Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
7/13/1993 - Regular
~ pOAN ,~,~ ti p Z ~>;~1xYtfYr ~I ~IY~1'~LY.EZ.Q .. a 1838 ROANOKE COUNTY ~ BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION AGENDA July 13, 1993 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. THERE WILL BE AN AUDIT COMMITTEE MEETING AT 2:00 P.M. IF NECESSARY, THERE WILL BE AN EVENING SESSION AT _ 7:00 P.M. FOR THE PURPOSE OF WORK SESSIONS. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 P.M.) 1. Roll Call. ALL PRESENT AT 3:05 P.M. Z. Invocation: John M. Chambliss Assistant County Administrator 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag. B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS LBE ASKED TO ~ THE ESTABLISHIVIENT OF PUBLIC ~[EARINGS FOR REZONING ADJACENT TO BLUE RIDGE PARKWAY - WITHDREW AFTER ECH ADVISED THAT THIS WOULD BE DISCUSSED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. i ® Fecyded Paper LBE ASKED THAT "NUISANCE CIAIMS" BE DISCUSSED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND AWARDS NONE D. NEW BUSINESS 1. Request for Appropriation for Completion of the Ballfields at Northside High School. (John Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator) A-71393-1 BDT MOTION TO APPROVE APPROPRIATION UP TO $62,000 URC 2. Request for Appropriation to Fund Frozen Position in the Clerk of Circuit Court's Office. (Steven McGraw, Clerk of Circuit Court) A-71393-2 HCN MOTION TO APPROVE APPROPRIATION OF $26,400 FROM BOARD CONTINGENCY URC E. OLD BUSINESS 1. Request for Approval of Proposed Legislative Requests for Virginia Association of Counties. (CONTINUED FROM JUNE 22, 1993) (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney) A-71393-3 HCN MOTION TO APPROVE PROPOSED LEGISLATIVE REQUESTS WITH MODIFICATION TO SECTION XVII.C REGARDING ELECTED SCHOOL BOARDS URC a 2. Request for Readoption of the Public Private Partnership Policy. (Tim Gubala, Economic Development Director) STAFF TO BRING BACK REVISED COPY OF POLICY THAT WOULD INCLUDE LBE'S SUGGESTIONS BUT RETAINING FLEXIBILITY AND 50% PARTICIPATION. LBE AND TWG TO WORK ON MATRIX. F. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS NONE G. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS NONE H. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance Amending and Reenacting Section 5-21, Definitions and 5-44, Tax Imposed, Adding Sections 5-26.1 to 5-26.5 and Repealing Section 5-26 of Article II. Dogs, Cats and Other Animals of Chapter 5, Animals and Fowl of the Roanoke County Code to Control Dangerous and Vicious Dogs. (Kenneth Hogan, Chief Animal Control Officer) EGK MOTION TO APPROVE 1ST READING 2ND - 7/27/93 URC HCN ASKED STAFF TO COINIMUNICATE INFO TO THE TOWN OF VINTON. I. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES NONE 3 J. APPOINTMENTS 1. Community Corrections Resources Board LBE ASKED THAT APPOINTMENTS TO THIS BOARD BE CONTINUED TO THE END OF JULY. 2. Social Services Advisory Board FM NOMINATED BETTY LUCAS TO A FOUR-YEAR TERM EXPIRING AUGUST 1, 1997 REPRESENTING CAVE SPRING DISTRICT. EGK NOMINATED ED WOLD TO A FOUR-YEAR TERM EXPIRING AUGUST 1, 1997 REPRESENTING CATAWBA DISTRICT. K. CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO BE ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WII.L BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. R-71393-4 BIT MOTION TO ADOPT CONSENT RESO URC 1. Minutes of Meetings -May 25, 1993, June 8, 1993, June 22, 1993. 2. Confirmation of Committee Appointments to the Social Services Advisory Board A-71393-4.a 3. Donation of Drainage Easements on Lots 18 and 19, Section 3, Plantation Gardens Subdivision. A-71393-4.b 4 L. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS Supervisor Kohinke: (l~ Threw the opening ball at the Dixie Giris Softball League and Tohn Chambliss caught the ball. Thanked staff for their participation. (2) Attended the West County Civic League Meeting. Thanked staff for attending and making presentation. Supervisor Eddy: ~1) Asked for a report and update on Private SSE/R Program. (2) Asked about schedule for ISTEA applications. Terry Harrington advised that info can go to TTC of the MPO and then come to the BOS on 7/27. He briefed Board on the proposed projects. (3~ Reported that Bob Blankenship had recommended trapping or other alternatives for handling beavers on Bent Mountain. (4) Announced he had asked for info on emergency medical dispatch program after letter to editor in newspaper. Chief Fuqua advised it would cost $100,000 with five new staff. ECH advised that this program is primarily for rural areas with slow response times. There is no EMD program in the Roanoke Valley. (5) Asked support from the Board of Supervisors that PMM bring a resolution to 7/27 board meeting concerning a referendum on school board members being appointed by the BOS. Board consensus to go forward. BIT asked PMM to ask Courts whether referendum could include all three methods for choosing school board members. (~ Read a statement in response to Mayor Bowers comments on consolidation, stating he felt it would be counterproductive. Supervisor Nickens: (1) Asked for follow up regarding ECH memo on regional enforcement of decals. PMM reported he had discussed with other local goo. attorneys and the Public Safety Team. ECH will discuss at next local goo. quarterly meeting. (2) Asked for list of departments that had cost Overruns and positive cash flows. ECH will provide list. (3, Asked about response to letter from citizen who complained about having to pay duplicate fees. ECH had responded and will send cony to board members. (4) Asked about response to Fred Anderson's memo on the salary survey appeals process. ECH advised he had responded with copy in Board Reading File. Supervisor Tohnson: (1) Asked ECH to provide copy of memo to Fred Anderson for each board member. (2) Asked PMM to study what could happen if Roanoke City dropued its charter, but advised he did not want staff spending time and money on consolidation issue. (3) Recommended that the Board review book published by Virginia Education Association and advised that Virginia ranks 43rd in taxes at the state and local level. M. CITIZENS' COMII~NTS AND CO1~~IlViiJNICATIONS NONE N. REPORTS BI;T MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILE - UW 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Proclamations Signed by the Chairman O. WORK SESSIONS (WILL BE HELD AT THE END OF THE AFTERNOON SESSION AND CONTINUED AT 7:00 P.M. IF NECESSARY) 1. Machinery & Tools Tax PRESENTED BY WAYNE COMP'rON NO CONSENSUS TO GO FORWARD WITH ANY CHANGES TO THE TAX. FM DECIARED A DINNER BREAK AT 5:10 P.M. RECONVENED AT 6:35 P.M. 2. Commission on Population Growth 6 PRESENTED BY TERRY I~IARRINGTON TH ASKED THAT THE BOARD SEND HIM CONIlI~NTS TO FORWARD TO THE C011ZNIISSION. BIT - SHOULD ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT AND THAT WORK SESSION WAS HELD. HCN -SHOULD ADVISE THAT THE CHANGES WILL INCREASE THE WORKLOAD AT THE LOCAL LEVEL. 3. Parks & Recreation Fees PRESENTED BY TOHN CHAMBLISS, DEBBIE PITTS, TIM TONES STAFF TO WORK WITH PARKS & RECREATION CONMSSION ON REFII~TING THE FEE ORD. WHICH WILL BE BROUGHT BACK TO THE BOARD. 4. Refuse Collection PRESENTED BY GARDNER SMITH, DON MYERS BOARD CONSENSUS 4 TO 1 IN OPPOSITION TO 2 TIMES/MO. BULK AND BRUSH COLLECTION. STAFF TO BRING BACK FUTURE COST OVERRUNS WHEN THY BECOME APROBLEM -NOT AT END OF THE YEAR. P. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to the Code of Virginia 2.1-344 (a) ~'n Consultation with legal counsel and briefings by staff members, pertaining to probable litigation, condemnation of an easement across real estate owned by Tanosko, Casey, Boone and Wallace for the water transmission project; and a claim for damages to real property arising from certain utility operations, and Norma T. Sigmon v. Board of Supervisors and Boone, Boone & Loeb and Nicholas H. Beasley v. Board of Supervisors EGK MOTION TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 7:15 P.M. URC Q. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION R-71393-5 BI,~T MOTION TO RETURN TO OPEN SESSION AT 834 P.M. AND ADOPT CERTIFICATION RESO URC R ADJOi;fItNMENT BIT MOTION TO ADJOURN AT 8:36 P.M. - URC An article in this morning's paper revealed that a leading proponent of consolidation not only favors some sort of restruct- uring, he also said that our failure to do so is the "...biggest impediment to the economic stability and growth of the region." I would like to go on record as saying that this is fal- lacious thinking that needs to be debunked at every turn. The only rational reason for merging governments would be to improve both the effectiveness and efficiency of the delivery of services to our citizens, i.e., better services at less cost. It was substantially proven during the consolidation debate of 1990 that such would not be the case. At the same time, I think it has become very obvious to most people that our local economy is in a period of transition, occurring as it is against the backdrop of a bleak state and national economic picture. They believe, as do I, that all in good time our economy will be robust and prosperous no matter how we structure government here in the Valley. In fact, most of us are convinced that our economy will be far better the more we in government stay out of it. I note with amusement that the latest plan of choice doesn't call for a meaningful restructuring of ALL Valley governments into ore entity. Instead, it boils down to a plan in which the County disappears altogether, engulfed and devoured by the two cities and town. Apparently, by some process of reasoning, four governments are too many, while three would be okay, especially if the County sees its demise in the process! I remain opposed to consolidation, not just for the sake of being opposed, and not because it is the politically correct thing to do for a supervisor from the Catawba District. I'm opposed because no one has yet proven to me or to the rest of the County taxpayers that things will get better, and cost less. And, I reiterate a position I took in 1990, and have repeated many times since: the economic development issue is bogus as a basis for consolidation, one that is used primarily as a scare tactic by those who favor a merger of any kind. Finally, such tactics inhibit good communications, and cause people--myself included--to waste a lot of time, money, and other resources in the defense of their positions, rather than creating a climate in which we can all work together and move ahead. ~, ROAN ~.~ ~ ~ A ~ ~ a Cn~~~# ~~ ~~x~~a 1838 ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA July 13, 1993 ~ff~a~~ 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. THERE WILL BE AN AUDIT COMMITTEE MEETING AT 2:00 P.M. IF NECESSARY THERE WILL BE AN EVENING SESSION AT 7:00 P.M. FOR THE PURPOSE OF WORK SESSIONS. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 P.M.) 1. Roll Call. 2. Location: John M. Chambliss Assistant County Administrator 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag. B, REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND AWARDS D. NEW BUSINESS ® Recycled Paper 1. Request for Appropriation for Completion of the Ballfields at Northside High School. (John Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator) 2. Request for Appropriation to Fund Frozen Position in the Clerk of Circuit Court's Office. (Steven McGraw, Clerk of Circuit Court) E. OLD BUSINESS 1. Request for Approval of Proposed Legislative Requests for Virginia Association of Counties. (CONTINUED FROM JUNE 22, 1993) (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney) 2. Request for Readoption of the Public Private Partnership Policy. (Tim Gubala, Economic Development Director) F. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS G. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS H. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance Amending and Reenacting Section 5-21, Definitions and 5-44, Tax Imposed, Adding Sections 5-26.1 to 5-26.5 and Repealing Section 5-26 of Article II. Dogs, Cats and Other Animals of Chapter 5, Animals and Fowl of the Roanoke County Code to Control Dangerous and Vicious Dogs. (Kenneth Hogan, Chief Animal Control Officer) a I. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES J. APPOINTMENTS 1. Community Corrections Resources Board 2. Social Services Advisory Board K. CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO BE ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WII.L BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. 1. Minutes of Meetings -May 25, 1993, June 8, 1993, June 22, 1993. 2. Confirmation of Committee Appointments to the Social Services Advisory Board 3. Donation of Drainage Easements on Lots 18 and 19, Section 3, Plantation Gardens Subdivision. L. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS M. CITIZENS' COMII~NTS AND CObIlVIiTNICATIONS N. REPORTS 3 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Proclamations Signed by the Chairman O. WORK SESSIONS (WILL BE HELD AT THE END OF THE AFTERNOON SESSION AND CONTINUED AT 7:00 P.M. IF NECESSARY 1. Machinery & Tools Tax 2. Commission on Population Growth 3. Parks & Recreation Fees 4. Refuse Collection P. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to the Code of Virginia 2.1- 344 (a) ('n Consultation with legal counsel and briefings by staff members, pertaining to probable litigation, namely, condemnation of an easement across real estate owned by Janosko, Casey, Boone and Wallace for the water transmission project; and a claim for damages to real property arising from certain utility operations. Q. CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION R. ADJOURNMENT 4 A-71394-1 ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER .~ - / AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: July 13, 1993 AGENDA ITEM: Request for Appropriation for the Completion of the Ball Fields at Northside High School COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS: ~(~'~'µ~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY' One of the projects included in the 1992 bond referendum was the relocation of two baseball/softball fields adjacent to Northside High School which were being displaced by the construction of the new Forensics Laboratory. $52,000 was included in the bond project for realignment and $10,000 for fence repairs for a total of $62,000. Our target budget for the construction of a new ball field has been $31,000 each. The Recreation Clubs which serve this area of the County and the School programs have requested that the construction be expanded to complete a total of four fields at this site (instead of only replacing two). The engineering, grading, stormwater management and utility costs will be the same at this site whether two or four fields are built because the entire 8+ Acre site must be managed. The projected cost to complete the construction of the first two (replacement) fields is $95,180. The additional costs for fencing, infield soils, bleachers, etc. to develop the third and fourth fields would be approximately $20,500. Before the final grading is completed, we plan to install the water and sewer service lines for a future restroom facility so that we will not have to disturb the fields once they are built. Based upon the bids received for the grading of this site, it is anticipated that we will need up to $62,000 additional dollars to finish the work for all four fields. Any savings from the bond projects scheduled for the Walrond Park development would be used to offset this cost. The Schools are attempting to provide the new parking facility for this site using School Board monies. FISCAL IMPACT' It is requested that an amount not to exceed $62,000 be appropriated from the Capital Reserve Account to complete the construction of the two additional fields at the Northside complex. ~-/ ALTERNATIVES• Alternative No. 1 Appropriate an amount not to exceed $62,000 from the capital reserve to allow the completion of two additional fields at this site making a total of four fields. Alternative No. 2 Make no new appropriation at this time and only replace the two existing fields on this site. RECOMMENDATION• Staff recommends Alternative No. 1 which appropriates the $62, 000 and allows the construction of all four fields at this time for use by the School and Recreation programs. Respectfully submitted, Appr ved b ~~ , s~ : ~,. .~ ohn M. Chambli Jr. Elmer C. Hodge Assistant Administrator ----- County Administrator -------------------------- ------- --------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved ~ ) Motion by: Bob L J ohnson Motion to No Yes Abs Denied ( ) approve appropriati on up to Eddy x Received ( ) $6,000 Johnson x Referred ( ) Kohinke x To ( ) Minnix x Nickens x cc: File John M. Chambliss, Jr., Assistant Administrator James Jones, Assistant Director of Parks Debbie Pitts, Assistant Director of Recreation Diane Hyatt, Director, Finance Reta Busher, Director, Management & Budget A-71393-2 ~~'TION NO. ITEM NUMBER - .Z AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: July 13, 1993 AGENDA ITEM: Request for an appropriation to fund a frozen position for the Clerk of the Circuit Court. COTJNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~ ~~ /~~ BACKGROUND: On July 1, 1990, one of the three full-time County positions in the Clerk's office was eliminated for budgetary and personnel management reasons. When I came into this position in January, 1992, I discovered employees working nights, weekends, and holidays. Since then, the workload has continued to rise. Simultaneous increases in all areas of responsibility in the Clerk's office have not allowed for the normal backup capabilities between staff members with different job duties. Any minor occurrences in staffing such as vacations or sickness result in an almost immediate backlog of work. It is highly unlikely that there will be any reduction in civil, criminal or real estate related activities in the near future. However, should any significant downturns occur, this. can be dealt with in the budget process at that time. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Roanoke County Circuit Court Clerk's office experienced a dramatically increased workload during the past calendar year. Specifically, the number of recorded instruments, with a previous four-year average of slightly over 12,000, jumped to nearly 19,000 in 1992. This increase of more than 50 o is reflected in the amount of work done at the front counter when the documents are brought in for recordation, in filing and indexing the new documents, and in microfilming them for permanent record storage.. With regard to the civil and criminal caseloads, the number of concluded cases is also up significantly. The increase in 1992 over 1.991 is well over 200 cases, or approximately 10%. Since October of last year, this office has employed a part-time, temporary employee currently working an average of 30 hours per week to assist primarily at the front counter and in the criminal caseload. This person has been handling front counter activities and microfilming as well as preparing court orders, filing cases at the various levels of processing, working with judges, attorneys, and the general public with regard to criminal matters, and answering telephone inquiries. Anew position at the Deputy Clerk III level would have its major responsibilities in the criminal and probate areas where the most rapid growth is expected to occur. ~ -z The Roanoke County Circuit Court Clerk's office is a fee office; it operates on funds generated from its activities. It is one of only 19 clerk's offices, out of a total of 121 in the Commonwealth of Virginia, which has consistently operated "in the black" for years. In other words, not only is this office self-supporting, it also produces surplus funds which are returned to Roanoke County as revenue. When there is an increase in the workload, there are usually additional funds generated. The subsequent increase in revenues is good for Roanoke County, but a portion of the resulting fees needs to be returned to the Clerk's office to allow for the higher demands placed upon equipment and/or staff. FISCAL IMPACT: The total cost of a Deputy Clerk III position (Roanoke County Grade 19) including benefits for 12 months is $26,444.00. This amount could be appropriated from the board contingency. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends reclassifying one of the remaining 13 frozen positions to a Deputy Clerk III position and appropriating $26,444.00 effective August 1, 1993 from the board contingency. Respectfully ~submitted~, Steven A. McGraw, Clerk Appr~ed by ~, :. ; ~~ Elmer C. Hod e County Administrator ------------ ---------------------------------- ACTION ----------- VOTE ------- Approved (x Motion by: Harry C. Nickens No Yes Abs Denied ( ) motion to approve appropriation Eddy x Received ( ) of S26 400 from Board Contingency Johnson x Referred ( ) Kohinke x To ( ) Minnix x Nickens x cc: File Steven A. McGraw, Clerk of Circuit Court Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance Reta R. Busher, Director, Management & Budget D. Keith Cook, Director, Human Resource -~ PART I: MICROFILMING/INDERING COST INCREASES Do you anticipate increased costs in microfilming/indexing in 1994-96? Yes X NO If yes: What is the total amount of your approved Office Expense to be used for Microfilm/Indexing in FY94 - $ $~~(1h3.40 What is your total projected microfilming/indexing cost for FY95 - $ 105.751.30 What is your total projected microfilming/indexing cost for FY96 - $ 110.000.00 PART II: STAFFING FY95 Locality Roanoke Oounty Category A: Replacement of compensation Board funded temporary employees with permanent positions beginning FY95. (Complete this category only if you currently have funding under temporary employees on your Compensation Board Approved Budget.) Any position provided in this category will not increase your current total staff, but salaries and benefits for those employees will be reimbursed on the Compensation Board payroll in the permanent salaries section rather than from the temporary employees budget. Classification: GOC/ MT CTII DCI OTHER* Total Positions Forecast: Total Reduction in Compensation Board part-time budget: * INDICATE TITLE - one Use Titles from the CLASSIFICATION AND PAY PLAN FOR EMPLOYEES OF THE CIRCUIT COURT, 7/1/93 - 11/30/93 Check here if you do not request replacement of temporary employees funds (if any) with permanent positions in FY95: CateQorY B: Replacement of locally funded permanent positions with Compensation Board funded permanent positions beginning in FY95. Any position provided in this category will not increase your total staff, but will provide for Compensation Board reimbursement of salaries and benefits for permanent positions currently funded by your locality. 1 ~-2 GOC/ CTII DCI GOC/ Classification: MT CTII DCI Total Positions Forecast: OTHER* DCLI DCIII two one * INDICATE TITLE - Use Titles from the CLASSIFICATION AND PAY PLAN FOR EMPLOYEES OF THE CIRCUIT COURT, 7/1/93 - 11/30/93 Check here if you do not have any locally funded positions or do not wish to replace them with Compensation Board funded positions in FY95: Cateciory C: New Compensation Board funded permanent Positions in FY95 - Any positions provided in this category will increase your total staff. Classification: Total Number of New Positions Forecast: * INDICATE TITLE - Locality Roanoke County OTHER* Use Titles from the CLASSIFICATION AND PAY PLAN FOR EMPLOYEES OF THE CIRCUIT COURT, 7/1/93 - 11/30/93 Check here if you do not forecast a need for new positions in FY95: FY96 IF YOUR STAFFING NEEDS IN FY96 REMAIN UNCHANGED FROM FY95, DO NOT COMPLETE THIS SECTION. If you requested staffing changes in FY95, we will assume that you will also need the same changes in FY96. If, however, you need additional changes in FY96 over and above your request for FY95, complete the following section. If you do not need staffing changes in FY95 but you need them in FY96, complete the following section. Category A: Replacement of Compensation Board funded temporary employees with permanent positions beginning FY96. (Complete this category only if you currently have funding under temporary employees on your Compensation Board Approved Budget.) Any position provided in this category will not increase your current total staff, but salaries and benefits for those employees will be reimbursed on the Compensation Board payroll in the permanent salaries section rather than from the temporary employees budget. GOC/ Classification: MT CTII DCI Total Positions Forecast: OTHER* 2 -.-ti Locality Roanoke bounty Total Reduction in Compensation Board part-time budget: ($ )($ )($ )($ ) * INDICATE TITLE - Use-Titles from the CLASSIFICATION AND PAY PLAN FOR EMPLOYEES OF THE CIRCUIT COURT, 7/1/93 - 11/30/93 Check here if you do not request replacement of temporary employees funds (if any) with permanent positions in FY96: Category B: Replacement of locally funded permanent positions with Compensation Board funded permanent positions beginning in FY96. Any position provided in this category will not increase your total staff, but will provide for Compensation Board reimbursement of salaries and benefits for permanent positions currently funded by your locality. GOC/ Classification: MT CTII DCI Total Positions Forecast: OTHER* * INDICATE TITLE - Use Titles from the CLASSIFICATION AND PAY PLAN FOR EMPLOYEES OF THE CIRCUIT COURT, 7/1/93 - 11/30/93 Check here if you do not have any locally funded positions or do hot wish to replace them with Compensation Board funded positions in FY96: Category C: New Compensation Board funded permanent Positions in FY96 - Any positions provided in this category will increase your total staff. Classification: Total Number of New Positions Forecast: GOC/ CTII DCI OTHER* * INDICATE TITLE - IIse Titles from the CLASSIFICATION AND PAY PLAN FOR EMPLOYEES OF THE CIRCUIT COURT, 7/1/93 - 11/30/93 Check here if you do not forecast a need for new positions in FY96: JIISTIFICATION FOR NEW POSITIONS IN FY95 OR FY96: If you projected a need for an new position under Category C above, please address the following questions for each new position projected on a separate attachment labeled "Part IIA, Justification for New Position". To the greatest extent possible, you should base your justification on specific quantifiable data. 3 -~ A. What results do you plan to achieve with the new positions? B. What alternatives have you considered other than new positions? C. Are the positions needed to maintain current service, accommodate current or projected workload increases, or provide new or better quality service? D. What will be the effects on your service delivery if your request is not approved? Category D: As the law now stands, effective January 1, 1995, divorces and other family matters will come under the jurisdiction of the Family Court. The study document prepared by the Supreme Court states that 96 positions statewide in Circuit Court Clerks' offices will be freed up as a result of this transfer in workload in FY96. With your help, the Compensation Board will have sufficient information to show that something less than 96 positions may be freed up, while your need for additional staff due to workload increases in other areas is equal to or greater than the positions freed up by the Family Court. Please note that your answer to the questions below will be used along with the other categories throughout this questionnaire to come up with a net figure for staffing needs. It is important that you answer the questions. 1. Estimate the number of cases that will be reduced due to Family Court in FY96: 550 2. How many full-time equivalent employees, as their primary responsibilities, currently handle divorces and other Family Court matters• .95 (If one•employee spends all of his/her time on Family Court matters, enter 1.00; if three employees each spend 25% of their time on Family Court matters, enter .75; etc.) PART III: CERTIFICATION I mailed (or delivered) a copy of this document to the governing body of my political subdivision on the 30th day of June , 1993. ature of Constitutional Officer Steven A. McGraw, Clerk Printed Name Roanoke County Circuit Court Locality 4 ACTION NO. A-713r93-3 L=. ITEM NO. '~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: July 13, 1993 AGENDA ITEM: 1994 Legislative Program, Virginia Association of Counties COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY• The Virginia Association of Counties requested its membership to identify major legislative issues of statewide concern that should be considered in the 1994 session of the Virginia General Assembly. This agenda item suggests several issues for Board consideration. BACKGROUND• The Virginia Association of Counties has requested each of its members to submit to it any proposals for VaCO's 1994 Legislative Program by June 15, 1993. On June 8, 1993 the Board considered a report from staff on this topic. At that time the Board requested several amendments to that report. This report incorporates the Board's suggested amendments. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The following is a list of legislative initiatives recom- mended for consideration by the Board: 1994 Legislative Program I. 599 Law Enforcement funding A. Closely monitor any proposed changes in the method of allocating funds. B. Support an equitable distribution system that rewards local efforts to prevent crime. II. FOI Study (SJR 238, Sen. Houck, 1993 General Assembly) A. Support legislation to protect taxpayer investment 1 in collecting, developing, storing and maintaining public records. Any dissemination requirement should allow local governments to recover the actual cost of developing GIS system. III. Recycling A. The 25~ State recycling goal adversely effects County finances, since the County is losing money recycling. B. The State should either: 1. waive this recycling requirement (25~ for 1995), or 2. guarantee market prices for recyclable materi- als, IV. V. VI. VII. VIII. Social Services A. Increase administrative funding for the Comprehen- sive Services Act. B. Monitor HJR 603 Task Force on Restructuring Vir- ginia's Long Term Care for the Elderly. Libraries A. Full funding of State Aid for Public Libraries B. Approximately 77~ of funds required under formula (Sec. 42.1-48) are appropriated in State budget. Treasurer A. Amend Sec. 58.1-3013 to require credit card compa- nies to honor local ordinances authorizing the payment of local taxes by credit card and imposing a service charge not to exceed 4~ of the amount due. DUI A. Increase penalties for DUI violations. B. Improve and toughen enforcement of DUI statutes. Equalize the taxing and borrowing powers of counties with those powers granted municipalities. 2 IX. Support the recommendations of the Governor's Advisory Commission on the Dillon Rule and Local Government. X. Support the reduction of unfunded regulatory and statu- tory mandates, and oppose any state mandates on local governments without sufficient funding to cover the costs of these mandates. XI. Expand the revenue powers and authority of local govern- ments, including authority to levy a tobacco tax, and to provide for a local option income tax. XII. Continue the moratorium on any city annexation and city annexation initiated by citizens of counties. XIII. Grant local governments the authority to adopt growth management ordinances, including the power to impose impact fees, to restrict the authority of the courts to overrule local land-use decisions, and to allow reasonab- le procedures and time periods for the amortization of non-conforming signs. XIV. Support legislation establishing a deposit on beverage containers. XV. Support the following finance issues: A. Return a portion of lottery proceeds to local governments as originally intended, B. Increase State funding for local police depart- ments. XVI. Support initiatives for economic development: A. Funding in the form of grants and loans for the development of industrial parks and the shell building program B. Legislation to allow revenue sharing (without referendum requirements) among participating local governments from jointly developed industrial parks. XVII. Public Education A. Enhance funding for public education, including increasing the funds available for distribution to localities through the Literary Fund for capital construction or renovations. B. Authorize local school divisions to establish 3 opening dates for school. C. set and tion STAFF RECOMMENDATION: in nd me '~~ . a E~itution to allow el~ected~~~school boards to levy taxes to support local public educa- Staff recommends that the Board endorse and adopt a recommended legislative program for the consideration of the Virginia Association of Counties for the 1994 session of the Virginia General Assembly. Since Explore funding is a local concern, perhaps this issue should not be included in the VaCO package of recommendations. Respectfully submitted, ~ ~~ Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney Action Vote v No Yes Abs _ Approved (x) Motion by Harry C. Nickens Eddy Denied ( ) motion to approve proposed Johnson x Received ( ) legislative requests with Kohinke x Referred modification to Section XVII.C Nickens x to regarding elected school boards Minnix x cc: File Paul Mahoney, County Attorney James D. Campbell, Executive Director, VACo c:\wp51\agenda\general\94.1eg 4 S ACTION NO. ITEM NO. E - ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: July 13, 1993 AGENDA ITEM: 1994 Legislative Program, Virginia Association of Counties ~"~. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS : ~ - ~ - ~~q~"'~`~''' EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Virginia Association of Counties requested its membership to identify major legislative issues of statewide concern that should be considered in the 1994 session of the Virginia General Assembly. This agenda item suggests several issues for Board consideration. BACKGROUND' The Virginia Association of Counties has requested each of its members to submit to it any proposals for VaCO's 1994 Legislative Program by June 15, 1993. On June 8, 1993 the Board considered a report from staff on this topic. At that time the Board requested several amendments to that report. This report incorporates the Board's suggested amendments. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The following is a list of legislative initiatives recom- mended for consideration by the Board: 1994 Legislative Program I. 599 Law Enforcement funding A. Closely monitor any proposed changes in the method of allocating funds. B. Support an equitable distribution system that rewards local efforts to prevent crime. II. FOI Study (SJR 238, Sen. Houck, 1993 General Assembly) A. Support legislation to protect taxpayer investment in collecting, developing, storing and maintaining 1 -/ public records. Any dissemination requirement should allow local governments to recover the actual cost of developing GIS system. III. Recycling A. The 25% State recycling goal adversely effects County finances, since the County is losing money recycling. B. The State should either: 1. waive this recycling requirement (25~ for 1995), or 2. guarantee market prices for recyclable materi- als, IV. Social Services A. Increase administrative funding for the Comprehen- sive Services Act. B. Monitor HJR 603 Task Force on Restructuring Vir- ginia's Long Term Care for the Elderly. V. Libraries A. Full funding of State Aid for Public Libraries B. Approximately 77% of funds required under formula (Sec. 42.1-48) are appropriated in State budget. VI. Treasurer A. Amend Sec. 58.1-3013 to require credit card compa- nies to honor local ordinances authorizing the payment of local taxes by credit card and imposing a service charge not to exceed 4~ of the amount due. VII. DUI A. Increase penalties for DUI violations. B. Improve and toughen enforcement of DUI statutes. VIII. Equalize the taxing and borrowing powers of counties with those powers granted municipalities. IX. Support the recommendations of the Governor's Advisory 2 .~ - / Commission on the Dillon Rule and Local Government. X. Support the reduction of unfunded regulatory and statu- tory mandates, and oppose any state mandates on local governments without sufficient funding to cover the costs of these mandates. XI. Expand the revenue powers and authority of local govern- ments, including authority to levy a tobacco tax, and to provide for a local option income tax. XII. Continue the moratorium on any city annexation and city annexation initiated by citizens of counties. XIII. Grant local governments the authority to adopt growth management ordinances, including the power to impose impact fees, to restrict the authority of the courts to overrule local land-use decisions, and to allow reasonab- le procedures and time periods for the amortization of non-conforming signs. XIV. Support legislation establishing a deposit on beverage containers. XV. Support the following finance issues: A. Return a portion of lottery proceeds to local governments as originally intended, B. Increase State funding for local police depart- ments. XVI. Support initiatives for economic development: A. Funding in the form of grants and loans for the development of industrial parks and the shell building program B. Legislation to allow revenue sharing (without referendum requirements) among participating local governments from jointly developed industrial parks. XVII. Public Education A. Enhance funding for public education, including increasing the funds available for distribution to localities through the Literary Fund for capital construction or renovations. B. Authorize local school divisions to establish opening dates for school. 3 ~-i C. Amend Constitution to allow elected school boards to set and levy taxes to support local public education STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board endorse and adopt a recommended legislative program for the consideration of the Virginia Association of Counties for the 1994 session of the Virginia General Assembly. Since Explore funding is a local concern, perhaps this issue should not be included in the VaCO package of recommendations. Respectfully submitted, ~ ~~V V~~ Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney Action Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to c:\wp51 \agenda\general\94.1eg Motion by Vote v No Yes Abs Eddy Johnson Kohinke Nickens Minnix 4 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: July 13, 1993 AGENDA ITEM: Request for Readoption of Public Private Partnership Policy COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS: ,,~L`~~~~~~~~~,,/I~,~~~'~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors adopted a Public Private Partnership Policy by Resolution (22790-1) on February 27, 1990. Since the development of this program, County economic development staff have used this program to assist twelve (12) projects in Roanoke County. A total of $224,349 has been expended in retaining or creating 648 jobs and resulting in an estimated $14.5 million of new private investment in Roanoke County. Funds have been used for public purposes; typically, water and sewer extensions, utility, connection fees, and traffic control equipment. The initial policy's emphasis has been aimed at manufacturing and major employers. During the past year, a variety of prospects have sought a Roanoke County location. The trend and type of prospects that have recently inquired about a Roanoke County location are both non-manufacturing and local Valley companies that are expanding. The staff's analysis supports an expansion of the Public Private Partnership to include non-manufacturing companies, tourism related industries and activities and employment training. Evaluation criteria based on new taxes, employment, payback, and other factors will be used to review applicants for assistance. The readopted Public Private Partnership Policy proposes that Roanoke County participate up to 50% of eligible costs for public improvements if payback from new taxes occurs within the first three years of the new project. This level of participation meets the intent of the partnership concept and provides funding opportunities for more partnerships. a- FISCAL IMPACT: Currently, $147,704.50 is available in the Economic Development Fund for an allocation. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors readopt the Public Private Partnership Policy by the attached resolution. Respectfully submitted: ~~ ,, ~'~ ',, " . Timothy W. Gu ala, Director Department of Economic Development Approved: ~~ >,~,~./ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ----------- -------------------------ACTION No Yes Abs Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Motion by: Eddy Johnson Kohinke Minnix Nickens Attachment ~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JULY 13, 1993 RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF THE READOPTION OF THE PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP POLICY WHEREAS, the expenditure of public funds for the general purpose of promoting Roanoke County's commercial, industrial, and business development is a lawful, valid, public purpose; and WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 81286-169 authorizes the payment of a portion of the total water connection fee by resolution of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, for certain commercial or industrial projects which are determined to be in the best interests of the County's economic development and which generate significant employment; and, WHEREAS, the adoption of a policy to specify certain guidelines for the application of this provision will prove beneficial in determining the scope of local incentives in the negotiations for economic development projects. BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: That the Board hereby readopt and establish the following "Roanoke County Public Private Partnership Policy" in order to provide policy guidance in applying the provisions of the Roanoke County Code in negotiations concerning local incentives for economic development projects. F~ ROANORE COUNTY PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP POLICY Purposes• 1. Roanoke County may fund all or part of site development costs for public improvements, roads, and off site facility fees for water and sewer for a qualifying industry or business that meets the evaluation criteria for public private (P/P) partnerships. 2 . Roanoke County may encourage the creation or retention of jobs of companies within the community which employ 200 or more employees through assistance with employment training. 3. Roanoke County may support tourism related industries/ destinations/activities that provide a range of activities to the visitor from outside the Roanoke Valley. Determination• A qualifying business or industry may apply for County assistance by addressing a letter to the Director of Economic Development that indicates: a. a description of the business activity to be conducted on the site b. total capital investment in real estate (land, building) machinery and tools and anticipated personal property and/or other taxes paid on site c. total employment and annual payroll and jobs to be created or retained d. specific water and sewer needs (i.e., size line and/or capacity) or other public facility assistance required e. date of construction and/or start-up (if in an existing building) f. if applicable, the terms of any lease to ensure that the company will occupy the building during the period calculated for payback. Impact Calculations: The Director of Economic Development, upon consultation with the County Administrator and other County staff, will review the request for participation to determine the extent of Roanoke County's funding. The County may either partially or fully fund participation for the project. Criteria based on anticipated taxes (real estate, machinery and tools and personal property), payback and other factors will be used in an evaluation formula on the attached table. The County may participate in up to 500 of public C ~" improvement costs of the project if payback occurs within the first three years of the new project. However, if the staff's analysis supports it, the County's participation may be greater. County participation with developers of leased buildings shall be limited to 50%. Areas of Partnership Assistance: If approved, Roanoke County may fund all, or part of; a. water and sewer line extensions b. water, fire, and sewer utility connection fees. c. public road construction and required drainage structures d. traffic control devices such as signals and related equipment e. employment training/retraining. Requests for assistance with employment training and retraining of new and/or relocated employees may be considered. Amounts and priority of funding will depend on the salary/wage rate to be paid, the number of permanent full time jobs created, relocated or retained, and availability of matching funds from the state of Virginia and federal funds. County training funds will not be directly paid to a company, but will be appropriated to a training agency, state agency or economic development organization recognized by the Board of Supervisors. Public Private Partnership funds shall be funded after the approval of the required site plan and at the time that a building permit is issued for the project. Industrial Park Development Off-site fees of jointly developed parks shall not be held as a portion of the total cost of the project and thus not a portion of the payback equation. Such assistance shall be funded after the approval of the required site plan and at the time a building permit is issued for the project. Limitations• Roanoke County will not pay for any private sewage pre-treatment facilities or waive any ordinances requiring fire protection or industrial discharge certification. 2 ~~ Funding Sources: Roanoke County shall fund its participation from the General Fund from anticipated tax revenue, or from an Economic Development Fund or other special non-utility funds. There is an intent to continue the maintenance of a fiscally sound utility enterprise fund to provide water and sewer service to County utility customers. (This provision is authorized by County Code Chapter 22 as amended by Ordinance 8-12-86-169, Section 3b.) Agreement• A written agreement on a form provided by the County Attorney may be required to specify terms of the Public Private Partnership. Apnroval• Staff has the authority to enter into a Pubic Private Partnership agreement with a prospective new or expanding business after completing a staff evaluation. The Board of Supervisors will review such partnerships as part of the annual budget process and as necessary in negotiating with businesses seeking to locate in Roanoke County. (This is limited to the amount of appropriations.) 3 ' °` °O ~ E r ~i (~ ""~ .. 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~. 0 0 0 c A U O O G C ~ O _ - . O . e~ U ~ c UT~ G~ • -• O ...~ O -~ "~ O O O O C...7 L'. v ~ • ~~ .-~ v v G ~M Vy v O O .~. .r ~. u N v u n ro a~ c`3 t~ M N cy N N M .. M N M N 4 n ti ~ U • t•1 v ~ ~ O " ~ ~~ Cvp O'' O . .. N '.' ~ N M ~ O p ~~~~ M .. N M ^. O O G' zoH ~- ° oo. o c. ~ n. ~~ ~ L~ + 0 3 V C N 0 ~ w J O • • G N I.n .~ ~ V l ~i V T V ~ r A ` C ~ y C3 O J G v O O O .-~ O O O . .a O O ..~ G. O . E'- .Z ~ "O '~ C G V U .L' v C L' K. ~ `° E E -1 ~ ~ C' ~ r •~ U U H .w ~QE ~ C i Q ~ C C ~%+ '". `. N N "~ '' N r, N ..• N °_ O ~ 7 L • n a o ~ .. ~~ 0 0 0 0 ° ° o .. G v G ~ ~ O 0 0 o --~ _ ~ G C G ~ u ~ L' O G V '~ n ~ J . ~ C gy ~ A v -~ `~ .~ ti O O w C..."J C .-1 v ~ .-~ O "~ "' `~ .~ . p v 00 O ~- cO C C ~ 9 C ~ y ~ C C. O G 7 U _~_ p V ~ ~ .1L J N .. C j P. 'J ~ O p uDq ~ A o C O ~ u F J c ~ c. E E '~ ~ G O ~ QK U ~ O y x w x ~ U Ci N ~ ~' = ¢ ~i ACTION NO. ITEM NO. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: July 13, 1993 AGENDA ITEM: ORDINANCE AMENDING AND REENACTING SECTIONS 5-21, DEFINITIONS, AND 5-44 TAX IMPOSED, ADDING SECTIONS 5-26.1 TO 5-26.5 AND REPEALING SECTION 5-26 OF ARTICLE II. DOGS. CATS AND OTHER ANIMALS, OF CHAP- TER 5, ANIMALS AND FOWL OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE TO CONTROL DANGEROUS AND VICIOUS DOGS. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS : ~'=~~-Y~~~ l~~ _ t~ 'fie e~ cam- c:~-+~'~,~~ ~'4'°~~ ~''~ •-~~~~ ~s~r~ ~~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY• This ordinance will significantly strengthen Roanoke County Code provisions to respond to attacks by vicious or dangerous dogs. The amendments are consistent with recent changes to ordinances in adjoining jurisdictions. BACKGROUND• A series of savage attacks upon children and adults by dogs in the past few years in the Roanoke Valley has revealed deficiencies in the ability of the county's Animal Control Officers and the court system to impose reasonable controls on dogs which have demonstrated a propensity for attacks on humans or other animals. Roanoke County's Animal Control Officers have worked through the Public Safety Team to develop a comprehensive ordinance which defines dangerous and vicious dogs and establishes strict condi- tions for handling each category. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The ordinance adds detailed definitions of "dangerous dog" and "vicious dog" to Sec. 5-21. The ordinance replaces the current Sec. 5-26 with a comprehensive series of sections which details the conditions under which a "dangerous dog" may be kept and how a "vicious dog" is to be disposed of. Criminal penalties are provided for under the new Sec. 5-26.1 to enforce these provisions and a separate licensure procedure for "dangerous dogs" is created by Sec. 5-26.2. In addition, a new license fee of $50.00 is mandated for owners of any dog found to be a "dangerous dog." Sec. 5-26.3 establishes detailed conditions which the owner of a "f "dangerous dog" must comply with and gives to the Animal Control Officers specific authority to enforce these provisions by inspections and impounding of the dog, if violated. Sec. 5-26.5 provides exceptions so as not to innocently impact unsuspecting dog owners. FISCAL IMPACTS' This may provide some incidental revenue to the county. ALTERNATIVES' 1. Adopt the proposed ordinance. 2. Retain the present Sec. 5-26. "Vicious dogs." of the Roanoke County Code. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative # 1. Respectfully submitted, Kenneth L. Hogan Chief Animal Control Officer Approved, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator Action Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Motion by Eddy Johnson Kohinke Minnix Nickens Vote No Yes Abs }~- AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JULY 13, 1993 ORDINANCE AMENDING AND REENACTING SECTIONS 5-21, DEFINITIONS, AND 5-44 TAX IMPOSED, ADDING SECTIONS 5-26.1 TO 5-26.5 AND REPEALING SECTION 5-26 OF ARTICLE II. DOGS, CATS AND OTHER ANIMALS, OF CHAPTER 5, ANIMALS AND FOWL OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE TO CONTROL DANGEROUS AND VICIOUS DOGS. WHEREAS, injury or death to innocent children and adults has become a more serious problem in the Roanoke Valley in recent years; and WHEREAS, the current definition of vicious dog contained in Sec. 5-26 of the Roanoke County Code is not sufficiently detailed or comprehensive to deal with the many and varied situations which the County's Animal Control Officers are called upon to handle; and WHEREAS, neighboring jurisdictions to the County of Roanoke have recently amended their animal control ordinances to expand the power of their Animal Control Officers to deal with dangerous and vicious dogs; and WHEREAS the first reading of this ordinance was held on July 13, 1993; and the second reading on July 27, 1993. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, as follows: 1. That Article II. Dogs Cats and Other Animals of Chapter 5, ANIMALS AND FOWL of the Roanoke County Code be amended and reenacted as follows: N- sec. 5-21. Definitions. For the purposes of this article, the following words and phrases shall have the meanings ascribed to them by this section, unless otherwise indicated to the contrary: Dangerous doa: Any dog (1) which causes a wound to any person without provocation on public or private property; (2) which, while off the property of its owner, has killed a domestic animal; (3) which is owned or harbored primarily or in part for the purpose of dog fighting or any dog trained for dog fighting; (4) which, unprovoked, chases or approaches persons upon the streets, sidewalks, or any public or private property other than the owner's property in a menacing fashion or apparent attitude of attack; (5) which has a known propensity, tendency, or disposition to attack unprovoked, to cause injury or otherwise to threaten the safety of human beings or domestic animals; or (6) which has been declared dangerous by any General District Court or Circuit Court of this Commonwealth. Any dog evidencing the characteristics or conduct described in subsections (1), (2), (3), (4), or (5) above shall be a "dangerous dog" even though not previously found dangerous by any Court. Vicious doct: Any dog which (1) kills a person; (2) inflicts serious wound to a person, including multiple bites, disfigurement, impairment of health, or impairment of any bodily function; (3) continues to exhibit the behavior which resulted in a previous finding by a Court that it is a dangerous dog; or (4) which has 2 ~-r been found vicious by any General District Court or Circuit Court of this Commonwealth. Any dog evidencing the characteristics or conduct described in subsections (1), (2), or (3) above shall be a "vicious dog" even though not previously found vicious by any Court. Sec. 5-26.1. Dangerous dogs; vicious dog; penalties; procedures. (a) Dangerous doa. It shall be unlawful and a class 1 misdemeanor to own, keep, harbor, act as custodian of or permit to remain on or about any premises any dog that the owner knew or reasonably should have known to be a dangerous dog, as defined by Section 5-21, except in strict compliance with Section 5-26.3 of this Code. If after hearing evidence, the Court finds any dog to be a dangerous dog, the Court shall, in addition to any other penalties imposed, order the dog's owner to comply with the provisions of Section 5-26.3. If any owner knew or reasonably should have known any dog to be a dangerous dog and such dog thereafter causes a wound to any person, such owner shall be guilty 3 {~- l of a Class 1 misdemeanor. (b) Vicious doa. It shall be unlawful and a Class 1 misdemeanor to own, keep, harbor, act as custodian of or permit to remain on or about any premises any dog that the owner knew or reasonably should have known to be a vicious dog, as defined by Section 5-21. If, after hearing evidence, the Court finds any dog to be a vicious dog, the Court shall, in addition to any other penalties imposed, order the animal control officer to euthanize the dog. If any owner knew or reasonably should have known any dog to be a vicious dog and such dog thereafter causes a wound to any person, such owner shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. (c) Procedures. When a warrant has been obtained or a summons issued pursuant to this Section, the animal control officer and/or police officer may, in his discretion, confine the dog until such time as evidence shall be heard and a verdict rendered. The Court may, through its contempt power, compel the owner of any dog to produce it for the animal control officer and/or police officer. In the event any dog is found to be a dangerous dog or vicious dog, the owner of such dog shall be responsible for payment to the County of any expenses of impounding and keeping the dog pending disposition of the case at the rate prescribed by the County Board of Supervisors. Sec. 5-26.2 Lioensure of dangerous dog. The owner of any dog found by a Court to be a dangerous dog shall, within ten (10) days of such finding, obtain a dangerous dog 4 +~- i license from the Treasurer by paying the fee required by Section 5- 41 of this Code. The Treasurer shall provide the owner with a uniformly designed tag which identifies the dog as a dangerous dog. The owner shall affix the tag to the dog's collar and ensure that the dog wears collar and tag at all times. All licenses issued pursuant to this Section shall be renewed annually as required by Section 5-41 of this Code. sec. 5-26.3 Reepinq dangerous dogs; conditions. It shall be unlawful for any owner of any dangerous dog to own, keep, or harbor any such dog within the County except in compliance with each of the following conditions and specifications: (a) Any dangerous dog shall be securely confined indoors or, if kept outdoors, shall be kept in a securely enclosed and locked pen or structure adequate to confine the dog and located upon the premises of the owner of the dog. Any such pen or structure shall have secure sides and a secure top and, if it has no bottom secured to the sides, the sides shall be imbedded into the ground no less than two (2) feet. Such pen or structures shall provide any such dog with adequate space and protection from the elements and shall be kept in a clean and sanitary condition. (b) The owner of any dangerous dog shall display two (2) signs on his property stating: "Dangerous Dog on Premises." One sign shall be posted at the front of the property, and the second sign shall be posted at the rear of the property. Each sign shall 5 ~- be capable of being read from a distance of fifty (50) feet. (c) The owner of any dangerous dog shall procure and maintain public liability insurance in the amount of $50,000 insuring the owner for any injury or damage caused by such dog. The owner shall maintain a valid policy and certificate of insurance issued by the insurance carrier or agent as to the coverage required by this Subsection at the premises where such dog is kept and shall, upon request, display such policy and certificate to any animal control officer or police officer. (d) The owner of any dangerous dog shall have such dog permanently identified by means of a tatoo on an inside thigh, and the owner of any dangerous dog shall provide the animal control officer with a color photograph of the dog taken within the last twelve (12) months, suitable for use in identifying the dog. (e) If any dangerous dog is taken off the property of its owner, such dog shall be muzzled and restrained by a substantial chain or leash not exceeding six (6) feet in length, and such dog shall at all times be kept under the control of a responsible person. Such muzzle shall be constructed in such a manner that it will prevent the dog from biting any person or animal, but such that it will not cause injury to the dog or interfere with its vision or respiration. (f) The owner of any dangerous dog shall notify the Animal Control Department within twenty-four (24) hours if such dog is loose or missing; if such dog has attacked or wounded a human being or another animal; or if such dog has been sold, leased, given 6 +a i away, died, or custody has been transferred to another person for more than forty-eight (48) hours. If such dog has been sold, leased, given away, or custody has been so transferred, the owner shall provide the Animal Control Department with the name, address, and telephone number of the new owner, lessee, or custodian who shall be required to comply with the conditions of this Section if the dog is kept within the County. If the owner of a dangerous dog moves such dog to a different address, such owner shall notify the Animal Control Department of such fact and the new address within twenty-four (24) hours. (g) The animal control officer and/or police officer shall be permitted the right to inspect the enclosure in which any dangerous dog is kept at any time. (h) In addition to the conditions and specifications established by this Section with respect to dangerous dogs, the owner of any dangerous dog shall meet all other requirements established by this Article for keeping any dog. (i) The animal control officer and/or police officer shall have the right to seize and impound the dog if any of the conditions and specifications established by this Section for the keeping of a dangerous dog are not being met. Sec. 5-26.4. Violations. It shall be a Class 1 misdemeanor for the owner of any dog which has caused a wound to any person to conceal or cause to be concealed such dog from any animal control officer or police 7 ~-I officer. Sec. 5-26.5. Exceptions. (a) No dog shall be deemed or declared to be a dangerous dog or vicious dog if the threat, wound, injury or damage was caused by any person who, at the time, was (1) assaulting the owner of the dog, (2) committing a willful trespass or tort upon the premises of the owner of the dog, or (3) provoking, abusing, or assaulting the dog or can be shown to have repeatedly provoked, tormented, or abused the dog at other times. (b) No animal which, at the time of the acts complained of, was responding to pain or injury, or was protecting itself, its kennel, its offspring, or its owner's property, shall be found to be a dangerous dog or vicious dog. (c) This Section shall have no application to any dog owned by a federal, state, or local law enforcement agency. (d) No dog shall be found to be a dangerous dog or a vicious dog solely because it is a particular breed. Sec. 5-44 Tax imposed. (a) An annual license tax is hereby imposed on dogs required to be licensed under this division in the following amounts: (6) Dangerous dog, as declared by any General District Court or Circuit Court of this Commonwealth: Fifty Dollars ($50.00) (in addition to the other applicable fees herein). 8 N-1 2. This ordinance shall be in effect from and after the date of its adoption. c:\wp51\agenda\vcousdog.ord 9 ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER ~ I '' '~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: July 13, 1993 Appointments to Committees, Commissions and Boards COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: 1. Community Corrections Resources Board One-year terms of Edmund J. Kielty, and Mrs. Chris Pickard, Alternate will expire August 31, 1993. Both are eligible for reappointment. 2. Social Services Advisory Board Four-year terms of the representatives of the Catawba Magisterial District, the Hollins Magisterial District, and the Cave Spring Magisterial District. Terms will expire August 1, 1997. This is a new Board, established on June 22, 1993, replacing the Social Services Board. The Board is comprised of seven members, one representing each magisterial district, one liaison from the Board of Supervisors and a representative from the City of Salem. State Code recommends that the first terms be staggered so as to provide for the balanced overlapping of terms. Subsequent appointments shall be for a term of four years each. (See attached). Dr. Betty McCrary, Director of Social Services, recommended that the terms for those who previously served on the Social Services Board expire the year of their previous expiration date, but on August 1. Therefore, Supervisor Nickens' term will expire August 1, 1994; Robert H. Lewis' term will expire on August 1, 1996, and Betty Jo Anthony's term will expire on August 1, 1996. The new appointments will have expiration dates of August 1, 1997. Submitted by: Approved by: m .~ ~~ l~ Mary H. A en, CMC Elmer C. Hodge Clerk to the Board County Administrator ---------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved ( ) Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied ( ) Eddy Received ( ) Johnson Referred ( ) Kohinke To ( ) Minnix Nickens ~' "" § 63.1-42 WELFARE (SOCIAL SERVICES) § 63.1-44 § 63.1-42: Repealed by Acts 1977, c. 36. § 63.1-43. How local board of a city constituted. -The local board in each city shall be, at the discretion of the city council, either the officer in charge of the department or division of public welfare or a board consisting of five members appointed by the city council of such city in accordance with the provisions of § 63.1-39. If the officer in charge of the department or division of public welfare constitutes the local board, he may designate either his principal assistant, or the superintendent of public welfare or chief public assistance supervisor to act in his behalf, in his absence, with respect to approving, cancelling or changing grants made under the provisions of this title. (Code 1950, § 63-53.1; 1952, c. 409; 1956, c. 126; 1958, c. 195; 1968, c. 578; 1977, c. 36.) § 63.1-43.1. Advisory boards. - A. If the governing body or bodies of a city or county or of the cities and counties participating in a district designate, under the provisions of §§ 63.1-40, 63.1-43 or § 63.1-44.1, the officer in charge of the department or division of public welfare as constituting the local board, such governing body or bodies shall appoint a board, committee or commission to serve in an advisory ca acityy to such officer with respect to the duties and functions imposed upon him by this title. Each such advisory body shall consist of no fewer than five and no mere than thirteen members. In the case of such board representing a district, there shall be at least one member on the board from each county and city in the district. The members shall be appointed initially for terms of from one to four years so as to provide for the balanced overlapping of the terms of the membership thereon. Subsequent appointments shall be for a term of four years each, except that appointments to fill vacancies shall be for the unexpired terms. No person shall serve more than two consecutive terms. The officer in charge of the department or division of public welfare shall be an ex officio member, without vote, of the advisory body. The advisory body shall elect its own chairman and shall meet at least bimonthly. In addition to regularly scheduled meetings, it may meet at the call of the chairman or on the petition of at least one-half of the members. B. The powers and duties of the advisory body shall be as follows: 1. To interest itself in all matters pertaining to the social welfare of the people of the city or county served by it; 2. To monitor the formulation and implementation of social welfare programs in the city or county; 3. To meet with the officer in charge of the department or division of public welfare at least four times a year for the purpose of making recommendations on policy matters concerning the department or division; 4. To make an annual report to the governing body, concurrent with the budget presentation of the department or division, concerning the administra- tion of the public welfare program; and 5. To submit to the governing body, from time to time, other reports that the advisory body deems appropriate. (1977, c. 36; 1981, c. 264; 1984, c. 586; 1989, c. 356.) § 63.1-44. Local boards representing two or more political subdivi- sions. -The provisions of §§ 63.1-40 and 63.1-43 notwithstanding, the State Board, with the prior consent of the Governor, may establish districts consisting of two or more counties andlor cities. Except as provided in § 63.1-44.1 there shall be one board of not less than three nor more than nine members for each such district. There shall be at least one member of the board from each county and city in the district. Additional representation 15 K i-3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SIIPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JULY 13, 1993 RESOLUTION 71393-4 APPROVING AND CONCIIRRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SIIPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM R - CONSENT AGENDA BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for July 13, 1993, designated as Item K - Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 3, inclusive, as follows: 1. Minutes of Meetings - May 25, 1993, June 8, 1993, June 22, 1993. 2. Confirmation of Committee Appointments to the Social Services Advisory Board 3. Donation of Drainage Easements on Lots 18 and 19, Section 3, Plantation Gardens Subdivision. 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 Consent Resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: ~~ Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Cliff Craig, Director, Utility Social Services File ~`~ r ,t Map 25, 1993 Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Roanoke County Administration Center 3738 Brambleton Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24018 May 25, 1993 The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, met this day at the Roanoke County Administration Center, this being the fourth Tuesday, and the second regularly scheduled meeting of the month of May, 1993. IN RE: CALL TO ORDER Chairman Minnix called the meeting to order at 3:03 p.m. The roll call was taken. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman H. Odell "Fuzzy" Minnix, Vice Chairman Lee B. Eddy, Supervisors Bob L. Johnson, Edward G. Kohinke, Sr., Harry C. Nickens MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney; Brenda J. Holton, Deputy Clerk; John M. Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator; Don C. Myers, Assistant County Administrator; Anne Marie Green, Community Relations Director 339 y May 25, 1993 David Danco, Christina Cunningham, Marge Bonney, Martha Hoyle, Robin Lawson, Susan Cease, and Gail Campbell. IN RE: NEW BIISINE88 i. Presentation by Virginia Association of counties on Local Legislative Actions. (811en Davenport, VACo) Ms. Ellen Davenport, Public Policy Coordinator for VACo, described the services that VACo offers and reviewed the 1993 Legislative Program. She requested that the County submit a list of proposals to be considered for VACo's 1994 Legislative Program which will be approved in November at VACo's Annual Meeting. 2. Request for Approval of Procedure for Adoption of Cable Tv Budgets and Approval of Capital Expenditure. (Anne Marie Green, Director of community Relations) R-52593-1 Ms. Green advised that on May 5, 1993, the Regional Cable Television Committee approved the roll-over of operating funds into a capital account for equipment replacement. The Committee also approved a procedure for approval of the operating and capital budgets and the expenditure of approximately $50,000 for equipment for the studio. These actions must now be approved by the three local governments. Supervisor Nickens moved to adopt the resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix May 25, 1993 34 ~ to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, the Roanoke City Council, and the Vinton Town Council. If all three governing bodies approve the Operations Budget, it shall, prior to the 15th day of the forthcoming fiscal year, appropriate the funds from the respective general fund budgets of each governing body's pro rata share. Prior to February 15 of each year, the Committee shall prepare and submit for approval a Capital Budget for funds to be expended from the Capital Grant established for the station by Cox Cable as a part of the franchises agreements between the governing bodies and Cox Cable. For purposes of this contract, a Capital expenditure shall be any expenditure of funds for equipment, furniture, construction, engineering or any other goods or services associated with the establishment of the studio and the initiation of programming services for the Government and Education Access Television Station, intended to benefit 3 or more future fiscal years. Prior to February 15 of each year after FY 1992- 93, the Committee will prepare and submit for approval a separate Capital Budget for funds to be drawn from the station's own Capital account. This account shall be established as of July 1, 1993 by the roll-over of all unused year-end funds from the station's Operating Budget of the previous fiscal year into a Capital account. For this contract, a capital expenditure shall be any single expenditure exceeding $5,000, intended to benefit 3 or more future fiscal years. 2. That the roll-over of unused operating funds of the Committee at the end of any fiscal year into a capital replacement account is hereby approved. 3. That there is appropriated to the Committee the sum of $50,000.00 from the Cox Cable Capital Grant for the purpose of acquiring equipment for the studio. This appropriation is contingent upon the approval of this expenditure by the City of Roanoke and the Town of Vinton. y May 25, 1993 '~ 4. Request to Appoint Local official and Business/Citizen Representative to Rural Transportation Advisory committee of Fifth Planning District Commission. (Elmer Hodge, County Administrator) A-52593-2 Mr. Hodge requested that Terry Harrington, Director, Planning & Zoning be appointed as the local official on the Rural Transportation Advisory Committee, and that the Board appoint a business/citizen to serve. Supervisor Nickens moved to appoint Terry Harrington as the official representative and Supervisor Eddy as a citizen/businessman representative. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None 5. Request for Appropriation of 1993-94 Budget for Regional Special Education Program. (Dr. Eddie Rolb, Roanoke County Schools) A-52593-3 There was no discussion. Supervisor Nickens moved to approve the Regional Special Education Budget. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None 345 May 25, 1993 motion in order for the issues to be separated. Chairman Minnix called for a vote on Supervisor Nickens' motion to approve the first reading of the ordinance. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None Supervisor Eddy requested that before the second reading of the ordinance, several alternatives for paragraph 2 in the ordinance be drafted for the Board's approval concerning the authority of the County Administrator to transfer funds. Supervisor Eddy also requested that a copy of the mission statement for each County department be furnished to the supervisors. Supervisor Johnson moved that the salary survey be implemented at 100 at an effective date when funding would not change as adopted in the fiscal year 1993 budget. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: Supervisor Eddy IN RE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance Donatinq Roanoke County's Interest in Certain Real Estate to the Virginia Department of Transportation for Rutrouqh Road Improvements. (Joyce Waugh. Economic Developmeat sgeaialist) May 25, 1993 ~ 4 7 On motion of Supervisor Nickens to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None 2. ordinance Authorizinq Amendments, Extensions, and Terminations of Leases in Connection with Office Space and the I~ew County Administration Center and Aporooriation of Revenue (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney) 0-52593-5 In response to a question from Supervisor Eddy, Ms. Huffman, Assistant County Attorney, advised that the modifications requested at the first reading concerning the square footage and effective date have been made to the ordinance. Supervisor Nickens moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Supervisor Minnix ORDINANCE 52593-5 AIITHORIZING AMENDMENTS, E%TENSIONB, AND TERMINATIONS OF LEA888 IN CONNECTION WITH OFFICE SPACE FOR ROANORE COIINTY STAFF AND THE NEW COIINTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, AND APPROPRIATION OF REVENIIE GENERATED FROM THE LEASE AGREEMENTS WHEREAS, the purchase of the new Roanoke County Administration Center, known as the Traveler's Building at 5204 May 25, 1993 3 4 9 2. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to extend the lease of office space for County departments at Brambleton Corporate Center from Peery Realty, Inc., from August 1, 1993, through December 31, 1993, with the monthly rental of $3,548.65 to be paid by Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Virginia. 3. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to enter into a Lease Amendment and Sub-Lease with GettyMart, Inc., and Uni-Marts, Inc., to rent 14,795 square feet of office space on the fourth floor of the Traveler's Building from April 1, 1993, through January 31, 1996, at a monthly rental of $7,767.00, and to make such arrangements for rental payments, offsets and credits as may be appropriate and acceptable to all parties. 4. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to enter into lease termination agreements, effective April 1, 1993, with regard to the previously existing leases of office space to Fieldcor, Inc., and ADS Software, Inc. 5. That the rental income, aggregating $53,099.00, generated to the County from these leases for the 1992-93 fiscal year be, and hereby is, appropriated to cover the expense of moving and relocating the Roanoke County Administration Center to the Traveler's Building. 6. That the County Administrator is authorized to execute the lease agreements on behalf of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke and to execute such other documents and take such further actions as are necessary to accomplish these transactions, all of which shall be upon form approved by the County Attorney. May 25, 1993 ~~ Supervisor Johnson moved to approve the Consent Agenda with the deletion of Mr. Bullen's confirmation from Item 1. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None RESOLIITION 52593-6 APPROVING AND CONCIIRRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SIIPERVISORB AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM R - 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 May 25, 1993, designated as Item K - Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 5, inclusive, as follows: 1. Confirmation of Committee Appointments to Board of Zoning Appeals, Clean Valley Council, Fifth Planning District Commission, and Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission. 2. Acknowledgement of Acceptance of 0.51 Miles of Flintlock Road, 0.15 Miles of Duxbury Lane, and 0.05 Miles of Brewster Circle into the Secondary System of Virginia Department of Transportation. 3. Donation of Sanitary Sewer Easement on Lot 12, Section 6, Ivy Green, Branderwood Subdivision. 4. Authorization to Pay Certain Legal Fees Regarding Grumman Emergency Products. 5. Authorization to Execute Final Change Order for Design of Starkey Wastewater Pump Station. 2. That the Clerk to the Board is hereby authorized and May 25, 1993 ~ ~ 3 Supervisor Nickens: (1) He asked that a correction be made to Page G5 of the Emergency Operations Plan because Lifeguard 10 is not stationed at Community Hospital. (2) He advised that the Lancelot's owner is working closely with Don Ford in the process of getting the facility back in operation. He requested that Mr. Bill Mercer, Therapy Associates, a tenant at the Lancerlot, be provided with information and kept advised of the proceedings. (3) He requested that the VPI study of the Commissioner of Revenue's and Treasurer's Offices be utilized to implement those items without dollar expenditures. He encouraged the review to improve service. (4) He advised that the purchase of a ladder truck for Vinton is on hold for thirty days while evaluating the retrofitting of truck. (5) He commended the staff for an excellent budget process. Supervisor Johnson: (1) He commented on the legal expense involved in litigation concerning the emergency services vehicle, and suggested that if an alternative resolves the situation, this should be done. (2) He advised that he has Mr. Mercer's address. (3) He asked that the County follow through on buffering and screening requirement for the State Forensics Lab. He advised that he will bring back a report on the North County Recreation facilities. (3) He advised that he would like to receive reports such as Emergency Operations Plan in sufficient time to read before Board Meeting. Supervisor Kohinke: (1) He advised that he and staff attended a Mason Cove Meeting regarding community concerns about Jubilee Acres, a project sponsored by a downtown rescue mission. Another meeting has been scheduled, and he asked that staff follow up 355 May 25, 1993 7. Report on Bond Projects. Supervisor Nickens requested that a different method be used to show progress on future reports because of difficulty with reading information. IN RE: RECE88 At 5:20 p.m., Chairman Minnix declared a three-minute recess. IN RE: WORK SESBION ON ILLEGAL DIIMPING Terry Harrington, Director of Planning & Zoning, and Lee Garman, Zoning Enforcement Officer, briefed the Board on the situation concerning illegal dumping in the County. Mr. Harrington advised that there are 60 known sites in the County which consist of roadside dumps, private open dumps, and landfills. He described the current enforcement initiatives that staff has developed for dealing with smaller sites but stated that there no current tools or strategies for cleaning up the larger sites. Supervisor Kohinke requested that each supervisor be provided with a list of the locations of dump sites in their district. Supervisor Johnson suggested that if the opportunity arises, helicopters could provide good aerial views of illegal dumps and could assist in locating them. He also suggested the possibility of purchasing more freeloaders in order to prevent illegal dumps. Supervisors Johnson and Nickens requested that Mr. Mahoney investigate possible legislative remedies for corrective action. Mr. May 25, 1993 357 RESOLIITION 52593-7 CERTIFYING EBECIITIVE MEETING WA8 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 Certification Resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None EVENING SESSION Map 25, 1993 ~ be $1,800 and for the vice-chairman of the Board to be $1,200; and WHEREAS, this section provides that the maximum annual salaries therein provided may be adjusted in any year by an inflation factor not to exceed five (5$) percent; and WHEREAS, the first reading on this ordinance was held on May 11, 1993; the second reading and public hearing was held on May 25, 1993. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that the annual salaries of members of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, are hereby increased by an inflation factor of three (3~) percent pursuant to the provisions of Section 3.07 of the Roanoke County Charter and Section 14.1-46.01:1 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended. The new annual salaries shall be $9,808 for members of the Board. In addition, the chairman of the Board will receive an additional annual sum of $1,800 and the vice-chairman of the Board will receive an additional sum of $1,200. This ordinance shall take effect on July 1, 1993. On motion of Supervisor Nickens to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens NAYS: Supervisor Minnix 2. Ordinance Amendinc the Roanoke County Code by Amending and Reenactinc Section 18-168 Schedule of Charges by Providing for Establishing an Increase in Seller IIse 3fi 1 May 25, 1993 BE IT ORDAINED by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, as follows: 1. That the provisions of Ordinance 62486-147 with respect to sewer user rates are hereby repealed. 2. That Section 18-168, Schedule of Charges, of the Roanoke County Code, is hereby amended and reenacted by providing for and establishing sewer user rates or charges for residential, commercial and industrial users for the use and service of the sewage system in Roanoke County. Such rates or charges shall be based upon the volume of wastewater as determined by the amount of water supplied to the user, as follows: Sec. 18-168. Schedule of charges. * ~ ~ ~ (c) The schedule of base charges for residential, commercial and industrial customers of Roanoke County shall be as follows: SCHEDULE OF BASE CHARGES Volume Based Water Supplied 1000 Gallons Base Charge Per Month Per Month 10 $ 6.43 14 9.65 17 16.08 28 26.68 39 37.28 54 51.43 69 66.22 111 107.03 153 147.86 210 202.81 267 257.78 440 424.60 613 591.42 853 822.85 1093 1,054.27 3b3 Map 25, 1993 pinball machines. It is consistent with the Core land use design in the Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan and the Planning Commission recommended approval without conditions. Supervisor Kohinke moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None ORDINANCE 52593-10 GRANTING A SPECIAL IISE PERMIT TO NATASBA RO88 TO OPERATE A COMMERCIAL INDOOR AMIIBEMENT AREA LOCATED AT 5383 W. MAIN BTREET (TA8 PARCELS 64.01-3-13), CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, Natasha Ross has filed a petition to operate a commercial indoor amusement area located at 5383 W. Main Street in the Catawba Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on May 4, 1993; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on April 27, 1993; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on May 25, 1993. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Board finds that the granting of a special use permit to operate a commercial indoor amusement area located at 5383 W. Main Street in the Catawba Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 1985 Comprehensive Plan pursuant to the 365 Map 25, 1993 AYES: Supervisors Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Johnson ORDINANCE 52593-11 TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A .359 ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED AT 7155 BENT MOIINTAIN ROAD (TA% MAP NO. 95.01-1-34.4) IN THE WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C-2 TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF AV IIPON THE APPLICATION OF BLIIB RIDGE INTERNATIONAL LIMITED hIABILITY CO. WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on April 27, 1993, and the second reading and public hearing was held May 25, 1993; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on May 4, 1993; and, WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing .359 acre, as described herein, and located at 7155 Bent Mountain Road, (Tax Map Number 95.01-1-34.4) in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of C-2, General Commercial District, to the zoning classification of AV, Village Center District. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of Blue Ridge international Limited Liability Co.. 29 May 25, 1993 3 ~ 7 ~- Incorporate Lands Acquired for the Entrance, Tipper Building, and Rail Yard Associated with the Regional Landfill at Smith Gap, Located Northwest Side of Fort Lewis Mountain Between smith Gap and Bradshaw Road, Catawba Magisterial District, IIpon the Petition of the Roanoke valley Resource Authority. (Terry Harrington, Director of Planning & Zoning) 0-52593-12 Mr. Harrington advised that this request to amend the Special Use Permit granted in 1989 for the Smith Gap Landfill is being made to clarify the acreage which is approximately 100 more acres than originally stated. It is also being requested to include the entrance, tipper building and the rail yard under the Special Use Permit. The Planning Commission recommended approval. Supervisor Nickens moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None ORDINANCE 52593-12 AMENDING RESOLIITION 62789-12 GRANTING A BPECIAL BBCEPTION PERMIT TO THE BOARD OF BIIPERVISORS OF ROANORE COIINTY, VIRGINIA, TO PIIBLICLY OWN AND OPERATE A SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY ON WSAT I8 RNOWN AS THE "SMITH GAP SITE;' SAID AMENDMENT TO REFLECT THE ACTIIAL SIIRVEYED ACREAGE AND TO INCORPORATE ADDITIONAL LANDS WHEREAS, on June 27, 1989, the Board of Supervisors granted a Special Exception Permit for the location and operation of a solid waste facility on what is known as the "Smith Gap Site" located on 31 36 g May 25, 1993 outlined in pink on the attached plat entitled "Composite Plat for Roanoke Valley Resource Authority showing 6 parcels of land containing 1241.355 Ac. Situate off Va. Sec. Rte.. 622, Catawba Magisterial District, Roanoke County, Virginia" dated February 23, 1992 and revised April 29, 1993 and prepared by T. P. Parker & Son, Engineers, Surveyors, Planners, said plat attached hereto and made a part hereof. On motion of Supervisor Nickens to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None IN RE: ADJOIIRNMENT At 7:17 p.m., Supervisor Nickens moved to adjourn. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None H. Odell "Fuzzy" Minnix, Chairman 33 June 8, 1993 Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Roanoke County Administration Center 3738 Brambleton Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24018 June 8, 1993 370 The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, met this day at the Roanoke County Administration Center, this being the second Tuesday, and the first regularly scheduled meeting of the month of June, 1993. IN RE: CALL TO ORDER Chairman Minnix called the meeting to order at 3:05 p.m. The roll call was taken. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman H. Odell "Fuzzy" Minnix, Vice Chairman Lee B. Eddy, Supervisors Bob L. Johnson, Edward G. Kohinke, Sr., Harry C. Nickens MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney; Mary H. Allen, Clerk; John M. Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator; Don C. Myers, Assistant County Administrator; Anne Marie Green, Director, Community Relations IN RE: OPENINQ CEREMONIES 372 June 8, 1993 Roanoke, Virginia, is greatly concerned with the health, safety, and well-being of its citizens and desires that the best possible emergency services be available to them; and WHEREAS, the Commonwealth of Virginia Emergency Services and Disaster Law of 1973, Chapter 3.2 of Title 44 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, requires that each city and county in the Commonwealth maintain an Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) which addresses its planned response to emergency situations; and WHEREAS, such an EOP has been developed by County staff in coordination with the Virginia Department of Emergency Services incorporating input from responsible local agencies. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of RoanoY.e, Virginia that, on the 8th day of June, 1993, it does hereby officially adopt the revised and current Roanoke County Emergency Operations Plan, to include plans and procedures for both peacetime and war-caused disasters. On motion of Supervisor Nickens to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None 2. Request for Approval of Proposed Legislative Requests for Virginia Association of Counties. (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney) The Board members made several suggestions and June 8, 1993 3~a address minor areas of the new zoning ordinance including expansion of uses now permitted by Special use Permit, prohibiting the sale of firearms as a home occupation, exempting family and church cemeteries under certain conditions, and expanding the districts in which Day Care Center and Cultural Services are allowed by Special Use Permit. Supervisor Nickens moved to approve the first reading and set the public hearing for June 22, 1993. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None b. Ordinance Amending and Reenacting Ordinance 82592-12~_ The Zoning Ordinance for Roanoke County, by the Adoption of Certain Provisions Concerninc Amateur Radio Towers in the various zoning Districts of the county. Mr. Harrington reported that after adoption of the new zoning ordinance, staff was advised that the Federal Communication Commission issued a limited preemption on the legal regulation of amateur radio towers which conflicts with the County~s zoning ordinance. This ordinance attempted to address the conflicts . Supervisor Nickens moved to approve the first reading. The motion was withdrawn with no vote. The following individuals spoke in opposition to any June 8, 1993 ~ 7 6 c. ordinance Amendinc and Reenacting the Zoning District Mans for Roanoke County by the Adoption of Certain Miscellaneous Changes Throuchout the County of Said Maps. Mr. Harrington reported that the zoning map amendments resulted from citizen comments and technical map errors. The Planning Commission recommended approval of six of the requested changes and denial of six of the requested changes. Two requests were tabled by the Planning Commission for further study. They were changes along the Blue Ridge Parkway and the Sowder property. Supervisor Eddy requested that the revised zoning for the Sears property be approved. Supervisor Kohinke requested that the revised zoning for the Old Virginia Brick property, the Wingate property, and the Moran property be approved. Supervisor Nickens asked that all requests be approved. Supervisor Kohinke moved to approve the first reading with the modifications as requested by the Board members, and set the public hearing for June 22, 1993. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Minnix NAYS: Supervisor Nickens 2. Ordinance Authorizing Donation of 0.16462 Acre of Land. Toctether with a Permanent Drainage Easement and Temporary Construction Easement to the June 8, 1993 37~ ORDINANCE 6893-2 APPROPRIATING FDNDS FOR THE 1993-94 FISCAL YEAR BIIDGET FOR ROANORE COIINTY~ VIRGINIA WHEREAS, upon notice duly published in the newspaper, a public hearing was held on April 27, 1993, concerning the adoption of the annual budget for Roanoke County for fiscal year 1993-94; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, approved said budget on May 11, 1993, pursuant to the provisions of Section 13.02 of the Roanoke County Charter and Chapter 4 of Title 15.1 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this appropriation ordinance was held on May 25, 1993, and the second reading of this ordinance was held on June 8, 1993, pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the following appropriations are hereby made to the following funds for the period beginning July 1, 1993, and ending June 30, 1994, for the functions and purposes authorized and approved by the Board of Supervisors in the adopted budget: June 8, 1993 380 ADOTIBD F'Y'1493-9< BUDGBT JUNH i' 1993 ry-~.. EXPENDITURES: GENERAL GOVERNMENT: GENERAL ADMINISTRATION BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 5214,839 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 20347 COMMUNTIY RELATIONS 99,981 ASST. CO. ADMINiS'TRATOIIS 289,900 PROPERTY MANAGEMENT 67,028 HUMAN RESOURCES 313327 COUNTY ATTORNEY 22&107 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 607,pg0 52,023,319 CONS777UTIONAL OFFICERS TREASURER 5479,647 COMMONWEALTH ATTORNEY 362,761 VJCTIM/WTINESS 3.048 COMMLSSIONER OF THE REVENUE SO1M4 CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT 343x670 SHERIFF'S OFFICE 983,343 CARE ~ CONFINEMENT OF PRISONERS 2,422,974 53,303,087 JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION CIRCUIT COURT 586,203 GENERAL DISTRICT COURT 26,183 MAGISTRATE 930 J k DR COURT 11,929 COURT SERVICE UNIT 79,400 5204,643 MANAGEMENT SERVICES COUNTY ASSESSOR 5383,448 FWANCIAL PLANNDdG 33483 PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION 7000 MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET 110224 RISK MANAGEMENT 1,102,738 PROCUREMENT SERVICES 246,821 52,667,736 PUBLIC SAFETY ~~~ 54,394A22 TRANSPORTATION SAFETY COMM 960 E911 MAINTENANCE 2601100 FIRE AND RESCUE 2,790,893 57.443,873 COMMUNTIY SERVICES GENERAL SERVICES 5223.194 ~~ WASTE 2.419,692 ENGB~fEERINGAND QdSPEC7TONS 1.387 123 BUII.DB+iG IdA1NTENANCE , 961,628 PLANNING AND ZONBYG 336,904 PLANNII~IG COMMISSION 20,612 53,369.133 HUMAlI SEAVK:BS GROUNDS YAD~178NANC8 S1;Ri7.881f PARLt AND RECREA710N 1A33A98 June 8, 1993 3 8 2 covrrTYOF itoAxO~ ADOP'IBO FY 1993-94 BIIDCtBT JUHB i, I993 DEBT SERVICE FUND 58,226,611 CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND S73p00 WATER FUND: WATER OPERATIONS 26,663,666 1991 WATER REVENUE BONDS 133,110 WATER REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT 330A00 RAZE STABILtL~TION 863,142 WATER SURPLUS 719,886 ~ TOTAL WATER FUND 58,732,104 SEWER FUND: SEWER OPERA770NS 53,631,839 SEWER REPAIR AND REPLACEMENT 187,694 TOTAL SEWER FUND 53,819,333 TOTAL COUNTY FUNDS 59864,713 SCHOOL FUNDS: OPERATING 568.133,403 CAFE'iERiA 2,880,000 GRANT 2,298,(T23 TEXTBOOK 693,973 CAPITAL 149,317 BUS 90,318 TOTAL SCHOOL FUNDS 574$47,238 TOTAL ALL FUNDS S 172,311.933 June 8, 1993 384 IN RE: APPOINTMENTS 1. Glenn Valley Council Supervisor Nickens nominated Vince Reynolds to serve another two-year term. His term will expire June 30, 1995. IN RE: CONSENT AGENDA R-6893-3 Supervisor Nickens moved to adopt the Consent Resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None RE8OLIITION 6893-3 APPROVING AND CONCORRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SIIPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AB 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 June 8, 1993, 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 5, inclusive, as follows: 1. Minutes of Meetings - April 27, 1993, May il, 1993. 2. Confirmation of Committee Appointment to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission. 3. Acceptance of Grant from the Virginia Department for the Aging on Behalf of the CORTRAN Program. 4. Request for Acceptance of Whipplewood Court into June 8, 1993 386 Forest Walk in Branderwood Section 5, Subdivision which map was recorded in Plat Book 13, Page 42, of the records of the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, on January 14, 1991, 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 fifty (50) foot right-of-way for streets. 3. That said road known as Whipplewood Court and which is shown on a certain sketch accompanying this Resolution, be, and the same is hereby established as a public road to become a part of the State Secondary System of Highways in Roanoke County, only from and after notification of official acceptance of said street or highway by the Virginia Department of Transportation. On motion of Supervisor Nickens to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None ZN RE: REPORTS Supervis following reports. 1. 2. 3. or Johnson moved The motion carri~ General Fund IIna~ Capital Fund IIna~ Board Contingency to receive and file the ed by a unanimous voice vote. apropriated Balance ppropriated Balance y Fund ~~g June 8, 1993 fund their share. Mr. Hodge was directed to bring back a request for $15,000 for an engineering and feasibility study. Mr. Hodge advised that staff will investigate financing methods for the possibility of the sixth floor expansion. IN RE: ADJOIIRNMENT AND TOIIR OF VALLEYTECH PARR, SMITH GAP LANDFILL AND SPRING HOLLOW .'tESERVOIR At 8:30 P.M., following a tour of Va1leyTech Park and Spring Hollow Reservoir, Chairman Minnix declared the meeting adjourned. H. Odell "Fuzzy" Minnix, Chairman June 22, 1993 389 Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Roanoke County Administration Center 3738 Brambleton Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24018 June 22, 1993 The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, met this day at the Roanoke County Administration Center, this being the fourth Tuesday, and the second regularly scheduled meeting of the month of June, 1993. IN RE: CALL TO ORDER Chairman Minnix called the meeting to order at 3:03 p.m. The roll call was taken. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman H. Odell "Fuzzy" Minnix, Vice Chairman Lee B. Eddy, Supervisors Bob L. Johnson, Edward G. Kohinke, Sr., Harry C. Nickens MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney; Mary H. Allen, Clerk; John M. Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator; Don C. Myers, Assistant County Administrator; Anne Marie Green, Director, Community Relations IN RE: OPENING CEREMONIES The invocation was given by the Reverend Richard Harris, Chaplain, Roanoke County Jail. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all present. June 22, 1993 39 f motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None RESOLIITION 62293-1 OF CONGRATIILATIONS TO MARR LEE FOR RECEIVING THE DISTINGIIISHED SERVICE AWARD FRO1-i THE ROANORE REGIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE WHEREAS, crime prevention is an important function for any police department, and depends to a large extent on the alertness and responsiveness of the citizens of the area; and WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Police Department encourages the residents of the County to assist the Department in preventing and solving crimes; and WHEREAS, Mark Lee, a resident of Roanoke County, was recently instrumental in assisting the Police Department in arresting two suspects; and WHEREAS, Mr. Lee, without regard for his personal safety, rendered valuable aid to one of Roanoke County's law enforcement officers by detaining one of the suspects; and WHEREAS, Mr. Lee was recently honored by the Roanoke Regional Chamber of Commerce for his actions, and received the 1993 Distinguished Service Award from the Chamber. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby extends its congratulations to MARK LEE for the recognition he received from the Regional Chamber; and FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board also extends its June 22, 1993 39 3 Following discussion, Supervisor Johnson moved to approve $15,000 funding. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: Supervisor Eddy 2. Request for Readoption of Public-Private Partnership Policy. (Timothy W. Gubala. Economic Development Director) Mr. Gubala reported that the staff is requesting that the policy be expanded to include non-manufacturing companies, tourism related industries and activities, and employment training. Supervisor Nickens moved to approve readoption of the policy. There was no vote. Following discussion, Supervisor Eddy made a substitute motion to (1) defer action; (2) that the policy be strengthened so that staff can approve the majority of requests, and (3) that the revised policy be brought back to the Board for approval. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None a. Request for Public Private Partnership Funds for Lingerfelt Development Corporation. A-62293-3.a June 22, 1993 395 to Enact Stronger D.U.I. Legislation. (Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator) R-62293-4 George R. Pelton, 5646 Orchard Valley Road, parent of a young man who was recently killed by a drunk driver, spoke in support of the resolution. Supervisor Kohinke moved to adopt the resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None RESOLUTION 62293-4 URGING THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO ENACT STRONGER D.U.I. LEGISLATION WHEREAS, recent senseless and tragic deaths in the Roanoke Valley attributed to drivers operating their motor vehicles while under the influence of alcohol have brought to focus the need for more effective D.U.I. legislation in the State of Virginia; and WHEREAS, these most recent accidents indicate a need for much stricter penalties for violations involving not only driving under the influence of alcohol, but also for persons abusing their limited privilege to drive on a restricted or suspended license; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that the Board wishes to 3 9 (- June 22, 1993 State Library & Archives. (Don Myers, Assistant County Administrator) A-62293-6 Mr. Myers advised that the grant is for $32,576 and will extend and improve services to adults 60 years and older. The grant will provide library services to area nursing homes, care centers senior meal sites and retirement centers. The grant funds will be used to pay for personnel costs and to purchase a van. Supervisor Johnson moved to accept the grant and increase the vehicle fleet. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None 6. Revuest for Aooropriation for unavoidable Expenses in the General services Department, solid Waste Division. (Elmer Hodge, County Administrator) A-62293-7 Mr. Hodge advised that as a result of a severe storm on June 4, 1993, the Solid Waste Division had additional expenses for cleanup of $52,382. Additionally, there were other unavoidable expenses of $104,567 for vehicle maintenance, $50,396 in overtime and an increase in the tipping fees of $15,951 for a total of $223,296. Following discussion, Supervisor Johnson asked for a work session on General Services Department and Solid Waste 39 g June 22, 1993 that a history of the one-armed bandit be included. Supervisor Eddy requested a work session for July 13, 1993 on draft legislation from the Commission on Population Growth. It was the consensus of the Board that these work sessions be scheduled for the evening session of the July 13, 1993 meeting. IN RE: REQ7EST FOR PUBLIC HEARING AND FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCES - CONSENT AGENDA Supervisor Johnson moved to approve the first readings and set the public hearings for July 27, 1993. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None ~. ordinance Authorizing a Special Use Permit to Expand an Existing Church Building, Located at 3917 Old Catawba Road. Catawba Magisterial District. Upon the Petition of Mason cove Chapel. 2. Ordinance to Rezone 0.410 Acres from R-1 to R-2 to Construct a Duplex, Located West of 67076705 Wood Haven Road, Hollins Magisterial District. Upon the Petition of Martha W. Cox. IN RE: SECOND READING OF ORDINA~TCEB June 22, 1993 ~o~ _ and safety concerns. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter, the acquisition and disposition of real estate can be authorized only by ordinance. A first reading of this ordinance was held on June 8, 1993; and a second reading was held on June 22, 1993; and, 2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Charter of Roanoke County, the interests in real estate to be conveyed are hereby declared to be surplus, and are hereby made available for other public uses by conveyance to the Commonwealth of Virginia for improvements to Valley Forge Avenue and Bunker Hill Drive in the County of Roanoke, Virginia. 3. That donation of 0.16462 acre of land in fee simple for the right-of-way, 0.03458 acre of land for a permanent drainage easement, and 0.06074 acre of land for 'a temporary construction easement, all as shown on Sheets 1-B, 3, and 4 of the project plans, to the Commonwealth of Virginia is hereby authorized. 4. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such further actions as may be necessary to accomplish this conveyance, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. 5. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption. ~~~ June 22, 1993 committee or board. Because of Mr. Shaffner's move to the City of Salem, Chairman Minnix will request Mr. Shaffner's resignation from the Virginia Western Community College Board. IN RE: CONSENT AGENDA R-62293-10 Supervisor Nickens moved to adopt the Consent Agenda with Item 2 removed. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None Supervisor Nickens moved to approve Item 2 following discussion. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None RESOLIITION 62293-10 APPROVING AND CONCIIRRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SIIPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM R - 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 June 22, 1993, designated as Item K - Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 6, inclusive, as follows: 1. Confirmation of Committee Appointment to the Clean Valley Council. ~a5 June 22, 1993 asked about a sign for Dry Hollow Road near the reservoir. Mr. Hodge advised that a sign needs to be built but it should be installed some time this week. (3) He asked that staff contact the railroad about the May Johnson Railroad crossing. Don Myers was asked to check on this. (4) He announced that he had received positive feedback from the citizens on the Neighborhood Watch Program. (5) He expressed concern about the new FEMA Flood Plain designations and how it affects property values, etc. Mr. Hodge advised that he had talked to the Corps of Engineers and found out that FEMA is responsible. He has discussed two possible meeting dates in July and August with FEMA to meet with the civic league. (6) He encouraged broader citizen participation in the future budget public hearings. (7) He advised that he had attended the West County Civic League meeting. (8) He complimented the staff on the tours at Spring Hollow and how they handled the concerns about Jubilee Acres. Supervisor Eddy: (1) He asked Mr. Mahoney about a memorandum he sent regarding nuisance claims. Mr. Mahoney advised that he was waiting for comments from the Board on the memo, and would then discuss at a future Board meeting or in executive session. (3) He asked the Board members if they supported his suggestion that the human service agency contributions be recommended by a committee. It was Board consensus NOT to set up a committee. (4) He asked about the department mission statements. Mr. Hodge advised that they are included in the annual budget document. (5) He asked about the 407 June 22, 1993 1. General Fund IInapuropriated Balance 2. Capital Fund IInaopropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Accounts Paid - Map 1993 5. Statement of Revenues and Expenditures as of May 31, 1993 ~ 6. Retort on Bond Projects. 7. Report on 1991 Water Project 8. Report on Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Solid Waste Facilities 9. Report on CORD Program Supervisor Eddy moved to receive and file Item 9 after discussion with Planning & Zoning Director Terry Harrington at the evening session. The motion carried by a unanimous voice vote. IN RE: EBECIITIVE SESSION At 6:00 p.m., Supervisor Eddy moved to go into Executive Session pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.1- 344 A (3) To consider the acquisition of real property for public purposes and (7) discussion with legal counsel and staff pertaining to a legal matter; possible amendment to the Landfill Member-Use Agreement. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None U June 22, 1993 heard, discussed or considered by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the Certification Resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None EVENING SESSION (7:00 P.M.) The following public hearing was not held although it had been advertised. The first reading and public hearing was postponed to July 27, 1993, and the second reading will be held on August 24, 1993. Ordinance Amending and Reenacting Ordinance 82592- 12, The Zoninq ordinance for Roanoke County, by the Adoption of Certain Provisions Concerning Amateur Radio Towers in the various Zoning Districts of the County. IN RE: PIIBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES ~. ordinance Amending and Reenacting ordinance 82592- 12, the Zoninq ordinance for Roanoke County, by the Adoption of certain Minor Amendments to Said ordinance. (Terry Harrington, planning & Zoninq Director) June 22, 1993 amendments to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia; and, WHEREAS, in the interest of public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice, the Board of Supervisors hereby amends certain provisions of the Zoning Ordinance for Roanoke County; and WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by lsw, and that the first reading of this ordinance was held on June 8, 1993, and the second reading and public hearing was held on June 22, 1993. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that the Zoning Ordinance for Roanoke County, adopted on August 25, 1992, be, and hereby is amended and reenacted, as follows: 1. That the provisions of Section 30-23-2, Non- conforming uses, be amended to exempt minor additions and expansions from the special use permit requirement in certain instances as follows: Sec. 30-23-2 Nonconforming IIses of Buildings, structures or Land (Page 18) (F) Any legally established use which existed prior to the adoption of this ordinance, or any subsequent amendments, shall not be considered a nonconforming use where a special use permit is now required for establishment of such use. The use shall be allowed to 4j3 June 22, 1993 guests for compensation, on daily or weekly basis, with or without meals. 3. That Section 30-41-2, Permitted uses, be amended to allow Bed and Breakfast in R-1, Low Density Residential Districts, as follows: Sec. 30-82-3 Home Occupations, Type I and Type II (Page 120 & 121) (B) General standards: 3. There shall be no outside storage of goods, products, equipment, or other materials associated with the home occupation. No toxic, explosive, flammable, radioactive, or other hazardous materials used in conjunction with the home occupation shall be used, sold, or stored on the r June 22, 1993 property line. :+.:::•:[..::•::::::.~ ::::::::::::.>}>•.v::::::~»::•isi::::::::::::::::n~n~::::~i.:v::::::::::.~:::::.~::::::::.~::::::::.'v^•.~:tiSvw:::::::::::::::::iw:::::::}:x.~::::::::::::::::::::::.~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::.V•:::: :w:::n~: ..:. ~ :::::::::::::::.:::. w:::::::::::::::::::::::w::::::::::: •:: w:: n: ~. ~: • w:::::::::.:: •>.......:. ;v.:..:........:::.::. yn.: • • :^.~ii»: }>isit.S>:•TYr'.iW'::•»>:ii>:::'ixf..•fr'f ' i'ffi.:ii: ::....::::::.i..::.:.: ::. :.: ~'.i:{i.i'w~~.:i1r:i;•i;4' Y:v{.:{1~::O: f',{{~~ .': {: xii;G: ": .: .: ;••: {r '.i. ::•:::i•:ti n'} .~.::i :•.:yi:w: ;...... :.:: i;.'.•: ;.b'~, ~: :::•:{•i:~~!.r;.'.. ...!:~jf:•: .: .: is •. '•~~~{•' d5S:E'~':::i::i::i~~Y:::i:::is~~i~Y:::::[:i:.Mi-i.~:::::.::~~~~;1~'.~>i:::.4~{ti~::~~~~::{pi:~~ii:'{'•~:i::::A4.iA:• •> ' $:::~x~ M .::.::: .: i:•>:G:•:i4:i::. ~: :iii:Jii:ii:vviv4:•i:!Lv:•:ii:h:4iii:vv4iis4i:v::v^»>:::i}iiiiiiiii:iiii?i}i}iiii:i{t:~.>::vi'•>}i}iii>i»>:•>'4iYr•..F{.i>}iii:ii::iii:':iiiiii•i?i:: :i•••:: ::ii: Y'F.4'.>:::•: •: nY:•:>w. :.:::i;.+<iiiji?i;fi: ... ..j::?u:r ... .:. .:. . .... ..:iiii i:~a 4: ~. .::::~ii::: .: ... >'f •»:. ... ... .:. ~ ... :.:: r.. {. ... .. f ~ .. {:?ii:{ .. ::. :: ~~:: r. . ~. •:: r. ': '' x:.a:.»;;::.:>:~:~::::; ~:Q~1T~~:.~"~»>::>M ~.:r::>:.~~:::~::::~`.~i.`~:~~~~.~t.~,lf~~~ .~i.~~~~..:.x;.~A~:~~.ki:~c.'w' /:'•}~:.r!.<~i •:.~:: s./..... t+~,,~++~~~~j~~ y~. i~1 ~}.yy~~M~y~~.y..}1t.;..~~yy ,{~,y#~!~~~~y ~,~6r.. {:•. ?~f"%r•5~~;Yt;~~4y?~~ ~~•f~~.~~~~~..~~.yy~~yy ~ yt. {~~/'l"~~~~:rr: - ~~~ ~. ~:. :.. :S:7i/.4F1:l:fi~Fi ~iiti:~:AkJ~ :..T.T..:.....~F:~ir:~~~l?`iii ~:::itii~i~i.~: ,•r•N:;-1i ~>::~Y . ~} y~ .....::....... f. fff ::.~.N..+.~7 ....fr':i•:•ii?»:~:::?:?::Y:.>:4:4:>'.i: ~>F~v v ..... : fiGVlJ iii:: n;:;;: is4n:4i:ii}i?E:•::.i}}:ii{•%:fffiJ•iYJf.::i:.ii::~:{i}•'.>%13:::iviii'r,':rf•~%4f iii:%/~:fv..v..:...:f}fff.. /........... :......:1:$'i.9f/l ~~fi Y.~•.~)~f Y. . rr:. f...:......:..::.:.:, ..................::>::i:::f..os:Yir.,<..:•»:a::f.•::.~:•.~:::.~::.:,.iR•::>:::w.~::fi.::::;;,:•.,::::>:::::::. h•::::::::::::::::Yiv}%w.o. >u..::: :c:a{.::;x.:::::.;i,.;;ry:::r:::.,•::,.»r;i:; ••>•••>•.•;;::: .....,:xi.,;, of .•r:x„::,.. .~,:9.c•>:,,.::r :o: •r>:.,:,WG~f~fiw; " N: ..:r..Fff::f~•:aDr/f~~:;riaaw>.E•:.:R:::;:>:::::::isii{,•(£,;:G,r,:{/fi;.;!•:::::: .f:.ailfk•Nc,:: ~ff:,•:,::;.:•:»:.,.::..::,•:....,.,..•:w:firffi?:x'~% .ct.#..':;a:fui 7. That the provisions in Section 30-92, Screeninct. Landscaping & Buffer Yards be amended as follows: 417 June 22, 1993 8. That the number of districts which allow Day Care Centers by special use permit be expanded so as to coincide with districts which also allow places of religious assembly as follows: SEC. 30-32 AG-3 AGRICIILTtJRAL/RIIRAL PRESERVE DISTRICT Section 30-32-2 (B) 2. D?`~>'f'f`~`':':,':.'?!~ (Page 48) SEC. 30-33 AG-1 AGRICIILTIIRAL/RIIRAL LOW DENSITY DISTRICT Section 30-33-2 (B) 2. ±%?~*E;i~f' (Page 51) SEC. 30-41 R-1 LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT Section 30-41-2 (B) 3. ~~`;<<'1~ (Pa a 61) .~, .._...... ._...... ..._..<.. g 9. That the following sections be amended by the addition of the permitted use, Cultural Services (Libraries and Museums), by special use permit: SEC. 30-45 R-3 MEDIIIM DENSITY MIILTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT Section 30-45-2 (B) 2. ~~• ''~ .~?~ (Page 67) SEC. 30-46 R-~1 HIGH DENSITY MIILTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT Section 30-46-2 B 2. 'f''~ ~'•~ ~~~"•}~~~•`~~~~"~~' ( ) .~• r,'x~?'W ( Page 7 0 ) ...::L+fi•i:.ii::. i •'l N.:fi is$f:x:.4}};h}:•};•i.':•'r•i': 10. That the following sections be amended, as 41 9 June 22, 1993 (B) Minimum setback requirements 1. Front yard: ''~z ii r!ttt.;.y:t4:::%iC:~$H/f/?i,Y???.mv: M.•::rA G '.::fi'.::{+{Jtx.}Yi.!!:/...R{:.:•'l..N f.{ t' HN ... .... r.:ti4fi11%f/l~i+b$::::~Y.'J..::i'1.iLvik.rti{t:~ri .:........:...... SEC. 30-36 AV VILLAGE CENTER DISTRICT Sec. 30-36-3 Site Development Regulations (B) Minimum setback requirements 1. Front yard: »-~~ :..................:..,..,.:....,...x:::.:.;....:::•....: r:.?. ,:;•~:,.:,Nt.:,:t~;::N:,.~:t;•••::;tt: •,t:..~rq . :t<.. ........................:...:: tai,'~:::+:::::iri:iiiriciv.':dc~~~'•:'•~~r`•'~,C c*ab'}~wivu:iil.G',u//r;•~N'•.G'a~'Giiiw::'<::,:::;•r.'.•'•i/1i%i?;i,: ??;s~:~:i SEC. 30-~1 R-1 LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT Sec. 30-~11-3 Site Development Regulations (B) Minimum setback requirements 1. Front yard: B-o~~ •tr:f!/.•{.'f.•n::•\,'::tfirts ft:: : .v,.:t~+F'•::• :t{{.::•: t{.{rri::n: f•::., v vfFf%? :IGi::,•:,•:,:;:;f:5?:S;y;;~4:...:...~.:r. ''. .Ti1Ff~ ''~w'T• ':.'.f: . ~y ~G, .........................:.....i'r'i{F•i:'v''2v:xrl//?1fn4ii.J}is4~/i(FFri'?ri:t•:LG:•:tistLiGCi'vttivi!:i~:{iri}:r:isvw:vrr%:i::•:::t•:v:•:tii9::1j/,C+ii? n~::•/'F.irG ~i ~ ~ , SEC. 30-~2 R-2 MEDIIII~ DENSITY RESIDEffi'1'IAL DISTRICT SEC. 30-53 C-1 OFFICE DISTRICT Sec. 30-53-3 Site Development Regulations SEC. 30-54 C-2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT Sec. 30-54-3 Site Development Regulations (B) Minimum setback requirements 1. Front yard: ~~yy ?{{{Y:.:'ii::~i?i?{x?r4~?Y..::}M1;.::u%:H, {:J.n:.;;: ~{?q{$:J.:•{,. .yv4,:w.J ffJ r.Y rXSC+{x;{{n:+i:<y?{{: x::::.i::?t? 20 feet when all parking is located behind the front building line. .........................................rif..r.:r.s~::::y::F i~~•:`Ji.•..::.5:•:~J/.l~~Ji.3:??4:itir{:i::viiii:?•ii....................... Ll:ti?•1 %(4::i::iii::•iiiiiiiiii~ ~~~/•• .........x.:i:1•ii•:?4i:~i.:if'Ji~}:iii ii:l r{,.Ji.{ il. That the citation on page v. of the Table of 423 June 22, 1993 ORDINANCE 62293-13 AMENDING AND REENACTING THE ZONING DISTRICT MAPS FOR ROANORE COIINTY, BY TH8 ADOPTION OF CERTAIN MISCELLANEOIIS CHANGES THROIIGHODT THE COIINTY TO SAID MAPS WHEREAS, on December 15, 1992, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, adopted Ordinance 121592-10 which amended the Zoning District Maps for Roanoke County; and, WHEREAS, citizens in various areas of the County have requested that the zoning classifications as reflected in the new zoning district maps of their properties be re-examined to address their questions and concerns; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 1, 1993, and has made recommendations to the Board; and WHEREAS, public necessity, convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice require that the following properties and zoning district maps be, and hereby are, submitted to the Board of Supervisors for amendment; and, WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law, and that the first reading of this ordinance was held on June 8, 1993, and the second reading and public hearing was held on June 22, 1993. BE IT ORDAINED, by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That "1992 Zoning District Maps (Master Set ,~1) of Roanoke County, Virginia" are hereby amended and reenacted as the zoning district maps for Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 42 5 June 22, 1993 an error in the preparation of the zoning maps. The approval of this change will correct this error. (4) OWNER(S): Paul L.Roberts Gene and Velma Davis LOCATION: Catawba Valley Drive; Catawba District MAP NOB.: 25.00-1-28,29 FROM: C-2 AND AG-1 TO: AG-1 AND C-2 COMMISSION COMMENTS: The zoning of the two properties was "switched" on the adopted maps. The approval of this change will correct this map error. (5) OWNERS: Various LOCATION: Village Lane; Hollins District MAP NOB.: 27.19-4-48.2,48.3,48.4,48.5,48.6,48.7, 48.8. FROM: R-3 TO: R-1 COMMISSION COMMENTS: The original R-3 parcel was platted and developed as seven single family lots late in 1992. This rezoning will reflect the current land use of these parcels. (6) OWNER: Hobart Properties LOCATION: Starkey Road; Cave Spring District MAP NOB.: 87.19-2-6,7 FROM: C-1 TO: R-3 COMMISSION COMMENTS: The owner of these lots has requested R-3 zoning. These two lots lie within a Comprehensive Plan 427.. June 22, 1993 COMMISSION CObII~ENTB: The property is located within a rural preserve area. Although public water service to this property is likely feasible after the construction of the Spring Hollow water transmission line, the steep topography and limited access to the property preclude the suitability of higher residential densities allowed by R-1 zoning. (10) OWNER: Merriam Sears LOCATION: Hidden Woods Drive; Windsor Hills District TAB PARCEL(S): 66.00-1-2,7,8 FROM: AG-3 TO: AR COMMISSION COMMENTS: The property is located within a rural preserve area, and is served by public water. The property has a very steep mountainous terrain. The only potential access to the property is Hidden Woods Drive. Due to topography, access from Hidden Woods Drive is problematic. In addition, Hidden Woods Drive i§ a cul-de-sac that was designed to a lesser street standard. The c~.evelopment of the Sears property at an AR density would result in traffic volumes that exceed the design capacity of Hidden Woods Drive, and are inconsistent with the neighborhood character. 2. That said map or maps are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 3. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. On motion of Supervisor Nickens to adopt the ordinance, and June 22, 1993 OF EPD WITH CONDITIONS IIPON THE APPLICATION OF THE VIRGINIA RECREATIONAL FACILITIES AIITHORITY WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on May 25, 1993, and the second reading and public hearing was held June 22, 1993; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on June 1, 1993; and, WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the zoning classification of a certain tracts of real estate totalling 767.33 acres located at the Explore Park in the Vinton Magisterial District is hereby changed from the zoning classification of AG-3, Agricultural/Rural Preserve District, to the zoning classification of EPD, Explore Park District. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of The virginia Recreational Facilities Authority. 3. That pursuant to Section 30-71 of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance (Explore Park District) all of the written and graphic information prepared and submitted as part of this application shall constitute proffers pursuant to Section 30-15 of the Zoning Ordinance. 4. That real estate affected by this request is as follows: Pa ce Tax Map Number Acreage ~. June 22, 1993 X31 IN RE: CITIZEN COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS 1. Margaret Crouse, Windsor West, Concerning Brush and Bulk Collection. Ms. Crouse asked that bulk and brush be collected more frequently than once a month. She also asked that the Regency Circle Street sign be replaced. Supervisor Nickens asked staff to determine why it takes so long to replace street signs. IN RE: NEW BIISINE88 1. Request for Expansion of the Bulk/Brush Collection Elmer C. Hodge. County Administrator) This request was continued to the July 13, 1993 meeting, and will be included in the work session on the General Services Department. Supervisor Kohinke left the meeting at approximately 7:15 p.m. IN RE: ADJOURNMENT At 7:35 p.m., Supervisor Johnson moved to adjourn. The motion carried by a unanimous voice vote with Supervisor Kohinke absent. H. Odell "Fuzzy" Minnix, Chairman 'x. ACTION NO. A-71393-4.a ITEM NUMBER I\ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: July 13, 1993 AGENDA ITEM: Confirmation of Committee Appointments to the Social Services Advisory Board COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The following nominations were made at the June 22, 1993 meeting. 1. Social Services Advisory Board This is a new Board replacing the Social Services Board. State Code recommends that the first appointments be staggered for balance. The expiration dates listed below are the same as they were under the Social Services Board with only the date changed to August 1. Supervisor Nickens nominated Robert Lewis as a representative of the Vinton Magisterial District. It is recommended by the Department of Social Services that his term expire August 1, 1996. Supervisor Eddy nominated Supervisor Harry Nickens as the Board liaison. It is recommended by the Department of Social Services that his term expire August 1, 1994. Supervisor Eddy nominated Betty Jo Anthony as a representative of the Windsor Hills Magisterial District. It is recommended by the Department of Social Services that her term expire August 1, 1996. RECOMMENDATION• It is recommended that the above appointments be confirmed by the Board of Supervisors. •~. K-a Respectfully submitted, Appr9 ed b , Mary H. Allen Elmer C. Hodge Clerk County Administrator ---------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved (x) Motion by: Bob L. Johnson No Yes Abs Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) Eddy x Johnson x Kohinke x Minnix x Nickens x cc: File Social Services File Dr. Betty McCrary, Director, Social Services # ~ ACTION NO. A-71393-4.b ITEM NO. ~'= AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: July 13, 1993 AGENDA ITEM: Donation of drainage easements on Lots 18 and 19, Section 3, Plantation Gardens Subdivision to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This consent agenda item involves the donation of easements for drainage purposes, upon, over, under and across lots in Section 3, Plantation Gardens (Plat Book 11, page 16), located in the Hollins Magisterial District of the County of Roanoke as follows: a) Donation of a drainage easement, 7.5 feet in width, along the westerly line of Lot 18, according to the Plat of Section 3, Plantation Gardens (Plat Book 11, page 16), from Bennie B. Wright, Jr., and Robin M. Wright, husband and wife (Tax Map No. 38.12-6-55). b) Donation of a drainage easement, 7.5 feet in width, along the easterly line of Lot 19, according to the Plat of Section 3, Plantation Gardens (Plat Book 11, page 16), from Paul M. Sorrell and Patsy A. Sorrell, husband and wife (Tax Map No. 38.12.-6-56). The locations and dimensions of these properties have been reviewed and approved by the County's engineering staff. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends acceptance of these easements. is ie L. H m n Assistant County Attorney Re ec(fully submitted, K3 Approved (x) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Motion by Action Bob L. Johnson Vote No Yes Abs Eddy x Johnson x Kohinke x Nickens x Minnix x cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Cliff Craig, Director, Utility ~ 1v o i ..1..'~ ~ S 1 ~-~~0-~2 Q ~7 6LZ . ~~ ZI-g~_oN l~'~ -~~Q ~~~~ ° ~ .moo -~ 0 a ~ - M ~ ~ `~ z " 8 -Q x b~ ' ~ ~. N ,-- ~~ °~ t ,o-b , b .S 0 ly ~ oft -~ - ~ Q ~-o Q'~`~ 00 •~S -b 1'g.bz ~. ~ Z cWn ~ N ~ ~ ~ Z o a v c~ ~ d-' ~. --- ,' a dl p a7 ~" ~ N ~ N ; lli W ~j c N ({~ ~ ~ ti ,~~ ~ ~ ~ ti H a ~' '~ O~ p 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ z ~ ~ 'b~ 2~ o °•°S ~ d i vii ---~ ~ ~ 8 ~ , h~ ~ ~ ~ d- ~ ~~ ~ ('~ Q N v ~ ~ 0~ N ~- O ow ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~, 1~ o- . .I cn T ~ T ~, of " d ~ cn cY ~1 o o' o o i -~el,ozoo~N `~9 ~ ~ . ~ ~ V . 1J ON ~~pN000CG~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~~ ~.1. •, .~ •-r J r O~ .-, rl r1 r) CD Q ~ n C~ ` i- ~ (~ (C 1N.-Ir1r~J~ID~~00 V.iCOrJJ('')JJ~t JOB N ~ N ,(1 ( L7 ~ ~ J J ~ \ \ `~ \ p 0 \ Q c1 W 3 3 3 3 W W 3 3 3 3 ~ Q DtpJN~D~DNOrItDJ O +1rINNr10NJ r)J 00 1 ~ '~2'~-~j I I ~ O I I i 1 1 I l 1 1 1 1 1 ~,ac„u,nwQ~orrN.-,.~ fJ N if, J N O N rI N r, .-+ Ul ' ~-'~ ~-~j L~ o~ 1 v O S • I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 .iNNQ~NOr'i~DU,r.-+Q~ 7DJ ~D•-~J~DrNNrlf>N ~ ~ V' J r U1 UIZZZ Vl 'LLZZU,Z .~ J(\ Q ww O Q rJrorJOOGOr,rl oooJJ m, O ,n ~ U' ~ ~ Q In~naoNro ' ~ N o ,~ " oric%Ilncorc~oooa,w - , UI UINJ ~ C- (r V Nr)~r UIJ J N .-~I .._ , Y ~ SS' ~2 1 O G O O O O G O O. 0 0 ~ ~ ~ O O O G O O O O G O O O G _ , ' O ~ l Ul~~ to ,f1000J In V, U - s( - Q o~n~~roJrc~,cowm~-+ 1 r) J 0~ ~ IT, .-~ Q~ c0 CO CD Q~ ~ '1 V ~ Q , ~ ~ ~- ~ O ~ . oulr,rnwro~~o~, I .-, J .? r1Q~NNNNNN I I l v ~ ~ ~. r 7 > ~ ~. ~ N 00(pN0 J O('`I rl r)N J .1 ~f1 .i C') to l!l .ti .-~ .ti .-, G lf, 1 1 1 M `r3Z ,OZ o-~ S -.-- I.L . 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ON(`i ~ ' ~ rIN(V tl1NN J OO 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 , D CD ~ N N N G (L ^ 1) ~Z L1 I '/ V 0 (~ - r t0 171 0 i I O OD J J CD ~0 J U1 ul tll tfi N , ll. 4 , (~~ rr I~DFMJHrMJU,~Dr(-" ~ O Q ~ O N N O UI F H N f O O W U I r ~ d), I ~9 11'O11 ~~ 8 z ,oa o-~ 'N 0 ~W d o ~- ~ ~ t- O M ~ z ,oZ o-b 'S -- ~•O 011 I O I I u I o~~ 0 =[1 - r ~ C o r s b'bo1 ~'-~ , .B ~. . O Z o V 1, I I ~ O ~ ( 0 ~ - r C ' ~~~ n ~ 'M,BZ,oZ o~'S-~ J LB'bol Q U o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ r I ~ o r ~ e 2 , o ~ o -b ' tV ~- II I ' ~ O I , U (' . _ 1 0. d N- COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA GENERAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE % of General Amount Fund Expenditures Beginning Balance at $4,512,763 July 1, 1993 (Unaudited) Original 1993-94 Budget Previously reserved for employee benefits and new administration building (886,182) Original 1993-94 Budget Addition to reserve 80,668 3 707 249 4.8% Submitted By Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance 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 revenues ($77,411,447). N-a COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA CAPITAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE Beginning Balance at July 1, 1993 $ 90,464 (Unaudited) Balance as of July 13, 1993 90 464 Submitted by Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance N=3 COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA RESERVE FOR BOARD CQNTINGENCY Beginning Balance at July 1, 1993 Balance as of July 13, 1993 Submitted by $100,000 10$ 0,000 Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance PROCLAMAT/ON DECLAR/NG THE WEEK OF JUNE 24 - 30, 1993 AS AMATEUR RADIO WEEK WHEREAS, the County of Roanoke has more than 200 licensed Amateur Radio operators who have demonstrated their value In public assistance by voluntarily providing emergency communications during periods of flooding, snowstorms, and other weather disasters; and WHEREAS, these Amateur Radio operators donate their services free of charge to the County, in the Interest of education, international culture exchanges, and public safety; and WHEREAS, these Amateur Radio operators are on alert for any emergency, local or world-wide, and practice their communication skills throughout the year, with particular emphasis on the annual American Radio Relay League, Inc.'s Field Day exercise; and WHEREAS, the Amateur Radio Field Day will take place the weekend of June 26 and 27, 1993, with Roanoke County Amateur operators participating of designated spots throughout the area. NOW, THEREFORE, 1, H. Odell "Fuzzy" Minnix, Chairman of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, do hereby proclaim the week of June 24 through 30, 1993, as AMATEUR RADIO WEEK in Roanoke County, Virginia, in recognition of this important emergency preparedness exercise, and call upon all citizens to pay appropriate trfbute to the Amateur Radio operators of our County. H. Ode11 "Fuzzy' Minnix, Chairman ATTEST: ~fYJa~-~7- .~- L~.~(.C.crr/ Mary H. Allen, Clerk ~~ocYamatioh n r PROCLAMATION HONORING DEIRDRE LEE AND MII~ ZIRI~L FOR THEIR ACTIONS ON JULY 2, 1993 WHEREAS, on July 2, 1993, Alana Nicole Fuller was at the Castle Rock Swim Club !n Southwest Roanoke County when she began chokfng; and WHEREAS, Deirdre Lee, a resident of Roanoke County and a nurse at the Veteran's Adminlstratlon Hospital, acted quickly and professionally to assist Miss Fuller, and through her actfons was responsible for preventing a tragedy; and WHEREAS, Ms. Lee was aided in her efforts by M/ke Z/rkel, the lifeguard at the pool; and WHEREAS, Ms. Lee and Mr. Zlrkel should be commended for their Immediate reaction to a potential life threatening sftuation, and for their willingness to help another Individual wfthout concern for their own well being. NOW, THEREFOR!" 1, H. Odell 'Fuzzy' Minnix, Chairman of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, do hereby issue this Proclamation honoring DEIRDRE LEE and Mlles Z/RI~L for their quick response and assistance to Alana Fuller In her tfine of need. -~ /-~~ ., -C. H. Odell 'Fu nnlx, Chaf man ~~-r'I~ s-~' Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator ATTEST: ;sY~~ ~ . Mary H. Allen, Clerk ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER C.J"' AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: July 13, 1993 AGENDA ITEM: Work Session to Review the Machinery and Tools Tax Rate and Assessment Method. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This time has been set aside to discuss the Machinery and Tools Tax rate and assessment method. FISCAL IMPACT: If the Machinery and Tools Tax rate and/or assessment methodology were changed (enhanced) effective January 1, 1994, the full impact would be realized in FY 1993-94 because the Machinery and Tools tax is collected in May. Respectfully submitted, ~~~ ~~ ~~~ Reta R. Busher Director, Management and Budget Approv by, ~ ~/> Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) ACTION Motion by: VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy _ _ _ Johnson _ _ Kohinke _ _ _ Minnix _ _ _ Nickens r 1 ACTION NO. ITEM NO . ~/ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: July 13, 1993 AGENDA ITEM: Worksession on the Commission on Population Growth and Development COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND' In 1989 the General Assembly created the Commission on Population Growth and Development. The Commission was charged to (1) study and evaluate the economic and environmental consequences of population growth; (2) develop initiatives to ensure that adequate planning occurs at all levels of government; (3) recommend alternative measures to fund needed infrastructure improvements; (4) propose innovative techniques to manage growth within the Commonwealth; (5) consider the adoption of a statewide planning process; and (6) report its findings to the General Assembly. In partial fulfillment of its charge, the Commission distributed a draft copy of the Virginia Growth Strategies Act (the Act) to the General Assembly in February of 1993. The Act is a comprehensive set of state legislation that, if adopted, will change the way that planning is undertaken within the Commonwealth. The Commission is soliciting legislation throughout 1993. The to the General Assembly for review comments on the proposed draft final draft will be resubmitted and action in 1994. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The adoption of the Act by the General Assembly will necessitate that localities throughout Virginia change the way they undertake planning on the local and regional levels. The Board's worksession on this proposed legislation will be an opportunity for the Board to review these legislative proposals and offer comments to the Commission prior to their next meeting in August. a2 2 Several complete copies of the proposed legislation are available in the Board's office. At your worksession, I will present a summary document that focuses on the major tenets of the legislation and a review of how it may influence Roanoke County's planning initiatives. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends as follows: 1. That a Board worksession on this topic be held on July 13, 1993. Respectfully Submitted, cs /C. ~' Terrance L. Harrin on, AICP Director of Plann ng and Zoning Approved, ~,~T~^'..,~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator Action Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Ref erred to Motion by Eddy Johnson Kohinke Minnix Nickens Vote No Yes Abs ~-a Board of Supervisors Worksession Commission on Population Growth and Development July 13, 1993 Commission on Population Growth and Development Created by the General Assembly in 1990. Commission was given six legislative charges: 1. Study and evaluate consequences of anticipated changes in population and patterns of development on Virginia's economic vitality and environmental health.... 2. Develop initiatives to ensure....adequate planning at all levels of government in order to guide population growth... 3. Recommend alternative measures to fund statewide infrastructure improvements. 4. Propose innovative land management techniques that will accommodate growth and development. 5. Evaluate ways to coordinate efforts by the General Assembly and state agencies to address matters of population growth, including consideration of a statewide planning process. 6. Report its findings and make recommendations to the General Assembly. Major Components of the Virginia Growth Strategies Act .... Governor will be required to prepare and implement a Vir inia Growth Strategies Plan (VGSPI. Responsibility for formulating the plan will be housed within a new division of the State Department of Planning and Budget (DPB). A three year timeframe is envisioned. .... Local governments will be required to submit to DPB; (1) information on current and projected land uses for four and twenty year planning horizons, (2) an inventory of current and proposed infrastructure for four and twenty year planning horizons. Information can and is encouraged to be provided on a regional basis. .... Every locality (above 3,500 pop.) will be required to submit their comprehensive plans to the DPB to determine whether the plans implement the state-wide planning goals contained in the VGSP. DPB will determine whether the plan is "recognized". .... Infrastructure and Planning Assistance Fund established within DPB. Funding available only to those jurisdictions with a recognized plan. Fund will provide matching grants for education facilities, transportation and transit, waste disposal, water and sewer facilities and omen space and land acquisition for public purposes.Four alternative taxation proposals are included within the proposed Act. These are a local option sales tax, a gas tax, a sales tax on other motor fuels, and a state sales and use tax. If a community's plan is recognized, state agencies must comply with the plan unless the Governor makes a finding of an overriding public interest. How the VGSP/VGSA will affect Roanoke County. 1. We will be Comprehensive with the VGSP Plan to DPB for required to revise our Plan so that it is consistent and submit our Comprehensive "recognition". 2. We will be required to send our Comprehensive Plan to neighboring jurisdictions for review (only prior to adoption. 3. We will be required to prepare a CIP on a yearly basis. CIP must be consistent with our Comprehensive Plan. 4. We will be required to revise our subdivision ordinance to ensure that it implements the Comprehensive Plan. 5. Our membership in the Fifth PDC will be mandatory. The Chairman of the Board and the County Administrator must be members of the PDC. ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER D' 3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: July 13, 1993 AGENDA ITEM: Work Session on Recreation Fees COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: During the Budget study, the Board of Supervisors asked staff to plan a work session to review recreation fees, particularly those involving adult athletics and the recovery of indirect costs. Staf f has reviewed and compared the fees charged by the surrounding localities for Adult Athletics (team sports) for consideration by the Board of Supervisors. Staff also wishes to discuss other concerns with the current ordinance and proposes changes which will simplify the administration of the fees. BACKGROUND' During 1989, the County retained the services of David M. Griffith and Associates, Ltd., to conduct a detailed cost/revenue study focusing upon an analysis of user fees. The Board of Supervisors then adopted an ordinance on August 14, 1990, imposing registration fees and fees for indirect costs for the various programs offered by the Recreation Division in addition to the direct program costs. This ordinance was amended on September 25, 1990, with the following guidelines (summarized): For Youth Athletics, the General Fund of the County shall subsidize all direct and indirect costs of these activities. For Community Education and Leisure Arts, the fee shall be based upon a $5 registration fee plus 25$ of the indirect cost plus 100$ of the direct cost. In any of the programs offered by these divisions primarily for youth under 18 years of age, there shall be no $5 per participant registration fee. For Adult Athletics and Outdoor Education, the fee shall be based upon 100 of the direct cost. The General Fund of the County shall subsidize the balance of the costs for this activity. 1 D-3 For Senior Citizens, the fee shall be based upon 100% of the direct cost. For Therapeutics, the fee shall be based upon 20% of the direct costs. For Special Events, the fee shall be based upon a recovery of 40% of the indirect costs and 50% of the direct costs. The Director of Parks and Recreation shall develop guidelines for the waiver or reduction of fees based upon demonstrable hardship and inability to pay and shall implement related policies. For purposes of the ordinance, DIRECT COSTS are defined as the specific costs of instructors and associated supplies. INDIRECT COSTS include the general fund appropriation for each of the cost centers associated with the recreation area based on the previous fiscal year budget, plus the allocation of the central administrative costs for the Department of Parks and Recreation. Originally, the share of the ball field maintenance which is provided by the Parks Division was included, but this cost recovery was eliminated by the September 25, 1990 amendment of the ordinance. Based on the ordinance in effect today, the County realizes a profit (revenues in excess of direct expenditures) of $21,726 for these recreation programs. Additionally, profits of $47,030 are realized by specialty programs such as After School for Kids (ASK) , Therapeutics and Special Events (see Attachment A). Staff is concerned that today's ordinance allows no fees to be realized by the County for youth participating in athletic programs, but charges full price (except for the $5 registration fee) for youth participating in any other opportunity offered by the Department. Similarly, adults participating in athletic programs (team sports) are paying only for the direct cost while the people in arts and craft type programs pay full direct costs and a share of the indirect costs. To simplify this process, staff suggests that the recreation fee ordinance be amended to provide a registration fee to assist in covering indirect cost in lieu of a separately calculated percentage share of the indirect costs. The attached ordinance is proposed for future consideration by the Board of Supervisors. The registration fee could be administered in much the same manner as the admission policy to theme parks whereby a reduced rate (or no rate) would be charged to youth and/or senior citizens, yet the adult participant would be required to pay the full registration fee on an individual or team basis. Attachment B shows the participation by the various groups during the 1992-93 2 fiscal year and the potential fiscal"impact if the suggested fees had been imposed. This registration fee would be in addition to the direct cost for the program. The concept of the proposed ordinance would require: o No payment by youth for related indirect costs for any program. In the case of youth athletics, the County would provide funds for both Direct and Indirect expenses. o Payment of a registration fee of $10 by adult participants in class or individual participation type activities. o Payment of a registration fee of $50 per team for Adult Team Sports. o Payment of an annual membership fee of $5 by teens and senior citizens in lieu of the registration fee suggested for adults. The opening of the Community Center will provide more opportunities for people of all ages to participate in the programs offered by the Department. This proposal to amend the ordinance makes the collection of indirect cost more equitable. The membership fee (card) also assists in the security aspect of participation in the activities of the new teen center and could be equally beneficial for participants in our senior adult programs. Most programs at the new Community Center will be classroom style and would not be segregated into age groupings or for specialized populations. The proposed ordinance also increases the share of the direct costs being paid by participants in our therapeutics program from 20$ to 100. The change takes the direct cost, reduces it by the amount of grant revenues received for this program and assigns the balance as the direct cost to be recovered from the participant. The therapeutics program is an important tool and resource to the County as it offers multiple avenues of addressing needs and requests by residents of our community to participate in our recreation programs, particularly since we must attempt to provide accommodation to our regular programs to persons with disabilities in response to ADA. Finally, the proposed ordinance would continue to provide a mechanism whereby the department could provide scholarship type assistance for persons who are financially disadvantaged and cannot afford to participate in the various programs offered by the Department. 3 ~'~~ ALTERNATIVES• ALTERNATIVE NO. 1 Implement the proposed recreation fee ordinance which eliminates the specific calculation for indirect cost and uses a $10 per participant ($50 per team) registration fee in recognition of the indirect costs incurred by the County, implement a $5 per person membership fee (card) for teens and senior citizens which eliminates their need to pay the registration fee, and increases the share of the direct cost paid by participants in the therapeutics program from 20~ to 100. ALTERNATIVE NO. 2 Implement the proposed ordinance without the membership fee for teens and senior citizens. ALTERNATIVE NO. 3 Implement the proposed ordinance without modifying the share of direct cost paid by participants in the therapeutics program. ALTERNATIVE NO. 4 Revise ordinance to recover only direct costs for the various programs as noted in the proposed ordinance (eliminate recovery of indirect costs). This would be similar to the policy of most other Parks and Recreation Departments. ALTERNATIVE NO. 5 No change to the ordinance. RECOMMENDATION• Staff recommends alternative No. 1. If the Board concurs in this recommendation, we would bring back a final version of the proposed ordinance after approval by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission to be considered for a first and second reading of an ordinance. It is suggested that the revised fee structure be considered to begin for programs offered for the Winter quarter to allow staff time to prepare the publications and advise participants. 4 Respectfully submitted, Appr~ved by, ohn M. Chambli s, Jr. Elmer C. Hodge Assistant Administrator County Administrator ----------------------------------------------------------------- Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) ACTION Motion by: VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy Johnson Kohinke Minnix Nickens 5 0-3 P R O P O S E D O R D I N A N C E AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON ORDINANCE REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 92590-13, WHICH IMPOSED OR INCREASED USER FEES FOR THE PARRS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT, AND ENACTING AN ORDINANCE TO AIITHORIZE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF CERTAIN FEES FOR SAID DEPARTMENT WHEREAS, on September 25, 1990, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, adopted Ordinance 92590-13 which authorized the imposition of user fees for the Parks and Recreation Department; and, WHEREAS, on the Board voted to reconsider this action and to repeal said ordinance; and, WHEREAS, the Board hereby adopts an ordinance to authorize the establishment of certain fees for certain recreational activities, and to appropriate from the general fund sufficient resources to defray the costs and expenses of these activities; and, WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on and the second reading of this ordinance was held on BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That Ordinance No. 92590-13 is hereby repealed in its entirety. 2. That the Director of the Roanoke County Department of Parks and Recreation is hereby authorized to establish fees for parks and recreation services and activities, subject to the approval of the County Administrator, and subject to the following Q-3 standards: a. Definitions: Direct costs relate to the specific costs of instructors and associated supplies. Indirect costs include the general fund appropriation for each of the cost centers associated with the recreation area. The recovery of said indirect costs shall be based upon a registration fee for adults, annual membership fee for Teens and Senior Adults, or other such means necessary to recover the indirect cost of conducting an event or activity such as sponsorships or admissions. b. Standards• i. For youth athletics, the general fund shall subsidize all direct and indirect costs of these activities. ii. For adult athletics, the fee shall be based upon a team registration fee of $50 plus 100% of the direct costs associated with the program. iii. For classes and individual participation programs, the fee shall be based on a registration fee of $10 per adult participant plus 100% of the direct costs associated with the program, however, in no case shall a registration fee be charged to a person under twelve years of age or to teenagers or senior citizens who possess a valid annual membership card. iv. For Teenagers (12-19) and Senior Adults (60 and older), an annual membership card may be purchased for $5 which will allow participation in the programs of the Roanoke County Department of Parks and Recreation without further payment of a a ~- registration fee. The cost of such programs shall be the direct cost as determined in the class or program offering. v. For Therapeutics, the fee shall be based upon 100$ of the direct costs associated with the program, after reducing the direct costs by any grant monies received. There shall be no registration fee for this program. 3. That the Director shall develop guidelines for the waiver or reduction of fees based upon demonstrable hardship and inability to pay and shall implement related policies. 4. That the effective date of this ordinance shall be 'lJ'. ATTACHMENT A Recreation Division Fee Analysis 7/6/93 *PROFIT SECTION ------------------------------- FY 90-91 ---------- FY 91-92 ---------- FY 92-93 ---------- COMMUNITY EDUCATION - GEN. 6,970 7,727 2,500 LEISURE ARTS 3,141 14,862 13,911 OUTDOOR EDUCATION 6,578 3,298 (314) SENIOR CITIZENS (257) 785 444 ADULT ATHLETICS/LIFETIME SPORTS 955 4,696 5,185 SUBTOTAL ---------- 17,387 ---------- 31,368 ---------- 21,726 YOUTH ATHLETICS - AAU (567) 995 1,914 COMMUNITY EDUC - ASK PROGRAM 1,576 26,816 38,033 SPECIAL EVENTS 2,000 1,738 3,806 THERAPEUTICS 798 ---------- 8,615 ---------- 3,277 ---------- SUBTOTAL 3,807 ---------- 38,164 ---------- 47,030 ---------- TOTAL 21,194 69,532 68,756 *EXCESS REVENUES OVER DIRECT EXPENSES C.5-3 ATTACHMENT B YOUTH ATHLETICS THERAPEUTICS OUTDOOR ED COMMUNITY ED LEISURE ARTS LIFETIME SPORTS SENIOR CITIZENS ADULT ATHLETICS TEENS ESTIMATED FEES FROM THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. OF EVENT NO. OF TEAM TOTAL ADULTS FEE TEAMS --- FEE REVENUE ---------------------- ---------- 0 ---------------- 0 2431 0 0 449 10 4,490 336 10 3,360 1371 10 13,710 592 10 5,920 4726 0 0 112 50 5,600 0 33,080 TEEN MEMBERSHIP FEE 500 @ 5 2,500 SENIOR CITIZENS MEMBERSHIP FEE 1500 @ 5 7,500 TOTAL REVENUE 43,080 ASK PROGRAM (BASED ON 1992-93 PARTICIPATION) 38,033 YOUTH ATHLETICS (AAU FEES) 1,914 SPECIAL EVENTS (BASED UPON (1992-93) 3,806 THERAPEUTICS (BASED UPON 1992-93) 3,277 90,110 C.../ _ .. ~ ~ ~'` o O 0 O o O O O o O o N O O O C`7 CO Et1E' to : . U }'' U~€ O . ~`~ 0; ' 0 0 ~ O o O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O ~ :i ~ N N ~ W C G ~~. !d!~ ~i ~ W ~ ~ ~: Z Q ....::.: .. W ~ z Z Z - .. Z Z ~ ~ fl ~ ~ f~ Q ~ Q ~° ~ ~ ¢ O h w w ~ U W ~- ~ ~'. i.i. ~ w w W CC ~ ~ ~ o a. 0 O z ~ (~ ~ ,' cc 0 ~ 0 ~ Q o ~ ~ ~ ~ z O z w z 0 a °_ Z O ~ W p ' U U w Q ~ ~ z U N U ~ U CC ` LL] ~ ~ «~ F-, ~ w N W ~ J = J H Y ~ Q ~ U w w I - Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ U , .~~ 0 ~ O w cn ~ cn z t- Q >- O N 0~ C N U ,~, a~ ~ 0 C V c a~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ N ~ ~ > , ~ ~' c ~ ~ a a i ° o c U vi ~ 0 WQ _~ rn~ ~ ~ "~ ~' c °'~~ o u i ~ ~ O tWi.~ ,~ ~~ as m~ ~ c ~~ ~ ~ a~i as O ~~ UU a, o ~ o O ~~ ~~, ~~, ~ ~~ ~ ~ Off' ¢~ ~~ - _- a ~ a '~~ ~~ Q~ ~ U (~ ~, Cn Uo Uo U~ c ~ ~ c~ ~' °' ~' a ai a o 0 0 0 ~ C7 o c o m a, cn o m U ~ U a ti m c ~ ~ c a ~ 0 0 'C O ~ U U 3 ~ O p U U ~ p + °' o p ~ N U ,Q cn +- ?i O gQ ~ U z O d ~ N o ~ ~. o ~ ~ $ a ~ N N °` _ ~ ~ + ~ ~ 8 w +-. ~ j o Q ~ Q 8 8 8 U ~ O + ~ C O N ~ .C ~ U U r ~ ~ t N Q 'p '= ,-. N ~ ~ N '~ __ _ y Q U (~A o U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N Q C].. Rf Q N ~ o ,p ~ to Q N Q lf N N +. N ~ ~ t O o S CJ © U C1 C U Q ~ V '~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ " U ~ W U 8 > O ~ N _ ~ to v' ~ ctS ~ ae ae ~ U N d N ~ Y ~ ~ ~ a2 d to N > a> N o~ a2 8 8 ~ °Q ~ 8 ~ pL~. r ~ zU n ~' ~ ii 8 8 ~~ggvago z O ~W ~ ~ ~ ~ c o O Y L O ~ U ~ U C m ~ V L11 ~ : ~~ ~W ~ ~ U O U U N O m ai O ~ : ., O ~rW~ > U ~~ ~ Yo Z m Y ~ ~, ~, ~ ~ o ~ :~ 0 3 ~ ~~ ~ ~QQ o •~ ~ a o • v c ' ~ ~ c ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ N ~ O ° ~ ~ L ~ E ~~ ~ O O O~ N QL~ O U ~ ~ Q U _ (J = J ~ Cn U ~UJOcnCl~~¢>- c 0 ~~ _ ~. .Q c~ a~ O N O ••- ~ O U C Cu .~ o~ ~- C ~ N O .LO-. d ~ L ~ O ~~ ~Y ~o a~ ~ ~o _ ac ~ ~ a~ -Q -o a~ •- d N -O ~~ ~:. NO Q~ U ~+' a D_ ~C E LL Lt.: O' ' to cA cn u> ; W W W W :g i ~ ::: ;; ~1}; CO (J (J q g -; ~ W r r T T i~ a i t~ W:f ~ 4f} ff3 ~ Qa r .. :: 't:: i ~-. ~ ~~ - ; W r ~ _, ~ ~ ~ }::: ,; ' N: `'W 7 ~ .3 ~~ ~~~~ ~Q1~. ~'~~ a ,m~ , cn `~' w ~~ (~ Q 4 'W o~. ~ tL.: ~ N g a ,: { -_ U W a ~ ' :~' ~ ~ ~ ,g ~ ~ ~ W ct;, ,~' - ~ ~ J ~ V W 'J~~ ~ I F` E= E¢ ~ ~ 1 '¢ J ~ ~ ( ~ '~~ I # #~ D Q ~t!)aW ~ c~v ~. ,W ~ ~ i (y; ~ O '~ ,~-'' }: 4 j ~ i ~~ ~ _ 1 ~ J Q ~ ~ O Q ~ ~; ~ U Z W Q `~ >- ~ F- _ ; ~ W Y ~ a ~ -~ ~ ~ a O z ~~ ~ ~ U a Q ° r W W ~- } O ~ r 0 0 ~ ~ I w ww ~- ~- >- ~ ~ ~I r r r~ Ian O 4f? ft3 f O U z ~ Q W o Q f1" L~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~ .- ~ .- N O T O T ~ t1/ y T T N T t0 t~ W Z W (~ T ~ ~ ~ 0 = M ~ U r"' T T N wo ~~ D C3 z~ dQ ~~ Y (~ Q Q ~ ~- J Z ~ ~ m W ~ ~ ~ f!1 U= ~ J m Y Q ~ ~ Q ~ ~ Q ~~ m ~ ~ UY m Q o o oc~- z u~ o m a D - ~/ Work Session Refuse Collection July 13, 1993 Agenda ° Opening Remarks ° History of Refuse Collection in Roanoke County Elmer Hodge Gardner Smith ° Bulk/Brush Collection, Staff Annualized Cost Comparison Automated versus Rear Loader Manual Packer Automated Packer Initial Cost $ 98,000 $ 110,000 Annual Depreciation (7 years) 14,000 15,714 Annual Maintenance 18,000 25,000 Annual Fuel 4,509 5,399 Size of Crew 1 MEO1 1 AEOII 2 Ref. Coll. Cost of Crew (Sal. and Ben.) 57,966 24,158 Total Annual Cost of Truck & Crew 94,475 70,271 Number of Households Daily 700 900 Number of Pickups Annually 145,600 187,200 Annualized Cost per Pickup .649 .375 --------------- However, for 25,000 Households: Number of Trucks Required 10 7 Cost for Trucks and Crews 944,750 491,897 1 Truck for Unaccessible Areas 76,888 ** Trucks for Bulk and Brush (2) 188950 (5) 472,375 Total 1,133,700 1,041,160 8th Bandit With no Assigned Crew 46,113*** Total if 8 Bandits $ 1,133,700 $ 1,087,273 * Current plan is to have 8. ** This rear loader would only have a crew of 2. *** Annual cost for truck only, no crew. DCM 7/12/93 85-86 86-87 87-88 88-89 89-90 90-91 91-92 92-93 TIPPING FEE /TON 58.8$ 58.8$ 59.74 $11.00 X16.00 519.00 520.00 $20.00 TONNAGE 23,4$8 26,12$ 26,447 28,444 30,774 30,699 31,38$ 31,200* DISPOSAL COST 5207,603 5231,206 52$7,$94 5312,884 5492,384 5$83,281 5627,700 5624,000* PERSONNEL BUDGET 5916,321 58$3,698 58$8,4$6 5837,$64 58$0,$68 5846,292 5832,688 5833,373 AC'T'UAL 5863,464 5840,$66 5838,894 5828,364 5912,7$$ $1,041,842 5898,1$2 5919,046* OPERATING BUDGET 5433,824 5368,066 5427,7$4 5$$6,029 5663,008 5863,74G 5933,$68 5866,912 ACTUAL 5463,894 5389,417 5470,796 5600,$21 5847,361 5896,139 51,004,874 51,011,607* ACTUAL VEIIICLE MAINTENANCES 576,778 584,408 5121,481 51$8,843 5244,873 5212,146 5249,687 52$3,801* rlgures do not Inc-ude accruals for approximate 20 day period ending the fiscal year. SERVICE INCREASES: 198$-86 ELIMINATION OF GREENBOX COLLECTION IN RURAI, ARF,AS. ALL COUNTY HOMES NOW COLLECTED BY COUNTY CREWS. TASK SYSTEM IMPLEMENTED. 198$-86 FREELOADER SERVICE IMPLEMENTED. 198$-86 BEGAN MONTHLY BULK/BRUSH COLLECTION (FOR AMOUNTS OVER A "PICKUP" TRUCK LOAD). 1987-88 IMPLEMENTED CURBSIDE COLLECTION OF RECYCLABLES -SOURCE SEPARATION (1,000 HOMES). 1987-88 TWICE MONTHLY BULK/BRUSH COLLECTION BEHIND 1 ST PHASE OF AU'T'OMATION. 1988-89 2ND PHASE OF 3,300 HOMES RI?,CEIVE AUTOMATED SERVICE AND TWICE MONTHLY BULK / BRUSH. 1989-90 EXPAND CURBSIDE RECYCLING BY 900 HOMES. 1990-91 BEGAN PROGRAM TO RECYCLE CHRISTMAS TREES BY COLLECTING THEM SEPARATELY. 1990-91 BEGAN SEPARATE COLLECTION OF BAGGED LEAVES (1V0 1:3CTItA FUNDS). PARKS AND REC . STILL PERFORMED VACUUM SERVICE. 1990-91 IMPLEMENTED AUTOMATED CURBSIDE RECYCLING COLLECTION PROGRAM (1,6$0 HOMES). 1991-92 LEAF VACUUM SERVICE ELIMINATED. SOLE COLLECTION SOURCE OF LEAVES . 1992-93 BEGAN PROGRAM TO COLLECT BULK AND BRUSH SEPARATELY. BRUSH IS RECYCLED AT LANDFILL. 1992 -93 BEGAN PROGRAM TO ATTACH METAL TAGS TO ALL AUTOMATED CARTS ADVERTISING MONTHLY BULKlBRUSH COLLECTION SCHEDULE. OTHER VARIOUS COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES - TO INCLUDE ANY SPECIAL FESTIVALS OR OTHER PUBLIC GROUPS, CLEAN VALLEY DAY, SPIiCIAL RECYCLING ACTIVITIES (MTN. VIEW PHONE BOOKS, STONEHENGE DROP-OFFS...), FRIENDHIP MANOR, HOLLINS COLLEGE AND COURTHOUSE RECYCLING PROJECTS. ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER_~~- AT A REGULAR 1KEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETINC,~ DATE: July 13, 1992 AGENDA ITEM: Work Session on Refuse Collection. BOUNTY AD1rIINISTRATOR' S COI`II~ENTS BACKGROUND: During the past year there have been a number of discussions related to the subject of refuse collection, particularly with regard to our bulk/brush pickup system. We now have five automated packers and four manual rearloaders used in the collection of household refuse. In addition, we have two rearloaders with crews of three each, dedicated to the collection of bulk and brush once- monthly throughout the County. ~iiM1~fARY OF INFORNATION: The primary aim in this work session is to provide the Board with an overview of our refuse collection system, including a brief history of the major changes in the services during the last eight years and a discussion of the impact of those changes. It is our hope, that with the benefit of the overview to be provided and the related discussion, we can address the future of our collection system, particularly as it relates to bulk and brush. As you recall, during the budget process I advised the Board that, with the purchase of three new automated refuse trucks, we could eliminate four staff positions. Two of the suggestions as to how those positions might be utilized, were: o Transfer them to Parks and Recreation because of the growing need for resources there. o Increase the collection of bulk and brush collection throughout the County to twice a month. In the approved budget, the four positions were funded for six months in General Services to accommodate the transition from manual to automated pickup. It was estimated that this transition could be made by January, 1994. o-~ Based on conversations with the Director of General Services, I indicated during the budget process that we could accommodate twice-monthly bulk and brush pickup in conjunction with, and with the savings from, the automation of refuse collection in the remainder of the County. This is possible. However, to do so it will be necessary to retain the four positions and one of the refuse trucks that were to be displaced as a result of purchasing the three automated vehicles. ALTERNATIVES: (1) Implement twice-monthly collection of bulk and brush. (2} Transfer the four positions resulting from automation of refuse collection to Parks and Recreation. (3) Reduce the County staff by four positions. (4) Seek an independent study of our refuse collections system prior to making a final decision of disposition of the four positions. Alternative 1. 1993 - Fund four employees for 6 months Operating cost for 1 rearloader Annually -Fund four employees - Operating cost for 1 rearloader Alternative 2. 1993 - Fund four employees for 6 months Annually - Fund four employees Alternative 3. Reduction of four positions Alternative 4. Independent study of refuse collection (est) STAFF RECO~IMENI~ATION $29,000 5,000 58,000 20,000 $ 29,000 58,000 ($ 58,000) $ 15,000 This is a Board decision. I am willing to expand the service to one additional pickup per month with the understanding that we will retain one rearloader that would otherwise be sold, and that the four positions be retained in General Services. ~y Respectfully submitted, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ---------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Approved ( ) Motion by: Eddy Denied ( ) Johnson Received ( ) Referred ( ) Kohinke To ( ) Minnix Nickens JULY 13, 1993 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 matters requiring the provision of legal advice by the County Attorney and briefings by staff members concerning Norma J. Siqmon v. Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County and Boone, Boone & Loeb and Nicholas H. Beasley v. Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County in accordance with Section 2.1-344 A 7 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended. AT A REGIILAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SIIPERVISORS OF ROANORE COIINTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COONTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TIIESDAY, JIILY 13, 1993 RESOLIITION 71393-5 CERTIFYING ERECUTIVE MEETING NAS 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 Certification Resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Johnson, Kohinke, Eddy, Nickens, Minnix NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Executive Session County of Roanoke Department of Planning and Zoning Memorandum T0: Board of Supervisors FROM: Terrance L. Harrington, AICP /~~ Director of Planning and Zoning DATE: July 9, 1993 RE: Commission Action on Zoning Map Amendments. BACKGROUND When the Board of Supervisors passed the Zoning Ordinance December 15, 1992, there was concern expressed about the zoning of land near and around the Blue Ridge Parkway. Many acres along and near the Parkway had been proposed by the Commission to be R-1 Residential. This designation allows a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet if water and sewer is provided. The Board's action on December 15th placed many of these areas within an AG-1 designation. Due to the various concerns, a committee was appointed to study zoning along the Parkway in more detail and was asked to make recommendations on which areas in proximity to the Parkway are critical to the Parkway's viewshed, and thus should be protected. The committee was comprised of two representatives of the Blue Ridge Parkway, a representative of the Friends of the Blue Ridge Parkway, and two representatives of the development community. County staff has attended the meetings and provided support to the committee. The committee has been meeting since January and has identified eleven "CRITICAL VIEWSHED AREAS" along the Parkway. These eleven areas are owned by approximately 100 property owners. The current zoning of these areas is primarily AG-1 or AG-3 with one small area zoned R-1. The committee is continuing to study these areas to determine appropriate ways to protect the critical viewsheds, including additional design standards for these parcels. At their meeting on July 6, 1993 the Planning Commission made recommendations to the Board regarding the appropriate zoning of approximately 450 parcels that are in proximity to the Blue Ridge Parkway, but are outside of the eleven "CRITICAL VIEWSHED AREAS". Their recommendations were made after holding public hearings on June lst and July 6th. These recommendations will be forwarded to the Board when its public hearing is scheduled. With the exception of the "CRITICAL VIEWSHED AREAS" identified by the Blue Ridge Parkway Committee, the Commission's action covered all of the parcels near the Parkway that the Board of Supervisors rezoned to AG-1 on December 15, 1992. These parcels were encompassed in four large areas along the Parkway. The Commission focused primarily on two of the areas located within the Cotton Hill Road area of Roanoke County. The Commission has recommended that the two areas outside of the Cotton Hill Road area (Bonsack; Poage Valley Road), be zoned R-1. This designation is consistent with their original recommendation to the Board in November 1992. In the Cotton Hill Road area, the Commission has recommended a combination of R-1 and AR zoning designations. (See attached development standards). Their recommendation took into consideration proximity of this area to the developed portions of Roanoke County, the location of the proposed Spring Hollow Water line, the potential for public sewer, the character and capacity of Cotton Hill Road (north and south of the Parkway), and citizen comments pertaining to the Comprehensive Plan, Parkway protection issues, and the general current rural character of the Cotton Hill Road area. The Commission recommended that all of the parcels in the Cotton Hill Road area north of the Parkway be zoned R-1. This area includes the Sigmon property, and the Beasley property north of the Parkway. South of the Parkway, the Commission has recommended a combination of AR and R-1 zoning designations. Their recommendation is that the Beasley tract and several other large acreage tracts south of the Parkway and east of Cotton Hill Road be zoned R-1. The Commission has also recommended that all of the smaller parcels east of Cotton Hill and all of the land areas west of Cotton Hill be zoned AR. These are primarily the existing platted lots within the Cotton Hill area. The Commission's intent in recommending this dual zoning south of the Parkway was to recognize the existing character of the Cotton Hill area, and to allow future development of the parcels along Cotton Hill consistent with this character. The existing development patterns in the Cotton Hill Road area were established over a 20 year period under the standards of the "old" zoning ordinance. Properties in this area were zoned either RE or A-1 under the "old" ordinance. These "old" zoning districts allow 7,200 square foot lots provided public water and sewer were available. This is the same lot size now allowed in R-1 districts. The Commission's analysis of the existing subdivision patterns in the Cotton Hill area showed that approximately forty percent (40%) of the existing platted lots do not meet AG-1 standards. In making their zoning recommendations to the Board, the Commission also made the following requests/statements: 1. The Commission expressed a hope that preliminary subdivision master plans for the Beasley tract south of the Parkway be required to show an ultimate road connection in the area of Merriman Road. If required and ultimately constructed, traffic from the development of this tract would have an alternative to Cotton Hill Road. 2. The Commission asked that the Board consider adding improvements to Cotton Hill Road to the County's 6-year road improvement plan. 3. The Commission believes that the "CRITICAL VIEWSHED AREAS" should all be zoned AG-3 so that the owners of these properties have an additional economic incentive to comply with the Parkway design standards being developed by the Blue Ridge Parkway Committee. The Commission has asked that the Blue Ridge Parkway Committee review and concur with this recommendation. The Committee will discuss this item on July 20th. It was the desire of the Commission that these " CRITICAL VIEWSHED AREAS" be zoned AG-3 concurrently with the R-1 and AR zoning changes. However, since these eleven areas (comprised of approximately 100 different owners) were not advertised for rezoning, the Commission cannot formally forward a recommendation to you until a new public hearing is held. PROPOSED TIMELINE If the Board wishes to proceed with the rezoning of these "CRITICAL VIEWSHED AREAS" concurrent with the R-1/AR rezonings, the following timetable would allow all of the appropriate advertisements to be placed: August 3, 1993 Commission holds a public hearing on a Commission petition to rezone the eleven "CRITICAL VIEWSHED AREAS" to AG-3. (Note: Commission legal ad must be placed in the paper no later that July 16, 1993.) August 24, 1993 Commission forwards all of its recommendations to the Board. Board holds First Reading and Public Hearing on a comprehensive ordinance that incorporates all of the Commission's zoning recommendations, including their recommendations for the Cotton Hill Road area and their recommendations on the "CRITICAL VIEWSHED AREAS". September 28, 1993 Board holds Second Reading and takes action on the proposed ordinance. If the Board does not wish to proceed with the Commission's proposal for the "CRITICAL AREAS", this same schedule could be used to consider the Commissions current R-1/AR recommendations. O~ PDAN ~F ~ ~ i Z 9 V 2 a rasa COU NTY ADM I N ISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE (703) 772-2004 ~~~~~ ~~ ~~t~~.~2~ P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 Mr. Robert H. Lewis 1135 Deer Run Drive Vinton, VA 24179 Dear Mr. Lewis: July 15, 1993 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS H. ODELL "FUZZY' MINNIX, CHAIRMAN CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT LEE B. EDDY, VICE-CHAIRMAN WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT BOB L. JOHNSON HOW NS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT EDWARD G. KOHINKE, SR. CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT (703) 772-2005 I am pleased to inform you that, at their meeting held on Tuesday, July 13, 1993, the Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to appoint you as a member of the Social Services Advisory Board, representing the Vinton Magisterial District. Your term will expire on August 1, 1996. The Social Services Advisory Board was established to replace the Social Services Board. Since this is a newly established board, initial ter;~s are to be staggered, and the Board appointed you to serve the remainder of your previous term on the Social services Board. 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. State law requires that you take an oath of office before the Clerk of the Roanoke County Circuit Court. This oath must be administered rior 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. 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, / J / H. OdeYl Fuzzy" Minnix, Chairman Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Enclosures cc: Dr. Betty McCrary, Director, Social Services Department Steven A. McGraw, Clerk, Circuit Court ® Recycled Faper of a~ANO'~F ,> . 2 A ~ ~ a 1838 COUNTYADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE (703) 772-2004 P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 Ms. Betty Jo Anthony 6225 Hidden Valley Drive Roanoke, VA 24018 Dear Ms. Anthony: July 15, 1993 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS H. ODELL "FUZZY" MINNIX, CHAIRMAN CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT LEE B. EDDY, VICE-CHAIRMAN WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT BOB L. JOHNSON HOW NS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT EDWARD G. KOHINKE, SR. CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT (703) 772-2005 I am pleased to inform you that, at their meeting held on Tuesday, July 13, 1993, the Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to appoint you as a member of the Social Services Advisory Board, representing the Windsor Hills Magisterial District. Your term will expire on August 1, 1996. The Social Services Advisory Board was established to replace the Social Services Board. Since this is a newly established board, initial terms are to be staggered, and the Board appointed you to serve the remainder of your previous term on the Social Services Board. 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. State law requires that you take an oath of office before the Clerk of the Roanoke County Circuit Court. This oath must be administered rior 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. 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, ~~ ~ H. Odell "Fuzzy" Minnix, Chairman Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Enclosures cc: Dr. Betty McCrary, Director, Social services Department Steven A. McGraw, Clerk, Circuit Court ® R~yded Paper of PORN MF ~, c 2 p a 1838 COUNTYADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE (703) 772-2004 P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24015-0798 July 15, 1993 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS H. ODELL "FUZZY' MIN NIX, CHAIRMAN CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT LEE B. EDDY, VICE-CHAIRMAN WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT BOB L. JOHNSON HOW NS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT EDWARD G. KOHINKE, SR. CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT The Honorable Harry C. Nickens Roanoke County Board of Supervisors P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 Dear Harry: (703) 772-2005 I am pleased to inform you that, at their meeting held on Tuesday, July 13, 1993, the Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to appoint you as a member of the Social Services Advisory Board as the Board Liaision. Your term will expire on August 1, 1994. The Social Services Advisory Board was established to replace the Social Services Board. Since this is a newly established board, initial terms are to be staggered, and the Board appointed you to serve the remainder of your previous term on the Social Services Board. 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. State law requires that you take an oath of office before the Clerk of the Roanoke County Circuit Court. This oath must be administered rior 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. 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, ~1y H. Ode' '~FuZ ~~ zy Minnix, Chairman Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Enclosures cc: Dr. Betty McCrary, Director, Social Services Department Steven A. McGraw, Clerk, Circuit Court :I.- t ® Recyaad P~e- 0~ pOAN ~,~ ~. z p J 2 a 1838 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE (703) 772-2004 ~~~~~ ~~ ~r~~.~.r2~ P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 July 15, 1993 .. BOARDOFSUPERVISORS H. ODELL FUZZY' MIN NIX, CHAIRMAN CAVE SPRING MAGLSTERIAL DISTRICT LEE B. EDDY, VICE-CHAIRMAN WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT BOB L. JOHNSON HOW NS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT EDWARD G. KOHINKE, SR. CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT (703) 772-2005 Mr. James D. Campbell Executive Director Virginia Association of Counties 1001 East Broad Street Richmond, VA 23219 Dear Jim: Attached is a copy of Board Action 71393-3 endorsing and adopting a recommended legislative program for the consideration of the Virginia Association of Counties for the 1994 session of the Virginia General Assembly. This action was adopted by the Board of Supervisors at their meeting on Tuesday, July 13, 1993. If you need further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Attachment cc: Paul Mahoney, County Attorney ® Recycled Pape- JULY 13 Approve Legislative requests Adopt 456 Review Policy 1st - Vicious Dog Ord Approve Cable TV Capital Budget Audit Committee (2:30) Work Session - P & R Fees, Mach, tools tax, General Services, Commission on Population Growth Health Dept. Report Readopt Public-Private Partnership Policy ,- County of Roanoke Department of Planning and Zoning Memorandum TO: Elmer Hodge FROM: Terry Harrington DATE: June 22, 1993 RE: Growth Commission ~~~~ Lee Eddy talked to me about this last week. He has an interest in the Board possibly making comments for the Growth Commission to consider. I said that could prepare a report for the Board to consider for th my 13th meeting, but that I would clear with you first. -•----- I've talked to Kat Imhoff. Any comments received by mid-month would be considered by the Growth Commission. OK with you if I prepare report for the first meeting in July? Let me know ASAP if you would prefer that this not be an agenda item. c: Mary Allen MEMO - 6/1/93 To: Supervisors From: Lee B. Eddy ~~---~ Subject: Commission on Population Growth & Development At the 5/27/93 meeting of the Fifth Planning District Commission, there was a presentation by the Executive Director of the Virginia Commission on Population Growth and Development, Katherine L. Imhoff. She outlined the history and purpose of the Commission and distributed copies of their latest report, House Document #72, which includes draft #4 of their proposed legislation. The focus of the Commission's recommendations is on more coordinated planning among the various state, regional and local agencies. The emphasis is on Economic Development, Protection of Important Resources, Cost Effective Government, and Orderly Growth. The Commission hopes to make final adjustments to their draft legislation at a meeting scheduled for August 5 and 6, so they can submit it to the 1994 General Assembly. They are asking to receive comments no later than July 1. I will leave a copy of the report in the Supervisors' office, and hope you will take the time to at least skim through it for the highlights. The Commission Chairman has summarized the proposal in a relatively short summary dated May, 1993. The Planning Commission should also be interested in these documents. If the Board wants to submit comments representing the will of the County, we should plan to approve those comments no later than our meeting on 6/22/93. copy: Don Witt, Planning Commission Chairman Elmer Hodge Paul Mahoney Terry Harrington Time Gubala 1~1tO - 6/28/93 To: Paul Mahoney From: Lee B. Eddy ~~~^ Subject: Nuisance Claims Thank you for your memo of 3 June, 1993 on this subject, which outlined options for responding to small claims against the County. I favor the following approach: 1. General: Take neither a "hard line" nor a "liberal" approach to settling claims out of court, but an intermediate position. Generally I favor settling these issues out of court if the fault is clear and it does not establish a potentially costly precedent. 2. Authority: Grant administrative authority for settling claims as follows: a. Up to $1000: Risk Management upon the recommendation of the affected Department Head. b. Up to $5000: County Administrator upon the recommendation of the Department Head. c. Over $5000: Board of Supervisors. d. Because of potentially costly precedents, each claim to be reviewed by the County Attorney. If he advises against settlement, the issue should be decided by the Board. e. A Constitutional Officer must concur in any action affecting his responsibility. 3. Source of Funds: a. Where the problem is clearly the responsibility of a Department, the cost should be taken from the budget for that Department. b. Where responsibility is not clear, the County Administrator should decide the source of funds. c. For any issue brought to the Board, the Board should decide the source of funds. One question that occurs to me is whether a formal policy along these lines would have to be made known to the public. By copy to Chairman Minnix, I suggest that this subject be placed on the agenda for an Executive Session during our meeting of 7/13/93. copy: Supervisors Elmer Hodge Mary Allen O O C~D C~D ~J ~ a. a ~ N 0 0 b ~ ~, o ~~ ~~ ~~ b H r+. ~. YTS -~ CD ~*+ O ~' ~ O J ~ .~ y. O ~• 00 '~ O ~ ~ CD ~ ~ o w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ b o yp F~. ~ ~ ~' ~ ' n CD ~ ~ '~ n ~ ~S C O f /~ (/~ A pp A ~ O ~ ': G1 ~ r ~ ~ :h bd a fD o aq co a O~ O r~+ ~+ O O O O O O O O O O -+ C r. ... O n o o ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 O O ~+ Y-+ Y~ r-~ Y~ O Y-+ ~ O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~-+ W N ~+ N ~+ ~+ W N ~-` W W N N W N W N W N W ~-` :~8~~d o ~ ~ r~y M ti p ~ O ~ ~-. ~ C h+ a.i p ~~~~~. Cy ,b `N~ ~ '. ~D O ~ ~. ~a~~z "~~~~ ~ ~. N a.i n /"\ ~~ M i~j H+ b h+ v ~'C 8~v W a.i W b ~~~`~~ ? N Y~ A O '+ '+ i ~ ~. O O ,~ n b ~~ 0 r b p G. w. ~. b 0~ (iOANp~.~ a ~ y z ~ J ? a 1838 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE (703) 772-2004 TO: P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 MEMORANDUM Betty McCrary (703) 772-2005 FROM: Edward Kohinke /~'~~" ~ "'~`~, " Catawba District Supervisor DATE: June 2 8 , 19 9 3 SUBJECT: SOCIAL SERVICES ADVISORY BOARD NOMINEE Ed Wold, 3480 Alltree Trail, Salem, VA (phone 384-6393) has agreed to be my nominee for the Advisory Board. Ed is a social workers at the V. A. Hospital who is close to retirement. He is also a tree farmer, and is very active in community affairs. I asked him to prepare a brief "bio" and told him about the Board of Supervisors' policy of having the nominees interviewed by you first before we make a final decision. Please contact Mr. Wold and talk with him soon. EGK/bj h cc: Members, Board of Supervisors Elmer Hodge Mary Allen BOARD OF SUPERVISORS H. ODELL FUZZY MINNIX, CHAIRMAN CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT LEE B. EDGY, VICE-CHAIRMAN WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT BOB L. JOHNSON HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT EDWARD G. KOHINKE, SR. CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT And, thanks. ®q~~ per, ~! . d~ p~B 1, 9 '•~:.. ALLEGHANY HEALTH DISTRICT P. ~. BOX 220 Serving the People of: Fincastle, VA 24090 Alleghany County eotetourt County Craig County Roanoke County City of Clifton Forge City of Covington City of Salem Telephone: (703)992-8226 ~'ar4imile: (703)992-8242 7-~0 Mr. Elmer ~~°~~a.. County Adt ~~ /~~~ W ~ county of ~~ ~~~ C•L~- ~L° Q /~-~ ~ ~ P. o. Box e~ -- Roanoke , ~~~ /'' ~ ~C ~_ ~ ~~~ ~ i ~~ Dear Mr. •s ~ ,ems. Tel. 703$57-78W Fax No. 8576991 Molly L. Hagan Medical Director Patty P. Tiller Administrator Linda M. French Nurse Manager A. M. 'Mo" Owen Sanitarian Manager Nancy S. Harvey Nurse Practitioner Manager 1 ~ /'Y~/'~. e regular meeting c day, July 13, 1993 the Board members ~ ;sues, and to address any CUiluvi,.~ ~~ ~____ _ ~y have. Please let me know if this does not suit. Thank you for your time and attention. Sincerely, Molly L. Hagan, M.D. Director Alleghany Health District MLH/kjd r. i ~t~ ~ ~~ ~ 4' r ~_, en.n_ ~ . ~A,~ ate. 1 ~ ~~ „~~ ~_- -~- -J ~ ~ ~V "~` -+~~ °~ ~' ~~r~,,,~. ~ ~a~. . ,7, ,'~~ ..A~ ~ A,,, Pq A.h~ ~' ~ ,~"..~J}~f '~i~ ~ ~i r, ~,?~ "~ 7°~„`,( i71 _l,~` !~~}l. ,~_~ ~ _ ~ / , - ~, i ? ~ ~ 1 ~- ~ . ~' , ~; „A ~ 1 ~ ,~' '~. ` ~~ ~ ~~~ - ., r°, ~ . ~~; ~~ ~- 3 COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA RESERVE FOR BOARD CONTINGENCY July 13, 1993 Beginning Balance at July 1, 1993 $100,000 Clerk of Circuit Court New Position 26 400 Balance as of July 27, 1993 $$ 7_ Submitted by ~`~ ~• ~~ Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance