer Hodge asked that your request for approval of Bylaws for the Roanoke County Transportation and Safety Commission be placed on the Board of Supervisors February 11 agenda at the 3:00 p.m. session. Please plan to attend or have another member available to answer any questions the Board of Supervisors may have. Until the Board of Supervisors hears your request on amending the Bylaws and changing the expiration date of members, they will not make new appointments to this Commission. If you have questions, please call me at 772-2003. Sincerely, Mary H. Allen Clerk to the Board CC: Art LaPrade, Police Department BOARD OF SUPERVISORS LEE B. EDDY, CHAIRMAN WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT EDWARD G. KOCH~IT NIEBA AGVSTERIALDISTRICT BOB L. JOHNSON HOWNS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT H. ODELL'FUZZY MINNIX CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT ®a~yaad P>~e-