Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12/3/1996 - Regular0~ ROANp,~.~ ~ A Z z J `a ~ssa WORKING ,~~~~~ C~~~x~#g ~~ ~ ~~z~~C~ DOCUMENT.-SUBJECT TO REVISION ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION AGENDA DECEMBER 3, 1996 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. THE DECEMBER MEETING SCHEDULE IS AS FOLLOWS: DECEMBER 3, 1996 AT 3 P.M., AND DECEMBER 17, 1996 AT 3 P.M. WITH PUBLIC HEARINGS AT 7 P.M. Individuals with disabilities who require assistance or special arrangement in order to participate in or attend Board of Supervisors meetings or other programs and activities sponsored by Roanoke County, please contact the Clerk to the Board at (540) 772-2005. We request that you provide at least 48- hours notice so that proper arrangements may be made. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 P.M.) 1. Roll Call. 2. Invocation: John 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 1 ® Recycled Paper C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND AWARDS D. BRIEFINGS 1. Briefing on Spring Hollow Recreation Master Plan. (Pete Haislip, Parks and Recreation Director) E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Request for funding to replace missing Roanoke County welcome signs. (Anne Marie Green, Community Relations Director) A-120396-1 ~n,r ~,rnmrn~r nm sppunvr REPLACING SIGNS AMENDED BY HCN THAT $4,000 FUNDING TO COME FROM EXISTING BUDGET AND NOT BOARD C'ONTINGE_NCY FUND 2. Resolution adopting the Roanoke County Legislative Program to be presented to the 1997 Virginia General Assembly. (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney) R-120396-2 FM MOTION TO ADOPT R~E.SOLUTION WITH ADDITIONS SUGGESTED BY LBE AS FOLLOWS• (1~ SUPPORT FOR FULL STATE FUNDING OF LIBRARIES AND TF['HNOLOGY; (21 SUPPORT FOR SMALL CLAIMS COURT; AND (3) SUPPORT FOR 5TH PDC'S FCOMME_NDATION OF A TASK FORCE FOR WESTERN VA TO v~~nT~rn,r~~ LEGISLATIVE INITIATES THAT PROTECT CULTURE AND F,NVTRONMENT. I.~~ v~~r",r TO INVITE ROANOKE VALLEY LEGISLATORS TO MEETING FOLLOWING ORGANi7ATIONAL MEETING ON 1/2/97 TO DISCUSS LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM 3. Request to appropriate County share of funding of the Mason Creek 2 Interceptor improvements. (Gary Robertson, Utility Director) A-120396-3 rrn MOTION TO APPROVE PARTICIPATION AND APPROPRIATE FUNDING IT~Q F. OLD BUSINESS G. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS H. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS I. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance amending and reenacting portions of Chapter 5, Animals and Fowl, and repealing Section 5-69. Vaccination Clinics of Division 3 of Article II of Chapter 5, Animals and Fowl of the Roanoke County Code to clarify the authority of the Community Service Officers of the Roanoke County Police Department to enforce the County's animal control ordinances, and to increase the fees for boarding and pickup of animals. (Joseph Obenshain, Sr. Assistant County Attorney) HCN MOTION TO APPROVE 1ST READING WITH AMENDMENT EXCLUDING DELETION OF SECTION 5 69 REGARDING RABIES VACCINATION CLINICS. ?.ND AND PUBLIC IiF,ARING - 12/17/96 ~~ 2. Ordinance establishing a Board of Appeals and establishing procedures and requirement to hear appeals from decisions made under the provisions of Chapter 9, "Fire Prevention and Protection" of the Roanoke County Code. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) ~i MOTION TO APPROVE 1ST READING OF ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING BOAR OF SUPERVISORS TO H EAR APPEALS ~~J AND PUBLIC HEARING - 1 2/17/96 AYF -FM.FFH,HCN,BL7 NAYS-LBE 3 J. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance authorizing the creation of and financing for a local public works improvement project, Trevilian Road Water Project. (Gary Robertson, Utility Director) 0-120396-4 RT ~T MOTION TO ADOPT ORD ~~ 2. Ordinance authorizing the vacation of a portion of an existing 20- foot water line easement and to accept a relocated portion of same easement, located across Lots 27 and 28, Block 1, revised plat of the Orchards, Applewood, Section 9. (Gary Robertson, Utility Director). 0-120396-5 T.BE MOTION TO ADOPT ORD IL$.~ K. APPOINTMENTS 1. Blue Ridge Community Services Board of Directors 2. Library Board HCN TO HAVE NOMINEE AT 12/17/96 MEETING L. CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO BE ROUTIl~IE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. R-120396-6 LBE MOTION TO ADOPT CONSENT RE.SO AFTER DISCUSSION OF ITEM 6 ~~ 4 1. Confu~mation of committee appointments to the Disability Services Board and the Roanoke County Planning Commission. 2. Request for acceptance of Homewood Circle Extension, Othello Circle, Midsummer Lane, platted under the °Wexford Phase I and II Subdivision" into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. R-120396-6.b 3. Request for acceptance of Penn Forest Place into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. 4. Acceptance of sanitary sewer facilities serving PMI -Ogden Road 5. Request from School Board to appropriate additional revenues from the dual enrollment program. 6. Request from School Board for appropriation of $44,950 to the School Capital Improvement Program for installation of automatic doors. M. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS '~pp~ryjenr Mirinix• Described his new necktie given to him by his granddaug ter Supervisor Ha rrison• (11 Asked for an update on the North Trans missio n in e and ~o.,,o. . ~~d what wL be done during the winter (2) Advised that there ar e still pr le on view Road. A sked staff to investigate. ~~er vicnr Eddy (~) Asked wh ether a meeting has been s et up with t he School Blue Ribbon Committee B LT resp ond ed that t hey nee d fin al repo rt bef ore sc hed uling a meeting E CH advised be discu ssed with D r Gor don, and c ommi ttee w ill gather material nn a ll crhoo>s nrin riti~e n Perlc and then meet with B OS B L.T w ill wri te le tter to Ron Martin and let him kn ow BO S's intent (2) Att ended 2nd m eetin g with Ad visory f nmmittPp fnr Regional Compe titiv eness A ct and talk ed to Dire ctor of Urban Partnership They are regl ~g that Roanok e Coun ty rec onside r joLn i g BL.T asked 5 N. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COI~LVIUNICATIONS 1. Charles Greer and other residents in the Mayflower Hills subdivision to request support to keep the Blue Ridge Parkway Spur to Rutrough Road permanently open. 2. Mike Stovall, representative of Vinton Magisterial District on School Board. 3. Gene Wagner, former Chief at Vinton Fire Station ADVLSE D THA T AT ONE TIlVIE THEY HAD EMERGENCY ACCESS TO PARKWAY _ BUT IT WAS C LOSED SEVERAL YEA RS AC=O RECOMMENDED L EAVING SPUR ROAD OPEN BECAUSE IT CUT S TRAVEL TIME IN RESP ONDING TO EMERG ENCY CALLS 4. Gary Johnson, National Park Services PRESENTED WRITTEN REPORT ON HISTORY BEHIND THE TEMPORARY ~ r~~cr~ A ADVISED THEY HAD NO AUTHORITY TO KEEP THE ROAD OPEN AND A_NY DECISION WOULD HAVE TO BE MACE BY CONGRESS O. REPORTS 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 6 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Statement of Expenditures and Revenues as of October 31, 1996. 5. Status Report on the Spring Hollow Water Project and Transmission Lines 6. Financial Statement and Audit of the Industrial Development Authority for fiscal year 1995-96 7. Report on Recycling RT T M(1TTON TQ REMOVE -ECH TO BR_iNG BACK FOR ACTION ON 12/17/96 - ~~ P. WORK SESSIONS (4:00 P.M.) ~1. Overview of the Fire and Rescue Department (Fire and Rescue Chief Rick Burch) ADNIINLSTRATION EC NT SHIFT CHANGES HCN RFQjIESTED POPULATION FIGURES FOR STATION DISTRICT TO COMPARE WITH PERCENTAGE OF CALLS. 2. Update on the Drainage Maintenance Priority List (Arnold Covey, Director of Engineering & Inspections) PRES NTFD B Y ARNOLD COVEY AND GEORGE SIMP SON BOARD CONSENSUS P NT AFF TO BRING BACK TO BOARD TO CONCUR W ITH LIST AS RESE ED ST FOR APPROVA L ON 12/17/96 CONS ENT AGENDA. 3. Review of proposed policy manual (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) PMM AND ECH TO REVIEW WITH STAFF AND BRING BACK RECONIlVIENDATIONS AND DELETIONS FOR APPROVAL. Q. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.1-344 A (5) discussion of a prospective business or industry; 2.1-344A (7) probable litigation, BPOL tax. 7 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Statement of Expenditures and. Revenues as of October 31, 1996. 5. Status Report on the Spring Hollow Water Project and Trancmiccion Lines 6. Financial Statement and Audit of the Industrial Development Authority for fiscal year 1995-96 7. Report on Recycling BL.T MOTION TOR MOVE -ECH TO BRING BACK FOR ACTION ON 12/17/96 - ILY_Y P. WORK SESSIONS ~Q: 00 P.M. ) 1. Overview of the Fire and Rescue Department (Fire and Rescue Chief Rick Burch) SLIDE PRESENTATION ON ALL FIRE AND RESCUE STATIONS. AT)MTNTSTRATTON A_ND RECENT SHIFT CHANGES N REQUESTED POPULATION FIGLTRE.S FOR STATION DISTRICT TO COMP RE WITH PERCENTAGE OF CALLS. 2. Update on the Drainage Maintenance Priority List (Arnold Covey, Director of Engineering & Inspections) PRFS~NTF BY A_RNOL D COVEY AND GEORGE STM PSON B OARD CONSENSUS TO CONCUR WITH LIS T AS PRESENTED STAFF T O BRING BACK TO BOARD FOR APPROVAL ON 12/ 17/96 CONSENT AGENDA. 3. Review of proposed policy manual (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) PMM AND ECH TO REVIEW WITH STAFF AND BRING BACK RFrnMMF,NnATTONS AND DELETIONS FOR APPROVAL Q. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.1-344 A (5) discussion of a prospective business or industry; 2.1-344A (7) probable litigation, BPOL tax. 7 RT.I MOTION TO ~ iNTO EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 5:10 P.M. FOLLOWING WO K SESSIONS (EXECUTIVE SESSION HELD FROM 6.00 P M TO 7.12 P M 1 ~~ (FM LEFT AT 5:20 P.M. PRIOR TO EXECUTIVE SESSION) R. CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE SESSION R-120396-7 RT,T MOTION TO RETURN TO OPEN SESSION AT 7:12 P.M. AND ADOPT C'F.RTIFICATION RFSO AYES-L.BE,FFH,H N,B~~T. Ai3SENT-FM S. ADJOURNMENT BL.T MOTION AT 7:14 P.M. - UVV 8 o~ ROANp,Y~ ~ A 2 ~a~~~ ~~ ~~xx~~.~.~e 1838 ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA DECEMBER 3, 1996 ,~~~~~ 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. THE DECEMBER MEETING SCHEDULE IS AS FOLLOWS: DECEMBER 3, 1996 AT 3 P.M., AND DECEMBER 17, 1996 AT 3 P.M. WITH PUBLIC HEARINGS AT 7 P.M. Individuals with disabilities who require assistance or special arrangement in order to participate in or attend Board of Supervisors meetings or other programs and activities sponsored by Roanoke County, please contact the Clerk to the Board at (540) 772-2005. We request that you provide at least 48- hours notice so that proper arrangements maybe made. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 P.M.) 1. Roll Call. 2. Invocation: The Reverend Becky Proctor Associate Minister Rosalind Hills Baptist Church 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag. B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND AWARDS D. BRIEFINGS 1 ® Recycled Paper 1. Briefing on Spring Hollow Recreation Master Plan. (Pete Haislip, Parks and Recreation Director) E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Request for funding to replace missing Roanoke County welcome signs. (Anne Marie Green, Community Relations Director) 2. Resolution adopting the Roanoke County Legislative Program to be presented to the 1997 Virginia General Assembly. (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney) 3. Request to appropriate County share of funding of the Mason Creek Interceptor improvements. (Gary Robertson, Utility Director) F. OLD BUSINESS G. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS H. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS I. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance amending and reenacting portions of Chapter 5, Animals and Fowl, and repealing Section 5-69. Vaccination Clinics of Division 3 of Article II of Chapter 5, Animals and Fowl of the Roanoke County Code to clarify the authority of the Community Service Officers of the Roanoke County Police Department to enforce the County's animal control ordinances, and to increase the fees for boarding and pickup of animals. (Joseph Obenshain, Sr. Assistant County Attorney) 2. Ordinance establishing a Board of Appeals and establishing procedures and requirement to hear appeals from decisions made under the provisions of Chapter 9, "Fire Prevention and Protection° of the Roanoke County Code. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) J. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance authorizing the creation of and financing for a local public works improvement project, Trevilian Road Water Project. (Gary Robertson, Utility Director) 2. Ordinance authorizing the vacation of a portion of an existing 20- 2 foot water line easement and to accept a relocated portion of same easement, located across Lots 27 and 28, Block 1, revised plat of the Orchards, Applewood, Section 9. (Gary Robertson, Utility Director). K. APPOINTMENTS 1. Blue Ridge Community Services Board of Directors 2. Library Board L. CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO BE ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. 1. Confirmation of committee appointments to the Disability Services Board and the Roanoke County Planning Commission. 2. Request for acceptance of Homewood Circle Extension, Othello Circle, Midsummer Lane, platted under the "Wexford Phase I and II Subdivision" into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. 3. Request for acceptance of Penn Forest Place into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. 4. Acceptance of sanitary sewer facilities serving PMI -Ogden Road 5. Request from School Board to appropriate additional revenues from the dual enrollment program. 6. Request from School Board for appropriation of $44,950 to the School Capital Improvement Program for installation of automatic doors. M. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS N. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS 3 1. Charles Greer and other residents in the Mayflower Hills subdivision to request support to keep the Blue Ridge Parkway Spur to Rutrough Road permanently open. O. REPORTS 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Statement of Expenditures and Revenues as of October 31, 1996. 5. Status Report on the Spring Hollow Water Project and Transmission Lines 6. Financial Statement and Audit of the Industrial Development Authority for fiscal year 1995-96 7. Report on Recycling P. WORK SESSIONS j4: DODO P.M. )) 1. Overview of the Fire and Rescue Department (Fire and Rescue Chief Rick Burch) 2. Update on the Drainage Maintenance Priority List (Arnold Covey, Director of Engineering & Inspections) 3. Review of proposed policy manual (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) Q. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.1-344 A (5) discussion of a prospective business or industry; 2.1-344A ('n probable litigation, BPOL tax. R. CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE SESSION S. ADJOURNMENT 4 ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER ~~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIItGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 3, 1996 AGENDA ITEM: Spring Hollow Reservoir Recreational Master Plan Briefing COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: This is an opportunity that will equal Green Hill, Vnyard and Walrond Parks. I am asking permission to proceed with this, knowing that it has to be worked in with the other recreational needs. It will take considerable time, but that allows us to involve citizens and other agencies. Much of the money can come from grants. It will also serve a number of populations that have little recreational alternatives in western Virginia. Your support will be appreciated. SiTMMARY OF INFORMATION: As the Spring Hollow Reservoir project neared completion, Pazks and Recreation was asked to develop a recreational master plan for the reservoir site. Parks and Recreation hired Hayes, Seay, Mattern, and Mattern to develop the plan. As part of the design process Roanoke County recruited a citizens committee to help guide the master planning process. This committee was made up of citizens from throughout Roanoke County, including a resident of Dry Hollow Road. The committee, working in conjunction with staff and consultants, did a thorough analysis of the recreational potential of the site, paying close attention to the need to maintain the water quality and the natural beauty of the azea, its proximity to Camp Roanoke, and the impact on the residents of Dry Hollow Road. The plan that is presented to you is well balanced, providing a wide variety of recreational opportunities to people of all ages and abilities. The majority of facilities aze passive in nature. There aze literally miles of hiking, biking, and equestrian trails providing wonderful views and opportunities to recreate in a natural setting. Facilities aze planned to allow for non-motorized boating, with numerous picnic azeas, play meadows, and a marina and docks for fishing, if approved. The focal point will be the Spring Hollow Welcome Center, located overlooking the Clifford D. Craig Memorial Dam. This facility will provide restroom and concession facilities, a large picnic shelter, park offices, and display space that will highlight the unique construction features of the dam and other information of interest. Included in the plan aze upgrades to the railroad trestle at Dry Hollow Road, and if the appropriate agreements can be reached, alternate access through American Electric Power property will be provided. The plan, as presented, projects a five phase, ten year time frame for construction. As with any master plan it is understood that it is a flexible and fluid document subject to changes in community priorities and the availability of financial resources. f ~- ~ Respectfully submitted, ~~.~ /~- Pete Haislip Director ACTION Approved ()Motion by: Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) Approved by, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy - - - Harrison - - - 7ohnson _ - - Minnix _ - - Nickens _ - - i~ ~ RECREATION ~ MASTER PLAN ~ for SnrinQ Ho[[ow Reservoir i~ i~ r i 1 Roanoke County Department of ' Parks and Recreation Hayes, Sexy, Mc~ttern ~ Mctttern, Inc. ' ARCHITECTS • ENGINEERS • PLANNERS 11 November 1996 r . CONTENTS ~r ~~~ ~ ~r • Introduction • Ten Year Master Plan 4 Projected Cost Summary • Access to Recreation Area 7 ti• Phase 1 13 Description Elements 8L Costs ~ 2 • Phase 11 Description Elements 8t Costs • Phase 111 16 Description Elements 8t Costs ••• Phase IV 20 Description Elements 8t Costs • Phase V 23 Description Elements 8t Costs Acknowledgements INTRODUCTION r November 1996 Hayes, Seay, Mattern et Mattern, Inc. is pleased to submit the Spring Hollow Reservoir Recreational Master Plan. HSMM, working in conjunction with the Parks and Recreation Department and interested Roanoke County citizens, produced this Master Plan to serve as a guide to further renovations and development of the Spring Hollow Reservoir and its association with Camp Roanoke. The plan addresses the overall potential of the site in a gradual and phased schedule. Resevoir in the fall of 1993 Conce tual Recreational Plans were prepared and Dunng construction of the p presented to Roanoke County for consideration as an added use for the confluence of Spring Hollow and the Roanoke River. As construction of the resevoir neared completion, attention was directed again to the recreational resources created by this facility. In the fall of 1995, Landscape Architects, Architects, and Engineers from HSMM met with the Director of Roanoke County Parks and Recreation to focus on desired improvements. This meeting resulted in schematic plans which were prepared and presented for open roundtable discussion with Spring Hollow residents, American Electric Power representatives, sports and nature enthusiatss and all interested parties. These plans, proposals, and concepts were born out of this meeting held in December 1995. Funding for these improvements is provided by Roanoke County, and at each stage of development will be reevaluated as to adequacy for implementation of the proposed improvements. The plan includes specific elements of interest and concern, preliminary design sketches and preliminary cost estimates for the direction, and implementation of proposed facilities and programs within the park. All features of this Master Plan are preliminary and require further design of actual elements, material, and specific site conditions. The costs are based on historical cost indexes and local construction techniques of the proposed items listed. This booklet explains in chronological order the proposed park development over five phases and presents the following: • Ten Year Master Plan • Phase 1- Description, Elements and Costs • Phase 11 - Description, Elements and Costs • Phase I11 - Description, Elements and Costs • Phase IV - Description, Elements and Costs • Phase V - Description, Elements and Costs • Summary • Acknowledgements HSMM believes that this booklet and Recreational Master Plan respond directly to the current needs of this new park and the goals of the Parks and Recreation Department. We believe that these improvements and renovations will further enhance Roanoke County by providing exceptional and unique recreational facilities for its citizens. OVERALL MASTER PLAN -~ . ~ LEGEND ~ __- ~~ EQUESTRIAN TRAIL !I MOUNTAIN BIKE TRAIL 1 HIKING TRAIL/FOOT PATH .......................................... ~' PERIMETER ROAD =-~= a ~° PROPERTY LINE ~~~~~~• h, ~ RIDGELINE/WATERSHED LIMITS -- --- - -- F ~' PICNIC SHELTERS !' PICNIC/PLAY MEADOWS '*' -- - " - , - ' • _ ~' _-_ _ - !OU[fTIIIAN T~AII MOUNTAIN 111K1 T1UIl NIKING TRAII'/JJT IAT '~O _ __ 't~ ~~r ~~ - --_ -- t-- }~ =~~~~~, ~ ~ ~ -'ter.- ~, tit. ~~ + sue r, -~ STATION _~ i f ~ ~tw -J'r~ , - C T.•e - --• _ ~ r ~ .. ~ . _ -- ..+ - _ - v. r~` ~ .., • ~ N[w FAIIMA• - tilEfill ''~. -_ T,y - UNDlA-Alf `~- - -. - ~~~~~. MASTER PLAN ~ J - ~ _ orw RESExvo~ ,~.~ ;~ LE COUNTY 1. ~ o i ~ RECREATION \ ~y^\ / ~ RTMENT \ .\ •~ 1 W J UNTY, VIRGINIA \~ ~ ` ( ° / o Hayes, Seat', Matterrr, ~ l~~atterri., Inc. ARCHITECTS • ENGINEERS • PLANNERS TEN YEAR MASTER PLAN The creation of the Spring Hollow Reservoir, located in the Glenvar area of the western end of Roanoke County near Dixie Caverns, has had the positive effect of providing Roanoke County Parks and Recreation the opportunity to present some of its most scenic, undeveloped woodlands for public recreational use. The newly constructed reservoir holds in reserve 3.2 billion gallons of water for Roanoke County residents and with that service comes a 38 acre lake and over seven hundred acres of public park which when developed will serve as a primary source of passive recreation for the Roanoke Valley. This new recreation resource master plan includes both provides passive facilities that will preserve the critical watershed area. This is the highest of priorities since the water contained in the reservoir is part of the drinking water supply for Roanoke County. With that designation comes restrictions by the State Health Department on activities within the watershed including limits on human body contact within the "Fill Line" area of the reservoir. In addition to the issue of water quality, the large fluctuations in water level anticipated during reservoir operations, poses significant physical limitations and safety concerns at the shore line because of the steep terrain. S The master planning process involves analysis and evaluation of existing conditions, including slopes, vegetation, wildlife, newly created water's edges and the new ecology of marine and riparian systems being introduced to woodland slopes. This plan will carefully blend natural habitat with passive recreational features such as overlooks, fishing huts, family picnicking, and short distance hiking trails, as well as selected areas of paddle-boating and canoeing. Where the opportunity lends itself, provisions will be made for more physical activities, wch as controlled equestrian trails and mountain bike riding trails. The Recreation Master Plan must be sensitive to the need for parking and handicapped accessible facilities and be adaptable to as yet unthought of activities and avant-garde sports. This is a hallmark of all successful public properties - to be used to their fullest while maintaining their natural beauty. This Master Plan has been designed with Citizen involvement, including neighborhood residents, equestrian and sports enthusiasts, and others who are interested in the successful development of the Spring Hollow Reservoir Recreational Area. Citizen involvement is an essential factor in determining appropriate site facilities and guiding improvements within the park. Major issues addressed include: Along with the necessary utilitarian uses of the reservoir, Parks and Recreation envisions improvements to the land which will enhance the quality of recreation facilities in this area of the County. It will offer alternative sports enthusiasts, such as horseback riders and mountain bikers, a unique opportunity to have a facility designed originally with them in mind. This forward thinking is in place by example at the adjacent Camp Roanoke Challenge Course. This Master Plan is envisioned to evolve over a ten year period and consists of flue separate phases. These phases will help itemize and prioritize selected elements to be constructed within budgets set by Roanoke County for The Parks and Recreation Department. ~ Safe access under railroad trestle to Camp Roanoke and new Challenge Course ~ Safe access to Spring Hollow Reservoir avoiding railroad grade crossings ~ Equestrian courses around watershed perimeter ~ Mountain bike trails throughout the park ~ Family oriented passive outdoor recreation, picnicking and bird watching ~ Foot races, wheelchair races, cross country skiing trails RECREATION MASTER PLAN fpr Roanoke County S rin Hollow Reservoir Department of p g Parks and Recreation Hayes, S~ea~~Matt~ rn~~ Bern, I 6 Proposed Ten Year Phasing Plan 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 phase 1 phase 11 phase 111 phase N phase V PROJECTED COST SUMMARY (1996 dollars) Phase 1 ; 705,000 Phase 11 ; 330,000 Phase III ~ 425,000 Phase IV ~ 545,000 Phase V ~ 900,000 Total ;2,905,000 RECREATION MASTER PLAN for Roanoke County S rin Hollow Reservoir Depardnent of p g Parks and Recreation Hayes, SeaMattern f~ Mattern, Inc. ARC 5 • ENGINEERS • PLANNERS ACCESS TO RECREATION AREA For Spring Hdlow Recreation Area to be a facility for all ages it must accommodate and to the variety of ever changing needs of a vi community. lay Master Planning a rang activities from picnic sites for groups and indiv to mountain bike races, this park wn achi~ harmonious relationship with the environmen provide a balance between the public's dtanan~ the site's finite and fragile resources. The original design of Spring Hollow Rest included a road, built at fifteen feet above full devadon completely around the perimeter o lake. During construction, this road served access for grouting operations, reservoir access, quarrying route, and general service r Although designed for limited use it r+ec minimal improvements to serve the public func proposed for this park. 4~ ~+ ~,iv,. 4. . a ~;/~ ~ •' o P a \ ~,~~~~ r. ~~\ 7 This proposal would require permission from and cooperation with the Norfolk Southern Railroad and AEP to share their roads and rights-of--way with the residents of Roanoke County, as well as loci property owners. Once ali involved parties have agreed to an appropriate design, NS's underpass could be improved and AEP's existing service road could be extended to connect to the previously constructed perimeter rwd access near Camp Roanoke. Dry Hollaw Rwd would still extend to the overlook, but recreational traffic would be greatly redutxd along Dry Hdlow Road and costs for a totally new road by the County would be redutxd. This new road construction would provide a safe and securable print of entry to the park which could be further highlighted by directional signage and seasonal plant material. Safety for residents is a primary design iswe and existing site access is currently less than ideal. Any roadway improvements would serve not only park patron's vehicular access but also would benefit residents u greenways which encourage wildflowers, native grasses, and their accompanying wildlife. v • ~ -~ 9 ~ ~ ~~: ^a~ A f~~ N~~ ~ ~~ ~~"~~~~~ .,~ ~'`~. .y o ~~ ..t w ~. o• •: . v ~ °°v~• ~. ~ ~~w~~~ea~~~ • ` ~~'M~~ . ~~ RECREATION MASTER PLAN foT Spring Hollow Reservoir ROQ!lOILC COYN{y Departincnt of P~~fS a71d RCC1CQh01! Hayes, Seay, Muttem c~ A~ia~txerri., Inc. ARCHITECTS • ENGINEERS • PLANNERS PHASE I 1 8 Key Plan w /' ~ ~~. :~ .f- {~ .:.... Y .r .r ^~~ ~-, r L_J r~ _~ ~ ~ ~~ North ~ ~' PHASE I RECREATION 1~1ASTER PZAN fOT Romtoke County Spring Hollow Reservoir p ~ ~`e Hayes, Seamy, Maxtern ~ Mattern, Inc. ' A HiTEC'I'S • ENGIIdEERS • PLANNERS 9 1^1^1^1^1^1^1^1^1^1^1^1^1~ ^ ~ ~ ~ ^ ~ ~~ f .r ~ ~ '~ . ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ^ ^ ~ f ~ ~ ~ 0~ ~ t:'. or ~ • .wo J ^ ~ ~ ~ N ~/ ~ 1~ • • ^ ~ • • ~ ^ ~ ~iTLE~ ^ uwo~ _ ^1^1^1^1^i^1^1^1 1^~ PHASE I RECREATION MASTER PZAN for Roanoke County S rln Hollow Reservoir Department of ' p g Parks and Recreation Hayes, Sea AM S°~t~err`~I,~ 10 These first gathering spots will initiate visitors to the charm and quiet beauty of Poor Mountain. They will provide staging areas for family picnic and fuwre fishing expeditions. By providing safe access to the reservoir and comienient parking, Rwnoke County rosidents can begin to experience and appredate their newest park. ~ New underpass at Norfolk Southern Railroad Trestle and State Road 649, Dry Hdlow Road ~ New two lane asphalt driveway extended from south end of Dry Hdlow Raod; expandable parking lot for 50 cars inducting accessible spaats and equestrian trailers; overflow area to accomnadate 100 cars total ~ Natural rock retaining structures for safety of pedestrians, horses and vehides ~ Hiking trails through the woods to the southernmost cove at the perimeter road and successful Camp Roanoke ~ Portable, accessible toilets, ide~ifiation, degree of difRculty, destination and length and dme of travel signage will be posted as well as announcements of future improvements RECREATION MASTER PLAN for Spring Hollow Reservoir ~~ ~~ DeParrnient of Parks and Recr~alian Hayes, Seat', 1~'~rtte~n ~ l~~i~tern, Inc. ARCHITECTS • ENGINEERS • PLANNERS PHASE I Il Trestle Corrections SSOO,~ New two lane asphalt road S 70,000 Parking for SO cars, trailers ~iu~~it ~[ overflow w 100 S 55,000 ~~ Rock Retaining Structures S 25,000 Hiking, Biking, Equestrian New tVi Trails S 30,000 Signage, Miscellaneous details S 5,000 c~,y~., s~pppp Male 8L Female portable e ul ''° ~~~ accessible toiletsM____________.__.__; 20~~_ a~ p4LlPf~T COt'~~7 p ~4ry ~ Total Phase I 5705,000 ~~ Ili D > pl4'ab pQi A • o • ~pyy SLOW R R D ~ STOP ~ ~~ ® SIGNAL AHEAD AHEAD 15~-- ___~_ 9 + 9 ~ -~ 15~ EaUESTF~e~N STA-~p-,lap p,K~,,~b IiT[.~iIPIG I'b~T7 HILL xING GIs1Vl ~.,,~.~_ RECREATION MASTER PLAN Rock ~ for Spring Hollow Reservoir Roao~e county DepaRment of Parks and Recreation Hah'~s, ~'~ 1~1a~tern c~lV~a~ternr Inc. ARCftITECTS • ENGINEERS • PLANNERS PHASE II 12 Key Plan i~ w ~1^1 1~ 1^1 'Vi, ~ K ' _ • ~ V M . . .. :. ^1 ^1^1^1^1 ~ ; .• ~_ ~~ ~ North PHASE II RECREATION ~ MASTER PLAN fOT Roanoke County S rin Hollow Reservoir D~"`""'~ °f r p g Parks and Recreation Hayes, Sea~y, Mattern. £3 Maxtern, Inc. A CHfIEIC'IS • ENGWEERS • PLANNERS ~~ Y~ _ k ' . i ^^ i I I /3 i~ ~ PHASE II RECREATION ~ MASTER PLAN jor ~_~_.. ~...._.. o~..r._-- Roanoke County rln o ow Reservoir Department of ' p g Parks and Recreation ~] Hayes, Seax~C'a s r~s~,~Exs' 14 ~ Im ove rimeter road for walking and biking P~' Pe ~ Add accessible drinking water and elecaidty at Phase I parking area ~ Clear areas for playgrounds and picnic spots ~ Develop and extend hiking, biking and equestrian trails i ~ Develop and construct entrance design with ~~ information kiosk and directional signs RECREATION MASTER PLAN for Spring Hollow Reservoir Department of Perks and RecrtaAion ryes, Seay,1~'~ctteyri. ~ l~~Czttern, Inc. ARCHITECTS • ENGIIQE,FRS • PLANNERS Phase 11 items to be provided : 1 S Improve Perimeter Road S 160,000 Well, Electricity 8t Pump S 35,000 ~ Add Play/Picnic Meadows 540,000 Add Hiking Trails 2' io' ~~ ~rtou~ ~~~ ~+ ~~ I .,~ -~®~o.~ ~ :mod a~ ~ o oj- - ~=-cl~ ~"'~% Improve Perimeter Road Add Mountain Bike Trails ; 10,000 Add Equestrian Trails 5 10,000 Add Hiking Trails 5 i 0,000 Entrance Design ; 25,000 Add Signage ; 5,000 Add Safety Barriers ; 35,000 Total Phase 11 5330,000 RECREATION MASTER PLAN ,~,: ~~y'~,-, for Spring Hollow Reservoir Roanokt Coanty Deparhnnit of Parks and R~crealion Add Pla~r/P Hayes, Sexy, lltia~tern, ~ l~~Cztt~n,, Inc. ARCHITEC,'TS • ENGINEERS • PLANNERS PHASE III 16 ~ ~~~~~ ~"- ~~'~ PHASE III RECREATION MASTER PLAN for Roanoke County S rrn Hollow Reservoir D~`°`"'~'` °f p g Parks and RecTeadon Hayes, Sea~y, Mattern E3 Mattern., Inc. ' A CEIiIE('TS • ENGQ~EERS • PLANNERS it i~ i~ 1 ~~~l~l~l~l~l~l ~ANLE sOAT ~ CONCESSIONS 1 ~~IARlCING ~ i ~ OFFICE • _ 1 DOCK ..~ ~+ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~~ ~~ ~ . /- .~ ~~ -1 C ~ ~ a - ~ ~ ..... - . ~ ~ .~ ~ .` y' ` ~ • ~~ ~. ~ Q . ~ ~ a ~ • •.... ,r ~ .~ ~ ~ I~I~I~I~I~A~1~1' 11 ~ ~ ~ ~~~_ ~ d ., ~~ ~ ~ ^ Y ~~ . \\ ~ / ~ ' OVERLOOK ~V MCNIC sroT ~ . ~ • 1^- -~ ~1l1^1 i 1 1~ PHASE III RECREATION ~ ASTER PLAN fOT Roanoke County S rin Hollow Reservoir Department of p g Parks and Recreation Hayes, Sea, Mattern £3 Mattern, Inc. A }il'I'ECCI'S • ENGINF~itS • PLANNERS 18 ~ Vehicular circulation and parking near water's edge with perimeter safety /erosion control ' features ~ Boardwalk and Floating Dods for fishing ~ Permanent accessible toilets, concessions and boat rental office 1 PADDLE BOA' CONCESSION; TOILETS PARKING ~ ~? Ramps to existing overlook, and parking for 100 and expanded trails ~ Information kiosks, and site furniture such as grills, trash cans, benches and overlooks ~ Legal work for vehicular entryway improvements at NS Railroad trestle to indude paved access to AEP service road, as well as monumental signage to announce the new entrance to Spring Hollow Reservoir Park. RECREATION MASTER PLAN foT Spring Hollow Reservoir ~~ ~~ Deparl~nrnt of Parks and Recreation Hayes, Seay, I~lattern ~ ~~ Inc. ARCHITECTS • ENGINEERS • PLANNERS ~~'.y ' PHASE 111 Items to be provided: 19 *~~ Road to and Parking at cove S 80,000 ` w~ Toilets, Concessions and - ~'~ ~~ Non-motorized Boat Rental OlFice ; 60,000 ~' ~ ~ ~ Overlook accessibility ; 35,000 Kiosks/Site Furniture ; 35,000 Boardwalk/Floating Dock ;125,000 Septic/wells/pumps ; 60,000 Extend/Expand Trails ; 30,000 Total Phase III 5425,000 END VIEW PICNIC TABLE • Site Fury/ BENCH w/ TABLE w/ DISPLAY OPEN 2'_~~, G TIMBER BREAKWATER 4 MAIN CATWALK v ~~1~ ~ Q I 4' CATWALK I ~ ,. 10 -- ~ i i ~ `~---~ ~ _ I _.~-- Q I m B I J ' ° 3 i ~~~ Q I 4' CAT WALK/ Q f ~ p ~ I 1 ~ z ~ I ~~4NCMOR FENDER I I ~ PILE PILE ~ U J I i TIMBER BREAKWATER m I O ~ 1 I ~ I `/ ~ W ~ 4'-O" MAIN CATWALK a ,t ,It-A - ~1 PLAN CIAOfiAM Non-Motorized Boat Re RECREATION MASTER PLAN for Spring Hollow Reservoir Roanoke County Department of Parks and Recreation Hayes, Sexy, l~lalteyri ~ l~tixttern, Inc. ARCHITECTS • ENGINEERS • PLANNERS PHASE IV 20 Key Plan ,~ w •~. ~ •~ ~~ r~~:.. ,~~~ - 1^1^1 1^1^Ijl~l^1^1^ •~ rl^1^1^~~1^1^1^1~1~ ~.~ ~~ ~^ North RE ~ 1~7AS ,~Or Roanoke County Spring Hollow Reservoir p ~ ~~°~ Hayes, Seamy, Mattern c~ Mattern, Inc. ' CHITECTS • E[~GINEERS • PLANNERS PHASE IV :'REATION TER PLAN 21 ,,~ - - Phase IV The main emphasis of this phase is a new inte roadway and connection of the redesigned Hollow Road intersection at the Railroad trestl State Route 639, establishing highly vi! directional features and signage, and securing AEP roads as Primary access to Spring Ho Reservoir Park. Should the necessary rights-of- be unobtainable through AEP, this phase will its emphasis to currently held County land develop an alternate primary vehicular access to park. With a clearly defined new entrance to the Park reservoir which de-emphasizes and reroutes original entrance, a safe vehicular gateway created. With lighted bollards and secure lock entry gates, the park's inevitable increased u; will be more easiFy controlled. An additional benefit is to the residents of Hollow Road in that the majority of recreati~ traffic will be effectively rerouted from in front RECREATION MASTER PLAN for Spring Hollow Reservoir Roanoke County Deparime~ of Parks and Recreation Hayes, Seay, Matterrti ~ Matrern, Inc. ARCHITECTS • ENGIlVEERS • PLANNERS PHASE IV Items to be provided : 22 BATTER ~`r'~::: .~••••-L01Y •.:. 2~PERFT ~~~~ ~. '~ ~ New asphalt road at trestle 5157/000 - '+ ~~ - 6 -~~.~~~3.raNTS of soo a LDAr Improve AEP service road S 168,000 e_ a. ~: (LAID uPSioE~DDW» New floating fish docks S 100,000 :.: ; ~_ . ~`~ ~~ Picnic/Play Meadows with ;, war covered structure and play . '~ equipment 5 70,000 t a STONES SET ON f~ ~~! SMALL STONE Safety and Erosion controls 5 50,000 SPACES W-TM LOAM POCKETS ~~.~«~~~~.w~~N~~~.~~„M~~N~~„~MM ~~~~~~~~~~~~.~ BETWEEN Total Phase IV 5545,000 DRY WALL Erosion Control Floating Fisl RECREATION MASTER PLAN for Spring Hollow Reservoir ~~ ~~ Deportment of Parks and Recreation Hayes, Sexy, Atixrxem ~ l~~Cxtxerri, Inc. ARCEIITECt'S • ENGINEERS • PIANNERS Picnic/Play PHASE V I3 1 1 PHASE v 1 RECREATION 1~1ASTER PLAN fOr Roanoke Coanty S rin Hollow Reservoir D~~`"'~"t °f p g Parks and Recreation Hayes, Seamy, Mattern c~3 Mattern, Inc. HTIECTS • ENGINEERS • PLANNERS ^1^1^1^1^1^1^1^1^1^ ^ ^ CLIFFORD D. CRAIG ~ MEMORIAL DAM ^ • r~'t ' _ /I Vii' ~- ~_ `I' ^` ^^ ^ ^~ ^ WELCOME CENTER PARKING EQII ESTRI~ OFF-LOADI ~' ~ ~~~ _~ ^ ' ^ ^~ ^ ^^~^1^1^1^1^1^1 ~1~1^1 °`b\ 2pp• AEP 24 j 1 ^1^ 1^i' ~'~ ^ ROW •^ ^ ~~ ~' ^ ^ ~ ~ ~ ~ ^ ^ ^ ~ _ nr~r~ ~ ~ i~ ~ -~ ^ ~~ PHASE V x-x_...~^ RECREATION ~ ^, ^, s 1~IASTER PLAN fOT Roanoke County Spring Hollow Reservoir Department of ^ Parks and Recreation Hayes, Seamy, Mattern ~3 Mattern., Inc. A HfTECTS • ENGINE©tS + PLANNERS zs Za ~ Connecting Roadway ~ Driveway to and construction of Welcome Center and associated parking ~ Hiking and equestrian tails to dam ~ Educational exhibits, Informational kiosks RECREATION MASTER PLAN for Spring Hollow Reservoir ~~ ~~ Depwanna of Perks mrd Rec~atio-, Hayes, Sexy, Muttem c~ l~~C~tterra, Inc. ~S . ~~S . S ~'~., ~? ,. ~ ~ }T ~i , ~'=~' • ' Parking STEEP 5LL • Sit Blev~t ' ' IeG tGr•r~G • {-G Gut IN ' for miM„~+~ W1r.~OWRY- BAGKED STONE WALL PHASE V items to be provided: 26 Driveway, Parking, and Service Vehicle Docks S395,000 Welcome Center 8c Parking ;375,000 Walking Path to foot of dam ; 80,000 Educational/Info. 8t Kiosks/Signs ; 50,000 Total Phase V ;900,000 -steel pl.te 71ue-n~dc~ 0 blt-u~ glue- flitch Irlata box Ire~m Grsc~J ~ Ismm~tad 4hevlJ ~e en~~neered mere J~mens~on~lly st~lrl~ thin sold w.rd ~~sm WO~~ SEAMS ~~ . ,~ .~ Roanoke county Depaitniad of Parks and Reereabon Hcryes, Sexy, ~~ ~ ~~~ern,, Iris. ARCHITECTS • ENGINEERS • PLANNERS RECREATION MASTER PLAN for Spring Hollow Reservoir Walking Pat ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 2 ~ Recommendations for trail widths and construction are based upon guidelines set forth in the publication: TRAILS FOR THE TWENTY FIRST CENTURY PLANNING, DESIGN, AND MANAGEMENT MANUAL FOR MULTI-USE TRAILS Edited by Karen-Lee Ryan 1993 Rails-to-Trails Conservancy Other Graphics, Sketches, and Guidelines from: ARCHITECTURAL GRAPHIC STANDARDS EIGHTH EDITION, AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS Ramsey/Sleeper 1988 John Wiley ~ Sons ARCHITECTURAL HANDBOOK ALFRED M. KEMPER 1979 John Wiley 8t Sons GRAPHIC STANDARDS for LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Richard L. Austin, ]. Kip Hulvershorn, Thomas R. Dunbar, Kim W. Todd 1986 Van Nostrand Reinhold ' PERSPECTIVE SKETCHES THIRD EDITION Theodore D. Walker 1977 PDA Publishers HANDBOOK OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURAL CONSTRUCTION ' Volume One Edited by Maurice Nelischer 1987 The Landscape Architecture Foundation EARTHSCAPE A MANUAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING John Ormsbee Simonds 1978 McGraw-Hill, Inc. INSTALLATION DESIGN NAVY NAVFAC P-960 1 MARCH 1981 UNITED STATES PRINTING OFFICE RECREATION MASTER PLAN for Roanoke County S rin Hollow Reservoir Department of ' p g Parks and Recreation Hayes, SAr Mattern F~ Mattern, Inc. ' 'EC"I'S i ENGAIEHiS 4 PLANNERS t 7 7 n 1 1 ,f A-1203 96-1 ACTION # ITEM NUMBER~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 3, 1996 SUBJECT: Request for Funding to Replace Missing Welcome Signs COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: .~ ~~`~' ` BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In 1990, redwood welcome signs were installed at various major entrances to the County. The signs feature the Roanoke County seal in full color, along with the All America City emblem. Since that time, some of the signs have needed replacement, due to automobile accidents and theft. While motorists' insurance companies have paid for the replacement in some instances, the County has replaced signs which were missing for other reasons. The bid specifications for these signs has also been changed to specify "vandal-proof' bolts, which has helped to reduce loss through theft. Because the County is self-insured, replacement of signs is dependent on funding from the Board of Supervisors. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Currently, three of these welcome signs are missing, and one has been defaced and needs replacement. The missing signs are from the following locations: o Rte. 11 at the Botetourt County line, near Hollins College (This sign has already been replaced once, due to an automobile accident. The driver's insurance company paid for the new sign.) o Rte. 419 at I-81 at the Salem/Roanoke County boundary E-/ o Rte. 460/11 West, at the Montgomery County line The sign which has been defaced is located on Rte. 221, at the entrance from Floyd County. In implementing the recent beautification project approved by the Board of Supervisors, staff has taken advantage of these signs and used them as focal points for the plantings. An example of this is on Rte. 419, in front of Atlantic Mutual Insurance Company. The signs serve as visual reminders to Valley residents and welcome visitors to the County. Currently, the poles are still in place at the three locations, which is unattractive and amplifies the fact that the signs are missing. Because the poles are set in concrete, they are difficult and expensive to remove. FISCAL IMPACT: The cost of replacement is $1,000 per sign, or $4,000 to replace those outlined above. Money is available in the Board Contingency Account for this purpose. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve the request for funding in the amount of $4,000 from the Board Contingency Account to replace the three missing signs and the one which has been vandalized. 2. Do not authorize funding at this time. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative 1. These signs have been a source of pride for the County since installation, and along with the beautification project, improve the appearance of our roadways. %y,~~,~,t~ ~,y1,~ . ,,~~. Anne Marie Green, APR Director, Community Relations ~~ ~'~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ~~-/ ACTION Approved (x) Motion by: H. Odell Minnix to No Denied ( ) approve rep lacing signs amended Eddy Received ( ) by Harr y C. Nickens that 54 ,000 Harrison Referred ( ) funding come from existing Johnson To ( ) budget and not Board Contin gencyMinnix Fund Nickens VOTE Yes Abs x ~_ x x x cc: File Anne Marie Green, Director, Community Relations Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance • ~ L.. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 3, 1996 RESOLUTION 120396-2 ADOPTING LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM FOR THE 1997 SESSION OF THE VIRGINIA GENERAL ASSEMBLY AND PETITIONING THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY FAVORABLY TO CONSIDER THE TOPICS AND ISSUES ADDRESSED HEREIN WHEREAS the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, has identified major legislative issues of state-wide concern to be considered by the 1997 session of the Virginia General Assembly; and WHEREAS, the Board has recommended these issues to its state- wide organization, the Virginia Association of Counties, for consideration in the adoption of its legislative program; and WHEREAS, the Board adopts this resolution as part of the Legislative Program of Roanoke County for the 1997 session of the Virginia General Assembly. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that the following legislative proposals are submitted to the 1997 Virginia General Assembly for its favorable consideration and adoption. I. A. Education. Realizing that public education is the foundation of American democracy and the cornerstone of our future economic well being, the County urges the General Assembly to consider favorably the following actions. 1) The Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia should be amended to provide that elected school boards may be granted the authority and responsibility for taxation to support 1 public education. 2) The General Assembly should enhance funding for public education, including increasing the funds available to the Literary Fund for local school capital construction or renovation projects. 3) Local school divisions should be authorized to establish opening dates for school. 4) Disparity funding should be based not only upon the number of students eligible for free or reduced fee lunches, but also upon the locality's local tax effort in support of education. Disparity funding should be based upon the composite index (which measures a locality's relative fiscal ability to provide its share of the cost of a local school system that meets the standards of quality) and the locality's local effort in support of that school system. B. Roanoke County supports legislation amending the heart/lung/cancer presumption statute for Workers' Compensation to restore balance to the rebuttal process. Compensability shall be determined by establishing whether work or non-work related risk factors (life-style choices such as smoking, poor nutritional habits, lack of exercise, or obesity, or non-work related stress and familial history) are more likely the primary cause of the medical condition. In addition, Roanoke County opposes any further expansion of this statute. C. Roanoke County supports legislation relieving local governments of the responsibility of meeting recycling rates on all wastes collected by private haulers and diverted from waste 2 t disposal facilities identified to receive such wastes as set out in the local solid waste management plan. This legislation should also require that private haulers diverting such wastes be held accountable and responsible to meeting the same recycling rates and requirements as the local governments. Section 10.1-1411 imposes a 25% recycling mandate on local governments. The 1995 session of the General Assembly adopted the Waste Hauler Displacement Bill which severely limited the ability of local governments to regulate the flow of waste. This proposal would relieve local governments of the responsibility of meeting this recycling mandate on all wastes collected by private haulers. It would also require that private haulers be subject to the same recycling mandates as local governments. D. Roanoke County supports additional new construction and maintenance funding for the Virginia Department of Transportation for secondary and primary roads. Additional funding for new construction projects will address critical transportation needs of all local governments. Additional maintenance funding shall be used for an expanded program to mow grass and weeds, and inspect and clean drainage pipes and culverts. E. Roanoke County supports allowing the disposal of land clearing vegetative debris (including tree stumps) in less expensive facilities in a manner not detrimental to the environment. This would require groundwater and methane gas monitoring, financial assurances from the owner/operator, and local governing body certification of compliance with all local ordinances. 3 F. Roanoke County supports legislation amending Section 14.1-46.0:1 to increase the salary supplement for the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors from $1,800 to $2,500 per year. G. Roanoke County supports continued and increased funding for the Comprehensive Services Act, the Virginia Community Juvenile Crime Control Act, the Family Preservation Act, local police departments (HB 599 funding), and the Regional Competitiveness Act. H. Roanoke County opposes the provisions of H.B. 1513 (legislation carried over from the 1996 session) which would shift more of the costs of water and sewer facilities and operations from the homebuilders to the individual consumers. This legislation claims only to require "fair and reasonable" water and sewer connection fees, yet its practical effects are to shift costs and expenses to the existing utility customer, jeopardize new and existing revenue bond covenants, and impose a "one size fits all" mandate on local governments and water and sewer authorities. I. Roanoke County opposes any attempt to restrict or eliminate local sources of taxation, including personal property taxation and business and professional occupational licensing. J. Roanoke County supports authority to impose an additional one-half percent (2%) local option sales tax. K. Roanoke County supports expanding local authority to create transportation districts, to impose local option motor vehicle fuels taxes, and to expend these tax proceeds for local transportation improvements. L. Roanoke County supports authority to establish escrow accounts for storm water facilities. 4 M. Roanoke County supports legislation to relieve Treasurer's from liability for the loss of market value of Trigon stock as a result of de-mutualization. N. Roanoke County supports legislation appropriating funds and directing the State Compensation Board to modify staffing standards for local jails and court services positions for Sheriff's offices. O. Roanoke County supports amending Chapter 6.1, "Virginia Tire Tax" of Title 58.1, "Taxation" (a) to increase the tire tax from $.50 to $1.25, and (b) to direct and authorize the Department of Waste Management to utilize the increased Waste Tire Trust Fund to remediate illegal or abandoned waste tire dumps. P. Roanoke County supports full funding of the state aid formula for public libraries (currently only 74% of this amount is funded, full funding would increase Roanoke County's share by $71,000 per year); and state funding for technological development and support. Q. Roanoke County supports the creation of a small claims court for the 23rd District. R. Roanoke County supports the 5th Planning District Commission's recommendation to establish a Year of the Mountains Task Force to examine opportunities and problems facing communities in the region of Virginia west of the Blue Ridge Mountains. II. That the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors is directed to send a certified copy of this resolution to the members of the General Assembly representing the Roanoke Valley, to the Clerk's Office of 5 the House of Delegates and Senate of the General Assembly, to the Town Council of the Town of Vinton, City Councils of the City of Salem and the City of Roanoke, and the Boards of Supervisors of the Counties of Bedford, Botetourt, Craig, Floyd, Franklin, and Montgomery counties, and to the Virginia Association of Counties. On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the Resolution with the additions of paragraphs P, Q, and R, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: .~~• Mary H. A len, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney The Honorable George Allen, Governor The Honorable John S. Edwards The Honorable Malfourd W. "Bo" Trumbo The Honorable H. Morgan Griffith The Honorable C. Richard Cranwell The Honorable Clifton A. Woodrum The Honorable A. Victor Thomas The Honorable Bruce F. Jamerson, Clerk of the House The Honorable Susan Clarke Schaar, Clerk of the Senate Clerk, Vinton Town Council Clerk, Salem City Council Clerk, Roanoke City Council Clerk, Bedford County Board of Supervisors Clerk, Botetourt County Board of Supervisors Clerk, Craig County Board of Supervisors Clerk, Floyd County Board of Supervisors Clerk, Franklin County Board of Supervisors Clerk, Montgomery County Board of Supervisors James D. Campbell, Executive Director, VACo John Stroud, Roanoke Regional Chamber of Commerce I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of Resolution 120396-2 adopted by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors by a unanimous recorded vote on Tuesday, December 3, 1996. Brenda J. Holton, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors 6 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: December 3, 1996 AGENDA ITEM: Legislative Program for the 1997 Session of the Virginia General Assembly and petitioning the General Assembly favorably to consider the topics and issues addressed herein COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY• The attached Resolution identifies the major initiatives for legislative action. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Each year the County submits its legislative program for the upcoming session of the Virginia General Assembly. Many of these proposals are jointly supported by VACo and the Virginia Municipal League (VML). Attached you will find a copy of a Resolution adopting a legislative program for Roanoke County for the 1997 session of the Virginia General Assembly. This resolution contains the same legislative proposals sent to the Virginia Association of Counties and adopted by the Board on May 28, 1996, with the addition of paragraphs L., M., N., and O. It is recommended that the Board adopt the attached Resolution outlining the Legislative Program for the 1997 Session of the Virginia General Assembly. spectfully submitted, ~~ f'~ f ~ ~e; l~ 1 1 ,~~( Z ; Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney 1 ~/~ Action Vote No Yes Abs Approved ( ) Motion by Eddy Denied ( ) Johnson Received ( ) Harrison Referred Minnix to Nickens general\971eg.rpt 2 ~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 3, 1996 RESOLUTION ADOPTING LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM FOR THE 1997 SESSION OF THE VIRGINIA GENERAL ASSEMBLY AND PETITIONING THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY FAVORABLY TO CONSIDER THE TOPICS AND ISSUES ADDRESSED HEREIN WHEREAS the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, has identified major legislative issues of state-wide concern to be considered by the 1997 session of the Virginia General Assembly; and WHEREAS, the Board has recommended these issues to its state- wide organization, the Virginia Association of Counties, for consideration in the adoption of its legislative program; and WHEREAS, the Board adopts this resolution as part of the Legislative Program of Roanoke County for the 1997 session of the Virginia General Assembly. NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that the following legislative proposals are submitted to the 1997 Virginia General Assembly for its favorable consideration and adoption. I. A. Education. Realizing that public education is the foundation of American democracy and the cornerstone of our future economic well being, the County urges the General Assembly to consider favorably the following actions. 1) The Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia should be amended to provide that elected school boards may be 1 ~'' a granted the authority and responsibility for taxation to support public education. 2) The General Assembly should enhance funding for public education, including increasing the funds available to the Literary Fund for local school capital construction or renovation projects. 3) Local school divisions should be authorized to establish opening dates for school. 4) Disparity funding should be based not only upon the number of students eligible for free or reduced fee lunches, but also upon the locality's local tax effort in support of education. Disparity funding should be based upon the composite index (which measures a locality's relative fiscal ability to provide its share of the cost of a local school system that meets the standards of quality) and the locality's local effort in support of that school system. B. Roanoke County supports legislation amending the heart/lung/cancer presumption statute for Workers' Compensation to restore balance to the rebuttal process. Compensability shall be determined by establishing whether work or non-work related risk factors (life-style choices such as smoking, poor nutritional habits, lack of exercise, or obesity, or non-work related stress and familial history) are more likely the primary cause of the medical condition. In addition, Roanoke County opposes any further expansion of this statute. C. Roanoke County supports legislation relieving local 2 C P~ governments of the responsibility o:E meeting recycling rates on all wastes collected by private haulers and diverted from waste disposal facilities identified to receive such wastes as set out in the local solid waste management plan. This legislation should also require that private haulers diverting such wastes be held accountable and responsible to meeting the same recycling rates and requirements as the local governments. Section 10.1-1411 imposes a 25% recycling mandate on local governments. The 1995 session of the General Assembly adopted the Waste Hauler Displacement Bill which severely limited the ability of local governments to regulate the flow of waste. This proposal would relieve local governments oi= the responsibility of meeting this recycling mandate on all wastes collected by private haulers. It would also require that. private haulers be subject to the same recycling mandates as local governments. D. Roanoke County supports additional new construction and maintenance funding for the Virginia Department of Transportation for secondary and primary roads. Additional funding for new construction projects will address ~~ritical transportation needs of all local governments. Additional maintenance funding shall be used for an expanded program to mow grass and weeds, and inspect and clean drainage pipes and culverts. E. Roanoke County supports allowing the disposal of land clearing vegetative debris (including tree stumps) in less expensive facilities in a manner not detrimental to the environment. This would requirE~ groundwater and methane gas 3 C "'O` monitoring, financial assurances from the owner/operator, and local governing body certification oi: compliance with all local ordinances. F. Roanoke County supports legislation amending Section 14.1-46.0:1 to increase the salary supplement for the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors from $1,800 to $2,500 per year. G. Roanoke County supports continued and increased funding for the Comprehensive Services Act, the Virginia Community Juvenile Crime Control Act, the Family F~reservation Act, local police departments (HB 599 funding), and t:he Regional Competitiveness Act. H. Roanoke County opposes the provisions of H.B. 1513 (legislation carried over from the 1996 session) which would shift more of the costs of water and sewer facilities and operations from the homebuilders to the individual consumers. This legislation claims only to require "fair and reasonable" water and sewer connection fees, yet its practical effects are to shift costs and expenses to the existing utility customer, jeopardize new and existing revenue bond covenants, and impose a "one size fits all" mandate on local governments and water and sewer authorities. I. Roanoke County opposes any attempt to restrict or eliminate local sources of taxation, including personal property taxation and business and professional occupational licensing. J. Roanoke County supports authority to impose an additional one-half percent (2%) local option sales tax. K. Roanoke County supports expanding local authority to create transportation districts, to impose local option motor 4 vehicle fuels taxes, and to expend these tax proceeds for local transportation improvements. L. Roanoke County supports authority to establish escrow accounts for storm water facilities. M. Roanoke County supports legislation to relieve Treasurer's from liability for the loss of market value of Trigon stock as a result of de-mutulizati~~n. N. Roanoke County supports .legislation appropriating funds and directing the State Compensation Board to modify staffing standards for local jails and court services positions for Sheriff's offices. O. Roanoke County amending Chapter 6.1, "Virginia Tire Tax" of Title 58.1, "Taxation" (a) to increase the tire tax from $.50 to $1.25, and (b) to direct and authorize the Department of Waste Management to utilize the increased Waste Tire Trust Fund to remediate illegal or abandoned waste tire dumps. II. That the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors is directed to send a certified copy of this resolution to the members of the General Assembly representing the Roanoke Valley, to the Clerk's Office of the House of Delegates and Senate of the General Assembly, to the Town Council of the Town of Vinton, City Councils of the City of Salem and the City of Roanoke, and 'the Boards of Supervisors of the Counties of Bedford, Botetourt, Craig, Floyd, Franklin, and Montgomery counties, and to the Virginia Association of Counties. g.attorney.board.971egvac.res 5 A-120396-3 ACTION # ITEM NUMBER ~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOA~D OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOI~E COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 3, 1996 AGENDA ITEM: Request to Approve County Participation and Appropriate Funding for the Mason Creek Interceptor Replacement COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: Recommend approval. This was a generous and forward thinking action on the part of Salem to allow us to oversize this interceptor. BACKGROUND: The Mason's Creek drainage azea in Roanoke County covers the areas to Red Lane on the west, the AEP Service Center on the east and north to Catal~vba Mountain. The area includes the Roanoke County Public Service Center at Kessler Mill Road. It is anticipated that over the next 25 years, Roanoke County will need a sewer capacity averaging 1.1 million gallons per day (MGD) in this area. At the time the original Mason's Creek Interceptor was installed within the Salem City limits, Roanoke County did not have a public sewer system and, therefore, does not own any capacity in the interceptor. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The City of Salem is preparing to replace the interceptor from the Roanoke River to the vicinity of Lakeside Shopping Center. Roanoke County requested that we be allowed to participate in this project and purchase capacity in this line for future growth. The City of Salem agreed to this request and the p~toject was designed with a total capacity of 7.15 MGD of which Roanoke County would have a capalcity of 1.1 MGD. The project has been bid and the total cost is estimated to be $821,000 (including engineering and contingencies). Based on these costs Roanoke County's share would be $120,000. r ~ C'- 3 FISCAL IMPACT: Funds are available to be appropriated from the sewer repair and replacement fund. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the project be approvedy funds appropriated and that the County Administrator be authorized to enter into an agreement with the City of Salem to participate in this project. SUBMITTED BY: ~~ .~ Gary Rob son, P.E. Utility Di ctor APPROVED: J ~~ ,, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator --------- --------------- ACTION ------------------------------ ---------- VOTE Approved (x) Motion by: Fenton F. ;Harrison No Yes Abs Denied ( ) to approve participation and Eddy x Received ( ) appropriate funding Harrison x Referred ( ) Johnson x To ( ) Minnix x Nickens x cc: File Gary Robertson, Director, Utility Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finaince ACTION # ITEM NUMBER ~~ r AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BO~-RD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADNIINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 3, 1996 AGENDA ITEM: ORDINANCE AMENDING AND REENACTING PORTIONS OF CHAPTER 5, ArfIMALS A.,ND FOWL, AND REPEALING SECTION 5- 69. VACCINATION CLD~TICS OF DIVISION 3 OF ARTICLE II OF CHAPTER 5, ANIMALS AND FOWL, OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE TO CLARIFY THE AUTHORITY OF COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICERS OF THE ROAPIOKE COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT TO ENFORCE THE COUNT'Y' S ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCES, AND TO INCREASE THE FEES FOR BOARDING AND PICKUP OF ANIMALS. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS:, Recommend approval. Some of these are ~ousekE~eping " in that it changes the terminology from the Animal Control Departmenx to the Police Department. I am asking for your support of the increase in fees for repeat o,,Q`enders. Our budget crt the SPCA is overrun this year because of the tremendous increase in the number of animals placed there. In addition, we do not need to compete with the private sector by conducting shies clinics as we have in the past. The animal control ordinance of Roanoke County, Chapter 5 of the Roanoke County Code, predates the establishment of the Roanoke County Police Department in 1990. With the recent transfer of responsibility for enforcement of all ;animal control laws to the Community Service Officers within the Police Department, the County's animal control ordinance needs to be revised to conform to the current administrative structure. The recent renegotiation of the County's contract with the Roanoke Valley SPCA for boarding of impounded animals necessitates a revision of the boarding fee charged to owners who claim their animals. Current costs of personnel and equipment involved in animal control operations justifies an increase in the pickup fee for impounded animals which was first established in 1971. Other revisions in state law also require updating of the County's animal control ordinance. .~-' I SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The major substantive changes to the County's animal control ordinance are as follows: 1. Creates the positions of Community Service Officer within the Roanoke County Police Department, confers full law enforcement powers on these officers who are appointed by the Chief of Police and designates them the County's animal wardens for purposes of state law. 2. Substitutes "Community Service Officer" for "animal control officer" throughout Chapter 5 of the Roanoke County Code so as to confer the same duties and responsibilities upon these officers as formerly exercised by the County's animal control officers. 3. Clarifies the obligation of officers to make "reasonable efforts" to contact the owner of a dog or cat possessing an identifying tag or tattoo within 48 hours in conformity with state law. Further clarifies the length of time impounded animals must be confined before they may be delivered for adoption or disposed of. 4. Increases the daily boarding fee to $7.75 and the pickup fees to $20.00, $35.00 and $50.00 for first, second and third offenses, respectively and permits such fees to be recovered as a debt owed to the County. 5. Repeals the authority for rabies vaccination clinics as the Police Department has never held such clinics and has no plans to do so. Rabies vaccinations require the supervision of a licensed veterinarian. FISCAL IMPACT: The County may save as much as $3,600 per year in boarding costs with the SPCA by the change from 7 to 5 days as the required minimum time for confining animals whose owner cannot be identified. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the adoption of the proposed amendments. Respectfully submitted, Jo ph B. ~Jbenshain S 'or Assistant County Attorney 2 .~= / Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Motion by: ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy _ Harrison _ _ _ Johnson _ _ _ Minnix _ _ _ Nickens 3 ,.,~'~ I AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 3, 1996 ORDINANCE AMENDING AND REENACTING PORTIONS OF CHAPTER 5, ANIMALS AND FOWL, AND REPEALING SECTION 5-69. VACCINATION CLINICS OF DIVISION 3 OF ARTICLE II OF CHAPTER 5, ANIMALS AND FOWL, OF THE ROANORE COUNTY CODE TO CLARIFY THE AUTHORITY OF COMMUNITY SERVICE OFFICERS OF THE ROANORE COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT TO ENFORCE THE COUNTY~S ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCES, AND TO INCREASE THE FEES FOR BOARDING AND PICRUP OF ANIMALS. WHEREAS, the animal control ordinance of Roanoke County was passed prior to the creation of the Roanoke County Police Department and the creation of the position of Community Service Officer within that Department; and WHEREAS, the need exists to clarify the duties and responsibilities of the County's Community Service Officers to enforce the provisions of the County's animal control ordinance contained in Chapter 5 of the Roanoke County Code; and WHEREAS, the County's new contract with the Roanoke Valley SPCA includes an increase in the daily boarding rate for any domestic animal to $7.75 and the current pickup fee for confined animals no longer covers a reasonable portion of the County's cost involved in impounding such animals; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on December 3, 1996, and the second reading and public hearing for this ordinance was held on December 17, 1996. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, as follows. 1. That Chapter 5, ANIMALS AND FOWL of the Roanoke County Code be amended and reenacted as follows: s CHAPTER 5 ANIMALS AND FOWL* ARTICLE I. IN GENERAL Sec. 5-1. Animal control officer generally. (a) There is hereby created the position of tai>~C,~~'7' a~imzrr~~~ez e~-~r~ for the officers shall be appointed by the Ch~e,t~i` ~~1~. ~ea~rir count : `.,`:```Such ce eel (c) Such number of Q~t-m~z~:~~.y 5~~~:.~~ 4f~~t;~~~~ dep~~i-e~s-~e •'~~-rrm~~ez--~~ as are authorized b ~ the board of Y ::.:::::::::: ;<.;:.;:.;.::::::::::::::::::..;.::::: ointed b the ;C~Z~'~~<>cfPQIie supervisors t e app Y .................................................... ~v.~.. ,..1 »...~..-~.--------. (d) The Cornmun~t~ Servs,ce Q~fic~:rs ~-:-im~~~~, ~`~, ""r shall be deemed to be tYe county's animal warden, within the meaning of section ~-7,,96 3Q4 '~~T~ of the Code of Virginia. (Code 1971, § 5-4) Sec. 5-3. Wild bird sanctuaries--Established; markers. (a) The following area(s) in the county shall be set aside and declared wild bird sanctuaries: . , ' 'C ~ ~ Y~ - rCC~TIr~rG'G' .~ r ~Ce-7i~7C~aGZZ~- ~ e-TCe ~CC j C - } } Tl ~ r GT1 G 1 Gir ~ T -Ii4~ T SSRC-e~e~-e e~CB'a'QT ~ ~ e ~h t~- rvzr YY cc -ire-~~a'es~^ r G ~,, ~a^ "~ ~ ~ea~r~~e 7~If ,~ T ~ ~ 7-~ ~ ,, ,~es -se- ,~ } } ,., - e a „ ~ ~ y. ~ " ~ ~ y. ~., ' '~ '-~ ~1 } 'T ' ' 1 " CCTT -ea" T'iCCCt-IIS~~i'C'G'R ~' ye-~G~~T h ~+~ ~ ~ "eGZZ I•Ce'~ . 1. t ~ ~CT 1 1 L e ~ ~ienee--€ei~e 7 I . ~he ~14 b eurr~3i 2,3^zei~3 ~ ~6~ } ~ e-e es e -- ~ -~ "~ n ~~ T ~- ~ ~ ,es c~ e~~e~-~ L, a- - 9i~T~~-~"1• , ~- rR, , .a r c}E g „ ~ .d } 1... ~'~-6 ~ .rccc-re~ i i -~-~ ~ reSz rr d~ ~ czz~cscc~j ~ cv~'Ta~ur -6 e 8 t xec " e ~ t~~-~~~~ e- -~~ -~~ C ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~~ .,~.~= , i - e v. - ~ _ - - - - -- - ; .. T.Ti..-. ~- ~. v.,-. ~TC~~TCG'RZE- ' '6 ~~1TI-QI-~ ~ ~ e ~ GL T. 'f T ' } yG~T ,~ ,,,, G a m e'~' '~~-, l ~ •, ~ ~ ~fT1TTjTITe3 ~~. r e'~I~-'~ e ~~ ~ QG I ZL--~ ~ } } ' CZA 7 1 R~J7 ' } 1., c a- -, l a- .. _a ,., , ~- ., ~ o c j i~eS~cl~i-~~-r r ~-~., ~~~e--~r=t~ 8 9 } } } S~~e-~e~ } ~--6 8 6--~ r,....,,.,,a ~ n ~e a v v .a z,,.~,-.., 2 ~ 1 b+l ~v-i-any n a z+ ~e~l^sl-6i~--(~~ . 6~~~~-i-?? _ ... ~ } .. ,.. i j• ~ri~eE.~'-t--X633--~6--~~-43Ti ~cazei~~~ Uzi-~ci:irv---i r~cr~a vi-~~.-~~~ ~,ci uz~c~a-=63~-~9- cire~3~6-riTa~i°6F~rc~l~e-Az ~. t-• „ n.. t~ ^v~exd~c-ciuz-e~i-A-e~~et~eia-Freg~"~" j ~'t' •i ~-h~a ,..3 e- i T ' -~rt-~i~a -t-~i ' ~-- ' ear ~ r * z c ~--~--~-1 - ~ ~l ~-s~e-~~e~ nui~ C~l'~o ~ ~y~ may. e~as~t • t ~ 6Z- ~ ~ ~e ~~ ~ l LTZ'e'~'~. ~9V'~'CTl GTI'~'S61~-~6~ ~e~ '~_ -t~ ~ 4 ~ r ~B i o ~ ~= ~ ~T ~eg~ ee ~ ~--g a ~~ee-~~ea-- . ~iT i -~i "- -~~"~eS~e~keS-~ ~ a ~ ~ t' ~crr c -rrr~A -ar~z n 6~arr r~vreS z6- i-r ~tei~~e-irl~-~3~ (3~) Beginning at a point on Ruritan Road (Virginia ~~ Secondary Route 609) at its intersection with the lot line of Lot 11, Block 8, of La Bellevue Subdivision, thence S 85° 19' 30" W 910.35 feet to a point; thence N 58° 11' 44" W 400.30 feet to a point; thence N 12° 22' W along the northwest right-of-way of Virginia Secondary Route 609 to a point; thence N 59° 40' W 118.76 feet to a point; thence S 44° 32' W 1007.22 feet to a point; thence S 34° 45' E 358.82 feet to a point; thence S 46° 32' W 487.47 feet to a point; thence N 33° 37' W 1307.70 feet to 1219.37 feet to a poin property boundary of I point on the north lot Bellevue; thence N 52° point; thence N 9° 34' thence N 38° 44' 54" E 56° 16' 57" W 166.75 f E 173.25 feet to a poi distance of 91.14 feet W 207.99 feet to a poi distance of 100 feet t 463.79 feet to a point feet to a point; thenc a point; thence S 58° feet to a point; thenc point; thence S 30° 32 thence S 19° 51' 40" ~ point; thence N 11" 5y~ ~u~~ t; thence along the northerly et 1, Block 1 of La Bellevue to a line of Lot 2, Block 1 of La 46' 42" E 1511.15 feet to a 24" E 70.62 feet to a point; 201.40 feet to a point; thence N eet to a point; thence N 18° 45' nt; thence N 40° 38' 12" for a to a point; thence N 32° 33' 47" nt; thence S 71° 50' for a e a point; thence N 33° 42' 38" W thence N 52° 46' 42" E 920.0 e S 58° 50' 40" E 442.76 feet to 15' E for a distance of 1091.51 e S 58° 15' E 629.46 feet to a ' 09" W 1665.36 feet to a point; 321.80 feet to a point; thence S ~"- ~ 41° 32' E 300.08 feet to a point; thence S 41° 45' 30" W 199.61 feet to a point; thence across the right-of- way of Ruritan Road (Virginia Secondary Route 609) to the point of beginning and containing Blocks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 20 and 21 of the La Bellevue Subdivision. (b) Suitable markers approved by the may be erected on the roads entering the subsection (a) above, indicating that the aside and declared. (Code 1971, § 5-1; Ord. No. 2664, 9-9-80) ARTICLE II. DOGS, CATS AND OTHER ANIMALS county administrator sanctuaries described in areas have been so set DIVISION 1. GENERALLY Sec. 5-23. Dogs and cats deemed personal property; rights relating thereto. (a) All dogs and cats in this county shall be deemed personal property and may be the subject of larceny and malicious or unlawful trespass and the owners thereof may maintain any action for the killing of any such dogs or cats, or injury thereto, or unlawful detention or use thereof, as in the case of other personal property. The owner of any dog or cat which is injured or killed contrary to the provisions of this article by any person shall be entitled to recover the value thereof or the damage done thereto in an appropriate action at law from such person. ssession of the (Code 1971, § 5-6; Ord. No. 41294-7, § 1, 4-12-94) 4 ~. Sec. 5-26.1. Dangerous dogs; vicious doq; penalties; procedures. (a) Dangerous dog. 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 of a Class 1 misdemeanor. (b) Vicious doq. 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 enalties im osed order the ;ztt~t~;ry,:~:~v~~:~:;<~f:a., P P ...:.. :...:...:. .:...:...::....:.. -r~~ee~i~e;. ~~~ to euthanize 'the dog. If any ~owrier~ 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 !Community.Sertr~,ce .-.F~~ Q~~ ~-~-i~~~ee~~rez ~=tee= 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 x and/or police offcer:~~' tri 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. (Ord. No. 72793-7, § 1, 7-27-93) Sec. 5-26.2. Licensure of dangerous dog. (a) 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 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 5 _,,~° ~ 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. (Ord. No. 72793-7, § 1, 7-27-93) Sec. 5-26.3. Beeping 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 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 fifty thousand dollars ($50,000.00) 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 6 ~~ (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 ±v z«~ a .. ~n~ecla~~l:.€€€cari ,.-r-~i~-t~e€e ~ ~~ such dog is das~c~~ed ?o< 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 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 Police; I~e~artment a-~-i~a-~ ,a ,,i .. ,..+-Y....,..~ . .. ee~~i~ea ___ ____ ________ 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 Ft> 1:.:atz~er ~a~-imnr~ ~~?~Qeua~~c+.t of such fact ~~~an ~l7e~riew address within twenty-four (24) hours. ....r} „~~, ,,,.,~ (g) The ommur~~t<<~erv:ce Off~c'er ~-t-i~~~~~~' 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. 7 i The o~q~t~:~~:.::>:>:~:~~~:~~<:><G~:~:~;~~ ~=m~~-ire= 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. (Ord. No. 72793-7, § 1, 7-27-93) 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. ~ers.on to.•• conceal.., or... cause to be concealed such dog from any cmm~~~.ty ~exV~.G~ ~3ff~.ce~ a~ •ee~rt-re-~-s~~r~e~ or police officer. (Ord. No. 72793-7, § 1, 7-27-93) Sec. 5-27. Barking or howling dogs. (Code 1971, § 5-10.2) Cross reference(s)--Noise generally, § 13-3. Sec. 5-29. Same--Impoundment. o• notf`v tfie~ owner of~~~~ts•~~wfiereabouts. 8 SI ~e-~eg e~--~-s}red--e~rer-s~~~~--~~rr~~-€e~~be (c) An owner claiming his animal pursuant to subsection (b) above shall be required to pay the actual expense incurred by the county in keeping the animal confined. Such payment shall be made to the ~-i~~ee~~i~e~e€€~~e~-ei-~~ s~ officer at the time of the release of the animal . It sha~T~l ~~lie`~'the duty of the ~i~~eer1-~i~e-~ef~-i-ee~-ei~e= a officer to furnish the owner with a written receipt for ~such~'payment, in a form and manner approved by the board of supervisors. Such officer shall keep a carbon copy of all such receipts in abound book, which shall be turned over to the county treasurer when the book is filled and shall be subject to audit by representatives of the visors whenever re uested. Tr~«'~>','' board of super q ,,,..... ~ .............. collected pursuan s subsec --aid-~a~-~re~~~~~ No payment made under this subsec ion shall relieve the owner from prosecution for violating section 5- 28. (e) A pickup fee of ~z ~ dollars ($(3-X9.00) for the first offense, `~~~'e ~e-~rt~ dollars ($35~-9.00) for the 9 tirl ~i i~3--~e~vT@~y~y--day s-a-~~.. ,-. ~ ; ~ .~ ..~.~ j ~~ second offense, and offense shall be im or .x:...:...:.: ~y dollars ~os~ed~in addition to ................ s~ dollars ( $'~' a is claimed by ($3-9.00 ) for the third the~~~ normal board fee of ~9) per day when any dog its owner or custodian. Sec.•5-31. Billing, injuring, etc., livestock or poultry -- Generally. t shall be the dut of the 4~tzri~axx:~:::::::e:~~:~:~:<::;~~::a;c~:x':<; a-n-i~a~ee~r~i~ez ^-~-r or other officer, if~~he finds a ~dogiri~~the act of killing, injuring, worrying or chasing livestock or poultry, to kill such dog forthwith, whether such dog bears a tag or not, and any person finding a dog committing any of the depredations mentioned in this section shall have the right to kill such dog on sight. (b) The general district court or any other court shall have p y " the ower to order the un:Y~: ;<~e~v~~~;<<?f~;~~er; ,: .: ^~r or other officer to kill any 'dog"'lcnown to be a confirmed livestock or poultry killer, and any dog killing poultry for the third time shall be considered a confirmed poultry killer. ' cludin the °~:>: ::::::`~~>;>u>~:c~:<.:::~f:f~~~~`: (c) I f any person, in g ±t :..::::::::::: Y:.;:.;:.;:.;:.;:.;:<.::>:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.:...:::::::::: :.;~:::.;;:::::t.:. ~ ::::::::::::::: ..... ~:::::::::.....::::::::::.t:.:........... a~rim~-es~re-~ef€i-e~e~, has reason to believe that any dog is killing livestock or committing any of the depredations mentioned in this section, he shall apply to a magistrate of the county, who shall issue a warrant requiring the owner or custodian, if known, to appear before the judge of the general district court at the time and place named therein, at which time evidence shall be heard, and if it shall appear that such dog is a livestock killer or has committed any of the depredations mentioned in this section, the dog shall be ordered killed immediately, which the ~~rit'~~_:;:::::>~erv:~~~;:;:;C?:~:~:~ ~a~im~~~~, ^F~... or other officer designated by~the fudge of the general district court to act, shall do. (Code 1971, § 5-7) State law reference(s)--Dogs killing, injuring, etc., other animals, Code of Virginia, §§ 3.1-796.116, 3.1-796.117. 10 52290-7, § 1, 5-22-90; Ord. No. 41294-7, § 1, 4-12-94) T- Sec. 5-32. Same--Investigation of claims against county. a The ~turrt'~:.>:<:S~~v~~~<;~f~~~a;~ a~-im~a-1-~~~ shall conduct an investigation info any claim made pursuant to section 3.1-796.118 of the Code of Virginia for livestock or poultry killed or injured by a dog prior to the payment of such claim, to determine if the claimant has exhausted all legal remedies available to him against the owner of the dog, if known, prior to making such claim to the board of supervisors. (b) For the purposes of this section, "exhaustion " shall mean a judgment against the owner of the dog upon which an execution has been returned unsatisfied. (Code 1971, § 5-13.1) Sec. 5-33. Disposal of dead dogs. The owner of any dog which has died from disease or other cause shall forthwith cremate or bury....the.._same,.. I.f, after notice, the owner fails to do so, the ~~m~tu~a,'~y..:~~x'v'~.ce ~3ff~.ce ~~ .;:.;:.;:.;:.;;:.:::.; .: ; ..:::....:......:...:.::...:.:::::::::::::.::::::::::::...::::: ;. ee~~i~e~-e-f-~re~ or other officer shall ~ bury or cremate the dog and he may recover, on behalf of the .county, from .the owner..his cost for this service. A~.l sums recc~u:er~d.: un~~r..th~.s. sect~ari (Code 1971, § 5-8) Cross reference(s)--County solid waste collectors not to pick up dead animals, § 20-27. ....:...... ~.:...:.::. „ ~ i .. c c : ,.., ~... . Sec. 5-36. COt11~~1~t~ #B~;V'a,ce O;~fa~~er~ ~~aTeo~-~r-e ......, duties and responsibilities: There is hereb created the osition of ~~ttri`u~:':Se ~::> :.:a ,: a~-im~ee~~rez~= within the S~Q~?I~A`::.>::::~ .................. ~:~ ..y::::.;,;;;:.;::.;:.;:.;:.;:.:::. :,:,,.,. t~ ~rm~-ee~i~e-~e-f-€~-~e~ or his agent or any law ~en~orcement officer shall have the following powers: (1) May enter upon private property to apprehend any domestic animal which is in violation of any provision of this chapter or to apprehend any animal which presents an immediate threat to the safety, health or welfare of any person, including an animal suspected of being infected with rabies; 11 .z- r (2) May enter upon private property to investigate complaints of inhumane or lack of responsible animal care; (3) May seize, impound or dispose of any vicious or dangerous animal of any kind when necessary for the protection of any person or animal; and (4) May perform all other acts necessary to carry out the requirements of this chapter. (Ord. No. 41294-7, § 1, 4-12-94) Secs. 5-37--5-40. Reserved. Division 2. License Sec. 5-49. Preservation and exhibition of license receipt. A dog or cat license receipt shall be carefully preserved by the person to whom it is issued and exhibited promptly on request ... for inspection by the ~t~mmunty ~ervic~ Of~;er. ~im~' ~~~}~~' o~~r or any other officer: (Code 1971, § 5-25; Ord. No. 41294-7, § 1, 4-12-94) Sec. 5-53. Records of licenses sold. A list of all dog or cat licenses and kennel licenses sold shall be made in triplicate, consecutively numbered, and showing to whom issued; residence address; magisterial district; tag number; year ending; day, month and year issued; and the signature of the county treasurer. The original copy shall be delivered to the dog or cat owner, the second copy shall be retained by the treasurer and the third copy shall be delivered to ~h~;;:~r~s~mun~~:..;:::::::;5~.r~r~ce :;;~~:frcer ur~~t s~~ tY~~.:>:<P~1:~.q~::::>:;D~ artment (Code 1971, § 5-19; Ord. No. 41294-7, § 1, 4-12-94) . . Sec. 5-55. Special provisions as to kennel licenses. (a) The owner of a kennel shall securely fasten the license tag issued under this division to the kennel enclosure in full view and keep one of the identification plates provided therewith attached to the collar of each dog authorized to be kept enclosed 12 .1.~'" in the kennel. Any identification plates not so in use shall be ke~t...by...the., owner....or. custodian^and promptly shown to any :.. ~~,~ ,a~y~.ce. ~~~ice~ e~~~ee~-~ or other officer .. upon~~~request. A~~~keririel~~~~dog shall not be permitted to stray beyond the limits of the enclosure, but this shall not prohibit removing dogs therefrom temporarily while under the control of the owner or custodian for the purpose of exercising, hunting, breeding, trial or show. A kennel shall not be operated in such manner as to defraud the county of the license tax applying to dogs which cannot be legally covered thereunder or to in any manner violate other provisions of this article. (b) If a kennel dog is found running and roaming at large at any time of the year in violation of any provision of this article, the kennel license may be revoked, if the violation appears to the trial court to have resulted from carelessness or negligence on the part of the owner, who shall thereupon be required to secure an individual license for each dog. (Code 1971, § 5-27) Secs. 5-56--5-65. Reserved. DIVISION 3. RABIES CONTROL* Sec. 5-67. Vaccination certificate. At the time of vaccination of a dog or cat pursuant to section 5-66, a certificate shall be issued to the owner of dog or cat.,. ..which...certificate shall be_._pro~erly executed and signed by ~~e ~~tg~~r~.~a.~g.. ~eterinar~.~n ran the prema.ses ~ or cat has certificat descriptio name of the ~~ ,.~..,.r, r ~, and shall certify that the been vaccinated as required by section 5-66. The e shall show the date of vaccination, a brief n of the dog or cat, and its sex and breed, and owner of the dog or cat. the dog the (Code 1971, §§ 5-16, 5-30; Ord. No. 2135, 9-26-78; Ord. No. 51287-4, § 1, 5-12-87; Ord. No. 72688-11, § 1, 7-26-88) 13 z~ Sec. 5-68. Impoundment of unvaccinated dogs or cats. (a) Any dog or cat found in the county which is not vaccinated as required in division shall be impounded by the :::>::>:::;a::>:>::.;.<,:.; .:.:.:..:...:.:.;.::: rem. ~-~= or other r~~3~~~'derv<~:ce::>:::C~f:f>~e:er a~-i-mad-ee~r~ orricer:€:€ _ , ~ Sys. Tie dog or cat may be returned to its owner, upon proof of ownership, vaccination of the dog or cat, and payment of the cost of impounding the dog or cat. Such payment shall not relieve the owner from prosecution for violating section 5-66. . 2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect on and after January 1, 1997. c:\...\agenda\police\commserv.ord 14 5 t~~e--ce~e e-f - ~ ---- -- - (Code 1971, § 5-30; Ord. No. 2135, 9-26-78; Ord. No. 51287-4, § 1, 5-12-87; Ord. No. 72688-11, § 1, 7-26-88) ACTION NO. ITEM NO. T- ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 3, 1996 AGENDA ITEM: ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A BOARD OF APPEALS AND ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS TO HEAR APPEALS FROM DECISIONS MADE UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 9, "FIRE PREVENTION AND PROTECTION", OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE .~~~, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS : } /~ ~ ~'~~ /~""'"v A ~~ ~ ~~~°~ , EXECUTIVE SUMMARY' A~ This ordinance establishes a board to hear appeals from decisions under the Statewide Fire Prevention Code. Two ordinances are submitted for your review: One designates the Building Code Board of Appeals as the Appeals Board for these decisions; the second designates the Board of Supervisors as the Appeals Board. A recent controversy over the enforcement of the Statewide Fire Prevention Code by the Roanoke County Fire Marshal illustrates the need for an administrative board to hear appeals from these enforcement decisions. A first reading on this proposed ordinance is scheduled for December 3, 1996; a second reading and public hearing is scheduled for December 17, 1996. A public hearing is requested since the proposed ordinance is imposing a fee for these appeals. Section 27-98 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, provides that appeals concerning the application of the Fire Prevention Code "shall first lie to a local board of appeals and then to the State Building Code Technical Review Board." In addition, the local governing body may establish such procedures or requirements as may be necessary for the administration and enforcement of this Code. Fees may be levied by the local governing body in order to defray the cost of such enforcement and appeals. Since any appeal would proceed from the local board of appeals to the State Building Code Technical Review Board, and since Roanoke County's Building Code Board of Appeals includes representatives with 1 z~ a wide variety of professional background and experience, designating the local Building Code Board of Appeals would be an appropriate course of action. As an existing Board, its administrative procedures are already established and it can respond in a timely and effective fashion to the immediacy of an appeal by an aggrieved person. In the alternative, the Board of Supervisors may want to designate itself as the appeals body for decisions under the Fire Prevention Code. In some situations, the Board would be compelled to schedule special meetings in order to accommodate the due process requirements of these appeals. The proposed ordinances impose a Twenty-five Dollar ($25.00) appeal fee to help defray the costs of these appeals. Although the number of appeals anticipated is unknown, it is believed that the number of appeals will be minimal. Two ordinances are submitted Building Code Board of Appeals decisions; the second designate Appeals Board. for your review: One designates the as the Appeals Board for these s the Board of Supervisors as the It is recommended that the Board appoint the Building Code Board of Appeals as the Board for hearing appeals from decisions under the Fire Protection Code. Respectfully submitted, Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney Action Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Motion by C:\OFFICE\ W PWIN\ W PDOCS\AGENDA\GENERAL\APPEALS.BD 2 Vote No Yes Abs Eddy Harrison Johnson Minnix Nickens z- ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 3, 1996 ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A BOARD OF APPEALS AND ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS TO HEAR APPEALS FROM DECISIONS MADE UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 9, "FIRE PREVENTION AND PROTECTION", OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE WHEREAS, Section 27-98 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, provides that a local governing body may establish procedures and requirements for the administration and enforcement of the Virginia Statewide Fire Prevention Code; and, WHEREAS, appeals concerning the application of this Code by the County Fire Marshal shall first lie to a local board of appeals and then to the State Building Code Technical Review Board and, WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County hereby designates the building code board of appeals and establishes procedures and requirements for appeals of enforcement decisions made under the provisions of Chapter 9, "Fire Prevention and Protection" of the Roanoke County Code; and, WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on December 3, 1996, and the second reading of this ordinance was held on December 17, 1996. BE IT ORDAINED, BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, as follows: 1. That Chapter 9, "Fire Prevention and Protection" of the Roanoke County Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new section, Section 9-21, "Appeals" to provide as follows: Section 9-21 Appeals. (a) Any person aggrieved by a decision of the Roanoke County Fire Marshal under the provisions of this Chapter may file a written appeal with the building code board of appeals for review of ..L " the Fire Marshal's decision. The written appeal must be filed within ten (10) days of the decision of the Fire Marshall, in a manner and form to be specified by the Fire and Rescue Chief. (b) The written appeal must specify the grounds for the appeal, and must be accompanied by the payment of the sum of Twenty- Five ($25.00) Dollars in order to defray the costs of such appeal. (c) Upon receipt of the appeal the board shall proceed at its earliest convenience to hear the appeal. The board shall within three (3) working days render a decision in accordance with its findings. 2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after December 17, 1996. G:\ATTORNEY\ PMM\APPEALBD.ORD AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 3, 1996 ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING A BOARD OF APPEALS AND ESTABLISHING PROCEDURES AND REQUIREMENTS TO HEAR APPEALS FROM DECISIONS MADE UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 9, "FIRE PREVENTION AND PROTECTION", OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE WHEREAS, Section 27-98 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, provides that a local governing body may establish procedures and requirements for the administration and enforcement of the Virginia Statewide Fire Prevention Code; and, WHEREAS, appeals concerning the application of this Code by the County Fire Marshal shall first lie to a local board of appeals and then to the State Building Code Technical Review Board and, WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County hereby desi Hates ~~~?1<f`>a?sa>~oa~>>of>>~.:':'.°'.:'alp.... d ?>>-:and establishes rocedures an requirements for appeals of enforcement decisions made under the provisions of Chapter 9, "Fire Prevention and Protection" of the Roanoke County Code; and, WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on December 3, 1996, and the second reading of this ordinance was held on December 17, 1996. BE IT ORDAINED, BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, as follows: 1. That Chapter 9, "Fire Prevention and Protection" of the Roanoke County Code is hereby amended by the addition of a new section, Section 9-21, "Appeals" to provide as follows: Section 9-21 Appeals. (a) Any person aggrieved by a decision of the Roanoke County Fire Marshal under the provisions of this Chapter may file a and form to be specified by the Fire and Rescue Chief. (b) The written appeal must specify the grounds for the appeal, and must be accompanied by the payment of the sum of Twenty- Five ($25.00) Dollars in order to defray the costs of such appeal. (c) Upon receipt of the appeal the board shall proceed at its earliest convenience to hear the appeal. The board shall within three (3) working days render a decision in accordance with its findings. 2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after December 17, 1996. G:\ATTORNEY\ PMM\APPEALBD.ORD J AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 3, 1996 ORDINANCE 120396-4 AUTHORIZING THE CREATION OF AND FINANCING FOR A LOCAL PUBLIC WORKS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, TREVILIAN ROAD WATER PROJECT WHEREAS, Ordinance 112288-7 authorizes the financing of local public works improvements and the imposition of special assessments upon abutting property owners upon the adoption of an appropriate ordinance by the Board of Supervisors; and WHEREAS, the County Administration has negotiated the extension of the public water system to the Trevilian Road community; and WHEREAS, the extension of the public water system and the creation of a special utility (water) service area will alleviate a critical public health and safety problem; and WHEREAS, several of the residents have requested that the County allow them to pay their portion of the costs of connection to the public water system over ten years in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance 112288-7; and WHEREAS, the first reading of the Ordinance was held on November 19, 1996, and the second reading was held December 3, 1996. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That pursuant to the authority of Ordinance 112288-7, the Board authorizes and approves a local public works improvement project, namely, public water extension for a portion of the i Trevilian Road community. The total construction cost of this public water project is estimated to be $45,000.00, to be initially financed as follows: Roanoke County Utility Department (previously appropriated) $12,000 Citizen Participation (7 x $2,300) $16,100 Advance from Public Works Participation Fund $16,900 That there is hereby appropriated for this project the sum of $16,900 from the Public Works Participation Fund (which was established by the Board of Supervisors on July 23, 1996). Any citizen participation under paragraph 3. will be advanced as a loan from the Water Fund. 2. That the "Project Service Area" is shown and designated on the attached plat entitled "Trevilian Road Water Project" prepared by the Roanoke County Utility Department and identified as Exhibit 1. The Trevilian Road Water Service Area is created for a period of ten years. Any owner of real estate within this service area may participate in and benefit from the public water extension to this service area (a) by paying the sum of $3,645 until January 8, 1997; (b) thereafter, the cost to participate in the benefits of this service area shall be the prorata share of the construction costs ($2,300) plus the full off-site facility fee in effect at the time of application for utility service, said costs to be paid in full and in advance of connection to the public water extension. 3. That the Board authorizes and approves the payment by the property owners in the project service area who elect to participate on or before January 8, 1997, of their portion of the cost of extending the public water system to their properties in accordance with the following terms and conditions: (a) Payment of $2,300 per property owner/residential connection for construction costs and $1,345 for off-site facility fees for a total of $3,645 to be financed for a maximum of 10 years at an interest rate of 8% percent per annum. (b) Property owners agree to execute a promissory note or such other instrument as the County may require to secure this installment debt. (c) Property owners further agree to execute such lien document or instrument as may be required by the County; said lien document or instrument to be recorded in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County. This lien instrument or document shall secure the repayment of the promissory note by the property owners to the County and shall be a lien against the property of the owners. Property owners also agree to pay the County any Clerk's fees or recordation costs which may be required to record any lien instrument or documents in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court. 4. That the payment by citizens in the project service area, in excess of the seven anticipated with this ordinance, who elect to participate, shall be made to the various funds as follows: The off-site facility fee shall be returned to the Water Fund, and payment of the construction costs shall be returned to the Public Works Participation Fund until such time as the advance has been repaid. After the advance has been repaid, the construction cost shall be returned to the Water Fund. 5. That the County Administrator is authorized to take such actions and execute such documents as may be necessary to accomplish the purposes of this transaction, all upon form approved by the County Attorney. 6. That this Ordinance shall take effect on and from the date of its adoption. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: ~• Mary H. A len, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Gary Robertson, Director, Utility Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance 4 JI ACTION # ITEM NUMBER J- AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 3, 1996 AGENDA ITEM: Second Reading of Ordinance Authorizing the Creation of and Financing for a Local Public Works Improvement Project, Trevilian Road Water Project COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~~~~~~~~ BACKGROUND: Several residents along Trevilian Road have petitioned Roanoke County for public water service. Their source of drinking water was a spring that has muddied and is no longer suitable for drinking water. The Board of Supervisors approved an emergency water line extension for this area at the October 8, 1996 board meeting. The first reading of the ordinance was held on November 19, 1996. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The water line has been installed and is now in service. The attached ordinance establishes a special service area for the project with each participating property owner paying their share of the cost through a special connection fee, establishing a method of financing the project for the participating property owners, and establishing a 90-day grace period for additional properties to participate in this project. Initially 6 of 24 potential property owners were willing to participate. Since that time, one additional property owner has agreed to participate and other properties are still reviewing their options. Properties in the service area that choose to participate after January 8, 1997 shall pay their pro rata share of the construction costs ($2,300) plus the full off-site facility fee in effect at the time of application for utility service. ~~ The seven property owners that are presently participating are as follows: NAME ADDRESS TAX MAP NO. Lawrence & Iris Juanita Sowers Jim & Lois A. Craighead Theodore & Anne C. Johnson Paul S. & Pauline A. Page David L. & Susan B. Burnley William H., II & Linda M. Martin Eleanor & Robert Beach 6518 Trevilian Road NE 28.17-2-3 6642 Trevilian Road NE 27.20-1-22 6629 Trevilian Road NE 27.20-2-41 6440 Trevilian Road NE 28.17-2-5 6622 Trevilian Road NE 27.20-1-26 6619 Trevilian Road NE 28.17-1-14 6626 Trevilian Road NE 27.20-1-25 Of these seven property owners two are paying the full amount at this time and five have requested that Roanoke County finance their portion. FISCAL IMPACT: The total cost of the project will be $45,000. On October 8, 1996, $12,000 was appropriated as the portion to be paid from the Roanoke County Utility Department. Since we now have seven participants, the Citizen Participation will be $16,100 (7 at $2,300 each). This leaves a balance of $16,900 to be advanced from the Public Works Participation Fund (rather than a General Fund advance as stated in the October 8,1996 Board Report). Any citizen participation under the ten year payment provision will be advanced as a loan from the Water fund. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors adopt the Ordinance after the second reading for authorizing the creation of and financing for a Local Public Works Improvement Project, Trevilian Road Water Project. SUBMITTED BY: ~- Gary Robert n, P.E. Utility Direc r APPROVED: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ACTION VOTE Approved () Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied () Eddy _ _ _ Received () Harrison Referred Johnson _ _ _ to Minnix Nickens ~I • • • ~~ ~~ 1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 3, 1996 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CREATION OF AND FINANCING FOR A LOCAL PUBLIC WORKS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, TREVILIAN ROAD WATER PROJECT WHEREAS, Ordinance 112288-7 authorizes the financing of local public works improvements and the imposition of special assessments upon abutting property owners upon the adoption of an appropriate ordinance by the Board of Supervisors; and WHEREAS, the County Administration has negotiated the extension of the public water system to the Trevilian Road community; and WHEREAS, the extension of the public water system and the creation of a special utility (water) service area will alleviate a critical public health and safety problem; and WHEREAS, several of the residents have requested that the County allow them to pay their portion of the costs of connection to the public water system over ten years in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance 112288-7; and WHEREAS, the first reading of the Ordinance was held on November 19, 1996, and the second reading was held December 3, 1996. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That pursuant to the authority of Ordinance 112288-7, the Board authorizes and approves a local public works improvement project, namely, public water extension for a portion of the 1 ~"` Trevilian Road community. The total construction cost of this public water project is estimated to be $45,000.00, to be initially financed as follows: Roanoke County Utility Department (previously appropriated) $12,000 Citizen Participation (7 x $2,300) $16,100 Advance from Public Works Participation Fund $16,900 That there is hereby appropriated for this project the sum of $16,900 from the Public Works Participation Fund (which was established by the Board of Supervisors on July 23, 1996). Any citizen participation under paragraph 3. will be advanced as a loan from the Water Fund. 2. That the "Project Service Area" is shown and designated on the attached plat entitled "Trevilian Road Water Project" prepared by the Roanoke County Utility Department and identified as Exhibit 1. The Trevilian Road Water Service Area is created for a period of ten years. Any owner of real estate within this service area may participate in and benefit from the public water extension to this service area (a) by paying the sum of $3,645 until January 8, 1997; (b) thereafter, the cost to participate in the benefits of this service area shall be the prorata share of the construction costs ($2,300) plus the full off-site facility fee in effect at the time of application for utility service, said costs to be paid in full and in advance of connection to the public water extension. 3. That the Board authorizes and approves the payment by the property owners in the project service area who elect to participate on or before January 8, 1997, of their portion of the 2 ~..J " cost of extending the public water system to their properties in accordance with the following terms and conditions: (a) Payment of $2,300 per property owner/residential connection for construction costs and $1,345 for off-site facility fees for a total of $3,645 to be financed for a maximum of 10 years at an interest rate of 8% percent per annum. (b) Property owners agree to execute a promissory note or such other instrument as the County may require to secure this installment debt. (c) Property owners further agree to execute such lien document or instrument as may be required by the County; said lien document or instrument to be recorded in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County. This lien instrument or document shall secure the repayment of the promissory note by the property owners to the County and shall be a lien against the property of the owners. Property owners also agree to pay the County any Clerk's fees or recordation costs which may be required to record any lien instrument or documents in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court. 4. That the payment by citizens in the project service area, in excess of the seven anticipated with this ordinance, who elect to participate, shall be made to the various funds as follows: The off-site facility fee shall be returned to the Water Fund, and payment of the construction costs shall be returned to the Public Works Participation Fund until such time as the advance has been 3 ,~" repaid. After the advance has been repaid, the construction cost shall be returned to the Water Fund. 5. That the County Administrator is authorized to take such actions and execute such documents as may be necessary to accomplish the purposes of this transaction, all upon form approved by the County Attorney. 6. That this Ordinance shall take effect on and from the date of its adoption. C:\OFFICE\WPWIN\ W PDOCS\AGENDA\UIILITY\TREVILIA.ORD 4 ~..J "' c~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 3, 1996 ORDINANCE 120396-5 AUTHORIZING THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF AN EXISTING 20-FOOT WATERLINE EASEMENT AND ACCEPTANCE OF A RELOCATED PORTION OF THE SAME EASEMENT ACROSS LOT 28 AND 27, BLOCK 1, REVISED PLAT OF THE ORCHARDS, APPLEWOOD, SECTION 9 (PB 17, PAGE 86) WHEREAS, by Deed dated August 22, 1988, and recorded in Deed Book 1294 at page 506, F & W Community Development Corporation conveyed to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, a water line easement, twenty feet (20') in width, across a tract of land owned by F & W Community Development Corporation; and WHEREAS, F & W Community Development Corporation subsequently subdivided and developed a portion of said tract of land into Section 9, The Orchards, Applewood, as shown upon the plat dated 10 March 1994, made by Lumsden Associates, P.C., of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Plat Book 17, page 86; and, WHEREAS, the above-described 20' water easement is referenced as "existing twenty foot (20') water line easement" and shown upon the above referenced subdivision plat; and WHEREAS, the petitioners, F & W Community Development Corporation are the owners of Lot 28 and 27, Block 1, Section 9, The Orchards, Applewood, across which the twenty foot (20') water line easement is located; and WHEREAS, a recent survey of said property reflects that the residential dwelling located on Lot 28 encroaches upon the west side of the 20' water line easement; and, 1 WHEREAS, the petitioners have requested that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, vacate that portion of the water line easement encroached upon and accept in exchange an relocated water line easement across Lots 28 and 27 on the eastern side of the existing easement as shown on a plat prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C., dated 6 November 1996, entitled "Plat showing portion of existing water line easement (DB 1294, page 506) to be vacated and new water line easement to be dedicated to County of Roanoke for public use by F & W Community Development Corporation across Lot 28 and Lot 27, Block 1, Revised Plat of The Orchards, Applewood, Section 9, (PB 17, page 86)"; and WHEREAS, the relocation has been accomplished without cost to the County and meets the requirements of the Utility Department. 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 November 19, 1996; and a second reading and public hearing was held on December 3, 1996; and, 2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Charter of Roanoke County, the subject real estate (easement) is hereby declared to be surplus and the nature of the interest in real estate renders it unavailable for other public uses; and, 3. That, conditioned upon the exchange as hereinafter provided, a portion of the water line easement across Lot 28, Block 2 1, Section 9, The Orchards, Applewood, in the Hollins Magisterial District, owned by F & W Community Development Corporation be, and hereby is, vacated; and, 4. That, in exchange, acquisition and acceptance of a relocated water line easement on the eastern side of the existing easement be, and hereby is, authorized and approved; and, 5. That, as a condition to the adoption of this ordinance, all costs and expenses associated herewith, including but not limited to, publication costs, survey costs and recordation of documents, shall be the responsibility of the petitioners, F & W Community Development Corporation, or their successors or assigns; and, 6. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions as may be necessary to accomplish this vacation and acquisition, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. 7. That this ordinance shall be effective on the date of its adoption. On motion of Supervisor Eddy to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Gary Robertson, Director, Utility Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections John Birckhead, Director, Real Estate Assessment Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney 3 I I . N 54'31'30" E 66:56' - 76.74' i r- - - - EXIST. 10 P.U:E. s I •. --t-~---------------- i~~ `r~~ ---I ~---EXISTING 20' WATER ~ "' ~s ~ I LINE EASEMENT s+ ri EXIST. 10' P.U.E. s- ~M ~ `~~* I I D.B. 1294, PG. 506 z I ~ ~ ~o l ~~~• I EXIST. 15' P.U.E. 30' M.B.L. ~'' ~~ \\ C-5 B C ;;: ~~ ~ 2 S ~_,, ~ , ~ - - ~ ~ NEW WATERLINE ~ ~ ~~ ~~ (b~f~>:. ~/ EASEMENT `'_, BLOCK 1~ c~ J a.\ ~; ~ I 3 \ a I. \ I 2 \~ 4 44'13" W 136.221 °~\ 106.22' 6,• C-4~ ~, ,~\ }~ ;~ ~ _3 WIND SoER~W LANE ' I :;:;; `°~ PORTION OF EXISTING g`~ ~'::>> ~ WATERLINE EASEMENT ~,• \I`-~. a TO BE VACATED Q ,: ~,~, ~ ~~' 0 ~~ ~o. ~~ 2 ~ ~ . ~:. ~ `='~ ~ _ .\ ~~:~ ,\ i ~ ~~~ \ i~ ~: sr ~ ,oo ~ ~ Fx~s ~ • 2S, _ 'z ~ \ ~ • F. / .~ P~ TO BE YACATEDENT LINE DIRECTION DISTANCE A-B N42 7'11"W 20.00 CH. - N4 7'11" 4•~ -D S42'2722"E 20,00' D-A S48'1T11'"W __. 4.00 VIEW W/#TERLINE EASEMENT UNE DIRECTION DISTANCE -F N46'31 24 W 168.43 CH. F_ 7 15.14 -H 4 ' 41 144,63 H 14 4 PLAT SHOWING PORTION OF EXISTING WATERLINE EASEMENT, (D. B. 1294, PG. 506) 70 BE VACATED AND NEW WATERLINE EASEMENT TO BE DEDICATED TO COUNTY OF ROANOKE FOR PUBLIC USE BY F & W COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ACROSS LOT 28 AND LOT 27, BLOCK 1, REVISED PLAT OF THE ORCHARDS, APPLEWOOD, SECTION 9, (P.B. 17, PG. 86) HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA SCALE i"= 60' GATE: 6 NOV. 1996 .. LUMSDEN ASSOCIATES, P.C. ENGINEERS-SURVEYORS-PLANNERS ROANOKE, VIADINIA 5-~. ~. ,. ACTION # ITEM NUMBER AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 3, 1996 AGENDA ITEM: Second Reading of Ordinance for Authorization to Vacate a Portion of an Existing 20-Foot Water Line Easement and to Accept a Relocated Portion of Same Easement. The Water Line Easement is Located across Lots 27 and 28, Block 1, Revised Plat of the Orchards, Applewood, Section 9 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: F&W Community Development Corporation conveyed to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, a water line easement, twenty feet (20') in width, across a tract of land owned by F&W Community Development Corporation by Deed dated August 22, 1988. F&W Community Development Corporation subsequently subdivided and developed a portion of said tract of land into Section 9, The Orchards, Applewood, as shown upon the plat dated March 10, 1994, made by Lumsden Associates, P.C., of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Plat Book 17, page 86. The first reading of the ordinance was held on November 19, 1996. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: F & W Community Development Corporation is the owner of Lots 27 and 28, Block 1, and a recent survey of said property reflects that the residential dwelling located thereon encroaches upon the southwest side of the existing 20' water line easement. F & W Community Development Corporation has requested that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, vacate a portion of the water line easement and accept in exchange an additional area for water line easement purposes on the southeastern side of the existing easement. ,7 a The encroachment created by the residential structure will be eliminated by vacating the portion of the original easement proximate to the dwelling. Dedication of the additional easement will insure adequate ingress/egress and work area to operate and maintain the water line, which was installed in the original easement. The location of the dwelling on Lot 28 will have no adverse impact on the Utility Department's ability to operate and maintain the water line located in the easement. Attached are copies of the revised easement plat dated November 6, 1996, as prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C. and the deed of easement prepared by Osterhoudt, Ferguson, Natt, Aheron & Agee. FISCAL IMPACT: No costs are associated with preparation and dedication of the subject easement, as no water line relocation will be required. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: The staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors adopt the Ordinance after the second reading for authorization to vacate a portion of an existing 20-foot water line easement and to accept a relocated portion of same easement. The water line easement in question is located across Lots 27 and 28, Block 1, Revised Plat of the Orchards, Applewood, Section 9. SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ACTION VOTE Approved () Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied () Eddy Received () Johnson _ _ _ Referred Harrison to Minnix _ _ _ Nickens Utility llirector X66; 56' _ _ _ 71 3 ~. h ^I S M ~~ ~^ EXIST. 10' P.U.E. M I 2 I l' ` 28 BLOCK I• _ I N 54'31'30" E ''74 EXIST. 10 P.U:E. \\ ----t--I---------------- ~o\ --~ ~--EXISTING 20' WATER LINE EASEMENT S~.`~,~ ~ I' D.B. 1294, PG. 506 ~o I 2 2~~~' EXIST. 15' P,U.E. G C_5 C _._.~~ 30' M.B,L. B ~ ~.~~ ` i , - -" -' ~ ~ NEW WATERLINE ~ ?~ ' ~ ~f ~, ~/ EASEMENT ~J ~. a ~~=;1 \ I ..:.^ Z \S 46'44'13" W 136.22' s ~\ C-4 ,\ ~~ , ~~ .~ ~ ~~, ~~~. ~ ~ \` ~_3 WINDCREST LANE 50' R/W PORTION OF EXISTING `WATERLINE EASEMENT ~ ~ TO BE VACATED ~____~ ._ _._ _ , 3 ~ ~~F~s 2 8 o~~ °j% /~~kiST\T 2S S \ ~pF ~' // ~ J ~ PORTION OF EASEMENT ' TO BE VACATED LINE DIRECTION DISTANCE A-B N42 7'11"W 20.00 CH. - N4 '17'11' 4•~ -D S42'2722`E 20.00' 0-A 48'17'11''W 4.00 NEW W/~TERLINE EASEMENT UNE DIRECTION DISTANCE E-F N46' 1 24 W 168.43 CH. F_ 7 15.14 -H 4 ' 41 144.63 H, 14 4 CURVE TABLE CURVE C-1 RADIUS 55.00' LENGTH 50.24 TANGENT CHORD 48.51 BEARING N1 T05'37 W DELTA 52'20.20" C-2 55.00 53.60 51,50 N71'10 53 W 55'5013 C-3 900.40 144.79 144,63 546'3341 E 09'1248 C-4 910.00 168.57 168.43 546'31 24 E 10'3713 C-5 930.00 20.00' 1 20.00 542'2711 E 01'1356 PLAT SHOWING PORTION OF EXISTING WATERLINE EASEMENT, (D. B. 1294, PG. 506) TO BE VACATED AND NEW WATERLINE EASEMENT TO BE DEDICATED TO COUNTY OF ROANOKE FOR PUBLIC USE BY F & W COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ACROSS LOT 28 AND LOT 27, BLOCK 1, REVISED PLAT OF THE ORCHARDS, APPLEWOOD, SECTION 9, (P,B. 17, PG. 86) HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA SCALE 1"= 60' GATE: 6 NOV. 1996 >. LUMSDEN ASSOCIATES, P.C. ENGINEERS-SURVEYORS-PLANNERS ROANOKE, VIA~INIA ~~ Qom. ~.~, ~~ Q~ o~ S ~ ~. ~~ ~75TERNGUOT, FERGU5GN, NATT, AHERGN & AGEE ATT~ R N EYS-AT-LAW ..°.']ANOKE, VIRGINIA 24GI9-1699 THIS DEED OF EASEMENT, made and entered into this day ~f , 1996, by and between F & R COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, a Virginia corporation, Grantor and THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Dirginia, Grantee. W I T N E S S E T H THAT FOR AND IN CONSIDERATION of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00), cash in hand paid by the Grantee to the Grantor, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the Grantor does hereby BARGAIN, SELL, GRANT and CONVEY with General Warranty and English Covenants, unto the Grantee, its successors and assigns forever, the following described waterline easement, situate in the County of Roanoke, Virginia, the location of said waterline easement being more fully ,described as follows, to-wit: Being- that-.. new wate.r,lne _ easement included within the bounds of Points E, F, G, H and E, as shover. on the attached plat entitled "Plat Showing Portion of Existing Waterline Easement, (D.B. 1294, Page 506) To Be Vacated and New Waterline Easement To Be Dedicated to County of Roanoke for Public Use By F & W Community Development Corporation", prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C., dated the 29th day of October, 1996. To have and to hold unto the Party of the Second Part and its assigns forever.. The easement conveyed herein shall run with the land and be binding upon the successors and assigns of the parties hereto. Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator of Roanoke County, Virginia, party of the third part, joins in the execution of this instrument to signify the acceptance by said Board of aupervlsors of the real estate conveyed herein pursuant to Ordinance Number ~! adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. WITNESS the following signatures and seals: F & W COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION BY (SEAL) IT'S THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA BY (SEAL) ELMER C. HODGE, County Administrator 'STATE OF VIRGINIA ) )TO-WIT: COUNTY OF ROANOKE ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of 1996, by of F & W Community Development, a lVirg-na corporation. NOTARY PUBLIC STERHDUDT, FERGUSDN. NAT', AHERON & AGES ATTORNEYS-AT-tAW 24018-ifi99 (My Commission Expires: STATE OF VIRGINIA ) )TO-WIT: COUNTY OF ROANOKE ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this - day of 1996, by Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator for the Board of Supervisors oz Roanoke County, Virginia. _ ) AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 3, 1996 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF AN EXISTING 20-FOOT WATERLINE EASEMENT AND ACCEPTANCE OF A RELOCATED PORTION OF THE SAME EASEMENT ACROSS LOT 28 AND 27, BLOCK 1, REVISED PLAT OF THE ORCHARDS, APPLEWOOD, SECTION 9 (PB 17, PAGE 86) WHEREAS, by Deed dated August 22, 1988, and recorded in Deed Book 1294 at page 506, F & W Community Development Corporation conveyed to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, a water line easement, twenty feet (20') in width, across a tract of land owned by F & W Community Development Corporation; and WHEREAS, F & W Community Development Corporation subsequently subdivided and developed a portion of said tract of land into Section 9, The Orchards, Applewood, as shown upon the plat dated 10 March 1994, made by Lumsden Associates, P.C., of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Plat Book 17, page 86; and, WHEREAS, the above-described 20' water easement is referenced as "existing twenty foot (20') water line easement" and shown upon the above referenced subdivision plat; and WHEREAS, the petitioners, F & W Community Development Corporation are the owners of Lot 28 and 27, Block 1, Section 9, The Orchards, Applewood, across which the twenty foot (20') water line easement is located; and WHEREAS, a recent survey of said property reflects that the residential dwelling located on Lot 28 encroaches upon the west side of the 20' water line easement; and, 1 J-~ WHEREAS, the petitioners have requested that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, vacate that portion of the water line easement encroached upon and accept in exchange an relocated water line easement across Lots 28 and 27 on the eastern side of the existing easement as shown on a plat prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C., dated 6 November 1996, entitled "Plat showing portion of existing water line easement (DB 1294, page 506) to be vacated and new water line easement to be dedicated to County of Roanoke for public use by F & W Community Development Corporation across Lot 28 and Lot 27, Block 1, Revised Plat of The Orchards, Applewood, Section 9, (PB 17, page 86)"; and WHEREAS, the relocation has been accomplished without cost to the County and meets the requirements of the Utility Department. 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 November 19, 1996; and a second reading and public hearing was held on December 3, 1996; and, 2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Charter of Roanoke County, the subject real estate (easement) is hereby declared to be surplus and the nature of the interest in real estate renders it unavailable for other public uses; and, 3. That, conditioned upon the exchange as hereinafter provided, a portion of the water line easement across Lot 28, Block 2 Sa 1, Section 9, The Orchards, Applewood, in the Hollins Magisterial District, owned by F & W Community Development Corporation be, and hereby is, vacated; and, 4. That, in exchange, acquisition and acceptance of a relocated water line easement on the eastern side of the existing easement be, and hereby is, authorized and approved; and, 5. That, as a condition to the adoption of this ordinance, all costs and expenses associated herewith, including but not limited to, publication costs, survey costs and recordation of documents, shall be the responsibility of the petitioners, F & W Community Development Corporation, or their successors or assigns; and, 6. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions as may be necessary to accomplish this vacation and acquisition, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. 7. That this ordinance shall be effective on the date of its adoption. C:\OFFICE\ WPWIN\ WPDOCS\AGENDA\ UTILITY\F&W.WAT 3 ACTION NUMBER ITEM NUMBER ~ ~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 3, 1996 AGENDA ITEM: Appointments to Committees, Commissions and Boards rOL7NTV ADMTNT S'rR_A'rOR' S COMMENTS ~ BLIIE RIDGE COMMIINITY SERVICES The three year term of Susan J. Cloeter, Roanoke County appointee, will expire 12/31/96. This appointment is made by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors. The unexpired three year term of J. William Pistner, Roanoke County appointee who has resigned (see attached letter). His term will expire on 12/31/98. This appointment is made by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors. The three year term of John M. Hudgins, Jr., Member at Large, will expire 12/31/96. The Member at Large appointment is recommended by the Blue Ridge Community Services Board, and must be confirmed by the County, and Cities of Salem and Roanoke. ,~ LIBRARY BOARD The four year term of Carolyn Pence, Vinton District, will expire 12/31/96. Ms. Pence has served three consecutive terms, and according to the bylaws of the Library Board, is not eligible to serve another term. K~-a SUBMITTED BY: ~• Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ---------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved ( ) Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied ( ) Eddy _ Received ( ) Harrison _ Referred ( ) Johnson To ( ) Minnix Nickens M~~-29-9r~ WED 1ra25 M HSI2QANOKE GALLEY P.,02 ~i V~g~a Divtsian of Student Affairs (~~~ Tech VIRGLIIA POLY'fECHKIC 1NSTiTUTE Culinary Services AND STATE UNIVERS31"y Residential eod Dining programs 200 Owens l;all. Blacksburg, Virginia 24061 {540} 231.6431 FAX (540) 231-6818 October 1, 1996 Mr. Onzlee Ware, Chairman Blue Ridge Community Services 301 Elm Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, VA 24016 Dear Onzlee. Please accept tlus letter as my resig~lation from the Board of Directors of Blue Ridge Community Services. As I have become more involved in community activities in Blacksburg, I find the time constraints to be inimical to frill involvement with Board initiatives. All the best of luck in the future. Enjoy. ~~ BiII Pistner A Lattd-Grant Universin•-The Cornmona'eahlr !s Our Campus Art Equal Oppnrruttin•/Affirnratire Acrlon -nsrlrurtwr L- ~ "' l.o AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 3, 1996 RESOLUTION 120396-6 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM L - CONSENT AGENDA BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. that the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for December 3, 1996 designated as Item L - Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 6, inclusive, as follows: 1. Confirmation of committee appointments to the Disability Services Board and the Roanoke County Planning Commission. 2. Request for acceptance of Homewood Circle Extension, Othello Circle, Midsummer Lane, platted under the "Wexford Phase I and II Subdivision" into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. 3. Request for acceptance of Penn Forest Place into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. 4. Acceptance of sanitary sewer facilities serving PMI - Ogden Road 5. Request from School Board to appropriate additional revenues from the dual enrollment program. 6. Request from School Board for appropriation of $44,950 to the School Capital Improvement Program for installation of automatic doors. 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 1 a this resolution. On motion of Supervisor Eddy to adopt the Consent Resolution after discussion of Item .6, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: ~• Mary H. Alen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Gary Robertson, Director, Utility Dr. Deanna Gordon, School Superintendent Garland Life, Sr. Director of Instruction Homer Duff, Director of Facilities & Operations 2 f A-1203 96-6. a ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER ~w/ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 3, 1996 AGENDA ITEM: Confirmation of Committee Appointments to the Disability Services Board and Roanoke County Planning Commission ~"OUATTV ADMTNTSTR_A'T'OR'S COMMENTS: The following nominations were made at the November 19, 1996 meeting and should not be confirmed. ~ Disability Services Board Supervisor Eddy nominated John M. Chambliss to serve a three- year term which will expire December 31, 1999. ~ Roanoke County Planning Commission Supervisor Eddy nominated Al G. Thomason to another four-year term representing the Windsor Hills Magisterial District. His term will expire December 31, 2000. It is recommended that the above appointments be confirmed by the Board of Supervisors. Respectfully submitted, Mary H. A len, CMC Clerk to the Board Approved by, ~~.. Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ~ ~ .. L-/ ---------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved (x) Motion by: Lee B Eddy to No Yes Abs Denied ( ) approve Eddy x Received ( ) Harrison x Ref erred ( ) Johnson ~_ To ( ) Minnix x Nickens x cc: File Disability Services Board File Roanoke County Planning Commission File L- ~, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, IN REGULAR MEETING ON THE 3RD DAY OF DECEMBER, 1996, ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING: RESOLUTION 120396-6.b REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF HOMEWOOD CIRCLE EXTENSION, OTHELLO CIRCLE, MIDSUMMER LANE, PLATTED UNDER THE "WEXFORD PHASE I AND II SUBDIVISION," INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (VDOT) SECONDARY SYSTEM. WHEREAS, the streets described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(a), fully incorporated herein by reference, are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Recorded Vote Moved By: Supervisor EddX Seconded By: None Required Yeas: Supervisors Eddk, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson Nays: None A Copy Teste: ~~ .~"~ Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Virginia Department of Transportation ~, ~ ' ~ 3 t .7 s ~ 4 a j ~,. z ~ 6 » ~ 6j4r „ ~ 3 . ~o• ~= ~ ~ 7 = a .~ e6rt6 ' ~ s J ~ 6223 6213 ~ ~07'° 2 ~ _ Ac - ~~: •,~ i `~ ~ i ,eu o 1.36 Ac _~ d22s 'y w ~~. auit t w ! 2 ~ 6 ~ ,0 _ 01 .' t ~ _ • 8 x.n I~ 3 I~~C 'fit rslC~ a E w 6 ~'~ 4 b L _ g ~ t ~ ~9,.f ~ 6219 ~ 6210 d o 7 ' t' 82218 . 620- ~ ~ ~ . ~ i4 ~ „ `e 33 4 ~ o' y~23t ,• ~• I 6 ?~ 8 5 a 20 ? 1.27Ac s X » n 14 s~04. ~a x'67 s •~ 6206 ~jx ?~. + ,L ns. w 6 ti 6 ° ' ~~ d 13 >o, .~~ = 8 . ~ .,, O~ ,- 6 20, r1 ~ 5 ~ ' G b `' * 9 - b °''> - ~' . I I 12 ~ 6388 .~ d ; Y '' , ~ 4 ~~ d° 6 6330 l7 a 16 33 3 6 ~ ' 6310, 6330 6370 6360 6380 + - .z~ •,a 15 " 6 ' s 63~ ~ 23 '~ " .... M ~~ ~~. p 8 6,196 :~~ ,. ,~ _. 19 ,, bra 63/3 ~ u y~ 22 X11 17, +,~.a ti ~$ d 20 . „o 19 18 ~ ' . n~ tit " 7°~•• +~' •' s . ~ ,~ Y ~'' ~ ' b p ,b e ~ 23 ~ 6333 ~ 63t3 ~ 6357 ~ 6.'69 - 6381 639/ ,e - I rm ~. u c+ z, ne ~+) .,o /B ~~ .,o ~~ Lei - ~~• ,. _.3:.,_ PROPOSED ADDITION SHOWN IN GRAY DESCRIPTION: 1) Homewood Circle 2) Othello Circle 3) Midsummer Lane LENGTH: (1) .044/.074/.21 MILES (2) .06 MILES (3) .14 MILES RIGHT OF WAY: (1) 50 FEET (2) 50 FEET (3) 50 FEET PAVEMENT WIDTH: (1) 34/32/26 FEET (2) 26 FEET (3) 26 FEET SERVICE: (1) 20 HOMES (2) 7 HOMES (3) 16 HOMES ROANOKE COUNTY HIGHWAY ACCEPTANCE FOR WE%FORD, PHASE 1 AND 2 ENGINEERING & •_ INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT • C m L U t4 Q • M N a 0 E a c m j N ^ H'' ~ H W e ~. ~ ~ fA A ~' >+ C III YO N v ~ o ~ _ N O L Cm U G R1 Z a ~ > N ~ N 0 ~ O c v; > r, < v, °z ~ U o ~ ., ~ ~ _, T~ O O N O O O it1 U O O O O O O O m tf~ '~. O F- W N M CO N ~O N ~ N ~D N ~ Z a x Q x A x Q x Q x A W 0 3 3 ~ O 3 3 3 H H z H z H z H z H z » ~ z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~% w a.. ~i a d' a ~i a ~i a 3 ~ d~ 0 ~n 0 ~r, 0 ~n 0 ~n 0 ~n 0 ~n N N N N N -- tf~ N --~ ~ N N t+l ~!'~ ^ i tf~ ^ il'1 N t1y ~ ~ ^ • _n n n m ~ m ~ m n m rn ~ m w ~ ai rn m a ~?J ~ d ~ n a° ~ a° ,•z} a° c^'1 `n as c^ `^ a° a m n n ~ ^ o n ~ n n ~ ~' ° ^ ~ ° ^ w o ^ ~ •a ~~ ~ .o ^ ~ .o ~ ~ .o ^ H~H ^ ~~ ^ 0-1 ~ ^ ~ ~ i CJ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ H ~ i CJ I ~ H p ~ ~ y C ~ pg ~ ~ ~ u p ~ O O ~ ~ H H H Q', a O p O~i Ow rn ~ ~ ~ ~ rn Ow ~ [x., O Q H ~1 ~ 3 V] ~ ~fJ ~ ~ ~ ~ V ! ~ ~!J W ~ ! l ~!] ~ ! ~ ~!] [ ] z O~ N ~ ~ ~n v~ ~n cn ~ ~ cn ~ Q ~ „~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ cn ~ M c m O N c ~ ~ O N a ~ a ON Oj L~j o O ~ N ^ ~ a O ~ ON . a ~ ON O o Fi c •E m '• 0 0 p 0 ~ O t"~ O v X 0 0 ~ ~ v ~ c ~ ~ '~ ~ d ~ d D D y b m .y ~ IL H b d IL !~- N d IL 1~ d lL /~- d lL !~- d LL. F~- d t`L 1~- d U m W a W a W a w U w w m 3 a ~i H Ri H ~+ H Ri d' a C, a o ~ U U U U ~ ~ L ~ O O O O ~ O 3 O 3 O 33 r7 a Z W O O W O ~ Q A e Q Z ~•' N l7 v of rp t~ m O 2 L--.."~ m O `v d Z w ~ v 2 < 5 H ~- a O b Z a O a 6 LL ~ . U '~ }. U W p U ~ .. u 4 v g "'"` • Form SR-3 (Rev. 7!1!93) `•.' SECONDARY ROADS DIV. WINDSOR HILLS Sceoedarv Roads Div. Use Oaly Route No• Etfcciive Dite: ReportJRecommendation for Change in Secondary System of State Highways Type and Authority for This Proposed Change ^ Project Addition (Sec. 33.1-229) ^ New Subdivision Street (Sec. 33.1-229) ^ Discontinuance (Sec. 33.1-150) ^ Rural Addition (CTB/RAP E~ Sec.33.1-229) ^ Abandonment (Sec. 33.1-151) ^ -Rural Addition (Sec. 33.1-72.1) ^ Abandonment (Project relocation, Sec. 33.1-155) ^ Town Addition (Sec. 33.1-79 or Sec. 33.1-82) Subdivision/ProjectNo : WEXFORD, PHASE I & II SUBDIVISION Street or Road Name HG!`9E'WOOD GR. , OTHEIdA CR. , ~SU~MER LANE bongth 0.33/.06/.14 (miles) Termini From: To: Right of Way Width 50 t Ft, Date Recorded: Deed Book ] 6 / ] 7 Page ] 22 / ] 22 Public Service Provided: 4 3 (Number of occupied units of varied ownership /explanation of qualifying service) Description of present section & condition: VARIOUS CURB AND GUTTER WITH ASPHALT Describe work proposed &. resulting section: NONE Estimated Cost of Proposed Improvment S - 0 - and Source of Funding ^ 100% VDOT Rural Addition Funds S 0 ^ 50% VDOT Rural Addition & 50% County General Funds 2(S )= S ^ Cost Bome by Speculative Interests and Secured by County S ^ Assessment or Contribution from Abutting Property Owners 5 ^ County Revenue Sharing Funds S ^ State Revenue Sharing Match (Fiscal Year ) S - 0 - ^ Other ( ) S Total Funding (must equal estimated cost of proposed improvement) S Remarks: Recommendation ^ Accept^ Abandon^ Discontinue Resident Engineer Date Secondary Roads Engineer Date Approved: District Administrator Date Commissioner Date Date: DECEMBER 3 , 1996 County: ROANOKE Mag Distr. • ACTION # ITEM NUMBER ~~~`"" AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE• AGENDA ITEM• December 3, 1996 Acceptance of Homewood Circle extension, Othello Circle, Midsummer Lane, platted under the "Wexford Phase I and II Subdivision," into the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Secondary System. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~~ ~~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Wexford of Roanoke, the developer of "Wexford Phase I and II Subdivision," requests that the Board of Supervisors approve a resolution to the Virginia Department of Transportation requesting that they accept 0.33 mile of Homewood Circle, 0.06 mile of Othello Circle, and 0.14 mile of Midsummer Lane. Staff has inspected these roads, with representatives of the Virginia Department of Transportation, and found these roads to be acceptable. FISCAL IMPACTS: No County funding is required. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board approve a resolution to VDOT requesting that they accept the streets in Wexford Phase I and II into the Secondary Road System. ~-a SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: J~.Gaz~ ~ ,~~~ixry~o~rn-, ~ Arnold Covey, Director Elmer C. Hodge of Engineering & Inspections County Administrator --------------------------------------------------------------- Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred To Motion by: ACTION Eddy Harrison Johnson Minnix Nickens VOTE No Yes Abs .` i.r~ THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, IN REGULAR MEETING ON THE 3RD DAY OF DECEMBER, 1996, ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING: RESOLUTION REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF HOMEWOOD CIRCLE EXTENSION, OTHELLO CIRCLE, MIDSUMMER LANE, PLATTED UNDER THE "WEXFORD PHASE I AND II SUBDIVISION," INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (VDOT) SECONDARY SYSTEM. WHEREAS, the streets described on the attached Additions Form SR-5 (a) , fully incorporated herein by reference, are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described on the attached Additions Form SR-5 (A) to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to X33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, resolution be forwarded to the Department of Transportation. Recorded Vote Moved By: Seconded By: Yeas: Nays: that a certified copy of this Resident Engineer for the Virginia A Copy Teste: Mary Allen, Board Clerk /~ i a ~ ,~ •yMdtt ,FW DR.. ./ . 3 ~ ' '~P ~ •~Hrant~°~ 0 6 ~d 1 oJ~~ ~.y9 ~PL~' Po ~ ~ ~ 5 ? ~ __ _. _____ __. _ _ v,.._._f ' . ~~~ ~ . C ~ ' ~~- - VI CINI T ~' MAP~°y,.-- , ~ . ~ ~: ; s . M 4 a~ i :,. ~ s ~ 6 6~~r n ~ 3 . ~ » •~ \ 7 i : m ~+ a 6166 r J \ ~ 6423 621 3 " ~~`O _ 2 ~° ~ ~ ' ~• ' ~~ ,a » i 6164 'S I Ac 4 - ,:t • r I Est o 1.36 Ac _~ Z = 6 ~, 6201 3 8 te.n 10 3 1 h~ a ~e ~e 6 `.e 4 5 . -~ 9 F 6218 10 s e, o r ~6Y °' ~ g' ~ 1 / 62/9 620/ 33 6 tt + ,e 9~ 1'~ i i • 6 * ~ t C • 1.2~ s :es ,rs 12 ~ y 623 ~t b 7 a II.10 At 8 .• o ~ 20 ~ 1 2TAC n X 6 s . ` 6106 ' : - t 1 -• • V . N ;~ , 6 r 6'~Z5 6S p, . ;~ b ~ ~cc r 620 ~ . ,, f0 ~ 8 ' 9~N 9- IG~ b // ~ I I /r ~~ 4 K I Q 12 13 iJ .. •~ ~ °i ''1Q C. b is 6 ~ 4. ..• , Y 6388 O a 6380 e'' , ~~ 16 3y a .~ ~~ ~ r~ 6 \ ' 6330= '• 6310 6J30 6370 6460 5 ~ ` ~ 23 a 6~ •.e. .» „e o S 6J96 pt `" ,e t" ~ 17 ti IS +,o^ 19 : 63/3 'brr ~ • • 22 - : " ss X21 _ 20 19 ~ ne d, ,yee " 7°~~ 18 • Y ~~ ~ ~ b • b n ~ , tr /s z ~1 d ~ 6333 ~ ~ 63t3 ~ 6337 ~ . • ~;69 f 6JBl 639 ~ rs , I _ PROPOSED ADDITION SHOWN IN GRAY DESCRIPTION: 1) Homewood Circle 2) Othello Circle 3) Midsummer Lane LENGTH: (1) .044/.074/.21 MILES (2) .06 MILES (3) .14 MILES RIGHT OF WAY: (1) 50 FEET (2) 50 FEET (3) 50 FEET PAVEMENT WIDTH: (1) 34/32/26 FEET (2) 26 FEET (3) 26 FEET SERVICE: (1) 20 HOMES (2) 7 HOMES (3) 16 HOMES ROANOKE COUNTY HIGHWAY ACCEPTANCE FOR WEYFORD, PHASE ] AND 2 ENGINEERING & _ INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT C m L U T1 Q rn M N a 0 E m 9 N ^ H H ~ ~ a H ~ w J w A O W O W _S. ~ c o N c ~ o ~ _ ~ O L ~ ttl ~ Z c% >_ N ~ N 0 ~ c v: > o ~ z U O n ~~ J c ~ O 00 O '--' N ~O O I~ O ~ O M ~1 °v ~ < U O O O O O O O in o W N M a0 N ~ N ~ N ~ N ~ Z ~ H H H H H fs+ ~ A A 3 A 3 A 3 A 3 3 U ° z z z z z W z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~; H ~ ~ a ~ ~ d' ~ ~ ~ ~ w a a a w a.~ 3 Q~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N ~n N N -- N ,_, in N N ~ in N N ~n ~n ~ ^ ~n N ~n ~_ ~ ~ ~ m ~ m ~ m _~ O ~ O ~} YI ai ~} c~j d n d ~ d c2} d n M ~n a n M ~n a d ~ n n ~ O n n '-' ~ ~ ~ w 0 ^ , 'a z O zz O ~o z O ~o ~ ~o ., ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ HHH HHHHHH ~ H ~ ~H ~ w ~ H ~ I ~ H w C . ~ ~ S p Q y Q ~ ~ I ~ I ~ ~ o ~ H c~i a H Qi 2S 9 ~ ~ ~ O~i H O ~i ~ Obi O ~ ~ O ~ O E -~ ~n ~ !~~ ~!1 3 ~ ~ 3 ~ ~ ! 3 G] U ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ WW 2 ~ n y U' ~ ~ ~n ~ n ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,n cn ~ , ~ cn ~ cn ~ M n m ~ O N a D ~ ~ NO b O ~ O ~ Cj Q ~ ~, N _" ~ m ~ ~ O o E ~ O c Fi o ~ ~ ~ O O ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ O ~ ~ O X 0 0 ~ ~ d `p Q Q ~ D: ~ 0= b ~ Q O ~ 2 4 ~ Q b i 'n O u`. O r C a ` LL O r b a LL O r d a ti G r a LL C r a LL O r a LL O r d m w a w a w a w w w 4 ; ~ U U x U H a z z r ri U H U U P: H r-7 ~-1 ~ y A A A U W W ~ 3 3 3 a Z w O W O w O W cn A t!) A c x x x H o H ~ H ~; a ~ 2 Z .- N M < N t0 h d O Z r Z w 2 W LL z 0 U LL F w U L-- :+•, g i. '"` Form SR-3 ~?<~LAJ SECONDARY ROADS D1V. Date: DECEMBER 3 , ] 996 County: ROANOKE Mag Distr. Secondary Roads Div. Uu Only Route No• Effective Date: Report/Recommendation for Change in Secondary System of State Highways Type and Authority for This Proposed Change ^ Project Addition (Sec. 33.1-229) ^ New Subdivision SVoet (Sec. 33.1-229) ^ Discontinuance (Sec. 33.1-150) ^ Rural Addition (CTB/RAP ~ Sec. 33.1-229) ^ Abandonment (Sec. 33.1-151) ^ ~Rurai Addition (Sec. 33.1-72.1) ^ Abandonment (Project relocation, Sec. 33.1-155) ^ Town Addition {Sec. 33.1-79 or Sec. 33.1-82) Subdivision/ProjectNo : WE%FORD, PHASE I & II SUBDIVISION Stroot or Road Name HONEtidOOD CR., OTHELLO CR., MIDS i1nT'lER IA_NE Length 0.33/.06/.14 (miles) Termini From: To: Right of Way Width 50 t Ft. Date Recorded: Deed Book ) 6 / 1 7 Page 122 / 1 22 Public Service Provided: 4 3 (Number of occupied units of varied ownership /explanation of qualifying service) Description of present section i~ condition: VARIOUS CURB AND GUTTER WITH ASPHALT Describe work proposed 8~ resulting section: NONE Estimated Cost of Proposed Improvment S - 0 - and Source of Funding ^ 100% VDOT Rural Addition Funds S _ 0 - ^ 50% VDOT Rural Addition 8~ 50% County General Funds 2(S )~ S ^ Cost Bome by Speculative Interests and Secured by County S ^ Assessment or Contribution from Abutting Property Owners S ^ County Revenue Sharing Funds S ^ State Revenue Sharing Match (Fiscal Year ) S - 0 ^ Other ( ) S Total Funding (must equal estimated cost of proposed improvem ent) S Remarks: Recommendation ^ Accept^ Abandon^ Discontinue Resident Engineer Date Secondary Roads Engineer Date Approved: District Administrator Date Commissioner Date WINDSOR HILLS L-3 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, IN REGULAR MEETING ON THE 3RD DAY OF DECEMBER, 1996, ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING: RESOLUTION 120396-6.C REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF PENN FOREST PLACE INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY SYSTEM WHEREAS, the streets described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(a), fully incorporated herein by reference, are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets meet the requirements established by the Subd~v~sion Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirement ~ and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Recorded Vote Moved By: Supervisor Eddv Seconded By: None Required Yeas: Supervisors Eddk, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson Nays: None A Copy Teste: Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Virginia Department of Transportation ~., ~a 3i _ ;~ .,~ o' ` `F'y ~: Y' ~ .,,\ 9:1 .Y n eDA 1- 0~.~, \ , I P ~ // i I o~ ~~~+ Qo r I r4,e .a '.' ° ez yey 3 n / 16 e ~ ~~ ~ O ~~ ii °~ PROPOSED ADDITION SHOWN IN GRAY DESCRIPTION: . 1) Penn Forest Place - From the intersection of Merriman Road (Rt. 613) to cul-de-sac. LENGTH: 0.13 MILES RIGHT OF WAY: 60 FEET ROADWAY WIDTH: (2) 16 FEET PAVEMENT (1) 12 FEET MEDIAN SERVICE: 21 HOMES ROANOKE COUNTY ACCEPTANCE OF PENN FOREST PLACE INTO THE ENGINEERING & _ VIRGINIA DEPART!~NT OF. TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY SYSTEM. INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT ~'~,dD-< c 0 S U W "~ m 6 ~ O U ~+ • Q O O E 2 c ~. m y ~ W ~ U S ~ a N y O gO W m Ra ?. C~ C O N ~ ~> _° tp 'I E m~'I < Z n t^ _> N ~ N 0 E O V'; ~ ~ . ~:: ~ '~ U ~ m Ch M c .:~ ~ .~ r. U O O < 00 O r S z n n _ 3 =. N M O ^ ~ O m 1 O o m a m a m o a a C a a a a a a a a 0 2 ro N U O O ~ ~ ~ v b L rZ ~ ~ ~ b ~ N [ia Q CV n ~ m 0 m 0 m 0° m 0 m 0 Bi 0° "ai o m c . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m yC~ ' ' b ~ ' ' CL Q yC. ' ' Q d yC~ LL l~ C} U ' ' 2 d ~ ' ' Q 4 yC~ U ' ' ~ Ib .y ~ ` a ~ r a ii ~ r a ` u. 0 r ti ` a ~ r a ii ~ r a LL Q r a ~i ~ r a X b 3 E.., r W $ O U D S w ~ _ ~ ~ z a ~ z Z a a m 2 Z ~- N t7 < N 0 n N C Z ~.w O v ~ R c r E .' ~ z w ~ .o."' S m < t~ V d LL O a Z n O o / U `' ~ ~ Y V LL~G U ~ E L ~~ 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: December 3, 1996 AGENDA ITEM: Acceptance of Penn Forest Place into the Virginia Department of Transportation Secondary System. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~r~ ~~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Boone, Boone & Loeb, the developer of Penn Forest Place subdivision, requests that the Board of Supervisors approve a resolution to the Virginia Department of Transportation requesting that they accept 0.13 miles of Penn Forest Place. The staff has inspected this road along with representatives of the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) and find the road is acceptable. FISCAL IMPACT• No County funding is required. RECOMMENDATIONS• The staff recommends that the Board approve a resolution to VDOT requesting that they accept Penn Forest Place into the Secondary Road System with the following conditions: the road servicing lots 13 thru 19 of Penn Forest Place subdivision are private. Maintenance, including snow removal, is not a public responsibility. It shall not be eligible for acceptance into the State Secondary System for maintenance until it is constructed and complies with all requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation for the addition of subdivision streets current at the time of such request. Any costs required to cause this street to become eligible for addition into the state system shall be provided with funds other than those administered by the Virginia Department of Transportation. 1 ~'"' SU ITTE~ B APPROVED BY: ~ , s~~ A~z'nold Covey, irec or E mer C . Hodge of Engineering & I pections County Administrator ------------------------------------ ACTION --------------- ------------ VOTE Approved ( ) Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied ( ) Eddy Received ( ) Harrison Referred Johnson To Minnix Nickens 2 «... THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, IN REGULAR MEETING ON THE 3RD DAY OF DECEMBER, 1996, ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING: RESOLUTION REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF PENN FOREST PLACE INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY SYSTEM WHEREAS, the streets described on the attached Additions Form SR-5 (a) , fully incorporated herein by reference, are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described on the attached Additions Form SR-5 (A) to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to X33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Recuirements, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Recorded Vote Moved By: Seconded By: Yeas: Nays: A Copy Teste: Mary Allen, Board Clerk i ry; a ' \ >' Z7 '~" : c :\c6 '' ,° ~ s ~ 25 ` y~h 5. P 2 ~~~ ~h\ '~l~ ~ b'\ .... ~). , \ ~I ~i ~~ ~~ - .t .y/ _ 1 PROPOSED ADDITION SHOWN IN GRAY DESCRIPTION: 1) Penn Forest Place - From the intersection of Merriman Road (Rt. 613) to cul-de-sac. LENGTH: 0.13 MILES RIGHT OF WAY: 60 FEET ROADWAY WIDTH: (2) 16 FEET PAVEMENT (1) 12 FEET MEDIAN SERVICE: 21 HOMES ROANOKE COUNTY ACCEPTANCE OF PENN FOREST PLACE INTO THE ENGINEERING & _ VIRGINIA DEPARTr1ENT OF. TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY SYSTEM- INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT ~~ _ , y C~ 'T e si' ~, ''o oh ~ Y' ~` A i ~ m O ~ O U ~+ Q a 0 E 2 c T m 7 h ~ W ~ U ~p ~ H N O W V ~ a ~C+ O 0 YU W O ' O ~ _ ~ O E CmC U C l0 ~ Z ~ ~ N ~ N O C Y: Y Q "' G ~ is 2 U O n C~ O J m M M v ~ ~ ~ < U 00 1~- 2 i n f 3 3 `° N _ _M ~ o o m m ~" o ° m ° m ° ° ° ° a ~ a a a a a a m g z v ~ ## S C ~ ~ O g i 0 c V .~ ~' ~n ~ ~ ~ \ U ~ ~. Q N . n ~ H m ~ m O m O O O O ~ 01 ~ ~ O ~...j ZS ~ ZS ZS ~S b ZS `o m ' u Q o Q u F ¢ a Q o Q c ~ ¢ o .p - ~ c m 0 3 H ao ~ 'C ~I ~ c ~ z ~ W y W 7 Z .- N P1 Q 1A m ^ H 0 Z alb f ~p4 y \ U O .~ f- E ~' Z ~ ~ v` < $ LL a O e G 2 n O o 6 U ~ ~ LL F- V W '~ v E U G A-120396-6.d ACTION # ITEM NUMBER ~"~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 3, 1996 SUBJECT: Acceptance of Sanitary Sewer Facilities Serving PMI -Ogden Road COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~ _~~~ V~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Developers of PMI -Ogden Road, PM Properties, Inc., have requested that Roanoke County accept the Deed conveying the sanitary sewer facilities serving the subdivision along with all necessary easements. The sewer facilities are installed, as shown on plans prepared by T. P. Parker & Son entitled PMI - Ogden, dated March 14, 1996, which are on file in the County Engineering Department. The sanitary sewer facility construction meets the specifications and the plans approved by the County. FISCAL IMPACT: The value of the sanitary sewer construction is $2,800. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors accept the sanitary sewer facilities serving PMI - Ogden Road along with all necessary easements, and authorize the County Administrator to execute a Deed for the transfer of these facilities. f Z- ~/ SUBMITTED BY: .1 Gary Ro rtson, P.E. Utility Director APPROVED: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved (x) Motion by: Lee B Eddv to No Yes Abs Denied ( ) approve Eddy x Received ( ) Harrison x Referred ( ) Johnson x To ( ) Minnix x Nickens x cc: File Gary Robertson, Director, Utility Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Paul Mahoney, County Attorney L-y CHATTEL DEED THIS CHATTEL DEED, made this 4th day of November 1996 , by and between: PM Properties. Inc hereinafter referred to as the "Developer," party of the first part; and the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, its successors or assigns, hereinafter referred to as the "Board," party of the second part. WITNESSETH: THAT FOR AND IN CONSIDERATION of the mutual benefits accruing to the parties, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Developer does hereby GRANT, CONVEY, ASSIGN AND TRANSFER, with the covenants of GENERAL WARRANTY OF TITLE, in fee simple unto the Board all water and/or sewer lines, valves, fittings, laterals, connections, storage facilities, sources of water supply, pumps, manholes and any and all other equipment and appurtenances thereunto belonging, in and to the water and/or sewer systems in the streets, avenues, public utility, easement areas, water and sewer easement areas that have been or may hereafter be installed by the Developer, along with the right to perpetually use and occupy the easements in which the same may be located, all of which is more particularly shown, described and designated as follows, to wit: As shown on the plan entitled PMI - Olden ,made by T.P. Parker & Son and on file in the Roanoke County Engineering Department. ~-y The Developer does hereby covenant and warrant that it will be responsible for the proper installation and construction of the said water and/or sewer systems including repair of surface areas affected by settlement of utility trenches for a period of one (1) year after date of acceptance by the Board and will perform any necessary repairs at its cost. Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby joins in the execution of this instrument to signify the acceptance of this conveyance pursuant to Resolution No. adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, on the day of , 19_. Developer: By: As: State o£ ~. ~ l County/f~ of: OA , to wit: The forego' instrument was acknowledged before me this: day of 1 ci~, B /~i 1 Duly authorized officer ~ 5 i,,[aE' !Title on behalf of ~ ~ ~~ Notary is My Commission expires: ~~ WITNESS THE FOLLOWING signatures and seals: ~-Y Approved as to form: County Attorney State of County/City of: Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia By (SEAL) Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator to wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this: day of 19 _, by Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator, on behalf of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. Notary Public My Commission expires: c ' ~. - _ lNr c~awrc)xw )o !ar tnsu{e ~•I fM Ha'!X`7'~p0 A/,~ a s_. \ ~.~~ . u.1{I On[))y O[/A.47YOI- J ~ ASE 9 ~ e>!>L, ii /[fSOAMIL Y YfPlp/•M f0µ0 t. WµSUf - ~ \'~! ~ ~i1 •/ KN.lxI • easoi ~ 3s I~ / ~ ~ _ . nvo/afr a. STRANNA L ARTHUR, ET ALS • uuI / ±1 Ii ~~-+i~-~"'~^ . 1 CM MQ »,IS-01-I! _ aAUI[wnr zollfo a-] 'h, » t r~K . •. 91n ~ 7~0• wq n.c I •ti ~ , roe1l~ •) I rlp~ / I / ~ KfO fJC ` 1 ~ 7 KfO.aY 1H90I I4a.0eI / 11 ; ~ eC{I .1! / ~ . - • 101:{C ~!Q>Oe[ / •, % 9)000. ~? ~ ' ~~/,• \\ • 100 ast _ -\~ ~ / 7 \^'• `; \`` 1~6C[ - ~ ~ ~ . Iaoa[ \T ua3TC~')~Sl ~G• ' ~ ~a sr~ ss a.[ -~ ~~ _ ~ ~. IJO90I • IOOe1. / ff ssT / ~ t;.y`_ ~13~" :.•s.c.YCa ~ \ ~ n{.[• Fy +mme sms \. H.1[ ~ 1vv f.[ \ \ mMMd14L ~) \~ ` • fe.]![ . wa[ \ fe:o[ fA4fOAO~~eA/CO IO[L \ )0" Oel IlY ,A .-~~ ~ / ' , NO. !0i -j3/f ! Q' AfOY( CRAO[ W as sa fLEVAAOH 1 NM L'OYC.4t)t D[A/K7If ago = !00.00 (ASSUi ~' y~~ /AD SM4L K St7 LML ~+-a':]la ` ~ . A7 lf.00 . f{.l:t ': 7. G¢ [..,I Y.l\ HONE' - 7 ~ I r4•c~ [~ 1 NM LOG! O7 ~ +~ •r f{o:[ ff' -474! / 4 S 9e !7l' e ~ oo i •'~4.. ~ 1 ~~~~ S yt°e ye° e s q4b. e~ /J~4 •e.- +s7, [r 111 _ 1 7 ! ~~ 11 ~~ 1 ' ~Y[. av^b fa.SlL l f 6 O >HC /tYYfevt eav).uuof sNAu coofouu)r Ylu/rr / PROPbS£0 Of}TC£ BU LD ING 47(RAL LOG7lQV3' M7lYN (f.J07 ]q. IL (round )leer a/I:a,1) 7Nf fONO/N0 M7N 7HC (3,7/e a4• II. upp+r /WYr~ sllicea) .uc,{'7fc7ufAL /wKf (l.ew a4• n. e+,enl.nl ,/ere(.) l1N. ROOF ~ ff.73 • fs>eI • f>u[ _ . ~ • x.eaf f. >ac [[i9> Ia[ / I ~ C 1 yI. / GIe` f G srr[[~~wrt frOf[fI H.i'G ~• 70 A'(C~SC~YlN7 r / Ll x•sruuox[ / ~i!'~ l VVVVVV~~~iii ~ l I / 4 I fJ.sap / . ~~ ' l~•l ~, vr, .r.wwr ! / 1 1 . ! L r 1 / 1 L 1 f I 1 r / / --- ROANOKE COUNTY UTILITY DEPARTMENT ACCEPTANCE OF SEWER E%TENSION SERVING PA1 PROPERTIES, INC. ;~ i~ A-1203 9 - ~"~ 6 6.e MEETING DATE: December 3, 1996 AGENDA ITEM: Request to appropriate additional revenues from dual enrollment program. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: ~r~ Roanoke County Schools and Virginia Western Community College currently have an agreement whereby the college provides a college level course in the department of English. This course is taught within the local high schools, by Roanoke County Schools teachers who meet the college's criteria for an adjunct professor. Monies that have been collected exceed the expenses; therefore, the request for these additional funds to be appropriated for inservice and materials to be used in the program. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Roanoke County Schools collected $5,715 tuition from 127 students. Virginia Western Community College will reimburse the Roanoke County Schools $14,166.96 for services rendered (teachers, administrative expenses, rooms, utilities, and maintenance). Roanoke County Schools owes Virginia Western Community College $18,398.65 for tuition and technology fees and college service fees. The difference between that which was collected and that which was spent is $1,483.31. See attachment. FISCAL IMPACT: An additional $1,483.31 was generated in the dual enrollment program and could be used to purchase additional materials and inservice for the program. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends appropriating the additional revenues of $1,483.31 to the dual enrollment program. '_ L- S Submitted by: Garland Life Sr. Director of Instruction Approved by: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ---------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved (x) Motion by: Lee B. Eddy to No Yes Abs Denied ( ) approve Eddy x Received ( ) Harrison x Ref erred ( ) Johnson ~. To ( ) Minnix x Nickens x cc: File Garland Life, Sr. Director of Instructions Dr. Deanna Gordon, School Superintendent Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance ~_ S ATTACHMENT As per the agreement between Virginia Western Community College and Roanoke County Schools, each student will pay $45 per semester for three credits. Each school collected the following amount: Cave Spring High School - 41 students $1,845.00 Glenvar High School - 9 students 405.00 Northside High School - 39 students 1,755.00 William Byrd High School - 38 students 1,710.00 Total amount collected $5,715.00 The amount to be paid Virginia Western Community College by Roanoke County Schools is as follows: Tuition and technology fees - 381 credits @ $47.65 $18,154.65 College service fee for 122 students @ $2.00 244.00 Total due Virginia Western Community College $18,398.65 The amount to be paid Roanoke County Schools by Virginia Western Community College is as follows: Services rendered (teachers, administrative expenses, rooms, utilities, and maintenance costs (77% of $18,398.65) $14,166.96 Virginia Western Community College payment to Roanoke County Schools Students' payments of $45 each Total collected from VWCC and students Roanoke County Schools' payment to VWCC Net (funds requested to be placed in account for inservice and materials for dual credit courses) $14,166.96 + 5,715.00 $19,881.96 - 18,398.65 $ 1,483.31 't ACTION # A-1203 96-6.f ITEM NUMBER ~'r MEETING DATE: December 3, 1996 AGENDA ITEM: Request for Appropriation of $44,950 to the School Capital Improvement Program for Installation of Automatic Doors. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~ ~~`~ ~~ BACKGROUND: Roanoke County Schools, through Mrs. Denise Swanson, a parent, has solicited grants/donations for installation of automatic door systems (automatic door openers) to facilitate entrance to school buildings for individuals with disabilities. The ADA Committee determines the order of installation unless a designated grant is received. install the door openers. than requesting an appropriation each time monies are received. Expenditures would be subject to receiving the money. The appropriation would save staff time and expedite the efforts to SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Roanoke County Schools has received pledges of several grants from area businesses and groups. The grant monies must be appropriated by the County Board of Supervisors before they can be spent and may come at various times and in various amounts. The Roanoke County School Board is requesting that $44,950 be appropriated for said project rather FISCAL IMPACT: None, no local matching required. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends appropriation of $44,950 for installation of automatic door openers at schools designated on the attached list. These funds would be expended when grants/gifts to the appropriate School Board CIP Budget are received. Omer Duff. Director of Facili ies and Operations Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ACTION VOTE .. .~ ~ C.-~ ---------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved (x) Motion by: Lee B. Eddy to No Yes Abs Denied ( ) approve Eddy x Received ( ) Harrison x Referred ( ) Johnson x To ( ) Minnix x Nickens x cc: File Homer Duff, Director of Facilities & Operations Dr. Deanna Gordon, School Superintendent Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance O ~iy ~ O o a 9c~ej-' £scs~~~h ~~]P~II'~IIIlIl~IIIl~ ®~ ~~CIlllIl~Il~S ~7[Il~L ®j[D~7C'~¢Il®IIIlS ]E~®~Il~®~~, ~VA~ ~4®~9 TDD 540-562-3996 PHONE 540-562-3800 FAX 540-562-3988 School Code # O eners Unit Price Total A. R. Burton Technology Center 1 3 899 2,697.00 Cave Spring High 2 3 899 2,697.00 Glenvar High 3 2 899 1,798.00 Northside High 4 2 899 1,798.00 William Byrd High 6 3 899 2,697.00 Cave Spring Junior 10 4 899 3,596.00 Glenvar Middle 12 2 899 1,798.00 Hidden Valley Junior 11 899 0.00 Northside Middle 13 2 899 1,798.00 William Byrd Middle 15 2 899 1,798.00 Roanoke County Career Center 14 3 899 2,697.00 Back Creek Elem. ~ 21 2 899 1,798.00 Bent Mountain Elem. 22 2 899 1,798.00 Burlington Elem. 24 1 899 899.00 Cave Spring Elem. 26 1 899 899.00 Clearbrook Elem. 27 1 899 899.00 Fort Lewis Elem. 32 2 899 1,798.00 Glen Cove Elem. 33 1 899 899.00 Glenvar Elem. 34 1 899 899.00 Green Valley Elem. 35 1 899 899.00 Herman L. Hom Elem. 31 2 899 1,798.00 Mason's Cove Elem. 39 1 899 899.00 Mt. Pleasant Elem. 40 1 899 899.00 Mt. View Elem. 42 1 899 899.00 Oak Grove Elem. 43 2 899 1,798.00 Penn Forest Elem. 44 4 899 3,596.00 Roland E. Cook Elem. 46 0 899 0.00 W. E. Cundiff Elem. 36 1 899 899.00 TOTAL $44,950.00 BLUE RIDGE PARKWAY ~ _ J ROAD ACCESS BRIEFING PAPER September 11, 1996 Blue Ridge Parkway Resource Planning and Professional Services Division 400 B.B.&T. Building Asheville, NC 28801 (704) 271-4779 ext. 219 Recently, we have heazd that a number of Roanoke County residents are mounting a campaign opposing the closure of the temporary connection between the Blue Ridge Parkway and Rutrough Road. The National Park Service (NPS) agreed to allow a temporary connection between the Pazkway and Rutrough Road to provide access to Explore Park only until the permanent access is completed. All parties involved in the project agreed that the Rutrough Road connection is temporary in nature, strictly limited in its purpose, and is to be removed immediately upon completion of the permanent spur road. The NPS has no means or authority to grant the continued use of the temporary connection beyond completion of the spur road. Following is a discussion of congressional intent for the Pazkway and access authorities available to the NPS and a chronological background for this specific issue. The States of Virginia and North Carolina acquired all of the lands for the Blue Ridge Parkway right-of-way. Deeds that transferred all of the properties from the states to the National Park Service specifically called out those public primary and secondary roads and/or private crossings that had access reservations guaranteeing access to or across the Parkway motor road at a specific location. Congress authorized the Blue Ridge Parkway as a unit of the National Park System under the Act of June 30, 1936, and established as its purpose "to link Great Smoky Mountains National Park and Shenandoah National Park by way of a recreational destination-oriented motor road. " Through congressional intent and management prescription as a national parkway, the Blue Ridge Parkway has for sixty years been managed as an elongated park, providing scenic and recreational opportunities, and as limited access motor road assuring an uninterrupted high quality visitor experience. To reinforce the intent of limited access, Congress further authorized the National Park Service in Public Law 87-7b, June 30, 1961, to eliminate hazardous crossings of and accesses to the Parkway. Beyond the deed reserved rights for access, the National Park Service only has the authority to allow construction of a new public access on federal lands if the highway is part of the interstate system or designated as a national defense highway. Even in this situation, the agency proposing construction of such a highway must demonstrate that there is no feasible and prudent alternative to such use and that the project includes all possible planning to minimize harm (to park resources) in accordance with Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966, as amended. As Congress and the Commonwealth of Virginia did not intend that the Parkway serve general transportation needs, deed reserved access throughout the Roanoke Valley was provided only at intersections with primary state and federal highways. No direct access to the Parkway was deed reserved for Rutrough Road, only a grade separated crossing. Continued access to Rutrough Road would set a dangerous and unacceptable precedent. Parkway neighbors at many locations, including Rutrough Road, have long sought direct Parkway access to their private drives and public secondary roads as matters of convenience. If our original mutual agreement in this matter were to be somehow overturned, inevitably, we would be petitioned to provide similar accommodation to local interests with similar desires at many of the 130 other road crossings. The resultant impacts would greatly diminish the value of the Parkway driving experience and impose a considerable cost burden to the NPS and the two respective state departments of transportation. It is vital to ensure at this time that all parties remain firmly committed to the original agreement to sever the connection on completion of the spur road. CHRONOLOGICAL BACKGROUND NEED FOR TEMPORARY ACCESS -September 1989 The need for temporary access between the Blue Ridge Parkway motor road and the Explore Project was initially raised by Mr. Bern Ewert, Project Director, and Mr. Richard Burrow, Project Engineer, who were employed by the River Foundation. During a September 30, 1989, meeting with Congressman Jim Olin, Parkway Superintendent Gary Everhardt and Mr. Roy Crawford, Federal Highway Administration, it was discussed that the Explore Park would be open as early as July 1992 and that National Park Service (NPS) and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) planning, compliance, bidding and construction work for the Roanoke River Parkway would not be completed prior to the July opening, thus, there would not be any visitor access to the Park. To remedy this schedule problem, Mr. Ewert suggested that "a temporary access might be able to be developed, all on the south side of the Roanoke River...This temporary access would be taken out of service just as soon as the permanent access is completed... " BLUE RIDGE PARKWAY POSITION -November 1989 Mr. Ewert's temporary access proposal was answered in writing by Superintendent Everhardt in a letter to Mr. Richard Burrow dated November 15, 1989. Mr. Everhardt stated in that letter, "The parkway concept is that of an elongated park, providing scenic and recreational opportunities to the visiting public. Most Importantly, a parkway involves limited access, with a purpose to serve the public by assuring an uninterrupted high quality visitor experience. Any access connection must be considered in light of these principles and concepts. The ramifications of providing temporary access goes beyond simply a conflict with existing policy. Regardless of intent, there is the reality that the temporary access too often becomes permanent... " MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING -November 1991 A signed Memorandum of Understanding between the Virginia Recreational Facilities Authority and the Nationa_1 Park Service concerning the Blue Ridge Parkway extension to Explore Park set out a number of conditions for that partnership. In particular, that the 1.4 mile-long Parkway extension would provide... "a direct link from the Blue Ridge Parkway to the Explore Park and will be the access route for visitors to the Explore Park. " No such condition was made for continuation of the temporary access at Rutrough Road. ACCESS NEGOTIATIONS -December 1989 to June 1993 During this time period, The River Foundation (TRF), NPS, FHWA and Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) managers and staff discussed the location options for the Roanoke River Parkway and a temporary access. Through a public participation and environmental impact statement process, NPS and FHWA officials approved a section of the Roanoke River Parkway that would be on the south side of the Roanoke River connecting the Blue Ridge Parkway and the Explore Park by a 1.4 mile-long "spur road." With this decision came the proposal for building a temporary access b.,tween the Parkway motor road and Rutrough Road. In February 1993, Roanoke County agreed to widen, pave and otherwise improve the existing neighborhood street, Rutrough Road, in order to provide a better local street, improved construction access to Explore, and a temporary connector road with the Blue Ridge Parkway for access to Explore Park while the spur road connector is under construction. The proposed improvements to Rutrough Road were estimated to cost $700,000, with Roanoke County providing $350,000 and VDOT matching with $350,000. A meeting was convened in Roanoke, Virginia, on June 16, 1993, to discuss the temporary connection to Rutrough Road. The following people were in attendance: from FHWA--Carol Jacoby, Bob Welton, John Seabrook, Bob Bercler; from the NPS--Bob Hope, Jim Fox; from VDOT--Fred Wagner, J. P. Orr, P. A. Sensabaugh, Jr., L. E. Markham; and from Roanoke County--Elmer Hodge and Joyce Waugh. The NPS position at that meeting emphatically stated [hat the access, if it was granted, would only be for the time period during which the Roanoke River Parkway (Explore Park spur road) was under construction. Furthermore, the temporary access was only to provide visitor access to Explore Park. The access was not to be built for the convenience of local commuting traffic or school bus routes. So that all parties understood the connection was to be temporary, 2 the NPS representatives at the meeting stipulated that an agreement permitting the construction of a temporary access+at Rutrough Road be drafted by the NPS and signed by VDOT since it was agreed that they would construct the temporary access road. LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION -October 1993 Temporary access discussions and negotiations continued until September 1993, and culminated October 14, 1993, when Superintendent Everhardt signed a Letter of Authorization that enabled VDOT under certain terms and conditions to construct and maintain a temporary connection between Rutrough Road and the Blue Ridge Parkway. Condition number 10 contained in the Letter of Authorization specifically called for the following: "The temporary connection between the Blue Ridge Parkway and Rutrough Road will be closed and obliterated immediately after a spur road from the Parkway to Explore Park is opened for public travel. Leaving the connector in place will not be considered. " The Letter of Authorization was agreed to and signed October 26, 1993, via a letter from Mr. P. A. Sensabaugh, VDOT, District Construction Engineer, and addressed to Superintendent Everhardt. The VDOT letter added some language to Condition No. 10 as follows: "FHWA contract for the spur connector will contain provisions for the removal of the connector (temporary access) and restoration of the area. " CONSTRUCTION OF TEMPORARY ACCESS -Summer 1994 CONSTRUCTION OF EXPLORE PARK SPUR ROAD -Spring 1995 to Summer 1997 3 ~Illllllllllllllllllllllilllllllllllllilllllllllllllillllllllllllllllillllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllilllilllllllllllllll~ _ - - ~_~ - _ - AGENDA ITEM NO. ~~ APPE CE REQUEST PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE / CITIZENS COMMENTS _, s ~ SUBJECT: ~ ~1 ~. ~ ~ b ~ l~ ~~ - I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. I AGREE TO ABIDE BY THE GUIDELINES LISTED BELOW: s ~ a~ ~ ~_ ~ ^ Each speaker will be given between three to five minutes to comment whether speaking as an individual or representative. The Chairman will decide the time limit based on the number of citizens speaking on an issue, and will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to do otherwise. - _ ^ Speaker will be limited to a presentation of their point of view only. Questions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. ... c ^ All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between arecognized speaker and audience members is not allowed. ^ Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at all times. ^ Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments = with the clerk. _ ~- ^ INDIVIDUALS SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF AN ORGANIZED GROUP = SHALL FILE WITH THE CLERK AUTHORIZATION FROM THE GROUP ALLOWING THE INDIVIDUAL TO REPRESENT THEM. c i _ ~ _ ~ - S ~~ PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK ., - - ~Illllilillllillllllllllllllilllllillllllllllillllllillllllllllililillllllillllilllillllilllllllllllllllllllllllillllllllilllllllm GENERAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Amount Beginning Balance at July 1, 1996 (unaudited) $7,176,332 Add to Fund Balance from 1995-96 operations 1,440,559 Revised beginning balance at July 1, 1996 (audited) 8,616,891 Oct 8,1996 Public -Private Partnership Nov 19,1996 Valley Gateway Project (250,000) (599,250) 7.92% Balance at December 3, 1996 $7,767,641 8.58% Changes below this line are for information and planning purposes only. Balance from above $7,767,641 Recommended increase in 1996-97 budgeted revenues based upon 3 month review 2,050,943 Reserve for R.R. Donnelly -Phase II (570,000) Reserve for Valley Gateway sewer extension (150,000) Potential Liability (400,000) $8,698,584 9.60% Note: On December 18, 1990, the Board of Supervisors adopted a goal statement to mamtam the General Fund Unappropriated Balance at 6.25% of General Fund Revenues 1996-97 General Fund Revenues $90,565,107 6.25% of General Fund Revenues $5,660,319 Respectfully Submitted, ~~~ ~~ Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance C.~-/ of General Fund Revenues M:\Finance\Common\Board\Gen96. WK4 CAPITAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Amount Beginning Balance at July 1, 1996 (unaudited) $648,413.00 (Includes final payment from City of Salem which was received in June 1996) Sale of surplus equipment during 1995-96 46,093.00 Amount added from 1995-96 operations per rollover policy 368,480.00 Revised beginning balance at July 1, 1996 (audited) 1,062,986.00 Balance at December 3, 1996 $1,062,986.00 Respectfully Submitted, ~~~ ~.~~ Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance M:\Finance\Common\Board\Cap96. WK4 RESERVE FOR BOARD CONTINGENCY COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA From 1996-97 Original Budget August 27, 1996 Public-Private Partnership October 22, 1996 County share of Sheriff positions October 22, 1996 Outside legal council for Sheriff Nov 19, 1996 Environmental testing at Courthouse Balance at December 3, 1996 Respectfully Submitted, Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance "` Amount $305,313.00 (105,220.0 (11,842.0 (20,000.0 (14,015.4 X154.235.55 I M:\Finance\Common\Board\Board96. WK4 i ~" j ~. , I_ it :; ~ ; n ~~ c` r, .y + ,t: rl .., . o 1' F' •W W 1- 2 ~ r; 9. r LL n o c 0 !n o L ¢ r w w f O +~ S 4 '* F- z O C T: J J r V V7 ~a c !I, II n Ill v C !< r_„ N C i N I t9 CI Z Lr' L O ' Ci fj Q ! N n' . L V O ~+ a u \ U n m ~ 1 m m •a D d d N U -+ C ti .T. T d ro L m N d tl C H d r > d K N .T. d 7 L C a. d C ~ ' o N c oe ' I Y d I O~ I V I ~ I > t0 lf~ I P `t -ur l c s N M ' h W o I r O .- , gaol c .~ .7 r-1 C r 1. L c 0 C 0 ~ 1- ~- 1 r N~OI 1 ~ m 1 1 A N r r N - , 1 N N 1 •.n -- o ~ 1 I F 0+ c I ro m , , p .-. M N r 0 o c 0 o c O O < 0 o e o m aJ N< F -- d 1 N 1 N m c f C 0 O f N N C x m L ti 2 O f- ~ L T O N U L d d au O L > d L d ~+ N T C U O .+ N .-+ L O M1. ~ d 0_ t r r - N r 0 0 ! a n n 7 r, a ., r; .. .. - s - - v a v _ s r. n ~< - ~ . _ j4- I Y I ~ I i I II 'i , ~~ i ! ~ ' ~ ~ ~ II I I I ~ I I I I I ' I' I ~ ~ I ~ ~ I I ~ i I I i I i i i I ~ , i ~~~ )rJ Qn oo 7N OIrt mf- o!IOy' f`m .-nJ o7 O! ~ ~ . In - a .- I i r ~ n c r ,... r- -f r ~ r m 7 n .~II m Iii r ' Ul a n m 7 Ur r'I 1 t 7~ 'J o c r O O (! ul N^ 1 f J + M Y- fU nl - Y -r S ~t 7 t ~ c.~ '/ rJJJI IP 'U '~ I i r , Ir I ~, r- r- r o5 N o m IJi aJ III I I iI I nr- mc, nlhr-~ o nm I1rmI _a, r~-r -r~i .~ ' 0.~ G C n C' t'i n .- 0? N r- V .0 . 00 m rJ fc.~h, O -- _. r o :-~ ~ a r.. w m r•1 n.l m _. _. .- n ~ of '+ r ~i m F .- N O C o m N -~ N n 0 00 ~0 .. N o r- .~ UI ~ I m ^t In v0 t- o m 7 tl -- rJN iUtn o C~ f nt'r o I -n t ,r rn I ea r.i. I n•.or. m r7,hn I .. - _ i r 1 0 N SCI N ~ r~ t o P t- F- N c0 c .- ~ lrl N d5 Gi n 7 o I.n m N o o - o .O 0, ~ 7 ~ - t rU ~ UI 0? ~ - a1 ~ TY fU ~.0 0? M T m r. i c0 lfY r C. r.7 r .0 ._ ~'.' j+I ^, n'' ~ rS a'i nJ rc, Ul .~ N N R m m N C C C ~O n m N m m n - 7 t~ r- f f- ~~ l11 m n r- N •... .- r'• ~- - N I Ill 01 - N n rLy o n N M .I N _- _ P Q ~ r,l r r r,l ~0 U) .o t+ n o-i n n . o r- o G~ o l+? n U1 0 ( •_ rI CO R T n d1 -- N 0) m N .D 00 R m UI C m c0 N C~ '~T ,O K nJ ~ = .- ~ -- N C+ i In m I nJ ~ m ^J r~i yy bl l I.1 V' f 00 m I fJ N I,ti 7 r- r~ .O t~ In ~ ~ L II r- rt nt r Nd~ ,h T -_ -_ f~ n .- ~ •~ '{ >oo 0 0 00 00 00 00 o no -r-QI or- m N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o ap o o n1 0 o Ul Q, 0 09 .o fU ~1 I son oO 00 0o n o mo o nJO nUi oN fdr o o o O O i o n o U1 N fV - o r Ur t'1 007 c+ -- ffR7{~~ UI q Ul r9 ~. I I -oo N o LIOI U1 .Or W 0 7 7 lli~ t11 fU C(1N oCQ o ' - n r nl .o m n 1 .. nJ nJ a ro Inn t+~{11. r . ,ID :_ . m r .1 In M N .- r nl 1 I ~ p o Iii ' v I. i ~ ~ N i m .. H ' L E T D ' >- N N~ i V ' i ~L fl. d I y ~ ~ ,J, U1 ~ T O f, I ~ T N '~ ~ I O L ~ r N ~jl c .r ~ ~ i .:. n. > ~ I .. m d~ m C O M1~ N N U -, Iffs 1 1- x k ,4- y E L ., ~ ~ .. G . m O x O LL. N O O is O N L L ' '+- H m 11 '' d M L I '.7 O N~ r~ ' O H f- r O` ~ d UI 6~ d O~ ¢ ~ I U d m v c ~ N -}~ N r0 7 x N O d d LL Cn ~ 7 l7 L ul .-. .T. ~+ d It ~ ' N ~0 C L UI L D v L 7 d v N A .I. I -+ h- - d x O G b -. L N E E =. d N IH U r_7 r U L J ~ r0 U N d .. 7 L 0 0 U O O Q --. O W ~' N ~ F- d U d Ul ~ O U L L L d r L N N Ch 2 rn ~~ C 'N J C --+ L d QI V ti- ll- O L O v d j N N N C r0 r+ O w V O ,D ~ L <( N P Yt ~ _1 T• I F C N O O d d N V? L f+ 4 U1 c? r d f-. C d L ~ m r U 7 7 d l d T L N t- V d -+ C U UI ~ ryl L •+ .se O C C U a >! N L N L N t~ i I E M1I ~w C d -+ d d 9 E L •. N N L E O 1~ k d U N > U Ur ra x `- m 0 7 L T H .p v m N R C N N. L d- N O d L U~ T CI 0.. J 1 fI1 LL_ F- -i F- O .J 0. I V tl. rC !1: ! V CL 7. `' ~ O LLI n F T i ~. ~ o N n UI .? t CO G• - rc •-N t-00J a ~ o yr = 7Ml N.~f M •:? U N N N nl N N Nl 11 M n 1 T 7 y' Ul r 111 ..~ i ,p r- 0) 07 0• 'i n .. b O G .. O a _~ t- n L` ~. _ O O _ r O O f. ^_ C• 'i i i ~ ~'~ ~ i . .. b l ,' I i ;; m L ~I 'J ti m ,: n r n II ~. .: .' v G n ~, M Ul r- lL n N Q 1 s i 0 s J 4 ZJ N v 0 I C' 4 n ...... .......... ............................. II.II I ill '~I n o E ~ .7 :: d U C i c ~n c w In d ry ro v N L d N l a C E ~ 7 - U n ca N c a L ~ ] E v+ 7 ~ U [ V C F C W > N aw x W CT t C l V~ G r rot a+ N V L 7 r o~ r r: t F• [ C 1 O 1 E 1 a C L N 0 2 :, LL t I I i I I I I I 1 I I I 1 1 I I 1 I I I 1 I 1 I I I i 1 I I it i I I 1 i I I i I LI I I I 1 I I I nl I I I I I I I I N M - 171c~U -- N v n n n v r M Ut r •- li O G• 7 CJ u U} . r~ .-n< N Q C •O In f m N ~ c n N 7, vc P w N - M [ Inar PCJI o r-t N f-. M Uto• uto. f-r- t c ~ 1 n m < N N r N ro L N C E L• 4 1 1 ~1 CJ • C~ ro~ •C.. N W L M ~ ro -. ro N L ,,~ y U C N N J L7 1 O O 1 CUI 0 0 N n? 0 M m n r v 7 i M • i M r~ nJ i•- tn 7 m N to E 2 V N E L N 0 ro L N C N C7 0 c !n ~ i o?.o• ww= Nnlf t-Nc n o? t .- n.lr llt 6• f fL, M n.~. •- r~J Ut f 7 4~ • m v N •- - o r 7 r•1 L o .-. r.J Ln.-< ,7 o t No?t ~M •v M o P . N P 1 M r- m ti t P~ o to T N Y L ro N N C V O L E 7 E O O U C? O O 1 •-NI N N I o O e m P n U .n .~ Iwtu. M M F O ~ Ifl (1 ~t a a r •- M r~ ~~ N M r- b a. Nm. •- M N a .~ ~tr~nlo tP I Moa u-. (avl, Y r` r- C 7 7 M U f r [ri UI 0 ~ inn< N I UI o) rt < N 7 P• [ r~ Lna[ nl •r .o n I I v, MM f .D o M~ to ~mc nl r1 r- [ ~> o N[ .- .' .r C lTi l15 N . o NG~t - v t N I ao .- , J ~tl~• ~ [,,_[ -- [- V' [ C f.) I U _~ Y- i 4- i N L F- 1 f ~ i ~ +III I ~~ N C [ U N d E 7 t7 N U 7 U N I '~ L N o~. 0 4- a o C •a i N W _. N i 3 L ro .~ JlL 1 O O 1 -- nJ t M M t o a e !y r v c I t<t L 7 1 c Q r i ~~ r i •r r U~ 17 V ~ c c• ~ C •n L U.. M r- M O VI G ,~ v n~ nr K C I._ K a d G -- C nJ r, M . a . rt -- c n [ OJ [ -- C I tU [ lfl C to r i nr i ._ D C ~ I- r N• 7 t o t I Y t I ~ • o• ~ t rr t1 t i r•t I rn t I ro ' N Q o 1 Q 1 I N I O 1 I N 1 I N 1 ~ 7 I O- N I [r Z oU N t '? O c a P r .- u iN•-n ~~~Mr v n•_ .r N,; i m r~J V • I11 O, rl N f- I' i 7 .- •: Ir, r-i .r-t-c ~ In o r ~ J' n, L• en I - ~ Ir I ~ Ln r 1 7 sf L 1 v r- r. ~nm~- t- oL ~ CJ C 7 ~ f N c [ ~ C Pm[ e nl nl r d: C>' ~ [ ti E [ O i~ L V N N N r ~ CP r ro t [L L I crop, U1 t± 1. o U1 c M rt < 7 C r. N O t7 N I d r I n i N r- I Ln c I c~ I m I ~ ~ 1 ~ 1 Ln r o0 1 P I 0 1 K m 1 1 3 w u i ~ ! d 0 r o 1 O 1 S i n c r tnor .~n< r-Mo In 1'1 P Ul Jc Y [ P < 7 L r~l C 0 N U n r - r• t utn~ r- r'1 rM. nlnc rtNr <r ~ f L r, .~-~ ro ~ N N S2 t1 S N c n ro ~ r~ a a T ft. c Ut y' NNN to Ut O A ! M N - ~.a-u - T a I V r- a In lnc IM v U 0• !n U N N U lft c ~ ut r i 1 7 'S r •c~r I V ~ a 1 ~ I m N a • M - J W i 1 ul r • r- 1 N Ism r o aD• o N c vNr N G~ t 1!1 0J C m N d L ~ U N C U ,ro ~ N ro i C I m o i N . ' Q Y ~ 7 u v .+ ..a ~ ~ N I L O N I ~ G I rn Q ` i Ui lfl l O O f r- aJ M •, l t- L n'. [ r n < I M c N a 1 NI r :m nJ ~ ii C r N ~9 I r 0 ro n N • m •u r L y I M c ~ L c U 0 1 0 u~ 1 u1 • G ut n h.l f- I ~ I I n I CV 1 7 1 In I P hJ I m U1 1 U1 I a? 1 c i ~ 4 ~ k ~, w N o Q I. 0 y nJ FV 0 c I 6 ~ ~ ~' ~ ro C " L U N K H Y ro c r- 7 ~ ~ ~. I i :~, r~~ lC F- I j $~ 1 ~. ,~ .~ ~ d ri ~: ~ \ Iro (, ~P !J a n 1 w ~• o o ~ m L V < ro G o Ib 1 r S k ~ F Z' ( O I E 4. a c ~ J 'J Y K J U ti U7 ~~ lU o r~ i I nl ' = I o n ; I~ I t. o I n rN .i ` A A r r n o E ~ ~~~ a U [ I G ro t W as .n ro o I a I L ~ N t A [ E f J U r Ca a c N a L J] 7 E v 7 t7 C t cw> a aw x W T~ cl V t: l b J N 1 N . ~ r 7 I O t t1 C 7 ro L a C d 0 7_ u. >• L `+ ~ C I O F i o U~ 1 ? •- r 1 I a,ro~ 1 N M a 1 1 I I 1 I I Ul ac I Ul •- c I N N V 1 1 .-M ~ I oa c+ . t} N •- f- ln 07 O 0 .oer K I I I o 1 I 1 M OJ c 1 ~ ~ C 1 - r~ K o 7 ~ N -- I '- o N c r-G~. h N1 O cr-Q •f M c ~_ ,a .. E [ ~~ x c I c Lc I O a e m. L Y C N d ~ O tJ ~ Q r O U t C i T ro ! L M A N t c ~ alnt Ul _l 2 c 0 o e M TF U r-r-r 0 o c Ia I anw 1 ~ ~ I ~ ~ I ~ ~ I ~' I i j 7 7 -- I c~ m '_y n o I 0 0 7 0 ! I '1'T I ~~ I (^ r" Y ./ j YJ 1 I ~ u U 7r F n Jc~oo co~r4 G• Oc i ~ - ' . c c•~ ur rJ~-io Ul n rt ~Y o c j ~ ~ U r- n LO a+ o~ o r r 0.~ rt c 7 o e? ~ I .}~ r.l h 6. - n I nJ n) O n r- f- Y . _. rn o o n i I I v. ui ~ I oc rt n .a c I nJn o I r - c o ~~ l1l (V o r'1 ~ ~ .'J U7 Ul t` -- n N r~JJJI r- ~-- M ~ o 1 .J r, r+} ~ i ' nJ 'f i0 I f r i ~ .~ ~ I M O M 0? !~ I r r- - j v n N N N 7 U Ul ~~ I N N i h rl .~ .- O O r f{l hJ i~ 1 1 '- O ~ ~ O I o W o ~n rt ~ v o o ~o nJ - n M ,O m r UJ N N fJ rt .D nJ t!1 v G~ T ~ K -. o i n y - r. th r} r~ r i o n o V .- o o i o GO ~ .o o .p In ( •- O O~ a1 O O O CQ O vn 7 O rl ~. o - .- nJ 0 7 0 o nJ Ul fU rt a? rt o I M O O .- 7 N O C~ N M C f'1 n ii OD t rt t- h rl r. n J .O ~ Ul f`r ;r 0? - i i I M o 0 0 ' ~ Ul UI •~ ~ I '~. I f i ~ ( I i a ra: ~ I c c n I t a ro ~~ E ~ ~ a ~ L a O j a' V L a l A 7 ro ~ N a - .r. N .. 7 7 ~ j ~+ .. d ~•+ ~ C ~ C d 7 '. C .+ i 0 w O C ro I E N N O I ''~ N V U !+ d . . I ~ V L L ~ I U E rti ' T C ~ 11 ro N L d N U1 ', ~ C Q N F F m ~ (fl a m 'ti 'r- L ' r i O L ~ . 1 _1 > tyl ~ Q N rA ~ d C O C n~ d C C 0. ' O W N Q J U7 N r N N ,- LJ m ro N j ', rd 7 Ui E C 7 ,+ -+ / L 1 L L C , I a~ C E L o tJ n ~ m a C 1- ~- ro ~ I ~ O ro O N a a ro -~ U~ O L i L I U > C L d L Z U Z7 F ~ ~ qr V /-~ ro ro- U N 4 -+ C C J i ~ ~. ~ .+ O <J ~+ L ~ O m O 7 7 O d j E rJ o ry d 7 L C o v- ~- w 1- ~ , ~ O~ W N N d N n~ Q L T L m p~ O i .+ o U 7 E d N O d L o I-. '~ o n x ~~ w ... ro~ +- I J 7 ~-~ d d C G C~ '~ [] I Z Ut Ifi o N N a Ul N rt - N ~ Q ' ~ '- ( N rt •- . J r P 7 UJ N t er u' .~ _. I q IX Ol G• •;• P G• .n R -- -. .. ~.-~ o o .. ._ ~ ., c I I ACTION # ITEM NUMBER ~ - s AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 3, 1996 AGENDA ITEM: Report on Spring Hollow Water Project and Transmission Lines COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: J~/~?. ®~~~ ~~~~ ~ ,, ~;~~-..tea _~~ - ~ ~~ ~~ i'~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Snrin,g Hollow Reservoir: The reservoir reached full pond (elev. 1,410) in May 1996 and maintained this level for 45 days. Since then no additional water has been pumped to the reservoir and the water level is gradually being reduced to our proposed operating level of 1,370 feet. The present water level is approximately 1,390 feet which represents a level reduction of approximately one foot per week. Seepage in the reservoir remains well within the acceptable limits of the project design. As might be expected, there is an applicable reduction in seepage as the level decreases. Roanoke County continues our joint water quality monitoring program with Virginia Tech. This project is expected to continue through Spring of 1997. The preliminary data has shown that the reservoir has maintained an excellent quality of water to date and while aeration of the lower levels of the reservoir will still be required, the extent of this operation will be on a smaller scale than originally anticipated. Roanoke County; Hayes, Seay, Mattern and Mattern; and PCL received an "Award of Excellence" on November 19, 1996 from the Virginia Chapter of the American Concrete Institute. The award was in recognition of the withdrawal tower associated with the Clifford D. Craig Memorial Dam. ~®" South Transmission Line: All seven phases have been completed and in operation since January 1996. North Transmission Line: The North Transmission Line consists of four phases as follows: • Phase I is from the intersection of Route 11 and Fort Lewis Church Road to Allegheny Road. This phase involved acquisition of 16 easements and has been completed and in service. • Phase II is from Allegheny Road to Wildwood Road. This phase is presently under construction and is scheduled for completion in May 1997. This phase involves the acquisition of 40 easements with the following status: • 14 Complete • 17 Agreements with property owners, but awaiting documents from attorneys • 8 Continued negotiation • 1 Condemnation (Public Hearing December 17) • Phase III is from Wildwood Road to the Hanging Rock Golf Course. This project will involve 35 easements and is scheduled to begin construction in early spring with completion by late summer. Meeting this construction timetable will be largely dependent on easement acquisition. • Phase IV is from Hanging Rock Golf Course to Route 311. This phase is complete from Red Lane to Route 311. The section through the golf course to Red Lane will be constructed this winter to minimize the impact on the golf course. This phase involved the acquisition of 10 easements. Water Treatment Facility: This facility has been in operation since February 1996. Our average water production for the facility has increased from an initial flow of 1.0 MGD to an average of approximately 2.5 MGD. The facility has operated remarkably well with only minor problems and the quality of water treated far exceeds all state and federal requirements at this time. Roanoke County staff presented a paper at the National Water Quality Conference in Boston this month. The paper dealt with our chlorine dioxide pre-disinfection system. We are the first municipality in the Country to utilize the solid cartridge form of chlorine dioxide municipal water treatment. This has also been a joint project between Roanoke County, Va. Tech and the manufacturer. Conclusion: p_ s Staff has been pleased with the progress of the project. Perhaps the most challenging aspect of the project has been easement acquisitions. This has contributed to slight delays in construction of the North Transmission Line, but we still feel the project can be completed by the summer of 1997. SUBMITTED BY: Gary Roberson, P.E. Utility Dire for APPROVED: y Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ACTION Approved () Motion by: Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy _ _ Harrison _ _ _ Johnson _ _ _ Minnix _ _ _ Nickens t Item No. V'~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE OANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER IN ROANOKE, VA ON TUESDAY, MEETING DATE: December 3,1996 AGENDA ITEM Financial Statement and Supplementary Schedule (Audit) of the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, Virginia, for Fiscal Year 1995-96 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY• The Industrial Development Authority (IDA) is required to have an annual audit. H. Schwarz and Company performed the audit and determined that the Authority's operations and changes in its financial position are in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. FISCAL IMPACT: None. The IDA contracted for its own audit. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file audit. Respectfully submitted: ~~,. Timothy W Gubala Secretary-Treasurer, IDA Approved: C~ '~'~`' /4~ Elmer C. Hodge, Jr. County Administrator ---------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION No Yes Abs Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Motion by: Eddy Harrison Johnson Minnix Nickens Attachment INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY SCHEDULES June 30, 1996 and 1995 ~~ OFFICERS Billy H. Branch, Chairman J. Carson Quarles, Vice-Chairman Timothy W. Gubala, Secretary-Treasurer Edward A. Natt, Legal Counsel BOARD OF DIRECTORS • Guy Byrd, Jr. • J. Richard Cranwell • Ronald M. Martin • Carole Bracicman • W. Darnall Vinyard TABLE OF CONTENTS ~~~ Page INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Balance Sheets Statements of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance 3 Statements of Changes in Financial Position 4 Notes to Financial Statements SUPPLEMENTARY SCHEDULES Schedules of Revenue Bonds and Notes Outstanding H. SCI-~~RZ ~~ CO. 4-~ CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS A Professional Corporation 5204 Bernard Drive, Suite 300 Roanoke, Virginia 24018 (540) 989-6144 FAX (540) 989-6613 INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT Members of the Board of Supervisors and Board of Directors Industrial Development Authority Roanoke County, Virginia We have audited the accompanying balance sheets of the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, Virginia, as of June 30, 1996 and 1995, and the related statements of revenues, expenditures, and changes in fund balance and changes in financial position for the years then ended. These financial statements are the responsibility of the management of the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, Virginia. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion. In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, Virginia, at June 30, 1996 and 1995, and the results of its operations and changes in financial position in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. Our audits were made for the purpose of forming an opinion on the basic financial statements taken as a whole. The schedules of revenue bonds and notes outstanding on pages 8 and 9 are presented for the purpose of additional analysis and are not a required part of the basic financial statements. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audits of the basic financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole. November 7, 1996 INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA BALANCE SHEETS June 30, 1996 and 1995 ASSETS Cash Land (Note 3) LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCE Fund Balance 1996 $ 46,063 642,043 $ 688,106 $ 688,106 The Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of these statements. o-~ 1995 $ 3,960 1.453,282 $ 1,457,242 $ 1,457,242 2 INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA STATEMENTS OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE Years Ended June 30, 1996 and 1995 1996 1995 REVENUES Contributions from Roanoke County $ 815,309 $ - Audit fees 2,313 2,147 Member fees - 1,450 Application fees - 663 Interest income 1,251 74 TOTAL REVENUES 818,873 4,334 EXPENDITURES Relocation incentives 1,583,353 - Service charges 131 16 Professional fees 2,175 2,175 Directors' fees 2.350 1.750 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 1.588.009 3.941 EXCESS OF (EXPENDITURES OVER REVENUES) REVENUES OVER EXPENDITURES (769,136) 393 FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR 1,457,242 1,456,849 FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR $ 688,106 $ 1,457,242 The Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of these statements. V'-~ (f°' 3 INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION Years Ended June 30, 1996 and 1995 1996 1995 FINANCIAL RESOURCES WERE PROVIDED BY: Excess of (expenditures over revenues) revenues over expenditures $ (769,136) $ 393 Land given as relocation incentives 811.239 TOTAL RESOURCES AVAILABLE $ 42,103 $ 393 FINANCIAL RESOURCES WERE USED FOR: Increase in cash $ 42.103 $ 393 TOTAL USES $ 42,103 $ 393 The Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of these statements. ~" tJ/ 4 INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ""(.p OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Note 1. ORGANIZATION, DESCRIPTION OF THE ENTITY AND ITS ACTIVITIES The Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, Virginia, was created as apolitical subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia by ordinance of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors on August 11, 1971, pursuant to the provisions of the Industrial Development and Revenue Bond Act (Chapter 33, Section 15.1-1373, et. seq., of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended). The Authority is governed by directors appointed by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. It is authorized to acquire, own, lease and dispose of properties to the end that such activities may promote industry and develop trade by inducing enterprises to locate and remain in Virginia. In addition, the Authority is authorized to issue revenue bonds for the purpose of obtaining and constructing facilities. Liability under the bonds may be retained by the Authority, or it may be assumed by the enterprises for whom facilities are constructed. Collection of revenues pledged to liquidate the bonds may be assigned to a trustee. The revenue bonds are not deemed to constitute a debt or pledge of the faith and credit of the Commonwealth of Virginia or any municipality thereof.- The bonds are payable solely from revenues generated from the lease of the facilities constructed and may be secured by a deed of trust on those facilities. Note 2. ACCOUNTING POLICIES eratin¢ Cvcle and Classification of Assets The Authority may realize its assets and liquidate its liabilities in operating cycles which range from very short to very long periods. The accompanying financial statements are presented in a nonclassified format because working capital concepts are not indicative of its operating liquidity. Net Investment in Direct Financing Leases The Authority may acquire and improve properties and retain title to them. Where transfer of title at the completion of a lease to a tenant is not reasonably assured by bargain purchase options or other lease provisions, the Authority accounts for activities in its role as lessor as either capital leases or operating leases in accordance with the provisions of Financial Accounting Standard Number 13. Passthrou~h Financing Leases Most activities of the Authority represent passthrough leases. These agreements provide for periodic rental payments in amounts which are equal to the principal and interest payments due to project bondholders. The Authority has assigned all rights to the rental payments to the trustees of the bondholders, and the lessees have assumed responsibility for all operating costs such as utilities, repairs, and property taxes. In such cases, the Authority neither receives nor disburses funds. 5 INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ~~ OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Note 2. ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued) Passthrouah Financing Leases Although title to these properties rests with the Authority, bargain purchase options or other lease provisions eliminate any equity interest that would otherwise be retained. Deeds of trust secure outstanding bond obligations, and title will revert to the lessee when the bonds are fully paid. Although the authority provides a conduit to execute such transactions, it does not retain either the benefits of asset ownership or the liability for bond liquidation. Accordingly, the Authority does not recognize associated assets, liabilities, rental income, or interest expense in its financial statements. Investment Income Reco nition Interest income from short-term cash investment of bond proceeds related to projects retained and managed by the authority is restricted as to its disposition by the bond indentures and is deferred as a part of the basis of related properties. Contributions from Local Governments and Deferred Revenue Contributions from local governments are recognized as revenues of the Authority when the activities for which the contributions were designated have been completed. Use of Estimates The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from these estimates. Note 3. LAND The Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, Virginia, owns certain parcels of land as follows: • 27.241 acres of land located at Valley TechPark $ 292,500 • 15 acres of land located at 601 Hollins Road 286,152 • One-half ownership with Botetourt County of 15 acres of land located in the Jack Smith Industrial Park 63,391 $ 642,043 6 INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY D~ `* OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Note 4. REVENUE BONDS AND NOTES As of June 30, 1996 and 1995, the Authority has issued $42,559,077 and $43,372,077, respectively, and has outstanding $27,806,145 and $31,587,317, respectively, in bonds and notes under the Industrial Development and Revenue Bond Act, pursuant to Chapter 33, Title 15.1 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended. These debt issues are not included in the accompanying financial statements since the Authority is not liable for their repayment, as discussed in Note 2. Note 5. RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS The Roanoke County Director of Economic Development serves asSecretary-Treasurer for the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, Virginia. Roanoke County pays legal fees for the Industrial Development Authority to the legal counsel of the Authority in the normal course of business. Total fees paid for the years ended June 30, 1996 and 1995, were approximately $11,622 and $7,130, respectively. A member of the Industrial Development Authority was engaged by Roanoke County's contractual engineer to prepare a landscape plan for an industrial park. Total cost was $4,552. Note 6. COMMITMENTS The Authority has entered into a performance agreement to expend up to $2,500,000 of public funds to be provided by Roanoke County, Virginia, for infrastructure improvements as relocation incentives for R. R. Donnelley & Sons Company, Inc. As of June 30, 1996, the Authority had expended $647,495.00. Additionally, the Authority transferred approximately 134 acres of land in Valley TechPark in Roanoke County, Virginia to R. R. Donnelley & Sons Company, Inc. and 13.2 acres to Rusco Windows of Roanoke, Inc. The Authority has entered into an agreement with Roanoke County, Virginia, for the construction and future maintenance of a storm water facility at Valley TechPark. The cost for the maintenance for ten years has been funded by Roanoke County, Virginia in the amount of $9,300. ~~ O ~ ~z H ~' H ~> W so U aA Qi ~~i, O ~.~ O'r yw O 1-•i C.7 z H A H H O O w F O z A rn ¢' ~ H z° ~ G W G W W W w O W rl A W x U 1.7 U U •O a W O d A H Q` rn O ~ U G roo r-I M Pq N G G ti a~ ~ ~ G u U rl ?1 O •.•1 1.J ~ ro T ~ r-+ U W 1J !.~ •.-1 ro U H •rt b W aUi ,•••i ~ G ••-~ U U G G H •.•~ v1 W W o0 W J~ a U @ •,~ }-+ O ti0 hD GO C CO h0 ro b0 U o p g G o •a o N G G~ G G M ro a~.b G'Sb•O ~~•'U-trnbb ~b•~ •~W ~ r-I tOA ~ ~ A 70-+ A O G A .a cGQ ~ ~ .C o C ~ o a~ o 0 3 ~ ~ b a~ ro a~ a~ •~ `~ ~ •a •'•1 ,O U U U ~ ro U G U U U U G r•+ ~L ro L+ N ~1 W W W G O 'LS W 4-+ W W W ~~ Sa O G O ro W W W •'•1 1J N N W W W W 'C O J..~ 'LS z x 3 0 0 0~~~ w' O O O O~ x~ n W OO~no~~o+OHN0~OO rnO~o~o ~n OO~~I~NONMONOOa000~OO ~ OO~tMMt~O~nu•1O.•~OO~70NN0 ~--~ tIl O o0 M O M O ~7 O O ~D M O t~ t11 N ~O O ~O ~D (~ N ~ ~ n ~ ~ M N I~ M D\ ~ ~ W tf1 O O O~ O ~7 r-1 ul rl f~ ra N ifl r~ N Q~ Q~ N tf1 00 rl ~ r-1 M rl M N t!•1 I~ N yr v~- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 v1 O O O O N O O n r--I O O O O O O O O O O N O 0 0 0 lfl O O I~ ro O O O O O O O O O O N O 0 0 0~ 0 0 O G U - - - - - .. - _ .. - .. .. .. •.a G OOOOu1v'1OOO0NOOO00~1~0 Q\ hD to 00 ~O O O .-a a0 O u1 O N '-a o~ u~ ~o t11 O o0 O ~ •ri V1 1~ 00 Ol ~ M rl O ~7 V1 rl V1 I~ l11 M N N W ul u•1 S-1 H Q Lf1 Q1 rl r•i r~ ~ r-1 ~ f*1 tf1 ~ (? ch M ~ ~ ~O O~ M ao ao 00 ~ ~n may' ~ ~~ rn rn rn rn ~~~ rn rnrnrn~~r-+'--+ aooorn r~ ~ rn r-1 '-I ~ ~f1 Q1 O~ ~ 07 O\ M rl - -m r•+ r-t rn rn rn rn ~ e--I e•-'1 N r•~i N N N r-I - - ~C1 Q\ ~--1 e-1 ~ Q\ N Q\ '""~ .-d ~ rl ~ ~-I S-1 7-1 S-I 3-I 3.1 S-I - ~ ~ - ~ ro a~ a~ o a~ a~ o a~ rn ~ ~+ ~+ - ~ r+ ~+ A ~~~~~~.aN U U a~ L~ul cti -H E E~ H 6@ E .n .~ A ~ .~ .~ G~ N d N d d N O T 0 O O G T U U S-i N O O U N N N N G U U U~ G ro ro ~ cd G z z A A A A A ti 0 0 0 ~ "~ ~~ ~*. ~ ''~ y ~ T y O +-+ ~ ~ H ~ b U 1J N • r~ N U '~ U O •n N G N v~ ~ O •n H GS. U N ~ 1.~ p.r S-I N U t4 ro o .u a ~ .-+ ~ ~ •,~ z ~+ ~+ U ro O •n G~ ~ U 0 0 0 u ~, o o ~ o a~ o a~ ~ G .G •n U m N H ~ a~ ~ x T +~ cn t0 ~+ N ro U O O W .~ w~ b S-+ .u ro N N a~ ~ ~ ~+ ~ y b0 ~ ro U ~ ro G •a d .-+ •b ~ ~a.. roH ro~s~,,~ Groa~ ~U r+ ~ o a ~ ro •-~ ~ ~+ ~ H 3 0 o b o o x •~ ~ a~ ~-+ ro ,-+ a~ v~ o v .~ ~ z G N cu ro m ro G - X23 •b cn O •b >, v, o ro c7 3 a~ ~+ ~+ ro a~ d 3 ~ G t~ b a~ R+ v1 G G CL' a~ v G G ~ bA G ~ •a bD ~--i G G U G U ro O ro~ S-+ H v~ a~ o ro •.~ o 0 0 ~ ~ ~+ ~, o a o x w a 3 ~~ w v x cn d w w v ~ U ~ x t/)• ~~ ~~ ~ ~ F-I ~ H ~~ 4W W O U A O €".i G4 ~ ~ O H C7 z H A H Cn H 0 C!1 W F O z A rn r-I v] z° ~ ~ W ~ W W w O W a A W x U cn U d •O !a a W O m H U'1 rn D\ d H U G ro O rl M W N G h s+ a~ ~ ~ G ~ U ~ ~ N ~ ro T ~ H ro 4a J.J 1.~ •r•i U •,-I •'•I U Sa ro U •'-I •rl b W ~ ~ G •r•t U U G G ••~ u1 rl 4•I W D,0 4~1 ,!] H U H N G O G R~0 ~'+ U vGI N N G ~» ~ 1~ ~ G ro a~ E Gbb'd ~r•+•~o~bbb ~+b•~ G ~ •.C o a~ o d 3 eo ro v d a~ a~ a~ a~ •.~ ~ 3-i v1 O ~+ 4-I 4.~ 4.1 A O b 4-i W 4-I 4-1 4-t 4-! ~ J..i ~ ~ o ?•+ roww~+-i•a ~ N Nw4au-+w~b O"O zxfs+3OOO~N~R:OOOOO ~xW OOOtr1N u1v1O~ONO~t~00rnON0 n oooaooo~oo.-a~o~oooo~o~o ~ OOOOo~Nt~O'•-IO~ON.yOO~0O0~0 M 0 0 0 ~O N o0 a0 O o~ 00 t1'1 rl M N O ~ v1 N O n ~--1 v1 ~' N ~O O of O O M y ,--I f~ I~ B O O o0 O W D\ M ~--1 i!1 N ~O N CO N M N tf1 N M~ O if1 ul ~ ~ rl M ~ ~' M ifll ~'I Mu i/} {/} 0O0OOO0O0OO~'100O0ON0 t~ rl O O O O O O O O O O O N O O O O O vl 0 I~ G U O O O O O O O O O O O N O O O O O W O O •.•1 ~ OOOOO~ulOO00N00O0O0~0 N bO v1 00 ~O O O O r•~I o0 0 ul O N H O o0 u•1 ~O U'1 0 0 r~ •~ to I~ OO N 01 ~ M e-I O ~ ~fl e-~ l1.1 t!l 1~ t1'1 M N N if'1 M 3-1 H Q ~f1 Q~ '-I r•I r•1 rl ~ r-i ~' M t1'1 M v} yr ~ M M ~' .'r tp O\ 00 M 00 00 00 00 u'1 u•1 ~ !~ n O~ 00 O~ O~ Q\ 01 t1.1 tf1 00 OO T Q~ O~ '-•I O~ e--1 r-I ~--I rl 00 N ~ d\ ~ r-1 T ~ r-i r~ lIl O~ O~ r-1 ~ 00 O~ M ~ - -~r1 -~ooHaorn - -Ham ,--ern -rn r-i rl '--I N r-1 N N N rl - - ~fl ~fl D1 •-1 r-1 O~ N O~ r-I e--1 r-1 r-I J-~ S•1 Sa S•1 ~I }a }.a S-I S-I „ ~ ~ - ~ I ro o 0 0 ° a~ o a~ ° rn ~+ ~+ ~+ ~+ - ~ ~ ~ A .a .° ~ ,a .a ~ p p N U U N a~ 1J ir1 ro H E ~ ~ E 8 E ~ ~ .a ~ ~ .n u1 .~ .~ ~ U U U U U d N N '~, 0 0 0 0 7~ U U ~•+ U O O N N N N N N~ U U U U~~ ~~~~ z z A A A A A A ti 0 0 0 0 6 ti~~ Lt+ '~ m ~ ~ v1 O 1J ~ l~ ri ~ J..1 In ro t!I T3 U l~ N •rl U rl N U~ U 1J O •n o C a~ ro .~ O •n H p. •~ U ~ 1.I W S-1 d U O v1 o m u a~ ~ ro ~ ~ z ~+ ~ ~+ U ro o •n m G ~ ~ o ro m a~ ~ ~+ o o ~ ~ o a~ ro m A C ..G •n U cn O H ~+ N S.+ .~ ~ 1~ e0 ~ • ° U W a a ~ ~ ~ ~ U a i v i ~ , E ~ ~ i ~ .C ci ~ i r G • ~ ~ ~+ ~ w ~n ~-+ ro ~ >, ~ G a ro a o U r-, ~-+ o a a~ d ro ,--i ,-+ ~ ~ H ~, ~ 0 0 0 O ~ •*+ H G N ~-+ ro ~-+ ro N U m U .C .~ z G v1 t1. ro U ro G - d ~tf 17 m b 7, m t~ O ro C7 3 U 3•+ ~+ x ro U~ v1 G u b~ a~ a ~ G G a ro a~ C G x G o ~+ G tD G m o o ,C •.~ a~ •~ o o aA •~+ W •.1 N •.~ «-r 4.7 ro LJ V F~ ~i l~ rl •~ rl ~ H G rl ~ •a o no ~-+ G G U ~ a~ v ro o ro~ ,-~ ~ ~ Gt. W c.+; 3 ~ ~ r~ c~ w cn ~ w c~ a c.~ x c~ x 06 rn ACTION # ITEM NUMBER G _ ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 3, 1996 SUBJECT: Report on Recycling BACKGROUND INFORMATION: In October 1987, Roanoke County began a pilot program to study curbside collection of recyclables. The original program consisted of source separation, with homes in some areas receiving stackable bins for newspaper, aluminum and glass for collection on a biweekly basis. In 1989, this program was expanded into another area of the County. The participation rate for these programs has averaged between 25-35% per biweekly collection. In the early 1990's, the County began automated commingled collection, with selected homes receiving 65 gallon containers in which to commingle mixed paper, aluminum, plastic and cardboard. With a monthly pickup schedule, participation rates have ranged from 70-SO%. DATE MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT 1987 Windsor Hills 1989 Catawba 1990 Catawba 1990 Vinton # OF HOMES TYPE OF RECYCLING 1,000 Source Separated 900 Source Separated 900 Commingled 900 Commingled The cost of these programs is listed in Attachment A. The cost in that Attachment does not include the $15 per ton which the County pays to deliver the commingled materials to Cycle Systems, nor does it include the $50 per ton which is saved by not taking source separated and commingled tonnages to the Resource Authority. This is a popular service for citizens living in those areas, a list of which is Attachment B. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Board has asked staff to review these pilot programs along with possibilities for providing this service equitably on a County-wide basis. Expansion of recycling opportunities to all households will require additional equipment and staff. Capital costs are a main component of any expansion of service, ~-/ although there are a variety of different methods the County could use for this purpose. Commingled recycling is more cost effective and has a higher percentage of participation. We currently spend 89 cents per household per month for this program, and to expand it County-wide would cost $1.34 million in capital cost and $220,200 in annual operating cost. This program can be undertaken over a period of time. A breakdown of these costs is shown on Attachment C. It can be easily phased in, with first year costs anticipated only for additional carts. Expanding this program will also allow us to terminate the source separation program, which is more expensive per customer. If this program is expanded, it will also become less expensive per household due to economies of scale. Source separated recycling has a lower capital cost of $1 million, but higher annual operating costs of $347,000. Based on limited historical data, however, we do receive revenue from this method of approximately $27 per ton, which would equate to an offset of $59,486. Details of this are provided in Attachment D. This does not have as high a participation rate in the pilot areas, and requires a substantial investment in personnel. Drop-off centers are currently provided in some areas of the County, and this program could be expanded by adding 4 additional sites in outlying areas. This would allow all County residents to recycle, but would discontinue the current pilot program at 3,700 homes. Funding for the start up of this program would require approximately $85,000. Details are provided in Attachment E. Five trailers will be needed to cover the four sites, since one empty trailer must be available when full ones are removed. While this alternative would also save $85,280 currently being expended on the pilot programs, it would discontinue a very popular program at 3700 households. It will also leave the County with 1800 used cans used in the commingle program which will need to be stored or discarded. An additional alternative would be to explore regional recycling through the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority. The localities could bring all solid waste to the Transfer Station, and the recyclables could be separated out at that time. While this would require additional capital costs for adding space for this process and additional operating cost for personnel to perform the sorting, it would allow the Authority to pick and choose what to recycle, depending on the marketability of the material. Since the City of Roanoke is currently extending recycling to all homes, and the Town of Vinton already does that, those governments are obviously committed to providing this service to their residents. By doing this regionally, we could realize efficiencies which should save tax dollars in the long run. ~ ~ ~C~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator °~~ ACTION Approved ()Motion by: Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred To VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy _ _ _ Harrison _ _ _ Johnson _ _ _ Minnix _ _ _ Nickens cc: File CURRENT RECYCLE COSTS ATTACI-IMENT A Q ~ ~~ COMMINGLED SOURCE TOTAL Category SEPARATED Direct Costs Labor Costs Workers, Drivers and Misc. $ 7,000.00 $ 28,000.00 $ 35,000.00 Overtime $ 3,220.00 $ 2,146.00 $ 5,366.00 Temporary Wages $ - $ - Worker Compensation $ 131.00 $ 523.00 $ 654.00 Total Labor Costs $ 10,351.00 $ 30,669.00 $ 41,020.00 Operating Costs Maintenance -Vehicle $ 6,857.00 $ 27,427.00 $ 34,284.00 Motor Fuels and Lubricants $ 881.00 $ 3,522.00 $ 4,403.00 Advertising -Public Information $ 174.00 $ 695.00 $ 869.00 General Operating Expenses $ 779.00 $ 3,115.00 $ 3,894.00 Wearing Apparel $ 162.00 $ 648.00 $ 810.00 Total Operating Costs $ 8,853.00 $ 35,407.00 $ 44,260.00 Total Costs (Direct) $ 19,204.00 $ 66,076.00 $ 85,280.00 Sale Income $ (4,763.00) $ (4,763.00) Net Total Costs $ 19,204.00 $ 61,313.00 $ 80,517.00 Number of Customers 1,800 1,900 3,700 Cost Per Customer Per Year $ 10.67 $ 32.27 $ 21.76 Cost Per Customer Per Month $ 0.89 $ 2.69 $ 1.81 Average Tons 99.42 113.3 212.72 Avera a Cost Per Ton $ 193.16 $ 541.16 $ 378.51 RECYC$.XLS 11 /22/96 Attachment B a _ RECYCLING HISTORY COUNTY OF ROANOKE The first phase started October 1987 in the Cave Spring Magisterial District. 1000 homes in the Castle Roc1c area were delivered three stackable bins: orange for aluminum, green for glass, and blue for newspaper. The subdivisions included: Woodmont Manor Farmington Nottingham Hill Nottingham Heights Grander Park Sugarloaf Farms Castle Rock Farms Castle Rock Phase two began in August (approx.) of 1989 in the Catawba Magisterial District. 900 homes in the West Salem area were delivered three stackable bins. The subdivisons included: Texas Hollow 1~Torth Beverly Heights Vermont Heights Quail Crossing Grandview Gardens Bear Rork Westward Lakes Estates Glenvar East Cherokee Hills Phase three began in 1991 (possibly October) with homes in the Catawba Magisterial District and the Vinton Magisterial District. A total of 1900 homes were given a 65 gallon automated container for the comingling of mixed paper, plastic, and aluminum cans. The subdivisions included: Catawba Magisterial District: Vinton Magisterial District: Beacon Hill Lindenwood North Lakes Crofton Willow Creek ~~ontgom~ery Village Foxfire ` / ATTACHMENT C ALTERNATIVE # 1 PROJECTED COSTS FOR COUNTYWIDE AUTOMATED COMMINGLED RECYCLING Approximately 23,736 homes are now receiving automated collection of weekly household refuse. It requires 28 routes per week to collect all of these homes. With approximately 22 work days in a month it would require two vehicles to offer these homes commingled recycling collection. The capital investment and start-up costs would be as follows: (2) Automated collection vehicles @ $150,000 per vehicle - $ 300,000 *22,000 - (65) gallon automated containers @ $47 per cart - 1,034,000 Public information/education campaign - 10,000 TOTAL $1,344,000 The program would require two additional employees. The costs of these employees, vehicle maintenance, fuel, and cart replacement would be included in the operating costs. (2) Vehicles @ $35,000 per vehicle (maintenance and fuel) $ 70,000 (2) Operators @ $31,000 (fully burdened with fringes) 62,000 (600) Replacement carts @ $47.00 per cart 28,200 TOTAL $ 160,200 The remaining 2,064 residents currently receiving manual service would be offered some version of curbside collection, such as a blue-bag system, which can be collected with manual rearloading trucks. The annual operating cost of this service would resemble the cost of collection of manual service which is $60,000. TOTAL ANNUAL OPERATING COST FOR COUNTYWIDE COMMINGLED RECYCLING: $ 220,200 PROS Standardize fleet -compatible with weekly household collection fleet Most efficient/effective method of collection Convenience increases participation (historically averaged 70%-80%) Convenience increases volume which would result in a projected avoidance revenue of $63,802 Avoidance revenue is the difference between $15 sort fee and $50 tipping fee. Historically volume collected has averaged .0064 tons per month per customer. 23,736 x .0064 tons x 12 months x $35 per ton = $63,802 (projected). CONS Large capital investment Contamination of materials -containers harder to monitor No revenue received -sorting fee paid to materials recycling facility ($15 per ton) "1,800 homes already have 65 gallon containers. a-7 ATTACHMENT D ALTERNATIVE #2 PROJECTED COSTS FOR COUNTYWIDE SOURCE SEPARATED RECYCLING To collect weekly household refuse in Roanoke County requires approximately 33 routes (28 automated routes and 5 manual routes). To offer bi-weekly curbside source separated recycling to all 25,800 homes in Roanoke County would require half of those routes being serviced weekly. To collect approximately 17 routes per week would require the following capital costs: (4) Side-loading manual recycling vehicles @ $100,000 each - $ 400,000 23,600 Recycling container sets @ $25 per set - 590,000 Public information/education campaign - 10,000 TOTAL $1,000,000 The source separated program would require 8 additional employees. The cost of these employees, vehicle maintenance, fuel and container set replacement would be included in the operating costs. (4) vehicles @ $25,000 per vehicle (maintenance and fuel) - $ 100,000 (4) operators @ $31,000 (fully burdened with fringes) - 124,000 (4) collectors @ $27,000 (fully burdened with fringes) - 108,000 600 recycling container sets @ $25 per set - 15,000 TOTAL ANNUAL OPERATING COST FOR COUNTYWIDE SOURCE SEPARATED RECYCLING: $ 347,000 PROS More convenient than drop-off recycling centers Less capital investment than commingled recycling Receive revenue -approximately $27 per ton based upon limited historical data 25,500 homes x .0072 tons x 12 months x $27 per ton revenue = $59,486 CONS Less convenient than commingled -lower participation rates (25%-35%) Method does not allow much capability to change materials collected as markets change More labor intensive 4-7 ATTACHMENT E ALTERNATIVE #3 PROJECTED COSTS FOR COUNTYWIDE DROP-OFF RECYCLING CENTERS A drop-off plan would center around placing the containers in the most accessible, most visible sites possible. Other localities that have chosen this option have utilized schools and fire stations. One or both of these sites are located in close proximity to most neighborhoods and are readily accessible to vehicle traffic. The initial implementation of this program would require the capital investment of 5 trailers at $15,000 each for a total of $75,000. An extensive public information and education campaign at a cost of approximately $10,000 would be required for the start up of this program. Approximately $85,000 would fund the initial phase of a drop-off recycling program. Each trailer would have the capability of receiving up to four types of materials. The trailers would be transported to the processing center by 3/4 ton pickup trucks. Staff feels that trailers at four locations could be serviced and transported within current manpower and vehicle resources. Further implementation beyond four trailers would require an additional pickup truck ($20,000) and employee (avg. annual salary of $25,900 -fully burdened). Due to lack of historical data, staff has no projection of participation rates, tons collected or revenue received. PROS Low capital investment Ease of implementation Easier to respond to changing market conditions -more control over type of materials collected 100% participation of target customer (all those who visit site participate) - No wasted drive-bys Receive revenue CONS Lose convenience factor -lose marginal recycler Fewer tons collected/diverted Policing factor -sites must be monitored to avoid littering and illegal dumping ACTION N0. ITEM NUMBER ~"/ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 3, 1996 AGENDA ITEM: Work Session by Chief Rick Burch Showing an Overview of the Fire and Rescue Department COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Chief Rick Burch has been with the Fire and Rescue Department since August 1, 1996 and has spent much time meeting with each volunteer organization, the career staff, community groups and others within the County. He has also worked with the other area Fire and Rescue Chiefs to gain a feel for the emergency services operations in the Roanoke Valley. During the Work Session of the Board meeting on Tuesday, December 3, Chief Burch will give an overview of the Department based upon his observations during his first four months on the job. The Chief will also share how he will begin to address the issues and needs of the department. Respectfully submitted, Approved by, John M. Chambliss, Jr. Elmer C. Hodge Assistant Administrator County Administrator ----------------------------------------------------------------- Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) ACTION Motion by: VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy Harrison Johnson Minnix Nickens J a Q Z H ^ ~ Q U W U Y. U Q m U o z o O U Cn Q w p J U F- ~ ~ z ~ W m U x ~ ~ Q W U Z <L ~ W ~ W ~, ,~ r (D 0 . M 0 , 07 U M N N ~ M 10 N d' ~ W ~ ~ p r rn rn ~ ~ Z t9 ~ Q' -~ ~ ~ O U, r U V W m U~ M ~ W W O r r r r } W W ~ W -~ Z = 0 p ~ r W , Z Z~ W N m e ~ n m Q M~ Z~ W a'Q o ' ~ U p W Q~ m U ~ O U ~ ~ ~ r r r r r } W~ W~ N M W S ~ -J D Z fA ~ Q oo r O M o 1(f o r p 0 Z ~ r M r ~' Z N p Q? Z 0' Q 1- rL (J U~ W mU~Q(go0 np~ p ~~ N r T T M T r r Q r r ~ W~ ~ Z W Y= F J p ~ , c ~ M N ~ J 2 m~ C9 Z r M ~ o T h ~ r W } d' U~ W F-Qm~UQN 00 to N r r r r N M r d' Z W 0 ~ = O rn r ~ ~ ~ r ~ Z ~ m J ~ ~ ~ Q1 r W ~ U~ wQ~m W Q r C LV ~' r I - V M r r r M r r ~ ~ N b ~ o W } r ' ° Q Z U~ N r C7 ~~ a. m~ w~mQa to r t~ ~ N ao ~ W r rn r tn U h b r r N N r N W } Z W= --~ Q ~ ~ N ~ 1- C7 Z 7 J 2' Q m~ ~ M O O W Z OD a za~Ha~~n~ N r f N g ~-~ m c~ 0 1 L 1 7 n 1 ~~ Roanoke County Board of Supe~viso~s Work Session December 3, 1996 Presented By Chief Richard E. Burch, Jr. ~~~ ~ `_~, 1 1 1 1 ti ~~l k o~A4RTM~ Qur F~mily...~'ro~e,~~~~ng Y~~~s ~~~ Mission Statement ..~ ._~~.._ u To provide the highest level of pre-hospital care, fire protection, emergency services, and disaster response to the citizens of Roanoke County and surrounding localities while being free from harm and risk. verview > Approximately 600 volunteers > 57 Career Personnel > 4 Part-Time Paramedic/Firefighters > 11 Volunteer Fire Departments > 9 Volunteer Rescue Squads mergency Responses $, r 71 ~ a i 61 51 ~ 41 c 31 21 E 11 z 1 _c1 Fire ^ Rescue 1992 1993 1994 1995 C,'~ll ~/olrtna ]rr!;r~~ ~.s HJ)~i lrt~}d2nt.; Year 1982-1993 u'lu r'lr~-2,'.%0 1783-19J': a.1%, 1J9•;-1885 i.;,"/., i~e~cue - S'IJi Station Z -Vinton Magisterial District -Vinton > 4 Career personnel Y Monday -Friday - 7 am - 4 pm > 38 Volunteers > 3.4% (274) incidents - 1995 > Equipment: 3 engines; 1 ladder truck Rescue 2 -Vinton Magisterial District -Vinton > 3 Career personnel > 2 personnel - 6 am - 2 pm Monday -Friday > 1 person - 9 am - 5 pm Monday -Friday > 41 Volunteers > 12.9% (1042) incidents - 1995 > Equipment: 5 ambulances; 1 squad truck i~ Station 3 -Cave Spring Magisterial District -Windsor Hills • > Career staffing - 1 pumper with ' 3 personnel Monday -Friday -10 hour days ' > 37 Volunteers ' > 6.7% (542) incidents - 1995 > Equipment: 2 en ines• 1 tanker 1 la g ~ dder J, Rescue 3 -Cave Spring Magisterial District -Cave Spring > Career staffing - 1 ambulance with 2 personnel Monday - Friday -10 hour days > 51 Volunteers > 11.6% (934) incidents - 1995 > Equipment: 4 ambulances; 1 squad truck a ii Station 4 -Catawba ~. Magisterial District -Catawba ;:- > 0 Career personnel > 23 Volunteers ' > .4% (30) incidents - 1995 > Equipment: 1 engine; 1 tanker '~ • S tation 5/Rescue 5 -Hollins ' Magisterial District -Hollins > Career staffing -1 pumper with 3 personnel Monday -Friday -12 hour days 1 ambulance with 2 personnel Monday -Friday -12 hour days > 35 Volunteers -Fire; 33 Volunteers -Rescue > 6.2% (497) incidents -Fire -1995 > 17.7% (1430) incidents -Rescue - 1995 > Equipment: 2 engines; 1 ladder; 4 ambulances; ' 1 squad truck; 1 haz mat unit Station 6/Res 6 - Mt Pleasant Ma isterial District -Vinton g 7 > 1 Career driver for either pumper or ambulance > 25 Volunteers -Fire ' > 18 Volunteers -Rescue > 1 % (84) incidents -Fire - 1995 ' ~ 2.9% (233) incidents -Rescue - 1995 ' > Equipment: 1 engine; 1 tanker; 1 squad truck; 2 ambulances; 1 haz mat unit Station 7/Res 7 - Clearbrook ' Magisterial District -Cave Spring II'~~ > Career staffing -1 pumper with 3 personnel 1 ambulance with 2 personnel Monday -Friday -10 hour days > 25 Volunteers -Fire > 27 Volunteers -Rescue > 2.1 % (167) incidents -Fire -1995 > 5.8% (471) incidents -Rescue -1995 > Equipment: 2 engines; 2 ambulances; 1 squad truck i ii ~~ Station 8/Rescue 8 - Bent Mtn Magisterial District -Windsor Hills > Career,staffing 3 personnel to operate either pumper or ambulance Monday -Friday -10 hour days > 18 Volunteers -Fire; 19 Volunteers -Rescue > .9% (69) incidents -Fire -1995 > 2.1% (171) incidents -Rescue - 1995 > 21.3% (51) of Sta 8 calls were in Floyd County > Equipment: 1 engine; 1 tanker; 1 squad truck; 3 ambulances Station 9/Rescue 9 -Fort Lewis Magisterial District -Catawba _ _~~ > Career staffing -1 pumper with 3 personnel Monday -Friday -10 hour days 1 ambulance with 2 personnel Monday -Friday -12 hour days Saturday -Sunday - 24 hours > 33 Volunteers -Fire; 25 Volunteers -Rescue > 3.9% (314) incidents -Fire -1995 > 11.8% (953) incidents -Rescue -1995 > Equipment: 2 engines; l tanker; 3 ambulances; 1 squad truck; 1 air truck Station 10/Res 10 -Mason Cove ' Magisterial District -Catawba ' > Career staffin - 1 um er with r 1 g p p 3 pe Bonne 1 ambulance with 2 personnel Monday -Friday -10 hour days > 21 Volunteers -Fire > 31 Volunteers -Rescue > 1.5% (118) incidents -Fire - 1995 > 4.1 % (330) incidents -Rescue - 1995 > Equipment: 2 engines; 3 ambulances; 1 squad truck; 1 command bus Station 11/Res 11 -Back Creek ' Magisterial District -Windsor Hills > 0 Career personnel > 38 Volunteers ' > .8% (66) incidents -Fire - 1995 ' > Equipment: 1 engine; 1 reserve engine; 1 ambulance ' (did not initiate EMS service until Apri1,199~ ~~ tation 12 -Read Mountain > 0 Career personnel > 45 Volunteers > 4.4% (356) incidents - 1995 > 77% (272) of Station 12 calls were in Botetourt County > 106 rescue calls in Station 12 first due area handled by Vinton > Equipment: 1 engine dministration m_. ~ -:- . > Chief > Assistant Chief > Emergency Services Coordinator > Business Coordinator > Volunteer Coordinator > Apparatus Technician > Secretaries i raining .~.-_~ 1 Battalion Chief ' > Coordinates approximately 925 classroom hours training per year ' > Provides basic, advanced, specialized training ' > Coordinates EMS training with state > Provides Virginia Occupational Safety and Health mandated training evention w ~~ ' 1 Battalion Chief; 3 Inspectors > Cause and Origin -investigate cause and ' origin of fire ' > Inspections -plans review and fire safety inspections as prescribed by the fire prevention code > Education -public fire education romoted P for all ages throughout our community ~J 1 attalion Chiefs -Operations ,~ > On duty 24 hours per day > Assists in fire ground and EMS command activities > Assists in overall professional delivery of fire and rescue services utilizing our personnel and resources in the most professional manner ummary > Scored high in citizen survey > Budget > Buildings Staffing > Apparatus > Automation > Evaluating the needs and direction of the department i~ i~ i~ Thank you for your support. i~ '~ i~ 1 ~' 1 r ul u J ~~ i ACTION # ITEM NUMBER ~ `" AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: December 3, 1996 AGENDA ITEM: Request for work session to discuss addition of projects to the Drainage Maintenance Priority List for FY96/97. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: This program was established in 1986 and has grown substantially since that time. The projects are also more costly and this will be to be addressed during the budget process. If the Board agrees, I would like to return to open session following the work session to adopt the plan so that we can begin to line up contractors. BACKGROUND Projects P-87 through P-208 were previously presented to and approved by the Board of Supervisors last year. The status of these projects is shown in EXHIBIT "A," PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PROJECTS AND THEIR CURRENT STATUS. Staff is now submitting projects P-209 through P-237 for approval and inclusion to the Drainage Maintenance Priority List for FY96/97. These projects are estimated to cost $256,000.00, as shown in EXHIBIT "B," PROPOSED PROJECTS. As of November 1, 1996, there was $152,000.00 remaining in the drainage maintenance budget. Therefore, funding is available for projects remaining on the approved list through P-198. For FY97/98, funding is available for projects P-199 through P-234. The remaining projects will be funded FY98/97. EXHIBIT "C" represents projects that are also completed. These projects represents minor or emergency repairs to drainage systems that resulted in expenditures of less than $1,000.00. Due to the above average rainfall amounts this year, we have responded to 106 drainage complaints. 1 .~ BACKGROUND (continued) During the Board work session on February 23, 1988, the Board of Supervisors approved a procedure for establishing a priority of proposed projects. The procedure for evaluating projects is based on a rating or point value for a specific situation. For example, more points are given for the potential damage to a house or structure than what would be considered only a minor nuisance. In addition to assigning a point value to a specific situation, the frequency of a problem is considered. The proposed projects submitted are prioritized according to the approved procedure during the work session. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION EXHIBIT "A" PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PROJECTS EXHIBIT "B" PROPOSED PROJECTS EXHIBIT "C" ROUTINE MAINTENANCE OR EMERGENCY REPAIR PROJECTS ALTERNATIVES AND IMPACTS No additional funding is being requested. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of these additional drainage projects for inclusion to the Drainage Maintenance Priority List. SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED BY: Ar lon d Covey, Director Elmer C. Hodge of Engineering & Inspections County Administrator --------------------------------------------------------------- Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred To Motion by: ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy Harrison Johnson Minnix Nickens 2 z EXHIBIT "A" PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PROJECTS PROJECTS o COMPLETED P-87 thru P-208 91% 2 P-87. Pinkard Court Complete Cost: $ 5,000 P-88. Arthur Meador Complete 3502 Brandywine Avenue Cost: $ 4,000 Mt. Vernon Heights P-89. Samuel Mazingo Complete 528 Stacie Drive Cost: $ 800 P-90 Ruth Lipnik Complete 3660 Bunker Hill Drive Cost: $ 3,000 Mount Vernon Heights P-91 Maurice Rowe Complete 4404 Cresthill Drive Cost: $ 4,500 Cresthill P-92 Bob Shively Complete 5321 Grandin Road Ext. Cost: $ 5,000 C. J. Carmack Map P-93 Greg Barton Complete 2774 Ivy Lane Cost: $ 500 P-94 Bill Gradwell Complete 3570 Parkwood Drive Cost: $ 2,200 Green Valley P-95 Sandra Murray Complete 6348 Back Creek Road Cost: $ 2,600 P-96 James R. Craig Complete 2808 Ellison Drive Cost: $ 2,000 Robin Hood Park P-97 Ruth Ann Davis Complete 6102 Cove Road Cost: $ 1,200 P-98 Ken Smith Complete 5426 Doe Run Road Cost: $ 3,000 Hunting Hills P-99 Frances S. Tyree Complete 4785 Sunny Side Drive Cost: $ 1,000 Bellemeade P-100 Edward Whisnant Complete 5117 Norseman Drive Cost: $ 800 Viking Court P-101 Dennis Putnam Complete 8402 Brubaker Drive Cost: $ 5,500 William Creek ~z P-102 Randy Gerber 3038 Pebble Drive Hamden Hills P-103 Betty Overstreet 5315 Cave Spring Lane Nottingham Hills P-104 Alton Prillaman 6139 Darby Road P-105 John Newman 8242 Loman Drive P-106 Summit Ridge Road La Bellevue P-107 Leroy Moran 5000 Carriage Drive P-108 Elbert Lester 2695 Eastland Drive P-109 Jerry Arnold 4233 Arlington Hills Arlington Hills P-110 P. W. Carroll 5529 Merriman Road P-111 Betty Prater Berry 3402 Overhill Trail Penn Forest P-112 Harry Williams 1001 Martin McNeil Rd. P-113 Deborah Lynn Marshall 7192 Bent Mountain Rd. P-114 Robert Tunnell 5522 Galloway Circle Castle Rock Farms P-115 W. H. Farthing 1848 Dorset Drive, S.W. P-116 VDOT Manassas Avenue Mt. Vernon Heights Complete Cost: $ 1,100 Complete Cost: $25,000 Complete Cost: $ 500 Indefinitely delayed Loman Drive being a private road, property owners not in agreement of project. Cost: $25,000 Complete Cost: $ 2,500 Complete Cost: $ 1,000 Complete Cost: $ 1,500 Complete Cost: $ 2,800 Complete Cost: $ 5,000 Complete Cost: $15,000 Complete Cost: $ 1,500 Complete Cost: $ 1,000 Complete Cost: $ 3,300 Complete Cost: $ 1,500 Complete Cost: $15,000 Bond P-117 Willa Sink 6416 Suncrest Drive Suncrest Heights P-118 John E. Page 3043 Forest Acre Trail P-119 Ms. Jean Patterson 147 Missimer Court Crofton P-120 Betty Aliff 3606 Colony Lane P-121 Dan Gibson 5327 Endicott Street P-122 Tim Harris 3424 Ashmeade Drive Georgetown Park P-123 Andrew Woodson 2837 Crown Circle Complete Developer completed Cost: $ - 0 - Complete Cost: $ 1,500 Complete Cost: $ 1,200 Complete Cost: $ 2,000 Complete Cost: $ 7,000 Complete Cost: $ 1,000 Indefinitely delayed - downstream property owners not in agreement of donation of permanent easement. Estimated Cost: $ 1,500 P-124 W. R. Ferguson 2783 Diplomat Drive Montclair Estates P-125 Donna Hawkins 7456 Bradshaw Road P-126 Barry Jamison 2765 Fernlawn Road P-127 James McCulloch 5824 Oakland Blvd. P-128 Natalie Wheeler 6261 Buckland Mill Rd Buckland Forest P-129 Craig Hoge 5432 Scout Circle Cherokee Hills P-130 Jim Vitale 2127 Montgomery Circle Montgomery Village Complete (Engineering) Cost: $ 1,000 Complete Additional Cost: $30,000 Complete Cost: $ 1,000 Indefinitely delayed Cost: $ 3,500 Complete Cost: $ 1,200 Complete Cost: $ 2,500 Complete Cost: $ 1,500 Complete Cost: $ 1,600 ~' Z P-131 Sylvia Arthur Complete 8109 Hunters Trail Cost: $ 500 Bellview Gardens P-132 Ronnie Wade Complete 3505 Brandywine Avenue Cost: $ 5,000 Mt. Vernon Heights P-133 Gilbert B. Banton Complete 2331 Coachman Drive Cost: $ 800 La Bellevue P-134 George Jacob Complete 6024 Williamson Road Cost: $ 1,400 P-135 Daniel Wray Complete 4426 Keefer Road Cost: $10,000 P-136 Nelson Craighead Complete 4913 Colonial Avenue Cost: $ 5,500 P-137 Judy Shandor Complete 5781 Scenic Hills Drive Cost: $ 1,000 Crystle Creek P-138 Gary Crews Complete 3661 Bunker Hill Drive Cost: $23,000 Mt. Vernon Heights P-139 Gordon Willoughby Complete 3718 Martinell Avenue Cost: $ 3,000 P-140 Charles Callahan Complete 6324 Fairway Forest Drive Cost: $ 1,300 Fairway Forest P-141 Mark DiCarlo Complete 2613 Gaylor Road Cost: $ 3,000 Sugarload Heights P-142 Carroll Smith Complete 3787 Fairburn Drive Cost: $ 800 P-143 Sherry Burton Complete 5406 Apple Blossom Lane Cost: $ 5,000 Hidden Valley Court P-144 Troy Leon Smith Complete 913 Grove Lane Cost: $ 2,000 Captain Grove Estates P-145 S. Weade Complete 4015 Drake Circle Cost: $ 1,500 Buckland Forest ~2 P- 146 Charles Droste Complete 3727 Hyde Park Cost: $12,000 Windsor West P- 147 Geoff Straughn Complete 1946 Bridle Lane Cost: $ 900 Hidden Valley Court P- 148 Judy Chapman Complete 238 Spring Grove Drive Cost: $ 500 Spring Grove P- 149 Ruth Naomi Sheplak Complete 5811 Old Manor Drive Cost: $ 2,000 Old Manor P- 150 Sandy Hoke Complete 3924 Colony Court Cost: $ 3,000 Green Valley P- 151 Robert G. Williams Complete 7040 Highfields Farm Drive Cost: $ 400 Highfields P- 152 Danny Thomas Complete 5615 Penguin Drive Cost: $15,000 Penn Forest P- 153 Jim Oyler Complete 7834 Barrens Road Cost: $ 3,000 P-154 Les Hagie Complete 5235 Canter Drive Cost: $ 300 Canterbury Park P- 155 Matt Robertson Complete 2788 Ivy Lane Cost: $ 1,000 Spring Grove P- 156 Scott W. Bauman Complete 5585 South Roselawn Cost: $ 200 P- 157 Betty Sodino Complete 4704 Whipplewood Drive Cost: $ 100 Branderwood P- 158 Jack Waldron Complete 956 Paint Bank Road Cost: $ 500 P- 159 Mary Bland Complete 7920 Cedar Edge Cost: $ 3,500 Forest Edge Z P- 160 John Hamilton Complete 4209 Arlington Hill Dr. Cost: $ 6,000 Arlington Hills P- 161 Randy Likens Complete 906 Starmount Avenue Cost: $ 3,000 Deer Run Estates, Section #2 P-162 Mrs. Legg Complete 5647 Penguin Drive Cost: $ 4,000 Penn Forest P- 163 Nancy Biggs Indefinitely delayed 549 Water Oak Road Estimated Cost: $ 1,000 P-164 Danny Gilbert Complete 1820 Dorset Cost: $20,000 Windsor Hills P- 165 Wayne Lineberry Construction is 3730 Ellen Drive expected to begin Catawba next year Estimated Cost: $30,000 P- 166 Mr. Taylor Complete 2950 Penn Forest Blvd. Cost: $18,000 Cave Spring P- 167 Mr. Peyton Complete 4818 Colonial Avenue Cost: $ 3,000 Cave Spring P-168 Mr. Harry Goin Complete 8167 Hunters Trail Cost: $ 1,000 Hollins P- 169 Linda K. Winge Complete 4914 North Spring Dr. Cost: $ 5,000 Catawba P- 169A Public Safety BLDG. Complete 3568 Peters Creek Road Cost: $ 8,000 Catawba P- 170 Martin Carle Indefinitely delayed 5515 Tanney Drive Complete (Engineering) Catawba Cost: $ 4,000 Construction Additional Cost: $10,000 P-171 Reggie Lemons Complete 7131 Cedar Crest Road Cost: $ 5,000 Hollins Z P-172 Phillip Day Indefinitely delayed 7574 Old Mill Road Estimated Cost: $ 3,000 Windsor Hills P-173 Clifford Fountain Complete 7045 Starlight Lane Cost: $ 6,000 Cave Spring P-174 Joseph Stowers Complete 3326 Kenwick Trail Cost: $ 1,000 Cave Spring P-175 Alice Holpp Indefinitely delayed 1309 Ashebrook Drive Estimated Cost: $18,000 Vinton P-176 Robert M. Crigger Temporarily delayed 2933 Beldon Drive Estimated Cost: $10,000 Catawba P-177 Pacetti R. Carlos Complete 5339 Endicott Street Cost: $ 8,000 Hollins P-178 Chris Lawrence Complete 5342 Huntridge Road Cost: $ 5,000 Hollins P-179 Virginia Hodgson Complete 3717 Kentland Drive Cost: $ 2,000 Windsor Hills P-180 Cathy Yotka Complete 3930 Westmoreland Dr. Cost: $ 1,000 Cave Spring P-181 Sam St Clair Temporarily delayed 2850 Silver Leaf Estimated Cost: $10,000 Catawba P-182 Paul Black Engineering & Survey 7549 Williamson Road underway Hollins Estimated Cost: $10,000 P-183 Danny Rivers Complete 2417 Horsepen Mountain Cr. Cost: $ 1,000 Vinton P-184 Lawrence Kelly 3587 Farmington Dr. Estimated Cost: $ 7,000 Windsor Hills / _ ,2 P- 185 Dorothy Overstreet Complete 2725 Tanglewood Drive Cost: $ 3,000 P-186 Lucille Iartosca Complete 1313 Deer Run Drive Cost: $ 1,500 Vinton P- 187 Amber Spikes Complete 4847 Cherokee Hills Drive Cost: $ 1,000 P- 188 Betty Saunders Complete 1861 Terry Drive Cost: $10,000 Vinton P- 189 Mrs. Vickie Stinson Complete 5487 West River Road Cost: $ 3,000 Catawba P-190 David Herrick Complete 2635 Greenridge Circle Cost: $ 7,000 Catawba P -191 Jeff Foutz Complete 5440 Setter Road Cost: $ 5,000 Hollins P-192 Carl Sutter Complete 5007 Labradore Drive $10,000 Hollins P -193 Elizabeth Weaver Complete 4415 Wyndale Avenue Cost: $ 8,000 Windsors Hills Additional Cost: $ 6,000 (expand scope of project) P-194 Joe Farmer Complete 4749 Brookwood Drive Cost: $30,000 Windsor Hills Additional Costs: $15,000 (expand scope of project) P -195 Melinda Crosser Complete 6172 Burnham Road Cost: $ 1,000 Windsor Hills P -196 Barbara Doyle Under Construction 5041 Craun Lane Estimated Cost: $20,000 Catawba P -197 Lucille Harmon Engineering & Survey 3630 Brandywine Avenue underway Windsor Hills Estimated Cost: $15,000 ~z P-198 Scott Taylor 1141 Starmount Hollins P-199 J. D. Fralin Estimated Cost: $12,000 P-200 Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Hollins P-201 Raymond Nero 1689 Richland Hills Catawba P-202 Henry Trail 3052 Parham Drive Vinton P-203 George Igoe 3041 Embassy Drive Catawba P-204 Joy Kilbane 3867 Vauxhall Road Windsor Hills P-206 Jean & Gail Holbrook 314 Woodmere Drive Vinton P-207 Lisa Aly 5237 Cave Spring Lane Cave Spring P-208 Michael Daley 3055 Bradshaw Road Catawba Estimated Cost: (Total) $45,000 County 22,500 Private 22,500 Complete Cost: $35,000 Estimated Cost: $10,000 Estimated Cost: $ 8,000 Estimated Cost: $ 5,000 Estimated Cost: $15,000 Estimated Cost: $ 1,000 Estimated Cost: $ 8,000 Estimated Cost: $ 2,000 2 EXHIBIT "B" PROPOSED PROJECTS P 209-237 / ~ .,~. P-209 Anthony Wallace COMPLETE 5621 Legate Drive DESCRIPTION: STABILIZE EXISTING CHANNEL COMPLETED IN CONJUNCTION WITH P-124 COST: $6,500 TAX MAP ## 36.19-1-42 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: CATAWBA P-210 Bill Francis COMPLETE 3356 Kenwick Trail DESCRIPTION: STABILIZE EXISTING CHANNEL EMERGENCY REPAIRS COST: $7,500 TAX MAP # 87.06-3-41 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: CAVE SPRING P-211 Peggy Stack COMPLETE 323 Ingal Blvd. DESCRIPTION: CONSTRUCT STABILE CHANNEL EMERGENCY REPAIRS TO OUTFACE OF PIPE COST: $8,000 TAX MAP # 54.02-2-4 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: CATAWBA P-212 Charles Hofer 5932 Sunnycrest Road DESCRIPTION: CONSTRUCT A NEW CHANNEL FROM RIGHT OF WAY TO NATURAL WATERCOURSE ESTIMATED COST: $3,500 TAX MAP # 86.03-2-5 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: WINDSOR HILLS / - .~ P-213 Gina Barringer 3422 Lakeland Drive DESCRIPTION: CONSTRUCT STABLE CHANNEL ESTIMATED COST: $5,000 TAX MAP # 76.19-2-58 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: WINDSOR HILLS P-214 Robert Furrow 2711 Sunnyvale DESCRIPTION: CONSTRUCT NEW CHANNEL FROM RIGHT OF WAY TO NATURAL WATERCOURSE ESTIMATED COST: $4,000 TAX MAP # 79.01-3-16 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: VINTON P-215 Steven T. Doyle 1879 Elbert Drive DESCRIPTION: INSTALL ADEQUATE STORM SEWER SYSTEM ESTIMATED COST: $15,000 TAX MAP # 76.06-3-40 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: WINDSOR HILLS P-216 Julie E & J R Bell 2032 Governor Drive DESCRIPTION: INSTALL ADEQUATE STORM SEWER SYSTEM ESTIMATED COST: $18,000 TAX MAP # 36.19-2-32 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: CATAWBA P-217 Roger Jefferson Darrell Brittin 4721 Starkey Road DESCRIPTION: CONSTRUCT STABLE CHANNEL ESTIMATED COST: $16,000 TAX MAP # 87.07-4-10 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: CAVE SPRING P-218 Greg Walter 8521 Barrens Road DESCRIPTION: CONSTRUCT ADEQUATE CHANNEL ESTIMATED COST: $ 1,000 TAX MAP # 26.08-5-18 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: HOLLINS P-219 Doris E. & Mabel Carlson 4229 Sharolyn Drive DESCRIPTION: REPLACE COLLAPSING CORRUGATED METAL STORM SEWER SYSTEM WITH CONCRETE ESTIMATED COST: $ 25,000 TAX MAP # 86.16-4-3 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: CAVE SPRING P-220 Charles R. Simpson 5326 Cave Spring Lane DESCRIPTION: REPAIR AND REPLACE PORTION OF EXISTING STORM SEWER SYSTEM ESTIMATED COST: $10,000 TAX MAP # 76.19-2-6 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: WINDSOR HILLS P-221 Craig S. Sellers 3616 Manassas Drive DESCRIPTION: CONSTRUCT ADEQUATE CHANNEL ESTIMATED COST: $8,000 TAX MAP # 77.18-4-25 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: CAVE SPRING P-222 Terry Edwards 6258 Buckland Mill Road DESCRIPTION: STABILIZE EXISTING CHANNEL ESTIMATED COST: $8,000 TAX MAP # 18.17-4-26 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: HOLLINS P-223 Paul T. & Susan Leroy 4037 Crawford Road DESCRIPTION: REPAIR EXISTING CONCRETE CHANNEL ESTIMATED COST: $5,000 TAX MAP # 77.19-2-54 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: CAVE SPRING P-224 Jonathan Bingham 2725 White Pelican DESCRIPTION: CONSTRUCT ADEQUATE CHANNEL ESTIMATED COST: $20,000 TAX MAP # 87.13-2-4 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: CAVE SPRING P-225 Thomas F. Engl 5227 Rosecliff Road S. W. DESCRIPTION: CONSTRUCT ADEQUATE CHANNEL ESTIMATED COST: $ 3,000 TAX MAP # 86.11-2-4 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: CAVE SPRING P-226 William V. & Marian Johnson 2850 Embassy Drive DESCRIPTION: CONSTRUCT ADEQUATE CHANNEL ESTIMATED COST: $1,000 TAX MAP # 36.20-5-21 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: CATAWBA P-227 Walt Dixon 2680 Willowlawn DESCRIPTION: REPAIR EXISTING STORM SEWER SYSTEM ESTIMATED COST: $1,000 TAX MAP # 77.05-5-21 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: WINDSOR HILLS P-228 Iris Stone 5161 North Lake Drive DESCRIPTION: INSTALL INLETS ALONG EXISTING SYSTEM ESTIMATED COST: $ 5,000 TAX MAP # 37.09-1-33 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: CATAWBA ~~ P-229 Mr. David Cushman 805 Halifax Circle DESCRIPTION: CONSTRUCT ADEQUATE CHANNEL ESTIMATED COST: $6,000 TAX MAP # 71.10-2-23 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: VINTON P-230 John A. & Cynthia L. D. Marco 5069 Williamsburg Court DESCRIPTION: CONSTRUCT ADEQUATE CHANNEL ESTIMATED COST: $ 3,000 TAX MAP # 86.08-5-24 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: WINDSOR HILLS P-231 Don Neighbors 2020 Denise Circle DESCRIPTION: CONSTRUCT NEW CHANNEL ESTIMATED COST: $3,500 TAX MAP # 39.04-1-35 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: HOLLINS P-232 Jerry Ogden 3446 Poff Lane DESCRIPTION: STABILIZE EXISTING CHANNEL ESTIMATED COST: $12,000 TAX MAP # 87.10-3-11 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: CAVE SPRING /- - ,;~„ P-233 Michael & Karen Tripp 5081 Labradore Drive DESCRIPTION: STABILIZE EXISTING CHANNEL ESTIMATED COST: $2,000 TAX MAP # 40.13-3-30 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: HOLLINS P-234 Betty Saunders 1861 Terry Drive DESCRIPTION: STABILIZE EXISTING CHANNEL ESTIMATED COST: $18,000 TAX MAP # 50.03-2-15 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: VINTON P-235 Charles Noel 5507 Lynn Dell DESCRIPTION: CONSTRUCT ADEQUATE CHANNEL ESTIMATED COST: $15,000 TAX MAP # 86.16-3-13 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: CAVE SPRING P-236 Richard Lee Lawrence 5004 Falcon Ridge Road DESCRIPTION: STABILIZE EXISTING CHANNEL ESTIMATED COST: $10,000 TAX MAP # 88.13-3=20 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: CAVE SPRING P-237 Patricia Lewis 7192 Bent Mountain Road DESCRIPTION: STABILIZE EXISTING CHANNEL ESTIMATED COST: $5,000 TAX MAP # 95.01-02-40 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: WINDSOR HILLS ~z EXHIBIT "C" ROUTINE MAINTENANCE OR EMERGENCY REPAIR PROJECTS ~z COMPLETION DATE JOB DESCRIPTION 9/12/96 Removed several trees from creek behind 71 Orlando Drive. 9/18/96 Cut up walnut tree, which had fallen behind house at 4803 Topping Hill Drive. 9/18/96 Cut up cherry tree, which had fallen behind 3629 Willetta Drive. 9/19/96 Patched driveway where storm drain was repaired at Brookwood Drive. 9/26/96 Repaired drainage inlet with quickrete and filled sinkholes with dirt at 1719 Kingsmill Road. 9/26/96 Put up 80 ft. of silt fence where ditch is washing out at 3446 Poff Lane. 9/27/96 Filled in sinkholes and patched gap at bottom of pipe in drainage inlet at 3660 Bunker Hill Drive. 10/2/96 Dug up and repaired corrugated metal storm drain at 5133 Canter Drive. 10/4/96 Removed several trees from creek behind 3102 Garst Cabin Drive. 2/13/96 Installed 3 ft. riser on manhole at Sierra and Fenwick Drives. 2/26/96 Rip-rapped small section of ditch behind 3576 Colony Lane. 4/8/96 Installed 4" drain across driveway at 4616 Summerset Drive. 4/9/96 Put rip-rap around storm drain outlet behind 4425 Summerset Drive. 5/9/96 Removed trees from creek at 2826 Embassy Circle and also from under bridge at Poage Valley Road and Rt. 221. 5/14/96 Installed 240 ft. french drain beside Clearbrook School. 5/31/96 Lined ditch with rip-rap between 1223 and 1233 Martha Drive. 2 6/7/96 Relocated ditch and lined with rip-rap at Lewis Road 7/2/96 Removed tree from creek behind 83 Orlando Drive. 7/19/96 Dug up and installed concrete wall around sewer line to help prevent water surge behind house at 4616 Summerset Drive. 9/4/96 Filled 400 sandbags and placed 300 of them at different locations. 3 ROANOKE COUNTY ENGINEERING & INSPECTIONS 1993- 94 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS ~~ t''1 i S Q Y` ~.._._ Y Anthony ~tallace 5621 Legate Drive Montclair EsL 38.19-O1-42 T -~, PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS P-209 ROANOKE COUNTY ~ Z ENGINEERING & INSPECTIONS 1993-94 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS Forest B~~d, Penn Rt 6g7 ~~ Cr Harlte 33 ~oo~' ~~ Rt , 15 g~, 1~0 ~`~ ~'~' Beacon Rt. 1540 ~~ ~ ~~ L c r~p~ ~Q, GrPpp'~, gQ0 Bill Francis 3356 Kenwick Trail Penn Forest 87.06-3-41 PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS P-210 ROANOKE COUNTY ~ 2 ENGINEERING & INSPECTIONS 1993-94 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS G'~ ~e~~o- p~1 ,~ 11 ~ G'~ ~~ Q ~`~~,~20 J~ ~~,1 ~~ ~2~ Q~ ~jL ~~ ~~ ,`O`P Peggy Stack 323 Ingal Blvd. Glenvar East 54.02- 02- 4 PROPOSED IZ~PROVEMEN'I'S P-211 RoANOxE CouNTY ~ .~. ENGINEERING & INSPECTIONS 1993-94 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS ~a, ~t Ze U ~' ~2 x~~ ~- .~ ~ ~a ti ~~ 22 ,p ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~. S ~ ~-- Charles Hofer 5932 Sunnycrest Road 88.03- 02-5 PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS P-212 ROANOKE COUNTY ENGINEERING & INSPECTIONS 1993-94 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS Lake~Q s Cynth,a Dr icy ~ Dr ~ Cave Spr,n9 r- L n Q co 3 q Q~ ~,~50 ~ ~~ Gr <,;~ 9~Q .p ~n ~ 1509 Canter Rt,15~5 cQ ~ ~ ~~~ z ~a~ °~~ ~~ z v~ ~ i ;~ ~° ~? 2 R t,1S01 Rt,1573 Luwana ~ ~ ~~ 15°~ P r ~v a-~e Gina Barringer 3422 Lakeland Drive Nottingham Hills 76.19-02-58 ~ - PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS P-213 1 D L~ ~° ~° .c°',o ~ ~,. ~ ~ ROANOKE COUNTY '~~ ENGINEERING & INSPECTIONS 1993-94 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS S~~ v ale S~r~~ ~'~ ,~ 09 Robert Furrov~r 2711 Sunnyvale Street 79.01-03-18 PROPOSED IMFROVEMENTS P-214 ROANOKE COUNTY ~- .~- ,~~ ` ENGINEERING & INSPECTIONS 1993-94 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS ~ ~~' ~ a ~~ ~~ ~ ~. Br-dte Ln~ R t, 1315 Etloer-~ fir. Rt, 139 ~~ 00 '~' ~~'; ~ ~~ e~~, ~8 Steven T. Doyle 1879 Elbert Drive Hidden Valley Homes 76.06-03- 40 PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS P-2 t 5 ROANOKE COUNTY ENGINEERING & INSPECTIONS 1993-94 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS ~~ a5~~ ~~~ ~ ~ 0 o ~, ~ ~ o ~~ os =~ o ~~ ~ ~ Q 0 d ~~ d ~~~ o- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ No Julie E. & J. R. Bell 2032 Governor Drive Montclair Forest 36.19-02-32 PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS P-216 ROANOKE COUNTY ~ ~, ENGINEERING & INSPECTIONS 1993-94 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS Z5 ~ ~ ~ q Q~ Pen st b~vcl' n Fore 687 ~ ~~~ ~i ~ ~ ~ d ~ ~ ~ ~ ti~~ ~, ~;~ ~ ~ ~ ~- -~ ~~~ ~ s ~~ Roger 3efferson Darrel Brittin 4721 Starkey Road 87.07- 04-10 PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS P-217 ROANOKE COUNTY ~? 2,,, ENGINEERING & INSPECTIONS 1993-94 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS ~-~ ~'~ .~~. ~ ' ~ ~` ~%~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~`~ ~> ~~a ~~ ~~ ~~ ti~ ~ ~ ,~, ~, q~ ~- ~- ~, ~ ~~ ~~ s ~~ ,do- ~ ~ ~ Q Greg falter 8521 Barrens Road Buckland Forest 28.08-05-18 PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS P-218 ROANOKE COUNTY ~ 2 ENGINEERING & INSPECTIONS 1993-94 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS ~~ . c~'~~ ~h ~hQ~ ~ ti~O o~ ~~ S~ fix,. ~ ~ ti~ dom.' 9 ~~~ ~ S ~o~ 16~g s o ~~ y(~ .~ j6 ~~ ~~ ~f' Doris E. & Mabel Carlson ~ 4229 Sharolyn Drive Arlington Hills 86.18-04-3 PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS P-219 ROANOKE COUNTY ~~.~. ENGINEERING & INSPECTIONS 1993-94 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS LQk~~Qnd 15p1 CQ ve S pr'n9 ~ ~,~ n, 1573 ~p3 ~~ ~ Lu wana ~ Dr, ~~ Q~Q +; I?r, Charles R. Simpson 5326 Cave Spring Lane 76.19-02-6 PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS P-220 ROANOKE COUNTY ~ Z,, ENGINEERING & INSPECTIONS 1993-94 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS Q Q`J 9 ~~~ Q s ~~~ ~~~ `n o-~ Q~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ N PJ o-~ d ,~• ~ ~o ~.( Go ~~ ~`~, . ,~, ,per Craig S. Sellers 3516 Manassas Drive Castle Hill D. 77.18- 04-25 PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS P-221 ROANOKE COUNTY ~ '~' ENGINEERING & INSPECTIONS 1993-94 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS Ln Angel ~a ~~\` ~~,,185g Terry Edwards 6258 Buckland Mill Road Buckland Forest 18.17-04-26 ~ - PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS P-222 d G~\o-~ v ~~ z ROANOKE COUNTY ~ ~ ENGINEERING & INSPECTIONS 1993-94 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS ~~ .~~- ~\ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~' ~ ~- ~~' to ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ o-~~ ~~ o~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ G'~a ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o _ ~ ~ Paul T. & Susan Leroy 4037 Crawford Road Greenvalley 77.19- 02- 54 PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS P-223 ROANOKE COUNTY ~ 2 ENGINEERING & INSPECTIONS 1993-94 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS ~r ~ ~a `o- 6 o,'P .T 1, cJ ~ -0 B s~Q( ~,~ S~4 ~~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ,P ~Q-I-~y~ .n J`S69 9 ~~ ~r ~ dp`pe ~ 1588 ~~a ~ ~o R ~ SZ ,\~ a ~ ~ ti ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ -a ~ z~ o s ~ ~ 'S . 1s oq, q .~ O ~~~ 66 ~~, c ~ ~~h~ a ~~Q~ `Z,5 'P~ 1S'e an Ln, ~° ~ q, ~ 9~ ~ °°a Lr1~ 5~ ~ e ~o o°` ~' R'~' Rt ti~ ~~ ~ c°n' £ pr~ote ~ ~ ° ~ v Rt~ 1754 ~ ~ Jonathan Bingham 2725 White Pelican Lane Penn Forest 7 87.13-02-04 CIE - PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS P-224 ROANOKE COUNTY ~ 2- ENGINEERING & INSPECTIONS 1993-94 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS ~d~ Rose~awn R~ egg ~ 0 :o n ~ ~ ~ ~ dos P~~,P S~ ~, l ~Qq! 6~~ ~~ ~e ~~ ~4 ~o Thomas F. Engl 5227 Rosecliff Road Layman Lawn 86.11-02-4 PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS P-225 ROANOKE COUNTY ~ ~, ENGINEERING & INSPECTIONS 1993-94 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS ti12 ~~L ~~ ~ E~~isary ~~ ~, L tr o 'P O~ q ~~ 9/ P9Q ~ ~ J ~, ,~, R t139 ~`~ ~r , ~o-~ ~ ,~~ q~ ~ ~~Q ti~~~ ~~ ~ ~ c ~wti 1~0 cA N ~ ~' ~, IS ~~ ~~ i~ ~a55y ~ ~~"~~ ~ ~~ ~~ o ~ J~ ~ ~~ c ~ ~~ ~ J~ Wayburn oL ~ os ~ D r 2~ ~ 9 Rt,1~12 ~ 2 o ~ ~ Green R;~y ~ ~~ ~ d Rt ~ 1 ~~S Cr. d .L ~ -~ ~`~~r d on Gr1~ ~ o-y ~~ 11 William V. & Marian Johnson 2850 Embassy Drive Montclair Estates 36.20-05-21 ~!E -PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS P-226 ROANOKE COUNTY ~ ~ ENGINEERING & INSPECTIONS 1993-94 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS ~~ ~L fl '~VJ 9% ~ ~ c4 ~ s~ ~. ~ s~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. 13 5 ~r~o ~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ ~+ ~ Halevan Rd. R-t, 131 Walt Dizon 2680 Willowla~vn Sreet Southwoods 77.05-05-21 PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS P-227 ROANOKE COUNTY /- :~ ENGINEERING & INSPECTIONS 1993-94 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS ~e`~ S`~~ R~ 1505 ~~ c~ . o-~~~ ~~ O 15 s~ ~ v ~~ ~ q ~~ ~Q~ o ~, ~ 1`~~9 C' T6o ~~ ~ 0 4 ~ o ~ ~ "'~ ~'` ti ~ Winter ~ ~ ,~,~ , ~ 0+4~~~ c a Park Dr ~ ~ ~ d Z ~ rn Rt,2560 a a `" ~ -P ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ "js ~'~ M ~~`IS ~1o rah s~ ti~ ~~ ~3 ~ '~ 'ti s 4 ~ ~ ~~ ~ '~~ X23 ~ "1SS5 o A~~ ~~,~. ~ ~'p P (eda~e d < ~ ~~ ~ a~ ~`~ ae d S ~ ~~ N o rt~~ o hQ~o ~~ ~~ ~ ti 21 ~ Ln ti~ ~Q ~~ ~ ~P~1 ~~ >~9 ,~~ Ms. Iris Stone 5161 North Lake Drive North Lakes 37.09-01-33 ~ -PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS P-228 ROANOKE COUNTY ENGINEERING & INSPECTIONS 1993-94 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS c O c ~ c ~ o o `-' ~ oar ro~`Q Roa David Cushman 805 Halifax Circle Montgomery Village 71.10-02-23 CIE -PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS / "" Horn Cr. Rt,1071 P- 229 rn m~~:.,i.-..~ ROANOKE COUNTY ENGINEERING & INSPECTIONS 1993-94 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS ~~ '~q R t, xr e~` G~o,~ ~ ~w ~ ~ ~ Ct, 1 X97 ~z a s J 'n~ -/ AO ^~ ~ rW Y QI .S m ^~ W '~"> 'i^"1, W Y ,fit' ~~ Thh ~h c ,~h~Qh ~cr Lan e ~~ ~ ~ ~2 L ~ v -Issl ¢ a~ ~~ ~~ ~Z ~ w A P Q ~ ~ ~ h%gSQr~ ~ v~ ~ ~~ °~~ ,rte ~ ~ ~ ~ c `~ ~ ~ jj ~Manaer ~'1~ n ~, ~~, '~ti ~I -~ Q' Rd~ Rosel John A & Cynthia L. DiMarco 5069 Williamsburg Court Williamsburg Court 86.08-05-24 0 ~Z 2~, PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS ~ P-230 ROANOKE COUNTY ENGINEERING & INSPECTIONS 1993-94 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS Don Neighbors 2020 Denise Circle SUBDIVISION NAME 39.04-1-35 /~--Z ~d ~~e ~ ~~ SQ PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS P-231 ROANOKE COUNTY ENGINEERING & INSPECTIONS 1993-94 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS ~~. ~'- 2. u~ 0 R~~ ~`~' ~r ~2 C~apa ~a~e ~ ~e`~ ~~ ~' h4 ' ~~ ~ P°~~ Ln ~~ ~~ s s re5~ fin, Tree F ° \d e Rd, B~~P ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~'h~ o~ c ~, Jerry Ogden 3446 Poff Lane 87.10-03-i1 ~ - PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS P- 232 ROANOKE COUNTY _ _ - _ .ENGINEERING & INSPECTIONS _ 1995-96 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS ~. ~2 g:-\cad\drainage\d5003215 titVt VJl~L 11Y1i-l~V Y171v1L1~1~ ~f- __ ROANOKE COUNTY ~ ~ ENGINEERING & INSPECTIONS 1993-94 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS ~ ~r ~Q ~,~e 5 o ~~° ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~- ~~ ~~ ~ ~ q~ ~ ~~ ,p~ ~~( ~~ o~ 1~ ~ ~ Q ~~ ti~ ~s 1~ ~~ ~ Charles M. Noel 5507 Lynn Dell Road Lynn Dell Est. 86.16-03-13 PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS P-235 ROANOKE COUNTY ~ ~, ENGINEERING & INSPECTIONS 1993-94 DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS Tw P~~ P ~~ ~~~lo ~'~ 6 ck ~ 94 ~o ~-d` 21 ~~ ~'~ ~ 2 G~ o- ~d' -a. o '~,a`r N~°~r . ~~ .~er'~ Patricia Lewis 7192 Bent Mountain Road 95.01-02-40 PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS P-237 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: December 3, 1996 AGENDA ITEM: Work Session of Proposed Policy Manual COUNTY ADMINISTR_ATC)R~S COMMENTS: On September 24, 1996, a draft copy of the Policy Manual was distributed to each Board member. The Board requested a work session on this topic. This time has been set aside for Board comments and review. A copy of the County Attorney's transmittal memorandum from September 24, 1996, is attached. This lengthy document was previously distributed to you. If you require an additional copy, please contact this office in advance of the meeting. Respectfully submitted, Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney Action Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Motion by No ~ Abs Eddy y Harrison Johnson Minnix Nickens 1 3 ~O~IVOKK COUNTY i~TTO~IVKY'S O~~IC~ Roanoke County Administration Center 5204 Bernard Drive, S. W. -Room 431 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 772-2007 MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Superviso ~~~ FROM: Paul M. Mahoney DATE: 24 September 1996 SUBJECT: Policy Manual After long delay enclosed you will find a copy of the "Policy Manual." The term "policy manual" does not accurately describe this document; it is a misnomer when applied here. The term "policy manual" contemplates an organized, systematic approach to the handling of routine matters by an organization. Instead this document is a collection of summaries of the haphazard pronouncements, directions and resolutions adopted by the various boards of supervisors for Roanoke County over the past 20 years. In compiling these actions we have not included rezonings, real estate transactions, or County Code ordinances (however, we did include certain ordinances establishing fees so that this collection would become a "usable" document by collecting these actions in one place for future reference); we have not included items addressed in other policy documents (e.g. the employee handbook); we have only included the last resolution in a series of resolutions on the same topic (assuming that the last resolution implicitly repealed the prior resolutions on the same topic). We have duplicated and cross-referenced materials under several topical headings. Despite its obvious flaws this document is invaluable. Whether one agrees or disagrees with the content of these various actions, these actions are formal actions by the board of supervisors, and, as such, are still applicable until amended or repealed. One obvious benefit of this laborious process is the identification of actions of previous boards that should be repealed or modified. Staff s goal is to develop a usable document for internal purposes, which will be published and distributed to each County department, constitutional officer, and member of the Board. We recommend Board consideration of repeal or modification of many of these actions: various titles used throughout have changed with various administrations, gender usage, use of the community room (p. 6), the establishment if various fees, vending machine policy (p. 37), operation of concession stands at County parks (p. 52), the various 3 retirement and fringe benefit actions, and shift differential (p. 68) are obvious examples. Once you have had an opportunity to review these materials please contact me with your thoughts and recommendations concerning how next to proceed. Would you prefer that a management team draft a series of amendments to this document for your subsequent action? Which items would you want to repeal? Do you believe that the entire process is unnecessary? If you believe that it is unnecessary, how would you accommodate these past board policy directives with current practices and procedures? PMM/ spb G:\ ATTORNEY\PMM\ POLCYMAN.MEM AT A JOINT MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, AND ROANORE CITY COUNCIL, HELD AT 17 CAMPBELL COURT ON TUESDAY, DECEMBER 3, 1996 RESOLUTION 120396-7 CERTIFYING EXECUTIVE MEETING WAS HELD IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CODE OF VIRGINIA WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia has convened an executive meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provisions of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and WHEREAS, Section 2.1-344.1 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that such executive meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby certifies that, to the best of each members knowledge: 1. Only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the executive meeting which this certification resolution applies, and 2. Only such public business matters as were identified in the motion convening the executive meeting were heard, discussed or considered by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the Certification Resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Minnix A COPY TESTE: YYl.~c.~, ~ . Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Executive Session 0~ ROANp,I.F ti ,A .;.A ~;, ,, c~ z °v ` a 1838 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE (540) 772-2004 P.O. BOX 29800 5204 BERNARD DRIVE ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 FAX (540) 772-2193 December 4, 1996 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS BOB L. JOHNSON, CHAIRMAN HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS, VICE-CHAIRMAN VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT LEE B. EDDY WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FENTON F. "SPIKE" HARRISON, JR. CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT H. ODELL "FUZZY" MIN NIX CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT (540) 772-2005 The Honorable The Honorable The Honorable The Honorable The Honorable The Honorable The Honorable George Allen John S. Edwards Malfourd W. "Bo" Trumbo H. Morgan Griffith C. Richard Cranwell Clifton A. Woodrum A. Victor Thomas Dear Governor Allen, Senators Edwards, Trumbo and Congressmen Griffith, Cranwell, Woodrum, and Thomas: Attached is a certified copy of Resolution No. 120396-2 adopting a Legislative Program for the 1997 Session of the Virginia General Assembly. This resolution was adopted by the Board of Supervisors at their meeting on Tuesday, December 3, 1996. 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 M. Mahoney, County Attorney The Honorable Bruce F. Jamerson, Clerk of the House The Honorable Susan Clarke Schaar, Clerk of the Senate Clerk, Vinton Town Council Clerk, Salem City Council Clerk, Roanoke City Council Clerk, Bedford County Board of Supervisors Clerk, Botetourt County Board of Supervisors Clerk, Craig County Board of Supervisors Clerk, Floyd County Board of Supervisors Clerk, Franklin County Board of Supervisors Clerk, Montgomery County Board of Supervisors James D. Campbell, Execu ive Director, Virginia Association of Counties ~ a~ya~a P>~ O~ ROANp,Y~ ~' z c~ z °v a 1838 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE (540) 772-2004 P.O. BOX 29800 5204 BERNARD DRIVE ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 FAX (540) 772-2193 December 3, 1996 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS BOB L. JOHNSON, CHAIRMAN HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS, VICE-CHAIRMAN VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT LEE B. EDDY WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FENTON F. "SPIKE" HARRISON, JR. CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT H. ODELL "FUZZY" MINNIX CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT (540) 772-2005 Mr. Wayne Strickland Executive Director Fifth Planning District Commission P. O. Box 2569 Roanoke, VA 24010 Dear Mr. Strickland: This will notify you that John M. Chambliss, Jr., has been appointed to serve another term as the local official for Roanoke County on the Disability Services Board in the Fifth Planning District Commission. Mr. Chambliss' three year term will expire December 31, 1999. This appointment was made by the Board of Supervisors at their meetings on Tuesday, December 3, 1996. If you need further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, ~ ~. Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors bjh cc: John M. Chambliss, Jr. C~o~~xx~#~ ~~ ~~~z~~~tE ®Recyded Paper 0~ ROANp~~ ~ 9 Z '~ ~ 2 Oi) ; =~~ a 1838 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE (540) 772-2004 C~l~~x~t~ ~# ~.~~~~~e Mr. Al G. Thomason, 5388 Christie Lane Roanoke, VA 24018 Dear Mr. Thomason: P.O. BOX 29800 5204 BERNARD DRIVE ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24015-0798 FAX (540) 772-2193 December 3, 1996 Sr. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS BOB L. JOHNSON, CHAIRMAN HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS, VICE-CHAIRMAN VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT LEE B. EDDY WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FENTON F. "SPIKE" HARRISON, JR. CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT H. ODELL "FUZZY" MINNIX CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT (540) 772-2005 The members of the Board of Supervisors wish to express their sincere appreciation for your previous service to the Planning Commission. Citizens so responsive to the needs of their community and willing to give of themselves and their time are indeed all too scarce. I am pleased to inform you that, at their meeting held on Tuesday, December 3, 1996, the Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to reappoint you as a member of the Planning Commission representing the Windsor Hills Magisterial District for another four year term. Your new term will expire on December 31, 2000. State law provides that any person elected, re-elected, or appointed to any public body be furnished a copy of the Freedom of Information Act. Your copy is enclosed. We are also sending you a copy of the Conflict of Interest Act. 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 this oath administered, and Mr. McGraw has asked 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. Sincerely, Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors bjh Enclosures cc: Terry Harrington, Director, Planning & Zoning Steven A. McGraw, Clerk, Circuit Court ®p~~ py~ i~ - 3 i ROANOKE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE \ Roanoke County Administration Center . ~j ~~ 204 Bernard Drive, S. W. -Room 431 ,~/ Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 ~; . rt ~,'~ 772-2071 MEMORANDUM Board of Supervisors Members Joseph B. Obenshain Senior Assistant Coun Atto y DATE: November 7, 1996 SUBJECT: Local Board of Fire Prevention Code Appeals (BFPCA) ' ~,~c~~ ~.~--U~ -p m rye ~o s ~ lcP. C'vde, The recent revocation by the Fire Marshal of an open burning permit has brought to light that Roanoke County does not currently have a local administrative board designated to handle appeals involving the Statewide Fire Prevention Code (SFPC) as required by Section 27-98 of the Code of Virginia. The SFPC (SECTION F-105.0 APPEALS) states that appeals shall first be presented to a local Board of Fire' Prevention Code Appeals (BFPCA) consisting of five (5) or more members appointed by the local government. Their term of office is to be established by written policy, and these terms may be staggered (F-105.2. Membership of BFPCA). The SFPC further directs that members of the BFPCA "shall to the extent possible, represent different occupational or professional fields relating to building construction or fire prevention." Members shall also "be selected on the basis of their ability to render fair and competent decisions regarding application of the SFPC" (F-105.3 Qualifications of BFPCA members). This office, in conjunction with the Fire Marshall, recommend that the Board appoint a BFPCA for Roanoke County. There are presently three options which the Board may wish to consider in meeting the County's statutory responsibility in this area, as follows: 1. Designate the County's existing Building Code Appeals Board as the County's Board of Fire Prevention Code Appeals; 2. Enter into an agreement with the City of Roanoke to utilize their currently existing BFPCA as the County's BFPCA in the event any appeal is ever actually filed. The SFPC specifically permits a local government to enter into an agreement with another city or county, or even another agency, to act for it on appeals (F-105.1. General); 3. Establish a separate BFPCA for the County and designate five, or more, qualified individuals to serve on this appeal board. - Please let this office know how you wish to proceed in this matter. Enclosure cc: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator Donald W. Gillispie, Fire Marshal O. Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections § 27-98 FIRE PROTECTION § 27,, °- ~'~ . The 1994 amendment, in the second para- guage beginning "including the voluntary graph, in the second sentence, added the lan- stallation." A ~: § 2?-98. Enforcement of Fire Prevention Code; appeals from deg , `' sions of local enforcing agencies; inspection of buildings. -Any loc `" government may enforce the Fire Prevention Code. The State Fire Marsh` ' shall also have the authority, in cooperation with any local governing body;' ' enforce the Code. The State Fire Marshal shall also have authority to enforc the Code in those jurisdictions in which the local governments do not enforce C the Code. The local governing body may establish such procedures or require- ments as may be necessary for the administration and enforcement of th Code. Appeals concerning the application of the Code by the local enforcin agency shall first lie to a local board of appeals and then to the'State Building Code Technical Review Board. Appeals from the application of the Code by th'" State Fire Marshal shall be made directly to the State Building Code Techriic~ _ Review Board as provided in § 36-108 et seq. Fees may be levied by the local governing body in order to defray the cost of such enforcement and appeals' (1986, c. 429; 1994, c. 275.) The 1994 amendment added the second sentence. § 27-99. State buildings. -The Fire Prevention Code shall be applicable to all state-owned buildings and structures. Every agency, commission or' institution of the Commonwealth shall permit, at all reasonable hours, a local fire official reasonable access to existing structures or a structure undei® S' construction or renovation, for the purposes of performing an informational' 2' and advisory fire safety inspection. The local fire official may submit, subse'~ 2' quent to performing such inspection, his findings and recommendations including a list of corrective actions necessary to ensure that such structure is reasonably safe from the hazards of fire to the appropriate official of such agency, commission, or institution and the State Fire Marshal. Such agency, ~ 2 commission or institution shall notify, within sixty days of receipt of such findings and recommendations, the State Fire Marshal and the local fire ~ 2 official of the corrective measures taken to eliminate the hazards reported by' the local fire official. The State Fire Marshal shall have the same power in the 2 enforcement of this section as is provided for in § 27-98. The State Fire Marshal may enter into an agreement as is provided for iri § 36-139.4 with any local enforcement agency that enforces the Fire Preven- tion Code to enforce this section and to take immediate enforcement action upon verification of a complaint of an imminent hazard such as a chained or ~ 2 blocked exit door, improper storage of flammable liquids, use of decorative materials and overcrowding. (1986, c. 429; 1989, c. 258; 1994, c. 275.) i The 1994 amendment added the second paragraph. 40 ACTION # ITEM NUMBER -- AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE : November 19 ,~ "`~, 9 9 6 *.~ AGENDA ITEM: First Reading f Ordinance for Authorization to Vacate a Portion~~=gin Existing 20-Foot Water Line Easement and to ~s;~pt a Relocated Portion of Same Easement. The Wadi Line Easement in Question is Located across Lots 27 and 28, Block 1, Revised Plat of the Orchards, Applewood, Section 9 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND' F&W Community Development Corporation conveyed to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, a water line easement, twenty (20') in width, across a tract of land owned by F&W Community Development Corporation by Deed dated August 22, 1988. F&W Community Development Corporation subsequently subdivided and developed a portion of said tract of land into Section 9, The Orchards, Applewood, as shown upon the plat dated March 10, 1994, made by Lumsden Associates, P.C., of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Plat Book 17, page 86. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: F & W Community Development Corporat~ 1 is the owner of Lots 27 and 28, Block 1, and a recent survey ~ property reflects that the residential dwelling located ~ 'roaches upon the southwest side of the existing 20' ~ ~ment. F & W Community ~ ~ has requested that the Board of SupP~ ~ /~ ~'~ ,~ 1 ~ •ginia, vacate a portion of the wa~~ ~~j ~'`~"1 ~ exchange an additional area for w~ ~ ( ~ ~? southeastern side of the existing ~ r,~~~ V ~`'" ~~ The encroach. ;~ ~C/` structure will be eliminated b~ ~~ original easement proximate to t, /l~~ ~ ~ r° dditional easement will insure adE ~ ~ ~' ~ ea to operate and maintain the w~ ~ C ~- " in the original easement. The ~ ~ y 28 will have no adverse impact on ~ ,~lity to operate and (J`' ~~ maintain the water line located in the easement. Attached are copies of the revised easement plat dated November 6, 1996, as prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C. and the deed of easement prepared by Osterhoudt, Ferguson, Natt, Aheron & Agee. FISCAL IMPACT' • No costs are associated with preparation and dedication of the subject easement, as no water line relocation will be required. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff feels that the water line can still be properly maintained with this revised easement and therefore recommends that the attached ordinance be approved following the second reading on December 3, 1996. SUBMITTED BY: Gary Ro tson, P.E. Utilit Director Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Ref erred to Motion by: ACTION APPROVED: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy Harrison Johnson Minnix Nickens • • I N 54'31'30" E 66;56' 76.74' r" - - - - EXIST, 10 P. 3 I ., ---f--I----------- 1.1 s~\ I I---EXISTING 20' WATER ~ "' ~s ,I I LINE EASEMENT r ~ ExIST. 10' P.U.E. s• tO ~ `'~• I I D.B. 1294, PG. 506 ~ I Z I ~ 20 I ~\ ~? j~, I G EXIST. 15' P.U.E. ~~~ ~~ \ C-5 B ~. `, 28 { , ,_--_ L_. ~ ~~ BLOCK 1~ ~ J y, ~, ~ ~ Q, \ N s~~ I ,ri \ o I ~~' \ 11 a. ~ y\ \S 4b•44'13" W 136.22' ~\ 106.22' C.4 s ~`-\ ~. 30' M.B.L. NEW WATERLINE BASEMENT :~C-3 ~. WIND SoER~W LANE PORTION OF EXISTING cb`a WATERLINE EASEMEN7 Q~• ~' TO BE VACATED 2~ ~ ~ % ~ ~ _~- o~ `~ i ~ ~o •.\ ~/ • ~\ ~ / / ~~\ ~~' ~~F~S 2 6 PORTION OF EASEMENT ~ NEW WATERLINE 'TO BE VACATED EASEMENT UNE DIRECTION DiSTANGE uNE aRECnoN DISTANCE E-F N46' i 24 W 168.43 CH. A-8 N42 T11"W 20.00 CH. F_ 7 15.14 N4 '1T11' 4•~ 4 ' 41 144.63 H. -D S42'Z7'22"E 20.00' H_ 14 4 D-A S48'1TiT~W 4•~ CURVE TABLE PLAT SHOWING PORTION OF EXISTING WATERLINE EASEMENT, (D. B. 1294, PG. 506) TO BE VACATED AND NEW WATERLINE EASEMENT TO BE DEDICATED TO COUNTY OF ROANOKE FOR PUBLIC USE BY F & W COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ACROSS LOT 28 AND LOT 27, BLOCK 1, REVISED PLAT OF THE ORCHARDS, APPLEWOOD, SECTION 9, (P.B. 17, PG. 86) HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA SCALE 1"= 60' DATE: 6 NOV. 1996 `LUIIASDEN ASSOCIATES, P.C. ENGINEERS-SURVEYORS-PLANNERS ROANOKE, VIAOINIA ~~ I• • 7STERHOUGT, FERGUSGN, NATT.AHERGN & AGEE ATTORNEYS-AT-tAW RGAN9KE. YIRGINIA 2 4 019-16 9 9 ~'.~ THIS DEED OF EASE1`dENT, made and entered into this day ~f _ , 1996, by and between F & R COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT :ORPORATION, a Virginia corporation, Grantor and THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, a political subdivision ~f the Commonwealth of Virginia, Grantee. W I T N E S S E T H THAT FOR AND IN CONSIDERATION of the sum of One Dollar {$1.00), cash in hand paid by the Grantee to the Grantor, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the Grantor does hereby BARGAIN, SELL, GRANT and CONVEY with General Warranty and English Covenants, unto the iGrantee, its successors and assigns forever, the following described waterline easement, situate in the County of Roanoke, Virginia, the location of said waterline easement being more fully described as follows, to-wit: - Being- tha-t-.- new waterline .easement includzd within the bounds of Points E, F, G, H and E, as showy. on the attached plat entitled "Fiat Showin eP5061 TooBeLVacated Waterline Easement, (D.B. 1294, PDedicated to County of and New Waterline Easement To Be Roanoke for Public Use By F & W Community Development Corporation", prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C., dated the 29th day of October, 1996. To have and to hold unto the Party of the Second Part and its assigns forever. The easement conveyed herein shall run with the land and be binding upon the successors and assigns of the parties hereto. Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator of Roanoke County, Virginia, party of the third part, joins in the execution of this instrument to signify the acceptance by said Board of Supervisors of the real estate conveyed herein pursuant to Ordinance Number '~~ __._ adopted by the Board of Supervis-ors of Roanoke County, Virginia. WITNESS the following signatures and seals: F & W COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION BY (SEAL) IT'S THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA BY (SEAL) ELMER C. HODGE, County Administrator • STATE OF VIRGINIA ) )TO-WZT: COUNTY OF ROANOKE ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this,_- _ day of 1996, by ' of F & W Community Development, a ~~Virgni-a corporation. NOTARY PUBLIC JSTERHOUOT. FERCUS~N. NAT;. AHER~N & AGEE ATTORNEYS-AT-LAW RCA:70rE. `lIRu1NIA 24018-1699 II My Commission Expires: STATE OF VIRGINIA ) )TO-WIT: COUNTY OF ROANOKE ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _ day of , 1996, by Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator for the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. i~ T NOTARY PUBLIC My Commission Expires: z:\up50\lisa\f&u.Ded:lafll/11/96 • OSTERHGUOT, FEAGUSON, NATT,AHER~N & AGEE ATTORNEYS-AT-IAW RDANOKE, YIRGINIA 24018-1699 ~- ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 1996 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF AN EXISTING 20-FOOT WATERLINE EASEMENT AND ACCEPTANCE OF A RELOCATED PORTION OF THE SAME EASEMENT ACROSS LOT 28 AND 27, BLOCK 1, REVISED PLAT OF THE ORCHARDS, APPLEWOOD, SECTION 9 (PB 17, PAGE 86) WHEREAS, by Deed dated August 22, 1988, and recorded in Deed Book 1294 at page 506, F & W Community Development Corporation conveyed to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, a water line easement, twenty feet (20') in width, across a tract of land owned by F & W Community Development Corporation; and WHEREAS, F & W Community Development Corporation subsequently subdivided and developed a portion of said tract of land into Section 9, The Orchards,, Applewood, as shown upon the plat dated 10 March 1994, made by Lumsden Associates, P.C., of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Plat Book 17, page 86; and, WHEREAS, the above-described 20' water easement is referenced as "existing twenty foot (20') water line easement" and shown upon the above referenced subdivision plat; and WHEREAS, the petitioners, F & W Community Development Corporation are the owners of Lot 28 and 27, Block 1, Section 9, The Orchards, Applewood, across which the twenty foot (20') water line easement is located; and WHEREAS, a recent survey of said property reflects that the residential dwelling located on Lot 28 encroaches upon the west side of the 20' water line easement; and, • .~=a WHEREAS, the petitioners have requested that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, vacate that portion of the water line easement encroached upon and accept in exchange an relocated water line easement across Lots 28 and 27 on the eastern side of the existing easement as shown on a plat prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C., dated 6 November 1996, entitled "Plat showing portion of existing water line easement (DB 1294, page 506) to be vacated and new water line easement to be dedicated to County of Roanoke for public use by F & W Community Development Corporation across Lot 28 and Lot 27, Block 1, Revised Plat of The Orchards, Applewood, Section 9, (PB 17, page 86)"; and WHEREAS, the relocation has been accomplished without cost to the County and meets the requirements of the Utility Department. 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 November 19, 1996; and a second reading ~.~ and public hearing was held on December 3, 1996; and, 2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Charter of Roanoke County, the subject real estate (easement) is hereby declared to be surplus and the nature of the interest in real estate renders it unavailable for other public uses; and, 3. That, conditioned upon the exchange as hereinafter provided, a portion of the water line easement across Lot 28, Block • .... 1, Section 9, The Orchards, Applewood, in the Hollins Magisterial District, owned by F & W Community Development Corporation be, and hereby is, vacated; and, 4. That, in exchange, acquisition and acceptance of a relocated water line easement on the eastern side of the existing easement be, and hereby is, authorized and approved; and, 5. That, as a condition to the adoption of this ordinance, all costs and expenses associated herewith, including but not limited to, publication costs, survey costs and recordation of documents, shall be the responsibility of the petitioners, F & W Community Development Corporation, or their successors or assigns; and, 6. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions as may be necessary to accomplish this vacation and acquisition, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. 7. That this ordinance shall be effective on the date of its adoption. '~ C\OFF(CE\WPWIN\WPDOGi\AGENDA\UTILTIY\F&W.WAT • To t~~ A _ ,~~ - ~~ Time Z ~~ ~ 7 ^AM Date ^ PM WHILE YOU WERE OUT M ~ .R.~ #-~r M of Phone L_) _ ~} Z 7 _ L{- ~ ! ~f Area Code Number r l i Extension TELEPHONED CALLED TO SEE YOU WANTS TO SEE Y RE NE[ ~k. Message X1,7 ,_~ n t.' :, . .) -~ s ~ PLEASE CALL '• WILL CALL AGAIN URGENT YOUR CALL ~s ;i ----- c Operator ~ , AMPAD EFFICIENCY® REORDER N23-ooh • ~' wy~-y ~~r n__~ .wi • cam... ~~ ,a~.,. w~ ~ ~3 /2~3 Printed by Mary Allen / ADM01 10/16/96 7:38am --------------------------------------- From: Elmer Hodge / ADMO1 To: John Chamblis / ADMO1, Mary Allen / ADMO1 Subject: Social Services Space --------------------------------------- ===NOTE===='{ ____=====10/15/96==4:52pm= Fuzzy talked 'th me today. He had been to a SS Board Me~ ing. The lease runs out in May? and renews t:? s to be done before January. Can w ~ ut this on for Nov or Dec meeting? I prefer to leave them where they are and remodel. "spiff" up the place and renew for 5 years. What do you think? Page: 1 Printed by Mary Allen / ADMO1 11/21/96 9:17am --------------------------------------- From: Mary Allen / ADMO1Confirm receipt To: John Chamblis / ADMO1 Subject: lease for Social Services ===NOTE=====it At debriefing esterday, did ECH and you ever decide wheto }ring Social Services lease to BOS? I i~:~;12/3 or 12/17. I'll put on 12/3 agend a~d remove if you let me know . ~. Page: 1 November 20, 1996 Note to Mr. Eddy from Brenda Holton RE: SUSAN CLOETER APPOINTMENT BRCS Talked with Carolyn Davis at BRCS and they prefer not to give recommendations for reappointments. She gave me the attendance records. They have seven meetings each year and have had six already. Susan attended three of the meetings and participates in the discussion. CC:: Mary Allen -,+-2E~-9G WED 1 G 25 M H S tZOANOKE ',fiALLEY P 0 1 Blue Ridge Community Services fax PLEASE DELIVER TO: Phone # Fax # REMARKS Brenda, Ol1zNa Vllara p~++ Pamata K Cox rte. anhne.n John M. Hudplna, Jr, rre.w+r.. 8uaan J. Gloater srawry Fnd P ppeaaN, Jr., Ph.D. Date Number of Poges Includin Cover Sheet FROM: ~_ _ , _'„ GU~ Phone 8 Fax # 11/20/96 Dr. Roessel informed Mr. Pistner that he needs to notify Roanoke County of his resignation. Carolyn Davis 1 Transmission Problems -Lynne Allen 540/345-9841 Transmission via Sharp f0-600 Q G3 -540/342-3855 Executive Offices -301 Efm Avenue, SW Roanoke, Yugklia 24016-4026 (540) 345-9841 Fax: (540) 342-3855 TDO: (540) 345-0690 Serving the C+ties of Roanoke and Satem, and the Counties of Botetourt, Craig and Roanoke FAX TO: Dr. Nickens FROM: Mary Allen DATE: November 20, 1996 SUBJ: Library Board Appointment To follow up on our quick discussion yesterday, attached is a copy of the bylaws showing that members to the Library Board may serve only three consecutive terms. According to our records, Carolyn Pence has served 3 terms and is therefore NOT eligible to serve another term. I will note this in the Dec. 3 appointment Board Report. WHEREAS, The By-Laws of the Board of Trustees of the Roanoke County Public Library states in Article VII, Section 1: "Board members may serve only two consecutive terms"; and WHEREAS, Numerous and various boards throughout the County do not place a similar restriction on board service; and WHEREAS, Neither the Commonwealth of Virginia nor the Virginia State Library and Archives place any such longevity restrictions on board service; and WHEREAS, Members of the Board of Trustees have expressed a desire to continue service beyond the presently prescribed limits; then, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, That Article VII, Section 1 of the By- Laws be amended to state: "Board members may serve three consecutive terms". Enacted by a majority vote of the Board of Trustees of the Roanoke County Public Library in a special session, held expressly and solely for consideration of the proposed amendment, on December 21, 1992. Lees Dalton, and Chair Spenc r Watts, Library irector RKE BOARD SUPERVISORS TEL~703-772-2193 No . Receiver Transmitter Date Time Mode Pages Result Transmit Confirmation Report • 001 • NICKENS • RKE BOARD SUPERVISORS • Nov 20'96 751 • 00'54 • Norm • 02 • OK Nov 20'96 751 -1-- _ ~ COUNTY OF ROANOKE MEMORANDUM DATE: November 21, 1996 TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Elmer Hodge County Administrator RE: Spring Hollow Master Plan k~~i ~ ~ ~!0 ~la ~ Attached is a copy of the preliminary Spring Hollow Master Plan, which has been prepared by Hayes, Seay, Mattern and Mattern. The Master Plan will be presented to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission tonight, and Christina Nuckols of the Roanoke Times plans to write an article on it for Thanksgiving weekend. The Master Plan is ambitious, but as you will note, it can be completed in phases over time as funding becomes available. There is a proposal included for a new access road to the recreational area, which would be expensive, but would remove the traffic from Dry Hollow Road. We need to keep the citizens committee involved in the planning process as we move forward with it. Like Camp Roanoke, the Spring Hollow Recreational area will be a regional facility, attracting users from all over the Valley and this part of the state. This is an exciting project and will be a special and unique park for Roanoke County. i~. v ie INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ' OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA FINANCIAL STATEMENTS ' AND SUPPLEMENTARY SCHEDULES June 30, 1996 and 1995 II OFFICERS Billy H. Branch, Chairman J. Carson Quarles, Vice-Chairman Timothy W. Gubala, Secretary-Treasurer Edward A. Natt, Legal Counsel BOARD OF DIRECTORS • Guy Byrd, Jr. • Ronald M. Martin • J. Richard Cranwell • Carole Brackman • W. Darnall Vinyard TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT 1 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Balance Sheets 2 Statements of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance 3 Statements of Changes in Financial Position 4 Notes to Financial Statements 5 SUPPLEMENTARY SCHEDULES Schedules of Revenue Bonds and Notes Outstanding g H. SCH[~ARZ ~~ CO. CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS A Professional Corporation INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT Members of the Board of Supervisors and Board of Directors Industrial Development Authority Roanoke County, Virginia 5204 Bernard Drive, Suite 300 Roanoke, Virginia 24018 (540) 989-6144 FAX (540) 989-6613 We have audited the accompanying balance sheets of the Industrial Development Authority of ' Roanoke County, Virginia, as of June 30, 1996 and 1995, and the related statements of revenues, expenditures, and changes in fund balance and changes in financial position for the years then ended. These financial statements are the responsibility of the management of the ' Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, Virginia. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits. We conducted our audits in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial ' statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion. ' In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, ' Virginia, at June 30, 1996 and 1995, and the results of its operations and changes in financial position in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles. Our audits were made for the purpose of forming an opinion on the basic financial statements ' taken as a whole. The schedules of revenue bonds and notes outstanding on pages 8 and 9 are presented for the purpose of additional analysis and are not a required part of the basic financial statements. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied ' in the audits of the basic financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole. 1 ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ' November 7, 1996 i~ i~ INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA BALANCE SHEETS June 30, 1996 and 1995 ASSETS Cash Land (Note 3) LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCE Fund Balance 1996 $ 46,063 642,043 $ 688,106 $ 688,106 The Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of these statements. 2 1995 $ 3,960 1,453,282 $ 1,457,242 $ 1,457,242 INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA STATEMENTS OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE Years Ended June 30, 1996 and 1995 1996 1995 REVENUES Contributions from Roanoke County $ 815,309 $ - Audit fees 2,313 2,147 Member fees - 1,450 Application fees - 663 Interest income 1,251 74 TOTAL REVENUES 818.873 4.334 EXPENDITURES Relocation incentives 1,583,353 - Service charges 131 16 Professional fees 2,175 2,175 Directors' fees 2,350 1.750 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 1,588,009 3.941 EXCESS OF (EXPENDITURES OVER REVENUES) REVENUES OVER EXPENDITURES (769,136) 393 FUND BALANCE, BEGINNING OF YEAR _1,457,242 1,456,849 FUND BALANCE, END OF YEAR $ 688,106 $ 1.457,242 The Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of these statements. 3 INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION Years Ended June 30, 1996 and 1995 1996 1995 FINANCIAL RESOURCES WERE PROVIDED BY: Excess of (expenditures over revenues) revenues over expenditures $ (769,136) $ 393 iven as relocation incentives Land 811.239 g TOTAL RESOURCES AVAILABLE $ 42.103 $ 393 FINANCIAL RESOURCES WERE USED FOR: Increase in cash $ 42.103 $ 393 TOTAL USES $ 42,103 $ 393 The Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of these statements. 4 INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Note 1. ORGANIZATION, DESCRIPTION OF THE ENTITY AND ITS ACTIVITIES The Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, Virginia, was created as apolitical subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia by ordinance of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors on August 11, 1971, pursuant to the provisions of the Industrial Development and Revenue Bond Act (Chapter 33, Section 15.1-1373, et. seq., of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended). The Authority is governed by directors appointed by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. It is authorized to acquire, own, lease and dispose of properties to the end that such activities may promote industry and develop trade by inducing enterprises to locate and remain in Virginia. In addition, the Authority is authorized to issue revenue bonds for the purpose of obtaining and constructing facilities. Liability under the bonds may be retained by the Authority, or it may be assumed by the enterprises for whom facilities are constructed. Collection of revenues pledged to liquidate the bonds may be assigned to a trustee. The revenue bonds are not deemed to constitute a debt or pledge of the faith and credit of the Commonwealth of Virginia or any municipality thereof. The bonds are payable solely from revenues generated from the lease of the facilities constructed and may be secured by a deed of trust on those facilities. Note 2. ACCOUNTING POLICIES OoeratinQ Cvcle and Classification of Assets The Authority may realize its assets and liquidate its liabilities in operating cycles which range from very short to very long periods. The accompanying financial statements are presented in a nonclassified format because working capital concepts are not indicative of its operating liquidity. ~ Net Investment in Direct Financing Leases ' The Authority may acquire and improve properties and retain title to them. Where transfer of title at the completion of a lease to a tenant is not reasonably assured by bargain purchase options or other lease provisions, the Authority accounts for activities in its role as lessor as either capital leases or operating leases in accordance with the provisions of Financial Accounting Standard Number 13. Passthrou~h Financing Leases ' Most activities of the Authority represent passthrough leases. These agreements provide for periodic rental payments in amounts which are equal to the principal and interest payments due to project bondholders. The Authority has assigned all rights to the rental payments to the trustees of the bondholders, and the lessees have assumed responsibility for all operating costs such as utilities, repairs, and property taxes. In such cases, the Authority neither receives nor disburses funds. INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Note 2. ACCOUNTING POLICIES (Continued) Passthrough Financing Leases Although title to these properties rests with the Authority, bargain purchase options or other lease provisions eliminate any equity interest that would otherwise be retained. Deeds of trust secure outstanding bond obligations, and title will revert to the lessee when the bonds are fully paid. Although the authority provides a conduit to execute such transactions, it does not retain either the benefits of asset ownership or the liability for bond liquidation. Accordingly, the Authority does not recognize associated assets, liabilities, rental income, or interest expense in its financial statements. Investment Income Recognition Interest income from short-term cash investment of bond proceeds related to projects retained and managed by the authority is restricted as to its disposition by the bond indentures and is deferred as a part of the basis of related properties. Contributions from Local Governments and Deferred Revenue Contributions from local governments are recognized as revenues of the Authority when the activities for which the contributions were designated have been completed. Use of Estimates The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from these estimates. Note 3. LAND The Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, Virginia, owns certain parcels of land as follows: • 27.241 acres of land located at Valley TechPark $ 292,500 • 15 acres of land located at 601 Hollins Road 286,152 • One-half ownership with Botetourt County of 15 acres of land located in the Jack Smith Industrial Park 63,391 $ 642,043 L~ 6 J INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS ' Note 4. REVENUE BONDS AND NOTES As of June 30, 1996 and 1995, the Authority has issued $42,559,077 and $43,372,077, respectively, and has outstanding $27,806,145 and $31,587,317, respectively, in bonds and notes under the Industrial Development and Revenue Bond Act, pursuant to Chapter 33, Title 15.1 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended. These debt issues ' are not included in the accompanying financial statements since the Authority is not liable for their repayment, as discussed in Note 2. Note 5. RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS The Roanoke County Director of Economic Development serves asSecretary-Treasurer for the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, Virginia. Roanoke County pays legal fees for the Industrial Development Authority to the legal counsel of the Authority in the normal course of business. Total fees paid for the years ended June 30, 1996 and 1995, were approximately $11,622 and $7,130, respectively. ' A member of the Industrial Development Authority was engaged by Roanoke County's contractual engineer to prepare a landscape plan for an industrial park. Total cost was $4,552. Note 6. COMMITMENTS The Authority has entered into a performance agreement to expend up to $2,500,000 of public funds to be provided by Roanoke County, Virginia, for infrastructure ' improvements as relocation incentives for R. R. Donnelley & Sons Company, Inc. As of June 30, 1996, the Authority had expended $647,495.00. Additionally, the Authority transferred approximately 134 acres of land in Valley TechPark in Roanoke County, Virginia to R. R. Donnelley & Sons Company, Inc. and 13.2 acres to Rusco Windows of Roanoke, Inc. The Authority has entered into an agreement with Roanoke County, Virginia, for the ' construction and future maintenance of a storm water facility at Valley TechPark. The cost for the maintenance for ten years has been funded by Roanoke County, Virginia in the amount of $9,300. t'~ CC H ~z N a ~ H ~~ Qa ~j O U A a O H eN ~ .4 O H c7 z H A H N H O w H 0 z A o~ .--1 A O O M ~ ~ pW G Z ~ W W W O W a A W x v J.~ U d •O a W 0 0 H rn Q\ N H U G cC O rl M cd CG ~ h ~+ a~ u p, G +~ ~ •,~ U ri r71 N •.-1 JJ ~ ~ T ~ r-I U W 1.1 1J •.a •'•I •'•I U 3-1 cd U H -.~i b W 1.1 r-1 lei G •.a U U G G ~-+ •~-+ v1 W W bD W ,C H U E •*~+ ~+ O b0 b0 bD G oD CO Ri o0 U a~ G G G a~ •*+ O N G G~ G G b0 O N .d G b b b ~ r+ ••a rn b •LS ~+ •LS •,a •+a O G ~ ~ ~•Ha,~ ~W~H.1 ~b•Ha ~ a~ ~H ai.~~p NA O GAp cGCp ~ .~ O h0 Rf ~ ~d N H •.~ N v1 •.~ •~ a -°c v v v 3~ v ~ v v v v ~ ~-+ a~ v1 G. N •rl •,~ •,~ •r1 ~ •,~ O •,••~ •~ •'•1 •'•1 •r+ N •.-1 U 7a ~ ~+ W W W G O b W W W W W E 1~ ~+ ~ G O ~d W W W •rl 1J N N W W W W b O 1~ b Z x 3 0 0 0~ v~ ~ W o 0 o O d x v~ w Oou'1a0~7rnOrINOr~OOrno~~7o u1 OOo0c0I~NONMONO0o000~00 ~ 00.7MMnO u•1u'1Or-1OO~70NN0 H u'~OcoMOMO~tOO~oMOr~~nN~00 ~O ~O I~ N H D\ ~ ~D ~ M N n M O~ 00 u'1 00 tf1 O O 00 O ~ r-1 lf1 r~•~ 1~ ~--~ N U•1 r-1 N Q1 O\ 00 lf1 00 ~ ~ M ~ M N u•1I III N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~+' ~ O O O O N O O r r -1 O O O O O O O O O O N O O O O ~' 1 O O n ~ d O O O O O O O O O O N O O O O o ~ 0 0 O G y _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .. - - _ _ _ _ _ _ - •rl ~ OOOOvlu1OOOONOOOOrnr~O rn b0 VI o0 ~O O O r•-I o0 O ttl O N '-i o0 ~f1 ~O u1 O o0 O ~f1 •ri VI 1~ 00 ~ ~ M ~-•~ O ~ U'1 r-1 if1 I~ ~ M N N W tf1 ~ ~ f-+ O ifl O~ r•1 r-i .•-i ~ ~'•'~ ~ M t1.1 N t/} c1)• M M ~ ~ ~O ~ M 00 OO W W tf1 ~7 1~ (~ 00 O~ a\ D\ a\ iI'1 U1 00 ~ ~ O~ O~ ~ rl r--1 e-1 00 00 C~ 1~ r-1 p~ rl ~ ~--I lf1 O~ Q~ ri 00 O~ M rl - ^ - - a0 r-I ~-I rn ~ rn a\ ~f1 r-1 r-I N ~--I N N N H - ^ v1 O~ rl r-I O~ O~ r-1 N O~ rl r-1 l.~l 7-1 7••1 3•l ~ 3.1 S-I 3-I „ ~ ~ - ~ ~ A p .a .D .0 .O 1~ •I1 N N U U +~ ~f1 cd - .-1 8 E E E 8 8 E .o A~ ~ .~ ,~ ~ r-+ a~ o o a~ a~ a~ ~ ~, 0 0 0 ~ >, U U ~+ o 0 o a~i a~i a~i a~i aUi ~ v v v ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~d ~ Z Z A A A A A ~-i O O O d "~ ~~ fs•~ ~ '~ ~ ~ w o ~ ~ ~ ~ % b U 1.1 U I •' r-1 N U 7 U o •~ a~ G o m ,~ O •n H a U N U O ~ 1 J W S -i N U UI cd O 1J W 1J .~ N U1 •rl 'L Y+ 3a U td O •~ G d u1 U O N N JJ S•+ O O y O N O N m G .~ •~ U v1 a~ H ~+ a~ ~•+ .~ ~, ~+ y CO ~, a~ ~d U o o w ,~ a ~ • •d ~ ~ c~ ~ o a~ m ~ ~+ ~+ ~ oo ~ ro U ,~ ca G •.+ d ~ b G d a m~ ro u >,u G ro a G U ,~ ~ o a d ~d ~-+r-++~~H3 0 0 •ti o o x •a G a~ ,-~ cd ~-+ a~ v~ o v .~ .~ z G ~ o: c~ a~ ~ G - X23 b m o b D, ~ N ~d C7 3 o i+ s.+ cd a~ d a m G r-+ b d W ~ G G cs: a~ a~ G G x b0 G O t~ G G~ ~ O O ~ ••-+ •.•+ O O co G •~-+ ~ D ~ ~ ~ G v ~ v ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ i ~ • 0 0 G ~tf + U~ ~ o ~d •.~ o 0 o u~ ~~ o a o ~ [~ rs: 3 ~ D rx v u: cn d w or U oG U cn x ~ ~ O H x o~G d H ~> P•i so U A O ~., c~ y ~ O H O z H zA 6 H H O W H O z u, A rn r-I o° ~ ~ ti W W w O W r7 A W x U 1-1 U N •O R+ w O N A H rn a\ d ~ U C ro O r-1 M Proq N h a~ ~ ~ G ~ N •.a U r-1 ~ O •'•I J.1 ~ ro ~ T ~ ro w ~ ~ •,~ U •'•I •.~ U ~+ ~ •,U~I U U ~ w ~ •'•I O w ro ro O ~ O ~ VI r--1 w w e0 w ~] •.i U •~ 3•a ro O b0 00 a0 ~ a0 a0 t0 ro oo U O ~ ~ ~ ~ N •a d N ~ ~ G 1.l G ~ ro p., •,~ •d •~ •,~ •a ~ b U ao •,••~ •~ •.a N •a o w ,~ ro 1~ a~ ~ ~ ~ N p O o0 ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~+ G rl to p p A 7•+ ~ .~ .!] ~] ro ,a 1~ O CD ro ~ ~ ro U H •a of •a •~ •~ ~oA .~ v ~ v 3 cd v G v v v v v ~ r+ cad ~+ ~ a~ ~www ~ obwwwwww ~,~ ~ ~ o ~+ rowww•~+,~ ro ~wwwww•~ o•d Z x L*• ~ 3 0 0 0~~~ R: O O O O O d x W OOO~nNU'~v1O~DNO~r~OOrnoNO r~ oooooao.coo,~~o~aooo~o~o r-+ OOOOaoNt~O~O~ON~OO~0O0~0 M O O O ~D N a0 a0 O o0 00 u•1 .--i M N 0 ~7 u'1 N O ~ ~--I u'1 ~7 N ~D O OO O O M .t ~ n ~ ~D O O o0 O o0 Q\ M ~-•~I t!•1 N ~D N 00 N M N t!'1 N M~ O t!'1 tf1 ~' ~ r-I M r-I ~ M t!'1 r1 M yr rrr OOOOOOOOOOOu"1OOOO0N0 r~ rl O O O O O O O O O O O N O 0 0 0 0 tY1 O I~ O O O O O O O O O O O N O 0 0 0 0 00 O O ~ N •rl ~ 00000 UlutOOO0NOOOOO0~0 N d0 V1 00~oOOO~coO~nON'--1Ooo~rl~u'~OO r~ •rl to f~ 00 N D\ ~ M r•i O ~ U'1 r~ lfl lf1 I~ t!'1 M N N ~fl M ~ H Q Vl ~ e-i ~ .--1 r-i ~ r•~1 ~ M tf1 M ~ ~ t0 ~ O M 00 00 a0 00 u'1 u1 ~ ~~rn~rna`rnrn ~~~~ rn rn rn~ rn~~~~ ~~ rn rn ~ ~ rn - - - - oo r••I H rn ~ Q\ a\ M - - u•i - d oo .--I o0 rn - - ~ 00 H rn - rn ~-•1 r-1 ~ N r-1 N N N r-i - •• u'1 u'1 ~ r-1 ~ O\ rl N Q` r-1 ~ r-I 1> 7•d ~•d 3-I ~I ~-1 3-I ~I 1•a .. ~ ~ - ~ A -Opppppp,L]N B O N N 1.1 u•1 roH @ @ E E E E 8 E .a ~ .a .n v1 .~ .C O U O N N N O O N '~ 0 0 0 0 0 ,'~ U U 3-i N 0 o aUi a~i aUi a~i a~i a~i ~ v v v ~ ~ ~ ro ~ ~ ~ Z 2 A A A A A A h O O O O~ h~~ fs, ti m ~ ~ m O 1~ ~ b U 1.~ O • O ri N U ,7 U 11 O •n N G d ro ,C O •~ H (.L •r•I U ~ 1.~ R+ ~+ O U O y O ro N N ~ 7•+ O O m a,' O d N ~+ a~ ro •~ U o o w .c a ~ • ~ •d s~ ~ ro a~ a~ ~ ~ E ~+ ~+ ~ ao .a ro ~ r+ ro C •~ ~ v ~ s+~a ter, ro u >, +~ q aro a ~ Ur••i r+ o aa~ ¢ ro~ ~ ~-+ ~ H ~3 0 0 0 o ~ •,~ H ~ a~ r+ ro ,-~ ro a~ ~ m v b Z ~ ~ ~ % ro ~ ~ ~ ~ a i 7, cd c i 3 a ~+ x a~ ~ ~ ~ u •ti .~ a~ a ~ G G a: d a~ ~ ~ x G o ~ ~ eo ~ ~ ~ o o ~ •~+ a~ •a a~ o as •.~ CA •.~ ~ •.I •.a w ro L1 U H Qi L~ rl •~ r-I ~'} H ~i r-I ~ •~+ N o0 H A G $ U ~ N 'd ro O ro~ H U S-+ 3a N O ro •r1 0 0 O 1.1 •O S•+ ~ 7-~ O O ~ L~. CL. oG 3 ~ D c2: ~ is: cn ~ w w a... U oG v x