Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1/28/1997 - Regular., ~F ROANp~~ ~ ~~ A ~ ~ z ov ., ~~ rasa (~~~txtt~ ~~ ~2o~~x~~~P ACTION AGENDA JANUARY 28, 1997 .renxr a~ ng sure ~ 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. Individuals with disabilities who require assistance or special arrangement in order to participate in or attend Board of Supervisors meefings 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 (east 48- hours notice so that proper arrangements maybe made. ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 P.M.) 1. Roll Call. 2. Invocation: John M. ChambGss, Jr., Assistant Administrator 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag. B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS AT LBE'S REQUEST AND WITH BOARD CONSENSUS, TWO NEW BUSINESS ITEMS ADD ED: (1) CLARIFICATION OF ACTION AT LAST BOARD MEETING CON CERNING APPROPRIATION FOR DMV COUNTER BY COM OF REV AND TREASURERS AND (~ RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF ACQUISITION OF C ONRAII, BY NORFOLK SOUTHERN CORP. C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND AWARDS D. BRIEFINGS E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Request to appropriate funds to complete a master plan for a district park in Southwest County. (Pete HaisGp, Parks & Recreation Director) A-012897-1 FM MOTION TO APPROPRIATE $12,000 FROM BD CONTINGENCY FLTNn IIB~ 2. Request from Greenways Steering Committee for support in establishing and funding Greenways Commission. (Elmer Hodge, County Administrator) 2 AGREEMENT WITH OTHER TO FORM PE MANFNT TEE iN(~ COMMITTEE AND REFER TO T FF TO WO K OUT DET ii q; A ,i~(~ REFER FUNDING FOR COORi~INATOR' PO ITION TO B FT PROCESS IIB~ 3. Authorization to submit a grant proposal to the Foundation for the Roanoke Valley for funding of the 1997 Youth D.A.R.E. (IZrug Abuse Besistance Education) Camps to be held at Camp Roanoke. (Pete HaisGp, Parks & Recreation Director) l~~J 4. Request to adopt resolution authorizing the execution of a right-of--way permit with the National Park Service to cross the Blue Ridge Parkway with water and sewer lines for the purpose of serving the real estate of Boone, Boone & Loeb, Inc. and Nicholas Beasley, et al. (Janet Scheid, Planner) R-012897-4 FM MOTION TO ADOPT F O IVIN CO TNTY M A TTHnRiTY TO EXECUTE PERMIT UR 5. Request to clarify action taken on January 14, 1997 concerning request for funding to construct a counter at the Commissioner of Revenue/Treasurer's satellite office at Crossroads Mall. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) 6. Request for resolution in support of the acquisition of Conrail 3 by Norfolk Southern Corporation. (Elmer Hodge, County Administrator) F. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS G. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Request for public hearings for Community Development Block Grant application on behalf of Total Action Against Poverty (TAP) for Micrcenterprise Grant. (Tim Gubala, Economic Development Director) A-012897-7 RT.I MOTION TO SET PLTBL.IC HEARINGS ON 2/11/97 AND 2/25/97 I~Q H. REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARING AND FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCES -CONSENT AGENDA FM MOTION TO APPROVE FIRST READING 2ND READING AND PUBLIC HEARING - 2/25/97 IZB~ 1. Ordinance to rezone 11.05 acres from R-1 to R-3 to construct residential condominiums, located on the south side of Electric Road between McVitty Road and Electric Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Radford & Company. I. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES J. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 4 1. Ordinance authorizing the creation of and financing for a Local Public Works Improvement Project, Eanes Road sanitary sewer extension. (Gary Robertson, Utility Director) 0-012897-8 HCN MOTION TO ADOPT REVISED ORD IIg~ 2. Ordinance authorizing conveyance of an easement to Bell Atlantic - Virginia, Inc. for allowing the installation and maintenance of an above-ground cabinet across property owned by the Board of Supervisors. (Gary Robertson, Utility Director) 0-012897-9 FM MOTION TO ADOPT ORD I~ K. APPOINTMENTS L. CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT A~EL~A 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. R-012897-10 BL.I MOTION TO ADOPT CONSENT RESO ABSENT ITEM 4 I~B~ 1. Approval of Minutes -December 17, 1996 and January 2, 1997. 2. Acceptance of a grant by the Police Department for Community Crime Prevention Services. A-012897-10.a 3. Acceptance of water and sanitary sewer facilities serving Woodbridge, Section 14. 5 4. Request for emergency access to the Blue Ridge Parkway at the temporary access to the Parkway at milepost 115 and Rutrough Road. M. REPORTS AND INQUIItIES OF BOARD MEMBERS N. CITIZENS' COMII~NTS AND COl~'IlVIUNICATIONS O. REPORTS FM MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILE I~ 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Accounts Paid -December 1996 5. Report of Claims Activity for Self-Insurance Program. 6. Report on proposed EPA revised standards for ozone and particular matter and Roanoke Valley's compliance status. 7. Report updating status of Drinking Water State Revolving Loan Fund. P. DISCUSSION WITH CONGRESSMAN BOB GOODLATTE ~Q P.M. -FOURTH FLOOR CONFERENCE RODM) w DISCUSSION STARTED AT 4:45 P.M. VARIOUS TOPIC DISCUSSED: FUNDING FOR EXPLORE PARK; AERIAL MAPPING PROGRAM; I-73, I-63 AND I-81; STATUS TOWER APPROACH FACILITY AT ROA AIRPORT; FLOW CONTROL; EPA NON-ATTAINMENT AREA; HIGHWAY FUNDING STEP 21; CELLULAR TOWERS; TELECOI~'IMUNICATIONS BILL; WELFARE REFORM; SOCIAL SECURITY; UNITED NATIONS CONTRIBUTIONS; BAIL OUT OF DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Q. WORK SESSION 1. Work Session on Year 2000 Computer Upgrade. 2. Budget Work Session. R. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.1- 344 A (3) To consider the acquisition or use of real property; ('n To s discuss legal matters concerning negotiation of an agreement with the County of Botetourt; (3) To discuss the use of real property for public purposes, space for the Department of Social Services; and (~ to discuss location of a perspective business or industry. S. CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE SESSION T. RECOGNITIONS 1. Introduction of David Wiley, Roanoke Symphony Conductor. 9 1. Request to adopt a resolution authorizing the execution of a Performance Agreement with the Kroger Company and the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County for the expansion of the Kroger Mid-Atlantic Distribution Center and Appropriation of Funds. (Tim Gubala, Economic Development Director) $-012897-12 FFH MOTION TO ADOPT RESO I78~ 2. Request for resolution approving and authorizing the sale of a portion of the capacity of Roanoke County in the Regional Sewage Treatment Plant to the County of Botetourt. (Gary Robertson, Utility Director) R-01297-13 BL.T MOTION TO ADOPT RESO AYES:. EM, FFH, HCN.~ BL.T NAYS: LBE U. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Public Hearing and Adoption of the Secondary Road System Six Year Construction Plan for Fiscal Year 1997-2003 and the allocation of funds for Fiscal Year 1997-1998. (Arnold Covey, Engineering & Inspections Director) R-012897-14 FM MOTION TO APPROVE AND ADOPT RESO II$~ V. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance to rezone .73 acre from I-1C to C-2 to allow operation of a retail furniture store, located at 6024 io Williamson Road, petition of George Zoning Director) 0-012897-15 BL.T MOTION TO ADOPT O n IIg~ Hollins Magisterial District, upon the Jacob. (Terry Harrington, Planning & THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC HEARING HAS BEEN CONTINUED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION: Ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to allow a beauty shop in a residence, located at 6187 Bent Mountain Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Jean McDowell. W. CITIZEN COMI~~NTS AND CO1~~VIiJ1VICATIONS X. ADJOURNIVI~NT ii •~F FtOANp,Y~ z c~ ~ z OJ :: a~ 1838 C~.o~~t~#~ of ~Z.~~xx~~.~~ ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA JANUARY 28, 1997 tu~ar ar n¢ euff iamce 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. 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 of least.48- hours notice so that proper arrangements maybe made. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 P.M.) 1. Roll Call. 2. Invocation: John M. Chambliss, Jr., Assistant Administrator 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag. B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS C. D. E. F. G. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND AWARDS BRIEFINGS NEW BUSINESS 1. Request to appropriate funds to complete a master plan for a district park in Southwest County. (Pete Haislip, Parks & Recreation Director) 2. Request from Greenways Steering Committee for support in establishing and funding Greenways Commission. (Elmer Hodge, County Administrator) 3. Authorization to submit a grant proposal to the Foundation for the Roanoke Valley for funding of the 1997 Youth D.A.R.E. (prug Abuse $esistance $ducation) Camps to be held at Camp Roanoke. (Pete Haislip, Parks & Recreation Director) 4. Request to adopt resolution authorizing the execution of a right-of--way permit with the National Park Service to cross the Blue Ridge Parkway with water and sewer lines for the purpose of serving the real estate of Boone, Boone & Loeb, Inc. and Nicholas Beasley, et al. (Janet Scheid, Planner) REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Request for public hearings for Community Development Block Grant application on behalf of Total Action Against Poverty (TAP) for Microenterprise Grant. (Tim Gubala, Economic Development Director) 2 H. REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARING AND FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCES -CONSENT AGENDA 1. Ordinance to rezone 11.05 acres from R-1 to R-3 to construct residential condominiums, located on the south side of Electric Road between McVitty Road and Electric Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Radford & Company. I. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES J. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance authorizing the creation of and financing for a Local Public Works Improvement Project, Eanes Road sanitary sewer extension. (Gary Robertson, Utility Director) 2. Ordinance authorizing conveyance of an easement to Bell Atlantic -Virginia, Inc. for allowing the installation and maintenance of an above-ground cabinet across property owned by the Board of Supervisors. (Gary Robertson, Utility Director) K. APPOINTMENTS 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. Approval of Minutes -December 17, 1996 and January 2, 1997. 2. Acceptance of a grant by the Police Department for Community 3 Crime Prevention Services. 3. Acceptance of water and sanitary sewer facilities serving Woodbridge, Section 14. 4. Request for emergency access to the Blue Ridge Parkway at the temporary access to the Parkway at milepost 115 and Rutrough Road. M. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS N. CITIZENS' COMI~~NTS AND COMMUNICATIONS O. REPORTS 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Accounts Paid -December 1996 5. Report of Claims Activity for Self-Insurance Program. 6. Report on proposed EPA revised standards for ozone and particular matter and Roanoke Valley's compliance status. 7. Report updating status of Drinking Water State Revolving Loan Fund. P. DISCUSSION WITH CONGRESSMAN BOB GOODLATTE ~Q P.M. -FOURTH FLOOR (.'ONFF,RF,N('F. RnnMl Q. WORK SESSION 4 1. Work Session on Year 2000 Computer Upgrade. 2. Budget Work Session. R. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.1- 344 A (3) To consider the acquisition or use of real property; (7) To discuss legal matters concerning negotiation of an agreement with the County of Botetourt; and (3) To discuss the use of real property for public purposes, space for the Department of Social Services. S. CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE SESSION T. RECOGNITIONS 1. Introduction of David Wiley, Roanoke Symphony Conductor. U. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Public Hearing and Adoption of the Secondary Road System Six Year Construction Plan for Fiscal Year 1997-2003 and the allocation of funds for Fiscal Year 1997-1998. (Arnold Covey, Engineering & Inspections Director) V. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance to rezone .73 acre from I-1C to C-2 to allow operation of a retail furniture store, located at 6024 Williamson Road, Hollins Magisterial District, upon the petition of George Jacob. (Terry Harrington, Planning & Zoning Director) THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC HEARING HAS BEEN CONTINUED BY THE 5 f PLANNING COMMISSION: Ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to allow a beauty shop in a residence, located at 6187 Bent Mountain Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Jean McDowell. W. CITIZEN COMMENTS AND CONIlVIUNICATIONS X. ADJOURNMENT 6 A-012897-1 ACTION NO. _ ITEM NUMBER - ` AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ~S: Request for funding to complete a masterplan for a district park in Southwest County. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: Every Parks & Recreation assessment that we have conducted for the past eight years has shown that there is a tremendous need for additional recreational facilities in Southwest County. Merriman is conveniently located, large enough to provide athletic and `passive "recreation, and can be of benefit to Schools as well. The opportunity to plan this for preservation of a greenway as well, makes this particularly attractive. We anticipate the cost to be about one million dollars spread over time, with opportunities for grants as well. Recommend approval. The Board of Supervisors directed Parks and Recreation staff to assess and review the 1986 Parks and Recreation Master Plans developed by Eldon Karr and Associates, and asked the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission and staff to provide a status report to the Board at a work session on October 8, 1996. During the presentation staff identified a critical shortage of park land and facilities in Southwest County. As a result of this information, the Board authorized Parks and Recreation staff to proceed with the development of a master plan for park facilities on land adjacent to Memman and Crystal Creek Roads, including School Board and privately owned property. The ability to consolidate this undeveloped land with the existing area Parks creates an excellent opportunity to develop a much needed, multi use district park for Southwest County residents. It is important to note that Southwest County is the only area in the County which does not have a district park facility. The available land will not only allow for the addition of much needed athletic fields, but will provide the opportunity to develop areas for open space family recreation, picnicking, special events, and much more. Another exciting opportunity is a greenway trail system. Part of the property borders the Blue Ridge Parkway. Using the greenway concept we could conceivably link the new Wilshire residential development to this facility. Parks and Recreation staff developed a Request For Proposal for design services to develop a park master plan for the proposed high school site located on Merriman Road (see Attachment A.) and land located behind Plastics One, extending from the Merriman Soccer Complex to Starkey Park. The scope of services in the request included several key assumptions: Roanoke County would obtain, through outright purchase and/or a land swap, a contiguous piece of property located between the Merriman Soccer Complex and Starkey Park, along Back Creek. 2. The proposed school site, the 28 acres on Merriman Road, would be available for park or joint school/park facilities. 3. The site would be developed as a District type park, incorporating the existing facilities, i.e.. Starkey, Merriman, and Shell Parks into the final concept plan. A selection committee reviewed a total of eight proposals and interviewed the top three firms. Tfie Committee unanimously selected Resource Planners Inc., of Richmond to complete the plan. Resource Planners Inc. is a firm that specializes in park planning, with well over three hundred park projects completed in Virginia alone. Local projects include Rivers Edge Sports Complex in Roanoke City, Waid Recreation Park in Franklin County, and the outdoor sports facilities at the Dedmon Center at Radford University. The design process will include a great deal of community involvement. We are recommending recruiting a small citizens committee that represents the many and varied interests of Southwest County residents. They will participate in at least two planning sessions with the consultants, with the final concept(s) presented at an open community meeting. It is anticipated to take 90 days to complete this process. As with any project of this type the community involvement is essential for success. Following this plan of action also ensures the final product will meet the needs of the entire community. The contract price is $12,000. It is recommended that the Board appropriate $12,000 from the Board contingency fund. 2 ~`/ 1. Appropriate $12,000 from the Board contingency fund to complete the project. 2. Do not appropriate funds for this project. Staff recommends Alternative 1, that the Board appropriate $12,000 from the Board contingency fund to complete this project. Respectfully submitted, Pete Haislip Director, Parks & Recreation Approved (x) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To Approved by, w Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ACTION Motion by: H. Odell Minnix to ~.p~rove staff reco endation VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy ~_ Harrison _~ Johnson _~_ Minnix x Nickens x cc: File Pete Haislip, Director, Parks & Recreation Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance 3 ROK..CO. UTILITY DEPT. TEL~r03-3'-630 Ja.n 23 97 ' ATTACHMENT A MY r. m ~~ a` / ~ ~ to ,i tir ZQNE x KA r ~ - :. .. . .'.'.'.'.....','.'.'.',','.'.','.'.'.',:.gp::,.' .. ,...o~qd . ..... ~~ ~. .~ / as r X Z~ {~ ~ \ \\ Zt]NE X - -- - -- FLO 0 D WAY 1 i ""`,~"" ~~~ r~orp. 1 ~~N~, 1~2~ ~` 100 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN Existing Parks 4 ~r4 r . ~ ~ Starkey ~• ~p~ tt .. Park ,~~ in r ~ •d ~ ~ // BAGY' r.. ....."."."•'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.' t~sr ~` .. ,...:.`.. ,, ~~ 13.5 No.003 P.02 ~. ~- / s~~11 A Qr~ .~ ~~~ ~ ~`°N~ ~ _ ~ ~~ -~ 0 fi ~~~ J ..L r l Proposed land A-012897-2 '- ~ Action No. Y' Item No. ~'"`~ '4 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: January 28, 1997 SUBJECT: Request from Greenways Steering Committee for Support in Establishing and Funding a Greenways Commission COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS BACKGROUND: You may recall that the Steering Committee was formed almost a year ago by the Valley governments to determine the need for greenways and to develop a plan whereby they could be achieved. The Steering Committee has completed its work and is recommending three things: 1. Establishment of a Roanoke Valley Greenways Commission The Commission would succeed the Steering Committee and would promote, facilitate, and direct the development and maintenance of a Valley-wide system of greenways. It would consist of three members from each participating political subdivision and one member appointed by the Metropolitan Planning Organization. There would be ex officio members as well. 2. Continued Funding of the Coordinator Position The Steering Committee is asking the localities to continue funding the salary and expenses for the Greenways Coordinator, which will amount to $60,000 next year. The cost will be allocated on the basis of population and our share will be $21,600. 3. Acceptance of Conceptual Greenway Plan The Conceptual Greenway Plan was prepared by Greenways Incorporated under the direction of the Steering Committee, the Fifth Planning District Commission, and representatives of the Valley governments. It is an excellent plan that details the type of greenways to be built and reports on their benefits to the localities. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The complete proposal from the Greenways Steering Committee is enclosed in your agenda package. Roanoke Valley Greenways Coordinator Elizabeth Belcher will make a brief presentation and answer any questions that you may have. RECOMMENDATION: It is important that Roanoke County support the greenways program, as we have already begun doing. The Hanging Rock project is the first greenway in the Roanoke Valley and is being done by the County and the City of Salem. Because of the need to get the Commission in place, I recommend that the Board support establishment of a Greenways Commission, with the understanding that the other Valley governments will do the same. This should be referred to staff to work with other Valley governments. We should develop a regional agreement to be signed by all participants. I also recommend deferring the request for funding until it can be addressed in the budget process. Perhaps by that time we will know whether we have qualified for grant funding, which could make funding from the County unnecessary. If the Board chooses to support the request for establishment of the Greenways Commission, we will bring the necessary agenda item to you when the regional agreement has been prepared. FISCAL IMPACT: $21,600 if the Board chooses to fund it out of this year's Unappropriated Fund balance. The proposal agrees to repay the localities if grant funds are received to offset the expenses incurred. The Board may choose to address the funding as part of next year's budget. Respectfully submitted, ~~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ACTION VOTE Approved (x) Motion by: Lee B. Eddy to No Yes Abs Denied ( ) anbrove (_) Roanoke County Eddy ~ Received ( ) officially adopt the Conce,~ ual Harrison ~_ Referred ( ) Greenways Plan; (2) EndorcP Johnson ~- To ( ) in nrinciTnle agreement with Minnix ~_ others to form nermanAnt Nickens ~_ Greenways COmmiaainn and refer to Btaff to wo k out details; end f3) Refer funding for coo dinatnr~g Position to budgg~groce~~ cc: File Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance Brent Robertson, Budget Manager Liz Belcher, Greenways Coordinator Wayne Strickland, Executive Director, SPDC iOANOKE VALLEY GREENWAYS STEERING COMMITTEE clo Fifth Planning District Commission '/~~ P.O. Box 2569, 313 Luck Avenue, SW ~ Roanoke, Virginia 24010 _ 540-343-4417 (Phone)540-343-4416 (Fax) planfive@roanoke.infi.net (E-mail) January 21, 1997 Mr. Elmer C. Hodge, Jr. Roanoke County Administrator P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 Dear Mr. Hodge: I am pleased to present to you the recommendations of the Roanoke Valley Steering Committee for implementation of the greenway program. When established, the Steering Committee was charged with producing a greenway plan and developing recommendations for an organizational structure to implement the program. The Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan was completed in December 1995. The Steering Committee is now presenting as well its recommendations for organization and implementation of the greenways program. The Steering Committee recommends that each locality adopt three documents: 1) the Conceptual Plan, 2) an intergovernmental agreement establishing a Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission, and 3) a resolution for continued funding of the Greenways Coordinator position. Adoption of the Conceptual Plan will ensure its incorporation into your Comprehensive Plan and its consideration as other issues such as transportation planning and stormwater management are addressed. Establishment of the Greenway Commission as an appointed advisory board will continue the work of the Steering Committee, which was originally appointed for only one year, and will provide for intergovernmental coordination as a Valley-wide system of greenways is developed. The fiscal resolution requires Roanoke County's annual budgeting to help pay for a regional coordinator, but assures that this cost would be reduced proportionately by any grants or donations received. I am enclosing copies of these documents for members of the Board of Supervisors and Planning Commission. While the Plan may necessitate some review or hearing, we hope the other two items can be put on the agenda for the January 28 meeting. We appreciate the support of the many citizens and staff of Roanoke County who have been instrumental in initiating the greenway movement and bringing forth this proposal. Sin erely~~~ Liz ~elcher Greenways Coordinator ~. 0 .~. A ... ~, O O CQ a as ~. 0 C ee c 0 . N o ' ~ ~ ~ rn 0 ~ U O h N N ~ W v7x.~ U ~a ~ O C MM i_n¢ N.~ met ' QX V, ~ 1 ~V w V C ~O~ Q O M O cGO O.. ° wM`1' aw . Q ~ ~ w ' w ;OANOKE VALLEY GREENWAYS STEERING COMMITTEE c/o Fifth Planning District Commission '/~` I P.O. Box 2569, 313 Luck Avenue, SW Roanoke, Virginia 24010 = 540-343-4417 (Phone)540-343-4416 (Fax) planfiveC~roanoke.infi.net (E-mail) January 21, 1997 Honorable Chairman and Members Roanoke County Board of Supervisors P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 Dear Members of the Board of Supervisors: In 1996 the Roanoke Valley Greenways Steering Committee moved from successful development of the Conceptual Greemvay Plan to implementation of the greenway program. After selecting a pilot project, the Committee began addressing coordination among the four localities and establishment of a permanent organizational structure for regional planning and coordination of greenway construction and management. In the spring of 1996, at the request of the Steering Committee, the governing bodies of Roanoke City, Roanoke County, Salem, and the Town of Vinton agreed to budget funds, allocated on the basis of population, to pay the expenses of a Greenways Coordinator for FY 96/97. In August, Elizabeth Belcher was hired for this position and was physically and administratively placed as an employee of the Fifth Planning District Commission. She has proven to be a very effective coordinator. In November she sent to the four governing bodies a quarterly report showing accomplishments and progress toward the Steering Committee goals and objectives. At this time the Steering Committee would like to make its recommendation for a permanent organization that will promote and coordinate greenway development on a continuing basis. The Steering Committee proposes formation of a Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission, with three members appointed by each of the four governments and one appointed by the Metropolitan Planning Organization. The Commission would have the primary responsibility for advising, promoting and coordinating Valley-wide greenway development, but would not have the legal authority to accept or expend funds. A nonprofit friends group, which is already being organized and incorporated, would be able to receive and expend funds, and would be a resource separate and independent of the four governments to involve citizens in greenway planning, promotion, and maintenance. While these two organizations would assist with greenway coordination and development, the primary control of greenways within a jurisdiction would be the responsibility of that government. Page -2- The Steering Committee believes that the position of Greenways Coordinator should be retained, except that the person would now work for the permanent Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission rather than for the current Steering Committee, which would be terminated. Mrs. Belcher and the Fifth Planning District Commission are seeking funding for the position from foundations, grants, and other private sources. To date, they have filed applications for $136,710, of which $58,275 would, if received, cover the salary of the Greenways Coordinator. A list of these pending grants is included with the budget in this packet. Since grant, foundation, and donated receipts are apt to vary from year to year, the Steering Committee respectfully requests that each of the four governments fully budget funds for the Coordinator position each year with the understanding that monies received from other sources will reduce and offset any payments from the governments. We are optimistic that sufficient funds will be generated, so that little local government money will be required to pay for staff. We believe, however, that approaching the funding issue this way will ensure the ongoing services of a Greenways Coordinator and will result in a continuation of the significant greenway advances made to date in the Roanoke Valley. We present to you at this time three documents which we have developed to implement the greenway program and organizational structure. They are: 1) the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greemvay Plan, 2) an Intergovernmental Agreement Establishing the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission, and 3) a Resolution for Funding of the Roanoke Valley Greenways Coordinator Position. While we understand that adoption of the Plan might require review or hearings, we hope that you will be able to act expeditiously on the fiscal and commission agreements. These have been reviewed carefully by the Steering Committee and are critical to continuation of the greenway momentum and Valley-wide coordination. We feel that the greenway program is unusual in the Roanoke Valley in the tremendous support it has garnered from citizens, government staff, elected officials, and businesses and industries. The benefits of economic development, transportation alternatives, flood reduction, environmental protection, wellness and fitness promotion, and recreation are ones which improve not only the quality of life but also the economic viability of the region. We appreciate your past and continued support of the greenway program. Sincerely, ~~~~ ~~ wc~, Lucy Ellett, Chair Roanoke Valley Greenways Steering Committee cc: Members, Roanoke County Planning Commission INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING THE ROANOKE VALLEY GREENWAY COMMISSION A. PURPOSE The purpose of the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission, also known as Greenway Commission, is to promote and facilitate coordinated direction and guidance in the planning, development, and maintenance of a system of greenways throughout the Roanoke Valley. B. SCOPE This greenway system is intended to enhance the quality of life for Valley citizens and visitors and to: • provide safe and efficient alternative transportation linkages between recreational sites, open spaces, residential areas, employment centers, educational and cultural facilities, and other activity centers; • encourage citizen wellness and maintain environments which promote opportunities for recreation activities; • protect environmental assets and retain beneficial ecological habitats; • maintain a contiguous urban forest ecosystem to reduce community wide environmental problems such as excessive storm water runoff, air quality degradation, water pollution, and urban climate change; • promote an appreciation for the Valley's natural, historical and cultural resources and its neighborhoods; • protect and link significant remnants of the community's undeveloped open spaces, woodlands, and wetlands; and, • enhance the Valley's appearance to encourage tourism, promote economic development, and improve the living environment for residents. C. CREATION The Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission is created, in accordance with Section 15.1-21 of the Code of Virginia as amended, upon execution of this agreement pursuant to ordinances approving this agreement adopted by the governing bodies of the City of Roanoke, the City of Salem, the County of Roanoke and the Town of Vinton. January 15, 1997 I D. RESPONSIBILITIES AND DUTIES The Commission shall have the following responsibilities and duties: 1. To study the needs of the Roanoke Valley and the desires of the Valley residents as expressed in the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan, dated December 1995, as may be amended, and work to implement a coordinated system of greenways into each jurisdiction's planning efforts; 2. To advise and inform the governing bodies and the citizens of the Valley of existing, planned7and potential opportunities for establishing greenways within the Valley; 3. To make recommendations to the governing bodies relative to desirable federal, state, and local legislation concerning greenway programs and related activities; 4. To investigate and recommend funding, grants, and/or donations of land, property or services from the Commonwealth of Virginia, the United States of America, their agencies, private citizens, corporations, institutions and others to promote, construct or maintain Greenways within the Roanoke Valley; 5. To study and recommend uniform standards for the design and construction of greenways, including sign standards, to be employed Valley-wide; 6. To actively pursue and promote public/private partnerships, work closely with the Western Virginia Land Trust and similar nonprofit organizations, and facilitate cooperation between Valley governments in developing, constructing and maintaining a system of greenways throughout the Valley; and, 7. To coordinate the efforts of the federal, state and local jurisdictions in the Valley to create aValley-wide system of greenways and trails that satisfy the needs of all the residents of the Valley, including those with special needs. E. MEMBERSHIP The Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission shall be composed of members, appointed as follows: a. Three (3) members from each of the participating political subdivisions to be appointed by the governing bodies, each for a term of three years, except for the initial appointments which are to be staggered for each representative as a one, a two and a three-year term as determined by the governing body. Each member must be a resident of the jurisdiction which he or she represents. 2 January 15, 1997 b. One (1) member appointed by the Metropolitan Planning Organization of the Fifth Planning District Commission for a term of three years. 2. In addition to the above members, the following individuals, or their designated representatives, shall serve as ex-officio, non-voting members of the Greenway Commission: a. the chief planning official of each jurisdiction; b. the official responsible for parks and recreation from each jurisdiction; c. one representative of the nonprofit friends group established to support greenways; and, d. one representative of the Western Virginia Land Trust. 3. A vacancy for the remainder of any term shall be filled by the governing body making the original appointment. 4, The Commission may add ex-officio members, as appropriate, from interested organizations. 5. The members of the Commission shall serve without pay. F. MEETINGS The Commission shall hold regular meetings at least once per quarter each calendar year. All meetings and hearings of the Commission shall be open to the public except private meetings called pursuant to provisions of the Freedom of Information Act. Reasonable notice of the time and place of all regular and special meetings shall be given to the public. Meetings shall be called by the chairman or upon request of a majority of the members. 2. The Commission shall adopt bylaws necessary to conduct the affairs of the Commission. G. OPERATING REVENUE The Commission will not operate as a fiscal agent. 2. Funding for staff support to the Commission may be made available as appropriated and administered through an agreed-upon fiscal agent. 3. Annual funding requests from the Commission shall be made by February 1 of each year to the member jurisdictions. 3 January 15, 1997 H. ADMINISTRATION An annual report shall be prepared and submitted to the governing body of each member jurisdiction each calendar year. 2. The Commission may establish any committees necessary to fulfill the responsibilities and duties of the Commission. 3. Any greenway coordinator or staff positions of the Commission approved by the governing bodies shall be funded on a pro rata basis, based on the latest population studies of the Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service of the University of Virginia. I. DURATION AND TERMINATION The agreement shall remain in force for a period of 12 years unless specifically extended or otherwise modified by action of the governing bodies of all member jurisdictions. 2. A participating political subdivision may withdraw from this agreement by adoption of appropriate ordinance. J. AMENDMENTS This agreement may be amended only by approval by the governing bodies of each member jurisdiction. K. LIABILITY The participating political subdivisions agree to indemnify, keep and hold the members of the Commission and its staff free and harmless from any liability on account of any injury or damage of any type to any person or property growing out of performance of the duties and responsibilities imposed by this Agreement. In the event of any suit or proceeding brought against members of the Commission or its staff, the participating political subdivisions shall pay reasonable costs of defense. Any costs of the participating political subdivisions under this section shall be shared on a per capita basis as determined by the most recent population estimates of the Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service of the University of Virginia. 4 January 15, 1997 RESOLUTION FOR FUNDING OF THE ROANOKE VALLEY GREENWAYS COORDINATOR POSITION Whereas the local governments of Roanoke City, Roanoke County, Salem, and the Town of Vinton formed a Roanoke Valley Greenways Steering Committee in 1995 to work jointly for greenway development, and Whereas the four local governments fully funded the position of Greenways Coordinator for fiscal year 1996/97, with funds appropriated on a population basis, and Whereas the Steering Committee has recommended that the position of Greenways Coordinator be made permanent and that an intergovernmental Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission be formed to replace the Steering Committee, and Whereas the Greenways Coordinator has already sought and will continue to seek funds from sources other than the local governments to pay the related costs, and Whereas funds from other sources are apt to vary from time to time and the Steering Committee wishes to establish funding that will ensure the continued services of a Greenways Coordinator, and Whereas the current total annual cost for the salary and related expenses of the Greenways Coordinator is $60,000, Now Therefore Be It Resolved that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors agrees to budgeted annual funding for the position of Roanoke Valley Greenways Coordinator, with fund allocations prorated based on the respective populations as recorded by the Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service of the University of Virginia, and with the understanding that funds will be actively sought by a permanent Greenways Commission and the Greenways Coordinator from foundations, grants, and private donations to be used to reduce and offset payments by the governing bodies for this purpose, and Be It Further Resolved that copies of this resolution will be transmitted to each of the other three local governments, the Fifth Planning District Commission and the chair of the Roanoke Valley Greenways Steering Committee. t FUNDING REQUEST AND ALLOCATION FOR GREENWAYS COORDINATOR POSITION Funding Request Salary Benefits Overhead Staff support Direct costs Total Budget Request: $27,500 6,094 10,219 8,839 7.348 $60,000 Funding Allocation Prorated among the Localities, Using 1995 Population Estimates of Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service of the University of Virginia Jurisdiction Population Estimate % Share Re uest Roanoke City 96,600 48% $28,800 Roanoke County 74,135 36% $21,600 Salem 24,200 12% $ 7,200 Vinton 7.665 4% 2 400 TOTALS 202,600 100% $60,000 O z a O O z z 0 ~., O z W z w O H l~ z z z a ~ °o o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C~ O O N N C ~ ~ N N y ~ b A 6 9 bA V y it ~ in r i C~ ~ ~ ~ .s L ~~ o~ v a L. y O O N ~ I N ~ M (' ~ 69 6 9 69 . -i 3 o a ~ o ~ . ° ~ ~ ~ w~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a~ ~ ~ C~ _ ~ o ~ ~ , o '° a ~ ~ ~ w ~ a i ~ ° s >, ~ °~ ' o ~ ° ~ a ~ U ~ ° ~ U . ~ ~ `' ~ ~, ° ~ ~ U O ~ `~ U ~' ., b ~ ~ ° ~ a~ ~ ° ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ° ~ z ° .~ ~~ w ~~ c7 ~ ~ wo c 0 ~y ~ 8A °~ ~ ~ ° ~ ~ ° ~n ~ ~ ,.~ ~ 3 ~~ ~, ~ ~ ° ~ o ~ c ~ C~7 3 .ti a,~~a .~ ~ w c~ C ~¢ ° ..IVr ~ e~ ~ Y ~ cd O ~ i ~f", Q ~ cd ~ O U ~ ~ ° b D~ v i ~ O N . ~ ~ ~ ~ o~ z~c~ cd ~w >w O ~Q Roanoke Valley Virginia Prepared For: the Roanoke Valley Greenways/Open Space Steering Committee, the Fifth Planning District Commission the City of Roanoke, the County of Roanoke, the City of Salem, and the Town of Vinton Prepared By: Greenways Incorporated December, 1995 1 ~ Contents 1 ' t Document Summary ................................................................................ Section 2: Top Ten Strategies for Success Section 3: Benefits of Greenways Section 4: Goals and Objectives/Strategies Section 5: Inventory and Analysis Section 6: Conceptual Greenway Route Plan Section 7: Getting the Greenway Built Section 8: Greenway Maintenance and Management »........ 1 1 1 2 4 4 4 5 ' Section 9: Greenway Trail Design 5 ' Sec :Introduction ............................................................................ ......... 7 Section 2: Top Ten Strategies for Success ....................................................... 9 ' Sec :Benefits of Greenways ................................................................... 13 3.1 Transportation Benefits 13 3.2 Economic Benefits 14 ' 3.3 Health and Recreation Benefits 14 3.4 Cultural Benefits 15 3.5 Water Quality and Water Quantity Benefits 15 ' 3.6 Air Quality Benefits 16 3.7 Plant and Animal Habitat Benefits 17 Section 4: Goals and Objectives ..................................................................... 19 4.1 Summary of Citizen Input 19 4.2 Goals, Objectives, and Strategies 21 Section 5: Inventory ........................................................................................ 25 ' 5.1 Historical Context of The Roanoke Valley 25 5.2 Previous Support for Greenway Planning 25 5.3 Existing Trails and Bicycle Facilities in the Valley 27 ' S.4 Potential Greenway Corridors 29 t t ~~ ~o~Q~~`~~~~ ROANORE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY PLAN I Acknowledgements The Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan was prepared under the direction of the Roanoke Valley GreenwayslOpen Space Steering Committee, in cooperation with the Fifth Planning District Commission, the City of Roanoke, the City of Salem, the Town of Vinton, and Roanoke County, Virginia. Inquiries should be directed to the: Fifth Planning District Commission PO Box 2569 Roanoke, Virginia 24010 (540) 343-4417 Project Consultant Greenways Incorporated 121 Edinburgh South, Suite 210 Cary, North Carolina 27511 (919) 380-0127 Assistance provided by the West Main Design Collaborative Members of the Roanoke Valley Greenways/Open Space Committee Lucy Ellett, Chair John Marlles City of Roanoke City of Roanoke Charles Blankenship Anita McMillan Roanoke County Town of Vinton Barbara Duerk Ed Riley City of Roanoke City of Salem Lee Eddy John Sell Fifth PDC Town of Vinton Brad Grose Don Witt Town of Vinton Roanoke County Butch Kelly Joe Yates Roanoke County City of Salem ~`~ ~~~;~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY P ' Document Summary ' The regional greenways planning effort began in earnest in December 1994 when the elected officials of the valley's four governments appointed representatives to serve on the RoanokeValley Greenways/Open Space Steering Committee; the group is staffed by ' the Fifth Planning District. Local governments also provided funding, on aper-capita basis, to hire a gneenways specialist to assist the steering committee with acitizen-based greenways planning effort. The steering committee's activities have included: visiting greenway systems in Ra- leigh/Durfiam, Notth Carolina, and Knoxville, Tennessee; hiring Chuck Funk and his ' firm,Greenways Incorporated, as the consultant for the planning effort; conducting a series of three public workshops across the valley to obtain citizen input; working with the consultant to develop the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Plan; and selecting, from among several regional alternatives, the first greenway corridor for which ISTEA funds will be sought. (For a detailed chronology of the planning process, see Appendix A.) ' Section 2: Top Ten Strategies for Success Based on its experience working in communities across the United States, Greenways ' Incorporated, the consulting firm which helped the regional steering committee prepare the conceptual plan, sets forth 10 strategies as essential to the successful development of the Roanoke Valley greenway system. The strategies are: ' 1. Establish a formal framework for on-going inter-governmental cooperation. 2. Promote and ensure private-sector involvement. 3. Create anon-governmental, citizen-based greenway advocacy organization. ' 4. Develop aValley-wide network of on and off-road corridors linking major facilities and points of interest. 5. Incorporate bicycle (and, where feasible, pedestrian) accommodations when up- grading existing roads and building new roads. 6. Develop a highly visible, multi-jurisdictional pilot project. 7. Establish an on-going, regional program to preserve or acquire the use of property ' for greenways. 8. Institutionalize the greenway system by way of annual funding allocations by local governments for greenway development and maintenance. ' 9. Implement a regional greenway management and maintenance program. 10. Develop an on-going information and marketing program for the regional green- way system to ensure maximum usage and support by citizens as well as the realization of economic benefits. ' Section 3: Benefits of Greenways Investments in greenway systems pay off, directly and indirectly, through a variety of ' benefits realized by communities. ~~i ~^(~ y..~;~~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY PLA~ ~6 UrCJ~„ PACE 1 are based on citizen input obtained at the series of three public workshops; these state- ments were reviewed and refined by the regional steering committee to ensure that the plan being presented to local officials is complete and comprehensive. The transportation goal states that greenways should be viewed as an alternative to motor vehicles as a means to access shopping areas, schools, work sites, parks and other important places in the Valley. Objectives/strategies focus on integrating greenways into the community by connecting them with mass transit sites, widen- ing or modifying roads to accommodate bicycles and ensuring access to greenways for those with physical challenges. The safety Qc,~ focuses on designing greenway corridors and programs to ensure the safety of users and those living and working nearby. Supporting g~iectives/s11 egies address the establishment of effective taw enforcement and emergency re- sponse programs, the prevention of problems, minimizing user conflicts and im- proving bicycle safety. The recreationaUfitness goal states that the greenway system should be designed to ' serve both as a recreationaUfitness resource and as a means of access to parks and other recreational opportunities. Objectives/strategies cite the need for a range of fitness activities, encourage the integration of greenways into area businesses' fit- ness programs and promote the use of fitness education to help Valley citizens emphasize wellness. ' The education goal focuses on providing the public with information about the ben- efits and uses of greenways and the area's natural and cultural history. Objectives/ strategies address a variety of education initiatives dealing with the environment, ' economic benefits, proper greenway use and conduct, historic resources and the use of greenways as learning laboratories for school and community groups. ' The economic development goal states that both costs and benefits should be consid- ered as the greenway system is being developed. Objectives/strategies deal with promoting tourism; maintaining greenways; utilizing easements, incentives, public rights-of--way and other approaches to promote and enable greenway development; documenting greenway benefits; and cultivating multiple sources of financial sup- port for greenways. The environment goal identifies environmental benefits as a major focus of the green- way system and establishes as supporting objectives/strategies: stormwater man- agement and flood reduction; protection of stream corridors, vegetation and wild- ' life habitats; and reduction of non-point-source water pollution. The organization and operation goal addresses the implementation of the regional ' conceptual greenway plan and the greenway system. Objectives/strategies include: obtaining local government and citizen support; being responsive to citizen con- cerns; establishing standards for the design, operation and maintenance of the sys- ' tem; ensuring the existence of an organizational structure to carry out regional planning, implementation and operation of the greenway system; establishing a ' ~('y~,~~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL CREENWAY PLAN 1 ~/` PAGE 3 Ilt C L C L Several sub-parts comprise_ the first implementation comment. greenwav planning and design: feasibility studies, master planning and construction documentation. Find_ ing land for greenway development is the second component; easements, regulations and impact fees are among the approaches used and within each of those categories there are a variety of mechanisms. For instance, conservation easements, preservation easements and public-access easements offer landowners a range of options and incen- tives to provide land for greenway development. The third implementation component. sources of fundin¢~g,~.g~nwav proiects, is ex- amined in some depth. Local funds for greenway systems can be provided by way of bond referenda, General Fund appropriations and Capital Improvement Programs, green- way trust funds, private-sector funds and other initiatives such as volunteer-assistance and small-scale donation programs which give citizens opportunities to actually buy- in to greenway systems. Federal funding sources include the Intermodal Surface Trans- portation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) monies which are passed through and administered by the Virginia Department of Transportation, the Symms National Recreation Trails Fund Act, the National Scenic Byways Program, various programs charged with pro- tecting public land and conserving natural resources and public works/community development programs. Some of the more prominent grant programs funded by private foundations are also identified. Section 8: Greenway Maintenance and Management A greenway maintenance and management plan is critical to the long-term success and viability of any greenway system and should be developed early in the greenway de- velopment process. A regional approach, to the extent it is feasible, is proposed for the Roanoke Valley greenway system. Techniques for addressing liability and risk mana eg ment issues are discussed, as are safety and securitX considerations and routine maintenance. Section 9: Greenway rail Design The final section of the plan provides technical information about a range of trail types, widths and surfaces; special structures, such as bridges and boardwalks; signage; and furnishings. ' ^~~ ~~J~i,_ Q~~~~~~/J` ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY PLAN (Jr(SJfV ~lltJ-CAfLJ~F„ M/\ PAGE 5 I Section 1: Introduction ii 7 The Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan's study area includes the Cities of Roanoke & Salem, the Town of Vinton, and Roanoke County. This plan delineates proposed conceptual routes for a network of greenways throughout the four jurisdic- tions. It also addresses necessary policies, programs, and physical improvements needed to develop this network of greenways throughout the Valley. This plan addresses both off-road and on-road corridors, and makes recommendations for a trail system that would serve the needs of bicyclists, walkers, jog- gers, rollerbladers, horseback riders and hikers. This plan reflects the strong desire of local residents to ensure greater mobility and improve the quality of life in the region. The Roanoke Valley Concep- tual Greenway Plan is the result of growing grassroots support for greenway development among local citizens. Hundreds of Roanoke Valley residents demonstrated their support during a series of three public workshops conducted during July and August of 1995. These residents, along with the Greenways/Open Space Steering Committee, provided detailed input that became the foundation for this Conceptual Plan. It is their collective vision that made this plan possible, and that vision will carry its implemen- tation into the 21st century. ' ~~ ~~~~,~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY PLA~ -'~„ PACE 7 i C C C Section 2: Top Ten Strategies for Success A tremendous amount of work will be needed to achieve the greenway route network envisioned by the Conceptual Greenway Route Map. In order to fully implement the plan, success must occur both "on the ground" - as indicated by miles constructed - as well as at a programmatic level. Greenway programs such as on-going planning, education, marketing, maintenance and advocacy are essential components of a suc- cessful program. It is important to consider"these elements during the early years of greenway development to ensure continued public interest and safe and secure trails. The ten action statements below represent the most critical items that must be accom- plished in order to successfully develop the Roanoke Valley greenway system. These recommendations are based on successful techniques that other communities have used to get greenway systems on the ground. Some will be easier to accomplish than others - but all are necessary. • Establish a framework for on-going inter-governmental cooperation to develop a regional greenway system through a permanent committee of interjurisdictional local staff. A successful greenway program in the Roanoke Valley will be more likely if local staff are able to devote time for planning and coordination. In some communities, intergovernmental Greenway Commissions can provide not only a forum for staff involvement, but also a planning entity that can be charged with reviewing local greenway plans and on-going regional greenway planning. • Promote and ensure private sector involvement from all localities by means of organized partnerships. As fundraising efforts begin in earnest for greenways in the Roanoke Valley, it will be essential to identify private sector corporations and businesses that are willing to contribute land, funds, materials, or services for greenway development. By formally organizing public/private partnerships to develop greenways, local busi- nesses will be assured that their contributions are recognized • Create anon-governmental greenway advocacy organization that would in- ' clude citizens from all communities. Grass-roots support will be essential in order to keep the greenway movement going ' strong in the Roanoke Valley. A Citizen's Greenway Advocacy Group can provide local support that is critical during the early years of implementation. Local plan- ners will need community support for ordinance revisions, local Capital Improve- meats Program funding, and specific greenway projects. In other communities, greenway advocacy groups have foamed to promote a particular project, and then have graduated to new projects as greenways are built. ' ~~ ~<J~,~r /~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY PLA~ ~i/~ PAGE 9 • Implement a multi jurisdictional greenway maintenance and management program to promote a safe and clean trail system. Maintenance and management issues should be resolved before greenways are built. • Develop a regional marketing program for the greenway system that includes promotional literature, maps, and tourist information. As the Roanoke Valley's greenway system begins to take shape, local governments, and community organizations should join together to market this system. Maps and brochures can be used not only to educate local citizens, but also to increase tourism revenues. ^~~ ~~ ~(~~ ~^~ y,.~~~~/J~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY PLA~ (~ r~jV-~„ W~ PAGE 11 i 1 1 0 C Section 3: Benefits of Greenways Greenways are not a new land use concept, having existed in the United States for more than 100 years. Greenways are generally regarded as systems or networks of connected lands that are protected, managed or developed to provide environmental protection, alternative transportation, flood plain management, economic revitalization, and a rec- reation amenity. In the urban areas of the Roanoke Valley, greenways will be estab- lished along the last vestiges of undeveloped land, which include abandoned railroad corridors, streams, utility rights-of--way, and park lands. Many geenways are implemented by local communities to control flooding, improve water quality, protect wetlands, conserve habitat for wildlife, and buffer adjacent land uses. Greenways typically incorporate varying types and intensity of human use, in- cluding trails for passive recreation and alternative transportation, and low intensity park facilities, such as open play fields. They have also been shown to increase the value of adjacent private properties as an amenity to traditional forms of land develop- ment. These and other benefits of a Roanoke Valley geenway network are described below. 3.1 'I~ansportation Benefits Greenway corridors throughout the Roanoke Valley can serve as extensions of the road network, offering realistic and viable connections between origins and popular destina- tions such as work, schools, libraries, parks, shopping areas, tourist attractions, and others. Congested streets and highways are a familiar sight throughout the Roanoke Valley, despite a program of new roadway construction and roadway improvements. The Valley's roads are becoming more congested, and the congestion often makes public roads unsafe for alternate means of transportation. Greenways offer us the option to bicycle or walk, when few options otherwise exist. ' In past years, our communities have grown in a sprawling, suburban manner fueled by the capability of the automobile. Our nation has abandoned some traditional forms of transportation (such as passenger train service), and has been slow to improve other ' forms of mass transportation (bicycle networks, bus systems, local train service). In order to provide relief from congested streets and highways in the Roanoke Valley, we should concentrate future transportation planning and development on providing a choice in mode of travel to local residents. These mode choices should offer the same benefits and appeal currently offered by the automobile: efficiency, safety, comfort, reliability and flexibility. 7 J i Greenway corridors, if viewed as extensions of the roadway network, can serve as viable commuting and travel routes throughout the Roanoke Valley. Greenway based bike- ways and walkways are most effective for certain travel distances. National surveys by the Federal Highway Administration have shown that Americans are willing to walk as far as 2 miles to a destination, and bike as far as 5 miles. It is easily conceivable that destinations can be linked to multiple origins with a combination of off-road trails and on-road bicycle and pedestrian facilities. ^~~ ~('~ ~^~ y.~,~~/Jt ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY P~ (J~(~(~ ~~(~~„ ~\ PAGE 13 7 i~ 1 u i u u [1 The proposed greenway system for the Roanoke Val- ley would be developed to complement the community's existing parks and open space system. Trail systems could be developed not only for alterna- tive transportation, but also to serve as primary recre- ation and fitness resources. Many older Americans are asked by their doctors to walk at least two miles a day to maintain a healthy life-style. Greenways can offer safe off-road facilities for this prescriptive therapy. 3.4 Cultural Benefits (Jreenways can enhance the culture and protect many historic resources of the Roanoke Valley. Successful greenway projects across the United States have served as America's new "main street," where neighbors meet, children play, and community groups gather to celebrate. For cities and towns large and small, greenways have become a cultural asset and focal point for community activities. Some communities sponsor "Greenway Day" to celebrate the outdoors and local traditions. Various walking and running events are also held on greenways to support charity or extend traditional sporting events. Many environmental groups adopt segments of green- ways to sponsor Earth Day activities and Clean Sweep programs. Some greenways, like San Antonio's Riverwalk, are the focal point not only for community activities, but also for economic growth and prosperity. The richness and diversity of the Roanoke Valley's historic resources are represented by numerous local National Register of Historic Places properties and historic districts. Many of these properties are found along the Roanoke River and within some of the stream corridors throughout the valley. Streams played a critical role in the early settlement and development of the Valley and greenways are a land use tool that can be utilized to further protect and enhance these historic resources. Greenways can also be a vehicle to provide controlled public access to important historic properties in a manner that allows preservation to continue. 3.5 Water Quality and Water Quantity Benefits Greenways often preserve wooded open spaces along creeks and streams which absorb flood waters and filter pollutants from stormwater. Flooding is a significant problem throughout the Roanoke Valley. A problem that continues to occur in the Valley is the encroachment of buildings and other Victory Stadium ' ^~ ~ ~~ ~<'~ ~^~ y.~;~~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY PLAN (~ ~~(~jV~„ PAGE 15 Nutorie Home in Salem II ~~ 3.7 Plant and Animal Habitat Benefits Humans are not the only beneficiaries of greenway corridors. Many species of urban and rural wildlife also benefit from greenways. Most of the wildlife that we are familiaz with today in our urban communities aze known as "edge species." These mammals, birds, amphibians and insects have adapted to urbanizing landscapes and are develop- ing aharmonious relationship with urban residents. Greenway corridors can serve as a suitable habitat for many edge species wildlife. These corridors offer the necessary food source and, most importantly, access to water that is required by all wildlife. Additionally, greenway corridors in the Roanoke Valley could become the primary migratory corridor for ten es- trial wildlife, serving to keep gene pools well inte- grated. Some wildlife biologists have extolled greenways as future "gene-ways" and determined that north-south migration routes are essential to maintaining healthy wildlife populations. Greenways can also serve asgene-ways for plant ' life. Plants migrate with changes in climate and habitat. Recently, several scientific studies have described the demise of the eastern North American forest; one of the culprits has been 200 years of intensive land use that fragmented important gene- ways. These gene-ways are often the rivers and stream corridors that have long served as transpor- tation routes for animals and humans. Greenways in the Roanoke Valley can be targeted as a primary habitat for many species of plants and animals. Pro- grams can be established to not only protect the valuable existing forested areas of the Valley, but also to reclaim and revegetate channelized streams in order to support better ' habitat. Tinker Creek near Hollins College 11S p ~~ ~~~~ ~^~ y~~~~/~, ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY PLA~ ~(~'~ r(~J~(~~T/~ ~\ PAGE 17 ~~ ilr1 7 Section 4: Goals and Objectives Public interest in a greenway system for the Roanoke Valley has been growing for some time. The concept of greenway development has been supported by many local plan- ning projects. This plan, however, represents the first effort to address a greenway system comprehensively. All localities within the Roanoke Valley have become coop- eratively involved in developing a greenway system that will work to link these juris- dictions. The development of goals, objectives and strategies to guide this cooperative effort has been a major part of this plan's preparation. The process of developing goals and objectives for the greenway system has allowed citizens and the Steering Committee to examine how they want the system to function and what they want it to provide for the community. The setting of goals and objectives involved three steps. At the first community workshop, citizens divided into small groups and "brainstormed" sets of goals and objectives. These were compiled and displayed on the wall. Citizens then voted for the goals and objectives considered to be the most important. After the meeting, the consultant further compiled the citizen responses {avoiding duplication, clarifying wording, etc.). They provided the results at the remaining community meet- ings and in the first draft of the plan. This draft was presented to the Steering Com- mittee which closely examined citizen input and further refined goals and objectives. 4.1 Summary of Citizen Input The citizens attending the first community meeting were divided into groups and asked to "brainstorm" goals and objectives for each of six topics -transportation, safety, recreation/fitness, education, economics, and environment. After compilation of the small group results, the large group refined a set of goals and objectives. At subsequent workshops, a summary of these results was distributed and further citizen input was collected and incorporated. That is also reflected in the following to the extent possible. The community workshops were held on July 14, 1995 in Roanoke City, August 17, 1995 in Vinton, and August 30, 1995 in Salem. They utilized an interactive group process. Although input collected from citizens cannot represent an exhaustive listing of all potential greenway planning factors and concerns, it provides many examples of the types of things that Roanoke Valley residents consider important. For example, citizens noted the importance of including a variety of users on the greenways. They mentioned bicyclists, walkers, joggers, parents with baby carriages, rollerbladers, and horseback riders. They wanted the physically challenged to have access to at least part of the system also, although they noted that some trails would be of the "rougher" type that could not accommodate wheelchairs. They wanted greenway surfaces to vary - being paved in some places and unpaved elsewhere. Citizens stated that it may be difficult to decide exactly how each trail should be used. They wondered if horses would get along with bicyclists, noting that some trails (like the New River State Park Trail) allow horses and bicyclists on the same path. In other ' ~C~~~ . ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY P~ ~/~ W~ PAGE 19 ' the ground is restabilized after routine replacements of sewer or other utility lines. Tinker Creek and the Garst Mill areas were given as examples of such opportunities. Many citizens proposed that greenways be used as outdoor learning laboratories for school students. Adults also could use greenways for various learning experiences. Along the greenways, displays can provide specific cultural and historical information. ' Citizens noted that greenways would provide ideal opportunities for teaching bicycle safety. ' 4.2 Goals, Objectives, and Strategies This section of the plan combines input of citizens, the consultant (Greenways Incor- ' posted), and members of Roanoke Valley GreenwaysJOpen Space Steering Commit- tee. Steering Committee members attended citizen workshops in order to hear citizens' concenls in person. The Committee then reviewed the consultant's analysis of the citizen ' input as compiled in the first draft of the plan. Steering Committee members provided comments on the draft goals and objectives, which were then sent to a Technical Sub- committee comprised of local staff planners and a Steering Committee representative. That sub-committee further refined the draft and returned it to the Steering Committee ' for final comment. The Technical Sub-Committee also drafted Organizational and Opestional goals for review by the Steering Committee. Because some of the objec- tives that came out of the planning process also could be described as strategies, they are called Objectives/Ststegies in the following statements. The following is a listing of goals, objectives, and strategies for greenway planning in ' the Roanoke Valley over the next decade. It is not in priority order. ' 4.21 Transportation Goal Provide corridors that bicyclists, pedestrians, and others can use to get from one place to another as an alternative to motor vehicle use. ' Objectives/Strategies: • Provide greenways that connect schools, libraries, shopping centers, work sites, parks and other places in the community. ' Provide connections between mass transit sites and make arrangements for safe storage of greenway system users' bicycles (or other belongings) while they are using the transit system. ' Identify and make plans for existing roads that should be widened or otherwise modified to accommodate bicycles and pedestrians. • Initiate Valley-wide design and installation standards to incorporate bicycle and ' pedestrian facilities on new roads and road improvement plans. • Initiate design standards that are sensitive to the disabled in order to ensure oppor- tunities for a variety of users. ' 4.22 Safet Goat Y ' Design a greenway system that maximizes the safety of greenway system users and nearby property owners and neighborhoodsObjectives/Strategies: ' ~`~ ~~i~;~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY Pt~N ~~tt~,~` PAGE 21 • Provide historic information using trail markers along historically significant trail corridors. ' Provide maps and literature on trail length, difficulty, restrictions, and amenities. 4.25 Economic Development Goal ' Address both the appropriate costs of implementing the greenway system (including land acquisition and capital improvements) and the benefits that will result from its creation. ' ObjectivesJStrategies: • Utilize the greenway system as an economic development marketing tool for the Roanoke Valley. • Use greenway linkages to complement and enhance tourist attractions. • Document economic benefits of greenways, such as increasing the value of land that lies contiguous to a greenway and the benefits to a new business locating in the Roanoke Valley. • Establish a mechanism to ensure continuing maintenance of the greenways, such ' as using volunteers to keep maintenance costs low and starting anAdopt-A-Green- way program. • Utilize tax incentives, easements and other approaches to encourage individuals and businesses to donate land, funding, or materials. ' Establish procedures for subdivision developers to provide donations of land or rights-of-way for greenway systems. • Utilize existing rights-of--way, utility corridors, and other features to lower instal- ' lation costs. • Explore and obtain mutiple sources of funding for the greenways. ' 4.26 Environmental Goal Design a plan that preserves, promotes and enhances the Valley's environmental assets. ' Objectives/Strategies: • Encourage localities to include greenways as a flood reduction strategy in the ' Roanoke Regional Stormwater Management Plan. • Develop avalley-wide strategy for protecting natural stream corridors and other open space, plus a mitigation program for addressing resources that have been ad- ' versely altered by land development. • Promote greenways as an alternative transportation mode that can help reduce air pollution. • Utilize areas adjacent to greenways as natural areas that protect, maintain, or restore natural vegetation and aquatic and wildlife habitats. • Design greenways to reduce non-point source pollution in stormwater runoff. • Utilize greenways as buffer zones between developed areas and open spaces. 4.27 Organizational and Operational Goals Implement the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan on a regional level and proceed with future greenway system planning and implementation. ' ~j~ ~<~~ ~{_~ ~,~~I~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUALGREENWAY P~ ~~'(~ ~6 f(~(~ W\ PAGE 23 Section 5: Inventory As is common for growing urban areas throughout the country, the Roanoke Valley is ' experiencing the problems that often accompany this growth: increased traffic conges- tion, diminishing air quality, and flooding in urbanized stream and river corridors. ' Poorly designed urban roadways and traffic congestion have made it difficult for local residents and visitors to bicycle and walk for fitness, recreation or transportation. On the main roadways that traverse the Roanoke Valley metropolitan area, bicyclists and ' pedestrians face a traasportation system that is oriented almost completely to motor vehicle travel. There are many places where neighborhoods are not connected to nearby destinations with sidewalks. Residents are isolated in these neighborhoods. Many schools are also isolated because they are surrounded by high-speed 41ane roadways, which have minimal provisions for pedestrian crossings, and no travel lanes for bi- cycles. ' S.1: Historical Context of The Roanoke Valle Y ' The Roanoke Valley is known and loved for its rich history. Residents and visitors enjoy the cultural richness of the region on vacations as well as in everyday life. The region's natural resources and man-made historic features aze important components of the Valley and should be protected and preserved whenever possible. During future ' design of Roanoke Valley trails, it will be important to identify and enhance these historical resources. ' S.2: Previous Support for Greenway Planning Greenways are not a new concept for the Roanoke Valley. John Nolen in his Roanoke ' City Plans of 1907 and 1928 originated the idea. He called attention to the aesthetic and recreational possibilities along Tinker Creek and sounded an eazly call for its pres- ervation and incorporation into an open space plan for the city. Greenway development ' has been supported by other planning efforts in the Valley for quite some time. This Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan, however, represents the first comprehen- sive approach to greenway planning in the Valley. Support for this effort has been ' provided by several previous planning reports, which are outlined in the following section. These descriptions are brief; should any additional information be needed from these documents, they can be located in the reference library at the Fifth Planning District ' Commission. DRAFT Yrginia Outdoors Plan ' The draft version of the Virginia Outdoors Plan of 1994 by the VA Department of Conservation and Recreation supports the development of greenways throughout the Commonwealth. This plan is currently being prepared by the Virginia Department of ' Conservation and Recreation. It describes the benefits greenways provide, including economic, environmental, transportation, fitness and others. This plan outlines meth- ods of organizing and planning greenway systems, and raising funds to build the trail ' systems. ' ^~~ ~~J~ ~^~ y.,~,~~/J~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY P<~N (~(~f~ ~~~J~„ ~/\ PAGE 25 r Reconnaissance Survey of the Roanoke River Parkway Corridor The Reconnaissance Survey of the Roanoke River Parkway Corridor was prepared for the River Foundation by the National Parks Service. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the conditions and resources of the Roanoke River and its surroundings. The study's recommendations included the development of a greenway along the Roanoke River and led to the development of the Roanoke River Greenway Master Plan, de- scribed below. The Roanoke River Greenway Master Plan The Roanoke River Gn°enway Master Plan was prepared in 1988 for the River Foun- dation by Jones & Jones, and was the result of the assessr~nts and suggestion included in the Reconnaissance Survey of the Roanoke River Parkway Corridor. This plan gives a detailed account of the existing conditions of the Roanoke River Corridor. In this plan the river corridor is broken down into sections which are then examined on an indi- vidual basis. Each section outlines a different set of objectives tailored to that portion of the river. The Roanoke River Greenway Master Plan outlines many options for the development ' of a greenway along the river. These options range from a pazkway system which would allow vehicular traffic along the river corridor to a pathway system that would prohibit motor vehicle traffic. R a a River C rrui r Plan o nok o 0 n 0 ii The Roanoke River Corridor Plan was prepazed in 1990 by Lardner/Klein Landscape Architects. This study is composed of two parts, the first of which dealt with flood reduction measures in the Roanoke River Valley, while the second part proposed a trail system within that corridor. The plan includes strategies to be implemented in the com- munity that would enhance the environment, aesthetics of the region, and the local economy. 5.3: Existing Trails and Bicycle Facilities in the Valley The Roanoke Valley includes many hiking and equestrian trails, as well as several paved asphalt trails within local parks. The hiking trails are located primarily in the hills that surround the Valley, and therefore they command outstanding views of the metro area. The following is a brief overview of the locations of several populaz hiking trails in the region: The Appalachian Trail A section of the Appalachian National Scenic Trail passes through the northern portion of the County, and has three different road way access points in that area. One can be found on Hwy 311 just east of Catawba Mt., and provides adequate parking. 'Itvo more access points exist on Hwy. 785 and Hwy. 624, but the only parking provided is room to pull off the road. Through-hikers on the Appalachian Trail are unlikely to journey into town on foot, since all three highways carry fast traffic and have no place for safe walking. ' ~<J~ ~{_~ y„~,~~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY P~ ~~(~.1~/~ PAGE 27 ' there are no other paved greenway trails known to exist in the urban area of the Valley, except for several loop trails within local parks. 5.4: Potential Greenway Corridors There are numerous corridors of land within the Roanoke Valley that offer the potential to serve as trail corridors. These linear corridors will require much future research to determine their viability for trail uses. The predominant corridor types include aban- ' doned railroad corridors, power line easements, roadway rights-of--way, abandoned roadway corridors and river and stream corridors. C C In addition, there are many publicly and privately owned open space lands within the urban area that could be used for greenway development. As specific route planning occurs, it will be important to consider these public and private lands for greenway linkages. Railroad Corridors The Roanoke Valley has an active past in the railroad industry, and is still Criss-crossed by many active rail lines. Norfolk Southern Railroad lines stretch across the Valley linking Roanoke County, Salem, Roanoke, and Vinton. It is likely that some rail lines in the Valley will be abandoned in the future. Be- cause these corridors are often the last remaining traffic-free linear corridors in urban areas, abandoned rail lines present exciting opportunities for multi-use trails. It has become a national goal to protect these vital corridors from loss by using a provision and pro- cedure administered by the Interstate Commerce Commission to "railbank" these vital corridors. A legitimate and congressionally supported interim use for railbanking is the development of recre- ational trails. Former rail corridors, the rail bed and bridges associated within these corridors are well suited to trail development. The grades are normally flat to slightly sloped, and the bridges, trestles and other support structures that lie within the corridor were developed to support heavy and frequent rail-car use. It should be noted that existing railroad corridors also make ideal trail settings because impact to native vegetation and soil has already taken place, and cross drainage of storm waters has also been successfully resolved. Some of the problems typically encountered with rail corridors include: title issues related to the possible use of the corridor (some titles may include rail use only); op- position from landowners to conversion to trail use; presence of toxic chemicals in the ballast, soil and surrounding vegetation; missing bridges, ballast and other facilities - removed as part of the rail operators salvage of the abandoned corridor. Each project Railroad Corridor ' 1d ~ ~~ ~C~y.,~,~~/~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY PLA~ ~(~~ ~}/~ WW\\ PACE 29 i ' This type of network best suits the needs of people who bicycle and walk for transpor- tation reasons, since all major destination points connect directly to the street system. ' Some advantages of this approach include availability of publicly owned land, presence of graded shoulder, ease of access and use, especially by cyclists, and familiarity with the street system. Disadvantages include proximity to automobile traffic, lack of pe- destrian scale, and high volume intersections. The use of public roadways for trails must be coordinated with the appropriate local and state departments of transportation. ' River and Stream Corridors Early settlers chose to live in the Valley for reasons such as its proximity to streams and rivers. Perennial and intermittent streams flow through numerous subdivisions and ' neighborhoods on their way to the Roanoke River. There are several major tributaries of the Roanoke River within the study area, including Mason Creek, Tinker Creek, and Back Creek. Mason Creek flows south along Highway 311 in Roanoke County and ' through the City of Salem to the Roanoke River. Tinker Creek also flows south towards the Roanoke River from the Hollins area through Roanoke, just west of the Vinton town limits. Back Creek parallels Route 221 and runs east towards the river in the southern ' part of Roanoke County. Along with these major tributaries, numerous streams, such as Murray Run, Peters Creek, and Glade Creek all have potential as possible greenway corridors. Every natural water feature and flood plain in the urban area has experienced urban encroachment to some extent. The increasing amounts of impervious surfaces within these ' flood plains are taxing both the health and basic function of these stream and river corridors, resulting in poor water quality and flooding during peak storms. Comparatively speaking, the larger stream corridors are less urbanized than the smaller ones such as Murray Run. There are several stretches of Tinker Creek, for example, that are presently undeveloped and that should be preserved with gteenways. The threat of flooding has been somewhat of a deterrent to development in several of these corridors, except for those who could afford to channelize the stream (which has occurred in several areas). It will be critical in the future to preserve these corridors with greenways, not only to provide trail resources, but to also protect flood plains from further degradation. Many communities are also working to restore channelized streams to their original meandering and forested condition, so that they can again serve the function of filtering and slowing stormwater. "Paper" Streets Some roadways have been abandoned from future use, or may have never been built by the municipalities. These rights-of--way are often called "paper streets". While paper streets hold potential as publicly-owned, linear spaces, they are often short and discon- tinuous. In some cases, plans for building these streets may have been abandoned be- The Roanoke River near Downtown Roanoke ~~ ~('la~ ~^~ y~~~~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY P Irl ~(J~r~~ PAGE 31 I~ C 0 Section 6: Conceptual Greenway Route Plan A main objective of this plan is to produce a conceptual greenway route plan for dis- cussion, study and implementation throughout the Roanoke Valley and as the basis for further action by governing bodies. Several preparatory steps have taken place so that this can happen. The following section explains the process of identifying potential routes. 6.1 Route Planning Route planning decisions made as part of this study were primarily a function of public input combined with input from the Greenways/Open Space Steering Com- mittee and direction from the consultant. Excellent turnout at public workshops enabled project planners to identify specific corridors in high demand for im- provements.Over 140 citizens attended the first public workshop, held on July 24, 1995. Following keynote presentation on greenways throughout the U.S., partici- pants broke into five groups to "brainstorm" on poten- tial goals and objectives for the greenway system, as well as the destinations their ideal greenway system would link. All participants were given the opportunity to share their suggestions during the break-out session. By this process, a set of goals was established. The goals were divided into six categories and are discussed in detail in the Goals and Objectives sec- tion found earlier in this report. The linkages recorded during the break-out session of the first workshop formed the basis of the route plan. Additional routes were ' added following the second and third public workshops based on participants' input. Po- tential greenway routes were established by ' directly applying the desired linkages to the existing features map. Where potentially vi- able off-road corridors were known to exist, ' a route was included on the plan. Where no known viable off-road corridor existed, on- road corridors were identified. ' The Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan recommends many on-road bicycle and ' pedestrian facilities throughout the metro- politan area. In general, this system of on- road bicycle and pedestrian facilities is de- ' signed to capitalize on already-planned road improvement projects. These are termed Public Workshop priorities for the Roanoke Valley Greenway System ' ~~ ~C~,~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUALGREENWAY Pl~H -~„ W\ PAGE 33 Citizen Involvement at a Local Citizens vote on their ' Route 4: Mason Creek Mason Creek runs south from the northem part of Roanoke County to the Roanoke River. The stream, which pazallels Hwy 311 for much of its distance, would make an ' excellent off-road route linking Roanoke and Salem with the Appalachian Trail and the northern on-road routes. Neaz the intersection of Routes 311 and 419 is the site of the Battle of Hanging Rock, fought on June 21, 1864. Mason Creek also played a role in ' the settlement of the Valley. One of the eazliest families in the region, the Garsts, built Kessler Mill here. The mill went out of business in the 1920's. ' Route 5: Timberview Road Timberview Road links Mason Creek and Cazvins Cove. It runs east/west just north of I-81. 1 Route 6: Wood Haven Road ' This on-road route is in the northern portion of the County of Roanoke. It serves as a linkage from schools and suburban neighborhoods to both Mason Creek and Peters Creek Road. Kingstown Community was once located in this area. This community was established in the 1870's by freed slaves. A number of 19th century buildings and descendants of the original inhabitants still remain in this area. ' Route 7: Horse Pen Branch This off-road route links with Timberview Road to complete the east/west corridor to Carvins Cove. This links neighborhoods along Mason Creek in northern Salem and ' Roanoke County with the outlying area of Carvins Cove. Route 8: Link to Appalachian Trail ' This route in the northeastern portion of Roanoke County serves the need for a future linkage that could connect to the Appalachian Trail in Botetourt County. ' Route 9: Carvin Creek Cazvin Creek runs south from Carvins Cove toward Roanoke City. It would provide an ideal off-road linkage for neighborhoods and schools in the Hollins area. Route 10: Paint Bank Branch This small tributary of the Roanoke River runs north to south through the western portion of Salem. This route would link neighborhoods in this area to Main Street and the proposed Roanoke River Greenway. Route 11: Horner's Branch This tributary of the Roanoke River could serve as an off-road route for suburban ' Salem neighborhoods linking to the Roanoke River Greenway. Route 12: Roanoke River Tributary The headwaters of this unnamed stream begin in the Havens Wildlife Management Area. ' ~d~`~~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY PLA~ ~ /~ PAGE 35 7 Route 20: Main Street, Satem This eastlwest on-road route runs directly through downtown Salem linking many important destinations. Shopping centers, schools and neighborhoods would be acces- sible from this route. Downtown Salem is rich with both commercial and residential historic architecture. Route 21: Lick Run ' Lick Run is a small stream that would provide anoff--road corridor linking neighbor- hoods, such as Fairland, with parks and schools, such as Washington Park and Lincoln Terrace Elementary School. r 7 1 Route 22: 10th Street This corridor would provide an important on-road route into downtown Roanoke from the north. This portion of 10th Street is already slated for some improvements in the 20 Year TIP and should include provisions for pedestrian and bicycle traffic. Route 23: Williamson Road This on-road corridor would link the northern section of the City of Roanoke (Hollins area) with downtown Roanoke. Route 24: Tinker Creek Tinker Creek is a major tributary of the Roanoke River. With its head waters near Hollins, Tinker Creek runs north to south. This off-road greenway route would create an ideal link from Hollins area neighborhoods and schools to (toanoke and Vinton. Tinker Creek is the Roanoke Valley's largest tributary to the Roanoke River. Settlement along Tinker Creek dates back to the 1740's and 1750's and included farms, mills, churches, and schools. (See "Routes Not Shown On Map" for more information on Tinker Creek Routes.) Route 25: Highway 460/Challenger Rd. This on-road route would link outlying Roanoke County neighborhoods with Roanoke City. Route 26: Glade Creek Glade Creek runs in a southwest direction from Roanoke County into Vinton. This stream would serve as an off-road route, linking schools and neighborhoods with each other and downtown Vinton. ' Route 27: Glenwood Horse Trail Link This route would provide a connection with existing horse trails in Botetourt County, to the northeast of Roanoke County. ' ~(J~,~I~IJt ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY PION W\ PACE 37 7 i 7 Route 36: Barnhardt Creek This creek could serve as a linkage to the Roanoke River for several suburban neigh- borhoods in southwest Roanoke, including Farmingdale, Medmont Lake, and Crest- wood. Route 37: Mudlick Creek Mudlick Creek would be a valuable off-road corridor, providing linkages for many sub- urban neighborhoods, schools, and libraries in the Cave Spring area of Roanoke County and Southwest Roanoke City. This route passes by Cave Spring Corners Shopping Center, Melody Acres and Lee Hy Gardens. Route 38: Brandon Road This short on-road corridor would link to Grandin Road, providing cyclists with a direct route into downtown Roanoke from the southwest. Route 39: Grandin Road Grandin Road would provide a direct on-road route into downtown Roanoke from the southwest. This route would link a densely populated suburban area with the Roanoke River and other amenities such as schools and shopping centers. Route 40: Colonial Avenue Colonial Avenue is slated for improvements in the 20 Year TIP which would provide an opportunity to include provisions for bicycles and pedestrians. This is an important corridor for commuter traffic in southwestern Roanoke City and County, and would serve alternate transportation needs. Route 41: Garnand Branch Gamand Branch is a small stream located in southeast Roanoke City that could connect neighborhoods, schools and parks in this area with the Roanoke River and downtown Roanoke. ' Route 42: Rutrough Road This on-road corridor would link the Blue Ridge Parkway with the entrance to Explore Park in southeast Roanoke County. This would provide on-road access to Explore Park ' for pedestrians and bicyclists. Route 43: Murray Run ' This stream meanders through neighborhoods and parks in and around the Cave Spring section of the Valley. This linkage would provide an important connection with the Roanoke River. Route 44: R utes to Mill Mountain 0 There are two routes that lead to Mill Mountain. The route on the north side of Mill Mountain would utilize Prospect Road and connect the park at the summit with down- ' ~~ ~('y„~,~~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY PLA~ ~/~ PAGE 39 ' 6.3 Routes Not Shown On Map The following is a list of routes, which due to size and scale could not be included on the Greenway Route Plan but should be officially recognized as recommendations of ' this document. ' Route to Explore Park Anew road, providing direct access to Explore Park from the Blue Ridge Parkway, will be constructed. It will be important to include on-road facilities to accommodate bicycles ' and pedestrians. Roanoke City ' Within the City of Roanoke there are many possibilities for greenway corridors utilizing a combination of City streets, sidewalks, alleys and open space. Three categories of corridors merit special attention: ' Linkages among and between neighborhoods, shopping areas, schools, and parks; • Rail trails located on abandoned railway beds; and • Corridors located on or near sewer interceptor lines or other utility rights-of--way. ' Six comdors within the City of Roanoke have been identified for inclusion in this conceptual plan. • Mill Mountain to Downtown Roanoke: Mill Mountain is a resource to the entire Roanoke Valley as are the City Market and the Central Business District. A cor- ' ridor linking the park at the summit of Mill Mountain with the downtown, by way of Prospect Road and including Riverview Park, would connect these two impor- tant tourist attractions. -This linkage could incorporate Elmwood Park and the City ' Market and could be extended to the Hotel Roanoke and beyond, through the Gainsboro neighborhood and Washington Park, to the Roanoke Civic Center. • The Roanoke Center for Industry and Technology (RCIT) to Tinker Creek: ' The newest of the City's industrial centers, the RCIT features clean and progressive industries and corporations in a park-like setting. Tinker Creek was important to the early development of the Roanoke Valley and contains valuable historic and ' cultural resources. Preliminary designs for a Tinker Creek greenway have already been developed. •Mudlick Creek to Patrick Henry High School Complex: This corridor would utilize City streets, sidewalks and alleys to connect Mudlick Creek and its tributar- ies--and the adjacent Greater Deyerle and Raleigh Court neighborhoods -with the ' high school complex and surrounding community. • Tanglewood Mall to Virginia Western Community College: This segment of the ' greenway system could extend from the Tanglewood Mall through the old Jefferson Hills Golf Course to Virginia Western Community College and Madison Junior High School and Fishbum Elementary schools. Extending this corridor to the Patrick ' Henry High School complex by way of Shrine Hill Park would enable it to connect to the corridor linking the high school complex with Mudlick Creek. ' ~~ ~~i~/ \;~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY P PAGE 41 ' Roanoke River • Mudlick Creek/Garst Mill • Blue Ridge Parkway (on-road and off-road facilities) ' Salem Rail Trail (Hanging Rock) • Tinker Creek • Downtown Roanoke to Explore Pazk (via Mill Mountain) ' Connection to Appalachian Trail via Carvins Cove • Electric Road/Rt. 419 (on-road and off-road facilities) • Wolf Creek Stewartsville Road/ Rt. 24 to the Blue Ridge Parkway ' • Connection to existing horse trails The routes on the list above should be considered as "starting points" for greenway implementation. While the list indicates the routes that are most desired for greenway development, the actual feasibility of such routes is yet unknown. The availability of ' land in these areas has not been determined, nor have potential trail alignments been explored. These and related issues will be resolved during the next phase of greenway planning and design. ' ~~ JY-~~~~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY PLAN ,~c~6 ~'T„ ~` PAGE 43 Section 7: tong the Greenway ystem Built Development of this Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan is the initial step in a process that will require more planning, on a trail-by-trail basis. This plan does not address the specifics of trail development along each corridor, such as land ownership, trail installation, and environmental constraints. An implementation schedule for the Roanoke Valley Greenway System is found in this section of the report. This schedule addresses the practical aspects of greenway planning and design (below), as well as the programmatic activities that should occur in the years to come. (reference "Strategies for Success", Section 2). 7.i Greenway Planning and Design ' Step 1: Greenway Feasibility Studies The first step in determining the viability of a priority route in the Roanoke Valley is ' a feasibility study. This step is especially important in cases where corridor ownership is in question or land acquisition will be necessary, The feasibility study also allows for public input in the early stages of project planning and it allows municipalities to determine citizen support for specific routes and political feasibility prior to making firm commitments to develop particular trails. It also provides additional time to disseminate information about the benefits of greenways to trail opponents, and to plan for security issues. A typical trail feasibility study would examine the following aspects of trail development: ' What are the options for trail routing and what are the pros and cons of each? • For corridors that are not presently owned by the local government: what is the ' feasibility of either obtaining the land orgetting apublic-access easement to use the land? • Are there special areas that would represent design challenges that may be ' impossible orcost-prohibitive to resolve? If such challenges exist, it may be helpful to enlist the help of a trail designer to provide possible solutions and their costs. • What are the estimated costs of each trail routing option? ' Based on information obtained, which is the preferred routing alternative? • What agencies need to be involved to make this facility a reality? What permits will be necessary? ' What is the targeted funding source of this facility, and is funding sufficient for detailed trail design, surveying, land acquisition and construction? Does this funding source have particular requirements that must be considered early in the trail planning process? {If the source of funds is the Transportation Enhancements Program, there are strict requirements for land acquisition and trail design). ' ~(J~jS~ ~~~ y.~;~~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY PLAN ~~(~~„ PAGE 45 ~1 V .~.y C~ J..i ^I rya 3 ~--i 4~ O O 0 0 N O O N O O O N 01 00 O~ C1 ti O~ O~ O~ ., v C O .., a U U N ~ ~ a, U O r..+ ,~ ,U. O ~ ~ O U w .,.., ~' N ,~ O ao ~ 0 3 ~' Y ~ o U ~ ~ ~ «3 O ~ a~ > .~ •~ O ~ ~ U .~ ao .,., •~ ,~ c=°. w a N ~ ~ 3 ~ U a. C7 ~ ;, O ~ ~ U ~ ~+ ? ~ -°~ ~ 3 ~ d0 p ~ ~ '~ ~ U ~ ~ ~; . ^ o ~ ~ O fs. a ~, ~° cn .~ •~ O ~ O s o ~ ~ ~ ~ o :~ ~ :C o O a Q bOq 'O ~ `" .fl w aa ;~ ~~ ~ N ~, ~ a `~ 'b y ~ -d U ~ c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 y ~ O bq ~O ~ o u. ~ N ~ y ~ a ~° ~ c7 .-+ a U ~ O U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~; ~ 4. p., ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, C7 N ~ ~ a `~ ~ ~ cn ~ O ~ ~ `° ~ .Q ~ 3 ~ N G) ~ a ~o ~ C7 N a U O U 'T~ ~ Y ~ Uan ~ ~. 4. ~ -ti° bA _ '~ N ",~., .~ ~ cd b Q., ~, ~ b ~ ¢' O N N ¢' U O N O A a a. Q U a a N 0 .~ Q. 3 y N ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ ~ M C3. U c~ ~ a bn ~, ~ ~ O O O_ U bq w b00 `~ "~, > ~ w a PAGE 47 7 in which issues such as maintenance and public access are negotiated with the receiving organization. • Landowners can lease greenway lands to the responsible jurisdiction for long-term public access and/or conservation. ' Landowners can offer the jurisdiction first right of refusal in purchasing the land. Purchase would be made using money from an established greenway trust fund or another source of greenway funds. 7.21 Greenway Easements ' The purpose of greenway easements is to establish legally binding contracts based on a mutual understanding of the specific use, treatment and protection that greenway lands will receive. Property owners who grant easements retain all rights to the property ' except those which have been granted by the easement. The property owner is responsible for all taxes associated with the property, less the value of the easement granted. Easements are generally restricted to certain portions of property, although in some cases an easement can be applied to an entire parcel. Easements are usually transferable through title transactions, thus the easement can remain in effect in perpetuity. Three types of greenway easements which may be appropriate for use in the Roanoke Valley are: Conservation Easements ' This type of easement generally establishes permanent limits on the use and develop- ment ofland in order to protect the natural resources of that land. Dedicated conservation easements usually qualify for both federal income tax deductions and state tax credits. ' Preservation Easements This type of easement is intended to protect the historical integrity of a structure or ' important elements of the landscape by sound management practices. Preservation easements may qualify for the same federal tax deductions and state tax credits as conservation easements. ' Public-Access Easements Right-of-public-access easements provide the general public with the right to use a ' specific parcel of property. Both conservation easements and preservation easements may contain clauses for the right of public access and still be eligible for tax incentives. 7.22 Greenway Development through Regulation The following are regulatory tools that can meet the challenges of projected urban and suburban growth and development and, at the same time, conserve and protect greenway ' resources. While many of the methods below can be used in Virginia others require changes in state law. Some of the methods require zoning ordinances that do not currently exist in the Valley, or do not exist for all local jurisdictions. Therefore, the ' use of some of the methods would require ordinance revisions and staff resources to implement the new requirements. ~~ ~1r,~r~~~~~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY PLAN T W\ PAGE 49 r ii i ii ~~~ Subdivision Exactions A subdivision exaction is a condition of subdivision approval which requires the subdivider/developer to provide for certain public improvements at its own expense. Section 15.1-466 {A) (5) authorizes the exaction of certain improvements ("any right- of-way located within any subdivision, ... any street, curb, gutter, sidewalk, bicycle trail, drainage or sewer system, water line as part of a public system or other improvement dedicated for public use"). If authorized by local ordinance, this authorizes requiring the developer to dedicate parts of its land for public use or to construct at its expense, and in accordance with defined standards, needed facilities serving the subdivision. The courts permit the needed facilites serving the subdivision. The courts permit the use of on-site mandatory dedication and exactions when the need for particular facilities can be closely related to the development. Section 15.1-466 (A) (10) authorizes developers to pay for certain off-site improvments for sewage, water and drainage facilities. There aze statutory limitations and guidelines for calculating the amount of the developer's pro-rata share of these improvements. Section 15.1-466 (E) authorizes localities to include in local subdivision ordinances reasonable provisions for voluntary funding of off-site road improvements. Agricultural and Forestal Districts (AFDs) AFD's aze a land conservation and preservation effort that can only be enacted by a landowner. Through this special district, the landowner agrees to limit development on the property for the life of the agreement, which is usually 4-10 yeazs. This method can be used to preserve future greenway lands in developing areas, particularly where the landowner desires to keep the property intact in the years prior to greenway development. In return, the property owner is taxed on the use of the land, rather than its fair market value. 7.23 Greenways Land Acquisition The third method of developing greenways in the Roanoke Valley is through the acquisition of property. A variety of methods can be used to acquire property for greenway purposes, including: Donation/Tax Incentives, Fee-Simple Purchase, Easement Purchase, Purchase/Lease Back, Bargain Sale, Option/First Right Of Refusal, Condemnation, and Impact fees. Each of these is described in Appendix B. 7.3 Sources of Funding for Greenway Projects The most common method for funding greenways is to combine local, public-sector and private-sector funds with funds from state, federal and additional private-sector sources. Many communities involved with greenway implementation aze choosing to leverage local money as a match for outside funding sources, in essence multiplying their resources. ' During future greenway development in the Roanoke Valley, local advocates and government staff should pursue a variety of funding sources for land acquisition and ' greenway construction. A greenway program that relies on limited funding sources may one day come to a grinding halt should these funding sources dry up. ' /d a ~<J~ d-~ y~~~~I~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY PLAN ~(~~ f(~~/~ W\ PAGF, 51 ' One example of a successful endeavor of this type is the Swift Creek Recycled Green- way in Cary, NC. A total of $40,000 in donated construction materials and labor made this trail an award-winning demonstration project. This method of raising funds re- ' quires a great deal of staff coordination. (Note: Some materials used in the "recycled trail" were considered waste materials by local industries!) ' 7.32 Volunteer Assistance and Small-Scale Donation Programs ' Geeenway Sponsors A sponsorship program for greenway amenities allows for smaller donations to be received both from individuals and businesses. The program must be well planned and organized, with design standards and associated costs established for each amity. ' Project elements which may be funded can include mile markers, call boxes, benches, trash receptacles, entry signage and bollards, and picnic areas. ' Volunteer Work Community volunteers may help with greenway constriction, as well as conduct fund- raisers. Organizations in the Roanoke Valley could include the Boy Scouts, the Blue ' Ridge Bicycle Club, the Sierra Club and local civic clubs such as the Kiwanis, Rotary and Lions Clubs. LI [l 1 A point in case is Cheyenne, Wyoming's volunteer greenway program. The Greater Cheyenne Greenway has motivated an impressive amount of community support and volunteer work. The program has the unusual problem of having to insist that volunteers wait to begin landscaping the trail until construction is completed. A manual for greenway volunteers was developed in 1994 to guide and regulate volunteer work. The manual includes a description of appropriate volunteer efforts, request forms, waiver and release forms, and a completion form (volunteers are asked to summarize their accomplishments). Written guidelines are also provided for volunteer work in 100-year floodplains. To better organize volunteer activity, Cheyenne developed an "Adopt-a-Spot" program. Participants who adopt a segment of trail are responsible for periodic trash pick-up, but can also install landscaping, prune trail-side vegetation, develop wildlife enhancement projects, and install site amenities. All improvements must be consistent with the Greenway Development Plan and must be approved by the local Greenway Coordinator. Adopt-a-Spot volunteers are allowed to display their names on a small sign along the adopted section of greenway. Volunteers have included the Boy Scouts, the Southeastern Wyoming Mental Health Center, and F. E. Warren Air Force Base. Cheyenne's Job Training Partnership Program has become involved in building trail-side benches and picnic tables. School groups have also raised funds to build trail amenities. Other volunteers have participated in a stream bank improvement project, donating labor and materials. Estate Donations Wills, estates and trusts may be also dedicated to the appropriate agency for use in developing and/or operating the greenway system. ' ~~ J"'~(' y~,~~I~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY P}:AN N Jf/~ ~/\ PAGE 53 ' source is not as stable as it was once envisioned by the national trail community. In 1993, Congress appropriated only $7.5 million of a $30 million apportionment. The Act uses funds paid into the Highway Trust Fund from fees on non-highway ' recreation fuel used by off-road vehicles and camping equipment. Motorized and non-motorized trail projects receive a 30 percent share of annual ' appropriations. Forty percent of the appropriation must be spent on projects that accommodate both user groups. States can grant funds to private and public sector organizations. NRTFA projects are 100 percent federally funded during the first three years of the program. Beginning in 1995, grant recipients must provide a 20 percent match. Projects funded must be consistent with the Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan. • Section 1047: National Scenic Byways Program ' This component of ISTEA is designed to protect and enhance America's designated scenic roads. Money is available for planning, safety and facility improvements, cultural and historic resource protection, and tourism information signage. Bicycle ' and pedestrian facilities can be developed in conjunction with scenic roadway projects. Some states with Scenic Byway Programs have developed greenways in conjunction with this initiative. ' Section 1008: Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Program ' The CMAQ program was created to reduce congestion on local streets and improve air quality. Funds are available to urban communities designated as "non- attainment" areas for air quality, meaning the air is more polluted than federal standards allow. Since the Roanoke Valley is not currently classified as a non- ' attainment area for air quality, it is not eligible for this funding. However, this funding source should be considered in the event that the air quality in the Valley deteriorates. ' The program is administered by the Virginia Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration and Environmental Protection Agency. A grant recipient ' must demonstrate that its project will improve air quality throughout the community. Funding requires a 20 percent local match. ' Community Development Block Grant Program The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) offers financial grants to communities for neighborhood revitalization, economic development, and improvements to community facilities and services, especially in low and moderate- income areas. Several communities have used HUD funds to develop greenways, including the Boscobei Heights' "Safe Walk" Greenway in Nashville, TN. ' Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) Grants This Federal funding source was established in 1965 to provide "close-to-home" park ' and recreation opportunities to residents throughout the United States. Money for the fund comes from the sale or lease of nonrenewable resources, primarily federal offshore ' ~~ ~~. ~4~A~%~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL CREENWAY PLAN ~' ~S1J~ lJ ~, VV ~~~~` ll1l~~~C.RR.JJ~'ll CRJJ IIIIJJJJ~, ` ~/~ PAGE SS ' provides grants to states, counties and cities designated as redevelopment areas by EDA for public works projects that can include developing trails and greenway facilities. There is a 30 percent local match required, except in severely distressed areas where ' federal contribution can reach 80 percent. Design Arts Program ' The National Endowment for the Arts provides grants to states and local agencies, individuals and nonprofit organizations for projects that incorporate urban design, historic preservation, planning, architecture, landscape architecture and other community ' improvement activities, including greenway development. Grants to organizations and agencies must be matched by a SO percent local contribution. Agencies can receive up to $50,000. 7.35 Grants through Private Foundations and Corporations Many communities have solicited greenway funding from a variety of private ' foundations and other conservation-minded benefactors. American Greenways DuPont Awards The Conservation Fund's American Greenways Program has teamed with the DuPont Corporation and the National Geographic Society to award small grants ($250 to $2000) to stimulate the planning, design and development of greenways. The awards are ' intended to: 1. Develop action-oriented greenway projects; 2. Assist grassroots greenway organizations; 3. Leverage other money for greenway development; and 4. Recognize and encourage greenway organizations. Grant recipients are selected according to the following criteria: ' 1. The importance of the project to local greenway development efforts; 2. The extent to which the grant will result in matching funds or other support for public or private sources; 3. Demonstrated community support for the project; 4. Likelihood of tangible results; 5. Capacity of the organization to complete the project; and ' 6. The degree to which the project serves as a model for planning and developing greenways. ' These grants can be used for activities such as mapping, conducting ecological assess- ments, surveying land, holding conferences, developing brochures, producing interpre- tive displays and audio-visual materials, incorporating land trusts, building trails and greenway facilities, and other creative projects. Grants cannot be used for academic ' research, institutional support, lobbying or political activities. REI Environmental Grants ' REI (Recreational Equipment Incorporated) awards grants to organizations interested ' ~~~~;~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY P N ~„ W~ PAGE 57 C u n ii ection 8: Greenway Maintenance and Management A maintenance and management program is critical to the long-term success of greenways in the Roanoke Valley. Several issues should be addressed prior to the project being approved for funding and implementation including: liability and risk manage- ment, safety and security, and routine maintenance. 8.1 Liability/Risk Management The design, development and management of each greenway project must be carefully and competently planned and executed in order to provide a resource that protects the health and welfare of the public. Liability most often occurs when a greenway has been inadequately designed to handle the volume of use; when management of the facility is poor, or when unexpected accidents occur because potentially hazardous azeas haven't been effectively dealt with. The following measures should be taken to reduce liability: • Develop a thorough maintenance program that defines appropriate duties and designates a greenway management organization or agency. • Prepare a risk management plan that describes potential liability and government insurance issues for the greenway system. This should be reviewed by each jurisdiction's legal department. • Complete a safety and security plan for the greenway system that addresses law enforcement (cooperatively with multiple jurisdictions if the project crosses municipal boundaries), and establishes appropriate emergency-response mechanisms. Public use of greenways should be covered under existing municipal policies for the use of parkland, public spaces and city property. Jurisdictions should exercise care in the construction of greenway facilities to minimize hazazdous and public nuisance situations. Additionally, by setting specific hours of operation, any individual found using greenways outside the permitted hours of operation would not be covered by the insurance policies for public use. ' 8.2 Safety and Security Considerations In order to provide a standard of care that offers reasonable safety measures, greenway management agencies should prepare and implement a safety and security plan. This plan should address the following: ' law enforcement procedures; • emergency and fire-response guidelines; • user rules and regulations; and ' a system for accident reporting and analysis. ' ~(~~,~~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY P1~N PAGE 59 ' Section 9: Trail Design ' Trail design is a broad topic that covers many issues. For the purposes of the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan, the consultant has provided a general design overview. Below are references with other appropriate design standards that provide ' more in-depth information. • Greenways - A Guide to Planning. Desjsftt and Development ' Published by Island Press, 1993 Authors: Chuck Funk and Robert Seams ' Trails for the 21st Century Edited by Karen Lee Ryan, Rails-to-Trails Conservancy • C'~side to the Deveic~ment of Bicycle Facilit~PS* ' Updated in 1991 by the American Association of State and Highway Transportation Officials • Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Device Published by the US Department of Transportation ' Mountain Bike Trails• Techniques for Design Construction and Maintenance, Published by BikeCentennial • Construction and Maintenance of Horse Trails Published by Arkansas State. Parks ' *If the trail is intended for bicycle transportation or will be funded by Virginia Department of Transportation, these minimum national standards must be followed. 9.1 7~rail read Design r 1 1 J Trail design on a conceptual level typically occurs during the master planning process. After the general route of the trail has been established and the intended user groups identified, trail planners should determine the most appropriate design for the trail tread. The trail tread consists of the actual materials and design specifics of the trail surface. Provided below are several types of trail treads: 1) Single TreacUSingle Use: This tread is designed for single trail user groups, such as walkers or bicyclists. These can include trails within street/road/highway rights-of--way, off=road trails and sidewalks outside of rights-of--ways, and other pedes- trian ways and trails that meander through a variety of urban, suburban, rural or wilderness landscapes: These trails may have different uses depending upon the sea- o ~.+~~~d~~C~~ Single TreadlSingle Use ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY PLAN I PACE 61 exceed existing AASIiTO standards for trail tread development in the Roanoke Valley, based on the targeted user groups: Recommended Trail Widths for Single-Use and Multi-Use Trails Trail Users Bicyclists only Pedestrians, bicyclists and rollerbladers Hikers/Cross-Country Skiers Pedestrians only (wheelchair accessible) Equestrians only Hikers and Equestrians Equestrians and Mountain Bicyclists Recommended Tread Width 10 foot minimum (2-way travel) i 2 foot urban, 10 foot rural 5 foot urban; 4 foot rural 8 foot urban, 6 foot rural S foot urban and rural (8 foot cleared width) 6 foot urban, 5 foot rural (8 foot cleared width) (not recommended as dual use) 9.3 Design of the 7Yai1 Cross Section Trail surfaces must be carefully designed and constructed to support long term use. It is important to determine the design load for the tread cross section, and to determine if the surface must withstand the weight of emergency and/or maintenance vehicles. Once these issues are resolved, the component parts of the trail tread: sub-grade, sub- base and surface course can be designed. Advantages and Disadvantage of Trail Surface Materials Surface Material Advantages Native soil Natural material; lowest cost; low maintenance; can be altered for future improvements Soil Cement Uses natural materials; supports more usage than native soils; smoother surface; low cost Graded Aggregate Stone Hard surface supports heavy use; moderate costs; natural material; accommodates multiple uses. Granular stone Soft but firm surface; natural (limestone, cinders) material; moderate costs; smooth surface; accommodates variety of modes. Shredded wood fiber Soft, spongy surface; good for walking; moderate cost; natural material. ~ ~~~ Disadvantages Dusty, ruts under heavy use; not an all-weather surface;uneven surface; limited uses. Surface wears unevenly; not an all weather surface; erodes; difficult to achieve correct mix Angulaz stones can require continuous maintenance; uneven surface; erosion, ruts. Surface can wash away; ruts; erosion; constant maintenance to keep smooth surface. Decomposes under high temperature, moisture and sunlight; ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY P~ PAGE 63 ' conditions of the intersection; speed of vehicles through intersection (not posted speed); distance to alternative crossing points; traffic volume; and time of crossing based on the most physically disadvantaged user. Treatments of intersections can range from ' striping new crosswalks, installing flashing amber lights to warn motorists of the intersection, and installing special signalization at the intersection to constructing overpasses (bridges) or underpasses (tunnels). 9.6 7~rail Signage ' For each Roanoke Valley corridor project, signage should be carefully designed and appropriately installed to provide all users with essential information, guidance and supplemental data that will serve to enhance the greenway experience. Avoid over- signing a trail facility - it can create visual and physical clutter, confusing messages, and information overload. signage is the primary source of direct communication with each user, therefore, it must be clear, concise, and legible to a wide variety of people. Pictographs, sometimes referred to as "symbol signs", are the best way to communicate information to a wide range of user groups. There are several types of signs for trails: 1) IC{formational: Orients users to their position within the trail system: "You are here"; provides an overview of the types of facilities, programs and activities available; and describe routes or modes of travel required to reach these facilities. 2) pirectionaL• Provides users with instructions regarding their bearing and route of travel. Most directional signage is in the form of graphic symbols and brief descriptions or listings. For example, directional signage would include arrows that indicate a heading (direction of travel), and descriptive text such as "this way," "keep to the right," or "south, one-mile." 3) Regulatory*: Describes the governing laws and regulations that apply within the trail, such as permitted uses, hours ofoperation/accessibility, speed limit, allowable activities, and legal requirements for use. Regulatory signs must be uniform and standard in terms of size, location and information. Al( regulatory signs should have black lettering on white reflective background. Regulatory information should not conflict in any way with other components of the signage program, or vice- versa. 4) Warning: Used to caution trail users of various hazardous conditions, such as sharp curves in the trail, slippery bridges, roadway crossings, steep downhill or uphill conditions, blind intersections, changes in trail surface condition, and related messages about environmental conditions of the greenway. All warning signs should be of uniform size and shape, located a minimum of 50 feet in advance of the condition the user is approaching, and labeled with black lettering on a reflective yellow background. ' ~~ 4 I~~C-~~,.0~~~~1~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUALGREENWAY PLAN '` ,V ~~rlll..RRR777000RRRJJJ~~~VVV w` PAGE 65 C~ Appendix Appendix A: Overview and chronology: the Roanoke Valley conceptual greenway planning process ' T\vo recent initiatives culminated in the publication of the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan: interest and action on the part of Roanoke Valley citizens and grassroots ' organizations which have resulted in increased awareness of greenway opportunities, and months of hard work by members of the regional Greenways/Open Space Steering Committee and staffs of the Fifth Planning District Commission and the four Valley ' governments. The following chronology traces these initiatives, and subsequent planning activities, from late 1993 to November 1995. ' October -December 1993: ' Sponsored by the Valley Beautiful, Edward McMahon, director of the American Greenways Program, visits the Roanoke Valley. ' An open-space study is requested by the City of Roanoke through the Fifth Planning District Commission. ' October -December 1994: A citizens group supporting greenways sponsors a presentation by Sam Rogers, ' one of the founders of the Tennessee greenway system. Enthusiastic response results in astanding-room-only crowd. ' Valley Beautiful President Lucy Ellett and area builder Bob Fetzer make presentations on greenways to elected officials of Valley governments and request the appointment of a greenway commission in each jurisdiction. January -March 1995: t Elected officials of the four Valley governtrtents appoint representatives to serve on the Roanoke Valley Greenways/Open Space Steering Committee. Staff support ' for the steering committee is to be provided by the Fifth Planning District Commission. The regional steering committee is comprised of: Barbara Duerk, Lucy Ellett (Chairperson) and John Marlles, representing Roanoke City; Charles ' Blankenship, Butch Kelly and Donald Witt, representing Roanoke County; Ed Riley and Joe Yates, representing Salem; Bradley Grose, Anita McMillan and John Sell, representing Vinton; and Lee Eddy, representing the Fifth Planning District ' Commission. ' i ~ ~ I~~y-~1~~~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY P(~N ~~''~1~1JJ~~lIJJ„ ,V ~`IlAA77CCRRJJ"IIJJ~'T~~ ~1~/\ PAGE 67 ' and Virginia Business Opportunities and sent to a listing of experts compiled by the greenways steering committee and staff.) • developing the criteria to use in ranking the proposals and the qualifications of ' responding consulting firms; • ranking consultants' proposals and firms and informing the steering committee of which candidates are to be interviewed; and • interviewing candidates and negotiating contract terms with the top-ranked can- didate; (selection and tenors are subject to final approval by the steering committee). ' July -September 1995: Greenways Incorporated and President, Chuck Flink, are hired by the steering committee to provide technical expertise and work with the group in preparing the regional greenways conceptual plan. The steering committee requests the help of the National Park Service's Riv- ers, Trails and Conservation Assistance Division. The first newsletter is published by the Roanoke Valley Greenways/Open Space Steering Committee. Its purpose is to inform citizens about the regional greenway planning effort and to promote attendance at the series of three public workshops, scheduled for July 24 at the Roanoke Civic Center, August 17 at William Byrd High School in Vinton and August 30 at Salem High School. On July 24, the first public workshop signals the official beginning of the re- gional greenway planning effort. It is preceded by an extensive public information campaign which includes the appearance of steering committee members and af- filiated staff on area public interest programs, in-depth coverage of the greenway issue by The Roanoke Times, the distribution of public service announcements to the Valley's news media and the issuing of invitations to over 500 interest groups and individuals. A luncheon for about 100 elected officials and community leaders at the Vinton War Memorial precedes the first workshop. The event is underwritten by The Roanoke Times and features as speaker Chuck Rink of Greenways Incorporated, the newly hired greenways expert. His address and slide show focus on the benefits of greenways, including their positive impact on economic development and qual- ity of life. The first workshop--at the Roanoke Civic Center Exhibition Hall--draws approximately 130 citizens from across the Roanoke Valley. Chuck Flink and Greenways Incorporated staff present a general information session on greenways and discuss greenway opportunities in the Roanoke Valley. In breakout sessions, citizens brainstorm goals for the regional greenway system and each participant votes for his or her top-rated goals. Citizens also identify greenway corridors they believe should be included in the regional conceptual greenway plan. Each of the ' ~~i ~~~~~~~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY P db ~~~??T~~,~~` PAGE, 69 ' technical subcommittee to develop criteria for screening potential greenway corridors and ranking and selecting a final corridor. The criteria are presented and approved and the steering committee narrows approximately 10 proposed corridors ' to four. Additional research and analysis for each of the four possible ISTEA application ' sites is conducted by local governments' planning staffs. The steering committee ranks the sites and selects the corridor extending from Downtown Roanoke/City Market to Explore Park in Roanoke County by way of. Mill Mountain. Next steps: As the conceptual planning process and the initial work of the Roanoke Valley Greenways/Open Space Steering Committee draw to a close, preparations are being made to: (1) develop and submit an ISTEA application for funding the first phase of the Downtown Roanoke to Explore Park corridor; and (2) present the proposed regional conceptual greenway plan to the elected officials of each Roanoke Valley government. ' ~~~~~~~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL CREENWAY PLA~ ~„ PAGE 71 "greenway communities" have seldom used condemnation for the purpose of dealing with an unwilling property owner. In most cases, condemnation for greenway purposes has been exercised when there has been absentee property ownership, when title to the property is not clear, or when it becomes apparent that obtaining the consent for purchase will be difficult because there are numerous heirs located in other parts of the United States, or in different countries. The community must exercise caution in using Eminent Domain. It is recommended that the right of eminent domain for a specific property be exercised by the community only if all of the following conditions exist: a) the property is valued by the community as an environmentally sensitive parcel of land, significant natural resource, or critical parcel of land, and as such has been defined by the community as an irreplaceable property; b) written scientific justification for the community's claim that the property possesses such value is prepared and offered to the property owner; c) all efforts to negotiate with the property owner for the management, regulation and acquisition of the property have been exhausted and that the property owner has been given reasonable and fair offers for compensation and has rejected all offers; d) due to the ownership of the property, the time frame for negotiating the acquisition of the property will be unreasonable, and in the interest of pursuing a cost effective method for acquiring the property, the community has deemed it necessary to exercise the right of eminent domain. Impact Fees Impact fees are monetary one-time charges levied by a local government on new development to offset some of the cost of providing public facilities for new development. Unlike subdivision exactions, impact fees can be applied to finance facilities located outside a specific land use development and can account for the impact of a development on facilities beyond the boundary of the development. The purpose of impact fees is not to raise revenue, but to ensure that adequate capital facilities will be provided to serve and protect the public. They can be levied through the subdivision or building permit process. ' The Virginia General Assembly has granted certain local governments (any county over 500,000 population, cities and counties adjacent thereto, cities contiguous to such adjacent counties and cities, and towns therein) limited authority to assess impact fees for "road improvements", defined to include construction of new roads or improvements or expansion of existing roads to meet increased demand attributable to new development. This legislation is quite specific as to the manner in which the impact fees ' are assessed and used. Current State taw would have to be amended to authorize the use of impact fees for greenway purposes in the Roanoke Valley. The Dolan vs. Tigard Supreme Court Case and it's Effect on Greenways in the Roanoke Valley In July 1994, the United States Supreme Court in the case of Dolan v Tiga~rl examined the circumstances under which a property owner could be required to transfer land to ' ~~ a I~ J~p~.~.p~~~%~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY PLA~ v • v~~tr v ~ ` PAGIi 73 ' generated by the expanded store. Thus, where the transfer of land is required as a condition of receiving development approval, Dolan makes clear that local governments, and not the property owner, are burdened with demonstrating that the condition of ' approval bears the required relationship to the impacts of the proposed development documented at the time of imposing the conditions. ' Critical to the outcome of Dolan was Tigard's failure to include individualized findings at the development site review stage, quantifying both the impacts of Dolan's development and the extent to which the bicycle/pedestrian trail would respond to those ' impacts. While the Court did not require mathematical precision in determining the relationship of approval conditions to development impact, it does require that assumptions must be justified by "rough proportionality." Dolan a Tigard served to clarify the rules under which local governments can conditionally require the dedication of land for public-use facilities, such as greenways. While some hail the Court's action as a "victory for private property owners," the more accurate assessment of the decision is that it provides clearer definition for both landowners and local governments engaged in land development review and approval. For the Roanoke Valley, the decision clarifies the need for new programs, such as the proposed Roanoke Valley Greenway Plan, to establish fair, equitable and justifiable objectives for protecting the Valley's stream corridors and floodplains. The first step in achieving these objectives is the adoption of this plan. ' ~~ ~ I~~p~~,~.R~~~~~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL CREENWAY PLAN ~~'' ~SJ~SJJJ~~ IIJJ ' V ~~~' lll~~~lllCCC1L~~J' VVV ~ ` PAGE 75 '~ f ' Washington, DC 20036 ` (202) 797-5400 ' National Trust for Historic Preservation 1785 Massachusetts Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20036 (202) 673-4000 (Cultural resource protection identification) American Greenways Program The Conservation Fund 1800 North Kent Street Suite 1120 Arlington, Virginia 22209 (703) 525-6300 (Small Grants/Greenway Projects) Land Trust Alliance 900 17th Street, NW Suite 410 Washington, DC 20006 (Technical Assistance) Bicycle Federation of America 1818 R Street, NW Washington, DC 20009 (202) 332-6986 (Technical Assistance) American Trails 1400 Sixteenth Street, NW Suite 300 Washington, DC 20036 (Technical Assistance) /d ~ ~~ ~(J~ ~(_~ ~~~I~ ROANOKE VALLEY CONCEPTUAL GREENWAY Pt~N ~(~~'~ ~~(~ W\ PAGE 77 Roanoke Vaiwav Plan Legend and Numbered Ro O Downtown Areas ' ~~ Proposed On-Road Bicycle/ is Pedestrian Facilities t~.-a.~.+.- On-Road Bicycle/Pedeatrian Facilities That Can Be Added To Already Planned Road Improvements +-r+-F~--*- Proposed Off-Road Bicycle/ % Pedestrian Facilities ~ City/County/Town Boundaries x Oi Rt. 785/Blaeksburg Rd. ©Glenwood Hors. 2 O Rt. 622/Bradshaw Rd. ®Roanoke River O Appalachian Trail ®Peters Creek 1s ~4 Mason Creek O Lynchburg/SaD U5 Tlmberview Rd. Si Dale Avenue O l/ood Haven Rd. ®Roanoke River O7 Horse Pen Branch ®Stewartsville Oe Route to Appalachian Trail O Dry Hollow O9 Garvin Creek ®Rt. 8S9/Harbo l0 Paint Bank Branch ® Barnhardt Cre 11 Hornera Branch ®Mudlick Creek i2 Roanoke River Tributary ®Brandon Road 13 Red Lane 39 Grandin Roa 14 Gish Branch d O Colonial Aven is Salem Rail Trail 41 Garnand Bran 18 Peters Creek/Green Ridge Rd. ® Rutrough Road i© Herahberger Rd. ®Murray Run 18 Plantation Rd. O Mill Mountain 19 Hollins Road ®Back Creek O Main St. (Salem) w ®Route to Smit 21 Lick Run 4© US 221/Bramb O 10th Street O Rt. 419/Electr.~ O llilliamaon Rd. O Blue Ridge Pay O Tinker Creek 50 US 220 ~ O US 480/Challenger Ave. 51 Wolf Creek O Glade Creek Note: See page 41 of Plan for routes not shown o: Prepared Dy the Fifth Plannins District Commission, Novem e lIItO Mtn. . N E s 1 inch = 17,000 feet SthPDC -ke, Salem, Vinton ~ Roaaoke Cow~ty, VA A-012897-3 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: January 28, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Authorization to submit a grant proposal to the Foundation for the Roanoke Valley for funding of the 1997 Youth D.A.R.E. (I2rug Abuse $esistance Education) Camps to be held at Camp Roanoke. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: G~~4~~+~( BACKGROUND: The Roanoke County Departments of Parks and Recreation, Police, and Schools have jointly sponsored and organized two week-long D.A.R.E. Camps each year since 1995 for the County's rising seventh graders. One hundred and eighty children have participated in the camps since 1995. The camps are offered to the children at no cost and are viewed as a continuation and a positive closure to the elementary school's D.A.R.E. curriculum. The camps have been funded through individual and civic donations, a school grant, and in-kind support of staff, equipment, and materials from the departments. Staff are planning to offer the 3rd Annual series of D.A.R.E. Camps. The two weeks of camp which provide participants with educational programs and opportunities to experience positive recreational activities will cost approximately $8,307. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Foundation of the Roanoke Valley is accepting proposals for grant funding to provide community programs for children. Staff have completed a grant application to request a $3,000 grant from the Foundation for the D.A.R.E. Camps. These funds, if granted, will be used to purchase program supplies and equipment. The proposal requires Board of Supervisor support and approval to submit the grant request. FISCAL IMPACT: None ALTERNATIVES: 1. Authorize the Parks and Recreation Department to submit the grant proposal to the Foundation of the Roanoke Valley. 2. Do' not authorize the Parks and Recreation Department to submit the grant proposal. .~ ~..~ STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommendation is Alternative #1 to authorize the Parks and Recreation Department to submit a grant proposal to the Foundation of the Roanoke Valley for D.A.R.E. Camps at Camp Roanoke in the summer of 1997. Respectfully submitted, Approv by, ~~~C ~ ...P~t.C ~ /'V~' Pete Haislip Elmer C. Hodge Director County Administrator ---------------------------------------------------------------- Approved (x) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) ACTION Motion by: Bob L. Johnson to approve staff recommendation VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy ~L_ Harrison ~ Johnson ~_ Minnix x Nickens x cc: File Pete Haislip, Director, Parks & Recreation 2 THE E'-...3 FOUNDATION Fox Ro~vo~va~,c~ REQUEST EOR~ PROPOSALS- The Foundation for Roanoke: Valley announces,its-199TRequest.for Proposals for grants from the Funds- listedbelow. Our geographic servicearea isthe-greater Roanoke-VaIley, inchidmg the cities of Roanoke and Salem, and the counties of Roanoke, Botetourt and Craig and some surrounding areas. Agencies applying for a grant should be qualified, tax exempt charitable organizations. Grants Name of Fund udger $~ose of Fund Unrestricted Find $31,200 The Foundation has chosen to focus its unrestricted funds on the needs ofyoung children in the community (0 through 12 yeazs). We aze looking for programs, projects and agencies which help: 1. Budd the- capacity of fann`lies to provide safe, nurturing, healthy living environments for all children. 2. F.nsw-e that all children ewer school physically, emotionally, and developmentally prepazed to learn. 3. Provide a full range of positive opportunities for continued social, emotional, cognitive and imaginative development to help children make the transition to teenage years and beyond. Katherine Nelson $45,500 This Fund supports a wide range of important community Fishburn Foundation needs. This Fund has historically fimded requests in the Fund (Advised Fund) azeas of cuhnre, education and social services, although other important needs in the Valley aze considered. NOTES: + The deadline for these grant propo is February 1,1997. • NO Faxes accepted + It is anticipated that grants will be awazded by May 1997. • Agencies may apply for grants from more than one of the Funds, but you must clearly state in the proposal to which Fund you aze applying. • If you have other good ideas or programs which do not fall within the purposes of the above Funds but for which you would like to receive funding, you may submit a proposal and note on the Grant Request that it is for an Advised Fund. We will consider these proposals if and when they may meet a donor's funding preference. • Proposal Requirements are listed on the back of this page. P. O. Box 1159 Rosnoke, VA 24006 (540) 985-0204 The Valley s Endowment Fund PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS 1. A separate Request for Grant Form for each Fund to which you are applying 2. Proposal narrative (one copy, single-sided). The narrative (specifics about the project itself, not supporting documentation) should be no more than TWO typewritten pages. This should include a statement of how your program addresses a community need, purpose of the funds requested, amount requested and an explanation of how the money would be spent. 3. One copy of your organization's 1RS Tax Determination Letter (Do not submit if you have previously provided it to us) 4. List of your organization's Board of I}irectors and their principal occupations 5. Qualifications of key personnel 6. Current Annual Budget 7. Specific Project Budget 8. Copy of your organization's most recent Audit 9. Copy of your organization's most recent Annual Report 10. Copy of the minutes of the Board Meeting approving submission of a grant request 11. Names of 3 professionals (non-Board members) familiar with your organization 12. Recent grants received for this project from other fenders or other fund prospects to which you have or will apply for funding Please do not put the proposal in binders, notebooks, folders as we must copy portions of your applications. Should you receive a grant, you are required to complete a Grant Report Form upon completion of the project, when the funds have been spent, or after 12 months if the project has not yet been completed This form must be received by the Foundation prior to your filing for the next round of grants from that Fund If you have questions, please contact Barbara Peery, Program Officer, at (540) 985-0204. Tf-1E E. ~ FOUNDATION FOR ROANOKE VALLEY REQUEST FOR GRANT FORM for UNRESTRICTED FUPdD . (Name of Fund) ~--Organization:..... ROANOKE COUNTY PARKS AND~~ RECREATION DEPARTMENT, D, A, R, E, CAMP Mailing Address: 12 0 6' Kessler M i 11 R d . Salem, VA 24153 Street Adaress: (if di$'erent) Contact person: R i c kv Showa 1 to r Title: Coordinator Phone: (540) 387-6172 Please provide aone-paragraph, concise explanation of the proposed proje~dea: Roanoke County Police, School, and Recreation Departments would like to provide two week long day D,A,R,E, (Drug Abuse Resistance Education) Camps for the graduating sixth graders (11-12 years old) of Roanoke County and North Cross Schools, The D,A,P,,E, Camps will provide a continuation and positive closure to the elementary D,A,R,E, lessons taught in the school system, Hopefully the student will make the correct decision when challenged with drug and alcohol use later in their life, Through teamwork, education, self-esteem, confidence, recreational activities as an alternative to drugs, and a lot of fun the cooperating departments believe that the D,A,R,E, program (ropes course, canoeing, hiking, orienteering, group project, fire safety narcotics education, firearm safer and k-9 demonstration) will assist in allowing our young people to fulfill their human potential as they make their transition in to the teenage years and beyond, Project Starting Date: J I1nP. 1997 Project Completion Date: J U 1 Y 1997 Total Project Budget:$ $ , 306 , 84 Amount requested from the Foundation: S 3 , 000 , 00 Approval of Chief Executive Officer: The organization named above will act as the responsible fiscal agent for any funds received and will comply with applicable tax laws, regulations and Foundation policies. I understand that the Foundation may require expenditure reports from grant recipients and may request the opportunity to visit our organization before awarding a grant or after a grant has been made~for the purposes ofproject evaluation. Signature Title Date P. O. Box 1159 Ro~oka, VA 24006 (540) 985-0204 The Valley's Endowment Fund ~~` THE FQtJNDATIQN FOR THE ROANOKE VALLEY REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL by ROANOKE COUNTY D.A.R.E. CAMP The citizens of the Roanoke Valley believe that all young people are of worth and to be valued. Our children make critical choices every day which not only affect them as individuals, but their friends and family as well. The young people represent the hope and promise of the future for the Roanoke Valley. The City of Salem and Roanoke City have been sponsoring week long residential D.A.R.E. Camps for their children for several years. Through grants and civic donations, Roanoke County offered the first week long day D.A.R.E. Camp located at Camp Roanoke in 1995. In 1996 they hosted approximately 100 children in two, week long day camps. The Roanoke County School, Police and Recreation Departments believe that as our world changes, so do our children. The demands placed upon our children today by society are terrifying. The increase in child abuse, substance abuse, and peer pressure, has placed us in a situation which pushes young people to their limits and beyond. As adults we owe our children a choice, a well calculated choice. Let us equip them with an arsenal of skills designed to make appropriate choices. Young people cannot just be told "to be responsible." They must be shown, as well as taught, how to make responsible decisions. Please assist us in allowing our young people to fulfill their human potential as they make their transition in to the teenage years and beyond. We are proposing that the Foundation for Roanoke Valley, through the Unrestricted Fund, grant the Roanoke County D.A.R.E. Camp $3,000.00 to assist with the two weeks of day D.A.R.E. Camps for the summer of 1997. The grant will be used, along with other sources of income, to provide this new and growing program the necessary funding that it needs to operate. Although participating departments have pledged their full time staff to direct, lead, and supervise the camps, there are still many other direct costs that must be covered (please refer to the specific budget). The Foundation for Roanoke Valley is a brilliant conception, and we admire what your staff and benefactors have done for the Roanoke Valley. We hope you will find a way to help us in our grass roots development for a long term benefit. If you have any questions in regard to our request for proposal, please contact me at your convenience. Sincerely yours, ~~ IG Ricky Showalter Camp Roanoke, Project Manager ~-. QOALIFICATIQNS OF KEY PERSONNEL D.A.R.E. CAMP COMMITTEE: 1. Jack Liddy, Roanoke County School, Supervisor of, Health, Physical Ed. & Driver Ed. 2. Ted Williams, Roanoke County School Guidance Counselor, Glenvar High School 3. Bill Sgrinia, Roanoke County Parks & Recreation, Supervisor of Outdoor Education 4. Ricky Showalter, Roanoke County Parks & Recreation Coordinator of Outdoor Education Programs and Camp Roanoke Project Manager 5. Monty Williams, Roanoke County Police D.A.R.E. officer and past director of D.A.R.E. Camp 6. Lt. Gary Roche, Roanoke County Police, Supervisor of D.A.R.E. officers SPECIFIC PROTECT BUDGET 1997 DAY D.A.R.E CAMP BUDGET: COST Estimated on 50 children per camp, x 2 camps. 1. PERSONNEL 2 School staff NO CHARGE 6 Police staff NO CHARGE 6 Recreation staff NO CHARGE 1 K-9 officer for classes NO CHARGE 1 Firearm safety officer for educational class NO CHARGE 2 Fire rescue officer for educational class NO CHARGE 1 Vice detective, narcotics educational class NO CHARGE 4 Camp counselors ($7.00 x 384 hours) $2,688.00 3 Ropes course instructors ($7.00 x 96 hours) $672.00 2 Canoe instructors ($7.00 x 32 hours) $448.00 FICA (7.650 $291.31 TOTAL: $4,099.31 2. TRANSPORTATION 2 School bus drivers (966.60) $966.60 2 Buses and gasoline NO CHARGE 3. FOOD Lunch, drinks and snacks everyday $1,090.93 4. Camper's D.A.R.E. t-shirts and hats $1,400.00 Cups, plates, utensils, film, art supplies etc. $500.00 Photo processing and video editing fees $250.00 GRAND TOTAL: $8,306.84 _~ 3 PROFESSIONAL FAMILIAR KITH ORGANIZATION 1. Philip Trompeter, Judge, and Chair of the Roanoke Valley Drug and Alcohol Abuse Council 305 B. Main Street Salem, VA 24153-4347 (540)387-6231 2. Barbara Duerk 2607 Rosalind Ave. S.W. Roanoke, VA 24014 (540)343-1616 3. Jim Phipps, Court Community Corrections Program 516 E. Main Street Salem, VA 24153 (540)387-5232 4. Other references provided upon request. O~ ROANp,Y~ .~~ z ,°~ a 7838 PAUL M. MAHONEY COUNTY ATTORNEY ~sao~ n2-2oo~ OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY P.O. BOX 29800 5204 BERNARD DRIVE ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 FAX (540) 772-2089 January 3, 1997 Dear Contributor: Re: Camp Roanoke Renovation Fund Raising Campaign Roanoke County Department of Parks & Recreation JOSEPH B. OBENSHAIN SENIOR ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY VICKIE L. HUFFMAN ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY ~sao> nz-xn i The Roanoke County Attorney's Office, as legal counsel for the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, is providing this letter stating our opinion as to the tax deductible status of gifts or contributions which may be made to Roanoke County for purposes of the renovation and restoration of Camp Roanoke. It is our intention that this letter and the taxpayer identification number provided by the I.R.S. to Roanoke County will be sufficient to authorize the charitable deductibility of any contributions. The County of Roanoke, Virginia is a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia. It is established as a body corporate and politic pursuant to the authority of Article VII of the Constitution of Virginia, 1971, Chapter 18, of Title 15.1 of the Code of Virginia,1950, as amended and the Charter of the County of Roanoke enacted as Chapter 617 of the Acts of Assembly , 1986. Donations which are made to the County or the Board of Supervisors become the property of this county and are intended to enhance the governmental mission of the County of Roanoke. It is the opinion of this office that such a contribution or gift of money or property will qualify as a "charitable contribution," as defined by subsection (c)(1) of Sec. 170 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as a contribution or gift to or for the use of a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia for exclusively public purposes. Such a contribution must be in accordance with the rules and limitations of said Sec. 170 and any regulations established pursuant thereto. For purposes of claiming said deduction, any person or corporation making such a contribution or gift is hereby entitled to use the following taxpayer identification number of the County of Roanoke, Virginia: #54-6001572. Sin rely yours, Jos h B. benshain Assistant County Attorney ® Recycled Paper c-y AT A REGIILAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JANUARY 28, 1997 RESOLUTION 012897-4 AUTHORIZING THE EBECUTION OF A RIGHT- OF-WAY PERMIT WITH THE NATIONAL PARR SERVICE (UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR) TO CROSS THE BLIIE RIDGE PARKWAY WITH ROANORE COUNTY PUBLIC WATER AND PUBLIC SEWER LINES FOR THE PURPOSE OF SERVING THE REAL ESTATE OF BOONE, BOONE & LOEB, INC. AND NICHOLAS BEASLEY, ET AL. WHEREAS, on January 14, 1993, Boone, Boone & Loeb, Inc. and Nicholas Beasley, et al. filed a lawsuit against Roanoke County challenging its 1992 comprehensive rezoning of the Beasley Farm; and WHEREAS, in 1996 the County rezoned this property to Planned Residential Development, subject to certain conditions voluntarily proffered by Boone, Boone & Loeb, Inc. and Nicholas Beasley, et al.; and WHEREAS, this conditional rezoning would not become fully effective until a right-of-way permit was secured from the National Park Service (United States Department of Interior) to cross the Blue Ridge Parkway with Roanoke County public water and public sewer lines; and WHEREAS, the National Park Service has granted to the County a temporary right-of-way permit for these purposes; and WHEREAS, this right-of-way permit is substantially similar to the right-of-way permit granted to the Town of Vinton to service the Wolf Creek Development in east Roanoke County in 1996. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1 1. That the terms and conditions of the right-of-way permit granted to Roanoke County by the National Park Service (United States Department of Interior) are hereby acknowledged and accepted. 2. That the County Administrator or his designee is hereby authorized to execute said right-of-way permit on behalf of Roanoke County and the Board of Supervisors, upon form approved by the County Attorney. Further, the County Administrator is hereby directed to take such actions or to execute such documents as may be necessary to implement the terms and conditions of this right- of -way permit . 3. That this resolution shall take effective immediately upon adoption. On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. H ton, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Janet Scheid, Planner Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney 2 1 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. ~ ~` AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: January 28, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: National Park Service Right-of-Way Permit - Boone Property COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS: ~u~G~ywr-~+N( ~'~~ p(~ BACKGROUND: As a result of the 1992 general rezoning of the County, the Beasley farm was rezoned to R-1, AR and AG-1 against the wishes of Mr. Beasley and the contract purchaser. Mr. Beasely and Boone, Boone & Loeb, Inc. subsequently filed a lawsuit against the County. In 1996, as a strategy to settle this lawsuit and protect the Blue Ridge Parkway viewsheds, Boone, Boone & Loeb, Inc. proposed and the County approved, conditionally rezoning this property to Planned Residential Development. This rezoning will not become effective until a right-of-way permit is granted by the National Park Service to cross park property with utility lines. After two years of negotiations we have received a final right-of- way permit that addresses the concerns of staff and the developer. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The permit provides Roanoke County a right- of-way to construct, maintain and use a 12-inch diameter water line, a 8-inch diameter gravity sewer line, and a 6-inch diameter force mainline across lands within the boundaries of the Blue Ridge Parkway. As with all National Park Service right-of-way permits, this one is considered to be temporary and will have to be renewed after 20 years. The National Park Service does not have the legislative authority to grant permanent right-of-way agreements. All existing permits the County has with the National Park Service and the right-of-way permit signed last year with the Town of Vinton, for the Wolf Creek development, are for a limited number of years with rights of renewal. Under the terms and conditions of this permit the County is required to consult with and seek comments from the National Park Service before extending the subject utility lines beyond the .~~ '~~ 2 Beasley property. This is to ensure that the scenic viewshed issues, that were of concern to the Park Service during the Beasley rezoning process, will be considered before utilities are extended to serve new developments within the Parkway viewshed. This right-of-way permit is substantially similar to the one negotiated and signed by the Town of Vinton to allow utility lines to serve the Wolf Creek development in east Roanoke County. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors adopt the attached resolution giving the County Administrator authority to execute the right-of-way permit with the National Park Service. Respectfully Submitted, Ja et Scheid, Planner Department of Planning and Zoning Approved, ~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ~. "" - / AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JANUARY 28, 1997 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMIT WITH THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE (UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR) TO CROSS THE BLUE RIDGE PARKWAY WITH ROANOKE COUNTY PUBLIC WATER AND PUBLIC SEWER LINES FOR THE PURPOSE OF SERVING THE REAL ESTATE OF BOONE, BOONE & LOEB, INC. AND NICHOLAS BEASLEY, ET AL. WHEREAS, on January 14, 1993, Boone, Boone & Loeb, Inc. and Nicholas Beasley, et al. filed a lawsuit against Roanoke County challenging its 1992 comprehensive rezoning of the Beasley Farm; and WHEREAS, in 1996 the County rezoned this property to Planned Residential Development, subject to certain conditions voluntarily proffered by Boone, Boone & Loeb, Inc. and Nicholas Beasley, et al.; and WHEREAS, this conditional rezoning would not become fully effective until a right-of-way permit was secured from the National Park Service (United States Department of Interior) to cross the Blue Ridge Parkway with Roanoke County public water and public sewer lines; and WHEREAS, the National Park Service has granted to the County a temporary right-of-way permit for these purposes; and WHEREAS, this right-of-way permit is substantially similar to the right-of-way permit granted to the Town of Vinton to service the Wolf Creek Development in east Roanoke County in 1996. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the terms and conditions of the right-of-way permit granted to Roanoke County by the National Park Service (United E-_ ~~ States Department of Interior) are hereby acknowledged and accepted. 2. That the County Administrator or his designee is hereby authorized to execute said right-of-way permit on behalf of Roanoke County and the Board of Supervisors, upon form approved by the County Attorney. Further, the County Administrator is hereby directed to take such actions or to execute such documents as may be necessary to implement the terms and conditions of this right- of-way permit. 3. That this resolution shall take effective immediately upon adoption. C:\OFFICE\ WPWIN\ WPDOCS\ AGENDA\ ZONING\ NPS.RSO .~ - L/ COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF ROANOKE RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMIT N0.5:160:1672 SECTION 1-N UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR NATIONAL PARK SERVICE RIGHT-OF-WAY PERMIT FOR WATER LINE AND TWO SEWER LINES BLUE RIDGE PARKWAY WHEREAS, County of Roanoke, Virginia (hereinafter Permittee), has applied to the United States of America (hereinafter Permitter) for aright-of--way to construct, maintain, and use a 12-inch diameter water line, a 8-inch diameter gravity sewer line, and a 6-inch diameter force main line across lands within the boundaries of the Blue Ridge Parkway (hereinafter Parkway), a unit of the National Park System, United States Department of the Interior; and WHEREAS, the Permitter administers the Parkway that was established as a unit of the National Park System, United States Department of the Interior, pursuant to 16 U.S.C. 460a-2; and WHEREAS, the Director of the National Park Service (or his delegate) is required pursuant to 16 U.S.C. la-1 to authorize only those uses of land within the Parkway which will not be in derogation of the values and purposes for which the Parkway was established, except as may have been or shall be directly and specifically provided by Congress; and WHEREAS, 16 U.S.C. 79 authorizes the Director of the National Park Service (or his delegate) having jurisdiction over subject land, to permit an easement for aright-of--way across and upon the lands and reservations of the United States for the subject water and sewer lines and upon a finding by the Director (or his delegate) that the right-of--way is not incompatible with public interest; and WHEREAS, the Secretary of the Interior (or his- delegate) is authorized pursuant to 16 U.S.C. 460a-8 to issue permits ofrights-of--way over and across Parkway lands for such purposes as he may determine to be consistent with the use of such lands for Parkway purposes; and WHEREAS, the National Park Service has promulgated regulations in Title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, section 14.1 et seq., regarding permits of rights-of--way over and across lands administered by the National Park Service; and WHEREAS, the National Park Service has been delegated the authority to permit such rights-of--way across land under the jurisdiction of the National Park Service pursuant to 245 Department Manual 5.1; and ~~ WHEREAS, the National Park Service has determined that the proposed construction, operation, and maintenance of the subject water and sewer lines is neither incompatible with public interest nor inconsistent with the use of such lands for Parkway purposes and that there is no practical alternative to using National park Service land for the purposes stated in this permit; and WHEREAS, the purpose of the subject water and sewer lines is to provide water and sewer service for the benefit of residents in the area; and WHEREAS, the Permitter has developed an environmental assessment to meet NEPA requirements. WITNESSETH: The Permitter, through the National Park Service, an agency of the Department of the Interior, acting pursuant to 16 U.S.C. 79 and 16 U.S.C. 460a-8, and its regulations at 36 C.F.R. 14.1 et seq., hereby permits to County of Roanoke, whose address is Post Office Box 29800, 5204 Bernard Drive, SW, Roanoke, Virginia 24018-0798, aright-of--way across federal lands, to wit: the Blue Ridge Parkway, for the construction, operation, and maintenance of one water line and two sewer lines, subject to the terms and conditions set hereinafter. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY A strip of land situated in Blue Ridge Parkway Section 1-N, Roanoke County, Virginia, at approximately milepost 125.5, said strip set out in a plat prepared by Lumsden Associates, P. C., dated June 2, 1995 (Beasley South Property, Comm: 91-184), attached hereto and made a part hereof. The said strip of land is 26 feet in width during construction. Construction right-of--way limits are 14 feet on the east side and 12 feet on the west side of the described centerline. Upon completion of installation, the 26-foot wide construction easement would be reduced to a maintenance easement 22 feet wide, being 12 feet on the east side and 10 feet on the west side of the following described centerline: The subject lines enter National Park Service property at a point approximately 62 feet N 71°27' E from NPS Corner Monument No. 292 and follow an alignment of an existing roadbed, continues S 9°32'37" E, fora ,distance of approximately 99.48 feet; thence S 20°27'45" E, for a distance of approximately 49.17 feet; thence S 3°06'03" E, for a distance of approximately 121.33 feet, passing under the Blue Ridge Parkway at approximately centerline station No. 251+70; thence S 25°17'45" E, for a distance of approximately 27.28 feet; thence S 47°57'45" E, for a distance of approximately 19.50 feet; thence S 58°12'23" E, for a distance of approximately 209.98 feet, exiting National Park Service land at a point approximately 392.90 feet, S 63°51'30" W, from NPS Corner Monument No. 58, said line being on National Park Service land for a total distance, all underground, of approximately 526.74 feet. 2 Ey The subject lines herein permitted are further described as follows: the 12-inch water line, the 8-inch gravity line, and the 6-inch force main are to be buried at depths of approximately four feet to provide a minimum coverage of three feet. The centerline of the said 12-inch water line is located approximately 5 feet west of the easement centerline; the centerline of the said 8-inch gravity sewer line is located approximately 5 feet east of the easement centerline; the centerline of the said 6-inch force main is located approximately 7 feet east of the easement centerline. There will be no valves or other appurtenances for either the water line or the sewer lines located within National Park Service boundaries except for three sanitary sewer manholes. In the area of the concrete box culvert, all three pipelines shall come out of the ground, run through, attach to the sides of the box culvert, exit the opposite side of the culvert, and return to underground. AUTHORITY TO ENTER INTO AGREEMENT FOR PERMIT OF RIGHT-OF-WAY The Permittee represents and warrants to the United States that: (1) it is duly authorized and empowered under applicable laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia to enter into and perform this agreement in accordance with the provisions hereof; (2) that all of the foregoing approvals, authorizations, and actions are in full force and effect at the time of the execution and delivery of this agreement. PERMITTED USE OF RIGHT-OF-WAY BY PERMITTEE The right-of--way hereby permitted is for the sole purpose of constructing, operating, and maintaining the water and sewer lines across the above described lands, application for which was made in writing to the Superintendent, Blue Ridge Parkway (hereinafter Superintendent), on June 11, 1993, by the Permittee. That in utilizing the right-of--way herein permitted, the Permittee agrees to comply with and be bound by laws and regulations regarding the use and occupancy of lands administered by the Service. DEVIATION FROM APPROVED RIGHT-OF-WAY The Permittee agrees that it will not deviate from the location of the approved right-of--way in its construction of the subject water and sewer lines. All ingress and egress for construction, maintenance, and operation of the subject water and sewer lines shall be restricted to the permit of right-of--way herein. In the event that the Permittee determines that ingress and egress over Parkway lands, not the subject of the permit of right-of--way herein, is necessary for 3 ~~ L1 the construction, maintenance, and operation of the subject water and sewer lines then the Permittee must apply, in writing, to the Superintendent for additional right-of--way for such ingress and egress. EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE PERMIT OF RIGHT-OF-WAY The permit of the right-of--way hereby made shall terminate twenty yeazs from the effective date hereof, at noon, Virginia time, unless prior thereto it is relinquished, abandoned, or otherwise terminated pursuant to the provisions of this permit or of any applicable federal law or regulation. The effective date of this permit shall be the date of its execution by the Permitter. FEES FOR USE AND OCCUPANCY . The Permitter and Permittee understand and agree that the consideration for utilization of the lands, pursuant to the permit of right-of--way, for municipally operated projects, is waived according to 36 C.F.R. ~ 14.26 (c)(1}. The fee exemption is subject to change without prior notification to Permittee. The Permittee further agrees that in the event the subject right-of--way is renewed, pursuant to the provisions for such renewal, then the consideration for said renewal will reflect the fair market value of the use of the lands for the term of the renewal of said permit ofright-of--way, if applicable. RENEWAL OF RIGHT-OF-WAY Unless relinquished, abandoned, or otherwise terminated pursuant to the provisions of the permit or of any applicable federal laws or regulations, the Permittee may make application to the Superintendent, within six months of its expiration date, for renewal of the permit of right-of--way herein. The Permittee shall file, in accordance with existing National Park Service regulations, a written application to renew the right-of--way permitted herein, and shall agree to comply with all the laws and regulations existing at such application date governing the occupancy and use of the lands of the Permitter for the purposes desired. If the Permitter has not acted upon the Permittee's written application to renew the right-of--way before the expiration of this right-of--way the existing right-of--way will be extended subject to then existing and future rules and regulations, pending consideration of the application for renewal. DISPOSAL OF PROPERTY ON TERMINATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY Upon the termination of the subject right-of--way permit by expiration or by prior cancellation, in the absence of any agreement to the contrary, if all monies due the Permitter 4 L-= thereunder have been paid, the Permittee of the right-of--way shall be allowed six months, or such additional time as may be permitted, in which to remove from the right-of--way all property or improvements of any kind placed thereon by him; and if not removed within the time allowed, all such property and improvements shall become the property of the Permitter. NONUSE OR ABANDONMENT It is hereby understood and agreed by the parties hereto that all or any part of the right-of- way granted herein may be forfeited and annulled by declaration of the Permitter, after construction, in the event of nonuse for a period of two years or for abandonment by the Permittee. TIMELY CONSTRUCTION Unless otherwise provided by law, a period of up to five years from the date aright-of- way is granted is allowed for completion of construction. If the Permittee fails to complete construction within the specified time period, the Permittee may petition the Permitter for an extension not to exceed an additional five years. ENTIRE AGREEMENT; AMENDMENTS This permit constitutes the entire agreement between the Permitter and the Permittee concerning this right-of--way, and it supersedes all prior written or oral agreements concerning this subject matter. This permit may not be amended except by written document executed by both parties. FEES AND REIMBURSEMENT OF COSTS Pursuant to 36 C.F.R. 14.22(a)(2)(i) for state or local governments or agencies or instrumentalities thereof where the lands will be used for governmental purposes and continue to serve the general public, payment of fees and expenses incurred by the Service as a result of this permit are waived. 5 ~- y TERMS AND CONDITIONS The permit herein made is subject to the following terms and conditions: General (1) This permit shall not be construed as a conveyance of permanent interest of right-of--way or as an abandonment of use and occupancy of the premises described in this permit, anything herein contained to the contrary notwithstanding. (2) This right-of--way permit may be terminated upon breach of any of the stated conditions or at the discretion of the Director of the National Park Service. (3) The Permittee shall comply with all applicable state and federal laws and existing regulations promulgated thereunder in the construction, operation, and maintenance of the subject water and sewer lines. (4) If required, the Permittee shall file a performance bond with satisfactory surety payable to the United States to fully insure compliance with the permit terms and conditions. (5) The Permittee shall pay the United States for any damage resulting from this permit which would not reasonably be inherent in the use which the Permittee is authorized to make of the land described herein. (6) Use by the Permittee of the land covered herein is subject to the right of the Permitter to establish trails, roads, and other improvements and betterments over, upon, or through said premises, and further to the use by travelers and others of such roads, trails, and other improvements already existing. If it is necessary to exercise such right, every effort shall be made by the Permitter to refrain from unduly interfering or preventing use of the land by the Permittee for the purposes intended under this permit. (7) In the event any facilities covered by this permit should interfere with future Parkway construction, Permittee agrees to relocate them to a point designated by the Superintendent at no cost to the Permitter within 60 days after written notice. (8) The Permittee agrees that the right-of--way permitted herein shall be subject to the express condition that the exercise thereof shall not unduly interfere with the management and administration by the United States of the lands affected thereby, and that the Permittee agrees and consents to the occupancy and use by the Permitter, its permittees or lessees, of any part of the right-of--way not actually occupied or required by the project, or the full and safe utilization thereof, for necessary operations incident to such management, administration, or disposal. (9) The Permittee agrees that the right-of--way permitted herein shall be subject to the express covenant that it shall be modified, adapted, or discontinued if found by the Permitter to be E-y necessary, without liability or expense to the Permitter, so as not to conflict with the use and occupancy of the land for any authorized works which may hereafter be constructed thereon under the authority of the Permitter. (10} During the performance of this permit, the Permittee agrees that it shall not discriminate against any person because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The Permittee shall take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed without regard to their race, color, religion, sex, or national origin: (11) No member of or Delegate to Congress or Resident Commissioner shall be admitted to any share or part of this permit or to any benefit that may arise therefrom, but this provision shall not be construed to extend to this permit if made with a limited partnership for its general benefit. (12) Renewals shall be subject to regulations existing at the time of renewal and such other terms and conditions deemed necessary to protect the public interest. Any alterations to this permit must be in writing and signed by the parties hereto. (13) No transfer of this right-of--way permit shall be recognized unless and until it is first approved in writing by the Superintendent of the Blue Ridge Parkway. Such a transfer must be filed in accordance with existing regulations at the time of transfer and must be supported by the stipulation that the assignee agrees to comply with and to be bound by the terms and conditions of the permit of right-of--way. (14) In consideration for obtaining the privileges permitted herein, the Permittee agrees to indemnify and save harmless the Permitter, to the extent permitted by the Constitution and laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia, from any loss to it, including not only damage to government property and injury to government employees, but also judgments, settlements, or compromises for property damage or injury to all persons for which the Permitter may be liable, resulting from the exercise by the Permittee and its employees of the privileges permitted herein. (15) Upon expiration, revocation, or termination of this permit, the Permittee shall leave the land subject to the permit in as nearly the original condition as possible, as directed and approved by the Superintendent. (16) No part of the construction, maintenance, operation, replacement, or removal of any water and sewer lines, structures, or other facilities authorized by this permit shall be accomplished at the expense of the Permitter. (17) Permittee shall be in compliance with NEPA during the duration of this permit. (18) Should rare plant species or plants growing within right-of--way of subject water and sewer lines become listed on state or federal lists after construction of subject water and sewer lines, Permitter shall require mitigating measures from the Permittee or relocation of subject water 7 E- y and sewer lines. Should mitigation measures require relocation of subject water and sewer lines, all environmental and cultural requirements applicable to said relocated water and sewer lines shall be satisfied prior to construction. (19) Nothing herein contained shall be construed as binding the National Park Service to expend in any one fiscal year any sum in excess of appropriations made by congress or administratively allocated for the purpose of this permit for the fiscal year, or to involve the National Park Service in any contract or other obligation for the further expenditure of money in excess of such appropriations or allocations. (20) Permittee shall consult with and seek comments from Permitter prior to extending the subject water and sewer lines beyond the property that the line is intended to serve to mutually determine if any such future line extension would result in harm to scenic qualities or other resources of the Blue Ridge Parkway, said property generally known as the Beasley property identified on Roanoke County, Virginia, tax maps as 96.02-01-01, 96.02-01-02, 97.03-02-05, portion of 96.02-01-46 that is on south side of Blue Ridge Parkway, and portion of 97.01-02-17 that is on south side of Blue Ridge Parkway. Construction/Nlaintenance Activities (21) The Permittee shall take adequate measures, as directed and approved by the Superintendent, to insure all disturbances of ve etation, soil, and other Parkway resources shall be kept at an absolute minimum. This includes providing soil conservation and protection measures, landscaping, weed control, and repairing roads, trails, fences. The Permittee shall dispose of brush and other refuse as required by the Superintendent. The Superintendent or his representative may at any time enter and inspect the area and facilities as deemed necessary and without restriction. (22) The subject water and sewer lines are to be constructed in accordance with approved plans and specifications and in accordance with the Commonwealth of Virginia Waterworks Regulations and Sewage Collection and Treatment Regulations. Detailed procedures of installation are subject to approval in advance of construction by the Superintendent or his representative. All work on Parkway land shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Superintendent or his representative. (23) Except during emergency situations or if instructed otherwise, the Superintendent, Blue Ridge Parkway, 400 BB&T Building, Asheville, NC 28801, shall be notified in writing no less than two weeks prior to the start of any construction, maintenance, or repair work on Parkway lands. An on-site meeting will be conducted prior to start of construction between representatives of Permitter and Permittee (construction/malntenance supervisor) to determine and clarify the scope of the project and Parkway expectations. The Permittee's construction/maintenance supervisor will contact the Park on the morning of the first day of work, prior to entering the parkway, advising the location and extent of work crews on the Parkway. 8 E~ Except in extraordinary situations or if instructed otherwise, all work on Parkway lands will be conducted on a Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m, through 5:00 p.m. basis. All work on Parkway lands shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Superintendent or his/her representative. All construction activities shall be confined to the right-of--way described in this permit. (24) The Permittee shall notify the Parkway of emergency situations as soon as practical. In the event emergency maintenance is required after normal business hours, the Permittee should contact Blue Ridge Parkway Communication Center (704) 298-0358 or 1-800-PARK WATCH (727-5928). (25) An Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan is required by the Commonwealth of Virginia if more than 10,000 square feet of land (or approximately 1/4 acre) is disturbed. This project is estimated to be 3/10 acre. The Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan shall be approved in writing by the Superintendent or his representative prior to beginning construction. (26) The Permittee shall be responsible for the provision and maintenance of proper signs, bamcades, or other means of warning motorists and pedestrians of danger during all periods of repair and maintenance. (27) No vegetation shall be cut or destroyed without first obtaining a permit from the Superintendent. The Parkway will be reimbursed for the market value of any vegetation removed. Any vegetation that must be removed shall be replaced in kind as specified by the Superintendent. (28) No tree in excess of 6 inches diameter breast height (DBH) shall be removed or trimmed without obtaining a permit from the Superintendent. The Landscape Architect shall be contacted (704/271-4779 ext. 208) at least thirty days prior to beginning construction for the purpose of marking any trees in excess of 6 inch DBH that shall be removed. The Permittee shall replace each mutually agreed upon tree removed with a 2 inch DBH tree that represents the local genotype and shall be placed in the general area of construction in a pattern that most closely resembles the natural pattern of adjacent, native vegetation.. The exact species to be planted shall be determined at the time of planting as directed by the Superintendent or his representative. An eighty percent survival rate shall be guaranteed for two years. Any plant material not meeting this survival period shall be replaced at the expense of the Permittee. If any tree over 6 inches DBH is removed or trimmed without a permit, replacement value for the vegetation shall be assessed using the 19921nternational Society of Arborculturalist Guide to Plant Appraisal. (29) All vegetation outside of the allowed construction right-of--way, as defined under the section, "Legal Description of Right-of-Way," shall be protected with a construction barrier fence. All tree drip lines adjacent to the right-of--way shall be protected against compaction of soils. (30) No vehicles, equipment, or materials shall be parked or staged on Parkway land at any time before, during, or after construction. 9 .. (31) No construction material, trash, or debris shall be stored or deposited on Parkway land. (32) Use of pesticides, herbicides, or growth regulating chemicals is strictly prohibited on Parkway lands. (33) The Permittee shall immediately halt all activities, including construction, and notify the Superintendent upon discovery of threatened or endangered species or archeological, paleontological, or historical findings. All artifacts unearthed are the property of the Parkway. (34) Permittee shall have a right of ingress and egress within the right-of--way for the purposes of constructing, maintaining, operating, or removing the subject water and sewer lines. Trucks, tractors, and other maintenance and construction equipment of the Permittee or its agents shall not use the Parkway motor road for access to the work area or for hauling workers, supplies, and equipment; construction, operation, and maintenance of the subject water and sewer lines shall be accomplished in a manner not requiring the crossing of the Parkway motor road or interfering with traffic flow by equipment. (35) The Permittee agrees to do everything reasonably within its power, both independently and on request of the Superintendent, to prevent and suppress fires on and adjacent to the right-of--way permitted herein. (36) Any utilities previously located within this right-of--way which are damaged or disrupted during maintenance shall be repaired or restored by Permittee within four hours. RestorationlMitigation (37) Upon completion of construction, the Permittee shall restore any damages to Parkway property to the satisfaction of the Superintendent or his representative. Restoration shall consist of removing all non-native materials and scarifying all soils compacted by construction and amending the remaining native soils as needed to support the growth of vegetation to be planted in the right-of--way segment. (38) All restoration and mitigation activities shall be completed within fourteen days after construction or as agreed upon. (39) Reseeding shall follow Parkway Hand-Grading, Seeding, and Mulching guideline, attached hereto and made a part hereof, and shall meet an eighty percent survival rate guaranteed for two years. Any plant material not meeting this survival period shall be replaced at the expense of the Permittee. 10 -~/ COMPLIANCE Failure of the Permittee to comply with any provision of this right-of--way permit shall constitute grounds for immediate termination of this permit. WAIVER NOT CONTINUING The waiver of any breach of any provision of this right-of--way permit, whether such waiver be expressed or implied, shall not be construed to be a continuing waiver or a waiver of, or consent, to any subsequent or prior breach of the same or any other provision of this permit. 11 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Southeast Field Director, of the National Park Service, acting on behalf of the United States, in the exercise of his delegated authorit~ has caused this P mit of Right-of-Way to be executed this ~~ day of Southeast Field Director National Park Service United States Department of the Interior ACCEPTED THIS day of , 19 County of Roanoke (Name/Title) Attest (Namef Title) 12 I ?. i:~I~ll~ 1 \\ `~1 ACE - 1 - 92 ''~ :` \ 1 R~ PROPOSED S S.M.H. 1 ~ ,~ __ ~ i-.._- _ : - ~ pal - 22~ MAINTENANCE ~ II ~ .~" ~ - 2 EASEMENT ~ 't~ ~' Q r`_ ~ I ''"~ ~ - ~(,l~~ I - I Ex. 10' X 10' '"~ ~`Ov., .~ ~ UNDERPASS PROPOSED S. S.M.H. r~~ \~ ~ ~~ ~ PROPOSED 6" SANITARY PROPOSED EASEMENT ~ SEWER FORCE MAIN CENTERLINE --=~.,.-_ \ ( PROPOSED S. S.M.H. ..\ ~~ I ~,. ~~' PROPOSED 8" GRAVITY SEWER LINE I I ,'',,° PROPOSED 12" WATER ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~, PROPOSED S.S.M.H, ~.clion I--N, st 125.5, said xioles, P C.. rmm: 91-184). construction. - re cost side and _ --~ ~ line. UVo^ .. _ .. _.... .. .. _.. _. ._.__ _.. .. .. lruclion _ ~ ~~ ~ ... - .___ ..._ .. --~---'--~ Herne^t 22 leel ... - _.. -..._ - --- ~- ------ . On the west _ REVISION GATE -'- -- DESCRIPTION WORKING DRAWING operly of O S Corner DE SIGNED - MSW -~ FOR POSED UTILITIES n exiatfng roadbed. PRO ~oximot ely ,Ge dl DRAW" _ PM __ ... _. __... .. .- CROSSING THE lore nder the Ellue CHECKED - MSw BLUE F.IDGE PARKWAY n No. 251+70; ~wimolely 27.28 ~~ ~ ~~~-~ ~~-- ~-~~ -- CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT opproxtmotely ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA ice of Service land dt " l1MSDEN AS I P.C, SOCIATES scAt.E: 1" = so' coMM: 91-18a W. from NPS 1 Ilona Pork Service , LL r~ cc'~1. tt~~ ,N1'~NG[;~;$-Su~Z , L~ o ~~GYORS-PIr1NNBRS ---~---------"--- ----------.. roroximoteiy e TJl1AN(1KF. . V112CINIA PATE: 6/18/96 SHEET 1 of 1 ma=y D30 May 16, 1996 ~~AFT INSTRUCTIONAL MEMORANDUM 96-1 (RP&PS) To: Division Chiefs Chief, ETS District Rangers District Facility Managers District Resource Management Specialists Concession Specialist From: Superintendent, BLRI Subject: Developed Area Landscaping Guidelines I. Introduction Park development areas include lands on which non-historical park development and public uses have substantially altered the natural environment. Lands within developed areas are managed to provide and maintain facilities that serve the needs of park management and visitors. These facilities include concession development, campgrounds, picnic grounds, major administrative and maintenance facilities, aggregations of buildings and utilities, and service roads. Also included within this definition, for purposes of this memorandum, are lands buffering the motor road, including the motor road itself, parking overlooks, shoulders, bays, vistas, public road crossings, private road easements, and public and private utility crossings. The purpose of this memorandum is to establish guidelines by which landscaping should be conducted in areas where vegetation is lost and/or soils are exposed due to construction scars, vehicular use of road shoulders and other non-established pull-offs, adjacent land development, road widening or other right-of-way/utility corridor disturbance, deforestation from gypsy moth or other defoliating forest pests and diseases, or any other factor. This memorandum does not preclude involvement and direction by the Park Landscape Architect, Park Natural Resource Management Specialist, District Resource Management Specialist, and others involved in NEPA compliance as required by law. The primary goal of this memorandum is to establish and maintain sustainable natural resource practices within developed areas that protect from (1) accelerated erosion, (2) introduction of exotic plant species, (3) degradation of views and viewsheds, and (4) loss of aesthetic qualities of the park. As stewards of federal lands, we are required to adhere to high standards of protection, and the National Park Service should serve as both a leader and example for others to follow. II. Reforestation of Denuded Areas/Screening of Visually Impacted a In instances where construction scars, adjacent land development, or other projects require screening, consider the following: A. Those areas visitors can see from the motor road, overlooks, or other developed areas should have a planting plan developed and reviewed and approved by the Park - Landscape Architect. Planting should take place at the most appropriate time for successful establishment of the plants being introduced. In general, rehabilitation should include a mixture of shrub and tree species native to the area. Wherever practical, plants and soils affected by construction will be salvaged for use in site restoration. Showy species, such as dogwoods, fringe tree, redbuds, etc. should be considered for areas readily visible to visitors. In areas not visible to the public, species that enhance soil stabilization and revitalization of nutrients should be considered first. Look for plant materials on-site with a high survival rate that will provide screening (white pines, rhododendron) and whose removal will not adversely affect visual or environmental conditions of the site (including how to access the site and number of plants removed in each area}. Plant materials should be selected using the following hierarchy: ^ Plants in the same drainage and similar elevation (change in elevation of 100 feet) ^ Plants in adjacent drainage and similar elevation ^ Plants in same drainage and lower or higher elevation (greater than 100 feet) ^ Plants in adjacent drainage and lower or higher elevation If transplanting plant materials from on-site is not realistic, procure plants from a reputable nursery. Purchase native nursery stock whose seeds have been collected from the nearest area to the area to be restored. B. Trails, secondary dirt roads, and other areas that visitors do not normally access can be reforested through natural regeneration. If District Resource Management Specialist, Park Natural Resource Specialist, or Park Landscape Architect decide that a planting plan is desired, the steps outlined in Section II-A should be followed. 2 ~. III. Stabilization of Slopes For slopes less than 20 percent, begin with the procedures described in IV Establishment of Grass. For slopes greater than 20 percent, begin with the following procedures and include IV Establishment of Grass below. A. Install a mechanical device that stabilizes the soil...any blanket that is biodegradable, weed-seed free (enka matte, excelcior blanket, etc.) or any on-site materials, such as rocks, that will hold soil in place. Native-type materials should be considered first. Non-native type materials can be used when natives are not available (e.g., coconut matting). B. Revegetate soil with a fast growing, non-invasive grass(es), using the park's standard grass mixture listed in IV below, until native grasses and fortis can be researched and identified for the park. IV. Establishment of Grass A. Grading. Unnatural or disturbed grades will be brought back to the natural and existing grades. B. Fine Grading. Drag or harrow final surfaces to a smooth and even grade. Maintain unobstructed drainage. C. Bed Preparation. After final grades are achieved, remove all loose rocks, debris and clods. Spread fertilizer and limestone evenly and incorporate into the top 2-4 inches of loose soil. Rate per 1,000 square feet as follows: Limestone--Agricultural limestone containing a minimum of 85% calcium carbonate or equivalent, meeting the following graduations: 100% passing a 10-mesh sieve, 98% passing a 20-mesh sieve, 55% passing a 60-mesh sieve, and 40% passing a 100-mesh sieve. Rate per 1,000 square feet is 125 pounds. Fertilizer--Analysis 5-10-5 at 45 pounds per 1,000 square feet or 10-20-10 at 25 pounds per 1,000 square feet. 3 D. Seeding Mixture. Sow uniformly at the rate of between two (2) and three (3) pounds per 1,000 square feet on flat areas and up to four (4) pounds per 1,000 square feet on slopes with the following mix: March 1 to September 31 For Elevations Above 2,500 Feet Shoulders/Ditches Slopes Name of Seed Lbs/Acre Lbs/1000 Lbs/Acre Lbs/1000 Clover, white 6 1/8 6 1/8 Fescue, chewings 65 1-1/2 40 7/8 Fescue, K31 29 5/8 79 1-3/4 Red Top 11 1/4 -- -- For Elevations Below 2,500 Feet Shoulders/Ditches ~ Slopes Name of Seed Lbs/Acre Lbs/1000 Lbs/Acre Lbs/1000 Clover, white 6 1/8 6 1/8 Fescue,. chewings 29 5/8 79 1-3/4 Fescue, K31 65 1-1/2 40 7/8 Red Top 9 3/16 -- -- ~~A~g~ 4 For Elevations Above 2,500 Feet Shoulders/Ditches Slopes Name of Seed Lbs/Acre Lbs/1000 Lbs/Acre Lbs/1000 Clover, alsike 12 1/4 12 1/4 Fescue, chewings 65 1-1/2 40 7/8 Fescue, K31 29 5/8 79 1-3/4 Winter rye grain (Dec 1 -Feb 15) 44 1 44 1 For Elevations Below 2,500 Feet Name of Seed Shoulders/Ditches Slopes Lbs/Acre Lbs/1000 Lbs/Acre Lbs/1000 Clover, alsike 12 1/4 12 1/4 Fescue, chewings 29 5/8 79 1-3/4 Fescue, K31 65 1-1/2 40 7/8 Winter rye grain (Dec 1 -Feb 15) 44 1 44 1 Make two (2) applications at right angles to each other either by hand or mechanical spreader. Lightly roll immediately after sowing. Possible planting times for elevations above 2,500 feet are March 5 -May 15 (optimal March 20 -April 20) and July 15 through August 30 (optimal July 20 through August 15). Possible planting times for elevations below 2.500 feet are March 1 -May 10 (optimal March 1 -April 1) and July 25 -September 15 (optimal August 15 -September 1). E. Mulch. After rolling, uniformly apply 1-2 bales per 1,000 square feet of mulch (native materials of grain straw or equivalent cover of another suitable mulching material). 30- 40% bare ground should be visible after mulch is applied. Secure mulch in place by staking and tying. Netting is the preferred anchoring method on steep slopes. 5 F. Water. If easily accessible, water with mist spray soaking ground to a minimum depth of two (2) inches. Water should be clean, fresh, free from harmful substances. G. Maintenance. Mow sparingly the first year, preferably no more than once. Refertilize in the second year unless growth is fully adequate. Reseed, fertilize, and mulch damaged areas immediately. V. Responsibility These guidelines should be implemented for NPS, concession, and other land disturbing projects, such as utility crossings and road widenings. The District Resource Management Specialist shall review all projects for environmental compliance, including compliance with these instructions. Consult the District Resource Management Specialist or Park Landscape Architect for unusual situations. - ~~~ 6 ACTION NUMBER A-012897-5 ITEM NUMBER E-5 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: January 28, 1997 SUBJECT: Request to clarify action taken on January 14, 1997 approving request for funding to construct a counter at the Commissioner of Revenue/Treasurer's satellite office at Crossroads Mall. County Attorney Paul Mahoney advised the Board members of his concerns regarding the motion which was approved at the January 14, 1997 Board meeting on this item. He asked that a clarification be made for the record. Supervisor Nickens declared that the intent of his motion on January 14, 1997, was for the Commissioner of Revenue and County Treasurer to take the funds for the proposed counter at the Department of Motor Vehicles out of funds already appropriated by the Board. Chairman Johnson advised that the clarification is made with the unanimous consent of the Board members. ACTION VOTE Approved (x) Motion by: Harry C. Nickens No Yes Abs Denied ( ) as stated above Eddy ~ _ Received ( ) Harrison ~- Referred ( ) Johnson x _ To ( ) Minnix ~_ Nickens ~_ _ ;F... f. AT A REGIILAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SIIPERVISORS OF ROANORE COIINTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COIINTY ADMINI8TRATION CENTER ON TIIEBDAY, JANIIARY 28, 1997 RESOLIITION 012897-6 IN SIIPPORT OF THE ACQIIIBITION OF CONRAIL BY NORFOLK SOIITHERN CORPORATION WHEREAS, the Roanoke Valley is a "railroad town", serving as headquarters for the Norfolk and Western railroad (predecessor of Norfolk Southern Corporation), home to the Virginia Transportation Museum, devoted to rail history and rail-related exhibits, and the location of the Waste Line Express, a train of specially built cars transporting solid waste from a transfer station to a regional landfill; and WHEREAS, CSX and Norfolk Southern Corporation are currently competing to acquire the Conrail railroad system; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Surface Transportation Board regulations, Roanoke County has been asked to provide input regarding environmental issues related to increased train traffic in Roanoke County if Norfolk Southern is successful in its bid to acquire Conrail; and WHEREAS, according to the information provided by Burns and McDonnell, the consultant charged with preparing an Environmental Report for the proposed acquisition, the increased rail traffic would be on existing rail lines. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors does hereby express its support for the acquisition of Conrail by Norfolk Southern; and further BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors anticipates no 1 4 environmental issues or concerns arising from increased rail traffic in the existing corridor, and further BE IT RESOLVED, that copies of this resolution be forwarded immediately by the Clerk to the Board to Burns and McDonnell; David Goode, Chairman, President and CEO, Norfolk Southern Corporation; and to the City of Roanoke, City of Salem, and Town of Vinton. On motion of Supervisor Nickens to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. H ton, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Burns & McDonnell, 9400 Ward Parkway, Kansas City, MO 64114 David Goode, Norfolk Southern Corporation W. Robert Herbert, Roanoke City Manager Randolph M. Smith, Salem City Manager B. Clayton Goodman, III, Vinton Town Manager 2 RESOLUTION 1N SUPPORT OF THE ACQUISITION OF CONRAIL BY NORFOLK SOUTHERN CORPORATION WHEREAS, the Roanoke Valley is a "railroad town", serving as headquarters for the Norfolk and Western railroad (predecessor of Norfolk Southern Corporation), home to the Virginia Transportation Museum, devoted to rail history and rail-related exhibits, and the location of the Waste Line Express, a train of specially built cars transporting solid waste from a transfer station to a regional landfill; WHEREAS, CSX and Norfolk Southern Corporation are currently competing to acquire the Conrail railroad system; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Surface Transportation Board regulations, Roanoke County has been asked to provide input regarding environmental issues related to increased train traffic in Roanoke County if Norfolk Southern is successful in its bid to acquire Conrail; and WHEREAS, according to the information provided by Burns and McDonnell, the consultant charged with preparing an Environmental Report for the proposed acquisition, the increased rail traffic would be on existing rail lines. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors does hereby express its support for the acquisition of Conrail by Norfolk Southern; and further BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors anticipates no environmental issues or concerns arising from increased rail traffic in the existing corridor, and further BE IT RESOLVED, that a copy of this resolution be forwarded immediately by the Clerk to the Board to Burns and McDonnell. M E M O RAN D U M To: Board of Supervisors ~~/`~ ~~~ From: Elmer C. Hodge Date: January 23, 1997 Subject: Acquisition of Conrail by Norfolk Southern Attached is a request for information about the impact on Roanoke County of a merger of Conrail with Norfolk Southern. I believe that it is very important for us to support this, based on my conversations with Norfolk Southern personnel. There is great concern that if we do not, there may be a much less desirable merger which would reduce operations and staffing here in the Roanoke Valley. I am having staff prepare a resolution of support that can be added to the agenda on January 28 if you agree with my recommendation. If there are things that you would like to have us include in the resolution or if you have concerns about our support, please call me. ECH/meh Attachment cc - Mr. Paul M. Mahoney Ms. Anne Marie Green Ms. Brenda J. Holton Burns McDonnell January 14, 1997 Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator Roanoke County 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, VA 24018 Norfolk Southern Corporation Increased Train Traffic -Norfolk Southern's Proposed Acquisition of Conrail (Finance Docket 33286) Project No. 96-678-4 -Dear Mr. Hodge: Burns & McDonnell is preparing an Environmental Report for Norfolk Southern's proposed acquisition of Conrail. The purpose of this letter, pursuant to Surface Transportation Board regulations, is to request your agency's input regarding environmental issues related to increased train traffic in Roanoke County. We request your comments or concerns on these increases in traffic. In addition, any information you can provide relating to the following issues would be helpful: • ambient noise levels • existing transportation system • public health and safety • air emissions and ambient air quality • energy use A map of the areas where traffic increases are expected in Roanoke County is enclosed. Final traffic plans are still being made. If any additional traffic increases are proposed in Roanoke County we will submit a request for information on these projects as well. Again, please let us know of any issues your agency thinks should be addressed in our report. ~~"'~ - 9400 Ward Porlcway Kansas City, Missouri 64114 Tel: Bl6 333-9400 fax: 816 333-3690 http: //www. burnsmtd. com Mr. Hodge January 14, 1997 Page 2 Your comments are needed by January 31, 1997 to ensure inclusion in Norfolk Southern's submittal to the Surface Transportation Board. Your assistance is greatly appreciated. Due to the restricted schedule, we will contact you to make sure you received this letter and to get any initial information you may have. If a visit to your office would help expedite your response, we will make an appointment and come in to meet with you. If you have any questions about this project, please call me at (816) 333-9400. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, -~o~ Gabe Herngan~ez Agency Coordinator Enclosures ACTIVITIES PROPOSED IN VIRGINIA Traffic Increases: Segments: West Virginia state line (Rippon, WV/Berryville, VA) to Roanoke to Tennessee state line (Bristol) - [Norfolk Southern] Riverton to Manassas to Lynchburg to North Carolina state line (Danville) - [Norfolk Southern] Enclosed Map(s) as Highlighted below: 1 j Virginia staternap M: W SCRM\6784~ENGR~PEA~.STATES. WPD i i., i .. ~ ~ S r ~•~ ~ ~. Y~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ s 'grin ~' _~ .y~I -~ v Y •: M 1R ~~ ', F ~ , yl ! ~ ` } 7y ~~',: :.> _ .~ ~~'~c a ~~`~ , ;. A ~ . fir.! ~..~ f,; ' ~ r f '~~ J x-••-•,_.._ `~ ,~ ~y. t ~~ ~ i, ~ ~% .~ o '~,, •:; ~- ~ .~~ ~';Y • H.. ~, r` ,.,_ .,y` ~: '` ' i.Y~ ~ ~~ i `.,~., ; ~,; ,r..~ . ~' t "` •. ti ` a" ~i ~ i ! +4>' i, tit ~; ~ ~ f ~.«,~. ~ .may' ~ ' ;'~ ~ ~ ~ ' :, .t r ~ =~ ~'. -". ~ ~+,. ~: ~'~"" ~ ~' ~ 5,,. 't 't •'i :'`~ .. ~ ' S~' ~r' ;.• ~l ~' •'' ~ ~;,. 4'v. t /f_ Z/ N U U N ~ ~ ~ U U J ~> N C ~ O = (~ U U ~ L ^~ ~ U F- F- Q J Z ' • . ~ ~,~~ ~ S ~•. I ~` A 012897 -7 Item No. ~ '•"' AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER IN ROANOKE, VIRGINIA, ON TUESDAY, MEETING DATE: January 28,1997 AGENDA ITEM: Request for public hearings for Community Development Block Grant application on behalf of Total Action Against Poverty (TAP) for Microenterprise Grant COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS : ~.( ~~~~-,1~c~ ~ ~~ ~~~~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Total Action Against Poverty (TAP) is requesting that Roanoke County participate with Craig County to allow TAP to apply for $100,000 of Virginia Community Development Block Grant (VCDBG) funds to establish a microenterprise loan program. This program will train and assist low and moderate income individuals with starting a business, developing a business plan and applying for loans from local banks. Craig County will be the lead applicant for grant administration. Roanoke County will have to provide assurances that we will comply with applicable state/Federal law, have a drug-free workplace and allow for citizen participation through the public notification process. Two public hearings are required before the application deadline of March 28, 1997. Alternatives• 1. Support the microenterprise grant application by TAP and schedule two public hearings for the February 11 and 25, 1997 Board of Supervisors meetings. 2. Do not participate in TAP's microenterprise grant application. ~/ Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors support TAP's microenterprise grant application and schedule two public hearings for the February 11 and February 25, 1997 Board meetings. Respectfully submitted: .~--r--""_. l F , Vv Timothy W. Gu ala, Director Department of Economic Development Approved: ~~ Elmer C. Hodge ' County Administrator ------------- ----------------- ACTION ------------------------ ---------- VOTE Approved (x) Motion by: Bob L . Johnson to _ No Yes Abs Denied ( ) approve staff re commendation _ Eddy ~_ Received ( ) Harrison ~ Ref erred ( ) Johnson _~ To ( ) Minnix x Nickens _~ cc: File Timothy Gubala, Director, Economic Development Attachment 54©3454461 TAP 973 P02 JAN 17 '97 16:31 ~~~ MEMORANDUM January 17, 1997 TO: Localities working with TAP on CDBG 1/ticroenterprise Grant FROM: A,nzt Rogers, TAP, (540) 345-6781. Fax 345-4461 RE: {1) Facts on proposed program; (2) Genei-a1 facts on CDBG grant process; (3) Required activities for local governments; (4) Special requirements far regional application; (5) How your involvement now can affect fixture funding for microenterprises in your area Thank you far your interest in wonting with TAP on a CDBG Microenterprise Grant. The following is a list of facts and required activities for localities wishing to participate. hope that this helps you make your decision and that you will decide in favor of working with TAP in order to get microenterprises started in your area. Please call if you have questions (number above). (~) Facts on proposed program a. The proposed program. will be based on the existing program at TAP. b. The existing prograr~t at TAF is Galled Entrepreneur Training and Microenterprise Loan Program. Started in 1994, the program works to assist men and women to become se1£ suflScient through starting their own business or by obtaining employment paying a livable wage. c. The program serves low- to moderate-income individuals who have skills but lack business start-up knowledge and capital. The existing service area includes the cities and towns of Clifton Forge, Covington, Roanoke, Salem, and Vinton, and the counties of Alleghany, Botetourt, Craig, and Roanoke. d. J'articipants are given a l6-hour course in business basics. The Faculty Dean of the program is Dr. James Lang, Strickler Professor of Entrepreneurial Studies at Vixgibia Tech. Other volunteer faculty come from the business community bringing expertise in marketing, accounting, insurance, financing, and business law. e. Each participant is assigned a mentor from the business community to provide support throughout traizxing and business start-up Outcome evaluation is integral part o£program azxd ongoing since inception of program. 5403454461 TAP 973 P03 JAN 17 '97 16:32 ~i - / g. Participants are assisted in developing a business plan -- this is a cornerstone of the program. h. Income-qualified graduates are offered access to microenterprise loans- i. Program curriculum offers sections on life planning, case study, business licensing, self-assessment, sales techniques, needs assessment, field research, budgeting, public relations, accounting, insurance, and much more. Advisory Committee includes individuals from govemment, business, and service sectors. k. Loan funds from Local banks - Crestar, First Virgizua, First Union, NationsBank, azxd Signet. 1. Program achievements as of December, 1996: 28 business plans completed; 17 new businesses started; $ETP loans applied for; 4 ETP loazzs received. {2) Facts o~~ CDBG grant process a. T.AP is doing a regional grant application for Microenterprise Loan Capitalization. Nonentitlement units of local government are the only Legal recipients of CDBG funds and therefore must be the legal applicants. Local governments may contract with non-profit organizations to undertake project activities. TAP proposes to subcontract for all localsties. b. TAP will apply for $100,000 in loan money for two years. CDBG also allows us to apply for funding for a program administrator in the same grant application. That amount will be in addition to the $100,000. c. The laarzs to nnicroenterprises in your community will be far $25,000 ar less. A microenterprise is Considered to be a for-profit entity with five or fewer employees, one or more of whom own the business. The owners}, or S 1 % of employees, must be Low- to moderate-income. d. The application must be postmarked by S p.m. an March 28, 1997. e. Your locality can apply far its own CDBG money while simultaneously participating in this grant. Please call me for details. 54©3454461 TAP 973 PD4 JAN 17 '97 16:33 ,~ __. ~--~` " ~' (3) iZequired activities far local govexnna.ents a. Two public hearings are re fired. • Applicant communities must publicize hearing in (a) an advertisement in the non-legal section of alocally-circulated newspaper with the largest general circulation; and (b) at least one of the following: -locally-received radio and/or television stations --flyers distributed in LM! areas and in proposed service areas} -announcements at local community organization meetings --announcements through local churches and community centers in LMl and in proposed project area{s) • Publicity described above :must occur at least 7 days prior to the date of each hearing. • Applicant must keep documentation in their CDBG odes of how they met the above requirements for publicity. The newspaper ads must be documented with actual newspaper clippings of your ad, not a xerox copy of your ad. • The Grst public hearing should request public comment on: -- general local community development and housing needs, and --the locality's use of CDBG funds in the past five years, if applicable. The locality only has to conduct the first hearing once withni asix-month period of March 28, 1997, even if undertakizag more than one CDBG project. • The second public hearing should request public comment on: --the proposed CDBG application --the locality's use of CDBG funds in the past five years, if applicable (same as above) • bearings must be conducted, at a minimum, one week apart. • The public hearing notices must provide address, phone number, and times for submitting; complaints and grievances to the applicant locality. TAP will forward pre-printed forms for localities to use for public hearing notices. • Localities must provide timely written answers to written complaints and grievances ~~ related to CDBG programs within 15 working days where practicable. • Where 5% or more of public hearing participants can be reasor-ably expected to be non-English speaking residents, localities must take measures to accommodate their needs. Census data on the proposed project area and on the locality as a whole should be consulted to determine if this provision applies in a particular instance. • Both hearings must take place within sia~-months prior to the application deadline of March 2~, 1997. b. Assurances must be com l~et,~~ by al localities statizta th~Y will comply with: • all appropriate federal and state Iaw * drug-free workplace requirements • citizen participation requirements (dates of public hearings filled in) TAP will fon~vard pre-printed forms for localities to use for assurances. 5403454461 TAP 973 PEAS JAN 17 '97 16:33 4 ,/'~ ~~-1 e. Resolution is required containing: • Locality's name and statement that it wishes to apply • Project Title (try to include location) • Amounts of requested CDBG funds and amount and sources of any other funds which axe part of the project • The projected number of LMI persons who will benefit from the project (figure at about $1.0,000 to $25,000 per loan) • Authorization for chief adminstrative officer to sign and submit all necessary information for CDBG proposal • Certification that participation requirements have been met TAI' will forward pre-printed forms for localities to use far assurances. (4) Special requirements for regional application a. One applicant is designated the lead applicant. The lead applicant and all other applicants must sign an interjurisdictional agreement. TAP will forward a pre- printed form for use as the interjurisdictional agreement. b. The lead applicant must: --sign one more authorizing resolution --serve as apass-through for program funds -- receive TAP's request far loazt znon.ey and forward to DHCD --receive TAP's request for salary support (administrative money that will be written into the grant) and forward to DHCD --keep records of above transactions for audit c. TAP will contact lead applicant. (5) How your involvement can affect future funding for _ microenterprises in your area By accessing this CDBG microenterprise loan grant, TAP will be strengthening a graztt application with the U.S. Small Business Administration for additional microenterprise loan funds to be submitted this summer. Your support now will help us obtain SBA funding, which will mean more start-up funds for small businesses in your community. ACTION N0. ITEM N0. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: January 28, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Requests for Public Hearing and First Reading for Rezoning Ordinances Consent Agenda COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: The first reading on these ordinances is accomplished by adoption of these ordinances in the manner of consent agenda items. The adoption of these items does not imply approval of the substantive content of the requested zoning actions, rather approval satisfies the procedural requirements of the County Charter and schedules the required public hearing and second reading of these ordinances. The second reading and public hearing on these ordinances is scheduled for February 25, 1997. The titles of these ordinances are as follows: 1) An ordinance to rezone 11.05 acres from R-1 to R-3 to construct residential condominiums, located south side of Electric Road between McVitty Road (SR 1662) and Electric Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Radford & Company. MAPS ARE ATTACHED; MORE DETAILED INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends as follows: (1) That the Board approve and adopt the first reading of these rezoning ordinances for the purpose of scheduling the second reading and public hearing for February 25. 1997. (2) That this section of the agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth as Item 1, inclusive, and that the Clerk is authorized and directed where required by law to set forth upon any of said items the separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant to this action. Respectfully submitted, ~ r ~~ ~ Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney N-~ Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Action Motion by Eddy Harrison Johnson Minnix Nickens Yes Abs '~ COUNTY OF ROaNOKF DEPT. OF PLANNING AND ZONING 5204 3ernard Or.• P,O. Box 29800 ~ . Roanoke. VA 24018 ( 540' 772-2068 FAX (540) 772-2108 For staff use on/y -~ dace t9e~1~Y~~~ ~ received bY: /i.,.. - ~~r r~ Pc~aza ~ ylacards issuod: SOS d~te• Case NumDar: . ? ;;~;. .;: ::;:, :::. ii lilt: =E~ .,.: •:~:..::~i Eiei t: •r. .•t!. Vii': %: -tilt. .l. i•. •1 F '~1::::~~'•:::: : : ~:.: :~1~: ~'~ • ~~: I : : : ~ t:: ~ fir ::=ti • : : : : r • ; . . . .I.. l : : : : : t : : : •: • : : : . I : •:\•: Check type of application filed (check all that apply): ;~' • ® REZONING ^ SPECIAL USE OVARIANCi: Applicant's name: Radford ~ Company Phone: 343-5000 Address: 2740 Franklin Road Zip Code: Roanoke, VA 24014 Owner's name: Lloyd G. and Lee W. Lazarus Phone: Address: 3124 McVitty Road Z;p Code: Roanoke, VA 24014 Location of property: te 419 and Ro Tax Map Number: 76.16-2, 3 , 4 , 5 u McVitty Road Magisterial District: Windsor Hills Community Planning Area: Windsor Hillis Size of parcel (s): Existing Zoning: R-1 11.05 acres Existing Land Use: Residential and vacant sq.ft. :..: ::t:: . @~ ::.: :., : - :-,:: ::~:- :i:: :i:~ ':i:: :~i: .; :~3E= :tl;s•: C~: ::iii ::~ :•. „~ :?i:; ~::::;;;:::~ ': i:;i::i::::~;•:.~.;.1 t:t;r~~ :.o-: =rte: :•_r:rl;•-:.: •: 1•' : f ~::: ~:.:....: ~' Proposed Zoning: R_3 Fir scary uS~ o~. Proposed Land Use: Residential condominium use Type: Does the parcel_meei the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? YES Y NO lF N0, A VAnl:,NCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for -he requested Use Type? YES X NO IF N0, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this requestl YES X NO .r. :::;i;:: ..t::~:::~:~ Variance of Section(s) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in order .o: v/A Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WILL NOT 3E ACCT?TcD IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. as v rcn v ivs v X Consultation Y 8 1 !2" x 1 1" concept plan Application fee X Application Metes and bcunds description Proffers, if aapliCable ,~__ - Jusrificarion '~ Water and sewer application Adjoin{gig property Owners i l hereby certify that I am either the owner of the properry or the owner's agent ar conrracr purchaser and am acting .virn the knowledge and consent,of me owner. RADFORD & C MPA~'tY Owner's Si nature: ;~ g ~1/ ~- , 11V ~ l V vv ~ vv i. for SraA' Use Un/y: Caso N~mbcr }I-I Applicant Radford & Company ' The Planning Commission will study rezoning and special use permit requests to determine the need and justification for the change in terms of public health, safety, and general welfare. Please answer the follo•+ving questions as thoroughly as possible. Use additional space if necessary. Please explain how the request furthers the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance (Section 30-3) as well as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning district•classification in the zoning ordinance. The proposed residential/condominium development would utilize a parcel of land located on Route 419 adjacent to a middle/high density residential development (Winterberry Pointe) and directly across 419 from a high quality office development (Colonade Corporate Center). Access would be provided on a major street (419). The development will be compatible with the residential development located generally to the southeast of the property and will be an excellent transition between the 419 development and the residential properties. ?lease explain how the projoct conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan. The property will conform to the general guidelines and policies contained in the comprehensive plan in that it will utilize for medium density residential development a parcel of land located on a major arterial highway and provide a transition from the general commercial uses located on Route 419 to the residential areas off of 419. The access for the condominium development will be provided off of Route 419 and, therefore, there will be no negative traffic impacts on residential subdivision streets. The utilities are available to provide for this development. The 419 development plan designates the property as Transition. The plan further provides for mid-high density residential develoment on the subject property. ?tease describe the impact(s) of the request on t: ,e property itself, the adjoining properies, and the surrounding area, as well as the impacts on public services and facilities, including water/sewer, roads, schools, . parks/recreation, and fire/rescue. The development will have no negative impact on the surrounding properties. The publi services and facilities are available. In a condominium development of this nature, there will be very few, if any, school children so the impact 'on the schools will be minimal while providing an excellent tax base for the country. I '1 ~r D~~E~OPNLE~T A.PPLXC~.~'XON ''.~-.'- ` t. . ~ ~ r 1 ~^ ~ ~0~~~~E APPLZCA`~T INFORMA'I'IOI`I ~ x~' ..4.., :~..,.~...,~ al l7 Basic ^ Comprehensive D:>,TE: December' 20, 1996 ^ Subdivision ^ Preliminary File No. (Staff Use Only) , APPLICANT: Radford & Company ,,,DDS: 2740 Franklin Road PHONE: 343-5000 Fes: 343-5135 Roanoke, VA 24014 OMlER: Same as above ADDRrSS: °I-LONE: FAX: EyGINEcR Lumsden & Associates, P.C. ,~p~S; P.O. Box 20669 PHONE: 774-4411 FAX: 772-9445 Roanoke, VA 24018 • S1~ ~F'~IZ1~1~.~~N - - -- PROPERTYADDRESS: Soutiz-Side of Route 419, 750; East of McVitty Road DEVF,LOPMElYINAME: McVitty l:orest PROPOSED USE: DEVELOPED AREA: GRADPD AREA: _ TAX l~L4P ~: 76.16-02-02 to OS ~~ 11.05 TOTAL W, ITS: _ ACREAGE RFSZr _ D s .RV7 _ .: Windsor Hills iNAGISTERIA L DISTRICT: 90 N/A TOTAI. LOTS: n'ATER FACIIrITIES: (COUNTY X- CITY - TOWN OF VINTON - PRIVATE - WELL) SEWER FACILITIES: (CO Wi 1'Y R - CITY - TONY;'{ OF VIi tTON - SEPTIC SYSTE~~ DESCRIPTION OF WORK: CONSTRUCTION OF S THREE STORY. BUILDINGS CONTAINING 18 CONDOMINIUM UNITS EACH. IS BUIY,DNG TO EE SPRL`fFQ.ERED? No FLUw REQUIRcD: N/~' G.?.yi. . BUTY.DL`~Gliti~'ORMATZOr (YEW CONSTRliC"FION A1~tD RENOVATION 3UII,DING ARE?:: OCCUP?.:tiCY LOAD: CONSTRliCTION "TYPE: BUCA USc GROUP: Thc apptir.:ntrequests review and approval of a devtlopmclt pLa r~uird by Zoning Ordinance. The nlazs conion with applicable sections of the Zonin; Urdirsttce. it is understood chat submission of Inaccurate or incomplc:c infor:rar:on mzy delay final a~oroval of the comprhensivc development pla,cs. I do F.c:cby certiry *.hat ! Cully understand thcprovisions of the ='-onion :.r:d Sedinaat Cone:ol Ccdinznce and program, and ;he abo~•e•rete:rnc:d project as approved. 1 Curthcr meant the rigit[-of entry to this projc ~ zs descrbed above, to the desivntt:d ptrsorne! Cor the p Yose of ins;.ecir.g znd monitoring Cor compliance with the aforesaid Grdinancc RA~. FORD &~OMPAt ~ ~ ~ ~~ SIGNATURE OF MOTE: ~ ` All BOLD sections oC!his application must be ,llcd oc:t _:.d tax map 2etaeted prior to issuance of Warr: and newt; availabiiir. PROFFERS TO TAE ZONING APPLICATION OF r)~j RADFORD & COMPANY I/'~' ! 1. That the property will be developed in substantial conformity with the concept plan for McVitty Forest prepared by Lumsden Associates under date of December 19, 1996. 2. That access to the condominium development will be from Route 419. 3. That the condominium development will be limited to ninety (90) units. RADFORD & COMPANY By Frank R. Radford Lloyd J. Lazarus Lee W. Lazarus ,, ` w _, :_, ~J' 1~ a ~~~ ~ s I~I~~K ~_~~,~~ ~i ~~ 9 ~ ~4~~! ~ aJ ~~ ` i ~ ~ 1 !z p ~ t1 Ft9t ~• 1~ ~ ~ ii bif q i~lspp• ~ i ~€! s9 ~y~y~ ~ ~ ~ 1j! ~ ss { j~ a~ ~~~~ t ~ ~l ( 3 ~ ' 66 ~ . .. . ~. -~ .. _ / T _ AO ~~ Y)J -~ ~\ 21 •1 la• .~.i l! ~• ~ ~\ ' ~ ~ ~ni. ~ viii ` ~~ •• '. •u.. - Y~ •Y-~ •=I -~ ~' ' / _ ~ i -0 ~ l • •:\ :Q~ . c. ~~~ - ~•• ., _- ~ . - ~ .~,~ ~ ~_ 1. ~ / ~ ~ Rimed! / ~ l ~- _ .p ~,\ ~s ~ ~~ O .v... .~P_FO,R,~~~11F0?., ~~~D` ~~~ ~. . PROPOSED RADFORD & COMPANY REZONING ~~ ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS n G c ~ r G CLERK' S OFFICE TO: Gary Robertson, Director, Utility FROM: Brenda J. Holton, Deputy Clerk ~~'" DATE: March 3, 1997 SUBJECT: ORDINANCE 012897-9 AUTHORIZING THE CREATION OF AND FINANCING FOR A LOCAL PUBLIC WORKS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, EANES ROAD SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION I was recently informed that another property owner gave notice to join the Eanes project on January 28, 1997. The ordinance which was approved at the January 28, 1997 Board meeting included approval for any property owner who elected to participate as of January 28, 1997. I have revised the ordinance and am attaching a copy for your file which reflects the new project cost of $36,000 and citizen participation at $4,500 each for a total of $18,000. The map of the service area has also been revised and is now dated January 28, 1997. If you have any questions, please call me. bjh Attachment cc: File Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JANUARY 28, 1997 ORDINANCE 012897-8 AUTHORIZING THE CREATION OF AND FINANCING FOR A LOCAL PUBLIC WORR8 IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, EANES ROAD SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION 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 sewer system to the Eanes Road community; and WHEREAS, the extension of the public sewer system and the creation of a special utility (sewer) 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 sanitary sewer system over ten years in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance 112288-7; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this Ordinance was held on January 14, 1997, and the second reading was held January 28, 1997. 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 sanitary sewer extension for a portion of the Eanes Road community. The total construction cost of this 1 public sewer project is estimated to be $36,000.00, to be initially financed as follows: Roanoke City $ 4,000 Citizen Participation (4 x $4,500) $18,000 Advance from Public Works Participation Fund $14,000 That there is hereby appropriated for this project the sum of $14,000 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 Sewer Fund. 2. That the "Project Service Area" is shown and designated on the attached plat entitled "Eanes Road Sanitary Sewer Project" prepared by the Roanoke County Utility Department, dated January 28, 1997, and identified as Exhibit 1. The Eanes Road Sanitary Sewer 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 sanitary sewer extension to this service area by paying the sum of $4,500 toward construction costs plus the off-site facility fees applicable at the time of connection, said costs to be paid in full and in advance of connection to the public sanitary sewer 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 28, 1997, of their portion of the cost of extending the public sanitary sewer system to their properties in accordance with the following terms and conditions: 2 (a) Payment of $4,500 per property owner/residential connection (of which $1,500 is the off-site facility fee based on a 5/8 inch water meter) 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 two 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 Sewer 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. 5. That the County Administrator is authorized to take such actions and execute such documents as may be necessary to 3 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 Nickens to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. lton, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Gary Robertson, Director, Utility Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance 4 ACTION # ITEM NUMBERS AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: January 28, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Second Reading of Ordinance Authorizing the Creation of and Financing for a Local Public Works Improvement Project, Eanes Road Sanitary Sewer Extension COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: /~ BACKGROUND: The section of Eanes Road between the Roanoke City boundary line and Bandy Road is an established residential area. Presently, this area uses septic systems for handling sanitary sewer wastes. A minimum sewer line extension of 400 feet would be required to connect the closest property (Mr. Bobby Pillow) to public sewer. Several properties have septic systems that have failed or are failing and have contacted the Utility Department for assistance. The Health Department has documented that some properties along Eanes Road have inadequate or failing septic systems and suspect that other properties have septic system problems that have not been identified. The first reading was held on January 14, 1997. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Roanoke County Utility Department received a petition from the majority of the property owners in this area requesting public water and sewer service for this area (See Attachment "A"). A public meeting was held on November 20, 1996 where a proposed public sanitary sewer main extension project was presented. The proposed sanitary sewer project cost per property owner was $4,500. If the project is constructed, it could serve 11 existing single family residences. It was determined at this meeting that the majority of property owners would not support or fund a sanitary sewer extension to serve this area at this time. However, two of the property owners have failed septic systems that cannot be repaired and limit ~ t the use of these properties. One of these property owners has not been able to remain at his home on a continual basis since October 1996. These two property owners aze interested in participating in a sanitary sewer extension to serve their properties. Staff has reviewed this request and feels that sanitary sewer should be installed in this azea for the following reasons: eliminates a potential health hazard from failing septic systems; allows property owners unlimited use of property with regazd to sewerage; eliminates Health Department restrictions and concerns about existing septic systems. The cost estimate for this project with two participants is approximately $28,000. Should all 11 property owners participate, additional laterals would be necessary and construction costs would increase to $41,250. Staff has received pledges from two property owners and the City of Roanoke has agreed to fund 50% of the project cost to the last City residence. Their participation is estimated to be $4,000. Should all 11 property owners participate, construction costs would increase to $41,250. Cost Participation: Roanoke City $ 4,000 Mr. Bobby Pillow, 1601 Eanes Road $ 5,000 Mr. Thomas Jordan, 1631 Eanes Road 5 00 $14,000 These costs are based on a 50% shaze of the estimated construction fee. This chazge also includes the $1,500 off-site facility fee based on a 5/8 inch water meter. Should a property owner choose not to participate at this time, they would pay a $4,500 surchazge toward construction costs plus the off-site facility fees applicable at the time of connection. During the proposed ten-yeaz period, the surchazge for each additional connection would be used to reimburse the County's portion of the construction cost. With the City of Roanoke's participation, the two property owners shaze has been reduced from $7,000 each to $5,000 each. This will eliminate the need to offer reimbursement contracts to Mr. Pillow and Mr. Jordan. If approved, it is suggested that this fee structure remain in effect for ten yeazs. The fee structure would be applicable to all properties within the Eanes Road Sewer Service Area as indicated on Attachment "A." Staff has contacted the remaining nine property owners again to inform them that in order to obtain the connection chazge of $4,500 they must agree to participate prior to January 28, 1997. FISCAL IMPACT: Funding for this project would come from the following sources: Property Owner Participation $14,000 Public Works Participation Fund 14 0 0 $28,000 y ~-.. Alternatives: Alternative 1. Participate in public/private partnership allowing Roanoke County to share in 50% of the construction costs. Roanoke County will recover its investment as the remaining nine property owners connect in the future. Alternative 2. Do not participate in the project and require the property owners to pay all construction costs. The property owners could then be given a reimbursement contract that would allow them to recover part of their costs as other property owners in the service area connected. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors adopt the Ordinance after the second reading to approve Alternative 1. Although only 2 of the 11 property owners are participating at this time, those 2 have severe hardships and are in need of remedy if they are to continue to utilize their properties. Staff feels this project is feasible because of the close proximity of the existing sewer and the fact that the 2 property owners are initially expending more than their share of construction costs ($5,000 as opposed to $4,500). The approval of this project will allow sanitary sewer to be installed along this area at a reasonable cost to property owners. SUBMITTED BY: ~Q.Ih~ Gary bertson, P.E. Utility Director APPROVED: ~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator Approved () Motion by: Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to ACTION VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy Harrison _ _ Johnson _ _ _ Minnix _ _ _ Nickens ~N w o ~~ m o0 >- ~' ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ w w w 0 3571 ~ w ~v z w _.___ __~ ~- Q t ~~ i 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ o i o ~ ~ f o t `~ ____- ~, i ~ i z o_ i :~ ~ (n Z c9 f ~ ~ ~ t ~J ~o ~ -- ~ W N i ~ N I ~ J Lo ~ cn ~- ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ -- - ~ 1 ~ o ~ ~ ~ - I ~ 0 _ ~ `"--- ~ CV ~- ~ f i N Ln ~ ~~ ~n ~- w w ~) ~ ~ Z~~ ~- O (n J X ~ W Ll - -- -_ ` ~ W O _ ,~I ~ ~- ~r~n ~-, Z` .. W `~WCS~ '~' U~ H s Z J,,, ~, W ~ --~ s ~ N ~ ~~~ W ~~ ~~ o ~ ~ `~ Q ~ 0 _-- ~ W W w \\ _z_ \\ ~ \ w ~ a \ b~ ~ . ~ ~~ \ ~ i' i \ ~. i ~' i' ,~,,,/' ~ .~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ on,d ~~~°~ ~~o d L o~ ------=__ o~ y w ~ ~ ~ ~ w ~~- ~ ~6. ~ ~ w "u ~ o x w ~,; w ~>~ v~ a ~ ~ ~ o w ~ ~ w ~ ~- c, w 0 i ~ ~o • s r~ cS~ N ~__-_ ----- r ~o ^ ^ .~.-~. - . _. _ r~ co r 0 Q S~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JANUARY 28, 1997 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CREATION OF AND FINANCING FOR A LOCAL PUBLIC WORKS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, EANES ROAD SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION 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 sewer system to the Eanes Road community; and WHEREAS, the extension of the public sewer system and the creation of a special utility (sewer) 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 sanitary sewer system over ten years in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance 112288-7; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this Ordinance was held on January 14, 1997, and the second reading was held January 28, 1997. 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 sanitary sewer extension for a portion of the Eanes Road community. The total construction cost of this 1 ~"'° public sewer project is estimated to be $28,000.00, to be initially financed as follows: Citizen Participation (2 x $7,000) $14,000 Advance from Public Works Participation Fund $14,000 That there is hereby appropriated for this project the sum of $14,000 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 Sewer Fund. 2. That the "Project Service Area" is shown and designated on the attached plat entitled "Eanes Road Sanitary Sewer Project" prepared by the Roanoke County Utility Department, dated January 14, 1997, and identified as Exhibit 1. The Eanes Road Sanitary Sewer 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 sanitary sewer extension to this service area by paying the sum of $4,500 toward construction costs plus the off-site facility fees applicable at the time of connection, said costs to be paid in full and in advance of connection to the public sanitary sewer 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 28, 1997, of their portion of the cost of extending the public sanitary sewer system to their properties in accordance with the following terms and conditions: 2 ~"' (a) Payment of $7,000 per property owner/residential connection (of which $1,500 is the off-site facility fee based on a 5/8 inch water meter) 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. (d) Once the County's actual construction costs are recovered, reimbursement to property owners who elect to participate on or before January 28, 1997, shall be made from any future additional connections. In no event shall reimbursement exceed $2,500 per property owner. 4. That the payment by citizens in the project service area, in excess of the two 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 Sewer Fund, and 3 .. i . ~~~ .~-- i payment of the construction costs shall be returned to the Public Works Participation Fund until such time as the advance has been repaid. 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\UTILTCY\EANES.RD 4 3-t AT A REGIILAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SIIPERVISORS OF ROANORE COIINTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TIIESDAY, JANIIARY 28, 1997 ORDINANCE 012897-8 AIITHORIZING THE CREATION OF AND FINANCING FOR A LOCAL PIIHLIC WORRS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, EANEB ROAD SANITARY SEWER EBTENSION 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 sewer system to the Eanes Road community; and WHEREAS, the extension of the public sewer system and the creation of a special utility (sewer) 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 sanitary sewer system over ten years in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance 112288-7; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this Ordinance was held on January 14, 1997, and the second reading was held January 28, 1997. 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 sanitary sewer extension for a portion of the Eanes Road community. The total construction cost of this 1 public sewer project is estimated to be $28,000.00, to be initially financed as follows: Roanoke City $ 4,000 Citizen Participation (2 x $5,000) $10,000 Advance from Public Works Participation Fund $14,000 That there is hereby appropriated for this project the sum of $14,000 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 Sewer Fund. 2. That the "Project Service Area" is shown and designated on the attached plat entitled "Eanes Road Sanitary Sewer Project" prepared by the Roanoke County Utility Department, dated January 14, 1997, and identified as Exhibit 1. The Eanes Road Sanitary Sewer 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 sanitary sewer extension to this service area by paying the sum of $4,500 toward construction costs plus the off-site facility fees applicable at the time of connection, said costs to be paid in full and in advance of connection to the public sanitary sewer 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 28, 1997, of their portion of the cost of extending the public sanitary sewer system to their properties in accordance with the following terms and conditions: 2 (a) Payment of $5,000 per property owner/residential connection (of which $1,500 is the off-site facility fee based on a 5/8 inch water meter) 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 two 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 Sewer 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. 5. That the County Administrator is authorized to take such actions and execute such documents as may be necessary to 3 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 Nickens to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: cc: Brenda J. H ton, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors File Gary Robertson, Director, Utility Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance 4 3571 J w W O -' .~ m ° i ~ w z ~ o ~ a w w 3 w w r- cn w z J w -- r r- O ~ ! - O ` ~ r ~- 1 o - r ~ .--- o o ~ ¢ i r ~ z-- I z O_ i ~ ~ ~ z c.0 1 r- ~ ~ N ~ 1 CQ ~--- ~ W ~ Cif f ~ Cv W ~ ~ ~ ~ cD ~ W ~ ~ -- ~ ~-- ~ ~ 1 ~ o ~ t o- f d- ~ 0 1 - _ ~, ~~ * i ~ r~ ~ ~ w ~ ~~ ~ w ~- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' Q-i cL ~ ~ W ~ Q n 0 ~ a.+ W Q_ rn ~ w ~ z °- ~ z w Q 0 / ~ c-- r rr7 c9 - - --- ~ N __.______ _-- r ~~ ~ ~ ~ r ~_ r~ -- . c~ r 0 w ~,~ ~ ~ W ~ U) [~ C7 Z ~ I- O U7 J X -1 W ~ J E-~ U ~-' ~ _ O ~- # a -~-~QUn W ~ T ~w~ ~ '~ 8 H ~ ~ r} i s •--~ ~ F-+ ~-' '-' t~ ~ U S ~ L ~ Z ~ ~ ~ 8 ~~y w 8 ~ - W W w ~ z J W ~-- Q O\ ~ ~. dJ ~ ~' i' ~.i ~. i i' r' i' i' r' .r ..+ . ,/ ~ ' ~ co ~ cfl n ~ -_______ ~lrvnn~ ~~Q 0 Y ,A- AT A REGIILAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SIIPERVISORS OF ROANORE COIINTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COIINTY ADMINIBTRATION CENTER ON TIIESDAY, JANOARY 28, 1997 ORDINANCE 012897-9 AIITHORIZING CONVEYANCE OF AN EABEMENT TO BELL ATLANTIC - VIRGINIA, INC. FOR ALLOWING THE INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF A 6' 8 9' ABOVE-GROIIND CABINET ACROSS PROPERTY OWNED BY THE BOARD OF SIIPERVISORS WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County is the owner of property designated as a booster station lot in Hunting Hills, Tax Map No. 87.07-1-13, in the Cave Spring Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, Bell Atlantic - Virginia, Inc. requires a right-of- way for installation and maintenance of a 6' x 9' above-ground cabinet as shown on the attached map; and WHEREAS, the proposed easement will serve the interests of the public and is necessary for the public health, safety, and welfare of citizens of the County of Roanoke. NOW, 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 January 14, 1997; and a second reading was held on January 28, 1997; and 2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Roanoke County Charter, the interests in real estate to be conveyed are hereby declared to be surplus, and are hereby made available for other public uses by conveyance to Bell Atlantic - Virginia, 1 Inc. for the provision of telephone service; and 3. That donation of a easement for the installation and maintenance of a 6' x 9' above-ground cabinet across County property, as shown on the attached map, is hereby authorized; and 4. That the offer of Bell Atlantic - Virginia, Inc.'s to purchase the easement for One Dollar ($1.00) is hereby accepted and the proceeds from the sale of the easement are to be allocated to the capital reserves of Roanoke County; and 5. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such further actions as may be necessary to accomplish this conveyance, all of which shall be approved as to form by the County Attorney; and 6. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption. On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. H ton, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Gary Robertson, Director, Utility Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney 2 RE1~A~NiNB MlQPE'R?Y Of OLO H~R1TA+t~ CORK S S~' 12' 1K S~.tO- . ~~ - ~ ~ - ~ :~ ~ - ~ tQ . T - I" Z 3 ~ - ~ ~ > ~ ~ w _ _ r, uc ~* . v1 c- r ~, r _ 3 ~ o _ ~ _ cE ~ „,.g= ~- z - V ~ QQVU i . Q ~ _ O Z - ~ ' . ~ ~~ _ Q _ ~ j-}' _ .~ _ • ~ ~~ ~~ \2~ c -. .~W ~,2-`E • ~ ~ ~ Rfl~11i+UN6 PROPERT7 Of • ~ .~~o~-' OlD HERITAGE CORP. ~~N 3 q=- . ~~ ~ ~c d ,~.~,"°~ • ~Jq ~ aV=~~ _ CCCl1 '~ ~~ G .. • ~z • . r. ~. 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: January 28, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Second Reading of Ordinance to Grant Bell Atlantic an Easement on Property Owned by Roanoke County COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~ ~~ .~/ ' BACKGROUND: The County of Roanoke owns a .052 acre lot fronting on Hunting Hills Drive. The property is presently used as a water pumping station that provides water to the citizens of the Hunting Hills subdivision. The first reading was held on January 14, 1996. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Bell Atlantic approached the Utility Department staff (see attached letter) in December 1996 about the possibility of obtaining an easement from Roanoke County. The purpose of this easement would be to allow for the installation and maintenance of a 6' X 9' above ground cabinet. Bell Atlantic has agreed to install the cabinet at the rear of the booster station and they agree not to remove any existing shrubbery in the installation or maintenance of the site. They also agree to screen the cabinet as needed. Staff has met with a representative of the Hunting Hills Homeowners Association and they have not expressed a concern with the proposed location. FISCAL IMPACT: ~- a This easement will have no fiscal impact on Roanoke County. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors adopt the Ordinance after the second reading that the easement be granted to Bell Atlantic. SUBMITTED BY: Gary Robe son, P.E. Utility Director APPROVED: ~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ACTION VOTE Approved () Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied () Eddy _ _ Received () Harrison _ _ Referred Johnson _ _ _ to Minnix _ _ Nickens ®Bell Atlantic Bell Atlantic -Virginia, Inc. 4843 Oakland Boulevard, ~.E. Roanoke, Virginia 24012 December 10, 1996 Mr. Scott Agner Water Operation Manager County of Roanoke 1206 Kessler Mill Road Salem, Virginia 24153 Dear Mr. Agner: ~~ The letter is request an easement to place a 6' X 9' above ground cabinet on Roanoke County property adjacent to Hunting Hills Drive. Bell Atlantic Telephone Company is in the process of upgrading our telephone equipment serving this area. This cabinet will allow us to provide the latest fiber optic technology to the residents. The installation of the cabinet would be at the rear of the booster station in the easement area shown on the attached right-of--way form. As part of the agreement, Bell Atlantic Telephone Company agrees not to remove any existing shrubbery in the installation or maintenance of the site. If acceptable, I have enclosed a copy of our standard right-of--way form that requires the appropriate signature. Please contact me or Mike Slusher on 540-265-7578 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Dan H. Shelton Engineer THIS INSTRUMENT PREPARED BY BELL ATLANTIC-VA., 4843 OAKLAND BLVD., ROANOKE, VA. 24012 FORM #2 BURIED CABLE This Deed of Easement, made this day of ATLANTIC-VIRGINIA, INC. hereinafter called "GRANTEE" and successors or assigns hereinafter called "GRANTOR" . J'e~"`. 19 _, between BELL WITNESSETH Received of the BELL ATLANTIC-VIRGIlVIA, one dollar ($1.00) in consideration of which the undersigned hereby grant and convey unto said Company, its successors, assigns, lessees and agents, a right of way and easement to construct, operate, maintain, replace and remove a communication system consisting of such buried cables, buried wires, posts, terminals, location markers and other appurtenances, as the grantees may from time to time require, upon, under, across, and over the land which the undersigned own or in which the undersigned have any interest; said land being located in the District of Cave Sprin~_, County of Roanoke and State of Vuginia, and upon, under, along and over the roads, streets and highways adjoining the said land, together with the following rights: Of ingress and egress over, under and across the lands of the undersigned to and from said systems for the purpose of exercising the rights herein granted; to open and close fences, cut down and keep cut down all trees and undergrowth within 0 feet of said system: and to permit the attachment of and to carry in said system the wires, cables, circuits and appurtenances of any other Company; including all electric wires. Said easement being located and described on said land as follows: As shown on the attached plat and subject to the condition that no existing shrubbery is removed Witness (Seal) Grantor (Seal) Grantor State of Virginia, _ To~ Wit: I, the whose name ,19 hand and seal this day of , 19 of _, a aforesaid, do hereby certify that of the State of Virginia in and for signed to the within writing bearing date on the has acknowledged the same before me in my State aforesaid. Given under my hand this day of day of and My commission expires RW# day of ORDER # ,19 Notary Public . -r ~. RE'I~ANflM~ Y OF OLO K~R1T~ CORP. .: ~- Q W -~ t!1 ~ ~ N ~ r r ~ ~ ~+ ,p - ~a n ~ Lc} as O o- ~_ ~ - ~"~ C~_ ,; '~` ~~ i:~.'~,~ s~~i ,~ $ o~~ ,~ .. ~ ~~d ~o Q~ N N S ~a S S~' ~2' yr s4.t0 -~-°r•' ..... _ ~ • ~"'~ Q a ~ ~~ ', ~~ ~ ~ Q t/1 _J T .- 'g _ Z t9 ~_ • W _ - gs ~~~ N o~z o~ c V C~ H S-}~ - . ~ ~~ \~ ~~ \2~~~ ~ ~~ -~' ~~ .~W ~2" ~ ~ .~ ' REMAtNtN6 PROPERTY OF ODD HERITAGE CORP. 3 :~ ~c'+ e A 2 °~ z t~ e Qp+.~~ d c~ `~`~g= acrvc~ i . .~ G -2 3 ~..~ °f MEMORANDUM TO: BRF FROM. ary Robertson DATE: January 23, 1997 SUBJECT: Bell Atlantic Easement on Hunting Hills Drive Enclosed are photographs showing the proposed fiber optic cabinet and also the proposed site that has been selected for installation. If approved the cabinet would be installed behind the existing screening, adjacent to the water pumping station. If you have any questions, please call. Thanks! i i ,+ F f s i J- ~ ~-a AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JANUARY 28, 1997 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING CONVEYANCE OF AN EASEMENT TO BELL ATLANTIC - VIRGINIA, INC. FOR ALLOWING THE INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE OF A 6' X 9' ABOVE-GROUND CABINET ACROSS PROPERTY OWNED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County is the owner of property designated as a booster station lot in Hunting Hills, Tax Map No. 87.07-1-13, in the Cave Spring Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, Bell Atlantic - Virginia, Inc. requires a right-of- way for installation and maintenance of a 6' x 9' above-ground cabinet as shown on the attached map; and WHEREAS, the proposed easement will serve the interests of the public and is necessary for the public health, safety, and welfare of citizens of the County of Roanoke. NOW, 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 January 14, 1997; and a second reading was held on January 28, 1997; and 2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Roanoke County Charter, the interests in real estate to be conveyed are hereby declared to be surplus, and are hereby made available for other public uses by conveyance to Bell Atlantic - Virginia, Inc. for the provision of telephone service; and 3. That donation of a easement for the installation and maintenance of a 6' x 9' above-ground cabinet across County property, as shown on the. attached map, is hereby authorized; and 4. That the offer of Bell Atlantic - Virginia, Inc.'s to purchase the easement for One Dollar ($1.00) is hereby accepted and the proceeds from the sale of the easement are to be allocated to the capital reserves of Roanoke County; and 5. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such further actions as may be necessary to accomplish this conveyance, all of which shall be approved as to form by the County Attorney; and 6. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption. C:\OFFICE\WPWIN\WPDOCS\ AGENDA\REALEST\BELL.ATL ~I-`~ AT A REGIILAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SIIPERVISORS OF ROANORE COIINTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COIINTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TIIEBDAY, JANIIARY 28, 1997 RESOLIITION 012897-10 APPROVING AND CONCIIRRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SIIPERVISORS 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 January 28, 1997 designated as Item L - Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 4, inclusive, as follows: 1. Approval of Minutes - December 17, 1996 and January 2, 1997. 2. Acceptance of a grant by the Police Department for Community Crime Prevention Services. 3. Acceptance of water and sanitary sewer facilities serving Woodbridge, Section 14. 4. Request for emergency access to the Blue Ridge Parkway at the temporary access to the Parkway at milepost 115 and Rutrough Road. 2. That the Clerk to the Board is hereby authorized and directed where required by law to set forth upon any of said items the separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant to this resolution. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the Consent Resolution with the removal of Item 4 for discussion, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson 1 NAYS: None On motion of Supervisor Nickens to receive and file Item 4 with the Consent Resolution with an editorial change by Supervisor Eddy that County Administrator will execute any necessary documents, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. olton, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File John Cease, Chief of Police Gary Robertson, Director, Utility Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Joyce Waugh, Econ Development Specialist Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance 2 l ~i ' December 17,1996 ~~~ Roanoke County Administration Center 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, Virginia 24018 December 17, 1996 The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, met this day at the Roanoke County Administration Center, this being the third Tuesday, and the second regularly scheduled meeting of the month of December, 1996. IN RE: CALL TO ORDER Chairman Johnson called the meeting to order at 3:01 p.m. The roll call was taken. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Bob L. Johnson, Vice Chairman Harry C. Nickens, Supervisors Lee B. Eddy, Fenton F. "Spike" Harrison, H. Odell "Fuzzy" Minnix MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney; Mary H. Allen, Clerk; John M. Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator; Don C. Myers, Assistant County Administrator; Anne Marie Green, Director, Community Relations IN RE: OPENING CEREMONIES The invocation was given by Reverend Samuel W. Crews, Coopers Cove: Baptist Church. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all present. December 17, 1996 various gateway locations around the County. Staff is proposing to expand and enhance six of the eight original gateway locations and requesting one additional location on U. S. Route 11 at the Botetourt County line. VDOT has requested that the County adopt a resolution indicating that the County is responsible for the cost and perpetual maintenance of the gateway areas. In response to questions from Supervisor Eddy, Mr. Harrington advised that funds for the gateways were included in the budget and that VDOT is hesitant to allow community groups to become involved in maintenance and only the Route 419/Brambleton Avenue Triangle is maintained by a community group. Supervisor Harrison requested that Route 460 at the 24ontgomery County line be added to the program in the future. Supervisor Johnson moved to adopt the resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None RESOLUTION X21796-1 REQUESTING APPROVAL BY THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OF THE EXPANSION OF SIB EXISTING GATEWAY BEAUTIFICATION SITES AND THE ADDITION OF ONE PROPOSED GATEWAY BEAUTIFICATION SITE WITHIN PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY IN ROANORE COUNTY WHEREAS, the Virginia Department of Transportation has reviewed specifications for the design, installation, and maintenance of existing highway median plantings and shall review specifications for the design, installation, and maintenance of all proposed highway median plantings at particular locations in Roanoke County, and WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission originally requested the establishment of the Gateway December 17,1996 Roanoke County is supportive of the act and is active on a Fifth Planning District Commission steering committee to develop a regional partnership. Supervisors Eddy and Minnix advised that they supported membership in the Urban Partnership because it demonstrates the County's willingness to be involved in regional efforts. Supervisors Johnson and Nickens felt that the Partnership would not be effective and that funding could be better spent locally. Supervisor Eddy moved to approve $5,000 funding from Board Contingency Fund. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison NAYS: Supervisors Nickens, Johnson ,~. Request for approval of Smith Gap Landfill Host Community Fund Expenditure Plan. (John Hubbard, Executive Director, Roanoke Valley Resource Authority) A-121796-3 Mr. Hubbard advised that the citizens in the Bradshaw community have developed an improvement plan that proposed a maximum $30,000 expenditure from the Host Community Improvement Fund for needs at the Mason's Cove Fire Department, Mason's Cove Rescue Squad and Mason's Cove Elementary School. These funds would be financed by the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority as . December 17, 1996 843 possibility of providing the services on a County-wide basis. He advised the alternatives were: (1) Expand commingled recycling to the entire County at a cost of $1.34 million in capital and $220,200 in annual operating costs; (2) Expand source separated recycling to the entire County at a cost of $1 million in capital and $347,000 in operating cost; (3) Investigate privatization of drop off centers to be located throughout the entire County at a cost of approximately $75,000 annually and $10,000 for an information campaign; or (4) Work with Virginia Tech and the Resource Authority to study regional commingled pickup to serve the entire Valley. Mr. Hodge advised that staff recommended Alternative 4 and that while the issue was being studied, to implement Alternative 3. There was discussion concerning the importance to equalize the service County-wide, and provide assurances that there would be adequate drop off boxes. --Supervisor Eddy suggested an independent study with continuation of the current program until the study was complete. Supervisor Nickens advised that he assumed any savings realized from the elimination of the current program would go into the General Fund and not remain within the departments budget. Supervisor Nickens moved to approve Alternative #3 and that staff work with the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority and other governments to develop a regional approach. There was no December 17,1996 845 $3,500, and the Foundation is requesting that the County pay this cost from the Economic Development Public Private Partnership Fund. Following discussion, Supervisor Harrison moved to approve funding of $3,500 for the Phase II application and that the contract with Hill Associates will not .exceed $3,500. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Edgy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None IN RE: REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARING AND FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCES - CONSENT AGENDA Supervisor Johnson moved to approve the first reading and set the second reading and public hearing for January 28, 1997. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None ~ ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to allow a beauty shop in a residence, located at 6187 Bent Mountain Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition- of Jean McDowell. -(Terry Harrington, Planning & Zoning Director) ~, Ordinance to rezone .73 acre from I-iC to C-2 to willow operation of a retail furniture store, located at 6024 Williamson Road, Hollins Magisterial District, upon the petition of George Jacob• IN RE: APPOINTMENTS December 17, 1996 847 Sandra Phelps to the Board of Supervisors in connection with the Pinkard Court Rural Addition Road Project. 4. Donation of water line easements to the Board of Supervisors from Fralin and Waldron and Minh and Su Dinh. 5. Confirmation of Committee appointment to the Blue Ridge Community Services Board of Directors. 2. That the Clerk to the Board is hereby authorized and directed where required by law to set forth upon any of said items the separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant to this resolution. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the Consent Resolution with the addition of Item 5, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None IN RE: REPORTS AND INQIIIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS Supervisor Minnix: He wished staff and the citizens Happy Holidays and advised that he was looking forward to working with everyone next year. Supervisor Harrison: (1) He reported that he had discussed with Terry Harrington concerns that the residents on Dry Hollow had regarding the logging operations. (2) He attended the Stagg Bowl in Salem and was pleased that the County was involved in the project. Supervisor Eddy: (1) He sent the guidelines on the Regional Competitiveness Act to the Board members and requested their suggestions. (2) He advised that the Fifth Planning District Commission is concerned about the New Century Council's recommendation to be recognized by the state as a regional Investments and Portfolio Policy, as of November 30, 1996. ~ Acknowledument from VDOT of additions to the Secondary system. IN RE: WORK SESSION ~ Undate on the Comprehensive Plan (Terry Harrington, Planning & Zoning Director) The work session began at 4:45 p.m. and ended at 5:25 p.m. It was presented by Terry Harrington who updated the Board on the Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC). He advised that the CAC had been involved ~iri citizen participation/community outreach; redefining the community planning area boundaries; and the role of neighborhood councils. He described what would be accomplished in each of these processes. He presented a list of neighborhood council meetings scheduled for January and February that will be held throughout the County. IN RE: EXECUTIVE SESSION Supervisor Johnson moved to go into Executive Session at 4:45 p.m. following the work session at 5:25 p.m. pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.1-344 A (7) Consultation with legal counsel regarding probable litigation, BPOL tax; Vest Property condemnation proceedings; amendment to the Sewage Treatment Plant; and (5) discussion of economic development December 17, 1996 3 WHEREAS, due to the complexity of family and business life, few volunteers are able to maintain this type of commitment over a long period of time, as demands on their time and energy increase; and WHEREAS, Roanoke County wishes to recognize those people who have been able to continue in service to the citizens of the County, and has established a Quarter Century Club for the volunteers who have served for over 25 years. WHEREAS, they have served as volunteers at the Vinton First Aid Crew, Hollins Fire and Rescue Department, Cave Spring Fire Department and Mount Pleasant Fire Department and are eligible for membership in this club. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, on its own behalf and on the behalf of the citizens of the County, does hereby express its deepest appreciation to the following for over twenty-five years of service as a volunteer with the Roanoke County Fire and Rescue Department: DOUG ADAMS, TOM PHILPOTT, DANNY SNIDER, BARRY FUQUA, BARRY LUSSEN AND DEAN RORRER; and FURTHER, BE IT RESOLVED, that they are hereby certified as members of the Quarter Century Club for Volunteers in Roanoke County. On motion of Supervisor Nickens to adopt the Resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None IN RE: PUBLIC HEARINGS ~ Public Hearinq and adoption of resolution ,~pporting tax exempt status for the Hollins Communications Research Institute. (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney) DENIED R-121796-19 Mr. Mahoney reported that Hollins Communication Research Institute is seeking tax exempt status in accordance with the Constitution of Virginia. The real estate consists of 6.114 acres located at the intersection of Carvin Street and December 17,1996 support of a bill to be introduced at the 1997 Session of the Virginia General Assembly to exempt certain property of the Institute from taxation pursuant to Article X, Section 6(a)(4) and 6(a)(6) of the Constitution of Virginia; and WHEREAS, a public hearing at which all citizens had an opportunity to be heard with respect to the Institute's request was held by the Board on December 17, 1996; and WHEREAS, the provisions of subsection B of Section 30- 19.04 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, have been examined and considered by the Board; and THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follow: 1. The County refuses to support the petition of the Hollins Communications Research Institute seeking exemption from State and local taxation. In adopting this Resolution the Board has examined and considered the provisions of subsection B of Section 30-19.04 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended. 2. The assessed value of the property owned by the Institute is $222,700 and the property tax is $2,516.51. The Tax Parcel No. is 27.06-3-4. 3. The Clerk is directed to forward an attested copy of this Resolution to the Chairman of the Committee of the General Assembly considering the designation of property to be exempt from taxation pursuant to Article X, Section 6(a)(4) and 6(a)(6) of the Constitution of Virginia and to the Institute. On motion of Supervisor Eddy to adopt a Resolution of Support. The motion was defeated by the following recorded vote; AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Johnson NAYS: Supervisors Minnix, Harrison, Nickens ~ Public Hearing and adoption of resolution supporting tax exempt status for the Hanging Rock Battlefield and Railway Preservation Foundation. (Paul Mahonev. County Attorney R-121796-10 Mr. Gubala reported that the Hanging Rock Battlefield and Railway Preservation Foundation is requesting tax exempt status. The Foundation is planning and designing the Hanging Rock battlefield trail Phase I. Mr. Gubala advised that the City of Salem approved a similar request on November 25, 1996. The December 17,1996 owned and used by the Foundation is $51,600 and the property tax is $583.08. The Tax Parcel Nos. of the property owned by the Foundation is 36.03-1-62 and 36.10-1-16. 2. The Clerk is directed to forward an attested copy of this Resolution to the Chairman of the Committee of the General Assembly considering the designation of property to be exempt from taxation pursuant to Article X, Section 6(a)(6) of the Constitution of Virginia, to the Commissioner of the Revenue and the Treasurer for Roanoke County, and to The Hanging Rock Battlefield and Railway Preservation Foundation. On motion of Supervisor Harrison to adopt the Resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None ,~ Public Hearing and resolution to consider the acquisition by condemnation or other means of an easement across certain ,,..property, owned b~ Michael C. Martin and Fay H. Martin and for the construction and installation of water transmission lines. (William B. Hopkins, Jr.) R-121796-11 Mr. Mahoney requested that the Weeks property be deleted from this request because the issue with them is being resolved, but that the Martin property remain. He explained that the properties are necessary for the Water Transmission Line project . A written offer was extended to Michael and Fay Martin of $957.00 which was based on an appraisal by Earl G. Robertson. Mrs. Martin is willing to accept the offer but Mr. Martin has not responded. Because the parties are going through a divorce, it is now necessary to go forward with eminent domain proceeding. The December 17,1996 859 water easement and temporary construction easement to be acquired from Michael C. Martin and Faye H. Martin. TI iv1Y rCii 1+C1 vi 1Qllu ~. v~.a ~.cu u ~. i i 5. That the fair market value of the interest in the property to be taken and damages to the residue of such property, if any, is as follows: PROPERTY OWNER FAIR MARKET VALUE AND DAMAGES, IF ANY Michael C. Martin and Faye H. Martin $ 957.00 6. That each of the landowners have been offered the amounts listed in paragraph 5 above for an interest in their property and that each offer was refused by the landowners. Therefore, the only feasible way of acquiring the land described above is by condemnation. 7. That it is necessary for the County to immediately enter upon and take possession of the properties described above and commence construction of such water transmission lines and any other appurtenances to the water supply system in order to more adequately serve the needs of the citizens of Roanoke County and to institute and conduct appropriate condemnation proceedings as to the above-described property as provided by law and by this resolution the County hereby states its intent to do so. 8. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.1- 238(E) of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, the Board finds that it is necessary to be vested with those powers granted the Commonwealth Transportation Commissioner pursuant to Sections 33.1-119 through 33.1-129, both inclusive, in order to enter upon the property to be condemned prior to or during the condemnation proceeding for the construction of water transmission lines and any other appurtenances to the water supply system as described above. 9. That the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors hereby condemn the interest in the properties shown on the December 17, 1996 1 of the ordinance concerning vaccination clinics would not be deleted. Staff is also requesting authorization to execute the revised contract with the Roanoke Valley SPCA. Assistant Administrator John Chambliss updated the Board on the SPCA's plan to relocate. Supervisor Eddy suggested amending the ordinance to include the use of electronic implants in sec. 5-29 of the ordinance. Supervisor Johnson moved to adopt the ordinance with the addition of "Electronic implant" on Page 8(sec. 5-29). The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None ORDINANCE 121796-12.a AMENDING AND REENACTING PORTIONS 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 COIINTY'8 ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCES, AND TO INCREASE THE FEES FOR BOARDING AND PICKUP 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. December 17, 1996 a r r i-n tersest-ierr-whir-3~*t A ,~ p R~ :„ ; ------- -- - --- ~ ' ~~~ • r , i i ~ ' ~ , ~ i ., n 1 L - - - - ~TrfTPZT i-"'~PE SC~ ~SLE ~~ ~~i _ _ _ F Q1ll G V y (~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 a point; thence N 11° 59' 20" E 1219.37 feet to a point; thence along the December 17,1996 damage done thereto in an appropriate action at law from such person. b The c~?~~rit~'`>~~:~~<:»::>:::~3::~~s of-f~cer or other officer finding a stolen dog or cat or a dog or cat held or detained contrary to law shall have authority to seize and hold such dog or cat pending action before a general district court or other court. If no such action is instituted within seven (7) days, such officer shall deliver the dog or cat to its owner. The presence of a dog or cat on the premises of a person other than its legal owner shall raise no presumption of theft against the owner of such premises, and the z~iu Q:~}£~?i~*~ 7ttr~a~}-~~'~rn-'_r =rrrrrc-~~ may take such dog or cat ~in charge and notify its legal owner to remove him. The legal owner of the do or ~;at shall a ?>~?z~?~f~>'s1~i.x~:~:~.:::;>::<:;~~: ;...;..:..:.,. ..: :...:...:...............,...:::..:.,.:.:....::g....:.,.,. P Y ...........,..... .....,. ..... ................,::g::.:~:::::::.~:.~:. ~~~'`~~>~..<~~4~>'S`- for the kee of such ....., ......................... :.~:,::..~.:::::::::..::::::::.~:.~::::.~:,:.r.~ P............................. doa or cat while in the possession of the ?au~3~<~~_~< (Code 1971, § 5-6; Ord. No. 41294-7, § 1, 4-12-94) sec. 5-26.1. Dangerous dogs; vicious dog; 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 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 vicious dog, as defined by section 5-21. If, after hearing evidence, the court finds any dog to be a vicious dog, the court shall, in addition to any other penalties imposed, order the t~~~<::~:~;:~:~~; to euthani z e the dog . I f any owner knew or reasonably should have known any dog to be a vicious dog and such dog thereafter causes a wound to any person, such owner December 17,1996 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 request, display .such policy ::.:,..::.~..; ,.::. ~::.r .:.:........:.:.:...~.:.:::.::.:.:;;:.:::. ~: and certificate to an ~u~~; ;<:~~?~~t~~t Y .::::::::.~.~::.~::.:~ ::::::::..:.:~:::::::::.~:::.:.::.:::::.:...:..:...:...:......::....:::. or police officer. (d) The owner of any dangerous dog shall have such dog permanently identified by means of a tatoo on an inside thigh, and the owner of any dangerous dog ovide the .~:::.~;::.;:'t~'~~>~~~~:::<~'<~'~`~'`~'.~:.,~>?>fl~`:%~::;~ amma~ shall pr ;.;.:~;1<~:~.;:.:~?".;;;:;;~.'-::.;::.:;:::.:;~::.;;:;:.,~.~.:.>:::.~:::: ~_=~__' =rr____-with~a color photograph of the dog taken within the last twelve (12) months, suitable for use in identifying the dog. (e) If any dangerous dog is taken off the property of its owner, such dog shall be muzzled and restrained by a substantial chain or leash not exceeding six (6) feet in length, and such dog shall at all times be kept under the control of a responsible person. Such muzzle shall be constructed in such a manner that it will prevent the dog from biting any person or animal, but such that it will not cause injury to the dog or interfere with its vision or respiration. (f) The owner of any dangerous dog shall notify the December 17,1996 Sec. 5-27. Barking or howling dogs. The harboring or keeping of any dog which, by loud, frequent or habitual barking or howling or by any other conduct, shall cause annoyance and disturb the peace and quiet of any person or neighborhood shall be unlawful; and any such dog is hereby declared to be a public nuisance. Any such dog may, after reasonable notice has been iven b the ~~'~~~~~~'~~'"~r<"`~~`~~:'~~~~~'` ~r;::>::~ttYP~<:>::>:'~:'aw[:>:>:>art:~4~r~~3~~:::>::::::fl:ff:~'e~xr ---- --1 -- -1--~~r{'{' i r_e,- to the ~owner~~~~of~~~~such~~~dog,~~~~~if ~ known~,~~~~~or~ upon the complaint of any person, if such owner is unknown, be impounded and confined in the county animal shelter b the ::;:.;>::,::;..::::.;~~~;,a",,,:::,::~:...: ----_.--- ----_--- .. ... . ~f~ftcer. The disposition of any such dog shall be in accordance with section 5-29. (Code 1971, § 5-10.2) Cross reference(s)--Noise generally, § 13-3. Sec. 5-29. Same--Impoundment. .w :.:............. .....,.::.:..;: (a) It shall be the duty of the QiG~c~~??>e ~=~ or other officer to cause any dog ~found~running at large in violation of section 5-28 or any dog or cat creating an animal nuisance in the presence of the officer as def fried by section 5-21 to be caught and confined in the county animal shelter. Every ~'~~"t~'3'~s effort shall be made on the part o the :"> :.;:.;:.:.:>,:<,::.;:><.:~::::..::.,:,:.;::::x;;,..;::;:.;:;::..:.:.:::.a:::;:;:;>::>.;: f €ta:~r3~:~!!~~:~ or other officer to determine the ownership of an animal so confined ~~~ ~~t~;~s (b) A do or cat ~~Z;tier~~rs~tiK>;:3::;::<:~;~;~: confined under this section '..:.:::'.,;~;~ ,..~~.:::::.;,><.:...,..:: ,.::::.:, >;;<~:~..::< :~<~~~::::;::: ma be claimed b #~ ......... ~ ~` .....~.~#:~~t.~:.. r ..:::.. ..: ,~`,: Y Y the rightful owner after displaying proof of ownership, a current dog or cat license and proof of current rabies inoculation of the animal. No dog or cat shall be released to any person claiming ownership, unless such license and proof have been displayed. (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 December 17, 1996 a?~y •(~Code~ 1971, §§ 5-il, 5-26; Ord. No. 2135, 9-26-78; Ord. No. 52290-7, § 1, 5-22-90; Ord. No. 41294-7, § 1, 4-12-94) Sec.. 5-31. Killing, injuring, etc., livestock or poultry -- Generally. (a) It shall be the duty of the zntar~i +'~~"~`" ~~"""`~ or other officer if he f finds a dog ~~n• 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 the owes to order the ~;»~'~:~;:~~!~ arrimztl p ........ ..... .:..~.:::::.::::,..~:...... ..:..... ..........:....... or other officer to kill any dog known~to be a confirmed livestock or poultry killer, and any dog killing poultry for the third time shall be considered a confirmed poultry killer. (c) If any person, including the `~~; ""~""~~~~~~ has reason to ~~~beleve 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 immediatel which the ?::~::.;;:~x~i:~~,:;:f3~~? Y ~ ::::::.::::.~ ::::.:::::.:...:..~..:..:....::::.~:::::::::::::::.~:.~::::::::::::...:..:...:.. officer or other officer designated by the judge 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. Sec. 5-32. same--Investigation of claims against county. •i:•i;•i:•i:Y.i:::!•:i ::.:i.Y.i$:.S:n:W..:}iiiii}i} ':::: iii'::::3:::'iiy:;'i .::'r ":":.:i,::i ii:::~i::! a The ':~:~:':~;:.>:::«~:::::~~7~w~:::-:::>:::::~3~; ~cf-fi-cer-shall conduct an investigation into 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 December 17,1996 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 on re nest for ins ection b the t'":'~>. promptly q P Y ..~.::::.:~ :...:....::.:.....:...:.. ~~~~;~ 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 _ shal.l...be_...delivered :..,:..: `<: <>~`: e ~ f:f. ~ .. ..... un t ~f" the p~ l ~ ~~ ~~ : ~~~?~-: (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 in the kennel. Any identification plates not so in use shall be kept by the owner or custodian and promptly shown to ::.:.~:;:.:;:.;;:::::<>:..:.v.:a'3e<~'~~Q or other any ?~o~a~i;~p~<...~....::,.::::::.~ ::::::::::::.::~.~:::::::::..~:::::::.: officer upon request. A kennel dog shall not be permitted to December 17,1996 :.:.,.:,,:.;...:.:,;::.> :::<,....:.;>:..:.::.:...>.:;<:;:.;~:<>:>-...;....:~~:.:~:;:~.:;:.>:,:- or other officerM daps: The 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. Sec. 5-69. Vaccination clinics. The board of supervisors may provide for clinics for the vaccination of dogs and cats under the supervision of the :.;>,,.~.:::;.;;:<::.;>~':::.":`>`:.:' '`~~: `''~~: ~ and the health director and fix fees to be charged for services rendered at such clinics. (Code 1971, § 5-31; Ord. No. 51287-4, § 1, 5-12-87) 2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect on and after January 1, 1997. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the ordinance with the addition of "electronic implant" on page 8, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None (b~ Authorization to execute a contract with the Roanoke Vallev SPCA for the impoundment of animals. (Joseph Obenshain, Sr. Assistant Countv Attornev) A-121796-12.b Supervisor Johnson moved to authorize execution of the (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) December 17,1996 Q77 ESTABLISHING PROCEDIIRES AND REQIIIREMENTS TO HEAR APPEALS FROM DECISIONS MADE IINDER TH8 PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 9, "FIRE PREVENTION AND PROTECTION'•, OF THE ROANOKE COIINTY 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 itself as a 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 and public hearing 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 f ile a written appeal with the clerk to the Board of Supervisors for review of the Fire Marshal's decision. The written appeal must be filed within ten (l0) 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 and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: Supervisor Eddy (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. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the Ordinance, such appeal. a December 17,1996 the Virginia Department of Transportation, the improvements to Country Farm Road for purposes of this project are no longer necessary at this time; and WHEREAS, the acquisition and condemnation of the Vest property is no longer required as a result of the VDOT changes to the road improvement project; and WHEREAS, the County has not entered upon this real estate; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors deems it in the best interests of the public to rescind Resolution 111996-13. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County as follows: 1. That the acquisition of this property for the Country Farm Road Improvement Project is no longer necessary. 2. That Resolution 111996-13 is hereby rescinded and the Board withdraws its authorization to acquire a one acre parcel of land from Randolph H. Vest, Jr. and Linda C. Vest for the .Country Farm Road Improvement Project by eminent domain proceedings. 3. That this Resolution is effective immediately upon its adoption. On motion of Supervisor Harrison to adopt the Resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None .~ Resolution concurring in the extension of the statute of limitations on behalf of the Kroger o. , for the purpose of apvlyinq for relief from an assessment of license taxes. R-121796-15 Mr. Mahoney reported that the Commissioner of the Revenue has been negotiating with Kroger Company concerning BPOL taxes paid in 1993. The statute of limitations expires on December 31, 1996 and staff is requesting 90 days additional time to work out a solution with Kroger. In response to a question from Supervisor Eddy, Mr. Mahoney advised that the Board has the December 17,1996 Utility Directorl R-121796-16 Mr. Robertson explained that this amendment will base the participating locality's final flow allocation on a percentage of the total permitted plan capacity when the permit is amended. Supervisor Eddy suggested removing the language in the resolution related to the allocation of total project costs among the parties. Supervisor Harrison moved to approve the contract with Supervisor Eddy's suggestion that resolution be amended to remove "allocations of total project costs among the parties" language. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None RESOLUTION 121796-16 APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING AMENDMENTS TO THE REGIONAL SERAGE TREATMENT CONTRACT ON BEHALF OF THE COUNTY OF ROANORE WITH THE CITY OF ROANORE, THE CITY OF SALEM, THE COIINTY OF BOTETOURT AND THE TOWN OF VINTON WHEREAS, by Resolution 101194-1 adopted on October 11, 1994 the Board of Supervisors approved and authorized the execution of a regional sewage treatment contract, dated November 1, 1994, on behalf of the County of Roanoke with the City of Roanoke, the City of Salem, the County of Botetourt, and the Town of Vinton; and, WHEREAS, the parties to this contract desire to amend this contract to reflect certain changes to the capacity of the regional sewage treatment plant, and the allocations of capacity in said plant among the parties., NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, By the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, as follows: December 17, 1996 QQZ Supervisor Minnix moved to adopt the resolution as amended by Supervisor Nickens. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYE5: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None RESOLUTION 121796-17 AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING THE SETTLEMENT OF A LICENSE TA% CLAIM- AGAINST CO8 CABLE ROANORE WHEREAS, the Commissioner of the Revenue and the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia (the "County") and Cox Cable Roanoke ("Cox") have disagreed with respect to the liability of Cox for business, professional and occupational license taxes; and, WHEREAS, the County and Cox desire to settle this dispute amicably in order to avoid the expenses and uncertainty of litigation; and, WHEREAS, the County and Cox have negotiated a settlement of their dispute. NOW THEREFORE, Be It Resolved, By the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, as follows: 1. That in settlement of this dispute (a) Cox agrees to pay to the County the sum of $32,725.00 to satisfy any liability for license taxes for 1996 and a tax at .20 per hundred for the period of July 1, 1995, through December 31, 1995; (b) the Commissioner of the Revenue and Cox agree that Cox be classified as a Retailer under Chapter 10, "LICENSES", of the Roanoke County Code; (c) Cox agrees to withdraw any objection to this classification or assessment and levy of license taxes by the Commissioner and the County; (d) Cox agrees to pay said license taxes under the Retailer classification beginning January 1, 1997; and (e) this license tax shall not be reflected on the monthly bills of any cable television customers. 2. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions as may be necessary to accomplish the purposes of this resolution, in conjunction with the Commissioner of the Revenue, all upon form approved by the County Attorney. On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the Resolution as amended by Supervisor Nickens, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None December 17,1996 period of time not to exceed August 31, 1997. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County that the County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute the necessary documents authorizing an extension of the lease of said 14,762 square feet of office space in the Salem Bank and Trust Building for use by the Department of Social Services or other public purpose of the County for a period of time not to exceed August 31, 1997, in accordance with the rates, terms and conditions of the original lease upon form approved by the County Attorney. On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the Resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens NAYS: None ABSTAIN: Supervisor Johnson IN RE: MEETING WITH ROANORE VALLEY LEGISLATORS There was discussion on issues to emphasize during the January 2, 1997 meeting with the Roanoke Valley legislators. Mr. Mahoney will send a list of the issues to the members of the Board who will rank the items and return their priorities to Mr. Mahoney prior to the meeting. IN RE: p.m. ADJOIIRNMENT Chairman Johnson declared the meeting adjourned at 8:34 Submitted by, Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board Approved by, Bob L. Johnson Chairman January 2, 1997 1 Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Roanoke County Administration Center 5204 Bernard Drive S. W. Roanoke, Virginia 24018 January 2, 1997 The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, met this day at the Roanoke County Administration Center, this being the organizational meeting and the 2nd day of January, 1997. IN RE: CALL TO ORDER Chairman Johnson called the meeting to order at 9:01 a.m. The roll call was taken. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Bob L. Johnson, Vice Chairman Harry C. Nickens Supervisors Lee B. Eddy, Fenton F. "Spike " Harrison, H. Odell "Fuzzy" Minnix MEMBERS ABSENT: None 3 STAFF PRESENT: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator; Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney; Mary H. Allen, Clerk to the Board; John M. Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator, Don C. Myers, Assistant County Administrator IN RE: OPENING CEREMONIES The invocation was given by Supervisor Harry C. Nickens. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all present. a January 2, 1997 3. Resolution establishing Bylaws, Rules of Order and Schedule for Board Meetings in 1997 . R-010297-1 Supervisor Johnson moved to adopt the prepared resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson. NAYS: None RESOLUTION 010297-~ ESTABLISHING A MEETING SCHEDULE FOR THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1997 AND ADOPTING RULES OF PROCEDURE FOR SUCH MEETING BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That for calendar year 1997, the regular meetings of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, are set forth below with public hearings scheduled for 7:00 o'clock p.m. unless otherwise advertised. Tuesday, January 14, 1997, at 3:00 p.m. Tuesday, January 28, 1997, at 3:00 p. m. and 7:00 p.m. Tuesday, February 11, 1997, at 3:00 p.m. Tuesday, February 25, 1997, at 3:00 p. m. and 7:00 p.m. Tuesday, March 11, 1997, at 3:00 p.m. Tuesday, March 25, 1997, at 3:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. Tuesday, April 8, 1997, at 3:00 p.m. Tuesday, April 22, 1997, at 3:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. Tuesday, May 13, 1997, at 3:00 p.m. Tuesday, May 27, 1997, at 3:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. January 2, 1997 IN RE: RECESS Chairman Johnson declared a recess at 9:15 a.m. IN RE: RECONVENEMENT: Chairman Johnson reconvened the meeting at 9:20 a.m. IN RE: MEETING WITH ROANOKE VALLEY LEGISLATORS TO DISCUSS 1997 LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM. Legislators who were present for this meeting were Delegates A. Victor Thomas, C. Richard Cranwell and State Senator John Edwards. County Attorney Paul Mahoney presented the list of legislative requests adopted in Resolution 120396-2 on December 3, 1996. It was recommended that several of the items should be emphasized. They included: (1) Increase funding for public education and more particularly, assist localities in capital construction and renovation projects; (2) Support legislation appropriating additional funds and directing the State Compensation Board to modify staffing standards for local jails and court services positions for sheriff s offices; (3) Support legislation to restore the balance to the rebuttal process for heart/lung/cancer presumption in Workers' Compensation; (4) Support additional new construction and maintenance funding for VDOT secondary and primary roads; and (5) Oppose any efforts to eliminate or restrict local powers of taxation for personal property tax and BPOL. i January 2, 1997 7 ~~. - _m AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None IN RE: CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE SESSION R-010297-2 At 10:40 a.m., Supervisor Johnson moved to return to open session and adopt the Certification Resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None RESOLUTION 010297-2 CERTIFYING EXECUTIVE MEETING WAS HELD /N CONFORMITY WITH THE CODE OF VIRGIN/A 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, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A-012897-10. a 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: January 28, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Acceptance of a grant by the Police Department for Community Crime Prevention Services. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ,~~„~` BACKGROUND' The Roanoke County Police Department applied for a grant to enhance equipment at the Tanglewood Mall Substation. The equipment is a computer and hub to interface with the County's mainframe. Use of the substation can then be expanded to part time staffing by police, and additional public programs such as the Citizen's Police Academy. The grant has been approved by the Department of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS) in the amount of $3,500.00. FISCAL IMPACT' The grant is for $2,625.00 in DCJS federal funds (750) and $875.00 in local funds (25~). The criteria of the grant requires a hard dollar match of local funds. The local match will be taken out of existing police department funds for community crime prevention services. No additional funds will be requested. ~-a STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Staff recommends acceptance of the grant from the Department of Criminal Justice Services. Respectfully submitted, ..~.~_ ohn H. Cease Chief of Police Approved (x) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) Approved by, ~.-,~~r Mr. Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ACTION VOTE Motion by: Rob L. Johnson to No Yes Abs ap.~?rove Eddy ~_ Harrison x Johnson ~- Minnix _~ Nickens ~ cc: File John Cease, Chief of Police Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance cc: File Chief Cease A-012897- l O.b 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: January 28, 1997 UBJE T: Acceptance of Water and Sanitary Sewer Facilities Serving Woodbridge, Section 14 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Developers of Woodbridge, Section 14, L & S Enterprises, have requested that Roanoke County accept the Deed conveying the water and sanitary sewer facilities serving the subdivision along with all necessary easements. The water and sewer facilities are installed, as shown on plans prepared by Balzer & Associates entitled Woodbridge, Section 14, dated Apri130, 1991, which are on file in the County Engineering Department. The water and sanitary sewer facility construction meets the specifications and the plans approved by the County. FISCAL IMPACT: The value of the water and sanitary sewer construction is $23,600.00 and $43,400.00 respectively. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors accept the water and sanitary sewer facilities serving the Woodbridge, Section 14 subdivision along with all necessary easements, and authorize the County Administrator to execute a Deed for the transfer of these facilities. ,..~ SUBMITTED BY: Gary Rob son, P.E. Utility Di ctor APPROVED: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ---------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved (x) Motion by: Bob L. Johnson to No Yes Abs Denied ( ) ~.~prove Eddy ~_ Received ( ) Harrison x Referred ( ) Johnson ~_ To ( ) Minnix x Nickens ~ cc: File Gary Robertson, Director, Utility Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections THIS CHATTEL DEED, made this 10 day of October , 19 96 , by and between: L & S Enterprises 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 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 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 perpe±ually 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 Woodbridge. Section 14 ,made by Balzer & Associates and on file in the Roanoke County Engineering Department. The Developer does hereby covenant and warrant that it will be responsible for the proper ~, y""` 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_. WITNESS THE FOLLOWING signatures and seals: Developer: L & ySp Enterprise By: As: L. S. President State O£ Virginia County/~ of: saiem , to wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this: 14tH , day of October ~ 1 g 96 , By: L. S. Waldrop and Duly authorized officer President Title on behalf of L & S Enterprises ~ ary Public My Commission expires: 8-31-98 Approved as to form: Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia ,. By (SEAL) County Attorney Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator State o£ County/City of: , 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: ~` -NORTH _ ~ JI ~ie1~o~ op ~ e°~ 2 ~ J / ee .2 . 23 V~e~s~s q ~• C " 76c - 5 32 ~~ \'~o} D35 2 ~°~ ° ~ ° 20 ee ~!\~e ee `Zc o- a s~qo Q~ 2 d~ ~ I9 M~ R?~~ 3Q o: ~ //33 ~ r 8 3 - ~ ~ ~~ w. ~'.~ ~,a. ~~ e32 i31 ~\7~ ~ [ ~ZO . - ep /J 38 ` ~ ,p °~ :- IC ,9? .. 'i" 33 o y ., 8 e-:. .L V ,a,~ i '"" - a ;`s qp :~ `~\~9 90 ~42 II a ;38 .'~.. a° e~ 45 ~ e .~° 36 ~ % ° 6~ I . =~~ y ~ ~ 46 o e ' ~O 1 n a' ~ vQ 50 1 48 ° 1 Z ~ ~'' z' S1 5 '` - m 47iS.W -~ qp 3 •2 °6 ° a 52 6 J ~ m a .3 J 11.65 -c ', ~} q' '' ~ ~' • 5 ;. I.I ~ . ~ 16 o Z I ~ a ? ~ .:o I 5.S3Pe(D) ``xb~ qp8 .~ ~\d E, ~7 14 : 15 qp 2e ~ 17 ;, _ G _ ~ \~\b , 13 18 ' ~ M. i9 12 s 19 ~q- 5 - ~ -s 20 ° 'O`*p ' / ~ • IQ * r ' 21 90 5 ze~9. V` 6 d '' 9 _ ~ 22 :° °' X32 \1 5a ,J ep `L'3 e° 31 ° ~s , 's? ,,, . 3 ~ ' p e 24 p "30 m e5, ~~-,Qp. F' o ,a, 8 ~ ~ ~c< a•3 "'o ~ qp 27 m p2 ' ep r e 1 ,e ~' ~ ~ q~• 26 m 2, ~ - - ,, 4~ 9 _ ,= qp 25 a zo `` O • O `3` 101.11 `~-. SS ~ •qC IOv ~y /9 ,'~9s. ~ 9 ~"a ~ ~ IQ b ~ IOU 9J 8 J° ~ .~ 'e . Ec '~ ~re.re iz~ ie cz.rr wa- ~ 2'R ~a s 12 _ ~ ~ 9 ~2Op' 4 ~ Zo4 , - a 13 ~ 10.20 Ac - o _, e - go.c, " a 19 ~° 14 = fD § ~ I uo.~ i "'°' ~ 9.97 AC \ - Y `g6 ~t ~ 18 ~ S J V _ 4 '- ~ ~~ :e.43 ° ,,° 15 'Qo \ ° b ,v .. 56„~ .` 5,7 .. .. .. .... _ ROANOKE COUNTY UTILITY DEPARTMENT Acceptance of water and sewer service for Woodbridge Section 14. - _ Tx ~6c/ A-012897-10.c ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER L~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER 1VIEETI~jG .DATE: January 28, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Report on emergency access to the Blue Ridge Parkway at the temporary access to the Parkway at milepost 115 and Rutrough Road (Rt 618) ~~~NTYADMINISTRATOR'S C_OMMENT~_ Recommend approval. We should express appreciation to Explore and to the Blue Ridge Parkway. EXECU~'IVE ~UMMAR~: County staff have worked with Virginia's Explore Park and the Blue Ridge Parkway to establish authorization for emergency access by way of the Roanoke River Parkway when it is completed. (Please see attached letterfrom Dr. M. Rupert Cutler with Virginia's Explore Park. A similar letter is anticipated from the Blue Ridge Parkway, but has not yet been received.) This addresses the emergency access issue which was the primary concern of citizens who came before the December 3rd, 1996 meeting of the Board of Supervisors. Virginia's Explore Park officially opened to the public in July of 1994. It was evident that the Roanoke River Parkway would not be under construction in time to be open when the Park was scheduled to open. Through community meetings, Roanoke County staff worked with the Blue Ridge Parkway, Federal Highway Administration, and the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) to improve Rutrough Road (Rt 618) and locate a temporary access to and from the Blue Ridge Parkway for visitors to travel to Explore. The final component of the Roanoke River Parkway's completion includes the demolition of the temporary access at Rutrough Road and Parkway milepost 115. Officials of the Blue Ridge Parkway, a limited access and scenic linear park, were reluctant to grant a temporary access because of their previous experiences with communities wanting a temporary Parkway access to become permanent. In requesting the L-y temporary access, Roanoke County provided assurance to the National Park Service and the neighborhood that the Parkway access would only be temporary. At that time, the Mayflower Hills community was equally divided on allowing access through the community, but worked with the County and VDOT, donating frontage portions of their properties to widen and improve Rutrough Road. Rutrough Road improvements will remain. The Roanoke River Parkway started under constriction in 1995 and is scheduled for completion in late summer or early fall of 1997. Since 1994, when Explore opened to the public, citizens in the broader community have become accustomed to the use of the temporary Parkway access from Rutrough Road. The Parkway through the Roanoke Valley area in Virginia and through the Asheville area in North Carolina is recognized as heavily used for commuters, though the intended purpose of the Parkway is as a linear park with the scenic road as a means of viewing the national Parkway. Any access to the Parkway is always conditional, based on weather and other acts of nature, i.e. downed trees. Mount Pleasant Fire & Rescue has benefitted from use of the temporary access is Roanoke County's Fire & Rescue (F&R) Department. It is the County's policy to backup other F&R crews and this temporary access far Mount Pleasant has allowed quicker access. Currently three County units use the Parkway: Clearbrook, Vinton, and Mount Pleasant. Times & mileage figures for these three units to milepost 115 on the Farkway are summarized in the attached data sheets. F&R feels that they could enhance delivery of service (estimated to be 3-5 times a year, maximum) to the Blue Ridge Parkway with emergency access, however gating the access would decrease the benefit. Gating the temporary access would not fit the intent under which the temporary access was granted. Roanoke County staff who have worked with this project for many years feel that it is important for the County to follow through with the original intent, solely as a temporary access to Virginia's Explore Park until the Roanoke River Parkway was completed. According to Gary Johnson with Blue Ridge Parkway Resource Planning, emergency access to the Parkway from any official primary or secondary road access is allowed. Use of the Roanoke River Parkway is a viable alternative for emergency access that staff members have pursued. Both Explore (letter received, attached) and the Blue Ridge Parkway {letter anticipated) have stated that the Roanoke River Parkway, when completed, can be used for emergency access. The cost of a break-away gate could be absorbed by Fire & Rescue, if necessary. Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors accept these letters from the Blue Ridge Parkway and Virginia's Explore Park as authorization to use the Roanoke River Parkway on an emergency basis. ~-y Respectfully Submitted by: ~%G~ ~~ -~~ Elmer C. Hodge. County Administrator Jo ce c\\~lau h -~v~ Y g Ec mic Development Specialist ACTION Approved (x) Motion by: Harry C., Nickens to Denied ( ) receive and file with Consent Received ( ) Resolution and editorial change Referred ( ) by Lee B. Eddy for County Adm. To ( ) to execute anv necessary documents cc: File Joyce Waugh, Econ Dev Specialist Richard Burch, Chief, Fire & Rescue John Cease, Chief, Police Department VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy ~_ Harrison ~- Johnson ~_ Minnix ~- Nickens ~_ ~- VLRGINIA'S PAR K An outdoor classroom and Uving history museum enabling visitors to learn about the land, wildlife, and early American civilizations through a diversity of experiences «[ Milepost 115 on the blue Ridge Parkway Administered by Virginia Recreational Facilities Authority Virginia Code § 10.1-1600 et. seq. in partnership with The River Foundation, lnc. I.R.C. §501 (c) (3) Post Office Box 8508 Roanoke, Virginia 24014-0508 (540) 421-1800 FAX (540) 427-1880 Mr. Elmer Hodge Administrator Roanoke County P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 Dear Elmer, January 22, 1997 ~~1~'. I;',1 t__~_-- __~._.______. The subject of this letter is emergency vehicle access to the Blue Ridge Parkway via Explore Park and the Roanoke River Parkway. When the temporary paved connection between the Blue Ridge Parkway and Rutrough Road (made to give parkway travelers access to Explore Park during construction of the Roanoke River Parkway) is removed, and the Roanoke River Parkway is completed and open, Virginia's Explore Park is willing to allow emergency vehicle access to the Blue Ridge Parkway via Explore Park's service entrance (currently its main entrance) and the Roanoke River Parkway. This emergency shortcut-through-Explore Park route will not be open to the general public. Arrangements will have to be worked out between Explore Park, the National Park Service, and local emergency services to implement this understanding, including the provision of keys to the locked gate at Rutrough Road and/or the installation of a "break-away" gate at Rutrough Road designed to yield to an ambulance or fire truck when hit by its bumper. The cost of installing such a gate would have to be borne by the county. Coordination with Explore Park security staff and with the local National Park Service ranger will be essential. MRC/pkl c: Marry N ickens Bob Goodlatte Gary Johnson Joyce Waugh George Nester Sincerely, --~ M. Rupert Cutler, Ph.D. Executive Director JAN-28-97 TUE 09;46 BLUE RIDGE PARKWAY FAX N0. 7042714313 1N aFrZ,Y knrrx Tq Ul8 ra~zu~ty 2s, I997 Mi•. Elmer Hodge County Adiniuistrator County of Roavaoke Post Office Box 29500 Roanoke, Virginia '74U l 8-0798 Dear Mr. Hodge: ,. ~~, P, 01 L-~+ As the time approaches for eliminativag the tcrnporary comiection between the 131ue Rid~c Parkway Azad Rtvtrough Road; T recommend that local emergency service providers coordinate responses to Parkwa~v lands and lands adjacent t4 the Parkway thraugh our Plateau District Ravager in Vinton. Zt has long bccn Parkway policy to allow emergency azad law enforcement traffic to utilize the Parkway, and we do not propase to discontinue this policy in the future. There may be occasions when access to Mayflower Hills or to other areas could be facilitated by use of the Roanoke River Parkway, once completed. Such emergency access determinations will be made by the District ranger, based on the needs of the local community and our ability to accommodate such needs. We do not envision the use of the Roanoke River I?arkrvay as a primary alternative to using existing public routes maintaizaed by the'4'irgitaia I:7epartment ofTr<'tztsportation. Rather, Parkway access naay be permitted as an occasional alternative emergency access, as determined by the District Ranger. Further, seasonal gating of all or portions of the Roanoke River Parkway and limitations of traffic circulation within Explore 'ark may eliminate even such limited use in the Future. For purposes of long-stage planning, we Caution against reliance on Parkway emergency access to neighboring communities. However, we ~wiIl continue to work coaperativcly with city and county agencies to cnstue safe and effective responses to erncrgczacies. Sincerely, .-+.r.. Gary Everhardt Superintendent O~IONAL FORM 94 (T-90) FAX TRANSMITTAL Tp rrGm Phone F~ X~` ~'~ 7 / ~X ~ oC ~~V Fau N NCN 76411 M a+~ vino e.w, ... united States Department of the ~nteriol~ N.4,T'IONA,L PARiti ~FRVICE Rice Ride Parkway 400 T3B~r,T Builc-I;ra~u One Pack Syuare Asheville, North Carcilina 2.RR01 nor awes . ' 1~ ~ c January 9, 1997 Data from Tommy Fuqua, Fire and Rescue: ~~ Fire & Rescue estimates an average of 3 - 5 calls year on the Parkway. From July 1,1995 -June 6, 1996, there was only 1 call. Routes lYi~gs inutes* ~ 1) Mt. Pleasant Fire & Rescue to Milepost 115 temp. access to Parkway 3.4 4.5 2) Mt. Pleasant Fire & Rescue to Vinton (for backup) 4.0 5.5-6.0 ^ 3) Vinton Fire & Rescue to Parkway at Route 24 2.6 3.5 On Parkway to Milepost 115 3.0 3.5 4) Vinton Fire & Rescue as backup to Explore area by Rutrough Road 6.0 7.5 ^ 5) Cleazbrook from U. S. 220 by Parkway to Milepost 115 6.7 8.0-9.0 Actual routes highlighted on attached map. 1) Mt. Pleasant to temporary Parkway access at Milepost 11 S: 3.4 4.5 Left out of Station on Jay Valley Road to top of hill Right on Mt. Pleasant Blvd Left on Pitzer Road Left onto Randall Drive Right onto Rutrough Road to temporary Parkway access at Milepost 115 2) Mt. Pleasant as backup to Vinton Station: 4.0 5.5-6.0 Left out of Station on Jay Valley Road to Mt. Pleasant Blvd. Right on 13th Street to Dale Avenue (Rt. 24) Left on Pollard to Station 3) Vinton Fire & Rescue to Parkway at Route 24 to Milepost 115: 5.6 7.0 Left on Pollazd to Cus Nicks Blvd (Route 24) to the Parkway (2.6) (3.5) South on Parkway to temporary access Milepost 115 at Rutrough Road (3.0) (3.5) 4) Vinton Fire & Rescue as backup for Mt. Pleasant to Milepost 115 alternate route: 6.0 7.5 Up Dale Avenue (Rt. 24) into the City to 13th Street Left on 13th Street to Riverland Road Left on Riverland to Mt. Pleasant Blvd. (Rt. 116) Left on Mt. Pleasant to Rutrough Road Rutrough to temporary Parkway access at Milepost 115 5) Clearbrook Fire & Rescue to temporary Parkway access Milepost 115: 6.7 8.0-9.0 Left on U. S. 220, North to Pazkway access North (left) on Parkway to Milepost 115 *'I~me varies depending on road conditions and traffic Fire & Rescue will need to reach Explore Park from time to time and will use either the Roanoke River Parkway (Vinton F&R) or Rutrough Road (Mt. Pleasant F& R) to reach the Park. Roanoke County is working with the Parkway and Explore Park to work out an agreement for emergency access through Explore as backup for emergency calls in that immediate neighborhood. .,, ,ax~„ I ~{\'_ ~:.. A - e a .I I /~ ,~xbC~ `\ q,1 41L I ~, I ` STEWKNOB \ ~ ~ S G a ~;,;M1", soo V p~ b~ OLE A~!(RfY ,FL%~~ E+ r je .,P` S w p Gar cme ew .Hrrls „ , ~ 9 ~ !, .rmo rrox • r ~ f xtr~n ~ r c 4E Cilia ro:~:rx 1yb" ~A~.. 4i ~ Y ~HUNTWOT ~ ~ ~vO / ~ • 0 1^ 1916 ANNEXA7/ ~'.. " ~ -.. ' f ••~ / JP NUAAY -- ;psx • h ~ ~ 8 AF $xr. ' + 4M V -1. y2 ~xss6~ r ,F,B Nar9 -p~ NGiHEE rrox E ~ C c' • ~~r ~ _> > _ ~~ [DLL IiAE b • a _ iw xpr • ~ICR ~ o axE '~ 9e _ __~ JAS xi[ ~1~4 Mu+T [xo9 ms•iwu•w ur'k, o,° '44 Wx I {fA ' _. • . N EIG ~ Rry ~ --~ T4T 4N ~ d RHH~~4 .Ia00 Na0 i4a eagT X'1 xM •. y•~ ae1Pn' P~ ~ ~ B - 9lll ILLS ? 0 F 5 t PV x1^ ~ eraxo[r(to G 11 J ~` ftY¢;~".° i A Cf 1N y10wv6rPP ..rMW ~4 '. 1 Q4 x ~( ~ IL o o. a n~ , .rug ~s wouo6 I a >~,A .ww ~r !/ ! w t ~ .~ _ s r.4. ~ / ca.° . n°o ~•', ` 651 ' 4 ~ Y ~ d1~~r•.en7U.kCf ~ .~~~ P RIND r ~ 4 rP• /y E . °'I y • • "v I err I. { < _ar s~ pT ~ ~ v S ( rl/Y ~ r I .rr00 ! g _ -_ pa. 'f 115 ~b;. °? l o nl .g[ 5 vR $ E G` f ~. ~ -. ' . -_ . 4EREC sr .. . •, Y"+ i R'o tr k~~, x~ 'o' av bni~~'aed I \ , I w ?- °, au +~ Y I s ~-E ~ 3 +x :.~, , . $ ,~ o r v MRa~ o ~ 8 .. .e + J~ a .~g\~ ~~ sx. ~ ~ ~ .. ~ cx 5 y - • 4. ~e ;~. 5 A / ~ pnr SF x•OV d rxr S4 ` C Y~ ~ L W - Icy yy ~, f -../ :r1",•+~,I I` ~trm ~ a9 E'v,~~'•x sm H wu ,W.xa, y ' ~ r ''. ~ 41~ "ys I ~ ,. x ~ ~ , [gip .La ~ r. s,,..l ^ G G F !n 4 Y MrNw"°"~` "a. R'~` s -. a mfr, E.~[r Fat w P`ta m ~ d a 2{ ~ •+ LINDCNW00D A h. C/V/C F 2 ~+ E%XON x o6y .. 14~. ~f".T.rR~W '~• Mn_~, ~ ~ ,. .. .v .._"'n£. . _ °k ~»,w4u aw r0(% rOL1 ~~~. T. ' sw oo F } ... & - 3 ~: ~ .rn x : ` ~ ` a • • ¢ w F R • - F~ ~_.MILL ~'I vY je ~ ~ ! ~y~ i ,~` (I c q , • C °+~• 9 I 1 • e . ~r I4 ~ j} / i JJ r, ~ .Y ~ • ; s •pFNHrLLS Y ~ • 4/ T S ` i r I a"^ n I N wo ~ ..•my4ab.9~ 0 ~ ~ T ~ w. ~ fi , c ~ q ~`,~ E~ x W 6SY CCM Q EllDw`'T .~ P •+~ mq g 0~ ..~,% ~ N . ) • I+~R t / ~, s ~ ~ B ii a° 0 4 r , , : K .... ~ rs 0A o M 5 "u~ uao. ~ ~ . A iGE ~ tArr NM ^~ ~~~ n A ' ~I; ¢~ . raoG; ~ ' ,. .. i e i)L _' ... .._... ~ ~ ¢ ~ & 45i _ .. s Cµl M M1 •a~~ _ xox9 •iwo I ~ Iroo. pOANOKE MOUNTAIN E~' x6c EL.2075.0- ~ U 0 Ao e ~' ~~ • y °~ ~ .199 ~ -'o c` ~ 1.1100 Q .H DO o I ^ ~ - ~,, ,. x o + ~ &.. _._ m ._... c IZOo -.-._. .u .. R •rso -5 R ... . ~',~° N o er .. ,M ^ ~ I~ :I iwe9c - o ,wrawo° E" ~ Q r,E-r- 5, i a I1 ~yo ~p14q ~e w~ a g ~, r b H" nLioN I \~C1rV+r ROrrM. I .com~-9 Ir[ ".c°'" w +e. _ p DV I f t a9y ~~ i pTON °xp~" «, q !I~ ~ • sax t 3 i -~ NOR~N 4 ~ ~~! EPH 6 LLl~E ~) .r000 \\9 O VINTON~HEIG S x J ,IPp~~ ~ ~~ i I D 5 ~Ca / ~.~, wrSrrR" RV 4'4Bw !J ~./' .NOO ~ ~ ~-~ woo. ~"/ r"• a wv:R ~ /• C~ ~~ ,xR10 .900 r E / x~ _ P NI4GRrx• C blx .Iry aAb ~ ~~ ~~~OC I.~ :1a8 ~ k6fe Ri/7P/' ' •. - •rp°rxnonr naa y p°•a 4ry'. ~ ~ RST Q:.0. CAWRP+N04r yWONLL, q00 ~_! 4 A ,11 1 ?~ NI ~ \ I ~o- ~ r .. f, ... aM 6 .I . ~ 0µ9 .,~ MP ~ i ~ s .I~ _- - - ~~< - - - /• 9 _ _ y ;~ •j , i tLNER g HILLS 9 § ~~ P~~' W~ I r 4d. € d .r g J~. pUNOEE I n / S ~ I -/ ~~~ f ~ ~a II ,P° • ~ Q69:" I _ _.__ ~ , - ~_ T. ~ MEPUWP I . I z° 4 .4N• .900 ~ ~ •~ ~I ~ di L65ux I eQ. /~ ' ea / o L~¢ lv1 A ;.:= .ro.x ~ ~~ I pF THE MT. PLEASANT FIRE & RESCUE: 1 AND 2 (YELLOW) .rooef;~ VINTON FIRE & RESCUE : 3 AND 4 (BLUE) ~ CLEARBROOK:S(ORANGE~ _. -- R r •~ ` ~Q P ~,-~lilillllllllillilllllllllillllillllllllililllllllliiilllllilllllllllillllilllllllllllllllililillillllllllll IIIIIIIIIiIIIlIII11111~ - - - •` - - ~ - ~ - ~ ~ ~ AGENDA ITEM NO. _~/ ,~ - - APPE CE REQUEST _ __ PUBLIC HEARING , ORDINANCE CITIZENS COMMENTS ... - - - SUBJECT: '~ 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: __ ^ Each s Baker will be iven between three to five minutes to comment whethe P speaking as an individual or representative. The Chairman will - decide the time limit based on the number of citizens speakin on an issue, c and will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority o~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. _ ^ All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between a recognized __ speaker and audience members is not allowed. ^ Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at all times. ^ Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments - with the clerk. c ^ INDIVIDUALS SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF AN ORGANIZED GROUP '- SHALL FILE WITH THE CLERK A UTHORIZATION FROM THE GROUP c ALLOWING THE INDIVIDUAL TO REPRESENT THEM. c -_ P E NT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK c - LASE PRI _ - - _ - - ~ - _ - - - - _ mlilllil1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111~ (` 1w~ GENERAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA of General Amount Fund Revenues Beginning Balance at July 1, 1996 (unaudited) $7,176,332 7.92% 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 (250,000) Nov 19,1996 Valley Gateway Project (599,250) Balance at January 28, 1997 $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 maintain 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, ~,C.cLr-,a.., ICJ, ~'~~ Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance M:\Finance\Common\Board\Gen96. WK4 o-~, 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 January 14, 1997 Revised rollover amount 50,057.00 Balance at January 28, 1997 $1,113,043.00 Respectfully Submitted, ~~ ~. Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance " ..J RESERVE FOR BOARD CONTINGENCY COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Amount From 1996-97 Original Budget $305,313.00 August 27, 1996 Public-Private Partnership (105,220. October 22, 1996 County share of Sheriff positions (11,842. October 22, 1996 Outside legal counsel for Sheriff (20,000. November 19, 1996 Environmental testing at Courthouse (14,015. December 17, 1996 Urban Partnership membership (5,000. January 14, 1997 Travel Assistance Grant Program (2,500. Balance at January 28, 1997 $146,735.55 Respectfully Submitted, yJ~.a,.,.~ D. ~~' Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance M:\Finance\Common\Board\Board96. WK4 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: January 28, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Accounts Paid -December 1996 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Payments to Vendors: Payroll: i• 12/2/96 $277.68 12/13/96 648,488.72 12/27/96 622,353.83 $3,098,752.78 1,271,120.23 $4,369,873.01 A detailed listing of the payments is on file with the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors. SUBMITTED BY: Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance APPROVED: E/t" Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator • f ~~ o-~ • Approved () Motion by No Denied () Eddy Received () Harrison Referred () Johnson To () Minnix Nickens Yes Abs ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER V ,. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: January 28, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Report of Claims Activity for the Self-Insurance Program COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: In accordance with the Self-Insurance Program, Ordinance #61494-4, Section 2-86.C attached is the 2nd Quarter (October, November and December) claims activity and status report. FISCAL IMPACT: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Respectfully submi~ted, Robert C. Jernig Risk Manager / ACTION Approved 1 1 Motion by: Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred 1 ) To ( ) Approved by, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator Eddy Harrison Johnson Minnix Nickens VOTE No Yes Abs g:\ris kmgmt\trustees\board. rpt ~ r Vw ~ z o °o °o M ° W O 00 CD O ~ M ~ ~ M _ Q ~ N W a O ~ wQ y Q m N ~ y ~ 0) O> U ~ ~ ~ c c o 3 ~ ~ Q -0 ~L Y N ~ N ~ N ~ y ~ a "O 'D 'O ~ o 0 0 U U U W O O O O O O ° ° ~ O O O ° ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ W ~ Q M a W o m Z W ~ U = ~ ~ m ~ a F ~ ~ .~ ~ U ~ ~ a w Z O ~ ~ m ~ aNi N o a_ ~ ~ r rn E W ~ H ~ ~ U d L -O ~ a ~ fA ~ ~ W ~ °_> L o ~ ~ l0 Z Z N ~ ~ Q W H C1 ~ W D -oo a N ~ a Q m Q U U ~ a ~ axi ~ ~ ~ J (/~ J Q o ~ ~ Z Q ~ ~ ~ ~ C OC J Z W ~ ~ ~ d E W ~ W N ~ ~ ~ ~ N ? ~ Q E U °' m ~ £ OTC ~ O F- Z W F- W ~ ~ D ~+~ ~ ~+~ ~ a U ~ Z w ~ rn ~ m ~ rn p H V ~ co ~ ~ rn O Q O ~ O ~ 0 ~ Q o ~ ° ~ F- ~, J Z U O O O m ~ (~- 5 ~ O O O O O O O M O O O O O M Z O O O O O O O O O O O O O O W O ~n O O a0 O O ~ O O O O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N O n O Q O '- N a O H °C ~ E E E E E E E Q N ~ ~ _ J '~ 07 ~ ~ O7 ~ "7 D1 O7 ~ ~ ~ (~ Z Y C Y Y C C Y C C Y Y Y U ~ ~ U ~ U . m O U ~ N U ~ U ~ U ~ o 3 ~ 3 3 ~ ~ 3 ~ ~ 3 3 3 m Y rn m Y Y m Y Y J ~ ~ ~ N N N N v7 tq ~ N_ N ~ N N N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ y Q a a a a a a a a a a a a a ° m a~ ° ° m d o m a~ m m o ~... Vl tq N to N N fq N N fq N N N ~ O _O _O O O O O O _O O _O O O U U U U U U U U U U U U U O O O O O O O O O O O O O O W O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ W W ~ ~ H Q M d w Q m W Z ~ U O. ~ N i O L U ~ ~ N ~ L ~ a C U7 7 a Y ~ ~ y W O C C O ~ d 47 . C C ~ fA C 47 L 7 C C N C a f0 ~ tq +O+ ~ N N N y ~ ~ N 3 E °' m °~,' ~ a ~ o o a°i F. ~ c 3 ~ ~ ~ m ' ~ ~ v°7i c c ° ~ I- F- 'm a t ~ .~ n E o o _~ ~ W H W ? p) ), a Y ~ a O 7 U U C Q Z m a E -o ~ ° m ° 5 ~ 5 ~ m - -o ~ Q V m o y ~ a ~ E 3 i . c ~ Q m ° ~ m N ° a ~ a ° E c ° o o E v> fq J ~ .~ U £ O ~ ~ y W Z N a U O ~ ~ ~ Y d O N N O. '++ L N O. d ~ ~ m a C ~ ~ `J J Z ~ ~ Y O c m N ~ W ~ ~ N ~ ~ N ~ U O = U N a ~ L :n L a t /1 O y ~ ( O L L ~ N L L J Y N N ~ ~ a N Y N N y ~ U ~ ~ ~ 2 U U O = ~ n 2 O O C ( H W C L N O+ F- OC + N m d ~ Y T T Y ~ ? T N Y . . . - . Y a 0 = ~ ~ ~ ~ ._ ° > > > ~ > > a ~ a > > c n ~ CO CO CO (O GO t0 ~O (O (O N CO CO CO W W ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q F" I~ N M M N W N d' ~ d' U Q O ~ O N M O ~ N '- O O O N D V n n n n n W O 00 ~ ~ ~ O Q O O O O O O O O O O O N y ~ C ~ ~ ~ ^ ~ O M O Q O O O N M ~ M d' m J Z O O O O O O O O O M O O O ~ U M ~ ~ a ;.~_ r~ ~ 0 0 0 ~ ~n W O O M M N O N M N ~, (O N I~ (O Q .- N a O H ~ Q ~ F ~ E a`~i E Q y N N m m J Q) O) ~ ~ U ~ C C ~ _U Y U_ p ~ ~ ~ ~ Q Y N Y fA LA ~ m ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ N Q a a~ ~ a~ -o a~ -o a~ ~ y 0 0 0 0 U U U U O O O O O W O O O O O ~ O O O O O W ~ W W C1 H ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ M ~ p w ~ Z m ~ c ~ O ~' ° U w ~ U U m ~ N W p ~ ~ N U R ~ ~ ~ > ~ ~ ~ L O ~ O O. Q~ O Y ~ N N W ~ V N L+ OU N y ~ w y ~ « 3 o H z J_ p E 'O N C ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ W W Q C _ O O - Q a U ~ p y m U o Q J U ~ ~ ~ ~' c ~ m Q Q Y o +`+ N m _ O ~ ~ y z J - . w E ° ~ N o w ~ ~ O J ~ O 'J ~ m o W W ~ Q 7 O a +~' ++ m mw '~ C W ~ fq m C ~C m O ~ ~ . O' N ~ U J Q N ._ m Q v Q > ~ z W ,~ O O7 y ~ y m C C O N' a O ~ C U ~' W U ~ O. ~+ p d (n w ~ ~ ~ W W CO m CO M (O ~ CO M p F Q U .- N N ~ _ M N LO O p U n W O N Q O O N C 0 N n W U z O O O O U m m 1 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. J"" AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: January 28, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Report on Proposed EPA Revised Standards for Ozone and Particulate Matter. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: At the Board's January 14, 1997 meeting, the Board requested additional information on the proposed revised EPA standards for ozone and particulate matter. Of interest to the Board, was whether or not these proposed revised standards would result in the designation of the Roanoke Valley as a "non-attainment area" for these two regulated pollutants. The staff has compiled information for the Board's review. Attached is a brief report that outlines the EPA proposals. The report has been prepared in question and answer format, as an easy way to concisely present this information. The report explains the nature of the proposed revised regulatory standards, and presents information regarding the Roanoke Valley's compliance status. Given Roanoke Valley's current air quality, the Valley currently complies with both the existing and proposed revised standards. o-v Staff recommends as follows: 1. That the Board receive and review the enclosed information. Respectfully Submitted, ~/~ Terr nce L. Harrin n, AICP Director of Plan ng and Zoning Action Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Motion by Approved, u/ g, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator Vote No Yes Abs Eddy Harrison Johnson Minnix Nickens v-c~ A BRIEF SUNIlKARY OF PROPOSED EPA REVISED ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS In November 1996 the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed revisions to the current ozone and particulate matter (PM) regulations. Questions have been raised about whether the Roanoke Valley would become a "nonattainment" area under the new revised regulations and, if so, what that would mean to our ability to promote economic growth. The following questions and answers attempt to provide some background information about these two regulated pollutants, and the proposed revised regulations. What is ozone? It is the prime ingredient of smog. It is not emitted into the air directly but is formed when nitrogen oxide gases and volatile organic compounds react with oxygen in the air. Ozone is considered a summer time problem because the formation of ozone is exacerbated by strong sunlight and high temperatures. The volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides that form ozone are primarily emitted from cars, industrial, chemical and utility plants. What is particulate matter? The type of particulate matter that the new regulation is concerned with is called "fine particles" - those smaller than 2.5 micrometers in diameter. These fine particles are emitted directly into the air from activities such as industrial combustion and from vehicle exhaust. Why are these 2 pollutants harmful? Though it acts as a protective layer high above the earth, ozone can be harmful to breathe. When inhaled, ozone can damage the lungs and relatively low levels of ozone can cause chest pain, coughing, nausea, throat irritation and congestion. Healthy people as well as those with respiratory problems, experience breathing problems when exposed to ozone. Children are most at risk from exposure to ozone because they are active outside, playing and exercising, during the summertime when ozone levels are at their highest. Repeated exposure to ozone can aggravate preexisting respiratory diseases such as asthma. Fine particles can become deposited deeply in the lungs and cause increased respiratory disease and decreased lung function particularly in children and other individuals with asthma. o-~ What are the proposed revisions to these 2 standards Ozone: EPA is proposing to lower the ozone standard from its current 0.12 parts per million (ppm) to 0.08 ppm. Particulate Matter: EPA is proposing to revise the current particulate matter standard (which regulates "coarse" particles) by adding two new "fine particle" standards. The annual arithmetic mean standard is proposed at 15 micrograms per cubic meter. A 24- hour average standard is proposed at 50 micrograms per cubic meter. When will these proposed rules be final After public comment and review the rules will become final in June 1997. When will these proposed rules go into effect The year 2000. What is the attainment status of the Roanoke Valley The Valley is currently in attainment with both the current ozone and PM standards and would remain in attainment under both of the proposed regulations. Our current ozone readings are slightly below the 0.08 ppm proposed regulation. How is the attainment status determined The Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) monitors ozone and fine particle levels at a site located at Herman Horn Elementary School in Vinton. These monitors are continuous 24-hour monitors and comply with the annual monitoring plan that DEQ submits to EPA for approval. What are the consequences if the Valley was nonattainment for either reclulation? There may be nothing additional that would have to be done on a local level if the Valley moved into nonattainment status. This is due to the fact that many regional and national initiatives, such as negotiations among 37 eastern states to adopt stricter power plant control strategies and the acid rain control program, may eliminate the need for any additional local controls for either ozone or fine particles. If local control strategies became necessary, they could range from mandatory auto emission inspection programs and tighter controls on vapor recovery at gasoline stations to new industries being required to use "lowest achievable emission rates" rather than "best available control technology". 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: January 28, 1996 AGENDA ITEM: Report Updating Status of Drinking Water State Revolving Loan Fund COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: Congress approved re-authorization of the Safe Drinking Water Act in August of 1996. As part of this Act, a State Revolving Loan Fund was established to make available monies for construction and improvement of drinking water systems. These monies are in the from of low interest loans. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The fund share allocated to the State of Virginia for 1996/1997 is approximately 30 million dollars. Approximately 18 million will be used for construction projects and the remainder will be used as set-aside monies for technical assistance, education, source water protection, etc. In December 1996 staff made application for eight projects in Roanoke County. These projects were generally projects that have been considered in the petition for public works program. I attended a public meeting on the program in Richmond on January 7, 1997 and received the rankings for 221 potential projects in the State of Virginia (copy attached). Ranking for Roanoke County projects were 42, 47, 48, 52, 53, 54, 120 and 143. Although some of these rankings were pretty high, it appears that construction funding for the year will end at project 19. v-~ The state will be asking for new applications covering fiscal year 1997/1998 in July of this year. Staff intends to make new applications for these projects and hopefully be successful in obtaining some monies. SUBMITTED BY: Gary Rob rtson, P.E. Utility Director APPROVED: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ACTION Approved () Motion by: Denied () Eddy Received () Harrison Referred Johnson to Minnix Nickens VOTE No Yes Abs a~ J ;, ~ x = S ~ 2 SIx IS I 2 x x S ~, 2S IS S x 2 2 2 2 2 I I xl2 ix S Z 2 2 x S x 2 2, S 2 2 2 S• S S S S x x 2 2 2 S S S x x x S 2 2 S Z S 2IS 2 2 3 I I ~ i Y C Y C Ol • 1~ h O h Oi 10 P m I Ol m m 10 m ml v1 m N m f m~ • 10 N m m N ~O N m ^ m ^ 10 ; ^ I^ _ mIm m IO O m 10 N N N m ~O 1` ~O h l N pp ~fl ~p x f a ~ x N N YNI Yf ~ N N N f f f f ~ f ~ ~ s f f ~ ~ f~ f ° .£ E g I I ' l l i I tll ~ I 1 = Yy N 3 I y ~ I I ~ I; E I ~ ~ I I I I I II I I I I I IJ y ~ i t i O °o i OO ° e 8I °o 8 I °o BOO to°'. °o I8P1i °01 81 °0 OO 0 e °o e °o~I v°iI °o ~1 H 8g °o I°m °o 8 o8 Q4 8 8i °o l °o. OO j °o. °o i °oo ~i OO'$o 8 8 ~OO 8 o,°o °o e .°o 8 °o ~ B $ g~ 81 OO1 81 °ol °0~ o°I °" 8 I °o. e °o °i g °o I °o °0 g 8 g 0° °o8 8 8. ° $ 8 $°o $ 8 8 $ g $ o °o g $ °o ~ °o 8 8 g 81 °m l 8 OO °0 $ 1 8 $ 8 $$ °0°0 oB 8 I°8 0 °o I N 8 o N v>I N o O m to lm Oi N fI ml O I! o O 1 0 o m I .- ~• m l m I N IM oo .O ~ O m O + I~ ' ~i c°D ,~ N;O!~ 8 ' i[°1 m ,°i N O I ~ N O m ~• i O M m' B ~ O M L ^ O ~O 1D ~O N ~O Cf m ~I i N m N O 1^ lf IM N f N m N AI ^ 8 m r N O SI O 0 m 8 N 8 pPj ^ N INI f {L » N MI p N ^~O~i NIN' O N m H N M N N MI N i M N HI I^ N N N N f i N I N N <;t7 d O ^1„iN IN N N l y; N ~IN I N 0 p I ~ N ~ N M MI ~ N ' Y1 M M N M M N N M M w~ ~ N p M N N N N N N U I ~ I ~ I i I I W ~ r. O d. O _~~ O dl OIOO dld'.d I O d O dl O dl OI dl O I dl O'~.O dld OI 'di O O d a OI ldl OI d. O _I OI010 O d~'d'•d d ,O O idld a z 0 d 0 d 0 d O d O d O d! OI d I O, d t ol O d' O d O O d d O1 di 0 d O O d _ O d O di O d O a' O dl O d O O d O d O - O d O O d I I I I I I 1 I '' I I'I i ~ I i „ I I I I I I ( I 1 ~ I o J I I I '`g !~~m a D 2 O v o U o ~o I = E I Y c - u n E ~ ^ ° c ~ i ~~ u u o' c m _ ~ ° N '_u te u "e I ~ ~ I o ~ lolc°'.S U' ~ I`~I¢IE y l T~ ~m o ~ ~ - . ~ m m ~ r a e _ ° 2 N -o 3 < N a c `m 3 o C $ q a S ~ o " u ~ o ° a o a - i 'e a ~ ~o w c ^ L s ~ r c G a v ~ ° c ~ a 3 ~ 0 'E 0 r o ~ I a` >. ~ m ~ ~ lY w ~ 3 r , C o X, $ L_ _ m '3 ~ >. o m c ~ in Ic'•I~:N l ol3 ~i m ~ . c c _ m ` '~ u1 - c i m ~ _ ~ E r ~= 'o U _ „ 2 ~ ~ . E Q a Ti o e ~ ~ ° ~ = U ~ e a ' a ' x l¢ o ~ = a a ~ m c° q @ ~' D € ~ E w Z m a° - I U N 3 q ! m o ~> € v' of l„ L o O . i . U `° o x ~ o ~ ~ 4i.L F m c o x = > ~ . $ a>.._ ~ ° I`o ~~ul~ 8 >'o o, U ' `0 E z 0 o o U m a U o 'm `o F i= ~ U _~ p I c m ~ L° o m f '~'• ~ y ~ ~ E m b ~ ° o 'S ci e t e: c°_ U o E ; a ,°. m U. o. o ~ o _ c ff c ~~ 3 ;c ~, ~. ~ E o O t m m c .f ~ o U ° O p ~ w u _ E S ~ r Z x Y a i 7 x c 9 Y F OIxm ~ r ~ r ~ r ~ r ~ I¢ I€ r p ° a 3 . O m O O z o: IL l< _ w 3 0 ~i° O r:3 > t O 41 o x s 0 ~ r U ~ ~- S y ILL ~ r S O r ~ Ir C U ; Im & w ~ SO r ~ m ~ r z P C m m S IU ~' m C o a r ~ r C 6 m C m O f Z' o ~ r 0 > z < m i 3 z ~ U O r I I$ y, t 2, t o I$ ?' $ ~ ~ r s o 0 0 0 ~ 0 $ Q ~ ~ ` H = I~ 8 ~ g S ~ 8 o $ Q $ Q < s ` 8 8 8 t 8 8 8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ;' Q V ~ N a U 0 Im t = Q o u N 0 N 0 f° ~ a r ~~ 6 Q Y ' e 3 'f e s "~ ~ C ~ N E V tll O N O N O ~ < s iD 0 N 0 N 0 ' C _ y a = Q 8 V C lc` "UC N C m I° ~ 0 V ~ a r3 . m ~ $ O y ~ a r la a u d 4 = a ~ p o a >. C w 3 y a a r ~ p ~ c a c r o. c c ° ~~ w a ma Q a y. ~ ~ a 3 ~ ~ E o m 0 2 ~ E p r$ E p m ° H E 0 m E 0 m E m ~ S S c ~ a ~ g m r 0 U y ~ c = w 3 r ° a l m ; ~ 0 3 a' c '° m ~ Y w ~ ~ ~ ' ~ o U - ~ ~ ° U y. ° = c 'o ~ , ~ = c o' c o ; = b @ _ 3 o o a r c = ~ o U ~ ~ c 0 ¢ 2 o U c 'o U c U o . °. N o B f a r c ~ o U c 'o o - , '. c = ° "„ o c r c ~ ~ w ~ cr = ° c _ ° ~ ~+ ~ m c ~ c _ ° c ~ ° < c ~ 3 o S L c = o C r a r r c = < °rn ~ = o a_ ° c 'o U 3 2 o U U C ° c ' v U ~ 3 o o` s z o o U : ~ ~ M ° e x s a` q o U ~ U C o U ~ o U „ U ~ O g g 'm > o o a 0 >. ~ ~ O 2, c o U 3w c O ~ U o ~ 4 > B N ' z 'o o T2 M o 5 c7 w. ° m o i= 0 o U c . 6 U ~ ~ O x ~ O U Y ~ ' o o U „ ¢ o z o U Y ° c U Y I ° c ° o :J ~ i Z $ U ~ U Y g o Y g U o ~ 3 a `° $ a' ~ a 5 S O cg ± c ~ ~ c 'o U ° o U . ~` € O S O1 = _ o 1 Io s o ~ C o w ~ ~ ~ a ' ~ I~ ~ w ' o > > a '~ °o ~ o ° ' ~ S o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m c° ~ o b o ' ~ ~ o o' c s a ' o o a ~ ~ - w ~ ~ ' ~ i U r w > fn c~ ~ ~= r r r a o r m ¢ m ¢ ¢ r r s r ~3 U a b r a= r 3 3 r r r U m r r r a r m r r ¢ ¢ a m < ¢ ¢ a r > w m U r Z ~ ~ ~ ~ I 8 ~ g ~ ~ ~ m ~ i~ l~ ~ s e a m a g ° ~ I~ ~ ~ g g ~ ~ s g q ~ ° s s s s ~ " N m ~ ~ g ~ m y m io m ~ o c m n N p n m ~ N c N n O N O r i O i o ' o N ~o ~ m m m '~ c ~ c ' vQ,' I ~ ~ N ~ O n O 1°m ^ rn m _ - P e _ m _ ~° n O N O_ N m N ~ N io c ~` m m et ^ ro N io N . M p np N N u N i° N % N o m 8 S ~ o N p~p N m ^ a ~ c D o ~ Q rv N ~- N N ~ ~ N 1j 1 a ~ p a N N IN N N N N ~ N I' f~ a N a [~ N N N N N N ' ~ ~ ~ ~ N N l~ N N 1~ ~ N t' a a a N fV a ' a 1j 1 N a a N ^ ~ ~ o i _ I^ _ I_ ' ^ ~^ .- i.- I I^ I ~ _ I_ _ I_ m ~ ~ o m a ~o o-~ ~' I 0 l l l l l l ~ l j l l l I I z ' Iz IZ z Z z z Z Z Z z Z~z Z zI2I0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O OIO O O O O J x ix oI Ix S S x Z z z z z z 2 z z Z;z z Z z z Z Z ~I I I I I c I olo o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o n N n N N Y Y~ ~ i ~ n n ~o .o ~ - o rn tiro n m n n Y ~ m~ I K I °n n N ry o 0 0 0 oIo p l 2I 'y I II ' III I I I' I I I I i I I N ~ W ~ I 'I I I = O€ I - i~~ I I I ~I I F ml~l i I ! I ' I Ill ( C I i i C9 ! ~' I III ~ I I N ~ ~~I ,sl,ol,o s l iii o s~o s'lols sls s sls;sjsls,slo s IS o~sl s o ~ ' 0 ,s,ols s u s s _ s~s Nslg 0 oa o g o o ss ss I oss o g o o ss o g o o g sss slslo o s o s s s s s o oM o o~ oooN I ~~~'g~~~~s~~s~Io~~ogs s~~~~~o~,N $~s~~~s O I ~l I°ss.I~~,olo O I ~ g ~ p C ; ~I^.~Is»,s O O N.O10 OS~O p O ~.;°s.~js IOoG C P O IN 1 mIN m IN O O O sg, O N O m OIpp NIA O N O W CIO l Ih p pp ~p pp p p I_f Omi O M M O N O ~N~pp I~IO ~f N~ S O N ~ O N n f00 O N ~O m O O O n N N N M ~O r N ~ M~ O~ N.~ N M N N N N N N Y pp iM N 'N Of ~Of O {L O IN N I .- NON I N m ~p M.N HIp IM mf N N SIN NIN NIN NI N N ~ N M~If' h Ht~ N _ f N N ~ m f N M M IN N N N N N C O I I U, W~ ~Olp O~OI O I I II ~ I I 'U ~U O Oj~t ~t ~O~ ~O'..a al =I0 O O O IO d di o d ' ~O ~O O O O V O d d d a a d z d U c° O O O OI O O p pZ, O OIr IO O OIOI .J°c 0 0 0 O,c° O O O O n O O O Q d did d z o:_ . d._ a d d,_ d d z z d dlold d a o d d d -'o I IIIIIIy d d_ d , _ olo d. _ z z d d d o ~ I I I I I I ~ , ~, rn I I I I I D U a 0 I_ O 3 I N C I` I b a P UI O,~OI PI V i~ l°iO O NI Uy• cl ,_,. I._~ U OI-~ O'U ° O IO Ti .. ~ o i m' ~ ~ _o ° W c ~ ` A c ~ o L D - C_ 0 Y U V U E S L O L O~~_U T E • • ±NQ ~ - ~ 1 3 ~ m ° 8: U 8'a .. N a ~ Q ~ W O• Y 7 9 0~ V 6 IT ~, ~ ° 3 m 8 ~ P3 ~ r , I °' IQ Q~E' r ',3 Ir I~ P uv w Plv Y• Q' U • rn~ ~; ~ ' LL~Ix I I I ~ ° _ a • g - L' - Os36 > m $ m - ~ o ~> a g v -~ ~, q & J O. O P j> O ~ w ~S O Q a ~~~, U a=m~° ~ ~°~ ° a r m.Y > ~ T P •~,- c a °v~ a , m n IC IC Y „ r li Olioyy ~ ~ ~ (J ° .N 81>,Y~~t s N gl'~ ,~,_ I m l ~ CZ • a K ~ ~ I,a c 7 a ° v C ~ ~ ~ C C • O S O C ~ • ~ ~ ~ > V• D y C V • Q U C ° G 'S g ic'uc.o ~ 8 ° 2sLL 4 ° ~ x 9~smm Qa ¢ ° ool a 0to Qlf = al° E Q ~ H I __ _ c y I = ~ O xi Im lm 2 UIV IJ x~ w • Q j Fogie oho o ~~a ~vIZI go3'~~ml~ °' U ( NU m I' ~ .~ ~ ° ~i€~'~ c3 `` n m I of>cr 2 •~ •o 'c oU QaooQ `o `o oo ~¢ ~. Q'~ C ¢5 % J'. d .2 ~~^ m a o~ Flo e o X b~°°~ b+•~ S b~ a C $ w b~ c o w° ~_ €~ O r rli~io m i l cr-iI~ a wl¢ aI r ~ r r r 31a1x = r z (!S OIL m r r m w z r r r r r ~' r U z 3 U m -+ t7 w m> W w r x i c I~ 2' ~ • c ~ c ~ > r ~ a a' ils U > o ~ 5 @ = r ~ ~ ~' c, g . ' s a ~ 5 : m 7 y ~ ~ U c a c m ~ v o u o ~~ T q o U m U N m Cglb ~ ~ ~ o ~ o~ $ 'c 8 $ U r 2• 5 0 5 c N C ~ n N ~ „ p Q E <o U ' L 3 O L lJ ~ A J ~ 0 V : O • e3 j ~ >~~ S• •ee m S~ J 1 ;~W~m mbar • LL 2 b C ' O O r~ ~=y_ .a N _ e 0 S •• C C ~ J :$ 'r`o'~oa;~f.S6o 2~g~s~~~N ~~s ~I~°' ~> N J m • C 0 J > p~ ~ O C o U> 'C g ; ~ > Y ° O 0 0 ~ C C a C IL C U ~ U~ S r m ~~ LL Q m LL • C S O 'C O Q y ~ S U S ~ ~'c o ~ ~ K ~c o E £ u J ° ' " = I.. o rfa= • r_° U q 3• Em,m s o 0 0 O C Y -~ o~• U U - 0 3 LL o 3 c c U •• =Uo xe3 0~ ~„ o 9 ~ o m me c c c7 w~ ao ~? ~. m • ~ m m q S a o U 8 ; (/ a U c I~ Y a ~ U ~ a o Q o a£ c o 0 8 Y V 8 8 0 0 0 o a 'o `o Sao oa5`o o iU' z. a ~ ~ { ' ~ E ~ ° ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r r smo 4 ciinzrr 7i rULL (lrUrr 3 °~ v ~ rc U Yr ~rr LLamm il= rd r3 z UK ~ r` i¢r U o N ~ a°~88ar r80B~h 5~ '" ^ O l 8 O, = O po N N n ~ N N ' M N pp O~ s I N I ONN ~ 0 0 r ^ O O N arv~ g g g fPV A I .~ r ~'OI YI ~~ _I p O ^ N g mg9i~m O~ N H S O m O~ m m $ NMf O ;,fig g p frp$nX ~eYi' ^o~n oNr~ ~ o~~ ~ O r N s M N r m l' mm °~ B O O p~ N O ~i~I~l ~ O~ O~ 0 0 1^ O ~ .N- O ~ M ~~ ry O ~ ~ ~ N N1~ ' ~I~D O P N _ m> O S N M ' O tp r ' N •N- , I I , O NHS ~~00; ~Q I N m O O ~ i(1 ~ I I 0 b ~~_ ~ ~ N N N _ N ~ ~ A f f N ~ r N ~ N m N ~ f f ~ mQ :Q 6 I {Mpp ~ 01 impp N ~ m ~ N N M ~ ~ ~ ~ 1~ Q L^ ~ C^ X 0 } ~ ~ ~'I~'~~ S ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C ~ ~ ~ 1 ~~^ $ ~_ ~ ~_ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e ~ Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Y ~ C ~ ~I~I~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ /~~ N om' ~ a N Cl ~] a ° ? R, N A r , I~ I C IC a rv N N n ~~ O~ -~~ N N N N I I ~ ~ N f~ N fV a' [~ _ 1 ~ c~ ~ A A A a a a a a N N a a N r l~ l~ a N H t~ ~ I~ ~ . I~ a IN ^ N ^~I ' ^I~ ~ ~-I ~ "1~~ .N-I^ I O I I 1 ~ O ~ N OJ h . , N Y M~ ~ f• N J [ v ;;O.;0,O10 ~ O O, 1 O 1 I D O O I OH i I O OOI I 01 0 O O O I O O I I OO10;0 O i t O O O O I OIO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O R N ~ w N 3, Y _c°i ~ ! l ~O p~N N N N ~ N N' I O I NI N ~ tOV N N N N ~- N 0 0 0 01 ~ I IN 0 0 0 0 N N N 0 N P a0 Q~aD I m 0 m 0 0 0 0 m 0 ~° O m b f ^I f ^ < ^ < N N O O O m m H 0 0 0 1 I i l I I i ~ ~I i l ~ I I ' : I I, OI I ~ I I ~ I I l I I p S I ~ I I I I ~ ~ ~pp N IY!~I i I ; I I I I I f I I W' £' II _ <:a II l N v I I ~ ~~. I I I ~ I ~; I i Y I O S S O SI S S O I S I O o S S S'0' O o 01 p 0 O SI S I O O S I~O, pp O O O p S O O O' O O O O p S O O CC O O p S O G G O O p O p p 8.8 . O G O G O p G 8 S C 0 G p 0 0 p 0 G 0 p 0 p 0 p S O O L~.O ' S 8 ..S'~ C S 01 S 0 SI C $'' O' o l O G o SI O C',O $~S'I$ n S CI O O ^ mI OI S G S1 S O 8 O SI O GOI S S,~I O S oI C S p 8' O ° O SI S' p ~I OG S~S I O o I G S O SI O S ~ C S O S O o G ~~~af C +lm ' 010 8 S O SI cl C i S O 8 O O o O O N c O 8 S O o O IQ i N m~ 8 O ~ O Q I S ~D. LL I ~..°n S o u', .:,'~o wl I n rn ~I rn rc l nl w oo I ' w N wI op n ^i w ,° ono w'wp i ~ o e ' w Q E ^, of n w o w o w n -I °I n M'OO vii N P~P .Nitlw l °O n w S n w po Nf °o w M N aDl I Q E 1D ~ I°o' wH S n S M Q E~ p •°N; 25 °o m .i°. ,°q ac ~ w M OP l , m ac Sw a ' wl p .N+ an o w~ a N u n a ~ n ~ n w S o r U° i ~ I W m. a: '~OO O~O' I 0 0 l 0'.0 l I o U' a OIO I I O!O I OI dl c O O I O I O I O U.OI I O l 0 0 I O O I 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O~a `u O O r' dd d d~ dl d 1 ala 0 _ O _ a ztid! dld dl o s _ , d. d.I LL _~d' d d.l d. d d d. d_ d d d d d d _ s - d d d s .I d .r L d d d d s - d0 d. d ' i I I it I II I 'I I i j '~ II ~ ~ ~ci ~ l ~ ; V I j u I I I I ~ I ~' l V I ~ j = ~ I II i I m ; U ~ ~ ~ o ~ a a I I~ I~ ~ ~ ° o ~ a m ~ ° ~ 8 ° 0 ml I UI Id ;` y u NI ~ml ~' I a E n ' 3 n tjoni ~ P ¢ 'c ~ ? l E °' ~~ o L c E u i ~ v m - I~ `o ( 3 c e ~ ' c 5 ;~ c E o o .y a O O o£ n' ~' 0 oI lin ' c ° I I l o ._ aiw l~i clc ° a' o P to I_ U I ~'Om p I n j IC ° m ° m It ' w I ~ o m n ° ~ ' o O- ¢ r '.2 Orn _ ~ I~ '= ~ u o 'u o ~ m .E ~ °° ~ T o ° IU _ lo It a u l o ~ o N o ._ > o 5 S ~ n t m K U l_ ~ z o U o S b = . m E° m 3 L' m a a o . o _ `c 1 E lu ° y ~ o a _ ~ ~ ~P ~ c m E E m o U m u E to a o ~ o n .- ~~ N U a 2 S c o' a p m ml ~o ~ -' > .~ ~ ~ ' c I ~ ~ I °' ~ ~_ , ~ I c'am$ l ~ la l I ~' cl n «° o U f ° a' '2 I °._ u, E' l ' a n o m `u ^ 3 I ~~ J w C ' ~ m ` r o :~ ` ~ 3 -° i` o O c o E o c u 'S N ~~ m ^c ~ O > 8 - m o U v I . E 0 3 I ,U zl ° ~? ° : : ° m ~ <^ ~ . E' Im 'V U m = ~ ' o ~ rn „ miE na c clew ~_ O ~ ~ o ICI ;. . $' m ~ `S 1 ~ 1 a~ a im ~ m g T a,a a ".Io c ~ ° V ~ ; u ~ l o ° 0 m o ~ l~ m U u N ~ ~ m o i t V ~ U o I U ~ = o ~ Y mm m ~ b a r ~ m ~ ` ~ L 9 ° 3 C - _ c _ J'= N ~° ~ L o '~ c = ~ qq y a t° o _ o y u O ' C O 5 O - -° ~ ` ~ _ c To m G lS ° a N I - Q 3 > -, ~ d: 1''~¢ U.r ~ ,r ~,U £ I~ o ~.~ m ~I~ U~O,N ~ w ~ o ~,r to %c , o L l LLl V'.~ U 2 CH I!" O E d I I o l LL a f= !~ ~, ?' a IZ ~ ~io ~o rl>ir $ l._ S IE In ILL t ;q .S I._ ILL ir U ~ r m lm I: lam ~ ~ ° . m OO '> € to r € ° ~r > l0 'm ¢ `; tn '¢ 3 ~ f E , m ~ O 3 ~ ~' 2 J!s Y ~U $ 'r = m U - l.n 'v S n U R'Z ~.. r r~ _~ U ~ f-~ (~ o '> ~ LL > a ~ o O Ali ~~ r .c r .~ ai m a+ '~ ~ L a .~ C C 'C ° aJ C ° O p U ' C O ° ~ C n O ' 8 ° a m = ~ a ~ a S ~ U ''8'8~ t'n t'n ' ~ j~ = y is ~ ~ ~ u ~ o t a u n 0 o 3 ~ 3 ~ 3 ~ f° ~ a ~ ~ a ~ m V 8 '~ r c m ~1 C ~ ° ~ „ '0 L 8 ~ N a 0 U _ ~ C ~ ~` . ~ ° ~ Q O a O ° < ~` a o S c ° ', o' o' I 'mm L ° a m m o. ~ o 3 a m w s s a ~ l3 N N N s r ~ C ° O ~ o '` ° ' i, ~ a' ~' ~ a ;;~ ~ 8 r r s U O ~ m ° ~ ~~, m 'I m o l = m c ` a 3 la 3 = ~ E 2 o ~ U n o o m c o . ~ ~ o Q ~ m ~ ~ T Z N c o S ~ s 3 a o 3 ti a a' c o U ~ ~ ~ U `o ; 6 a ~ a 3 m _ 'S 5 a 3 r s L. ~ ~ j o w 8 ° ~ o = `gi a o a' n d o o U , e a : s ~ c ~ U ~ a R E N r ~ • ~ ~` V ° '~ c ~ ^ a S ~ c o o. ~I ~ __ -° I .~,o ~. > III U ~ n o N J u L 3a $ d U o U c $ o U U o 'a S 0 > ~ -° o ~ ' o U c c c i y t i m 5 r > r > r > Q t'° -° 3c ; , s ~ ~ i o m U o C9 ~ o o U t o 3 ~' "c a U 0 ' c r 0 ~ o t° ff ~ S a r ~ w ~ c o C ~ ~ U , m ~ Q' C ~ E LL = a ~ th V °c ~ 'o o Z~i IUW U. o i ' o. IA N ~~ o ° p, f i c lo c 'a o '€ I o ~ m 'o W ,S ~ O r ~ ~x = W E o c c o r .6 '- m .` o n n g r p c o U a „ c t `o m z a jp ' ~'§ o U r 0 U r 0 U z o U O m n o rn 'o ~ O U o N Z. o c i > y ° ° g U s ' _ ~ Fs y a >m o S O o m E °U o ~ > > g ' Y b ~ ~ ° C7 ° (7 °' $ S tl ° ~ o Q E ~ U 3 ~ if o D ' ~ s w o ~ ~ ° t€I~ r ~ r ~ o A f I~ m 1N m ~ I o I c t' a s '° ~ o p o m u ~ ~ P o c 0 c 0 c o 2` ~ o m a E ~ b ~ w ~ m m T ^ „ m . _ c . ~ c c ^ o ~ ~ s o 0 7 w 0 I ~N ~10' U '~r _ U t, ',~ Y i ( , ,N I ,W T LL U ~ I U m ~ a r 8 -~ m f r . lr 2 2 2 Y U r m ~ m 3 r r LL r ; ~ O W m ~ U ~ ~ U r ~ ~ R 2 r U r (? ~ U > a U 8 Z 0n 8IOi a p ~ Oi~Ntpp Q~ ,, ~ IOjiN N S p p N Np p O p ~(f O ~ 1° + G ~ p OO i~~o m ~ ~ Q ry ~ p~ O ~0 1 Y• p ~p n O N q n O 1p ~1 ~ O ~ ~ ~ m pO ' p O ~ p ~O p O N p 1° p 8 ~ ° ~ ~ ~ ~ m ^ (~ ni N n O '°Ni p O~ M O~ .f'I In 1Pp 17 1 D N n N A tp N n ^ IN O nl~~°if m m m rn °i ~ ~ ^ N C off N ^ Y p1 q 1p m~ fn m~ Nl rl q O O p m qqq ~ fIl N > 1 i , N I ~ N O G ~ GN D f N I ~O ~ N M O ~ ~ ' ' ^ ~ O_ ^ ~ ~ ~ p y~ YOi N lp m i'1 N ~ N ~ f ~( f Yf IpD ~_ ^~ ~ ~ O J ~ ' N ^ ~ M f p° p 10 Ip'J $ I m N N 1 0' l 1° = ~ a N t° O T I,6'~O_'~~~ pp ~ m~ ~ p ~ p NIP N ~ p ~ p °1 O~ ~ 1 ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ p mli~ ~ ~ 1 ~ m I~ ~ ~ ~i~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ Ln ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ Q ` ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a7i ~ ~ p q 2 ~ QQ C ~ ~ N m W I a a ~ ~ VV ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ t C ~ ~ O Q N ~ ~ 1~ Y Q a m l O _O wl Na _ ~a ^ ^ ~ I`r h P ~ Q ^ ^ ~ ~O ~ `r N a _ M 'a _ ~ ^ _ ala ^^ "_ ~ ~ ^ ^ ~ _ a ^ N alN _^ a _ a ^ _ a ^ a ^ a a ^ ~ ~ a a a a a l - tYV ^ _ aa a _ a a ~ a a - a a a a a a a C a ^I I I I ~ O < N N /D 1D A O o-~ J ~ ~ ~ NN iN N, I N NI N IN NI N N N N N N NININ NI : N I NI NI , N N NN N N N I ! • I I ~ I I i i I I ! y O ~ o 0 0 0 0 0 oio o~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0l 0 0 0 0 o I a I s i s n I s I I I 81 8 8 8I 8 8 8 8 8 8 8.1 8.1 81 8 8. 8 I j 8 . " i ~ » « » I ill ! I I j I I i ! i I I I I I I i ~l I i I , l i I I I ~ I I! ~ d i ' l l I i ! I ~ ! ' 1881 $Q I ! I ! ! ! I ! $ j ! '0 8.81oi i i o! ~ q I ' ! ° 1 I ! I Si~ I ! S I i E 25 I i I = y ; I~$ I I I . O gi I I! ''Ni $I~Qi g j 1 j ~~i I I I I ' 1 i i I I"j I ~; j";" I I ~ !"I ~ I ~ j I;~ I i i ljl I ~I ~~i l ~ 'I ~!'I ~~IIoI ~ i; ~l o ~ A '~! I I i l!' I l l I ' i l j 1 1 I I ' 1 1 1 I I I I I I 1 1 1 j ~ •' w ~~I : I E, ! , o ,, I i ,., ~ I o f ' o I I I I I ~, 81 i! 1 LL ! I I I I I I '8; I 1 u. ~ I $' ~j io ~, ~ 31 e N ~ I 1 I.,o. I D a.e i I .~~ ~I 'I I '~ ~ 1 n' n l ! ~ I O O I I I I ' I I I I " I l I ~ I ~ ~ I "I W " I I ~ I I • e i I ~ ~ . 1~ ~.. . ~ I ' ~ I ~ ~ U '2 i I~ i ! O Z,N W I S~ isO O~c_°i O!OI i IOII c°O! O Ir c° r 01'01010!0'0 c° tli $~OI i ! I ~S'O'2'N r O a -C dd~ ~d~0' a. O'~O O Oi dla, d'alu O,O-0~a I '. I I I I ~ I I ! ~1 <! zl ' I i ! ~!! j I l j l l i'~ I ~ I I of °i I ~I ~ I ~ ~ W ~ , r ~ ~ i I ~ I I ! el 11 I I Zi i !~ i I I CI I I I I I ! I I I i . I I ~ I j i r 1 i u I I u i I rI 1 i O I I I ! I ' 1 ~ ~ ~ _ ~ m I I I ~ `~ i I ~ I ~ I ! I I ~ I I N I! I I R o oI I I j l l l l ~ a I 3 ' I I ' I I .. ^o q i l ~ 1 $5 fi1 I I I ~ !~ I !61 1 '~" c I I ', o Ic 3 •I ( ~ lal m°~mlm° •I IYi i! I I I I I ~ ! ~I I ! i 4 n e m 3 g ~ '. ~' I 1 ' I cl ci I ~I !p Ir!EI I oIC ~I ~g eiw I ( I I j I I zI > ° I ( aYl 1=1=I i i I ~, ~ u,~l , I lolej o 'I ocl9~ I ~ e ~ I I i l I l! 3 a , IE`E;~ 'S!o ! ' :a oll% '''I`'clrc!o !rj I ; ! . d.2I LL!LL r r.LL 10 1~,U.UU U U~ I 'U' I i! ~ ,`o_ ~ e = e v = i C C o LL o U ~ ~3 IU ~ { Cw r QQ~ 5 3 r Td ~ j 8 o gCg 3 S ~ _ C ~ a g 'r e ~ 3 ~ ~ J ~ 7 c ~ U N ~ s c ~ 7 ; ~ s ~ ` ~ s r » l ` = s` 3 r a s > a ~ ~ Q a s ~ ~ ~ a N ~ a N ~ 0 iy m 0 5 ~ ~ 5 m ~ ~ t ~ ~ o i g e ' > ~ li s tL s ~a ;s s ILL lo LL o 1L o . y a s ~r 'S lO u ~i lY l; R ~ p VVV lll ^ : qC y gC £ ~ N '~i S '~1 y '~ S W ; N Y • C) !c~ ~ ~ B ~ ¢ ~ $ x ~ ~ r ~ u r ~' .ti ~ ~ u I< 0 !u < 8 u < ~ o ~ r a ~ u o ~ r 7 : LL 1~ g 4 ~ o u ~ x . c ~ '~ ~ ~ 3 ~ 3 o F u o £ u I5 ~ u 0 u ~ S I ~ o u Z m ~ O ~ I~ "~~ h N ~ ~~ ~ Q I~'Yj ,N 8N IM p 18 I ~ l 8O W l 8p O N I~ j$ j~,g g ! lg lg lg i~ l~ $ '8 ~a 1~ _ l8 ~ ~ !~ n I !e l~ ~ ~ ~p p 'e~~iE !~ I~ I~ I ~ ~p IY !~.~ ~p ~E '~; ~ ~p ,~ ~l. ry I ~ I ~ ~ ~i~ p E 1 i~ '~j~ I I ~ ~ ~ ^ i I ~ N 1 I aj a a ~ ~ I a ~~ 1 la \I ~ a 1^.' l~la , ''~ Ia In n ^ NIH I I ~ I I I I i a I I - I-I I_I_ i_ I_ I~ I_ ^I i~ l~l~ l I!^ I I I~ _ _ I I ~ I ! ~ Pf do b a A O O O h O N O O N Y N h N m N O N O N N N N N N N h N N • N N N N N t0 N N A N N ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER AT A REGIILAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SIIPERVISORS OF ROANORE COIINTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: January 28, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Work Session on Year 2000 Computer Upgrade COIINTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: This time has been set aside for a work session on the Year 2000 Computer Upgrade. Craig Hatmaker, Director, MIS Department, and Don C. Myers, Assistant Administrator, will make presentations. Submitted by: •~ ~/ Don C. Myer , Assistant A ministrator Approved by: J ,~ ~ ~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ---------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved ( ) Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied ( ) Eddy _ Received ( ) Harrison _ Referred ( ) Johnson _ To ( ) Minnix Nickens _ . . 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: January 28, 1947 AGENDA ITEM: Budget Work Session on the Upcoming Annual Budget for FY 1997-98. ('niTNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S CQMMENTS~ SLTIvIMARY OF INFORMATION: This time has been set aside for a budget work session to discuss several items concerning the FY 1997-98 budget. The County's operating budget is currently being developed by staff; therefore, a comprehensive inventory of departmental needs will be brought to you at a later date. This work session will focus on the following items for discussion: • Capital Improvements Program Summary and discussion • Mid-year ExpenditurelRevenue Update • Preliminary FY97-98 Revenue Projections • Tentative Budget Calendar The CIP Summary (Departmental Requests) and the Budget Calendar is attached for your review. Budget/Work Session notebooks will again be provided and will include detailed information regarding the other topics mentioned above. Respectfull submitted, Brent Robe son Budget Manager Approved by, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ~.. a ACTION VOTE Approved () Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied O Eddy - - - Received () Harrison - - _. Refereed () Johnson - ~ - Ta () Mmnix - _ - __ Nickens - - - ~_ a N T E R MEMO O F F I C E To: Members, Board of Supervisors ~~ ~~~ From: Elmer Hodge, County Administrator ~~"" Subject: Preliminary Review of Capital Improvement Program Date: January 23, 1997 Attached you will find a preliminary summary of departmental requests for capital. The purpose of this document is to provide the Board with a general overview of all capital requests determined by departments to be significant. Therefore, the summary contains all projects and related costs as requested by departments for the Fiscal Year 1998 through 2002 CIP. Last year, several of you requested a listing of projects that have a more realistic likelihood of receiving funding. Currently staff and I are working to pare down this list of projects. Several of the projects will be transferred to a deferred projects list. These are projects which, through the staff review process, have been deemed less critical in nature, and therefore fall outside of the 5 year scope of planning contained in the CIP. The Board may choose to reinstate any project included on the deferred project list. This list is merely staff's recommendation. The revised summary and the deferred listing of projects will be provided at the January 28, 1997 worksession on the CIP. We look forward to working with you on the CIP this year as we strive to improve the process and overall content of the document. N O O O O O O O O O O O N O O O 00 O ~ ~ s++ . } lL ~ O O O O O O O O O O G O O O O O O G O O O O O O ~ ~ N ~ ~ N V' d L 7 ~ ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O . O O' ~ ~ O ~ O ~ O O O N ODD ~ LL) W r N N fR to 00 r ~ r N d A y O O ~ W~ O O O O O 0 0 O ~ ~ ~ ~ O t~ O ~ O O ~ N ~ r N N r [fl ~ ~ O r r N ~" O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ~ O O Off t~ ^~ .~- ~ O O O ~ ~ N Oi r r e - r r ~ lt') In N r } cv ~ ~ . d ~ O ~ a ~' ° o° °o 00 °o °o _ •r d N Cf O O O O ° O O d~ o N O~ ~ ~ rn M v ~ o O v a0 C O. ~, O ~ a~ c ~ ~ 3 0~~ „ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 V~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w+ 0f U ~ O I~ ~ ~ O ~ O O ~ (O ~_ ~ M CD '~ ~ CO O O ~ N N O M 1~ a, l0 O i0 ~ M r O O n M ~ ~ O n N r U d C r ~ CO N r ~ .. m ~, ~' ~ r r r N M r r N M ~ ~A CO ~ L as ar 0 rn ~ O Y a a~ c U C d m L a y N c •m ~ C ~ U • V ~ ~ Q rn m iq ~ lL ~«. c y ~ W ~ O w > U t O C N ~ ~ C ~ m Ul f0 z 4. C Y '- a v ~ ~ - > N d1 7 v ~ ~ O V N O ~ Q' L ~ Z ~ '~ ~ a a~ c Y 3 ~ ~ rn .~ ~ ~ m C ~ Q o m m ~ ~ O O W (0 O -Q c i a y N L m ~ ~ '- >° ~ w N >. m ~ O .~ C s fa0 O`~ O t~ C~ C ~ > ° ~ v O ~ N -° ~ 1. C 7 U ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ 3 ~ O m C O .~ ~ U Q U o lL C N a~ t0 >O C ~ C C N ~ •~ ~ ~ v w f6 E Q Q d ~ L ~ ~ C~ O ~ Q y oif •~ N ~ W (p O .p ~ U U N a U w 0 z d E ' N O O O O O O O O ~ O N O O t!') O O M O O aD ~ LL ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O t~ ~ O N N ~A f~ V -- ~ . N ~ d 3 r ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ~ i °' O O O O O O O a O CO O W r M V_ ~ O LL M d eo H W °~ O O O O O O O O O O o~ O O O o 0 o O O rn rn ~ O ~ M t~ O O ~A O V~' ~ d0 01 r .- ~ N ~ ~ LL O O O O O O N O O O ~ O ~ ~ N O O Of N N M O ~ ~ ~ O ~ LL Cf d O Y ~ ~.+ =a O ° O ° O ca "~ ~ o ~ c o_ o ~ d~ N C~ M M c °' a °' a 3 ~ d a~ c ~ ~ ~ ~~~ o ~n 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~n 0 o 0 0 0 0 (~ ~ v p N O O O O O O O O O N O QO 00 ,. m U . ui O o (D 0 to 0 O 0 O 0 M 0 ~ ui CO o ~ N v O CO Sri f~ G. O io ~ ~ tD a0 (O f~ N M ao t0 ~- U a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .. c d ~, ~ O r- N N N N N M ~' ~ CD ~ N ~ '~ as d O y C O ` ~ l4 C N o U ~ c a~ ~ rn c ~ c_ rn w ~+ o ~ >. m m > ~ ~ LL m ,~ ~ a~ C o N ~ a f0 ~ ~, U T w V (n ~ ~ ~ O C ~ ~ _ ~ N m 'j ~ ~ ~ ~ C ~ 7 .~? ~ V ~ C ~ ~ C- V U m C ~ ~ N N ~ a ~ ~° d ~ • ~ ~ Q ~9 ~ ~ ~ m ~ Gl ~ c (0 ~ 'O Q C Y a ~ ~ ~ rn C og ~ ~ Q ~ O a N 4. y `° p f6 C `0 N N m ~ ~~ N "O ~ ii o o a i ~ o ~ i (~ N a iL ~ ~ ~ ~ Y. o ~ o ~ a _ rn c N o y ~ S ~ a~ -p ~ ~ 3 ~. :B O E 2 2 ~ o Y c C o O c C = ~. c •~ o rn O -Q ~ c C o ~ fl Z U m ~ S 2 m 1- a°o ~ ci ~ U cj . O ' M a U D W O Z _n U c R E N t6 L d Q L ~ a c R ~' ~ o o d E N 0 ~ ~ c `c. ~ ~ o ~ ~ U ~ a fa U N O r O O N fy O O O O N } O O Of • W Of ~" LL ° ° ° o c o c o N ~ O) t~ O N O ~ I~ M ~ O ~ ~ m O O ~ O C O CO CO M i ~ ~ CD °o °o °o °o ~°n °o ° O t!') O O CO O M N ~ V a0 M R m ~ r ~ M ~~ O O M O ~ O O O O O ap O O M O O O O O O O O O O M N ~ O O O O O O) COO N ~ N O ~ O N Vim' V' O M tf) N O ~ ~ O ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ~ O O O O O O O ~ O O O cD O O I~ O U7 O CO u7 O O oD O (O O ~ O M h• ~A M O Q) ~ O (O ~ ~ ~ ~ M ~ M (O ~ ~ ~ N N N r CO ~ O O O O O O O O O O O N ~ O h O O O O O to O to O O I~ ~ O d' O O O O O ti') O ~ O O r O O ~ O O O N Op M I~ O ~ ~ (V O ~ O a0 O M U) r M N O r V' ~ c0 M N OD O O O p~ ~ O ~t I~ O) O ~ O N ~ ~ O! f~ ~ OD V' O N r ~ r n O O O O ti O ~ ~ O 0 ~ ~ Of c~ c 0 a 0 W ~ M N ti ~f r ~ ~ } r r I i. M M ~ c o :o . °~ °~ L C a ~ aL w N ~ ~ O O 0 ~ ~ r +~ „ o CD _ r a 0 _ V O jp O r ~ co N 0o _ O N CD O) _ ~ ~ N f~ ~ r+ a O r M c m ~. 'C O ~"' N M ~ ~ CO I~ O ~ 'C ~a d 0 O O O ~ N M O O O O o ~ Om ~ r N O O O O M O O ~ O O O O O N O tl) O O ~ O O O O M O ~ CO O O O O O i~ O N O O ~ O O O O M O OD ~ O ~ O t!•) O ~ O rf O) O f~ 0 o ui o v ao ~ ~ ao ui ~ u'i o o ~i v o ri O O f~ ~ O) M r er In Q) N O O f~ M 00 CD CO O O N r O f~ O M CO M tt7 f~ ~ O r r r cO f~ ~ N I O N r N M ~ In O n GD O) Or er- ~ .M- ~ ~ (r0 ~ ~ o U m c > o N p~j U o ~ - U 7 ~ U 'O C Q N ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ U , m ~ I6 p O) ~' c C~ c m C N ~ ~ ~ '~ Of ~ O .N ~ a W 'J O) y ~ o > T `~° ~ -~ c m N O U N ~ L1J ~ w p ~ ~ E O U •C E U C O C a w c m C ~p ~ c m ~ T w > N ~ J ~ ~ J a ~ J (~0 ~' •~ O C O U Ul ~ fn ~. aci ~ ~ a y ~ ~ i C7 ~ a o ~ Y C O E U ~ to Y ~ d 3 Ll. ~ C ~ J = o m Y a - ~ C7 N ~ U c i~ U N ~ 'C E U x m E U U ~ L r m _ o L ~ y O. T > = n a Y a ~ ~ N ~ Q ~ Y a ~ .N. C E a ~ c U U •~ ~ •~ u. s C N U O ~ m c O. ~ O O .` fA _ o ~ ~ N C d ~ m ~ x ~ a (~ dj U O C .L ~ ` N C U c o ~ Q' ~ N .m U _ o L ~ Y Q. Y lq N ~ L 0. C o m m ~ °~ y Y ~_ ~ n ~ c~ ~ a U o z uJ' a N y ca d ~ O Y ~, oa.. R m o O d E N O j ~ a c a~ ~ O U G. R U N O r O O N } LL O O O O N LL O O • Of Of r Of Of d0 O> Of r } LL Of 01 OI r rn c o :o '~ c a ~ w ++ y 0 a~i U ~O rte. a` o c r E ~' a` D ° ° ° ° ° ° o o o o o o O O O O O O 0 O O O O O i ` ~ N O O O O O O O O O O O O N O O O O O O O O O O O O N O O O O OI O O O O O O ~ t A 'C O O O O O O O O O O O O r ~ ~ N O O ~ ~ O O O O O O O ° o ° ° ~ ~ ~ o u i ~ n n ~ N N N N N N V' ~ N M ~ ~ CO c c o O U .y. ~ j .° . ~ ~ p, ~ . a ~ ~ y o c C ~ ~ 3 rn ~ o v c ~~ C ~ > n j C f0 ~j ~S ~ O ~ ~ C c ~ O ~ ~ ~ L N _N L ~ t/1 O O 0 o 2 0: -~ d m L .O C p ~ .U ~ N ~ ~ p ~ Z U ~ J 0~. (n ~ O ~ 0 O O O ~ ~ COO N ~ COO N ~ COD O O O COO O O O O O O O O O O) ~n v n ~n ~ r ~ O O O COO O O N 000 tOA ~ (OD ~ ~ N M ~ ~ a0 ~ N M ~ to CD N N f6 o a a` ~ ~ d ~ O a c ~ a .~ W ~ ~ y ~ O U c N ~ y ~, ~ N 0 a~ .n ~ n N ~ y ~ ii y N o N ~ m c U ~ t0 a cn o U O w ~ 07 ~ ~ ~ w' ~ E Cj U c m °' W f6 ~ .~ O ~ m o ~ 0 0 O N n i~ O ~ 00 r C' M CA O i0 M n M CD O O M N N ~ ~ N r 69 O O ~' ~ ~ 00 ~7 d' C ~ ~ c~ O O 1~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ O ~ N COO N ~ M t!') ~ (D CO f <- ~ N ~ ~ E ~ ~ o .... ~ O T 3 j C N ~ ~ ~ ca N ~ C6 Q IL w ~ ~ _a o lL '~ V O ~ ~ y ° `0 0 .c . O c i a o ~ o. ~ U ~ ~ ~ 1 - N I N a ~ y a~ i m ~ c ~ 4: ~ m c ~ a c ~ ~ '~ ~ ,c ~_ i ~ O i W L O Q ~ y ~ y y F U N ~ O C i ~ W ~ w w i c o t .N a C ~~ `o ~ U ~ N T ~ 'rn E ~, ~ Q L L_ S f- ~3 N U ~ E F N ~ ~ ~°n u m c o < E ~ a ~~ m n a ~ u (D V1 U y >+ 'y c [ a~ c O ~ U C y u y G m a~ a ~o ~ a ~ u) u V- o c ~ U C U (0 ~ 7 m c c ~ ¢ G 4- ~ V V i i 6 i i i i i i 1 s O A ` O a w O y i ~ • O ~ a i ~ i a 0 i ~- ~ ~- j U j c I ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ U ~ C 1 ~ j O I i v i. I ~ Q i ~ i i .~ .a n 07 M U 0 W Z n 5 E -~ I N T E R MEMO O F F I C E To: Members, Board of Supervisors ~~~ From: Elmer Hodge, Gounty Admuustrator ~,~'~~~ Subject: FY1997-98 Budget Calendar Date: January 22, 1997 Please find attached a tentative schedule for the development and adoption of the EY1997-98 Roanoke County Budget. The dates and events shown on the calendar are presented for planning purposes and can be modified to suit changing situations as needed. This schedule highlights notable components of the budget development process and provides an overview of important dates to ensure legal requirements are satisfied. In general, the chronology of the process is similar to that of prior years; however, development was started earlier this year to allow adequate consideration to all prominent issues. Please review this proposed calendar and convey any suggestions or concerns to me at your earliest convenience. O~ O~ O~ a 0 m - ~ I.t1 d~ - ~~ d .~ ' uc Q a c_ ~ °= ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~- •= ~~ v w M - N M m o ~. a~ ~ N = I- E •" d .v ~ rp M ~ .... o- O N CT -- N M m o d ~,,'z •~ `^ 0 3 e o X11 N ~" O~ - 00 -- N m N L N f~ ~ (~ ~i. ' ~ rr 1~/ x a • . E . ~ a°JC W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m H '~ ~ H ~ d © ~ ~ v v~ CO C ~ ~- - /M~~\ W ~ 1'~ - N N ~- ,4 ~"' ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ d °' O ~ ~ M C.:~ d ~O N N m 0 Z H N O~ ~ ~l1 -- N (~'z a /~ V~ a e p a H X11 N 00 -- N a p W d" ~~ 1~ - N N o .~ N ~ .~ ~ H ~ V d ~ ~ 3 Y ~ M ~~ ~C - m N N o "~ d ~ ~ W ~ ~ d e ~ o v V c V O~ ~.~"f m N .~ N ~M+ d y y rr L W Q y c ~ c ±-' ego d a c ~ L,l1 ~ C °° `~ ~~ d C ~ . c .~ ~ U'd °d' o a~ p o = . .~ • `~ . _~ ~ c ~ L d 0 •• ~ ~ ~ ~ a~ ~^ g ~ ~ bn ~ . i ~ ~i E O ~ d ~ O C ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C.7 ~ Z g l m ~ f- v S m 3 F- _ _ ~ - ~ CO ~ x.11 'd" - m - a N e .~, d ~ ~o r N a-+ 0 ~} V M m ~ N p z N ~ N ~ N q-~ O~ O~ a h 0 a ~' 1~• N ~'`~I 0 M O VD N d ~:= E a+ o ro o a, ~ ~- ~- Q d Q 'uao G bo C c b~.0 d O o~ m ~ O ~ m ~ C M ~ N ~ ~ C V ~ V ~ /\ LV ,N V1 d N N N d ~ C ~ ~ C O`Q ~ ~ r ~ _ ~ y O a ,a; d OC 11 N V C W D ,~ _O H °C V ~ ny X H O C ~' ~ .~ •~ N N W H O C f! a~~+ O O ~3 ~ '~ lV F- O -0 Q1 i~ C ~ ~ ' C ~ ~ '~ c L o ~' ~' " a~ .° +-' vs c v ~ '.~ d a d v Y o .c a °- a m c~~ Q op --• vs v ~~ ~ ~ .eC d rt ] ~} v ~~~ ~'~ O / e ~ l \ 1~ a z° 0 v ~~ M - ~-- N Q 0 a H N V ~ ~ C~~ M (~-oti H ti O~ e 0 e N N O~ ~O ~-~'1 N s 0 a OO ~.r1 d' - - ~'V e 0 O t~• d' M - - ~'V 4 D Q D ~'_ ~ °~ a i m ~ N ~ ~. N li ~p M O nl ~T ~ - C'V M 61C _ C • N `w w1I ~ O i '^ ~-+ N i a~ d ~ Li. .~ 'a as O .G O ~ ~ in (~ C '~ ~L ~ i lQ .Z ~( 0 LV _ ~~ d O _~ ~ L ~ m C = m N N d` VA m H 'Y w ~ m ~ C RS ~ N C ~ m a, a~ ~ ~+ x ~ O ~ N O m d = :~ LEI ] ~ C'G N O ~ ~/ A a v 0 S ~' .~ r''``r ~"V N e 0 N M 0 ~O ~ V (~_~. O~ O~ ^_ s 0 m s H /~• V '_ ~ ~~ M N M 4 LL ~ ~ nl O~ N M S t D H ~ = ~ d ~ a d ao ° m - _ - m 00 ~`V N a 0 W Z ~~ N A , l ~ ~_ 'D ~+ v O ~ ~ ~N b4 O ~ 7 ~ d ~ G y0 C .~ m Q ' ~ Q W ~. t+ _ a ~ d as p,, ISO O C N O OD w ~ • ~ 0- OC M.=-~= O ~ a G t~,~ ~ a 0 z 0 f N O~ ~ N e 0 z H ~ w . A w 1 __ ~- A [ `I ~~ O~ O~ o~ /~ V~ o~ s ~' - Q~ a 0 W ~1 \Q s v n~ ~~ ~0 Ln ~"'~~ a v W Z W - ~ ~ l d' - - N e O F O t~• ~' M - - N 0 ~ ~ t'V O~ N M H ~- - 00 N N Q.~ t y AT A REGIILAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SIIPERVISORS OF ROANORE COIINTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COIINTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TIIESDAY, JANIIARY 28, 1997 RESOLIITION 012897-11 CERTIFYING 88ECIITIVE 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 Nickens to adopt the Certification Resolution, and to notify that Supervisor Johnson was absent for discussion of the item concerning the potential lease of property for the Social Services Department, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson 1 NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: ~' Brenda J. olton, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Executive Session ACTION # ITEM NUMBER ']"-1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: January 28, 1997 SUBJECT: Introduction of David Wiley, Music Director and Conductor, Roanoke Symphony Orchestra COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND INFORMATION: David Wiley, Music Director and Conductor of the Roanoke Symphony Orchestra, will be present to be introduced to the Board of Supervisors. Attached is biographical information on Mr. Wiley, who is serving his first season with the Symphony. ~yyt~~ /' Y Q-~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator JAN-24-9' FR I E'~9 : 53 pAVZD WILEY, Music Director and Conductor 1 Biography Celebrating his inaugural season as Music Director of 7'lte Roanoke Symphony Orchestra, D,A-.V>lD WILEY is admired as nits of. the most dynamic young conductors in America. Fox the 199596 season, David Wiley served as the A.ssistazxt Conductor of The Minnesot4 Orchestra, a position he also held duxirtg 1994.95 with the Indianapolis Syrzxphox~y Orchestra. where he had been the Paul E. and Martha Schmidt Conducting Fellowo Wiley has led nuzn.erous concerts with The Mina~esota Orchestra, skzaring the stage with such celebrities as Doc Severinsen, Bernadette Peters, Ben Vereera, and The Sounds of Blackness. Wiley has also conducted the orchestra on its "Symphony for the Cities" tour of Minmesota and Wisconsin ir.. July of 1996, attended by over 50,000 listetzers. Maestro Wiley made his Minnesota Sorrxm.exfesc. debut this past sunomer, collaborating with The Minnesota Orchestra and pianist Chxistiax. Zacharias. In additiota to numerous concerts with clte orchestras of Minnesota and Indianapolis, 1Vlaescrc Wiley has conducted the Cinci~ati, Columbus, Hawaii, Kingsport, Milwaukee, Northwest. Indiana, anal Savannah Symphony Oxehestxas, performances with both the Aspen Chanabez~ Syzfaphony and Concert Orchestra, and a produetioza of Puceini's La Boherne with the Asper.. Opera Theatre. Mr. Wiley's numerous opera and musical theatre credits include a 198 production o£ Leonard Bernstein's Caudide, adapted and re-arranged with the blessing anc. guidance of Maestro Bernstein, and productions of Bernstein's'VVonderful Town, Pucinni's 11. Tabaxro, and Mozart's La Einta Giardinera and Le Nozze •di Figaro. In Juxte of 1997, hE makes his debut with Opera Roaztoke, conducting Verdi's La Trawiata. Wiley has just received the Doctor of Music degree izt Conducting from Indiana University. where he had received his Master of Music degree in 1.992. He holds a degree in piazu~ performance with honors from the New England Conservatory of Music and a degree ir.. Religion, suznnna cum laude, from Tufts University. A tlaxee-summer scholarship recipient ir.. the Aspen Fellowship and Seminar Conducting Programs, Mr. Wiley ~uvon the prestigious 199? Aspen Conducting Prize, which led to his engagement as Assistant Conductor for the 1994• Aspen Music Festival. He bad also been the conductor of the Indiana University New Musir Eztsezxzble, with whom he has toured and recorded, and has been a conductor at the Music. Academy of the West in Santa Barhara. During the summer of 1995, Wiley was a conducting; fellow at Ta~nglewood, awarded after he conducted the Boston Symphony Orchestra. in rehearsa:. at Symphony Hall. Barn in 1956, David'Wiley made his debut as both pianist and composer at the age of ten witY. Boston's professional Adventures in Music Orchestra, in the pxezniex perfornaance of kris first. piano concerto. IJaviaog continued to compose, he has pezfoxxtted his three pzazao concertos: while his vocal music has been recorded on several CDs with the Tufts Aannalgax~aates, a chora;. ensemble he founded in 1984. His commissions include incidental music to staged production.. of lEuripidcs' Medea and Feydeau's Motel )Paradiso at the Indiana University Mainstage Theatre- and a synxphonac work, Prism Bars. JAN-24-97 FRIG 09:54 AM ROANOKE SYMPHONY 7033430055 P. 02 As a piano soloist, Wiley k~as perfotxned with the Indianapolis Symphony Orchestra, at the 1996 Nli~esota Orchestra Sonunerfest, at Aspen, and as a jazz pianist in Symphony Hall, Boston... in addition to recital appearances in China, Russia, Romania, Bulgaria, and throughout the U.S David Wiley and his wife, actresslsoprano, Leah Marer live in Roanoke. f - .. .. / AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF BtJPERVI8OR8 OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COIINTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TIIEBDAY, JANIIARY 28, 1997 RE8OLUTION 012897-12 AUTHORIZING THE E%ECUTION OF A PERFORMANCE AGREEMENT WITH THE RROGER CO. AND THE INDIIBTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF ROANORE COUNTY AND AN APPROPRIATION OF FUNDB THEREFOR WHEREAS, the County of Roanoke and the Industrial Development Authority desire to promote and encourage the economic development of Roanoke County, Virginia, and the Roanoke Valley by the expansion of existing businesses in the Roanoke Valley, in order to provide for increased employment and corporate investment in the County; and WHEREAS, this increased employment and investment constitutes a valid public purpose for the expenditure of public funds; and WHEREAS, The Kroger Co. desires to support these economic development efforts of the County and the Authority by expanding its facilities in the County. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the execution of a performance agreement with The Kroger Co. and the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County for the expansion of certain economic development facilities in Roanoke County is hereby authorized and approved. 2. That $1,780,000 is necessary to pay for the County's performance obligations under this agreement. These funds are derived from the following sources: (A) $869,917 from license fees paid by The Kroger Co. from 1994 through 1996 currently held by the County in an escrow account. (B) $460,083 is hereby appropriated from the Unappropriated Balance. (c) $450,000 is appropriated from the Unappropriated Balance to the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County. 3. That the County Administrator is authorized to execute said performance agreement on behalf of the County, upon form approved by the County Attorney. 4. That this resolution shall take effect immediately. On motion of Supervisor Harrison to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. H ton, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Timothy W. Gubala, Director, Econ Development Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance 2 Item No. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY, VIlZGINIA BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA MEETING DATE: January 28, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Request to Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the Execution of a Performance Agreement with the Kroger Company and the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County for the expansion of the Kroger Mid-Atlantic Distribution Center and Appropriation of Funds COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: County staffand representatives of the Kroger Company have concluded a performance agreement providing fora $35.5 million capital project in west Roanoke County. The project, to be completed in phases over the next five years, includes expansion of the current Mid-Atlantic Distribution Facility, and the construction of a new Vehicle Maintenance Facility (VMF) in the Glenvar area. The total taxable investment will be $26.9 million. The initial phase of the project, the VMF, will generate approximately $90,000 of new taxes after construction. Kroger's estimated total new taxes from the project over the five year period will be $1.729 million. Payback will occur between year 2003 and 2004. The Kroger Company is currently pursuing an aggressive expansion plan which includes new stores, expansions of existing stores and remodels throughout the Mid-Atlantic region. The Mid-Atlantic Distribution Facility, opened in 1959, is inadequate to handle the expanded business. The proposed expansion is expected to serve the company's needs for many years, and will expand the facility's distribution capabilities by 50%. The project will add 125 new jobs to the current 330 positions at the facility. The Roanoke Valley Economic Development Partnership has obtained training funds from the State of Virginia in the amount of $600 per job, for a total of $75,000. Kroger is also donating 1000 feet of property along West Main Street to be used when VDOT widens that section of Route 460/11. In return for the investment being made by the Kroger Company, the County will appropriate $1.78 million for public infrastructure improvements and land acquisition purposes as follows: The realignment and reconstruction of Garman Road to provide for access to a signalized intersection at Allegheny Drive and West Main Street. ($1 million) 2. The acquisition of approximately 4.8 acres of real estate from four property owners for road purposes and Kroger's Vehicle Maintenance Facility project expansion. ($400,000) 3. The extension of public water and sewer and funding of connection fees to serve both the Mid-Atlantic Distribution Facility and the Vehicle Maintenance Facility. ($170,000) 4. Storm water management improvements in the area to alleviate past drainage problems. ($50,000) 5. Payment of project costs, e.g., surveys, engineering fees, appraisals and contingency. ($160,000) A unique provision in the performance agreement settles a dispute between Kroger and the County concerning local license taxes. Instead of receiving the full disputed amount, Kroger has agreed to accept a partial refund which the County will allocate to this project.. In return for this investment of public funds, Kroger agrees to complete a new 30,000 square foot Vehicle Maintenance Facility, to employ 125 additional people, and to obtain building and trade permits for new construction and building renovations at the Mid-Atlantic Distribution Facility on or before the expiration of the five year period. The performance agreement sets forth a repayment procedure in the event Kroger's new taxable investment and employment goals are not met by 2003. FISCAL IMPACT: The performance agreement calls for an investment of $1.78 million by Roanoke County. Of this, $1.33 million is needed for the County's portion ofthe performance obligations, and $450,000 should be appropriated to the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County to meet its obligations under the agreement. These funds are available in the County's Unappropriated Fund Balance. ALTERNATIVES: Approve the attached resolution and authorize the County Administrator to execute a performance agreement with the Kroger Company and the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County. This resolution appropriates $1,330,000 from the Unappropriated Balance to pay for the County's portion of the performance obligation and $450,000 from the Unappropriated Balance to the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County for the project. 2. Do not approve the resolution at this time. 2 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative 1. Respectfully submitted, L~/L~C I ~ W . Q~~~lrGr Timothy W. Gubala, Director Department of Economic Development ,~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ACTION Approved ()Motion by: Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Attachment No Yes Abs Eddy - - Johnson - - Harrison Minnix _ _- _ Nickens 3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JANUARY 28, 1997 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A PERFORMANCE AGREEMENT WITH THE KROGER CO. AND THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF ROANOKE COUNTY AND AN APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS THEREFOR WHEREAS, the County of Roanoke and the Industrial Development Authority desire to promote and encourage the economic development of Roanoke County, Virginia, and the Roanoke Valley by the expansion of existing businesses in the Roanoke Valley, in order to provide for increased employment and corporate investment in the County; and WHEREAS, this increased employment and investment constitutes a valid public purpose for the expenditure of public funds; and WHEREAS, The Kroger Co. desires to support these economic development efforts of the County and the Authority by expanding its facilities in the County. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the execution of a performance agreement with The Kroger Co. and the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County for the expansion of certain economic development facilities in Roanoke County is hereby authorized and approved. 2. That $1,780,000 is necessary to pay for the County's performance obligations under this agreement. These funds are derived from the following sources: (A) $869,917 from license fees paid by The Kroger Co. from 1994 through 1996 currently held by the County in an escrow account. (B) $460,083 is hereby appropriated from the Unappropriated Balance. (C) $450,000 is appropriated from the Unappropriated Balance to the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County. 3. That the County Administrator is authorized to execute said performance agreement on behalf of the County, upon form approved by the County Attorney. 4. That this resolution shall take effect immediately. C:\OFFICE\ W PW IN\WPDOCS\AGENDA\ECON\KROGERRSO 2 In return for the investment being made by the Kroger Company, the County will appropriate $1.78 million for public infrastructure improvements and land acquisition purposes as follows: The realignment and reconstruction of Garman Road to provide for access to a signalized intersection at Allegheny Drive and West Main Street. ($1 million) 2. The acquisition of approximately 4.8 acres of real estate from four property owners for road purposes and Kroger's Vehicle Maintenance Facility project expansion. ($400,000) The extension of public water and sewer and funding of connection fees to serve both the Mid-Atlantic Distribution Facility and the Vehicle Maintenance Facility. ($1N~0114) J~o~ pa o 4. Storm water management improvements in the area to alleviate past drainage problems. ($50,000) 5. Payment of project costs, e.g., surveys, engineering fees, appraisals and contingency. (~'~~ /~o, oov A unique provision in the performance agreement settles a dispute between Kroger and the County concerning local license taxes. Instead of receiving the full disputed amount, Kroger has agreed to accept a partial refund which the County will allocate to this project.. In return for this investment of public funds, Kroger agrees to complete a new 30,000 square foot Vehicle Maintenance Facility, to employ 125 additional people, and to obtain building and trade permits for new construction and building renovations at the Mid-Atlantic Distribution Facility on or before the expiration of the five year period. The performance agreement sets forth a repayment procedure in the event Kroger's new taxable investment and employment goals are not met by 2003. FISCAL IMPACT: The performance agreement calls for an investment of $1.78 million by Roanoke County. Of this, $1.33 million is needed for the County's portion of the performance obligations, and $450,000 should be appropriated to the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County to meet its obligations under the agreement. These funds are available in the County's Unappropriated Fund Balance. ALTERNATIVES: Approve the attached resolution and authorize the County Administrator to execute a perfornance agreement with the Kroger Company and the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County. This resolution appropriates $1,330,000 from the Unappropriated Balance to pay for the County's portion of the performance obligation and $450,000 from the Unappropriated Balance to the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County for the project. 2. Do not approve the resolution at this time. 2 AT A REGIILAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SIIPERVISORS OF ROANORE COIINTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COIINTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TIIESDAY, JANIIARY 28, 1997 RESOLIITION 012897-13 APPROVING AND AIITHORIZING THE SALE OF A PORTION OF THE CAPACITY OF ROANORE COIINTY IN THE REGIONAL SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT TO THE COIINTY OF BOTETOIIRT WHEREAS, by Resolution 101194-1 adopted on October 11, 1994 the Board of Supervisors approved and authorized the execution of a Regional Sewage Treatment Contract, dated November 1, 1994, on behalf of the County of Roanoke with the City of Roanoke, the City of Salem, the County of Botetourt, and the Town of Vinton; and, WHEREAS, by Resolution adopted on December 17, 1996, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County approved and authorized certain amendments to said contract; and WHEREAS, the County desires to sell a portion of its allocated capacity in an amount not to exceed 990,000 gallons in the Regional Sewage Treatment Plant to the County of Botetourt, substantially in accordance with the terms and conditions of the proposal dated January 23, 1997, from Mr. Stewart Lassiter, P.E. of Finkbeiner, Pettis & Strout, Inc.; and WHEREAS, this proposed sale of flow capacity in the Regional Sewage Treatment Plant is based upon the proposed permitted capacity of the Sewage Treatment Plant of 62 MGD and, at the rate of $.75 per gallon of flow capacity. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, By the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, as follows: r 1. That a contract to sell a portion of the County of Roanoke's capacity in an amount not to exceed 990,000 gallons in the Regional Sewage Treatment Plant on behalf of the County of Roanoke to the County of Botetourt, substantially in accordance with the terms and conditions of the proposal dated January 23, 1997, from Mr. Stewart Lassiter, P.E. of Finkbeiner, Pettis & Strout, Inc., is hereby approved and authorized. 2. That this contract is contingent upon certain permitting approvals from the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality with respect to sewage treatment plant capacity of 62 MGD. 3. That the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors is hereby authorized to execute said contract on behalf of the citizens and Board of Supervisors of the County of Roanoke, subject to the review and approval of the final contract amendment by the County Administrator and the County Attorney. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: Supervisor Eddy A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. H lton, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Gary Robertson, Director, Utility Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney 2 JAN 23 '97 11 15 FR FPS INC 910 855 5648 TO 15403876230 P.02i02 p1NKBEINER, P1;TTYS & S'P'ROUT, INC. January 23, 1997 G(1jv~L1'LYC S4GiP~T~S E$'~JtBLISHL'D if0~1 oNe C~~VTERV~v! ~xuYE GREF`lSBORC~. ~C I7w7 yias9a-xv~ ssa~sssue vi+x FMS lvxr. Elmer Hodge County Administrator County of Roanoke 8204 Bernard Drive, SW IZOanoke, VA 240i8-079$ Mr. Gary Robertson Utility Director County of Roanoke 1206 Kessler Mill Road Salem, 'CIA, 24153 Re: Roanoke Regional WPCP Agreement for Purciaase of Capacity Roanoke Regional WPCP Dear Sirs: The proposed terms for the purchase of flow capacity in the Roanoke Regional Water Pollution Control Plant (WPCP) by $otetourt County froze Roanoke County are summarized below, The proposed terms as of 3anuary 21, 1997 are as fellows: 1. Botetourt County will purchase up to 990,000 GPD of capacity in the Roanoke Regional WPCP froze Roanoke County for $0.7$ per gallon. 2. The purchase of the full 990.404 GPD of capacity is contingerxt upon the Virginia Department of Eavvronmental Quality approving a WPCP capacity of 62.4 MGA_ 3, No additional capacity (0 GPD) will be purchased if the WPCP capacity is less ihan or equal to 52.0 MGD_ 4, 'The purchase of additional capacity between a WPCP capacity of 52.0 MGD and f2,0 MGD stall be prorated on a straight line basis from 0 GPD additional capacity at a WPCP capacity of 52.0 MGD to 990,000 GPD at a WPCP capacity of 62.4 MGD. ~, Purchase of additional capacity in excess of 990,000 GpD shall be open to negotiation brxween the two parties if the WPCP capacity exceeds 52,0 MGD. b, payment of the purchase price, in full, for the amount of flow capacity purchased shall be made upon final written approval of the WPCP capacity by the Virginia Department of Envuronmenta! Quality. The proposed terms listed above shall be presented to the Board of Supervisors of each respective County #or review and approval at tYze earliest date possible. It is anticipated that ~d eBbaard "`x1997 ~Pldeaseicall meelfaeither ofryoui bavice arty queshf o s~s during January ~'Y c: Mr. Jerry Burgess, Botetouzt County No~c TOTAL PAGE . 02 ~* ~~ .__.- 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: January 28, 1996 AGENDA ITEM: Resolution Approving and Authorizing the Sale of a Portion of the Capacity of Roanoke County in the Regional Sewage Treatment Plant to the County of Botetourt COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: Roanoke County, Botetourt County, Roanoke City, Salem City and the Town of Vinton are involved in a major upgrade of the regional wastewater treatment facility and the Roanoke River and Tinker Creek Interceptors. Roanoke County's main need in the project is to obtain additional capacity in the interceptor lines. Our present capacity in the treatment facility is adequate for today's need and will increase from a present capacity of 9.0 MGD to 15.20 MGD if the proposed upgrade is approved by DEQ. Botetourt County on the other hand has expressed a desire to obtain additional capacity in the treatment facility. They have seen their growth increase at a faster pace than they envisioned during the original expansion negotiations and feel they will need more capacity than they originally requested. In early 1996, DEQ denied approval of the tiered permit concept as outlined in the 1994 contract. This decision required the other parties to renew negotiations and to amend the contract. The tiered concept was based on an average flow capacity in the plant of 42 MGD that would expand up to 72 MGD during period of heavy rainfall. This is now being replaced with a proposal to have the plant upgraded to 62 MGD capacity at all times. 'During negotiations to amend the wastewater treatment contract there were vazious proposals for allocating capacity above the origina142 million gallons per day (MGD). Under the tiered permit concept each party had an allocated capacity based on 42 MGD. This concept allowed each party's capacity to increase lineazly to a total of 72 MGD during wet weather. Roanoke County felt strongly that our capacity in the upgraded plant should also follow the lineaz concept based on our percentage of flow at 42 MGD. Under the Roanoke County proposal, Botetourt County received approximately 0.6 MGD less capacity than they would have received under Roanoke City's original proposal if the plant is upgraded to 62 MGD. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Because Roanoke County made significant financial concessions during the original contract negotiations, the other parties agreed to Roanoke County's proposal for allocating additional flow above 42 MGD. Botetourt County made the greatest concession in agreeing to this proposal and therefore requested the ability to purchase 0.99 MGD capacity from Roanoke County. This capacity would be purchased at a cost of $.75 per gallon. Based on negotiations between Botetourt County and Roanoke County, Mr. Stewart Lassiter with Finkbeiner, Pettis & Strout, Inc. has submitted a proposal with six conditions (see attached letter). Roanoke County staff has recommended that the purchase of 990,000 GPD capacity be contingent on a minimum upgraded plant capacity of 62 MGD based on the following growth projections. Should the upgraded plant capacity be between 52 MGD and 62 MGD, the sale of additional capacity shall be prorated on a straight line basis from 0 MGD at a plant capacity of 52 MGD and .99 MGD at a plant capacity of 62 MGD. AVERAGE FLOW FOR ROANOKE COUNTY 1996 6.5 MGD 2020 * 10.1 2040 * 13.1 MGD * These numbers aze based on a growth of 500 equivalent residential connections (ERC's per year with an average flow of 300 GPD/ERC). In 1995, Roanoke County had 298 new ERC's. Roanoke Co. Plant Roanoke County Capacity Per Plant Capacity Proposed Amended following Proposed Contract Botetourt County Purchase Treatment Plant Capacity @ 42 MGD 10.3 10.3 Treatment Plant Capacity @ 52 MGD 12.75 12.25 Treatment Plant Capacity @ 62 MGD 15.20 14.21 FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of this proposal will allow Roanoke County to reduce its cost in this project by $742,500, if the upgraded plant is permitted at 62 MGD or greater. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The agreement should protect Roanoke County's need past the year 2040 if the plant upgrade is approved at 62 MGD. Staff recommends that the sale of 0.99 MGD capacity to Botetourt County be approved contingent on the six conditions in Mr. Lassiter's January 23, 19971etter and that the County Attorney be authorized to work with Botetourt County's legal staff to prepare a contract document. SUBMITTED BY: Gary Ro ertson, P.E. Utility Director ACTION Approved () Motion by: Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to APPROVED: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy _ _ _ Harrison _ _ _ Johnson Minnix _ _ _ Nickens ~w, AT A REGIILAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF BIIPERVIBORB OF ROANORE COIINTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINIBTRATION CENTER ON TUEBDAY, JANUARY 28, 1997 REBOLIITION 012897-14 APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF THE SECONDARY ROAD SYSTEM SI% YEAR CONSTRUCTION PLAN FOR FISCAL YEAR 1997-2003 AND APPROVAL OF THE ALLOCATION OF FIINDB FOR FISCAL YEAR 1997-1998. WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on January 28, 1997, to receive comments on the adoption of the Secondary Road System Six Year Construction Plan for Roanoke County for Fiscal Year 1997- 2003; and the adoption of the Funding for Fiscal Year 1997-1998; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors does hereby approve the adoption of the Secondary Road System Six Year Construction Plan for Roanoke County for Fiscal Year 1997-2003 and allocations for Fiscal Year 1997-1998 as set out on the attached Secondary System Construction Program. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution duly attested be forthwith forwarded to the Virginia Department of Transportation Salem Residency Office along with a duly attested copy of the proposed Second Road System Six Year Construction Plan for Roanoke County for Fiscal Year 1997-2003 by the Clerk to the Board. On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: /e~~%~ Brenda J. H ton, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Virginia Department of Transportation 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: January 28, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Public Hearing and Adoption of the Secondary Road System Six Year Construction Plan for Fiscal Year 1997-2003 and the Allocation of Funds for Fiscal Year 1997-1998. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS: /f`u~'_ ._ _D ~~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY• Staff is requesting the Board of Supervisors to adopt the attached Resolution to approve the Secondary Road System Six Year Construction Plan for Fiscal Year 1997-2003 and approve the allocation of funds for Fiscal Year 1997-1998. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: In accordance with Section 33.1-70.01 of the Code of Virginia, as amended, the Board of Supervisors is required to conduct a Public Hearing on the Secondary Road System Six Year Construction Plan to receive public comment. The plan before the County Board of Supervisors was presented to you at a work session on January 15, 1997. At the work session, County staff explained the evaluation process for inclusion of projects in the plan and also reviewed the estimated funding for the next five years and how this year's allocation ($2.4 million) would be distributed among the three funding categories. 1 STJNIlKARY OF INFORMATION: (continued) (~_ ~ Staff is now requesting the Board of Supervisors to conduct the Public Hearing and approve one of the following alternatives and impacts. ALTERNATIVES AND IMPACTS: 1) Conduct the Public Hearing and adopt the Resolution approving the Six Year Secondary Road Construction Plan for Fiscal Year 1997-2003 and Allocation of Funds for Fiscal Year 1997-98. 2) Conduct the Public Hearing and defer approval of the Six Year Secondary Road Construction Plan for Fiscal Year 1997-2003 until staff can review (if any) additional comments received at the Public Hearing. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative 1. ITTED BY: Arnold Cove, Direct of Engineering & Inspec ions Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred To Motion by: ACTION APPROVED BY: ~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator VOTE Eddy Harrison Johnson Minnix Nickens pc: Virginia Department of Transportation No Yes Abs 2 GC- I AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JANUARY 28, 1997 RESOLUTION APPROVAL AND ADOPTION OF THE SECONDARY ROAD SYSTEM SIX YEAR CONSTRUCTION PLAN FOR FISCAL YEAR 1997- 2003 AND APPROVAL OF THE ALLOCATION OF FUNDS FOR FISCAL YEAR 1997-1998. WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on January 28, 1997, to receive comments on the adoption of the Secondary Road System Six Year Construction Plan for Roanoke County for Fiscal Year 1997- 2003; and the adoption of the Funding for Fiscal Year 1997-1998; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors does hereby approve the adoption of the Secondary Road System Six Year Construction Plan for Roanoke County for Fiscal Year 1997-2003 and allocations for Fiscal Year 1997-1998 as set out on the attached Secondary System Construction Program. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution duly attested be forthwith forwarded to the Virginia Department of Transportation Salem Residency Office along with a duly attested copy of the proposed Second Road System Six Year Construction Plan for Roanoke County for Fiscal Year 1997-2003 by the Clerk to the Board. v ~;% _._ AT A REGIILAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF BIIPERVI8OR8 OF ROANORE COIINTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COIINTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TIIE8DAY, JANIIARY 28, 1997 ORDINANCE 012897-15 TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLA88IFICATION OF A .73-ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED AT 6024 WILLIAMBON ROAD (TA% MAP NO. 38.06-6-2) IN THE HOLLINB MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLA88IFICATION OF I- 1C TO THE ZONING CLA88IFICATION OF C-2 WITH CONDITIONS IIPON THE APPLICATION OF GEORGE JACOB WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on December 17, 1996, and the second reading and public hearing were held January 28, 1997; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on January 7, 1997; and WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing .73 acres, as described herein, and located at 6024 Williamson Road, (Tax Map Number 38.06-6-2) in the Hollins Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of I-1C, Industrial District Conditional, to the zoning classification of C-2, General Commercial District. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of Georqe Jacob. 3. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the westerly side of U.S. Route 11, 100 feet southerly from the intersection of the westerly side of Route it and the southerly side of Route 623, both 1 extended; thence with a division line between Lots 12-B and 12-C, S. 78 deg. 1' 30" W. 200.17 feet to an iron on the line of Lot 11; thence N. 0 deg. 0' 30" W. 222.25 feet to an old iron on Route 623; thence with the southerly side of Route 623, S. 64 deg. 40' E. .181.29 feet to the beginning of a curve; thence with a curve to the right, whose radius is 25 feet, an arc distance of 23.09 feet to a point on the westerly side of Route 11; thence with Route 11, S. 11 deg. 58' 30" E. 87.56 feet to the place of beginning, and being all of Lot 12- C, according to a survey made for Captain's Grove Corporation showing a division of Lot 12, Block 1, Captain's Grove, which survey was made by T. P. Parker, SCE, July 16, 1962 and was made a part of a deed recorded in Deed Book 698 at page 29 in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court for the County of Roanoke, Virginia. 4. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. lton, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Terry Harrington, Director, Planning & Zoning Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections John W. Birckhead, Director, Real Estate Assessment Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney 2 'J'•' ' ' •• , ..• •' ... • •.• . •' ,. • " ~~' • • ' <•~. , • . _ .. i ~r ~. . • use e . a~• '~ 239ac10 ~• 12 • ~` - •~ ~ O , ~n • ~ •' ~ ~ 1256 k . °~1n ~ Y ~ \ ~ S tD*lts ~ o Lam... ~„~ h ~ • ~ ~ ' 30 ~ • - s • i ~~ i3 .. ~ ~ •4 x• W ~' .~~ . • ,r .~ ~ ~, ~ : . . ya I 8 _ . ~._ Sssaz ca •.~aw ow.n.owr,m • •Location~ Map V' v- PETITIONER: GEORGE JACOB CASE NUMBER: 2-1/97 Planning Commission Hearing Date: January 7, 1997 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: January 28, 1997 A. REQUEST Petition of George Jacob to rezone .73 acre from I-1 C to C-2 to allow operation of a retail furniture store, located at 6024 Williamson Road, Hollins Magisterial District. B. CITIZEN COMMENTS None. C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION Mr. Ross asked if the building would be used for a single tenant. Mr. Harrington stated that it was his understanding that the proposed new owner of the property would use the building for a single retail use. Mr. Witt asked if the frontage and area of the adjacent paper street (Route 623) was considered in the calculation of the lot's size and frontage. Mr. Harrington stated that it was not. D. PROFFERED CONDITIONS None. E. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Mr. Ross moved to recommend approval of the petition. The motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Robinson, Thomason, Hooker, Witt, Ross NAYS: None ABSENT: None F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. G. ATTACHMENTS: _ Concept Plan _ Vicinity Map _ Staff Report Other Terrance Har ~ gton, Sew ary Roanoke unty Planrffng Commission .. _i v STAFF REPORT PART I PETITION: George Jacob FILE NO.: 2-1 /97 PREPARED BY: Terrance Harrington DATE PREPARED: 12/26/96 A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Petition is to rezone a .73 acre parcel from 11 C to C2 for the purpose of removing a proffered condition accepted during a 1988 rezoning of this- property. C-2 designation is requested so that the property can conform to the current comprehensive plan designation for the property, and can be marketed for the full range of C-2 uses. B. DESCRIPTION This is a rezoning petition submitted by George Jacob for the purpose of rezoning a .73 acre parcel from I-1 C to C-2. The property is located at 6024 Williamson Road, in the Hollins Magisterial- District. Property was zoned I-1 C in 1988 at the request of Mr. Jacob for the purpose of allowing a small scale (custom manufacturing) use on the site. At the time, custom manufacturing was not defined as a permitted use in the zoning ordinance, and I-1 was the only way to allow small scale manufacturing at this location. The requested C-2 zoning will allow the property to be used for the full range of commercial uses permitted within the C-2 zoning designation. The immediate use of the property is intended to be for the retail sale of furniture. C. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS 1. Current I-1 C designation of the property limits the use of the property to the manufacture of specialized products, and wholesale businesses and storage warehouses. In addition, current proffers on the property limit signage on the property to attached building signage, or the use of the pole sign existing in 1988 (since removed). Proffers limit the maximum signage on the property to 32 sq feet. 2. Site plan approval will not be required for future uses on the site, unless a physical change is proposed to the existing building or site. new si na n he roe will need to com I with existin 3 Any g ge o f p p rty p y g V • regulations in effect at the time of application. 4. VDOT may require a new commercial entrance permit based upon the change in use of the property. C • 2 PART I I ~ "~ • A. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS The property is currently developed with a 6,000 square foot single story block building. Access to the property is from Williamson Road. Approximately 19 paved parking spaces exist on the property, which is slightly elevated above the road. The property lies near the intersection of Florist Road. Although there appears to be adequate site distance at the entrance to this property, the substandard geometry of this intersection restricts traffic flow and turning movements. No significant vegetation exists on the site. A small area of volunteer trees and brush separate this property from the Boxley Place Apartments which are zoned R-3 and are adjacent to the western edge of this property. Other adjacent and surrounding land uses include a retail cabinet shop and locksmith to the south, and an office equipment store directly across Williamson Road to the east. • B. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT No changes to the site layout are known or proposed at this time. Any future changes to the site or building would need to comply with code and zoning standards in effect at the time of the proposed change. Traffic Generation The previous use of the property had minimal traffic generation. As a retail operation, the proposed furniture store could be expected to generate additional traffic. The ITE Traffic Generation Manual was not able to provide valid estimates of traffic generation due to the wide variety of sizes and types of furniture stores studied. The property is currently served by public water and sewer. • 3 File No.: ~/~ ~ Fire/Rescue • The Fire and Rescue Department has reviewed this rezoning request and advised us that, if the rezoning is approved, they can continue to provide the same level of service to this property • C. CONFORMANCE WITH COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The property lies within a Transition Land Use Designation. Transition policies advocate the development of office and institutional uses, multi-family residential uses, and single family uses within planned communities. Retail uses have limited applicability within Transition areas unless clustered within planned developments. D. CONFORMANCE WITH COUNTY SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS Subdivision of the property is not possible under the existing I-1 zoning district, nor the proposed C2 zoning due to the inadequate size/or frontage of the of the property. PART III The purpose of this rezoning is to remove the specialized conditions on this property that allowed the current owner to use the property for a small scale manufacturing use since 1988. The commercial use of this property for small retail uses will not have an impact on the surrounding properties which are currently used for retail, retail service, and higher density residential. Comprehensive Plan policies that advocate limited clustered retail uses within Transition areas, do not seem applicable, as the property has historically been developed for either commercial or industrial uses. Rezoning this property to C2 will allow the property to be used for a purpose consistent with surrounding land uses. PREPARED BY: DATE PREPARED: File No.: • ~ ~ A 'S" L " z • COUNTY OF ROANOKE " DEPT. OF PLANNING AND ZONING 5204 Bernard Or." _ P.O. BOX 29800 ~ , Roanoke, VA 24018 ( 540' 772-2068 FAX (540) 772=2108 For staff use on~v iJ date received: received by: it-~-~~ u. a pplication fae: PC/BZ date A : g /~7.~6 1 r ~j Q~v ~./7~~~ placards issued: BOS date: eS ~ Z ~/ air z&, r`t t ~ Case Number: J - Check type of application filed (check all that apply): ®"REZONING ^ SPECIAL USE ^VARIANCE Applicant's name:. George Jacob Address: 6024 Williamson Road, Roanoke, VA Phone:540-563-0020 Zip Code: 24018.. Owner's name: George Jacob Address: 6024 Williamson Road, Roanoke, VA . Phone:540-563-0020 Zip Code: 2401g- Location of property: Tax Map Number: 38.06-6-2 6024 Williamson Road Magisterial District: Hollins Community Planning Area: peters Creek . Size of parcel (s): . 73 acres 6,000 sq.ft. Existing Zoning: I-1, C Existing Land Use: light manufacturing Proposed Zoning: C-2, with previous conditions removed Proposed Land Use: retail furniture store Forsraff use o~/y Use Type: Does the parcel meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? YES X NO IF NO, A VARIANCE 1S REQUIRED FIRST. Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for the requested Use Type? YES X NO IF N0, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. If rezoning request, are conditions being prorered with this request? YES NO X Variance of Section(s) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in order to: Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. ws v ws v ws v Consultation ~ 8 1 /2" x 1 1" concept plan Application fee Application v «'~ Metes and bounds description ': ;; Proffers, if applicable ~" Justification ?~%~ Water and sewer application Adjoining property owners /hereby certify that l am either the owner of the property or the owner's agent or contract purchaser and am acting with the knowledge and consent oft owner. D Owner's Signature: ~~~~~L~'• ~~~~_ ~. ~~~~ • Applicant George F, Jacob , Sr. Foi Stall Use On/y: The Planning Commission will. study rezoning and special use permit requests to determine the need and justification for the change in terms of public health, safety, and general welfare. Please answer the following questions as thoroughly as possible. _Use additional space if necessary. - - - Please explain how the request furthers the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance (Section 30-3) as well as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning district classification in the zoning ordinance. This request_.;for rezoni_rig;;furthers the purposes of the .Zoning Ordinance by putting a parcel of land with an I-1,'C zooming-into-compliance by :chaning it-to a C-2 zoning without prior conditions. ;This will make this building/land compatible in zonirig~and use.with.:other uses and frontage.tracts~along:Williamson-Road.. It. wily also. fit nicely with the William- son Road master plan, - .The 1992 Zoning Ordinance was written.~in such.a way that the -.. ... -. industrial rezoning for.~this property in 1988 would not be required today,. Custom manu- facturing (what American Drum does) is now .allowed in`C-2.with a Special Use Permit. Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan. IThe Comprehensive Plan calls for the frontage properties along Williamson Road to be com- ~,mercial in use. This rezoning will fit in and conform with the Comprehensive Plan, '..going from .I-1, C to C-2 without conditions. Please describe the impact(s) of the request on the property itself, the adjoining properties, and the surrounding area, as well as the impacts on public services and facilities, including water/sewer, roads, schools, parks/recreation, and fire/rescue. No change in impacts is anticipated. _ It v-~! Location Map • ~~ `~ ~ o ,U T 4~ Q ~ ~ ~ Q N O H H a~ f~ ~ ~ Y ~ •U O Q v --~ ~ ~ c o ~ ~ o ~ O ~ V ~ ~ O a: L ~~ O Lf7 V' ~ . ~• • •~ ,.. ?~ 6{r` ,9/ GCS<NJY ~ •Z " -~' ' ~_ _ ~ ~`_ l 7j s ~'~a Eri3T •C ` ~ ~ _~~ _ /f / ~~ \ O/ ,111111 /~ yb ~ • ~ ~ ~ ~ E ~ '`' t' ~'~ ~• -` o.,fs~ ~ '' ~ a ~j e j ~ .` ~ +~. ~ I, / n ~I~ . e~' • ~ ~ \ l ~ of / / 'I A I ~ _ il\ i ~ • - • W/LUAM50N ,e0. /US RT//~ 220) • I e z ~`-___. fr.r ourYea r Ooo-rmarci ttn tl~7 (7oc ~' .._ '~ , 23BAC p , p ~ ;;` ~: .. 6 13..F ~ .~~ O , 4 ~ ~ ~d 19a~ (•~ ~' ~ ~ 2 N.44 ~' ~ •' ~ • • 1256 Ac C ias~ `` tns~ s- I ~ E . „ "~ •°. .'~ , any 7 • ` .. ~ ~. F • . ~ .' Y Q .CIO ~` 2 6 ,• 3I ' .. . . 9 , ,~,' a l _ ~ • • *+ ~' e' l 1. ` 1. ~ ~ tr~ ^~ -~• Y ' \• till ?• °o-_ O ~~'d, ~ \ :• - o _ _ w~4 ~ ~~ A s3 ~ ... 1.21As •. •N~. a •O., ~; la• ~ .a a.• . '` 3,16 r ~ 'f '' ` ~ . I ' ~ . . _ .•zoo Ac tol V' V-~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, JANUARY 28, 1997 ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A .73-ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED AT 6024 WILLIAMSON ROAD (TAX MAP NO. 38.06-6-2) IN THE HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF I-1C TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C-2 WITH CONDITIONS UPON THE APPLICATION OF GEORGE JACOB WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on December 17, 1996, and the second reading and public hearing were held January 28, 1997; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on January 7, 1997; and WHEREAS, legal notice and advertisement has been provided as required by law. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing .73 acres, as described herein, and located at 6024 Williamson Road, (Tax Map Number 38.06-6-2) in the Hollins Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of I-1C, Industrial District Conditional, to the zoning classification of C-2, General Commercial District. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of George Jacob. 3. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the westerly side of U.S. Route 11, 100 feet southerly from the intersection of the westerly side of Route 11 and the southerly side of Route 623, both extended; thence with a division line between Lots 12-B and 12-C, S. 78 deg. 1' 30" W. 200.17 feet to an iron on the line of Lot 11; thence N. 0 deg. 0' 30" W. 222.25 feet to an old v-' iron on Route 623; thence with the southerly side of Route 623, S. 64 deg. 40' E. 181.29 feet to the beginning of a curve; thence with a curve to the right, whose radius is 25 feet, an arc distance of 23.09 feet to a point on the westerly side of Route 11; thence with Route 11, S. 11 deg. 58' 30" E. 87.56 feet to the place of beginning, and being all of Lot 12- C, according to a survey made for Captain's Grove Corporation showing a division of Lot 12, Block 1, Captain's Grove, which survey was made by T. P. Parker, SCE, July 16, 1962 and was made a part of a deed recorded in Deed Book 698 at page 29 in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court for the County of Roanoke, Virginia. 4. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. C:\OFFICE\W PWIN\W PDOCS\AGENDA\ZONINGUACOB.ORD MEMO ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS n G G ~ r ~ CLERK'S OFFICE TO: Gary Robertson, Director, Utility FROM: Brenda J. Holton, Deputy Clerk ~~'" DATE: March 3, 1997 SUBJECT: ORDINANCE 012897-9 AUTHORIZING THE CREATION OF AND FINANCING FOR A LOCAL PUBLIC WORKS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, EANES ROAD SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION I was recently informed that another property owner gave notice to join the Eanes project on January 28, 1997. The ordinance which was approved at the January 28, 1997 Board meeting included approval for any property owner who elected to participate as of January 28, 1997. I have revised the ordinance and am attaching a copy for your file which reflects the new project cost of $36,000 and citizen participation at $4,500 each for a total of $18,000. The map of the service area has also been revised and is now dated January 28, 1997. If you have any questions, please call me. bjh Attachment cc: File Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance Printed by Brenda Holton / ADMO1 2/28/97 1:Olpm --------------------------------------- From: Gary Robertson / GUPO1 To: Brenda Holton / ADMO1 Subject: fwd: Eanes Road --------------------------------------- ===NOTE====------=====2/27/97=11:55am== In talking with Sue, I have been informed that the re. ordinance should be amended. The person I spoke with had committed to participating that day therefore the cost per participant was reduced to 4500. We will submit a revised project map. Fwd=by:=Brenda=Holton=2/27/97=12:42pm== Fwd to: Gary Robertson / GUPO1, Sue Patterson-Bane / ADM01 ....................................... I will send out another ordinance to take the place of the one previously issued with a memo explaining the corrections. I checked the tape and after HCN's motion, BLJ explained that this was to approve a sliding ordinance to take care of anyone who signed up today. I will include that information in the vote on the ordinance. The corrections I see to the ordinances are as follows: page 2 - project cost to be $36,000 and not $28,000. Citizens Participation (4 x $4,500) for $18,000 and not 2x$5,000 for $10,000. (Costs: CITY $4,000, CITIZENS $18,000 COUNTY $14,000 FOR TOTAL OF $36,000) Page 2 - there is reference to map on that page. Should it read "revised map" and should date of January 14, 1997 be changed? Page 3 - Payment of $5,000 should be changed to $4,500. Please let me know if these corrections are OK, or if you have other comments about this. Fwd=by:=Gary=Robertso=2/28/97=12:20pm== Fwd to: Brenda Holton / ADM01 ....................................... The revised map is being sent to you today. The date is 1/28/97. The rest of the changes are correct. Page: 1 Printed by Brenda Holton / ADMO1 2/27/97 12:41pm From: Gary Robertson / GUPO1 To: Brenda Holton / ADMO1 Subject: fwd: Eanes Road --------------------------------------- ===NOTE====------=====2/27/97=11:55am== In talking with Sue, I have been informed that the re. ordinance should be amended. The person I spoke with had committed to participating that day therefore the cost per participant was reduced to 4500. We will submit a revised project map. Fwd=by:=Brenda=Holton__________________ Fwd to: Gary Robertson / GUPOl, Sue Patterson-Bane / ADMO1 ....................................... I will send out another ordinance to take the place of the one previously issued with a memo explaining the corrections. I checked the tape and after HCN's motion, BLJ explained that this was to approve a sliding ordinance to take care of anyone who signed up today. I will include that information in the vote on the ordinance. The corrections I see to the ordinances are as follows: page 2 - project cost to be $36,000 and not $28,000. Citizens Participation (4 x $4,500) for $18,000 and not 2x$5,000 for $10,000. (Costs: CITY $4,000, CITIZENS $18,000 COUNTY $14,000 FOR TOTAL OF $36,000) Page 2 - there is reference to map on that page. Should it read "revised map" and should date of January 14, 1997 be changed? Page 3 - Payment of $5,000 should be changed to $4,500. Please let me know if these corrections are OK, or if you have other comments about this. Page: 1 ~ N --~ W O ~ ~ m ° o ~ w z ~ o ~ x ~ a w w w ~ ~ 3571 W z J w r~ j a ~ j ~ O ,r f i `~ b f 1 r-- 0 I r' O ~ d- ~ co r ~~ z O ~ ~ vi Z c~ 1 ~ N ~ ~ ~ W ~ N N ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ c0 W ~ ~ -- ~ . ; ~ ~ ~ ~ t a- ~-- ~ ~ O ~ - ~- C`J ~' ^,~ ~ ~ W ~ Y~ w ~~- U ~~ ~ ~ W zn /~ Q-a' W U2 Q >-- 0 ~ a- ~ O W ~ z ~- ~ ~ W Q O ---~ -~ E-a ~ ', _~---' W O -~-~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~~ S H ~ ~ ~ a .-~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 8 UJ N U ~rl ~ , ~ r--~ ~ S ~ h-- H ~ Q ~ O g ~ N~s F~+-~1 g ~ - W CO ~n ~ N ¢ Cfl r `-' _ ~ r *_.~• Cfl O C O W ~ Q. W ~ ~ ~ d C7 _Z f- O (n J X J W ~ b ~~ ~~ .. i' ~' i i' i' i' ~' ~.~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ll~ 3~10Ny0~ Nno~ 3~~ d0~' January 28, 1997 49 sewer extension. (Gary Robertson, tility Director 0-012897-8 Mr. Robertson advised that several property owners in the section of Eanes Road between the Roanoke City boundary and Bandy Road have septic systems that have failed or are failing and have contacted the Utility Department for assistance. The cost estimate for this project with two participants is approximately $28,000, and with all 11 property owners participating, costs would be $42,500. He distributed a revised ordinance to reflect that the City of Roanoke agreed to participate and fund $4,000 of the cost and that the costs for the two participants was reduced from 7,000 to $5,000. He further advised that another revision to the ordinance may be `p necessary since the pr ' ~ ;erty owner of two parcels was to give notification by the end of O the day whether or not he nted to be included. If two additional parcels of property i are included, the cost to the citizens would be $4,500 each, and the project cost would be $36,000. The map of the service area would also have to be revised to reflect the additional two properties. Staff has contacted the remaining property owners again to inform them that in order to obtain the connection charge of $4,500, they must agree to participate prior to January 28, 1997, and in the future, they must pay a $4,500 surcharge towards construction costs at the time of the connection. There was no discussion and no citizens present to speak on this item. Supervisor Nickens moved to adopt the revised ordinance. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: 50 January 28, 1997 AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None It was the consensus of the Board that the ordinance adopted could be revised to include any property owners who petitioned to participate as of January 28, 1997. ORDINANCE 012897-8 AUTHORIZING THE CREATION OF AND FINANCING FOR A LOCAL PUBLIC WORKS IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, EANES ROAD SANITARY SEWER EXTENSION 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 sewer system to the Eanes Road community; and WHEREAS, the extension of the public sewer system and the creation of a special utility (sewer) 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 sanitary sewer system over ten years in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance 112288-7; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this Ordinance was held on January 14, 1997, and the second reading was held January 28, 1997. 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 sanitary sewer extension for a portion of the Eanes Road community. The total construction cost of this public sewer project is estimated to be $36,000.00, to be initially financed as follows: Roanoke City $ 4,000 Citizen Participation (4x $4,500) $18000 Advance from Public Works Participation Fund $14,000 That there is hereby appropriated for this project the sum of $14,000 from the Public Works Participation Fund (which was established by the Board of o~ ROANp~.~ ti~ <,~ z c'> ~ z °v a~ 1838 MARY H. ALLEN, CMC CLERK TO THE BOARD P.O. BOX 29800 5204 BERNARD DRIVE ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 (703) 772-2005 FAX (703) 772-2193 January 30, 1997 Ms. Elizabeth Belcher Greenways Coordinator Fifth Planning District Commission P. O. Box 2569 Roanoke,. VA 24010 Dear Ms. Belcher: BRENDA J. HOLTON DEPUTY CLERK Attached is a copy of Action No. 012897-2 which officially adopts the Conceptual Greenways Plan; endorses the agreement to form a permanent Greenways Commission; and refers funding for the coordinator's position to the budget process. This action was taken at the January 28, 1997 Board of Supervisors Meeting. If you need further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Brenda J. Holton, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors bjh Attachment cc: Wayne Strickland, Executive Director, SPDC Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance Brent Robertson, Budget Manager C~.a~x~#~ n~~ ~~~xxto~Q ® Recyded Paper FAX TRANSMISSION Ro.~lvoxE Cou1v'rY P. O. Box 29800 Ro,nriorcE, VA 2401 8 540-772-2005 F,nx: 540-22 I -2 193 To: Liz Belcher Date: January 30, 1997 Faz #: 343-4416 From: Brenda J. Holton, Deputy Clerk Subject: Greenways Commission COI\~IlVIENTS: Pages: 3, including this cover sheet. Liz, thanks for catching that part of the motion that was stated incorrectly. I listened to the tape and he did move the permanent Greenways Commission. o~ ROANp~~ ~ -~ A ~ _ ~ °v _ a? 1838 MARY H. ALLEN, CMC CLERK TO THE BOARD P.O. BOX 29$00 5204 BERNARD DRIVE ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 (703) 772-2005 FAX (703) 772-2193 January 29, 1997 Mr. Gabe Hernandez Agency Coordinator Burns & McDonnell 9400 Ward Parkay Kansas City, Missouri 64114 Fax: 816-333-3690 Dear Mr. Hernandez: BRENDA J. HOLTON DEPUTY CLERK Attached is a copy of Resolution No. 012897-6 in support of the acquisition of Conrail by Norfolk Southern Corporation. This resolution was adopted by the Board of Supervisors at their meeting on Tuesday, January 28, 1997, in response to your letter of January 14, 1997. If you need further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Brenda J. Holton, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Attachments cc: File David Goode, Chairman, President, & CEO, Norfolk Southern Corporation W. Robert Herbert, Roanoke City Manager Randolph M. Smith, Salem City Manager B. Clayton Goodman, III, Vinton Town Manager ® Recyded Paper January 23, 1997 Janet: I signed the report, but have had second thoughts about the Staff Recommendation: ...~ 1. Where is the resolution? /~ "''~, ~, .v 2. What do you really want the Board to do? Accept, reject, authorize me to sign? ~' ECH .4.._. - ~, ,. .f t ~) .r r ~;A • ~ ~f ..~ ,~ \ ~" per'` NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Pursuant to Section 33.1-70.01 of the Code of Virginia, 1990, as amended, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, jointly with representatives of the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) will conduct a Public Hearing on the 1997-2003 Roanoke County Secondary System Six-Year Plan. This Public Hearing shall also be for a review of the budget for the expenditure of improvement funds for fiscal year 1997-98. The Public Hearing is scheduled for Tuesday, January 28, 1997 at 7:00 p.m. in the County Board of Supervisors Room at the Roanoke County Administration Building. Complete copies of the Six-Year Plan and 1997-98 budget are available for inspection at the office of the Director of Engineering & Inspections and at VDOT's Salem Residency Office. ,~. Q.,~~c.~ Mary H. Allen, Clerk to the Board PLEASE PUBLISH IN THE ROANOKE TIMES ON: TUESDAY, JANUARY 14, 1997 TUESDAY, JANUARY 21, 1997 Direct the bill for publication to: Mary H. Allen, Clerk to the Board Roanoke County Board of Supervisors P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 RKE BOARD SUPERVISORS TEL~703-772-2193 Transmit Confirmation Report No. Reoeiver Transmitter Date Time Mode Pages Result 001 RT-LEGAL RKE BOARD SUPERVISORS Jan 07'97 1319 00'53 Norm a2 Or, Jan 07 ' 97 13 19 FAX TO: Roanoke Times Legal Notice FROM: Mary Allen, Clerk to the Board Roanoke County DATE: January 6, 1997 Attached is a legal notice to be run on January 14 and January 21. Please call me at 772-2003 if you have any questions. onnolly -Roanoke Times ol~os~97 ~e X81-3416 Q~i Jan. 8, 1 The Roanoke Times Acct: 7~22003ROAN Name: ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF ~ Ph: 772-2003 Class Rate: Mary H. Allen, Clerk to the Board P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke VA 24018 Pay ,type BL Rate LE LeRals Source FX Class 10 Legals Start Oli 14197 Issues 2 Rate Iss Words....... Lines........ Depth....... Columns...... Graphic..... 5t Words. n Boxed Ad Copy Line NOTICE OF PUBLIC HE SortStrin~ ^ ManualSort TearSheets ProductCade P ^ Receipt ^ Movable Comments NOTICE QF PUBLIC HEARING D1S Rate, ~ Pursuant to Section 33.1 - } 70.01 of the Code of Virginia, 1990, as amended, the CI'edltstatUS' Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, jointly with repre- sentatives of [he Yirginia Department of Transportation Reply Request (VDDT) will conduct a Public Hearing on the 1997-2003 Rep: 46 Roanoke County Secondary System Six-Year Plan. This Public Hearing shall also be for ^ T h' N a review of the budget fa the expenditure of improvement funds for fiscal year 1997-98. 2 Stop Q1121) 97 The Public Hearing is sched- uled for Tuesday, January 28, 1997 at 7:00 p.m. in the 132 Pri 00 112 County Board of Supervisors ce . Roan at the Roanoka Coun[y 35 piscount 0.00 Administration Building. Com- plete copies of the Six-Year Plan and 1997-98 budget are 3.01 Free Day 0 available for inspection at the 0 Net 11 ~. QQ office of [he Director of Engi - neering & Inspections and at 0 StTaR O.QQ YDOT's Salem Residency office. 0 FedTax Q.00 Mary H. Allen, Clerk to the Board Total 112.00 (a9oaso> Payment 0.00 App Cr. 0.00 Balance 0.00 o~ ^ On Hold ^ Kill Ad Reason for Discount Editions DC, Adid: 490410 (54U) ~i Frvm the TelePort of Patti Connolly -Roanoke Times Q Date: Wednesday, January 8, 1997 Number of Pages: 2 To: Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, ATTN: Mary H. Allen, Clerk Fax Number: 772-2193 Memo: LEGAL NOTICE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, January 28, 1997, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bemard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of George Jacob to rezone .73 acre from I-1 C to C-2 to allow operation of a retail furniture store, located at 6024 Williamson Road, Hollins Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Planning and Zoning, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated:. January 10, 1997 ~y Mary H. Allen, Clerk Please publish in the Roanoke Times Tuesday, January 14, 1997 Tuesday, January 21, 1997 Direct the bill for publication to: George Jacob 2800 Seven Hills Blvd. Richmond, VA 23231 (804) 226-1778 SEND AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: ROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT P.O. BOX 29800, ROANOKE, VA 24018 January 24, 1997 NOTE: LBE, FFH, BLJ, FM, HCN FROM: Clerk's Office RE: RECOGNITION OF CONGRESSMAN GOODLATTE FOR PERFECT VOTING RECORD IN THE 1996 SESSION OF THE U. S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Supervisor Nickens suggested that the Board present Congressman Goodlatte with some type of recognition for his perfect voting record. Attached is a copy of a Certificate of Recognition which will be framed and presented to him during the Board's meeting with him. Attachment CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION AWARDED TO Congressman Bob Goodlatte FOR A PERFECT VOTING RECORD IN THE 1996 SESSION OF THE U. S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ~ Participated in 454 votes for 100% record in 1996. ~ Only Congressman in Virginia to achieve this record. ~ Overall voting record of 99.5% during four years in Congress ~ Cast hundreds of additional votes as a member of the Judiciary and Agriculture Committees. Presented this 28th day of January ~ 1997 Signature Bob L. Johnson Chairman, Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Title CERTIFICATION OF RECOGNITION TO CONGRESSMAN BOB GOODLATTE FOR A PERFECT VOTING RECORD IN THE 1996 SESSION OF THE U. S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES * Participated in 454 votes for 100% record in 1996 * Only Congressman in Virginia to achieve this record * Overall voting record of 99.5% during four years in the Congress * Cast hundreds of additional votes as a member of the Judiciary and Agriculture Committees. January 9, 1997 Elmer Hodge Mary Allen Dr. Nickens read a story in the Vinton Messenger about Bob Goodlatte "perfect" record for voting in the ~. He said that since he will be at one of our meeting, we could present something to him in recognition. Not full- blown resolution but something framed. I suggested Certificate of Recognition and we could frame ourselves. He said fine. He wants to get in words about being "PERFECT" because it is something to be admired and be a little "humorous" about it. Brenda ~, - ~ t. ~x_ ~ ~' ,~-~-~~~ l fi_j ,~1 -t (,. ~ f C ~°~ ~ <<( n~ ti'Yk.t `,, ` 1L !/{f ~ f It t'4.i. .:,i-~. R..:{~'.-4^ Y-, 4. ~~ V ~ ~e ~ '(~I`~Q,a`1 1/ t the message, and the legislative issue on which they are expressing their views. The operator will record the caller's message and forward it to the legislator for review. If a caller wants additional information about an issue or wishes to speak directly to his or her representative, operators will provide the appropriate phone number. Calm cattle yield better meat Keeping cattle calm is the best way to ensure quality meat, according to the results of a recent study from Colorado State University. Temple Grandin, an assistant professor at the university, studies how a cow's disposition affects the meat oaken at slaughter. The results indicated cows that are high-strung, nervous or upset pro- duced tougher meat with more "dark cutters." Dark cutters are less attractive, darker meat that some consumers don't want because it looks like it has gone bad. "There's definitely some wth to it,"said Jim Johnson, a fieldman with the Virginia Cattlemen's Association, which is headquartered in Botetourt County. Johnson said spending more time with cattle helps keep them stress-free. Another way to improve overall disposition is to cull irritable cows from the herd. "Life's too short to put up with an onery cow," Johnson said. Goodlatte has perfect voting record U.S. Congressman Bob Goodlatte, Republican representative for Virginia's Sixth District which includes Botetourt, was the state's only member of Congress to earn a 100 percent voting record for 1996. The House of Representatives had 454 votes during the year and Goodlatte participated in each one. During Goodlatte's four years in Congress, he has achieved an overall participation rate of 99.5 percent. "The voters of the Sixth District elected me to represent them in Congress and I take my job very seriously," he said. "I feel that it is my responsibility to listen to my constituents and then vote." The 454 recorded votes of the full House of Representatives do not reflect the hundreds of additional votes Goodlatte cast in committee as a member of the Judiciary and Agriculture Commit- tees. SAr.~ T~s~'REGisrER THE VAN MESSENGER 389-9355 Trte I~`ICASTLE~'IERALD tr,._.,v.,,..._ 473-2741 343-0720 THE NEW CASTL~I~~REOORD 864-5944 lrattitng rut ut urc r,.arwcttw utn~+. Complex on Jan 3 between $:30 any 9:30 p.m. The car's owner reportei that the convertible top was slashes and a purse and cellular bag phonf were taken. The value was not listed Bird count identifies 73 species The Christmas bird count, cof ducted annually in the Fincastle are for more than 20 years, logged 1 species on Dec. 22 but no unusu~ birds. Barry Kinzie of Woodpeckf Ridge Nature Center in Troutvill said about 20 people took part in tt count, conducted within a circle wii a 7.5-mile radius centered just noa of Fincastle. "We saw. a redheaded woo pecker, Canada geese, a pretty ga variety of ducks, a loggerhea shrike, and a fair number of purpl finches -but no other Norther birds," he said. About the same number of peopl took part Dec. 21 in the Roanok bird count, which includes part f Botetourt County. Mike Donahu and Bill Hunley of Roanoke worke an area from the Carvins Cove bo landing to Bennett Springs and bac One bald eagle has been spoof at the boat landing. Donahue sa they also saw "a pine warbler, a la transient; and quite a few duck There were no real Northern bin and nothing exotic." About 70 sp cies were identified. Other Boteta areas in the count included Re' Mountain, Cloverdale and Murray Pond. Kinzie also did the Peaks of Ot count Dec. 24, in which 10 parts pants found 40 species, includin few bobwhites, but again nothi unusual. "It started raining befc we could look for turkeys a grouse." He added, "From what evf~ body says, birds are not coming feeders in big flocks yet.. They still using what wild food there Probably in February and Marcl will be different." ~ pOANp,~~ ~• y ~ O -_1838 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE (540) 772-2004 January 14, 1997 (~~~xxt#~ ~f ~.~~xxt~.~e P.O. BOX 29800 5204 BERNARD DRIVE ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 FAX (540) 772-2193 The Honorable Bob Goodlatte U. S. House of Representatives Suite 540 10 Franklin Road, S. E. Roanoke, Virginia 24011-2121 Dear Congressman Goodlatte: (540) 772-2005 This is in reply to your recent letter offering to meet with the Board of Supervisors and suggesting dates for such a meeting. We have chosen Tuesday, January 28, at 4:30 p"m. on the fourth floor of the Roanoke County Administration Center (5204 Bernard Drive, S. W.). As you requested, I have coordinated this with Jeanne Moomaw in your Roanoke office. We received your usual prompt response to our request for help in getting restored to us the grant funds that we expected to receive through the Planning Assistance to States, Section 22 Program. We are very interested in knowing if you have further information on this that you can share with us. Also, several Board members have suggested that you might bring us up to date on the I-73 project. If there are areas of interest that you wish to discuss, or if there is anything we need to do to prepare for your visit, please let me know. We sincerely appreciate your taking time from your busy schedule to meet with us and we look forward to seeing you on the 28th. Very truly yours, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ECH/meh cc - Ms. Mary H. Allen, Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Ms. Anne Marie Green, Community Relations Director BOARD OF SUPERVISORS BOB L. JOHNSON, CHAIRMAN HOW NS 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 ® Recycled Paper ~~- M E M O RAN D U M To: Board of Supervisors From: Elmer C. Hodge Date: January 7, 1997 Subject: Meeting with Congressman Goodlatte Congressman Goodlatte would like to meet with the Board as he has done in the past. He suggests sometime between January 13 and 31 or during the week of February 17. You will have a regular Board meeting on January 28. Do you want to add Congressman Goodlatte to the agenda for that meeting, or have a separate meeting with just the Congressman? I like the idea of a separate, afternoon meeting, but I realize that this might not be convenient for all of you. Please call me about a date for the meeting and possible topics for discussion. ECH/meh Attachment cc - Ms. Mary H. Allen BOB GOODLATTE 6TH DISTRICT, VIRGINIA 123 CANNON HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING WASHINGTON, DC 2D515-4606 (202)225-5431 FAX (2021 225-9681 Congress of the United States House of Representatives January 3, 1997 Mr. Elmer Hodge County Administrator County of Roanoke P. 0. Box 29800 Roanoke, Virginia 24018 Dear Elmer: COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE ASSISTANT MAJORITY WHIP This letter is to request a meeting with the members of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors. I would appreciate your placing this request on your next agenda and your assistance in arranging a meeting. Hopefully, the meeting can be scheduled between January 13 and January 31 or during the week of February 17. The purpose of the meeting is for me to hear about local issues of concern that any of the elected officials or staff may have regarding federal matters or any other issues of interest. Please contact my district scheduler, Jeanne Moomaw in my Roanoke office at 540/857-2672, to arrange for a convenient date, time and location. With kind regards. RWG : j m ^ 2 SOUTH MAIN STREET ^ 916 MAIN STREET SUITE A, FIRST FLOOR SUITE 300 HARRISONBURG, VA 22801-3707 LYNCHBURG, VA 24504-1608 (540)432-2391 (804) 845-8306 FAX (5401 432593 FAX (8041 845-8245 PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER Very truly yours, Bob Goodlatte Member of Congress 10 FRANKLIN ROAD, S.E. SUITE 540 ROANOKE, VA 24011-2121 (540)857-2672 FAX (540) 857-2675 ^ 114 NORTH CENTRAL AVENUE STAUNTON, VA 24401-3307 (5401885-3861 FAX (540) 885-3930 January 9, 1997 Note to Elmer Hodge From Harry Nickens via dictaphone RE: Response to memo relative to Congressman Goodlatte I would prefer that we tie the meeting into a regular Board meeting such as January 28 if possible. If not, just a time that is convenient. Will be glad to attend. One of the agenda items in my mind is: Status of his request for funding for a visitor center along the Blue Ridge Parkway at Explore Park cc: Mary Allen January 9, 1997 Elmer Hodge Mary Allen ~~'w~'" Dr. Nickens read a story in the Vinton Messenger about Bob Goodlatte "perfect" record for voting in the ~. He said that since he will be at one of our meeting, we could present something to him in recognition. Not full- blown resolution but something framed. I suggested Certificate of Recognition and we could frame ourselves. He said fine. He wants to get in words about being "PERFECT" because it is something to be admired and be a little "humorous" about it. Brenda MEMO n G ~ ~ r ~ ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO: Elmer Hodge FROM: Harry Nickens ! f ,/~ ~~~_ ~ ~d.,r DATE: January 27, 1997 ~p %~ SUBJECT: INCENTIVE FUND MEMO JANUARY 28, 1997 I would suggest that the incentive fund be a part of a dinner discussion so that all Board members can interact collectively and therefore, we might come up with the same conclusion. HCN/bjh cc: Members, Board of Supervisors I N T E R O F F I C E To: Elmer Hodge From: John M. Chambliss, Jr. ~ f,.~ Subject: VSBA Meeting in Richrm%ond Date: January 13, 1997 ~ ~~~ ~n ;fit- !~,~ r On Friday, January 10, I attended the Virginia School Board Association's Conference on Governance and Finance held in Richmond. Joe Obenshain, Marion Roark and Tom Leggett were also present ftom the County. Outlined below are the highlights of the topics discussed during this session. 1997 BUDGET UPDATE Robert Lauterberg of the Pc~ / ~j ~ ~ Budget presented an overview of the Governor's budget yr^~ / ~ The increased funding areas included the folt~- PM $ ~ PM G ~ ~~ ~ ,o v-( construction purposes. ,~~me ~~~~ ~ nding of teacher retirements, ose costs. ~Dace~~o+, ~` 1 ~ ~" Z ! ~xce~5~on ~,~~ V ., ~t ,~` M iN~mge< ti _ o~ ~ GPL~" p Pro~GP~e ode P~Ep,SCP~` PGp,\N Inc Tea $2.7 l S2.7 M, $1.1 Mill, v~~~~ ~ eNON~° goo UR~EN 'tE~E °.~pSE~ ~QU ~puRCP~~ CP~-~E S~ SE6 TVRN~° `N PNSS RE ;~,cL ' ~ R ~ ~ } {Y ~ ~ sage ' ~ t ~ ~ ~~~ : -~ FUNDING THE 1 Staff discus; the next sale is schec, become more involve. °pD ~ F G\ NG~m for improving the t disabilities. tudents. / P~~ ~id advised that _.,:,pt that the State should _,,~ dust in facilitating the loans. X600,000 for a blanket teachers. Elmer Hodge Page 2 January 13, 1997 FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT Roger Wiley, formerly of the Attorney General's staff, discussed the impact of the Freedom of Information Act on meetings held by public bodies, the effect on executive sessions, and the impact on working papers and documents. TAXING AUTHORITY FOR SCHOOL BOARDS Norma Szakal, Senior Attorney for the Division of Legislative Services gave an overview of the interest in taxing authority for school boards. Thus far, the typical arguments of being elected to perform a particular task or handling mandated services and the need for the revenue generating capability to accomplish those task have been used. Conversely, not all school systems have gone to the elected board process, the uncertainty of which revenue sources could/would be assigned to schools for their use, what happens when a referendum type approval for a particular tax rate fails and where do the monies then come from to pay for necessary school services, and the impact of such actions on the future elections of board members. Two other panel members, one a school board member from Pennsylvania and a former school superintendent from New York, both of whom have operated under the system of school boards having taxing authorities, discussed the systems that they were familiar with. Both members of the panel indicated that the referendum for the tax rate for the school levy was generally light, unless there were other significant community issues at stake. They also suggested looking into the impact on other nuisance taxes and the consistency on property valuations in considering going to such a system. The VSBA does not seem to have a strong position on this issue at this time. OTHER ISSUES The VSBA also discussed the possibility of the General Assembly considering standards or mandates for training for School Board members. The representatives suggested having a letter sent to each School Board Chair so that the local Board could make their feelings known. CONCLUSION The meeting had some goad overview information, but little or no specific data to pass on to the local operations. I will keep you advised of any other feedback that I hear from this session. cc Diane Hyatt VSBA CONFERENCE ON GOVERNANCE.& FINANCE . ~ January 10, 1997 • ' ~ : Richmond Mamott : - PJI~OGRAM ' 8:00 a.m. - 9:OO a:m. ,Registration (Continental Breakfast available) 9:00 a:m. - 9:15 a:m ~ :: YVelcome . - •-James R. Ruhland, President, VSBA -9:15 a:m: --:9:45 a.m. 1997Budget Update ... ~ ~ ~ ~ - • RoSert W.`Lauterberg, Director ~ . ~. _ ~ . ~ . DeparEment of Planning & Budget . 9:45 a.m. - 10:15 a.m. ` ~ .~ Funding the Technology end School Construction Link . , ~ . ~ .~ • Kathy Kitchen, Division Chief, .. . _ ~ Department of Education ~ ~ ~ • - `~ Ida Hill, Division Chief Department of Education -. :10:15 a.m. -.10:35 a m." Refreshment Break ~ - - :~ 10:35. a:m. - 11:15 a.m:. The Freedom of Information Act -Its Affect on You •Roger C. Wiley, partner ~ . _ Hefty &. Wiley . , . - . 1.1:15 a.m. - 12:3.0. p.m. ~ ~ 'Legal Aspects of Taxing Authority for.School Boards . ' . ~ ' -' Norma 5zakal, Senioi Attorney. _ . Division of .Legislative Services - ~ Issues, Concerns & Questions on the Issue of _ Taxing Authority for School Boards ~. Panel Members `.: ~ . ' . ,. . _. • Dr: James Coonan; Superintendent, .` . ° : - .. , . ' :'Buckingham County Public Schools ; - . - ` ` ~ Margaret M. Rowe, Board Member, .Frcderick County `Michael Berk, Board Member,~South Middleton ~ .:. . School District, PA & Former Board Member, " ' Farningdale Public -School District, NY , 12 30 p m. _2.00 p.m: - Luncheon & Adjournment EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION VSBA Conference on Governance & Finance Department of Education January, 1997 TABLE OF CONTENTS Background/History II. Funding III. Funding Priorities and Accomplishments IV. Technology Program Results V. Studies/Surveys VI. Next Steps BACKGROUND INFORMATION EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY BACKGROUND What significant developments contributed to the use of technology programs in K-12 schools? The Board of Education's Six-Year Educational Technology Plan for Virginia (1996-20021 is the result of work of the Virginia Educational Technology Advisory Committee (VETAC) and the Department of Education (DOE) with input from educators, business leaders and parents. A chronology of governmental and departmental actions that contributed to the development of the plan follows: • 1988: Code of Virginia § 22.1-212.2 "The Department of Education shall develop alive-year plan to make educational technology, particularly the Statewide Electronic Classroom, an integral part of public school education. The Board shall review and approve the five-year plan and may require revision of such plan as it deems necessary." • July 1992: Standards of Quality for Public Schools in Virginia, § 22.1-253.13.6 Standard 6. "Each local school board shall revise, extend and adopt a divisionwide six-year improvement plan... which shall include a technology component consistent with the Six-Year Educational Technology Plan for Virginia adopted by the Board of Education." • January 1994: endorsed educ< elements. • February 1994: Superintendent for educational VETAC. Commission on Equity in Public Education ~tional technology as one of its four core Board of Education authorized the of Public Instruction to develop asix-year plan technology with advice and assistance from EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY BACKGROUND Cont. • March 1994: General. Assembly approved Senate Joint Resolution 157 and established the Select Committee of the Senate Finance, House Appropriations and Equity in Public Education Committees to study educational technology funding. • April 1994: Superintendent of Public Instruction identified technology as one of the Department of Education's focus areas. • March 1995: General Assembly approved Senate Joint Resolution 352 authorizing continuation of the Select Committee on funding. • June 1995: Board of Education approved Standards of Learning in mathematics, science, English, history and social sciences which incorporate applications of learning technologies. • June 1996: Board of Education accepted Advisory Board on Teacher Licensure (ABTEL) recommendations for technology standards for teachers and released them for public review in June, 1996. • July 1996: Board of Education adopted the Six-Year Educational Technology Plan for Virginia. • 1996: General Assembly adopted two amendments relating to technology: 1. study of the feasibility of establishing an elementary and secondary education trust fund 2. negotiation of rates for communication lines which are used for educational technology in public schools FUNDING 1994-96 EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY VPSA-FUNDED INITIATIVE Q. What did the 1994 and 1995 General Assembly appropriation provide to schools? Reimbursements for purchases FY 94 - $14.4 million for middle and high schools library media center automation and telecommunications link to Internet via Virginia's Public Education Network • FY 95 - $46.2 million for elementary library media center automation, electronic reference materials and telecommunications link to Internet via Virginia's Public Education Network Grants • FY 95 - $17.8 million for beginning installation of networks in every school .~ ~~ ^~ O O s wv W OD C h O ~O N Y1 ~O h ~~pp 00 ~O N e~1 M 00 O C Yf e•1 O h h ~O N O~ M O v1 f"1 v1 00 N 00 N V1 N O~ N V1 • Q h C O~ 00 ^ O ~O ~ C ~ a M ~O ~n vi t~ v1 v'f ~ :.J 00 C M O~ O M N Q 00 V1 P~1 h N N h Q~ h I~ 00 N ['~ 00 h N O 'Cy ~ N Al N N t~ .~ F C ~ ~? $. s N a ~ O N ~/1 N ~O ee~~ ~ O~ v'f M h V1 ~O ~O N M M O+ O~ O~ O ~O ~O ~O ~O ~O M V1 O C M_ M •-• N ^ O C h ~O h O C .~ ~O ~O 00 N 00 N Q ~ w ~ (~ O N O ^ M Q N ~ ^ M ~O N N O+ N S Q 00 00 O+ O~ O Q ~O O Q M 00 R1 Q ~ ~ N h Q V1 h O Q M h N h M Q M M N Q ~j- " ^ ~ ~ L bD a v !; O~ N M ~ Q~ ~D N N ~O C~ O F ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O~ ~O ~O ~O O~ M M 3 O ^ ey, M e~ M M ~O ~~OO O: ~O f : M M 00 N O: CC v'~ ~n ~ a0 O 00 M ~ Q~ v ~O V N ~ M H 0 O ~Q ~ 00 h 00 M O~ O C O M h O O~ O ~n ~ I~ U N M M 1 1 ~ N Q f +1 Q v N N NO O N Q ~ w pp pQ 8 QQ 8 8 8 8 pQ pQ oQ QQ pQ Qp oQ 8 pQ 8 oQ pQ Qp pQ Qp pQ 8 ...{ O O O O O O O O O C O O O O O O O O C C C O C O ?~ C O ~ O M 8 C ~ O O M 8 O Q 8 $ O ao ~ ~ O h 8 O M ~ O O V1 C N C h 3 Q N Q N N N h r N z ... ...... .. . . . . •.. . ...~ :..: ....:~ :... ' .. ' :. ::. w'~ . : :~~: .. g~• • ...: .. aas .' pp ~ h .... + v1 ^ M ~p ~D O 00 ^ O 00 O h O~ N ~O pp N Q~ ~ O~ N Q~ Q~ h N 00 O 00 00 N 00 Q+ h h O ~~pp ~O ip • e 1 ~ 00 O O h Q^ O' t N o0 ~O o0 O~ O t ' ~C M ~ . ~ M N N Q N 00 N Q~ Q N 00 N O N ~D N N O~ Q M ~ ~ ~ ~-^ N Q r'S O ~m+ \° .G ~ ' t~ ~ c p N G: ~ ^ , , ~Q ~O N Q 00 M h O M h O Q N N O h 00 h Q v1 Q h ~O v1 M ~G v1 O~ OO O N M h N N O~ ~C N O . 5 000 N ! ~ ~O 00 ~O !'~ M M N ~a O+ Q~ ~n ~n N ~O ~O Q h 00 O 00 00 M 00 _ h M 00 M O N 00 ~ 00 M O, O` Q Q ~ $ m ~v~ 0 U v, o~ o~ n a o0 o h o M M v, M ~ v, N oo c~ oo M a O M N o h a0 O 00 N O I ~ ~O ^ C~ N Q~ O h N 00 h ^ ~O of v1 C = M 00 O ~ ~D C M O O M Q Q O ~ N 00 O~ M Q C ~i M Q N h Q 00 N ~ Q ~G Q 00 O N N '/1 00 N Q N N ~ O~ ~ N h N N Q N eT Q+ ~O C N N N N ~ ~O v, 00 p N h o 00 N O~ p ~ M a O M h a N ~o ~ h h a n N oo O ao ~o V1 o ^' ea~~ O~ 00 h O ~ W ~O ~O ~ N 00 ~O ( ~ l`i O~ h v1 Q M .•• ~O r+'~ ^ Q h Q M O~ O N ~O N M N N N h h ~_ ~ O N O~ N M N t•1 N ~ ~/'~ N ~ F ~ C4 N ^ h M h T N ~O O O O O h ~ ~ ~ N ~_ '~'~ ~ eye' ~ F ~ M O ~' ~ ~O ~ h 00 M Q ^ ^ ^ ~ N 00 V1 ~O ~ h ~ ~O ~ C f ' l'~ ~ 00 N `C r/. ~ ~ ~O O tai O O+ ~D M v~'~ ~ Q O r~i O Q N O Q O~ ~ N ~ ~ a r ~ U .~ .~ VJ h h ~O M 00 .•• M 00 M .Q. O 00 O M ~ ^~ M v1 ~ v1 M ~O ~O ••• N N 00 ^ M O 00 00 M h ~O M 00 O~ Q ' "~' ~ L Q~ h N O 00 O M 0 N C ~ O O~ N O O C O' O~ O 8 O O ~O v1 00 O~ ~? h N n Oo h Q M s. ~ h O h O~ N ~ N 0 N O~ N M N O~ N h O ~ F O M N 00 N M ^ h N M N N N N ... .. .~ N w k ~ A y v w ~ ~ 0 ~ U ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ x . ~ a ~ ~ 6 a .a O a 'S V g a 2 c7 ri O O F- v~ ~ ~ a O ~ v w G ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ c=7 ~ A ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ xO ~ a U ~ ` O a w O x O O a a ~ ~ ~ a m m m m m m m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~~ O O t~ wv` W ~ ~„ C M V1 N 00 ^ N M Y1 M ~G O ~ N ~ N O [~ O 00 ^ ~O N O v'f I~ N ~ Q v~ ~ N M ~ C Op V x ~- ~O • n N I ' t~ I ~ O ~ ~n l ' N h ~O ~n ~O ~O ~n - ~O C t~ 00 C Z .~ N O - ~ N 7 N tP I~ O~ 00 - ~O - V1 M - Q I~ N I~ N N O~ C v ~ ~ N N c~ C m ~ E~ \ ~ ~' N 0.~ ~ M ~O O 00 M .-~ V C~ M M T [1 O~ O O S ~O ~ ~O ~O ~ 00 N ~ ~ r [~ C M I~ S .~ _ O N ~ Q O 1 O M 00 ~•-~ ~-- - - ~O M S 00 -~ v1 N O h I ~ O M ~/? O v~ ~O M ~ N `~ ~ ~. ~ ~O M O~ N 00 00 N O M ~G I~ Q I~ (~ N ~ M N R h 00 O M ~O 00 ~ ~ O 00 M ~ ~ C N !~! v /~1 d- ~--~ 00 ~~QQ M ~ V1 ~O V'1 ~O ~O O~ ~O O ~ 00 O~ N M Q~ Q~ ~+ M N M 00 O~ O~ N O M l~ 00 ~/1 Q~ M M M O j ~O M p f`~ "" V1 Y1 M Y1 .••~ O ~ 00 ••-~ l~ 00 C• `O O+ 00 ~ M C~" Y1 v1 ..~ N --~ V1 V1 ~ ~ M - V1 [\ Q V1 N N O V1 M ~ M 8 N N O N V1 ~--~ ~O .., N V N . . N Q ~ N N Q ~ N ~ ~] ~ w C ~ ~ oQ oQ oq OQ oQ ~ oQ oQ QQ oQ OQ oQ oQ oQ oQ oQ ~ oQ 8 8 QO O O C O O O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O O C O O M ~ O l~ O M 8 O I~ O V1 ~ O ~ Q Q O 00 O V1 O N O Q ~ O V1 O I~ O ~ - N O 00 C Q 01 3 O0 v1 N r u z ~~,~ : :;~tw ;: .fin.: • ;~;~•;~' ;>: .; > x:: :: ~ <~ ~ ~~«• X<:<::: :: . . C~ O ~p C~ •.• O O 00 t~ O -- O M C~ v1 ~O 00 O~ ~O v1 - V1 ao t~ M h ~O N O M O ~,, m p .~ Q~ ~ O M ~ ~ ~O Q N O ao Q' n I ~ ~ - N N v1 Q~ v~ 1~ O' N ~O ~T O N y i A Q •m N N M ~ N N V1 O V1 Y1 ~O N - ~- N O~ V'1 ~O r''1 'g f. ~~ F y+ C N G+ F ^ X ~ O~ O M N v'f 00 v1 l~ N 00 O ~--~ N - - ~ ~p O ~ O ^ ~O M O ~O M C~ N ~ 00 V1 00 M l~ C O~ ~O M C O N_ U ~ O~ N 00 00 O O~ - ~O 00 ~O N 00 f~ f N O~ Q ~ O~ O~ M ~!i 00 O M N O 7 O N N N r N O - ~ r ~ ~ 00 r M O N Q N N -~ N ~ - ~ _ .~ ~' O U w 'C ~ ~O h O t~ N v~ ~p ~O 1~ 00 ~O O O~ N O~ 00 M 00 O ~O ~^ M of ~ 00 ~ ~!1 00 O N Q~ -- N v1 00 ~O Q~ O 00 M y y 'O ~ I ' O : O M O l ~ ••• O 00 ~O ~O N I ' - O~ O: O ~'1 Q;, v'+ ~ Gs. N M O N Q~ M ~O - N 7 00 v1 V1 Q O ~ N V1 N V1 N M V1 e{ O+ Q~ O 7 O N ~ ~ N N N . .I V V7 ~ `"" OO n h V1 ~ 00 00 ~ ' I~ ~O ~ ~O . - - ~ ~--~ o I~ o $ O~ .., v1 O~ M M ~O .n O N O~ O Q M ,,,,, •~ ' g ~ F ... ~ q e ~ Q' ao v: I Q n ^~ V1 ~ ~O O o ao < a O - M ~ .-• ~ ~ t~ I M j,,, ~ t~ M 00 N ~ ~O 00 N N M M 00 00 M ~ M N N M ~O ~/'~ _ ~ ~ F" N CY. F ~^ "' ~ p ~O O et• Q a0 O 00 n N v'w OCR O~ a0 l~~ ~O ~ ~pn O' of ~ ~ v1 v~'~ ~_ ~O Q vNi 1~ r~i v~ ~ h Q O+ O~+ O vMi M ~ O ~ap0 O+ O ~O T C j N N ~O ~ ~ w Q M M ~ N N Q~ N 00 O~ ' v1 N ~ N ~ E 6 ~ f _ .. ~ ~ U ag N h h ~ O ~N~pp O ~ ~ p~p ONO M ~ O ~ M OO N ~ O M O ~ p C ~ ~O ~O h ~ ~ M 00 M h ~O C~ O O ~ N1 Cw N C~ ~O -- M M + r GL '~ ' ~ h 00 N O~ ~ h h ~D ~ l~ N M O~ v'~ P N O M O M ~ •~ O 7 ~ N M ~ N N '~ N N ~ N N N N Q N G 4. a w m ~ o z ~ o ~ x Q a ae ~ ~ ~ z . a ~ x o v ~ r ~ v x o Ca w ~ ~ w a ` ~ ~ ~ ~ w ~ o ~ w ~ 0 U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ v v ~ a a S ~ a d ~ ~ a~ ~ ~a ~ ~ Z v -w-~ U O ~ w c: c~ w ~ w cz c7 v V V V ~ ~ ~ `!~ -, . . ~ ~ to .~ +~+ .~ O O s ~v W ~„ ~ i0 : ~ ~ V c m ,~ F M 00 ~O M M V1 l~ N M h h N OC Q - C'~ V1 ~ of ~ V1 a ~- C~ I~ O v1 Q (~ M Q ~ Y1 N o~ ~n N V1 ~O O~ M V1 ~L C M 00 r+~ 00 ~ N t~ ~O M ~ I~ O v'~ ~ I~ C v~ Q M o0 ._ Q ~ ..., 00 N Oo ~ Q~ M O~ O C - O N - Q+ Vl v'+ - M N V1 ~O '~? M V1 ~ M ^ ~n (~ M \° ~ N G: E"' M M M M 00 O ~O ~O ~ O~ o N .~pp ~O ~O M p ~p M O O+ O ~~^^,, .,. y ~ ~ • M ~ O _ O Q~ V1 00 ~ ~ I~ l~ 00 t' 00 N N O 00 !{ [ ~ M N ~O M O V1 00 V1 V1 ~ e'y, N V'1 M O~ O~ ~O Q O~ N N O 00 N O 00 M l~ ~O ~O t~ N M N - ['~ M P M O Q' 00 Q ~O M ~ N O~ ~O N 7~ ~C N N ~ V1 V1 Q ~ 2 - v M N N N M P O N N N 00 - v1 00 V1 S 00 ~p O~ O~ 00 M .•• M ! ~ M 00 O~ N ~ ~ 1 M M M .~-~ M •••~ O+ I ' M ~O ~O 00 O~ M O~ O ~ M O~ Q: M h V1 N 00 M O 00 O~ 1~ O O M M V1 N M - Q U ~ N N N ~ O~ h ~O N Y1 N'1 N OD h h Q T - N - N M M I1 ~A A e0 C 3 O C M O O M O O M O O ~ O C N M O C ~!1 O O ~ O O V1 O O' M O O N O O R1 O $ N O ~ O O Q O O ~ O O Q O C P O O ['~ O O 00 O C I~ O O ^' N O C ~ O O M C O O r v z .:. . .: . . pp . C O 00 N vw O 00 e~1 00 N N O M N O ~ 00 ~ h ~p O ~ f'~ M t ' ~O 00 O~ v'' l~ ~O t ~ h M I~ M O Q ~O 00 e1 O ..• M O~ O [~ ~O Q O O~ h O N N C ~ ~ - O~ p O V1 00 C~ c ~ ~ F M ~C M ~D N V1 N Q Q '~f N M M N h N M N O~ M M M g r OL F '1 ~ " .~ ~p ~ C O N .•• Q 00 V1 N O_ O~ N eOe~~ 'tT O 0p0 ~O N .• .. ~ O~ 00 00 ~ 00 ~O ~G 00 N ~ 00 ~p~~p O ~ ~O ~ Q -_ ~O eri V1 Vi O~ M Q N N ~ 00 ~Q 00 M O ~ N 00 00 ~O M ~O, ~D N ~f O N Q: h z ~. 0 U y 'p ~ T3 ,~ O Q~ M V1 M - p S M Qo ~O M ~ M Q~ M 00 O~ O O I~ Q Q N P h h M M ^'~ 00 M M ~ Q OO N V1 I~ 1~ V1 vi 00 O O ~D f~ N ~O O M M M ~O ~D O+ V1 O~ w 8 ~ w ~n N ~ ~p ~O ~D N v'~ N .• N O N 1~ e{ ~ ~ O~ 00 O~ ~+'~ N N ~ N O~ eT N vi N O N t~ N O+ C :ax•:: . ra•: ~.. S C ~ ~ ~ ~ v M 00 h M O o~ ~ O v, ~o M o v+ ~O O~ M ... N 00 ~o v~ M P ~•, t : ~ O~ v 00 t'1 ~, v, h O~ v, v O ~ q ~ h a~ o Q N ~ ao N ~ .- ~O 00 M o h n - 7 N o M O~ r ~ q N O a a; - - a v, I~ O~ g M 00 a ~ N N t.K X ~ 00 ~ N_ •• O v1 ~O M QQ ~O M Q O [~ h V1 O ~ l'~ 00 C~ V1 P `O N M ^' V1 M 00 V'f 00 O~ O 00 M ~O 00 Q V1 ~ V1 O V1 .-• V1 00 ~O P O fV 00 ~ O~ l w r~"+ C O vii i~ v ~ ~- ~~++,, ~ 6 ~ .~ ~ a 8 ~ ~ Q O~ N ~. N 00 Q ~ eM N 7 N ~ ~' N N ~ ~ Q` ~ M N O; U ai M ~ v1 N O~ h Y1 N O ~ h O~ O~ O ~O O~ Al 00 ~ N1 ^~ O M e~ ~1 N .~. ~ O N v1 tY N 00 P v'^ h ~+ h .•• ~ V1 ~O N N M N M 00 N h O V1 .~. O O~ h ~/1 O' N N N t ~ 00 P O~ N N '7 O V'f ~C O ~ 00 Q' ~O ~O h N O~ O O M C 's ~ ~ d v 3 c~ x ¢ v w a ~ Qg 5 g a 5 ~ ~ z ~ .a O `" ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ ° ~ pG ~ o ~ ~ W~ Z ~ 3W z ~ 0 Z W 0 Z ~ O 0 Z v ~ O ¢ a v ~¢ a ~ $'~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ¢ 3 w U ~ a ~ 0 w U ~ n. ^~ O O w~ W ~ `O •C ~p ~ O M O V1 ~O h V1 ~p O - V1 M 00 v1 O~ N M O O Q t M e+1 t f~1 00 r'~ N S O N - ^ Q 00 ~1 O O~ V1 ~C". ~n V1 h h f"; [ ' h h Q N `G N f~ ~'^ C~ 00 O h ~O ~O V1 T T h ~ o0 ~, U ~ ~ ~ Y1 N M ~ O~ N 00 V1 T O~ ~ N N h N 00 h - V1 = V1 N ... N N ~ Q ~ y ~" ~ e g U r a F ~ ~ O M N h P'1 M v 00 V1 ~O N ^- ~/1 00 c Q I M O Q [ h O Q {. . . - N O N N Q M 00 Q ~ O' 1 ' 7 ~ V' M O M N M C~ M N O ' M V1 L q ^ 4.. ~, . ~ ~ Co ~O - M Q~ M ~D Q h N ~O h t•1 Q ~ D M = f - O - N 00 e•1 ~O N ~O v1 00 O~ Q ~ Q a v q1 00 h O~ O O V1 N V1 ~O O~ N ~~pp O~ Q ~ ~~~Qpp N e•f 00 O~ ~O Q~ ~~Qp ~O p S Q~ O~ r'1 ~D N C~ O+ O K1 N N M I ~ 00 O~ ~O v1 O+ 00 v1 Q~ O ry, h M M O - ~O ~ BOO ~O ~O O M l~ CC ~ Q ~ ~ ~ C M 00 O Q~ -~ M t~f I~ O~ O+ O p Q~ 7 N Q h h 00 p O N ~-- ~O v'~ 00 M - M v'~ ~O ~ M Q~ O vi h 00 ~O O ~n ri R C~ ~n I Q~ U Q M N N M M N N N w ~~+ !-. ~I~ W QQ G ~ ~ QQ O ~ QQ G ~ Qp O ~ QQ O QQ G ~ QQ O ~ QQ O QQ O QQ G ~ QQ O ~ QQ O ~ QQ O p Q O O N O M O N O O~ ~ C v1 O ~ ~ O N O h C N O 00 O N C v'1 O 00 Q ~a O h O ~1 O `O O - O ~O O ao ~ h ... ~ z . ; .%'fk; 'a,'#r5y': ~: • l:•:C.^: ~ ~ .. •r.: :'y+',.nui.: %i+~: ::Sr'> pp y ^ O ~p ~ ~ O h_ ~O O 00 a' f~1 ~ M M P'1 h 00 Q O -- h N M O f'1 O~ ~O M ~O h V1 h 00 h 00 - ~D ~!1 ~D 00 V1 ~ 00 Q~ - O - ip l ~ O 00 n N Q O vi O: Q N ~ ~ .S~ M ~ ~ N [~ V1 N ~"~ N N Q N - [~ N 00 ~1 O - N1 N O~ N f3 c ~ $ F- ~ ~ g r OG F X ~ " ~ O~ r1 ~V V O h ~O 0 h ~p O N h ~ Q ~ Q~ M f~1 t 00 V1 O K1 Q~ O~ M p O e~ O 00 00 N I C N I ~ Q eT ~n O~ O 00 M O~ O~ Q~ Q~ O~ 7 t~ M N ~O O N1 ~ N C.~ I~ O Q Q . • 00 h 1 0 O O 0 ' 0 ~ ~ O O~ O~ ~--~ O M M7 O~ N O Q~ ~O ~ 5 h 00 0 `O Kf N ~O Q 0 M er Q ~ V1 Q M r+1 - f~1 - M M ~ °~ a ~ O U v~ y N ~O O t~1 ~ O ~p ~ O ~p ~ ~ h ~ ~~S n r0+'f ~p O oN0 N O O vi O N ~ ~n N ~n vooi O O_ w ~ O tY e+: O en en o0 t ~ - ~- Oo ~ O~ O~ O N O~ Q Q ~ O ~ ' PV C ~O h Q N N N1 O N Q ee~~ 00 O M N Y1 00 ~O Q M N N ~ 00 h N N V1 O O OO O~ N Q f 1 N ~O N ~, N ........ .............................. .. . .. . . O ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~p b ~O pQ ~ ~ N Y~1 N O ~~'1 N O ^h' ~ ^h^ OMO v~i ~ ~p O Qp~ t' ~ ~ I ~ N ~O f'~1 O~ O [~ O 00 00 w h h e+1 ~ Q ~"1 Q O~ ~ h ~ t~'1 w N - N H N yi-. ,,, b; l~ O t~ ~O V1 ~O h Y1 O N C 00 v1 ~ N v'f ... v1 M v1 00 f~1 N h O 00 O 00 00 O_ N [~ v1 C t O ~' w f'~1 h .-• Q~ en M h N ~- . 2 } pp M ..• 7 O t ~ M e+~ t ~ O t~j, O: O v~ oo ~O oo h ~ ' ~ re 77 . Y { 3 .: N r+ ~A N M 00 h 00 N N d' Y1 ~"f f~1 Kf N ~O 00 N N ~ v1 ~f Q N M ~C ~ v~ O Q 7 Q` ~ ¢ 7 i ~ ~ 7 ~ a .r ~ U .~ •Ob dJ ~ V1 ~ : e+1 h eV~1 Q 00 ~ N h ~O M 0ee~~0 O 1+1 00 ~ N_ 00 O O O O .N.pp ~ ~ 0 ~ •• O M N [ O N ~ ~O p O~ l ''~~' .~ ~p 00 - ~ ~O O~ O ~O O O^ N V~ v1 e a ~O ~ ~ O^ ~ [ ' O 0 N N • O~ ~O et N ~ h OC M Q h M N .r `~ V1 N N Y1 h N N O~ 00 N O h N N W 3 O w ~~" O ~ O ~ ^a] . H . '~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ 7 a g Z ~ ~ O ~C ra E~ '~ (~ O 4L S C~ w ~ v' a, O w as ~ ~ ~ Z ~ Ems„ w y, ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ w ~ O O ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ _ ¢ ¢ ~ ~ 3 O ~ a a a a a a a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~- 3 3 ~- ^~ .~ ~••r /~ O O wV W ~ ~. C 00 N M 00 V1 O [~ M N O~ h h V1 Y1 00 N h V1 Q~ C N ^ e~ 00 V1 00 O M h 1~ O~ N R h 90 M V1 ~ N V q~ VQ •G t V1 .•• ~O O~ h ~ ~ O O I~ 00 ~ ~ 00 ~ 00 N ~ ~ Q M M Q N 1 00 Q ~ Q N V1 N O+ Q M M Q ~ ~ N [~ ~ ~ N of M V ~ M ~ F ~ ' cL ~ e p N ~ 0. ~ M O `O O ~O h ~ (O~~ O `O ~O O O ~ ~ N M O ~ ^ I ~ ~ ~ Y '1 f~ M N N 00 ( w 00 D ~O N O oa v1 ~O v1 M M O O `1`1 ~ ~ ~O O M O ~ Q~ N N ~G = 00 ~O ^ N M O~ I~ ~O h l~ Q~ ~ ~ N ~ l~ 00 M N Q~ M N O h M ~ h Q M N M N ... v v1 ~O 00 O~ O N M M M ~p O~ Q~ O+ Q O Q O M V1 M Q O v1 @+ Q~ Q~ ~O Q V'f ~p ~p O M 00 N T O~ M V1 M O~ M '~1 N ~ 00 00 00 en M M O C~ ~1 l~ ~ ~--~ CC O ~ a0 00 I~ N O U O v~~ M Q N ~G 00 ~O .••• N 00 ~O Q M M ~ t~ O~ M O~ ~ ~O O~ K1 ~O V1 N I~ Oq N ~O Q ~O ~D V1 t~ O~ N N r ~ Q ~ ~ 8 8 8 O 8 8 8 pq S pQ pq 8 8 8 op pp 8 8 8 8 p 8 p p (~ ~ O O O O O O O O C O O O O C O O O O O Q G O Q C p O ~,,, O ~ O Q ~ O Y1 O M O l"~ O Y1 O M O M O ~ C V1 O O C ~ C B O C g O O C C M N O OM ~Q (V ~ N Q VN1 N !~' y z ..... ... .... ... . ..... .... .. . .... . .... . C ~ O O~ O O~ Q O V1 ~ ~ Q ~ ~ M Q N g • o0 0~ M ~ oo t~ N ~, O K a: O v, M Y, ... .': N o ~ ~O M N o f~ - Q~ o ~ ~o ~ v, 0, o ~ • ~ N Q M N , of h N N Q N Q~ ri N Q~ M N 00 N O+ C ri ~ t ~, 'g ~" N N N .~ E"' Q ~ a? ~ .C N CYi F X ~~Qp ~O M `O O M ~O O ~O M O 0 h ~ M N O+ h ~ N ~O ~O v'f O~ t~ ~O (~ ~O M q N ~ ~ ~ h -.• ry O 0 O l O ~~pp ~O p 8 N ~-- O n I O~ O M Vt Q O .- 00 O~ M 00 ~D Y1 00 ~ ~ M ~ ~ C . Q Q ~ p ~+ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q h (y O 00 00 ~ N O ~ N 00 M O 00 ~ N '~ `- o U q 4: M 00 Q~ O 00 00 O ~D 00 O ~ O N h P I~ M 00 l~ -- eT ~ I~ ~ M Q v1 ~ ~ M of I~ w ~ ''GC ~ t~f t~'~ (~ ^ t ~ ~ Vl 00 ~O Q I ~ N 00 R N I M n 00 V vY ~ Q v1 ~O N C N Q t ' ~n M I~ v1 l h ~ ~ r Q Q d' Q of N O Q+ ~O [~ R O~ N Q N O ~ ~ r4 6 N N N N N ~O N ~--~ 00 N N O~ N Q N N c~ ~ N ~ w V7 [ e O ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ O O v1 7 N O O+ 00 1~ ^ O o0 ~O v5 Q Oo N p 4+ ~~ 5 ~ ~ ry, <'~, ~ ~: R M O~ e~ M ^ M O Y1 Q N ~O 00 N M ~O P of _ N N N h O ~-- N ['~ V'1 ~'f C~ N t~ .L ~ i r. q ~ M N Y1 R M 00 I~ ~O N1 N v1 N 00 M Q ~O N V1 ['~ M N ~ I~ M 4..~ . ~ E"' ~ yQ' h N Qi .w ~ y ~ 00 O~ h ^ ~ O ~ 'R ~ Q ~ O ~pQ O~ M V1 00 O O 00 ~ ~ V1 O~ O N O N_ N N O~ V1 Q O~ ... M 00 00 ~ ~'S ~ O~ ~ ~1 t ~ ~ 00 Q v1 O~ ~ O~ !'~ 00 N 00 00 V, $ 9 M O~ N 00 M M M M vi N N 00 O t+i '~ Q ~ e~ O 00 ~ N O R ~ ~ Q N f h O N O h N M ~ ~ •~ C Qi v O U aq N h h v1 (~ O M M o O pp O V1 M ~ 00 P O O~ 00 N Y1 Q~ .~ 00 C V1 O Q O~ O~ M O C~ K O~ ~p Q ~ O O~ O ~ p 8 ~ M n 000 Q r w 'p~- $ V1 O 00 ~O ~ ~ ' O ~ '~ ~ O N .C N M N N ~ l ~ ~ N O [ O N v1 N v1 N Q h 00 v1 O~ O ~O N S I~ ~T Q N O ~ N N M p~ ~ h Fa- ti ~ o ~ O U cva~ ~ v a ~, v ~ ~ ~ U c . ~ ~ F. ~ U Z ~ .aa ~ ~ F pC ~ ~ p y .a O ~ O g v U Q ~ `n ~ ~ a 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ F Z ~ O ~ U ~ 0 ~ a ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~g W w o o ~ `~ ~ ~ o H Ca R1 U U U U G w w V _ ,.a 2 z Z Z a r a a ~ ^~ .~ O O s O 0 N 00 00 Y1 C Y1 O M ~D M C N O ~ M [~ M ;Q O •C 00 Q VN1 7 6` M [' ~ ~O ~ a ~ a w 00 V1 O~ N N ] •l9 N „[~,,, , I~ M 00 M N Y1 M f~ Q v1 N C r y ~ ~ ~- ~ H C + M !~r O' L cv e ~ r oG F- ~ N M N ~D OCO O M ~ M O ~G O ~O M ~O Q M ~O ~ ry o~ = oo t w r' o r^ n C o o ~ ~5 o C , M c = ~ ^ 00 ~O M vi M N ~ M ~ 7 N N ~ Q ~. O • ~ ~ N ~ ~ $ ~ ~+ v y y O M 0` ~ h ~ 00 ~ 00 ~ O+ ~ O t~ N ~~pp O M O N M ~O ~O N M O .app ~G M Q V1 Y1 O f ~ 00 Q~ ~O O N l~ O ~n ~D O~ Q O~ M ~O V1 ~O M ~ O O 00 v1 Y1 U N h '•+` ~O Q~ Q N ~ Q O~ v1 v1 ~O N ~ ~ ~ j w 00 N ~ ~~I/~~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ O O ~ ~ ~ (~/ 7 O O O O O O O p ~ S p p ~O p S ~ ~ ~ ~ O 3 N ~ ~Q Q 00 N ~ , 0 0 ems v r z :.• • . ;: ~: ::.; ..... ...... .... . y C M ~O N O 8 0 0 ~p 0 O~ M O Q~ O p O O N O~ O ~D iO •~ 00 ~O O~ C 3 N N M Q I~ C ~O O~ ~ r ~ M M Q N M M M N Q N N '~ H N ~ O ct ~ e p N K F X ~D M (~ h N M O O O ~f N h O t~ O 00 N 00 t~ C V1 y~ 'p ~~ M ~G [ ~ O C ~f N 00 ^ M M ~O O O~ I p ~O O ~D O j7 0 ' ~ V ~ Q w 00 C ~ ~ ~ h h o 00 ~ M M O P O ~O ~ ~ y ~ ~ 0 U ~ M OOH O O ~O l~ v1 O N O N 00 N Q O 00 C T7 v~ ~. a O vii ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q oo O~ o ~C O Q~ rn C~ ~O C~ w C ~ OiMO N f~~) ~ N ~ O~ 00 N V1 N [~ ,C ~ N N N N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~' ^ N M N ~ O O O h 00 O O N O 00 ~ O O~ ap ~„ C ~ • O °' ~ S,t ~. . ~ ~ (~ O~ N O ~O O~ N N v i N N .Q.i Z F O~ ~O t~1 v1 N N of t~1 ~ O M M ~ ~ i.' N LY. Fw x pr N ~ O O o0 ~ O O O O ~ ~ v ~ O «. p I~ O~ t ~ a0 O~ 00 tY ~O ~O 00 G~ e+~ Q ~O ~ O Ow N h Q~ ~ a v ~ U ' d; R N M ? O+ O O ~ ~ O O N O ~ ~ ~ O ~ 00 w h. 00 O~ H. O O 00 ~ ~D Q~ V1 to 00 M h v1 ' O~ N ~O ~O ['~ ~O h y ~ ~ N N 1 N 00 N N M N N O ~ ~ 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U U 0 U z rn rn ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ yx ~ a 7 ~ O ~ ~ ~ O O ~ w < k7 ~ C w = ¢ a d. 3 ~ ~ g ~ ~ g ~ w ~ ~ ~ o ~vv~ F, 3 v~ cL c:, U a w ~n as U 3 . 1996-98 EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY VPSA-FUNDED INITIATIVE What will the 1996 General Assembly appropriation provide to schools? Reimbursements for purchases: • FY 97 - $26,300 per school • FY 97 - $53,000 per division central office • FY 98 - $25,000 per school • FY 98 - up to $20 million for scientific probeware and graphing calculators • FY 97-98 -software inclusion $1.00 for each $13.00 hardware purchase Local funding share requirement: • FY 97-98 - 20 percent of total funds received • FY 97-98 - 25 percent of the 20 percent of total funds received for training W ~~ ~_ ~~ ~~ L' O ~ ' O s~ w~ W 'v S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m • o ~ ~ ~n o $ o o ~ o o u~ o 0 o a o o ~n o o ~n o ~n ~n C ~A 1~ f~ f~ ~A ~A ~ 1~ O O f~ ~A O M t~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O N ~ f~ ~ ~ ~ 1~ OD O M N ~ t~ 1~ M ~A ~ M t~ O f~ CO I~ N ~ ~ O t0 N CO c'~ J~ r N r M N N r- N ~ ~ t~ O ~ w ~ N ~ m ~ 1•- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O L ~' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~~ O to t!f ~A O O O O to O O 1l) O O O to O O ~A O O to O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ f~ ~ M ~ to N ~A ~ ~ O N ~ M 00 M 1~ M ~ ~ M o0 N ~ M ~ ~ ~ ~ o N ~ O O! ~ !" J ~ y O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O X O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 pp 0 pp 0 O 0 O 0 pp 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O O O O O 0 O 0 C ~ O ~fl ~ tf) O O O O ~ O O tf) O O O to O ' O 1ff 0 O 0 O 0 to 0 O to ~A ~ 1A I~ 1~ P ~A O M t1y I~ O O P 1A O M ~ 11 ) ~ 1~ ~ O N ~ r ~ M ~C1 r N ~ 1~ to ~A ~ N ~ ~ ~ M ~ N r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ tC w ::ia:? :;k; .C O ~A 1A 1A O O O O ~A O O N O 0 0 LA O O 1A O O 1A O O ~A ~~pp C~ to Cf O r• O O O ' N r r ~ W ~ f~ .t ~ O Of ~ C1 N CO ~A Os m - C O 00 00 ~ CO Cs r- ~ tt ) Qf Qs r c0 M a0 i[1 N N N a0 ~ ~ N ~ tp 'A P N ~ c0 CO P 1~ O e~f O N O ~A cD O cp Ci ~ ~ cG J a •~ N M I ~ ~ M N ~ ~ N ~ N ~ r- ~ ~ ~ m~~ o~~ ~ ~~ w, L U N ~ ~ `~ C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 +'' ~ ~ N d0 Y7 N ' CO M O N ~ O t N M CO M O 00 ~ <p t cC <O 1 ~O O Y7 ~O O N o0 M ~O cp O Q~ N • N a0 M ? 1 ~ O m m N t W r N ~ r N f ~ N i ~ V ~ i o r ~ ~ 0 .V. m ~ N ~ •" M ~ ~ ~p N e+ ~D .- M C m N N ~ .- M ap ~ ~ Cf ~ o CO ~ c tp cp N C ~t Sr O c M N t~ ~ c N ~ . r- ~ ~ ~ M ~ = ~ ~ ~ N ~ O t,C m ~ J ~ w C~ .~,. r ~ O O O O O O O O O p O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O y N 0 O pp O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ~ 0 Of O N O t0 Os O N M W 00 GC Y) CO O C~ 00 CO ~A c0 ~ C? C ~ 1~ f~ r- t0 00 N •- .- C) CO N O co O 1~ O <O ~ O N ~ ~ n ~ ~ N M M M r ~A ~ M M I~ ~A ~ ~ P ~ ~ r- ~ M r• N O O M N M ~ f0 N r- M ~ f0 ~ ~A r N ~f N ~t N M ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ lC ... Q X ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ V ~ ~ O V = J w ~ > Q H m a w Q F- ~ ~ 3 Q z o w Z J J N ~ W ~ ~ ~ Q ~ = Q ~ ~ (9 fn ~ O ~ p H ~ Q ? m ~ O w J O J w F- w Y a W m O w O J W O 2 ~ = W Z W Z 2 Y a O ~ ~ ~ (~ ~ O a U m w J w = a ~ c9 E- o g f- ~ c~ c~ ~ ~ ~ Q a w g ~ J ~ v J J ~ ~ a ~ ~ Q w o ~ > > a Q a = _ = a > a a a a a a a a m m m m m m m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ^~ ~~ ^~ V O ~ ~ O wV !~ W v c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 m ~ u~ ~n o u~ u~ ~n o 0 o u~ ~ u~ an an ~n ~n ~ u~ 0 0 0 ~n ~ C N f~ 1~ O N N 1~ ~A O M N N N N 1~ N N N N ~A O O 1~ 1~ ~ '(p ~ 00 l'7 ~fl r fp 00 f~ O 1~ ~ t0 tp t0 CO ~ ~ r tp CV O ~ c+i ch ~ J ~ N N ~ N r r N N 1~ N ~ `~ C ~ ~ , m ~ t A N ~ ~ H ~ O 0 O 0 O 0 O Q O O pO Q O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O O O O O O pv o 0 0 0 0 w y O O O vv O vv O O O O O O O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O O O O O O O C ~ 1A f'f O ' A f O O A i ~ A O ~ _ _ ~ V' ~ M r O N ~! f O ~ N ~[ M O ~ O M tff ~! ~ N ~f tD N 117 M to 00 ~f1 CO 1 1f) O O ~ O ~ N ~A ~ ~Cf ~ _ l0 ~ O . O N ~ 7 ~ m ~ \ c r N ~ O C~ ~ r J ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 y 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 1A ~A a(! O ~A to U9 O ' O O ~A ~ ~A to ~ ~ ~ O N O O O ~1'f ~A S N P 1~ O N N 1~ u f O O N N N N ~ N N N N N O O 1~ I~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M ~ r N ~ M r ~- ~ er er to N r O O ~ O ?~<:~ off Mf 1A O 1ff to M ' O O O X19 ~ to M ~f'f 1n to 1A to O O O O 1f'f 1A ~p m C ~ 00 ~ ~A a0 W ~A ~ Qf O O N N u f OD ~p O Q~ tp ~ a0 ~7 N N er t~ N N O a0 O O O O O ~O cp N fJ0 N t~ ~ .- C~ Cs ~ C1 'A U C ~ ~ m O N O ~ ~ crf O ~ C> Q~ Qi ~ ~A ~A 1~ O ~'i cM 1~ t0 t0 J Q ~ ~ ~ N N ~ N N ~ ~ ~ A N N 1~ M ~ d ~ ~ ~«. O ~ w ` ao .~ m ~ ~-' c~ N ~ H '+ C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 +' m ~ W N ~ CO M ~ N O O CD N ~ N <p 1 tp er W 0 W 00 O~ O O N N N N ' ~~pp N - o0 et CO 00 M L ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o tt O O et O r ~ tp t0 M y ~ ~ 1 ~ I~ ~ c0 N M CO O O ch 1~ ~ ~ O N 1 M9 ~p O a ~ ~O M 1~ ' O O O ~ N r M ~O <O O . O r ~ ~ c 1 r O ~ O ~ ~ M N r- N M N N ~ 3 ~~~ • N O ~ tC m J ~ ~ ... r ~ O O O O p O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O y O O O O O O pp O O O O O O O O O O O O ~ P r N r ~f9 r N OD 00 I~ ~A Of to r r r r th c0 ~ N C~ 01 C ~ O 00 P M S M aD ~ pp O ~ t~ M ~= N e+i !~ O •- Cf 00 ~ d Cs ~ ~ M O C O O N u") N 0 N 0 M tD 00 to ~ M ~ M (L N N ~ ~ ~A ~ N ~' ~ N N ~ M ~ N ~ ~ ~fl tp ~ N ~ ~ r- ~ ~ ~ Z = W O ~ W ~ Z Y W Z ~ ~ ~ W Q ~ N W ~ ? U U Q Z ~ ~ ~ ~ W J _ Z p p Xx _ Z Y w U ..J = N Z Z x > O Z LL' U p p W a W ~ p ~ N p U ~- W W Q ti V } = O ~ C7 Q Y ~ W ~ C7 } Z p W O W W O ~ S W W C7 C7 C7 U Z N _ p O p ~ W J Q O ~ S S J Z Z Z C9 J ~ Z Z Z !n Q Q J J ~ J Q Q W W ~ ~ W lL lL tL LL LL LL. U C9 C9 C9 C9 (~ _ _ = S = ~ ~ Y Y Y W ^~ ~~ ~_ ~~ L O ~ ~ s~ ~~ a~ 'C C O O O ' O ' O O ' O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O m ~ N O O H f O u f ~ O O ~ ~A O O ~ ~ O O t1Y u") ~ ~ O u'f O u'f ~ 1~ ~A O N O N 1~ O O 1~ N O O t~ 1~ O O 1~ 1~ N 1~ ~A 1~ O I~ ~ ~ cM I~ ~A t0 u9 tp crl N N M ~p to ~A M a0 O O 00 c'~1 ~C ch N ch ~ M J Q1 ~~ ~ ~ r N ~ ~ N r 00 r O ~ ~ , ~ c U L N ~ m H O O O Q O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O vO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O .r t O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O w m m M O O ~ O N ~ O O N ~ O O ~ Mf O O off ~ to N O ~ O ~ ~ w y~ C r 1~ Cp N N N ~- ~O N Oa N N N ~ M ~ ~ M Of N .- ~A M tp ~ 01 ~ y ~ ~ M N ~ O O! d r J ~ y 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C ~ 0 ~ 0 O 0 O 0 ~ 0 O 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 O 0 O 0 ~[i 0 ~ 0 O 0 O 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 O 0 O 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 tf) 0 ~ 0 O 0 ~ 0 O 0 ~ ~ 1~ ~A O N O N P O O f~ N O O ~ I~ O O t~ 1~ N I~ ~A I~ O 1~ M O r r ~- M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~-- N N .- ~ ~ N cp M m r t0 ~A O O H O N to O O ~A ~A O O ~A .~A O O K) to ~!9 to O O O to 01 ' Of N ~ N 01 M r M N ~- ~- Of ~Cf 1~ 1~ ~A M N Q1 O ~A M 01 ~Q m C ~ f O Q> N O~ N ~ it C~ c0 N C~ O> O 00 ~ ~ CO <O N ~ CO 1~ ~ ~ U ' ~ O ~ N C~ Ci 1~ Qf t0 CO f~ t~ Ci 1~ 1~ cD ~- M c'7 -- ~- t~ Oi c0 M - O 00 c0 J Q. E r N ~ ~ ~ r N ~ 01 r ~m~~ O ~ ,~ ~~ m U N ~ ~ C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 +-' d CO M ~' N tQ O Of ~ O Ql CO M N 1~ ~ ~ O Qf ~ ~ 00 M N 00 CO N ~ 'f O 00 ~ O N O N CO M owe p <p t~ tp ~ cp tp ~ u Q~ t f N M O 1~ «V+ m w m m N ~ A A tQ ~ M a '~ ~C M ~ A O c0 ~ ~ c0 f~ N N 1~ O t0 c0 c' M ~ c0 ` cv c N 1 M ~ M M M N ~ ~A ~A ~ ~ M N c0 ~ 1 N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ O ~ tD N ~ J ~ r ~ O O 0 Q O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O 0 O 0 y ~ N d0 U! N 0 ~A 0 Qf 0 m 0 N 0 ~ 0 u"f 0 N 0 N 0 W 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 M 0 Qs 0 O ~ tp Q1 C r M .~ N CD A ~ 00 N ~ r M 00 Cp lY ~ Cp Cp r I~ M M f~ N A ~ ~ t0 - ~A a0 r- M ~ (L ~ ~ A ~ ~ ~ ~ ~Q c`~7 ~ ~ ~A elf ~ ~A ~ ~ ~ M ~ M N t0 N t0 N M N ~ ~ CO .- M ~ ~ M r a0 tC M ~ m ~ ~Q r Z ~ W ~ Y ~ ~ ~ O W Q Q ~ J Z ~ W Z j Z ~ Z ~ ~ Z ~ ~ Q > Q W C9 ~ Q W ~ W Y E. . _ O Q O Q Z N ~ C9 H 0 Y S = O C9 U } Q = W U W U w U cn ¢ U z w O > N > W z Q = Q Y w p o O N w H O H O O Z ~ W ~ ~ ~ to ~ ~ z z z g a a g ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ w a a a a a a a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ z z z z z o a a W ^~ ~~ •~ ~~ •~ r O ~ ~ s~ ~~ a~ v ~ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ o ~n o ~ o 0 0 o u~ a u~ ~ ~ ~ o .n an o u~ ~n ~ o 0 0 0 ~ O N O I~ ~A M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ n N N ~ N N O ~ ~ N ~ O O ~9 ~ J ~ t0 O M 1~ 1~ N 1~ OD CD M M <p r I~ r ~p O M M r 1~ M N N m~ H M ~ N ~ r ~ ~ N N N N N ~ N N ~ O ~ w ~ L N ~ ~ F- C O O O O O O pp O O O O pp pp S 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ' ~ O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 + C ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ~ O YY O Y7 O O O O ~A ~Cf to ~A to 1A O M1 to O ~A 49 ~A O O O O ~ ~ ~ m N ~ ~ O ~ ~ M ~ M ~ 01 ~- N oD M 00 N e~ ~A 01 00 M N 'A r- ~ ~ y \ 7 N ~ O C1 ~ r J ~ y O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C ~ O O O M O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Y9 O M O ~ O ~A O ~ O O O N O ~ O O O M O 4") O 1A O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 ~ O N O 1~ ~t9 ~A ~ O ~ ^ ~ ~ N N N N N O ~ ~ N O O O N r P N ~ M M N M ~ ~A ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ `~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ N m l9 :~ ': O 1A O 1Cf O O O O tff 1f'f ~l'f iA M ~ O N ~ O ~ tf) t1Y O O O O ~ ~-- 00 P M O ~p ~A Qs M Qf N O ~ O N Qf H M O at _ W N ~p L C ~ Qf I~ ~- tG O O 00 O eD a0 ~O ~A N O O N ~O ~ cG O to O C) C 1~ O M t~ •- r- tff ~ ~ N 1~ c0 Oi ~A O ~[i Qf ch t~ I~ ~fl O 1~ to to J a. •~ ~ r- N N N ~ N ~ M N N •- N N r• N N r- ~ m~~ a~~ ~ ~~ N ~ ~ H ~ C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 "' ~ ~ ~ CO ~ ~t ~ O ~ N ' 00 ~ f CO O N ~O N O tp c0 'er N tp `~ O N ~ t0 N N N N ~ ~ t f M Q~ O H O Qf I~ ~ to O ~ tp N ~ m~~ ~ M M c0 N Y9 O ~ ~ 00 ~ S ~ 1~ ~ ~ M O r- tp N ~p M O O N ~ O O cD M ~ Ql 00 tp O ~ O O N ~ ~ M c4 t0 r- N ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .- ~ ~ 3Q . N O a ~ t0 y J ~ ~ lQ .+ r ~ 8 S Q Q S O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O y 1 v ~ v O O O O O p C O O O O O O O O ~ N ~ ~ I N N N ~ Cs 1~ Of .- a0 ~ N o0 M ~ ~ 00 N O ~O C ~ i[! - M N ~A r N r N m ~ ~ M ^ !Y N ~ ~ ~ p O 0 0 ~ M ~ N N O O O 00 ~A tp u'f O ~ ~ O ~ N ~ N ~ M r O 00 1 ~ M ~ B ~ M r ~ ~ M ~ N m ~ r r 1n N ~A r ~ ~ N ~ r •~ . . W J Z ~ Z Q Z > O O ~ Q O Q ~ W Q ~ w 0 ~ 0 > O Y ~ ~ J Z Q a } ~ x W Z Z O Z ~ > Z ~ ~ O Z m Y Y W N ~ Q = F- N ~ } ~ W W W ~ S ~ F- W = Y ~ O ~ Q Z J ~ O F- = U U Z ~ f- (~ ~ t~ c~ W ~ W V Q O O O cn ~ O v W = ~ ~ O O Q ~ N ~ ¢ Q w N _ ~ 0 W ~ W ~ Q 2 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a H > > 3 3 3 3 ~ m m U U tn u~ tn tn v~ cn v~ v~ t- } < ~_ •~ O ~ ~ O /V C~ W 'p O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C • ~ ~ Mf O M ~A N ~ O M O ~ u7 O ~ O O ~ ~ O ~!f O O O ~l9 ~ ~ N 1~ 1~ O 1~ I~ 1~ I~ N N ~ 1~ N ~ N O O 1~ 1~ 1A N O ~A to 1 ~ •~p fp M fD ~A M M M 00 t0 t0 1~ M r N r ~A ~J'f M CD 1~ r O 1~ N CO L J r ~ N ~A 1~ r M f~ M N O r m ~ ~ r w O ~ ,~ m ~ ~ U ~ ~ N H X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 y O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O +~ C 0 0 0 .O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O M ~'1 ~! O ~A Kf to M ~A ~A O ~ N O ~ O O N ~ O ~) O O O ~ ~ ~~ O d N r 1~ N r r ~ M N O M N N r ~ ~ N N ~ M O ~ M 1A M Q1 ~ .~ m c N ~ O Q~ d ~ J ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 y O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 to ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ off ~ O ~ ~ O ~ O O ~A ~ O ~ O O O ~A ~ N 1~ 1~ O 1~ t~ 1~ 1~ N N ~A 1~ N to N O O I~ 1~ ~ N O ~ ~ t~ LL r M r CO r r O r 0 ~ N 1~ r ~ I~ r ~ 0 r N r' ~ r r r N t[1 VY to O ~Y 1A M ~A to ~A O ~A elf O ~Pf O O ~A to O O O O O to N Cf 1~ r O C1 1~ M N ~O Q1 O 00 CO 1~ r M r '~t O ~ ~ O ~A m C • N «'f M O~ ~A to tG CO N N ~ r t0 N ~ et Q1 N `C to O ' 00 off O CO C ~ t0 N 1~ m m aD r Q) O O ~ P ~A ~t W I~ O M O tl f 1~ CZ 1A r ~ • N it r M r ~ P r M O it r N O r r ~ ~ J r ~ ` ` `~- ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~o L N ... t0 N ~ ~ `~ ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ~ O CO O ~ CO CO O N O ~~pp m CO ~ N N 'a' O CO O ~t ~ Q~ ~O <O tD r N O O C t0 r O N N ~ +~ Qf M ~A O M M I~ ~ Cn O r f ~ r ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ m ~«. d S N C O N N ~ ~ S ~ N N ~ M ~ ~ M O E o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o N o ~ tC m J ~ ~ ... r ~ O O oq Q S S 0$ o Q p O O O O O O O O O O O S O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O y ~ Y9 WW ~A N W wwww WW ~ r 1A ~'~9 CO C1 r ~p 1~ ~t N I~ M CO r O CO O r ~ ~ ~ r 1~ ~ r r M 1~ ~ Mf O M N ~ Qf Q> CO A ~ O O m O r O 0 ~ ~A O r t0 r 1 M M ~ M M 1~ M O r O N9 O CO CO ~ N M N ~ r r r r r OD N r aO N r ~A r N 1~ r t0 a0 N Y9 r r r r N ~ .+ ~ m Z Q ~ W N = Z ? Y m J ~ J ? j ~ U a O m Q ~ W = U 2 ~ W ] ~ ~ Y m O ~ z w z O Y m fA I- N ~_ U ~ U ~ N 3 ! z 0 ~ g O = o z z - cn w = E a 0 0 cn O z O z Z a ~ > z ° a a w a Z - a ~ u. a ~ a ~ ~ a w o z a Q i ~ Q ~ z ~ w ~ a ~ O O o ~ ~ a = = i } ~ z z z a a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ > 3 ~ ~ c 7 ., c n c n W ~~ ^~ O ~~ ~ O s ~ + ~~ W ~ ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O m ~ O H O O O ~A to to ~ O ~ 1~ N ~A ~ O 1~ N N 1~ ~A J~ ~~ M ~ N ~ ~ O m ~- M N O ~ ~ ,0 N fV ~ ~ N ~ ~ H C ~ O Q 00 Q O O O O O O O O O •' $ C ~j O G O O O O O ~ ~ m w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N O~ M N M N ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ m N j c C N ~ O Q! ~ r J ~ m N y 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 O ~ ~ A N N ~ O ~ N N ti ~ ~ O r r ~- r er m ~ tD t9 ~ .0 O ~ 'f v ~ O O O O ~ N M ~ N ~p ~ C ~ M ~ p u"f N v u~ Q~ 00 N ~ p O~ Q i ~ 1~ C O ~ m ~ ~!'1 O f~ ~ O eo OD ~ J ~ ~ ~ O ~ ,~ L L ~ U ~ N ~ ~ H `~ C O ~ ~ N O O O O N O ~ O 0 ' ~ OD C O 0 0 +- Cpl N r- ~ ~ ~ G~ OD c'7 CO r~ ~ N ~ p N ~ ~ ~ ~ r N R ~ - C N ~ _ ~ m ~ ~ N ~ tC o m ~ J ~ w ~ ~ r ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O ~ A ~ OD 0 0_ N ~ ~ 0 M CA ~ O ~ ~ ^ ~ 3 M A e +~ ~ ~ M ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~- N r- r CA w r ~ M t~0 Y = ~ w U ~ a O ~ Y v ~ v U Z U Z ~ N m 2 > ? ~ ~ a ~ ~ cQi~ cQn a O ~ ~ z O ~ ~ a a p a w z v i W ~ a ~ w ~ a ~ o v z a z a ~ ~ a a = ~ a w o o ~ o w u. c~ ~ w cn m a ~ ~ v ~ FUNDING PRIORITIES AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS 1996-98 EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY VPSA-FUNDED INITIATIVE What are the special requirements for use of grants provided by the General Assembly? Eligible grant recipients (reporting membership as of 9/30/96): • Regular schools • Regional special education centers • Regional vocational education centers • Regional schools for the gifted Grant use priorities: • Network-ready computers for students • Network-ready multimedia computers for classrooms • Upgrade and retrofit of school buildings for technology use • Networking components and peripherals • Graphing calculators for classrooms • Scientific probeware for classrooms • Software Program priority requirements: • Division technology plan (revised) • Curriculum integration relating to Standards of Learning • School personnel training • Technology Standards of Learning • Regional center technology plans 1995-96 EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY VPSA-FUNDED INITIATIVE What did schools accomplish with FY 95 and FY 96 technology initiative funds? School use of FY 95 funds: • Automation of middle and high school library media centers • Internet access via Virginia's Public Education Network • Library resources access from classrooms • Partnership launching with public libraries • Access to information from multiple locations School use of FY 96 funds: • Automation of elementary school library media centers • Internet access via Virginia's Public Education Network • Library resources access from classrooms • Information electronically from multiple locations • Initiation of school network development • Upgrade of computers/multimedia 1996-98 EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVES Q. What are schools expected to accomplish with 1996-98 technology lnitlative funds and their local match? School use of FY 97 funds: • Lower student-to-computer ratio • Multimedia computers for instruction • Upgrade and retrofit of school buildings for technology use • Continued development of school networks • Central office technology upgrades • Train school personnel • Enhance technology programs • Software School use of FY 98 funds: • Lower student-to-computer ratio • Multimedia computers for instruction • Upgrade and retrofit for school buildings for technology use • Continued development of school networks • Train school personnel • Enhance technology programs • Purchase graphing calculators • Purchase scientific probeware • Software 1996-98 EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY VPSA-FUNDED INITIATIVE Q. What are some unacceptable uses of the funds? VPSA-funded purchases exclude: • Training • Leasing • Independent consultants • Supplies • Telephone fees On-line and other recurring charges • Maintenance • Furniture , • Software (beyond stated requirement) TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM RESULTS EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY VPSA-FUNDED INITIATIVE Q. What planning, support, and training are being provided to schools by the state? State training and technical assistance • Statewide leadership training conference and summer institutes • Statewide teaching, learning and information resources via Virginia's Public Education Network • Broadcast graduate credit courses to train teachers via Old Dominion University and Virginia Tech, and programs on select topics via the Virginia Satellite Education Network (VSEN) • Software application training • Statewide presentations and workshops • Technical assistance with planning, procurement • Options and installations • SHEV pilot K-12 teacher training projects at Virginia Tech, Lancaster Community College and Old Dominion University • Access to key service and product providers via forums Support services • Handbooks, guides and reports on acceptable use policies, frequently asked questions and other topics • Contract options for voice, video, data and other technologies • Teaching, learning, and information resources via Virginia's Public Education Network (PEN) • Internet core discipline instructional resources • Assessment technical assistance • Best practices identification and sharing • Library media resources Planning • School division technology plan review • Technology Standards of Learning • Technology competencies for teachers • State Technology Plan • Newer technology pilot programs EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY VPSA-FUNDED INITIATIVE What planning, support and training are being provided by school divisions and regional consortia? School division planning, support and training activities include: Divisionwide technology plan development • Technology integrated curriculums • Bond sales • Training for school and central office personnel • Systemwide network installation and operation • Handbooks for school plan development • Software reviews and evaluation • Library media center automation Internet access for schools 1995-1998 EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY STATE-FUNDED PROGRAM RESULTS What specific results will be attributed to state-funded technology programs between 1995 and 1998? Results attributed to state-funded programs (1995-1998) include: • Automation for all school library media centers • Internet dial-up access via Virginia's PEN in all library media centers • Reading, writing and research skills in all schools enhanced by library resources, long-distance learning, credit courses, courseware and worldwide web information • Informational resources and courseware to all students unhampered by economic and geographical factors • Standards of Learning for technology for students • Technology standards for teachers • Classroom access to networks, computers, multimedia computers and library resources • Statewide and local technology plans in all school divisions • Distance learning credit courses to needy schools (1,400 students) • Integration of technology in core disciplines through Standards of Learning • Improved access to teacher certification, food service, vocational and special education information • Training opportunities for school personnel • Electronic sensors and graphing calculators for middle and high schools • Best teaching and learning practices identification and sharing STUDIES/SURVEYS WHO IS USING THE INTERNET IN VIRGINIA? 1996 DOE SUR VEY .~v,..::::::::::.: ..~: . Q 1: Can your school connect to the Internet via Virginia's PEN for use by Administrators, for use by teachers, or as a tool for student instruction? 100% by end of FY 1996 (Result of Library Automation Initiative Q2: Is your school currently directly connected to the Internetfor use by administrators, for use by teachers, or as a too! for student instruction? Yes dS•iL 117 School Divisions Reporting No SS•/. Q3: Does your school have plains to have a direct connection to the Internet within 2 ears? • 117 School t~ivisions KeporUng vA Do>;rr~n~iogy D~v~~~ ~ 1/7/97 ~ I,~ No o~ni 15% WHO HAS DEVELOPED WEB PAGES IN VIRGINIA? 1996 DOE SURVEY _:: ::~ .,. ~ ~ ~. Q 1: Does your school have a home page on the Internet or Virginia 's PEN? Yes 26% • 117 School Divisions Reporting 0 Q2: Will your school have a home page on the Internet or Virginia's PEN within 2 years? No ~ ~ o/ Yes 87°/. • 117 School Divisions Reporting ~A Do~r~a~y >~~~ ~ 1 /7/97 2 h a~ ~I d' W A a'" Z ~ ~ ~ W VI wz w E., A I~ a~ ~o ~ ~ A 0 z W E"" ~ 0 N O .-i N M ~f ~/'~ ~D h 00 O~ O ~+ N M ~ h ~O •+ ~ O~ h .~ t+1 .-+ Q h ~ Z o d d V 0. Nf et ~ O~ N O ~ M ~ h o0 00 ~--~ ~' M N O~ ~--~ ~O h ~--~ 1n h h ~O N h 00 h O ~! ~~pp O O~ N N h ~' h tai h rl Q 0 0~ ~O ~ et O^ N 00 ~ ~ O .-. 00 ~ ~. t7 1n ~! h 00 ~! h h •~r •~ ~y (~ E„ N ~O ~O ^' O N C~ ~--~ ~ ~t O N 00 ~O M ~O ~--~ N M 00 --~ ~O O N -+ ~ ~O M v'~ ~ O~ ~ O~ ~ N ['~ ~~pp c~ M ~O l+1 ~O Q~ ~O ~ O h 00 ~ C as a 0 0 ~ C/1 ~ O h v~'i ONO O~ O 00 N N ~ ~O oho ~ O V'1 ~ ~ .~~+ S •~• O~ °~$ .N.+ O r, E+ ~ h O~ 00 v1 O h ~D O~ N N O O O^ v1 e+1 N ?' ..r t' O OD h O O ~ rZ a ~ O~ a V1 N 0o ^~ Q~ 00 O~ M h ~O t~ ~O ~D ~O M h ~O O~ ~--~ O~ Q~ M M ~--~ O N O N N O~ ~O C ~O N .~ ~ V"~ ~~Qp ~O O~ ~D N V~ h Q 00 r 0 .~ .-. ..r ~y .-. ~ ~ ~+ ~D ~ O~ O~ M 00 !+1 h 00 h ~O 00 !~ ~O O~ D „ o~ ' ~ N O O ~O N ~O h M Q~ 00 v1 O N O~ ~~pp 00 N O+ ~ O~ O O~ h 00 h V1 00 O~ ~ ~O d1 O~ N 00 ee~~ O ~ h ~p M O ..r .~ O~ ~O h N O t7 h [~ ~ r.~ ~O M e* ~ N h ~ C^ ~D M ~ 00 00 ~O h 00 ~ !~ O~ ~ .r h ~ ~ "~ ~ N ..~ ... rl w.r rr .r ... r+ ri ~ rl N ri r1 r1 ~` ~" d O z z a ~- F ~ ~ ~ z ` ° ° ~ °a A o ° Q F~ ca Z ~ a ~ ~ ~ °a ~ ~ w `" a ` ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ Q N V ~ G ~ 0 4 v ~ ~ ~ ua Q a Z ~ ~ ~ x z E~ F- V ~ 0~ ° a a m ~ z E " a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ S ~ v~ E - ° ~ ~ z ~ o ° , 3 a W o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ °z z ° ~ z ~ ° ~ ~ 3 z ~ ~ ° ~ ~ o ° ~- 3 a~ A r V e 0 v w 0 0 .~ QC o~ 0 A ~M a rn N ~ ~ A ~ r, 05 ~ ~" V O W ~+ ~ O O d x V ~o W ~ E"' N N O Z 0 H Q V W O a O Z w a. } m w .~ ^+ 00 ~O ~-+ ~ N ~ N ~ N ~ N ~ N ~ M '~ M ~ M M er ~ '~t •--' ~!1 a ~z o~ (~ ~ G~ V1 ~ ~ 00 00 e* O~ \O G~ ^' O N ~ M O v1 O ~-+ ~+ ~-r N O~ N et ~ O ~O a~ ~o M O ~O ~ 00 v1 t~ M v1 v1 t~ et v'1 ~ O ~ 00 rl .~ ~„y ~" V1 C~ ~O O tf N v1 ~ M O~ M O~ N V1 00 l~ V1 v1 ~O v1 W a W a N M M ~ Q~ ~ ~ M O n M ~O ~ C ~ ~ ri ~ N ~ N ~D Q~ ~O ~O M Q~ ~ ~ U ~ U V1 O c~ ~ N 00 ~O N N M 00 ~ V1 N .--~ O 8 v t w ~.~1 ~ ~ 00 G~ 00 ~ ~ O O~ M C~ ~ V1 00 r-+ O~ 00 M rr ~--~ C~ •-• N E" Z W et M •~-~ [~ ~D ••• O N fr'w ~O N M v1 [~ ~O .-. ~ ~ l~ O~ N ~O ~ V'i ~O ~O ~O O 00 h v1 ['~ ~O O~ 00 ~O N v1 N O~ l~ w 0 ~ M~ N Q ~D 00 00 C ^ C~ G~ 00 ~O [~ 00 N O ~ ~O M 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ M ~+ O .-. •r ~ O M 00 O ~ ~--~ O~ V'1 et [~ O~ N 00 ~ ~ O N r. r.. ,... ... .-~ r. ,~ ,.. ... ... r.. O Q ~ a q C~7 ~ ,~ v~ i ~ ~ W a Q 7 ~ ~ ~ U ~ Q c~ o ~ ~ V z O ~ ~ ~ v i V x ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ " '~ ~ 5 ~ ~ ° ~ ~3 ~ o ~ ~ ° ~ ~ ~ ~ ° z a a a a • a ~ ~ ~ H '~ y {~ • ~ 0 a, w3 as a ~ z . ~ z V] .-. N M ~ V'1 t~ a A~ M~ H 0 ~1 O O V N F A W V ~ A W w ~z" ~/ MCI w O ~ O 00 00 ~C 00 M ~--~ ~-+ 00 ~ [~ Q1 M ~Q ~ M N ^-~ N V1 M ~ N N ~ N N z h M ~D Q~ O M ~!1 h N N N g of M B ~ W ~ M eh ~ ^~ ~O Q~ N ~ v1 O~ -~ V1 M N ~ ~ M ~-+ N .... er M ~ N N M et N ~--~ a !~'l i/1 ' ~ ~ N N N 7 N v ~ M N M ~ M N py oo ~D 00 C~ ~O ~D v1 ^. ~ ~ N M 00 00 ~ ~ ~ N ^~ M ~ ..a h M N M ~ (~/~ ~ 0 , U °' t~ v'~ O~ oo ~ ~ ~ O O ~O ~ v'~ p1 N ~ ~ ~ M M ~ N h ~ N M ~ M N N ~O ~O ..-~ v1 h N ~O N O ~O M G M ~ O~ [~ N n M o0 O 00 ~D O ~D ~--~ N Q d t ~ M [ ~ O O ~D 00 O ~ ^+ N O h ~.r -~ i M vi ~ O ~--~ O ~t ~D h M vi O ~ ~ ~ ~D ~ M ~ [~ V'I ~ M ~ ~D ~D t~ O M . .. M N M t~ 00 00 ~D ~D h ~D O 00 O~ V1 h M v1 ~O ~O ~ ~D M N M C~ N ~O p ~ o0 C~ O ~ ~ M M [~ n N t~ N ~ Q N O ~-- v1 O ~O ~D ~ O n N M M ~ h ~' N ~ ['~ ~ ~O M M 00 ~D ~D ~ M ~-+ ~O ~ vy n N ~ ~ ~ ~D t~ N N [~ ~ h o0 t~ t~ O O O 00 t~ V1 00 t~ ~ N ~ C ~ .-r 00 M h v1 00 N ~ ~O M M ~..i ~D N N C~ t~ ['~ O vi O~ ~n ~D oo t~ ~„ Q~ ~ of M 00 G1 h C V1 N 00 ~ ~ ~ ~ N w N M ~ ~ ~D ~D M M O ~D O~ ~--~ 00 ~O ` N ~ M M M o0 O ~ ~ M ~D O ~ N rk.~+ ~ O ~ ~ M ~ [ ~ ~ ~D N M O ~ M O M " h ~ O V1 ~. N ~ ~ .~ Vy O O O N N M M \O 00 ~ M ~ N ~D Q er et ~ N O~ ~ U ~D M N O -~ O N oo ~ N et N M ~t N M Q 00 00 O t~ O N V N ! ~/1 M C~ N Q~ Q~ V1 M O h in ~-+ M ~ ~ M w ~ ~ ~ Q~ ~O N '~ O ~ M ~ n " ~ V h ~O ~O ~,,,,~ O N O ~ N N ^ ~ M M ~ ~ ) M M M ~ H M ~O ~O ~! v~ ~O ~O ~O O~ N N O~ O ~ M O~ M ~-+ M ~ ~ ~D n N V1 Q~ l ~--~ ~1 C~ M O O~ ~D ~ ~D ~ Q ~ Q ~ ~ 00 O p y Q n ~-+ 00 N ~--~ ~--~ t ~ O ~--~ ~-+ M V'1 ~ 00~~ N N O .--~ vy ~ c~1 M ~ h M M M ~ ~ 0 7 ~ ~ ~ ~ z rr V N ~l m z a ~ ~ ~ c , ' . ~ ~ y x O x V x w F F ~ ~ ~ w ~ z 0 ~ ~ F , O ~ p ~ ~ ~ a a o a~ a ~ ~ z o ~- ; ~ w ~ a rn i.+ ^C O >r 0 ... e~ ~o w ~. ee C O .~ c L 4~ s ~n .~ ~v etS ^~3 .r.- '~ c .~ e~ a ~ w d a a z x x z a z > z ~ ~ .~ ~, z e ~~ ~ z WA z z z z z z z ~ ~ ~ z ~ ~ z H H ~ ~ z c~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ti A z ~ w z z z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ z ~ ~ ~ ~ Hw v~ F Q ~ Q ~ a ~ ~ ~ W ,~ C~7 w e ~ ~ v' Q a c~ O V ~ ~ ~ S ~ ~ ~ U x a O ~ (, x ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ > ~ O a Z a~ 00 c~ a ~ ~ y • ~ O ~ II II II II e a~ ~ a a, NEXT STEPS EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVES Q. What technology needs and issues must be addressed? Technology needs and issues include: • Training • Technology support and personnel • Up-to-date equipment and facilities • Teacher licensure technology requirements • On-going technology funding • Restrictions on use of VPSA funds • Expected recommendations from Legislative Commissions U O L d. L .~ ~F- M 0 ti 0 0 T L O .C c~ M I N M 0 T 0 o o o o o co o ~ ao rn o ~ ~ ti o 0 ~~ O O O O O O C'~ O e~ co N O O d' c~ o co N U ~ N ~t O d' ~ CO ~ ~t O .O C ~ L ~ ~ ~ ~~ N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C~ O T M IS O N ~ O O O O O O ~ O ~ I~ O O O N C0 0 ~ /~' if• i . ~ T N T T T T Q~ ~ 7 _ ~ ~ o 0 0 o o o o ~n o co co o o co ~ a~ cfl ~ O~ O O O O O O N CM C~ cO C~ 0 0 0 cV I.f) .r C N N ~ L ~ U f~ ~ 0 0 0 T O O CO T I.C) 0 ('7 0 T M N '- •-- M ~t ~ O r- CV N In T- CV ('~ O *- O C~ (O C7 T 0 ~ 00 C~ 0 N CO Ln C~ *- ~ ~' ('~ N C7 ~ ~ C ~ ~ c~ L H 0 •- ~ QO O N O N ~ O O O N 0 I~ T CO *'' N U ~- ~ C7 T O ~ (V C9 In (O (O c7 ~ CD CV N (~ T O O O (~ N m ~ ('~ f~ (~ tn In C ~ ~ EA ~ J C7 ~ In (O f~ M O O T N ('7 ~ In CO f~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q L ~ N C7 ~ ln (O I~ m 0 0 T N M ~ ln CO f~ ~- O O m m O M O m O O O O O O O O } O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T T U C O .~ Q O Q Q I rn rn N_ a N rn T J O ~+J Q O W Z ~_ `3 /T V 0 W Z ~ ~ } ~- c+~ ~i ~ N ~ ~ ~ G9 O °o tp O ~ 6H ° ° ° ° `r'- o o o~ o ~ ~ ~ O N o0 ~- ~ O O ' N O NEA ~ 6R O O tlD fA !d V m d c • L d •r C O V O ~ ' c £ ~ R ~ ~ ~ ' ~ 3 ~ ~ :? ~0 'C ~ m ~ ~ O N r ~ ~ a m ~ ~ . ~ c ~ N ~ R O ~' ~ ~ N N U ~ ~ ~ m o ~ a ~ a~ ~ m C ~ _ ~ N c E ,o U O U o ~, «, N w ~ .~ '~ ~ '. o w p N U .~+ m o h m aU E .. 7 ~ «. ~ m ~ ~ a ° w c ~ ° Q a r~ ch o ~n v o ao es~ o N ~ ~ r- ~ O ~ ~D ~ ~ °O°o °o~ °o O ~ N O O C7 ~ O M co ~ t0 EA I~ a O .. C m ~ c ' o Q ~ o 0 ~ o ~ ~ ~ A ~3 ~ ~ ~ r a? 'v +~+ L .. N ~ ~ ~ N ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a~ ~ ~ o t "'' W ~ N d 3 w w ~ ~ ~ a o a ~ m $ ~~ ~ N ~ O 3 Z o U U ~ .. Z C N C .~. 'C > y -p ~ ~ N °~ ~ ~ o O y U = ..~+ m O a m ~ QU ~ E vi ~ ~ c ~ ~ c c~i wUUI-o Qd Q c0 0 ~n o ~ o O O O M ('7 ~ °o O O C m :. c m U C w ~ r es -v o H ~ s m ~ ~ a< a co C T C (0 ~ C C o ~ c~ ~~ c ~ ,o '~ M C ~ N N ~ ~ N U ~ °o m ~ X rn C '~ C C N 7 U t 3 c O N .~ 0 U N rn co a C O .~ U W 0 n c~ .~ 'rn Report of the COMMISSION ON EDUCATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE (Pursuant to HJR 135 of 1996) A. Restoration of the Literary Fund In recent years, diversions of Literary Fund revenues have resulted in lack of direct loan capacity in the Literary Fund and closing of the 1987 bond resolution of the VPSA. Although these diversions were often made during times of fiscal crises, the Commission has indicated a desire to restore the Literary Fund. Recommendation: (1) Request the House Appropriations Committee and the Senate Finance Committee to assist in convincing the General Assembly to restrain use of the Literary Fund for purposes other than school construction and capital projects; (2) introduce a joint resolution expressing the sense of the General Assembly that the Literary Fund should be preserved for school construction and capital projects; and (3) support the Constitutional Amendment introduced at the 1995 Session of the General Assembly (introduced by Delegate Councill and Senator Early) which restricts the use of the Literary Fund for school construction and capital projects. B. Improvement of Funding for School Construction and Renovation Although the Commonwealth of Virginia does not directly fund any school construction, the state operates two interlinked debt mechanisms for funding school construction (the Literary Fund and the VPSA). In addition, a per pupil maintenance supplement is appropriated to be used for maintenance or debt service. Recommendations: (1) Support the development and funding of a recently proposed federal school construction program and encourage Virginia's participation in any such program; (2) propose an increase in the maintenance supplement for 1997-98 with language to require that receipt of the funds be conditioned on divisions taking steps to improve the life-safety conditions in schools scheduled to remain in operation for at least the neat five years; (3) during the neat year of this study, evaluate the feasibility of a one-time direct appropriation for school construction; and (4) request that the Senate Finance Committee and the House Appropriations Committee to evaluate a possible debt service funding program. C. Improve Access to and Funding for Educational Technology Currently, the funding for technology consists of VPSA equipment notes, with debt service paid from the Literary Fund. Some $63.6 million in technology has been funded in this manner; the current budget directs the issue of $55 million in 1996-97 and $46 million in 1997-98 to fund grants to localities for technology improvements including infrastructure needs. At this time, the Literary Fund's capacity probably restricts future use of this mechanism. Various recommendations were made by VPSA and DOE pursuant to Item No. 131 of 1996. Recommendations: (1) Request that the Senate Finance Committee and the House Appropriations Committee work with the Commission during the 1997 interim to enhance the State's commitment to educational technology funding; (2) amend the Literary Fund statutes to authorize borrowing for technology equipment; (3) support the 1997 VPSA Bond resolution to fund educational technology improvements/purchases and school construction needs; (4) introduce legislation to authorize local school boards to establish local or regional foundations in support of educational technology and other capital needs; and (5) introduce legislation to improve the quality and uses of educational technology, primarily in the area of staff training. Printed by Brenda Holton / ADM01 1/23/97 8:04am From: Brenda Holton / ADMO1 To: John Cease / PFR01 Subject: fwd: Board Report --------------------------------------- ===NOTE====------=====1/22/97==9:10am== John, I just received your Board Report on Acceptance of a grant by the Police Dept for Community Crime Prevention Services. It was received too late to go out with the Draft agenda but I will put it on the Consent Agenda. Fwd=by:=John=Cease=/==1/22/97==3:58pm== Fwd to: Brenda Holton / ADMO1 ....................................... Consent agenda should be fine. The match will come ffrom our dept. budget so there is no debate over general fund cost. Thanks - let me know if you need any thing from me. Page: 1 Printed by Brenda Holton / ADMOl 1/22/97 9:46am ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: JSCHEID @ PSTHASTE {JSCHEID$MHS} To: Elmer Hodge / ADMO1 Subject: fwd: BRParkway Permit ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ===NOTE====------=====1/21/97==1:38pm=====__________________________________ I have checked with Gary Robertson and Paul M. Neither one has any additional comments on the permit so I have asked BRP to send up the original copies for signature. I guess it's ready to go to the BOS. Fwd=by:=Elmer=Hodge=/=1/21/97==4:22pm_______________________________________ Fwd to: Brenda Holton / ADM01, JSCHEID @ PSTHASTE {JSCHEID$MHS}, Paul Mahoney / ADMO1 ............................................................................ Great, I'm glad we got this worked out. Please prepare an agenda item for Jan 28 for BOS approval. Thanks. Fwd=by:=Brenda=Holton=l/22/97==9:43am_______________________________________ Fwd to: Janet Scheid / ADMO1, Paul Mahoney / ADMOl ............................................................................ ECH wants everything so he can review Thursday. Could you give me a title for this agenda item. Thanks. Fwd=by:=Janet=Scheid==1/22/97==9:45am_______________________________________ Fwd to: Brenda Holton / ADM01 ............................................................................ How about: National Park Service Right-Of-Way Permit - Boone Property Page: 1 Printed by Brenda Holton / ADMO1 1/22/97 9:52am From: Brenda Holton / ADMO1 To: Brent Robertson / ADMO1 Subject: fwd: Work Session 1/28 --------------------------------------- ===NOTE====------=====1/22/97==9:47am== Brent, just a reminder that we need Board Report for Budget Work Session. ECH wants to review all reports Thursday. Thanks. Fwd=by:=Brent=Roberts=1/22/97==9:51am== Fwd to: Brenda Holton / ADM01 ....................................... I will send one up ASAP. I am still trying to figure out exactly what we will cover (given our time constraints). Thanks! Page: 1 Printed by Brenda Holton / ADMOl 1/21/97 4:40pm From: Brenda Holton / ADMO1 To: Mary Allen / ADM01 Subject: FYI --------------------------------------- ===NOTE________________________________ ECH said that there might be an econ dev announcement at Noon and maybe three of Board members might be there. He talked of it being a special meeting. After discussion, and there being no business to enact, PMM and odthers thought it was not a special meeting, just a press conference and press would be notified. FYI Page: 1 Printed by Brenda Holton / ADM01 1/22/97 9:48am --------------------------------------- From: Brenda Holton / ADMO1 To: Craig Hatmaker / MIS02, Don Myers / ADM01 Subject: Work Session 1/28 ===NOTE____________________ Just a reminder that we need Board Report with information for Work Session on Year 2000 Computer Upgrade. ECH wants to review all reports Thursday if possible. Thanks Page: 1 Printed by Brenda Holton / ADMO1 1/22/97 9:48am --------------------------------------- From: Brenda Holton / ADMO1 To: Gary Robertson / GUPO1 Subject: Board Report - --------------------------------------- ===NOTE________________________________ Gary, I just received in the mail your Board Report for Acceptance of Water and Sanitary Sewer Facilities serving Woodbridge, Section 14. It was received too late to go out with the draft agenda but I will put it on Consent. Page: 1