The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2/25/1997 - RegularOF ROANp,~~ ti ,~' ,; z ~ ~ z ov, , a~ 1838 C~.o~~xxt#~ ~# ~..~~t~.~~e WOB/(/NG DOCU ENT -SUBJECT TO REV/S/ON ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION AGENDA FEBRUARY 25, 1997 ~vrr a n~ ecc~ x~cs R~~ 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 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 Assistant County Administrator 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag. B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS i C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND AWARDS 1. Recognition of Parks and Recreation Department for the selection of Garst Mill Park being voted the Roanoke Valley's 3rd Best Park by the readers of Roanoker D. BRIEFINGS E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Adoption of resolution requesting VDOT to adopt recommended lists of Primary and Interstate projects for the 1997-2003 Six Year Improvement Program. (Arnold Covey, Director of Engineering & Inspections) ~G 2. Adoption of a resolution requesting $100,000 grant from the Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Board Flood Prevention and Protection Assistance Fund. (Arnold Covey, Director of Engineering & Inspections) ~~ 3. Request to the Planning Commission to consider amending 2 the zoning ordinance to require a Special Use Permit for broadcasting towers in industrial and commercial zoning districts. (Terry Harrington, Planning & Zoning Director) ORDINANCE C 4. Request from the School Board to amend the School Operations Budget to recognize additional revenues. (Jerry D. Hardy, Budget & Data Management Director) 3 5. Request for approval of an agreement with the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) A-022597-5 HCN MOTION TO APPROVE AGREEMENT WITH MINOR CHANGE TO AGREEMENT NOTED BY LBE 1~.~ F. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS G. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS H. REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARING AND FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCES -CONSENT AGENDA 1. Ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to expand the existing facility, located at 3028 Penn Forest Blvd., Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Penn Forest Christian Church. 2. Ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to construct a home for adults located 0.15 mile west of the intersection of Brambleton Avenue and Pinevale Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Balanced Care 4 Corp. 3. Ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to operate an ice cream stand located at 6415 Williamson Road, Hollins Magisterial District, upon the petition of McClung Enterprise T/A Wily's. I. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance authorizing the transfer of 3.0 acres, being lots 15, 16 and- the western 70 feet of Lot 14 of Fort Lewis Estates to the Industrial Development Authority for conveyance to Kroger as part of the Kroger expansion project. (Tim Gubala, Economic Development Director) FFH MOTION TO APPROVE 1ST READING 2ND - 3/11/97 ~~ 2. Ordinance granting a private water line easement across property owned by Roanoke County to Neysa M. Luckado. (Gary Robertson, Utility Director) T.3E MOTION TO APPROVE 1ST READING 2 ND - 3/11/97 IL~~ J. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance approving an option to purchase agreement with Eva M. Burritt for five feet of Lot 14, the eastern 25 feet of Lot 14, Lot 13, and Lot 12 on map of Fort Lewis Estates authorizing the exercise of said option and authorizing assignment of the contract to the Industrial Development authority in connection with the Kroger Project. (Tim Gubala, Economic Development Director) 5 FFH MOTION TO APPROVE ORD iZ~~ 2. Ordinance authorizing conveyance of a sanitary sewer easement to the Town of Vinton across Stonebridge Park property owned by the Board of Supervisors. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) 0-022597-7 H N MOTION TO APPROVE ORD WITH EDITORIAL CHANGE Si 1GGESTED BY LBE 1~~ K. APPOINTMENTS 1. League of Older Americans -Advisory Council 2. League of Older Americans -Advisory Board 3. Social Services Advisory Board L. CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO BE ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. R-022597-8 RT,T MOTION TO APPROVE CONSENT RESO IZ~~ 1. Approval of Minutes -January 14,1997 6 M. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS to move ~ forw pervi ard w cn it r N h l i~kPnc egal a : ~1) A ction a sked t gainst he the Boa M rd oos if ther e Lod e w ge. as consensus Affirmative rye ponn e from othe r sup erviso rs (~ ) Asked th at a le tter of app reciation sen t to Cong ressm an ooddl , atte fo r his s ucc ess in retain ing $75 million fed eral funds for c om mu nity a ction. BLT as ke d M HA to dr aft letter. for his ~g natur e ( ~ A sk ed for v ehicle count on R out e 24 at Kro~e~r and Wa shin gton A , venu e n ea r Vinto n Bap tist Chu rch (4) Asked sta ff to continue loo king at s peed li mits on Bandy Road wit h 35 mph at t he end and con side ring 5 0 MP H be yond t hat to its ter min us (,~ ) Per taini ng to school bo ard b udget (a) a sk ed staff t o look t "out of dist rict enrol lme nt" and state fun ding for t ; he pas t five years and p rojecti ons of cos ts and sta te funding if "ou t of distric t enr oll me nt" is r educe d;`() c ost s f or y ear ro und schools and cm ~rrPs of fu nding for teach ers; ~c l how the SB c ould a dd 48 positions wit hout budg ing fo r t hem BLT a nnounc ed two jo int wo rk s essions with crh nnl h oard' Marc h 11 and A pril 8 a nd poin t m eeti ng with S cho ol Board and Blu e Ri bbon Comm is sion on M arch 1 7. . ~ p ~rviso r Ed dy• ( W ~ as ple ased t o rece ive rep ort from Re al Estate AccP.ccmP , ntc th at sh ow th , e nu mber o f aupe als ha s drop ped dramatic ally. (2) ked st A aff ab out the s tatus of th e join t heal th insu Dia rance Hyatt ne s advised d eadlin e is T anua ry 1, 1998 f or imp lemen tation . Current pla .. n will go 1 97 1/1/ 98 C itt i tt t i th RFP bas ed on all from 7/ to / om ee m s hu o ng. ge er an mans. LBE a sked for a bri ef sum mary from staff o n what will g o out in RFP G l Ask ed i f Co unty will c onside r the new 3-1-1 non em erge l h EC H d d C t n d t h e m ch abuse and a dditional one et. , e p res pon e oun y oes o av u staff wo uld b e ne eded for 3-1-1- . (4 ) Ask ed if questions a bout the G t A h l d t ti l r i could be in cluded in overnm en c cess c an ne a n po en a prog amm n g citizen su rvey ECH resp onde d that severa l ques tions will be include d. LBE also requ ested draft of t he s urvey before it's c onduct ed (~,) Aske d for an ~~nc~ate o n Dixi e Ca vern s La ndfill c leanu p P MM re sponded that work is il l b dit l f i ith complete d and EPA is ac cepti ng now The re w e a rev ina au ew w Roanoke Electr ic St eel an d ar e litiga ing w ith the other PRP's. (A sked for a final re po o n legi slati on fr om the recen t Gene ral As sembly sessio n. PMM will prov ide a b rief s umm ary at 3/11 /97 me eting. . apervisor Harrison• (~) Advised tha t the fore~trv people are checking on the lugging operations in the Dry Hol low Road area. In response to question from FMS PMM advised that an individual can cut anv tr,_ ees he , chosen on his own property as long as h e meets an erosion and sediment rggt~lations (~) Advised there was an im portant basketball game between orge myth and Glenvar being played this evening. N. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS O. REPORTS 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Accounts Paid -January 1997 5. Report on low band radio system for the Roanoke Valley. 6. Acknowledgment from VDOT of changes to the Secondary System in January 1997. 7. Conveyance of property to Hanover Direct. P. EMPLOYEE SERVICE AWARDS (4:00 P. M. ) RF,C'F,SS FROM 4.30 TO 4.50 TO ATTEND RECEPTION Q. WORK SESSION 1. Budget Work Session R. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.1-344 A (3) disposition of publicly held property; 2.1-344 A (3) acquisition or use of real property for public purposes; 2.1-344 A (5) discussion concerning a prospective business or industry; 2.1- 344 A (7) Consultation with legal counsel and briefing by staff pertaining to specific matters requiring legal advice. FM MOTION TO 00 INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 5.30 P.M. ~C S. CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE SESSION R-022597-9 RLT MOTION TO RETURN TO OPEN SESSION AT 7:01 P.M. AND 9 APPROVE CERTIFICATION RESOL.LTTION I~~ EVENING SESSION T. RECOGNITIONS 1. Certificate of Recognition to Donald R. Witt for being awarded the Local Planning Official of the Year for 1996 by the Virginia Chapter American Planning Association. FM MOTION TO AWARD CERTIFICATE TO DON WITT ~~ MR WITT WAS PRESENT TO ACCEPT U. BRIEFING 1. 1996 Annual Report from the Roanoke Valley Economic Development Partnership. (Beth Doughty, Executive Director) V. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 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. (Terry Harrington, Planning & Zoning Director) io DECISION UNTIL 3/11/97 TO ATs,LOW STAFF AND PETITIONER TO LOOK AT T AFFIC FLOW AND ACCESS PROBLEMS. 3Li~C 2. Ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to allow a home beauty shop located at 6187 Bent Mountain Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Jean McDowell. (Terry Harrington, Planning & Zoning Director) 0-022597-10 LBE MOTION TO ADOPT ORD. ~l~ W. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Public Hearing and adoption of a resolution for Community Development Block Grant application on behalf of Total Action Against Poverty (TAP) for Microenterprise Grant. (Tim Gubala, Economic Development Director) R-022597-11 BLT MOTION TO APPROVE RESO U C 2. Public Hearing to elicit citizen comment for items to be included in the budget for the 1997-98 fiscal year. 3. Public Hearing on the "effective tax rate increase" as a result of increased assessed value of real estate. 4. Public Hearing to set the following tax rates: ii a. To set a real estate tax rate of not more than $1.13 per $100 assessed. valuation. b. To set a personal property tax rate of not more than $3.50 per $100 assessed valuation. c. To set a machinery and tools tax rate of not more than $3.00 per $100 assessed valuation. X. CITIZEN COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS 1. Terry Langford~_ representing Cave Spring Recreation Foundation spoke and expressed concern regarding the a vailability of fields an gvms for youth sports. Requested that Board and sta ff look for solutions to the problem. CORK SESSION (8:45 P.M. TO 9:40 P.M.) HCN ASKED FOR FIGURES COMPARING THE NATIONAL TEACHER AVERA E R T F.(7ION T A A B ..T A KED FOR INFORMATION REGARDING PROTECTED SCHOOL BOARD RETIREMENTS BASED ON HISTORICAL DATA. Y. ADJOi;fRNMENT TO 12:00 NOON TUESDAY MARCH 11.E 1997 AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION VENTER FOR THE PURPOSE OF A _IOINT MEETING WITH THE ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL. BL.T AD.TOURNED AT 9:40 P.M. 12 0~ p~OANp,F~ ~ ' p ~ ~ rasa ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FEBRUARY 25, 1997 ~r cr rr¢ ewe amce 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 at least 48- hours notice so that proper arrangements maybe made. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 P.M.) 1. Roll Call. 2. Invocation: The Reverend Becky Proctor, Associate Minister Rosalind Hills Baptist Church 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag. B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS C. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND AWARDS i 1. Recognition of Parks and Recreation Department for the selection of Garst Mill Park being voted the Roanoke Valley's Best Park by the readers of Roanoker Magazine. D. BRIEFINGS E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Adoption of resolution requesting VDOT to adopt recommended lists of Primary and Interstate projects for the 1997-2003 Six Year Improvement Program. (Arnold Covey, Director of Engineering & Inspections) 2. Adoption of a resolution requesting $100,000 grant from the Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Board Flood Prevention and Protection Assistance Fund. (Arnold Covey, Director of Engineering & Inspections) 3. Request to the Planning Commission to consider amending the zoning ordinance to require a Special Use Permit for broadcasting towers in industrial and commercial zoning districts. (Terry Harrington, Planning & Zoning Director) 4. Request from the School Board to amend the School Operations Budget to recognize additional revenues. (Jerry D. Hardy, Budget & Data Management Director) 5. Request for approval of an agreement with the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) F. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS G. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS s H. REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARING AND FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCES -CONSENT AGENDA 1. Ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to expand the existing facility, located at 3028 Penn Forest Blvd., Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Penn Forest Christian Church. 2. Ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to construct a home for adults located 0.15 mile west of the intersection of Brambleton Avenue and Pinevale Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Balanced Care Corp. 3. Ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to operate an ice cream stand located at 6415 Williamson Road, Hollins Magisterial District, upon the petition of McClung Enterprise T/A Wily's. I. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance authorizing the transfer of 3.0 acres, being lots 15, 16 and the western 70 feet of Lot 14 of Fort Lewis Estates to the Industrial Development Authority for conveyance to Kroger as part of the Kroger expansion project. (Tim Gubala, Economic Development Director) 2. Ordinance granting a private water line easement across property owned by Roanoke County to Neysa M. Luckado. (Gary Robertson, Utility Director) J. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance approving an option to purchase agreement with Eva M. Burritt for five feet of Lot 14, the eastern 25 feet of Lot 14, Lot 13, and Lot 12 on map of Fort Lewis Estates authorizing the exercise of said option and authorizing 3 assignment of the contract to the Industrial Development authority in connection with the Kroger Project. (Tim Gubala, Economic Development Director) 2. Ordinance authorizing conveyance of a sanitary sewer easement to the Town of Vinton across Stonebridge Park property owned by the Board of Supervisors. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) K. APPOINTMENTS 1. League of Older Americans -Advisory Council 2. League of Older Americans -Advisory Board 3. Social Services Advisory Board L. CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO BE ROUTINE AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE RESOLUTION IN THE FORM OR FORMS LISTED BELOW. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND WILL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. 1. Approval of Minutes -January 14, 1997 M. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS N. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS O. REPORTS 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 4 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Accounts Paid -January 1997 5. Report on low band radio system for the Roanoke Valley. 6. Acknowledgment from VDOT of changes to the Secondary System in January 1997. 7. Conveyance of property to Iianover Direct. P. EMPLOYEE SERVICE AWARDS (4:00 P.M. ) Q. WORK SESSION 1. Budget Work Session R. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.1-344 A (3) disposition of publicly held property; 2.1-344 A (3) acquisition or use of real property for public purposes; 2.1-344 A (5) discussion concerning a prospective business or industry; 2.1- 344 A (7) Consultation with legal counsel and briefing by staff pertaining to specific matters requiring legal advice. S. CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE SESSION T. RECOGNITIONS 1. Certificate of Recognition to Donald R. Witt for being 5 awarded the Local Planning Official of the Year for 1996 by the Virginia Chapter American Planning Association. U. BRIEFING 1. 1996 Annual Report from the Roanoke Valley Economic Development Partnership. (Beth Doughty, Executive Director) V. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 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. (Terry Harrington, Planning & Zoning Director) 2. Ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to allow a home beauty shop located at 6187 Bent Mountain Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Jean McDowell. (Terry Harrington, Planning & Zoning Director) W. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Public Hearing and adoption of a resolution for Community Development Block Grant application on behalf of Total Action Against Poverty (TAP) for Microenterprise Grant. (Tim Gubala, Economic Development Director) 2. Public Hearing to elicit citizen comment for items to be included in the budget for the 1997-98 fiscal year. 3. Public Hearing on the "effective tax rate increase" as a 6 result of increased assessed value of real estate. 4. Public Hearing to set the following tax rates: a. To set a real estate tax rate of not more than $1.13 per $100 assessed valuation. b. To set a personal property tax rate of not more than $3.50 per $100 assessed valuation. c. To set a machinery and tools tax rate of not more than $3.00 per $100 assessed valuation. X. CITIZEN COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS Y. ADJOURNMENT TO 12:00 NOON TUESDAY,. MARCH 11. 1997 AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CF,NTF,R FOR THE PURPOSE OF A _IOINT MEETING WITH THE ROANOKF, CITY COUNCIL.. ROK. 00. UTILIT'~ DEPT. TEL~T03-3R7-b230 F?b 20 9~ 1612 No .010 P.02 ~~ie vaLCe f~e /ivr„etevri ralc~cy~s~ule ......................................... TH E RD D TO ` VOTED~ROANO''~CE VALLEY'S Best Park BY THE READERS OF J40AIVOKER MAGAZINE e-~ i ~_ ~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANORE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1997 RESOLUTION 022597-1 REQUESTING VDOT TO CONTINUE FUNDING PROJECTS CURRENTLY ON THE PLAN AND ADOPT THOSE PROJECTS IDENTIFIED AS "PROJECTS NOT ON PLAN" FOR INCLUSION INTO THE 1997-2003 PRIMARY AND INTERSTATE SIX YEAR IMPROVEMENT PLAN WHEREAS, the Six Year Improvement Program is the Commonwealth Transportation Board's plan for identifying funds anticipated to be available for highway and other forms of transportation construction; and WHEREAS, this program is updated annually to assist in the allocation of federal and state funds for interstate, primary, and secondary roads. BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia as follows: 1. That the following projects identified as "Projects on Plan" are recommended to continue to receive funding for planning and construction; and • Route I-81 - Roanoke County is very supportive of the Virginia Department of Transportation's proposed plan to increase the number of north and south travel lanes. Roanoke County is requesting that consideration be given to improving all interchanges and investigate the possibility of constructing an additional interchange between Wildwood Road (Route 619) and the interchange at Dixie Caverns (Route 460). Increased urbanization, availabilities of utilities, and the potential for industrial development within the area justify the investigation of another interchange to serve this portion of Roanoke County. The average annual daily traffic estimates for I-81 range from 39,000 to 42,000 from Montgomery County to Botetourt County. • Interstate 73 - Roanoke County is very supportive of this project through southwest Virginia and looks forward to reviewing the Transportation Board and Consultant's 1 proposed conceptual alignments within the Route 220 corridor. • Route 221 (Bent Mountain Road) - Roanoke County is requesting continued allocation of funds for this 2.3 mile road project. The residential development projected to occur within this area will place additional demands on the road system that is currently providing an inadequate service level. Current traffic counts for this section show approximately 10,000 vehicles per day. • Route 220 South - Roanoke County is pleased with the feasibility study to improve and widen this road from Roanoke to Martinsville and look forward to discussing the recommendations and findings of the consultants with VDOT. 2. That the following projects identified as "Projects Not on Plan" have been identified by the Board of Supervisors as extremely important to the growth of Roanoke County and are requested to be included in the VDOT Six Year Improvements Program for the 1997-98 Fiscal Year. They are listed in priority order. 1 Route 11/460 (West Main Street) Need: With the widening of West Main Street to four lanes within the City of Salem, there is a need to continue the four lanes of Route 11/460 to the existing four lane section west of Technology Drive (Route 830) 2.03 miles. These improvements are needed to provide uniformity of road section, to address traffic congestion concerns along the road, and to provide a safer roadway for the residents and commercial vehicles. This area of the County is growing, and development over the past two years has increased dramatically. R. R. Donnelly and Sons Company, Rusco Windows, Frito Lay and Richfield Retirement Facility have all built new or expanded facilities in that area, adding 432,200 square feet of industrial and commercial space in the area. Additionally, Kroger plans a major expansion and renovation at its existing facility within the near future. Traffic Counts: From the Salem city limits to Alleghany Drive, 17,000 trips per day, and from Alleghany Drive to 2 Fort Lewis Church Road, 14,000 trips per day. Currently, Kroger and R. R. Donnelly generate 1,300 tractor trailer truck trips per week, with this number expected to increase by 50% in the next two years. This stretch of road is an alternate route when I-81 lanes are blocked, which has occurred several times over the past several years, causing major congestion and safety risks for the community. Recommended Improvements: A five-lane highway with appropriate turning lanes. Cost: $10,000,000 - $12,000,000. 2 Route 11 (Williamson Road) Need: Now that Route 11 has been widened from Plantation Road (Rte. 115) to Hollins College, there remains one section of three lane road from Peters Creek Road (Rte. 117) to the Roanoke City Limits. Additionally, the existing bridge over Carvins Creek does not meet current standards, and the realignment of Florist Road with Route 11 have created additional congestion and safety concerns. The existing section of road, 1.52 miles, is a three-lane with the center lane used for turning movements. Ninety percent of the tracts adjacent to Williamson Road are developed for commercial use. Traffic counts: 15,000 vehicles per day from the Roanoke city limits to Peters Creek Road. This stretch of road has also been identified as an alternate route in the event of a blockage on I-81/581. Recommended Improvements: A five-lane highway with appropriate turning lanes, which will complete improvement of Williamson Road from the city limits to the Botetourt County line. Cost: $10,000,000. ~ Route 115 (Plantation Road) Need: The existing road, 2.43 miles, is two lanes with numerous side connections to residential neighborhoods. The road needs to be improved from Roanoke city limits north to Route 11. If full funding are not available, various spot improvements, such as turn lanes, alignment and grade improvements, would help with safety issues. Additional land is available along the road for future development, which will increase traffic in the future. 3 Traffic Counts: From the Roanoke city Limits to Williamson Road, 11,000 vehicles per day. Recommended Improvements: Four lane divided highway with appropriate turning lanes. Cost: $12,000,000 - $15,000,000. Other primary roads in Roanoke County which deserve consideration for improvements: ROUTE 419 (ELECTRIC ROAD), ROUTE 116, (JAE VALLEY ROAD), ROUTE 118, (AIRPORT ROAD), ROUTE 311, (CATAWBA ROAD), ROUTE 24, (WASHINGTON AVENUE), ROUTE 460, (CHALLENGER AVE.) 3. That the Board of Supervisors request that the Commonwealth of Virginia create an expanded pool of funds to meet increasing transportation needs throughout the State. On motion of Supervisor Minnix amended by 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: Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Fred Altizer, District Engineer, VDOT The Honorable Robert E. Martinez, Secretary of Transportation and Chairman, Commonwealth Transportation Board Lorinda G. Lionberger, Salem District, Commonwealth Transportation Board 4 ACTION # ITEM NUMBER C_""( AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1997 MEETING DATE: February 25, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Adoption of Resolution requesting VDOT to adopt recommended lists of Primary and Interstate projects for the 1997-2003 Six Year Improvement Program. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: I recommend full support of improvements to I-71 and plans for I-73. My greatest concern for new projects is the improvements of 11-460. We had better improve this road BEFORE new construction to I-81 or we will have gridlock. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: County staff is requesting the Board of Supervisors to adopt the attached resolution for presentation to the Transportation Board at the Virginia Department of Transportation Preallocation Hearing for Fiscal Year 1997-98, on March 12, 1997, at the Salem Civic Center. BACKGROUND: The Six Year Improvement Program is the Commonwealth Transportation Board's plan for identifying funds anticipated to be available for highway and other forms of transportation construction for distribution in the 1997-2003 plan. This program is updated annually. As a part of the development of this program, the Transportation Board conducts a public hearing in each of the nine construction districts in the state to receive input from members of the General Assembly, members of Boards of Supervisors, 1 ~-/ City Council members and members of the general public. Roanoke County, which is in the Salem District, is one of the twelve counties and ten cities which are lobbying for these construction funds. These Federal and State funds are allocated according to formulae as mandated by State & Federal Statutes for Interstate, Primary and Urban Roads. The Salem District's Interstate, Primary and Urban funds for FY 97-98 are estimated to be $74,063,000. Interstates are expressways with controlled access intended to provide high levels of safety and efficiency in movement of traffic at high speeds, such as I-81 and I-581. Primary roads are either principal arterial or major and minor collectors (urban or rural), designed to carry traffic at slightly lower speeds and less mobility than interstates. These roads vary from two-lanes to multi lanes highways. Local examples are Routes 11, 115, 220 and 419. For both the primary and interstate system route, numbers are less than 600. Secondary roads can be classified as minor collector roads but the majority are classified as local roads. Any street with a route number between 600 and 3000 is considered secondary. The Board recently adopted Roanoke County's Secondary Six Year Construction Plan for FY 1997-2003. The purpose of classifying all roads is to determine the desired level of service and the minimum design standards to create a safe and efficient mode of travel. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: This year's preallocation hearing is scheduled for March 12, 1997, at 9:00 a.m., at the Salem Civic Center. The projects below are currently budgeted on the Six Year Improvement Program in Roanoke County. They are presented in numerical order as shown in the Transportation Plan: • Route I-81 -Roanoke County is very supportive of the Virginia Department of Transportation's proposed plan to increase the number of north and south travel lanes. Currently, there are two lanes in either direction. As a part of this plan, Roanoke County is requesting that consideration be given to improving all interchanges and investigate the possibility of constructing an additional interchange between Wildwood Road (Route 619) and the interchange at Dixie Caverns (Route 460). Increased urbanization, availabilities of utilities, and the potential for industrial development within the area justify the investigation of another interchange to serve this portion of Roanoke County. The average annual daily traffic estimates for I-81 2 ~-- f range from 39,000 to 42,000 from Montgomery County to Botetourt County. • Interstate 73 -Roanoke County is very supportive of this project through southwest Virginia and looks forward to reviewing the Transportation Board and Consultant's proposed conceptual alignments within the Route 220 corridor. Route 221 (Bent Mountain Road) -Roanoke County is requesting continued allocation of funds for the 2.3 mile road project. The residential development projected to occur within this area will place demands on the road system that is currently providing an inadequate service level. The existing road is a two-lane section of road with winding curves paralleling Back Creek. Any improvements will require major excavation and realignment. Current traffic counts for this section show approximately 10,000 vehicles per day. Route 220 South - We are also pleased with the feasibility study to improve and widen from Roanoke to Martinsville and look forward to discussing the recommendations and findings of the consultants with VDOT. Please note that this is a part of the I-73 study. Projects Not on Plan: For the past several years, Roanoke County has asked for the following three roads to be considered for improvements. Please note that this list is not in any prioritized order. • Route 11 (Williamson Road) Need: Now that Route 11 has been widened from Plantation Road (Rte. 115) to Hollins College, there remains one section of three lane road from Peters Creek Road (Rte. 117) to the Roanoke City Limits. Additionally, the existing bridge over Carvins Creek does not meet current standards, and the realignment of Florist Road with Route 11 has created additional congestion and safety concerns. The existing section of road, 1.92 miles, is a two-lane road with a median for turning movements. The alignment is fairly level, except for a steep incline adjacent to Boxley Hills. Ninety percent of the tracts adjacent to Williamson Road are developed for commercial use. Traffic counts: 15,000 vehicles per day from the Roanoke city limits to Peters Creek Road. This stretch of road has also been identified as an alternate route in the event of a blockage on I-81/581. 3 E- Recommended Improvements: A five lane highway with appropriate turning lanes, which will complete improvement of Williamson Road from the city limits to the Botetourt County line. Cost: $10,000,000. Route 11/460 (West Main Street) Need: With the widening of West Main Street to four lanes within the City of Salem, there is a need to continue the four lanes of Route 11/460 to the existing four lane section at Poor Mountain Road (Route 612). These improvements are needed to provide uniformity of road section, to address the continued safety and traffic congestion concerns along the road, and to provide a safer roadway for the residents and commercial vehicles. This area of the County is growing, and development over the past two years has increased dramatically. R. R. Donnelly and Sons Company, Russo Windows, Frito Lay and Richfield Retirement Facility have all built new or expanded facilities in that area, adding 432,200 square feet of industrial/medial space in the area. Additionally, Kroger plans a major expansion and renovation at its existing facility within the near future. Traffic Counts: From the Salem city limits to Alleghany Drive, 17,000 trips per day, and from Alleghany Drive to Fort Lewis Church Road, 14,000 trips per day. Currently, Kroger and R. R. Donnelly generate 1,300 tractor trailer truck trips per week, with this number expected to increase by 50% in the next two years. This stretch of road is an alternate route when I-81 lanes are blocked, which has occurred several times over the past several years, causing major congestion and safety risks for the community. Recommended Improvements: Staff recommends that this stretch of road be upgraded to a five lane highway with appropriate turning lanes. Cost: $10,000,000 - $12,000,000. • Route 115 (Plantation Road) Need: The existing road, 2.43 miles, is two lanes with numerous side connections to residential neighborhoods. The road is winding in spots with some minor grade changes, and needs to be improved north to Route 11. If funding is not available, various spot improvements, such as turn lanes, alignment and grade improvements, would help with safety issues. Additional land is available along the road for future development, which will increase traffic in the future. 4 ... Traffic Counts: From the Roanoke city Limits to Williamson Road, 11,000 vehicles per day, and 16,000 vehicles per day between Williamson Road and -81. Recommended Improvements: Four lane divided highway with appropriate turning lanes. Cost: $12, 000, 000 - $15, 000, 000. Other primary roads in Roanoke County which are beginning to show an increase in traffic and/or congestion are: ROUTE 419 (ELECTRIC ROAD), ROUTE 116, (JAE VALLEY ROAD), ROUTE 118, (AIRPORT ROAD), ROUTE 311, (CATAWBA ROAD), ROUTE 24, (WASHINGTON ROAD), ROUTE 460, (CHALLENGER AVE.) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors adopt the attached resolution for presentation to the Transportation Board at the Virginia Department of Transportation Preallocation Hearing for FY 97/98 on March 12, 1997. MITTED BY: Arnold Covey, Director of Engineering & Inspections Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred To ACTION Motion by:_ APPROVED BY: ~~~~' ,~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator Eddy Harrison Johnson Minnix Nickens VOTE No Yes Abs 5 C AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1997 RESOLUTION REQUESTING VDOT TO CONTINUE FUNDING FOR PROJECTS CURRENTLY ON THE PLAN AND ADOPT THOSE PROJECTS IDENTIFIED AS "PROJECTS NOT ON PLAN" FOR INCLUSION INTO THE 1997- 2003 PRIMARY AND INTERSTATE SIX YEAR IMPROVEMENT PLAN WHEREAS, the Six Year Improvement Program is the Commonwealth Transportation Board's plan for identifying funds anticipated to be available for highway and other forms of transportation construction for distribution in the 1996-2002 plan; and WHEREAS, this program is updated annually to assist in the allocation of federal and state funds for interstate, primary, and secondary roads. BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia as follows: That the following projects identified as °Projects on Plan" continue to receive funding for construction; and • Route I-81 -Roanoke County is very supportive of the Virginia Department of Transportation's proposed plan to increase the number of north and south travel lanes. Currently, there are two lanes in either direction. As a part of this plan, Roanoke County is requesting that consideration be given to improving all interchanges and investigate the possibility of constructing an additional interchange between Wildwood Road (Route 619) and the interchange at Dixie Caverns (Route 460). Increased urbanization, availabilities of utilities, and the potential for industrial development within the area justify the investigation of another interchange to serve this portion of Roanoke County. The average annual daily traffic estimates for I-81 range from 39,000 to 42,000 from Montgomery County to Botetourt County. • Interstate 73 -Roanoke County is very supportive of this project through E-/ southwest Virginia and looks forward to reviewing the Transportation Board and Consultant's proposed conceptual alignments within the Route 220 corridor. • Route 221 (Bent Mountain Road) -Roanoke County is requesting continued allocation of funds for the 2.3 mile road project. The residential development projected to occur within this area will place demands on the road system that is currently providing an inadequate service level. The existing road is a two-lane section of road with winding curves paralleling Back Creek. Any improvements will require major excavation and realignment. Current traffic counts for this section show approximately 10,000 vehicles per day. • Route 220 South - We are also pleased with the feasibility study to improve and widen from Roanoke to Martinsville and look forward to discussing the recommendations and findings of the consultants with VDOT. Please note that this is a part of the I-73 study. 2. That the following projects identified as °Projects Not On Plan" has been recognized by the Board of Supervisors as extremely important to the growth of Roanoke County and has been prioritized for inclusion in the VDOT Six Year Improvements Program for the 1997-98 Fiscal Year. For the past several years, Roanoke County has asked for the following three roads to be considered for improvements. Please note that this list is not in any prioritized order. Route 11 (Williamson Road) Need: Now that Route 11 has been widened from Plantation Road (Rte. 115) to Hollins College, there remains one section of three lane road from Peters Creek Road (Rte. 117) to the Roanoke City Limits. Additionally, the existing bridge over Carvins Creek does not meet current standards, and the realignment of Florist Road with Route 11 has created additional congestion and safety concerns. The existing section of road, 1.92 miles, is a two-lane road with a median for turning movements. The alignment is fairly level, except for a steep incline adjacent to Boxley Hills. Ninety percent of the tracts adjacent to Williamson Road are developed for commercial use. Traffic counts: 15,000 vehicles per day from the Roanoke city limits to 2 f~`! Peters Creek Road. This stretch of road has also been identified as an alternate route in the event of a blockage on I-81 /581. Recommended Improvements: A five lane highway with appropriate turning lanes, which will complete improvement of Williamson Road from the city limits to the Botetourt County line. Cost: $10, 000, 000. • Route 11/460 (West Main Street) Need: With the widening of West Main Street to four lanes within the City of Salem, there is a need to continue the four lanes of Route 11/460 to the existing four lane section at Poor Mountain Road (Route 612). These improvements are needed to provide uniformity of road section, to address the continued safety and traffic congestion concerns along the road, and to provide a safer roadway for the residents and commercial vehicles. This area of the County is growing, and development over the past two years has increased dramatically. R. R. Donnelly and Sons Company, Rusco Windows, Frito Lay and Richfield Retirement Facility have all built new or expanded facilities in that area, adding 432,200 square feet of industrial/medial space in the area. Additionally, Kroger plans a major expansion and renovation at its existing facility within the near future. Traffic Counts: From the Salem city limits to Allegheny Drive, 17,000 trips per day, and from Allegheny Drive to Fort Lewis Church Road, 14,000 trips per day. Currently, Kroger and R. R. Donnelly generate 1,300 tractor trailer truck trips per week, with this number expected to increase by 50°~ in the next two years. This stretch of road is an alternate route when I-81 lanes are blocked, which has occurred several times over the past several years, causing major congestion and safety risks for the community. Recommended Improvements: Staff recommends that this stretch of road be upgraded to a five lane highway with appropriate turning lanes. Cost: $10, 000, 000 - $12, 000, 000. • Route 115 (Plantation Road) Need: The existing road, 2.43 miles, is two lanes with numerous side connections to residential neighborhoods. The road is winding in spots with some minor grade changes, and needs to be improved north to Route 11. 3 ~_ r If funding is not available, various spot improvements, such as turn lanes, alignment and grade improvements, would help with safety issues. Additional land is available along the road for future development, which will increase traffic in the future. Traffic Counts: From the Roanoke city Limits to Williamson Road, 11,000 vehicles per day, and 16,000 vehicles per day between Williamson Road and I-81. Recommended Improvements: Four lane divided highway with appropriate turning lanes. Cost: $12,000,000 - $15,000,000. Other primary roads in Roanoke County which are beginning to show an increase in traffic and/or congestion are: ROUTE 419 (ELECTRIC ROAD), ROUTE 116, (JAE VALLEY ROAD), ROUTE 118, (AIRPORT ROAD), ROUTE 311, (CATAWBA ROAD), ROUTE 24, (WASHINGTON ROAD), ROUTE 460, (CHALLENGER AVE.) 3. That the Board of Supervisors request that the Commonwealth of Virginia create an expanded pool of funds to meet increasing transportation needs of all localities of the Commonwealth of Virginia. 4 ~~ ~"~, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, IN REGULAR MEETING ON THE 25th DAY OF FEBRUARY 1997, ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING: RESOLIITION 022597-2 REQIIESTING A $100,000 GRANT FROM THE VIRGINIA SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION BOARD FLOOD PREVENTION AND PROTECTION A33ISTANCE FUND. WHEREAS, Roanoke County participates in the National Flood Insurance Program and is a Class 9 Community in good standing, and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors entered into an agreement with the United States Army Corps of Engineers in June 1995 for the purpose of obtaining digital mapping of Roanoke County, and WHEREAS, federal funding for fiscal year 1997-98 has been reduced for this project, and WHEREAS, local matching money in the amount of $100,000 is available for matching this grant. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County does hereby request assistance in the amount of $100,000, as a grant, from the Commonwealth of Virginia Flood Prevention and Protection Assistance Fund, for the purpose of obtaining digital mapping as outlined in the application for the project entitled "County of Roanoke Digital Mapping Project." Recorded Vote Moved By: Supervisor Johnson Seconded By: None Required Yeas: ~,gervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson Nays: None A Copy Teste: •~V • ~-.e.~x~ Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Board ITEM NUMBER ~ °~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 25, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Adoption of a Resolution requesting a $100,000 grant from the Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Board Flood Prevention and Protection Assistance Fund COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: Recommend approval. We have contacted all federal legislators and have been advised that funding wild probably be restored next year. This one-time state grant keeps the project going. With the corridor study now being conducted for I-73 by VDOT, this information will be very helpful. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: County staff is requesting the Board of Supervisors to adopt the attached resolution in order that Roanoke County may obtain a grant from the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation to begin the second phase of our digital mapping program. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: In 1995 the Board of Supervisors approved the expenditure of $510,000 to be used as matching money (50/50) for obtaining digital mapping for Roanoke County. Federal funds (Planning Assistance to States, Section 22 Program) were used for Phase One, which is now being completed. We were notified in December 1996 that funds for the Section 22 program was being drastically reduced and Phase Two of our mapping effort would not be fully funded. As a result of our discussions with the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation we learned of the possibility of obtaining a $100,000 grant from the Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Board Flood Prevention and Protection Assistance Fund. This grant will allow our mapping effort to stay on schedule through Phase Two with anticipated federal funding resuming in FY 98-99. FUNDING SUMMARY: ~~ Federal State County Total Phase I (expended) $100,000 - $100,000 $ 200,000 Phase II (this request) - $100,000 $100,000 $ 200,000 Phase III (future) $100,000 - $100,000 $ 200,000 Phase IV (future) $100,000 - $100,000 $ 200,000 Phase V (future) $100,000 - $100,000 $ 200,000 TOTAL $400,000 $100,000 $500,000 $1 ,000,000 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors authorize the attached resolution requesting $100,000, in the form of a grant, from the Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Board Flood Prevention and Protection Assistance. Funds are currently available in the Engineering & Inspections Budget to match this expenditure. FISCAL IMPACT: No appropriation of funds are necessary to pursue this grant. ITTED BY: Arnold Covey; Director Engineering & Inspecti~ ACTION Approved () Motion by:_ Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred To APPROVED BY: ~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator Eddy Harrison Johnson Minnix Nickens VOTE No Yes Abs 2 E- a THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, IN REGULAR MEETING ON THE 25th DAY OF FEBRUARY 14, 1997, ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING: RESOLUTION REQUESTING A $100,000 GRANT FROM THE VIRGINIA SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION BOARD FLOOD PREVENTION AND PROTECTION ASSISTANCE FUND. WHEREAS, Roanoke County participates in the National Flood Insurance Program and is a Class 9 Community in good standing, and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors entered into an agreement with the United States Army Corps of Engineers in June 1995 for the purpose of obtaining digital mapping of Roanoke County, and WHEREAS, federal funding for fiscal year 1997-98 has been reduced for this project, and WHEREAS, local matching money in the amount of $100,000 is available for matching this grant. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County does hereby request assistance in the amount of $100,000, as a grant, from the Commonwealth of Virginia Flood Prevention and Protection Assistance Fund, for the purpose of obtaining digital mapping as outlined in the application for the project entitled "County of Roanoke Digital Mapping Project." Recorded Vote Moved By: Seconded By: Yeas: Nays: A Copy Teste: Mary Allen, Board Clerk j A-022597-3 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: February 25, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Request to the Planning Commission to consider amending the zoning ordinance to require a Special Use Permit for Broadcasting Towers in Industrial and Commercial Zoning Districts COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: We should begin the process immediately to require a Special Use Permit for all towers, at least until the committee has completed its study. I expect this study to be as successful as the Blue Ridge Parkway study was. I anticipate that we will bring to the Board a report that both the industry and the County can support. Because of that, we will need a review process with approval by the Board Since January 1993, Roanoke County has regulated the placement of broadcasting towers within the County. Such towers are used for a variety of purposes, most commonly as a structure upon which an antenna is placed. These antennae receive and transmit information for uses such as private radio communications, radio/television broadcasting signals, and wireless phone signals. These towers are regulated by special use permit in AG3, AG1, AR, and C1 zoning districts. They are a prohibited land use in the AV and all residential zoning districts. Towers are allowed as a by-right use in C2, I1 and I2 zoning districts. Use and Design Standards exist for any tower constructed. Since 1993 the Board has reviewed six special use permit requests for broadcasting towers. Four requests were approved, and two requests were denied. One request was reviewed in 1993, two requests each, in 1994 and 1995 and one request in 1996. Of the four approved requests during this period, two were never constructed, and the special use permit authority has subsequently expired. ~f~ 2 In addition to the six special use permits reviewed, one tower was constructed by right in an industrial zoning district. This tower was constructed within the last month, in the Benois Road area of Roanoke County. In February of 1996 the Federal Telecommunications Act (the Act) was passed by Congress. The Act is wide-ranging in its effect, and provides new guidelines for localities that choose to regulate the placement of broadcasting towers. Both the Planning Department's staff and the County Attorney's office have been involved in researching the Act's provisions and their applicability to the County. To this end, and at the Board's direction, the staff has convened a committee comprised of communication industry representatives, local government representatives, and interested citizens. The purpose of the committee is to review our existing policy guidelines and ordinance provisions including Use and Design Standards) for broadcasting towers. Although Roanoke County has seen a steady level of tower requests within the last four years, the adoption of the Act and the forthcoming next generation of digital communication technology creates the potential that the number of tower proposals will rise sharply within the near future. Our policy committee will be researching the potential for tower proliferation in this area given our population demographics and market demand for communication services. Our current regulations that allow broadcasting towers by right in C2 and industrial zoning districts permit the placement of towers in these zoning districts based upon an administrative review of zoning compliance. A zoning ordinance change to permit broadcasting towers by special use permit in these districts will allow the Planning Commission and the Board to evaluate future tower proposals for compliance with the Act, our local comprehensive plan, and the impact of the proposed tower on the general community. The policy committee will be presenting a comprehensive set of recommendations for the Commission's and Board's consideration within the next six months. Implementing the committee's recommendations may require future code changes. Adopting an amendment at this time will insure that all towers are properly reviewed by the community during the committee process. Staff recommends as follows: ~"` 3 1. That the Board of Supervisors Commission prepare an amendment to would permit broadcasting towers as I2 zoning districts. Respectfully Submitted, ,Di~~° Terrance Har 'ngton, AICP Director of Planning and Zoning Approved (x) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) request that the Planning the zoning ordinance that a special use in C2, I1 and Approved, ~~ ,/' Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ACTION Motion by: Harry C. Nickens to apFrove requesting the rlannina Commission to consider amendment to zoning orinance No Eddy Harrison Johnson Minnix N1ClrAnc cc: File Terry Harrington, Director, Planing & Zoning VOTE Yes Abs ~_ ~- ~_ ~_ A-022597-4 ACTION ~ ITEM NUMBER MEETING DATE: February 25, 1997 ~-y AGENDA ITEM: Request from the School Board to amend the School Operations Budget to recognize additional revenues COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS: .~~~~'"`v` ~~ ~~ BACKGROUND: State funding for school divisions is determined by the average daily membership (ADM based on the student count on September 30 and March 31 of each year. Sales tax revenues are budgeted each year based on the state's projections for collections in the following year. Non-resident student fees were increased from $100 to $500 for the 1996-97 school year for all new non- resident students accepted into the Roanoke County school system. SUNIIKARY OF INFORMATION: The school budget for 1996-97 was based on an ADM of 13,776. However, the September 30 enrollment was higher than budgeted and staff predicts that the March 30 enrollment will be 13,825 which is 49 students above the budgeted enrollment. As a result of the additional 49 students, the School Board will receive an additional $118,000 in unbudgeted state revenue during 1996-97. In addition, the state has made a mid-year adjustment to the projected sales tax collections for the year. The state is estimating an increase of $90,000 for the School Board. Based on past experience with the state projections, staff recommends increasing the sales tax revenue budget by $50,000. The increase in non-resident student fees this year will generate an additional $20,000 in revenue not yet budgeted. The additional $188,000, comprised of the above three revenue items, will be used to cover increased operating expenses in the following areas: 3-Instructional Assistants ........................ $ 28,000 2-Special Education Teachers .................. 50,000 Other Part-Time Staff ............................... 20,000 Textbook Allocation ................................ 30,000 ~. ~~ Title VIB Flow-Thru ................................. 31,500 Dumpster Pick-Up ..................................... 18,500 LegalFees ............................................ 10,000 Increase in Expenditures ...............$188,000 See the attached spreadsheet for a line item comparison of the revenues using the budgeted enrollment versus the projected actual enrollment. FISCAL IMPACT: The School Operating revenues and expenditures budget will increase by $188,000 for the newly generated state and local revenues. No additional funding is requested. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends asking the County Board of Supervisors for the additional appropriation of $188,000. Jerry D. Hardy, Director Elmer C. Hodge Budget & Data Management County Administrator Approved (x) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) cc: File Jerry D. f~.ardy, Director, Dr. Deanna Gordon, School Diane D. Hyatt, Director, ACTION Motion by: H. Odell Minnix to No approve staff recommendation andEddy ~ ag~rove amendment of School Bd Harrison budget by appropriation of Johnson 5188,000 Minnix Nickens ~_ Budget & Management Superintendent Finance VOTE Yes Abs U 00 0 ~ o0 N M l` O I~ 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0000 000000 W I~ OO d) I~ 00 OO M M O 0 r 0 O In N (O N M ISO I~ O ~ O r O D 0 M ao ao ~ ao O 00 O ~ ' 00 r lf ) t0 N w ~ r M Z O !~ LA ~ lf') o0 0 ~ M 0 0 00 0 1~ 00 0 00 0 M 0 td)1p00 I~OCAON • (V ~ r- 0 ~ 00 0 ~ ~ N 0 ~l7 0 f~ N M 0 I~ONOCA Md Q ~ ~ N ~ ~ 00 00 C0 0 1` (O CO CO ~ N 00 Cp00tfl rMOO~D ~ ~ Q C4 ~ O ~ ~ I~ oO lf') (p (O ~ N ~' 00 000 OO~ON O 00000 ~DMCANO ~ N N ~ ~ ~ ~ oO O ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 ' r r O N N 0 Ill N r r N ~ O~ ~ f ~r 00 d r N r ~- ~ ti r ~O N O N N M ~ N w /~/~ W ~p ti l` 0 ~ C0 ~- CO M OO M f~ 00 0 0 0 M 0 cOtc~oO CAOQ~ON ~ ~ M 0 1~ ~ 0 0 ~ N 1~ ~ 0 ~ N M ~~•0 CAON CA N Q ~ ~ M CO CO ~ I~ CO ~f l~ 0 C0 C0 N N 00 ~ 00 C0 C~ M O t0 M ~ Q CO ~Y OO ' OO N CO O If) ~- - CO ~ N 'd' ' 00 ~ N00 ~O~A N COM00 WMCA O ~ M N d M O Ln 00 0 ~ ~ 0 d w ' r r 0 N N 0 ~ N ~ ~ N ~ 0~ ~ Or00 ~ O O N ~- ~ ti ti ~- ~ N N N N M '~!' O w W (n LJ.I W W W Z ~ Z W .~ W ~ L~ W Z ~ ~ W W ~/ LL r w~J o~ w J Q O c~c¢i~U QOV ~= J Hw0 a~~ Q JJJ V)LLJa'O ~ ~ ~ ~ JJJ c J 000 HH a ~ ~ F -z ~~~ 000 O HHH H N W ~ ~ a~i ~ ~'? ~ ~ Z c c o ~ c ~. ~n c o ~' N 0) a Y ~ U N I- W E ~ ~ C'J ~ ~ _ ~ ~' ~ ~ °' ~ I a > ~ O v, o >, >. cn c W ~ ~ Q N O ~ ~ W ~ :, Z ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ c T Z ~ N v N ~ ~ J p ca ~ (/~ ~ , C C U N V N N - !~ p ` C W _ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ W (0 ~ CN C p ~ ~ ~ _ J ~ J (B C 'Y ~ •L ~ • Q V ~ W (a .U 0) N N co fd ~ L ~ • ~ ~ c ~ Q Q N m (n U' > fn ~ ~ ~ fn (A C~ U' ~ Q O ~ ~~ ~n 0 g~ L~ W [D A-022597-5 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. ~r~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 25, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Approval of an Agreement with the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS : il ' ' '`~ `~,r 0 wu~rn~~~ This agreement documents the working relationship between the County and the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County ("IDA") for the successful management, administration, and implementation of economic development projects in the County. Over the past decade taxpayer-funded economic development projects have grown in complexity and sophistication. County staff and the IDA recommend that a more formal understanding between the Board of Supervisors and the IDA for the management, administration, and implementation of these economic development projects is necessary. This agreement accomplishes these goals. This agreement provides: - that the IDA shall administer contractual obligations on behalf of the County; - that the County will provide IDA an appropriation of funds in support of its economic development purposes, but that the IDA shall not engage in such purposes absent such an appropriation; - that Economic Development staff shall provide technical assistance to the IDA; - that the County Purchasing Agent shall act as purchasing officer for the IDA, the County's procurement ordinance shall be the IDA's procurement policies; - that the County's financial staff shall be responsible for the financial administration of the IDA; - that the County will provide general liability and director's liability insurance coverage for the IDA; - that the IDA delegates to the County Administrator responsibility for project management and administration. 1 J The IDA is a separate legal entity under the State Code. The Board appropriates funds to the IDA to accomplish many of its economic development projects. The Board provides significant administrative, clerical, financial, engineering, and legal staff support to the IDA. Constitutional and statutory restrictions limit the ability of local governments to provide "incentives" for the location of new business or the expansion of existing business, but industrial development authorities possess broader powers. This agreement memorializes current practices between the Board and the IDA in order to continue our recent economic development successes. No additional funds are required to implement this agreement. The Board appropriates funds to the IDA on a project-by-project basis. Staff support is currently provided within existing budgets. It is recommended that the Board approve this agreement, and authorize the County Administrator to execute it on behalf of the Board. Respectfully submitted, l ~i~ Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney Approved (x) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) ACTION Motion by: Harry C. Nickens to abbrove agreement with minor change to agreement noted by Supervisor Eddy VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy ~_ Harrison ~- Johnson ~_ Minnix ~ Nici.ens ~._ cc: File Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney Timothy W. Gubala, Secretary, IDA 2 ~.5 THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of February, 1997, by and between THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, (hereinafter known as "County") and the THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA (hereinafter known as "Authority"). W I T N E S S E T H: WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, created The Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, Virginia pursuant to the provisions of the Industrial Development and Revenue Bond Act, Chapter 33, Title 15.1, 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended; and WHEREAS, the County has provided significant administrative, clerical, financial, engineering, and legal staff support for the Authority; and WHEREAS, this staff and professional support is critical to the Authority successfully completing and fulfilling its duties and responsibilities under the Code of Virginia and as requested by the County; and NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual benefits accruing to the parties hereto, the parties do hereto agree as follows: 1. The County shall provide operational staff support and personnel to the Authority from existing County employees as herein provided. In particular, the employees of the Roanoke County Economic Development Department shall remain full time County employees but shall provide technical assistance to the Authority. 1 ~S The parties agree that said County employees shall not have the authority to obligate and bind the Authority unless the Authority, by prior corporate action authorizes and/or directs such employees to act on its behalf. The parties further agree, that with the prior approval of the Authority, said employees shall have authority to act as the agent of the Authority. In so acting as the agent of the Authority, said individuals shall perform such duties as may be specifically identified and approved in advance by the Authority. Said personnel support shall be available for any and all of the purposes and powers of the Authority set out in Chapter 33 of Title 15.1, "Industrial Development and Revenue Bond Act", of the Code of Virginia, 1950 as amended. 2. The County may appropriate funds to the Authority in order that the Authority may exercise its powers and purposes as authorized by law and this agreement. The Authority may expend such funds appropriated to it by the County for such purposes and services as the Authority deems necessary and appropriate including without limitation engineering, legal and accounting services. Unless funds have been appropriated by the County or the County has agreed to pay for said functions, the Authority shall not engage any such services. 3. The parties hereto acknowledge that the Authority, in its role as the Economic Development Agent for the County of Roanoke, may, from time to time be required to enter into certain contracts and agreements for the acquisition of services. The Authority hereby designates the County Purchasing Agent as the purchasing 2 ~5 officer for the Authority for any particular Authority project, and, hereby incorporates by reference the provisions of Chapter 17, Procurement Code, of the Roanoke County Code as its policies and procedures with respect to such public procurement and directs the County Purchasing Agent to comply with the same. The parties further agree that the Purchasing Agent for Roanoke County shall act as the Purchasing Agent for the Authority. The County Purchasing Agent shall not make or approve any changes in Authority Contracts without the express authorization of the Authority. 4. The parties further agree that in furtherance of the administration of Authority projects, any County employee acting as an agent of the Authority shall, in the administration of said projects, be responsible solely to the Authority, it being the intent of the parties hereto that the Authority shall have full power to administer, according to its policies and procedures, all of its contractual obligations. 5. Notwithstanding the above, it is hereby agreed by the parties hereto that the County's financial officers shall be responsible for the administration of all checking and other Bank accounts of the Authority. The County does hereby agree to accept the responsibility for administration of said funds. The appropriate County employee shall provide monthly reports to the Authority of the status of such accounts in such form as is generally used by the County financial officers in reporting on all County accounts; provided, however, that the Authority shall have the right to require additional documentation should it so desire. 3 County financial officers shall be available to the Authority to answer inquiries concerning said accounts. 6. The County agrees to provide general liability and officer's and director's liability insurance coverage for the Authority. All costs for said insurance shall be borne by Roanoke County. 7. The Authority may delegate to the County Administrator, or his or her designee, on a project-by-project basis the responsibility for project management and administration. In the acceptance of this delegation of power for any particular project, the County Administrator accepts on behalf of any County employees or agents working on said project, the responsibility for the faithful execution and performance of the delegated powers. 8. This Agreement may be terminated by either of the parties upon the giving of sixty (60) days written notice to the other party. Should this Agreement be terminated, each of the parties agrees to fulfill its obligations hereunder as to any projects presently being undertaken at the time of the termination of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have made and executed this Agreement on the day and year first hereinabove written. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA By Chairman 4 ~_ 5 THE INDIISTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AIITHORITY OF ROANORE COIINTY, VIRGINIA By Chairman G:\ATTORIVEY\ PMM\ IDA.AGR 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: February 25, 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 March 25. 1997. The titles of these ordinances are as follows: 1) An ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to expand the existing facility, located at 3028 Penn Forest Blvd., Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Penn Forest Christian Church. 2) An ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to construct a home for adults, located 0.15 mile west of the intersection of Brambleton Avenue and Pinevale Road, Windsor Hills Magesterial District, upon the petition of Balanced Care Corp. ff i 3 3) An ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to operate an ice cream stand located at 6415 Williamson Road, Hollins Magisterial District, upon the petition of McClung Enterprise T/A Willy's. 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 March 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 through 3, inclusive, and that the Clerk is authorized and directed where required by law to set forth upon any of said items the separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant to this action. Respectfully submitted, ,~1~~ Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Action Motion by No Yes Abs Referred to Eddy Harrison Johnson Minnix Nickens For staff use on/y ~' COUNTY OF ROANOKE DEPT. OF PLANNING AND ZONING 5204 Bernard Or. P.O. Box 29800 - Roanoke, VA -24018 ( 540` 772-2068 FAX 1540) 772-2108 dates c 've received y: ~ app ication PC/BZA - k:~. placards issued: BOS date: J Case Number: ~' Check type of application filed (check all that apply): ^ REZONING C~ SPECIAL USE ^VARIANCE Applicant's name: MarshWitt Associates, P.C. Phone: 776-6322 Address: 4656 Brambl eton Ave Zip Code: 24018 Owner's name: ti Penn Forest. Christian Church ~ Phone: 774-2445 Address: ~, Q7'' R 3028 Penn Forest Blvd ~/~ Zi Code: 24018 Roanoke, VA ~J Location of p perty: Tax Map Number: g 7 , 0 6 - 3 - 2 8 , - 2 9 , - 3 0 , - 31 3028 Penn Forest Blvd Magisterial District: Cave Spring i k i i rg n a Roano e, V Community Planning Area: Cave S p r i n g Size of parcel (s): Existing Zoning: R_ 1 4.007 acres Existing Land Use: Rel jgjous Assembly 17 4 5 6 2 sq.ft. Proposed Zoning: R -1 ; Special l1 S e ............................. Far Statl Use o~/y Proposed Land Use: R e f 1 g j o u s A s s e m b l y Use Type: Does the parcel meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? YES / NO IF N0, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. ~ Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for the requested Use Type? YES / NO IF N0, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. J If rezoning request, are conditions being pro;~ered with this request? YES NO / Variance of Section(s) 30 -4 1 - 1 (B) 3 of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in order to: _ I Construct an approximate .12,940 SF multi-purpose religious assembly facility Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. n,~s v ws v ws v Consultation 8 1 /2" x 1 1 " concept plan Application fee Application '=~`< Metes and bounds description ~~;; Proffers, if applicable Justification '~: Water and sewer application Adjoining property owners l 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/~of the owner. Q, Q ~' /~~ ~{ Owner's Signature: ~ Q•~~` • ~~ ~5s/t ~ \"r+^-r(tisrr~~`~"rK~,:~-- ~-7~r~h • ~ For Staff Use On/y: Case Number ( ~ ~1 Applicant MarshWitt Associates, P.C. 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 provides for uses of a community nature (religious assembly) and is an extension of what is currently provided. Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan 'Land Use Principals provide for mix of non-residential land uses including churches. The proposed land use will not• reduce residential property values (NC-1) will be provided with noise and visual safeguards as ' required by the Zoning Ordinance (NC-2), and provides neighborhood activity centers within convenient distances to existing residential (NC-6). 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. The addition will have no negative impact on the surrounding area. The building, located directly behind and below the-sanctuary, its mass will have minimum ' impact. The addition will have minimum impact on water, sewer and other public services. It will provide additional recreational facilities for the local ' community. ~~ -- ~ ~~ ~.~ x ~~~ $ ~, $~ ~~ $~$ p ~i ~QQt iQ YQ QY '$gY a} S il: if if R Z -4 ~$ ~~ ~ ~ `~ ~t u 1 ~~L1 I at ~ V = • p'I~tlT! 20.M' Y __.~.__-__ - f ,.4-Z a R ~` - 1 ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ x P ~ I! fi +~ ' R ~' ~~Ysi 2~ .'\ U~~1• C '~~• i \ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ``\ \ ``\ ``\````~ `~\ `\`~ `q ` ` i - r _ ~ ~ .. p 1 ~ ~ ~ ~. :. \ i `. \ r. \~ `.. \v' ` 1 -'A ` \ ' \ `` ` L \\`\\ F 1 i9C iDY~V'FE g s; 8 a 8 ~ ~ 1 1~ ~,na r 1 8 8 x ' a P F F W ~ ~5 - .I c ~ ~ ~ ~~ N W W 8 N X W W ~ r Y ~3 z~ .~- ~_ iF y ~~ ~ ~~ .. ~ ~~ ~ ~ s n~ ~ „ao ,~ ~ ~ -~4-z m .~ ~~ 1 ~~ '~ ~~ a~x~ ~~~~ ~ ~~~ s ~ '` s~ ~, _ ~'~ i w ~~ gl~~ ~I~~ N ~i ~' ~ .~ ~ ~ ~~ x ~h • ~~ f{ - / ~~ g ~~ Y~ Y ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '- ~' ~ - ~- ~'$ ~~~~~ i ~~ ~` ~` ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ --~ ~~ -a-; ~~~ - ! ~~ { ~, ---~. ~~ ~~ __~~ s 4 • l~r F. 9 ~~~ L ;~ Sj~l 22 F ~ ,o J \_ , I COL • 1 \ u s M 'rNp o; ~. L~` ~ gLV D ~ ~C ~ a - ~ 87 ~ da ' Q"v E, ~Rp~~- P~ ~~ ~P ~ cL 1413 z 0~1F' ~~CiE' P S o Q R` TRAIL , , , Q- ~S~Oh o t~~ NORTN r;s R~ ~g?O ~~ fT tin r a .~ pt Est ~~ rtee ~ Z ~ ,. ec•e• rr ~ ' 49 ~ !fir J~ ~ ! >t + ~ $ ~ m ° I a. ~ ~ Jros 0~^~ i ~ ~ r = ~ Mt _ « ' Jlrf Jrrr ~ ~s-•' s*f ~ Y r ~ ~' rr R is r°! • Jrt9 - Jr1J se. pw 12 '• y r9°r , ~ Q eD 717 7'•~ - l ~ R N w N ~ yrr '1~ ~S s eo ~ ~ c hu..s ' • ~ ~ ss0s; '. ri4 Jrt+ 3rrt Jrrr Jrro Jra~ a ~ ~ ~ . ;, o !28 I w ~bty mob/ ,.. S 42 o M x ~ ~ '•~• ~soss w c ~ . + ~ 24 w ~ `~ t9°6 'i ~ - - / 3 33 ~'a ~ an wse $ + ~ c ~• ee rrd err ~ 9 '~ ei. +• ~ ~ ~ r + ' :, 9 Rt 1690 = •. 27 + _ ~u.s : ~ 11 5 I •~ ro. eo.n x» zeal ~se~ ~ ~ o ~ (4. a t + ~ ~ la S7 Iq ~.H ! ~ ~ RiM K3] ~ C .. ~ `~` 19.3 19.2 E 19.1 = '•~ 34 ~ '' ~? Jatr ~ f ~~ .~-~ SAc R - Jr/J ~~ ..~' uue 2r JN3 JrJ! J1JJ Jr 3 ~~ Btyd. ro r~.o~ +-°°#y3p ± c ~- ~r 96 962 .. 21 JpJ/JjOS eaa c~ '-~ aafpf~f! f IO + It ~ '~ ~ SKr ~ ~ S • ~ 24 y ~ is 20 p~nn ~ ex:s ~ i 2 r ~ n ~ ? '° 8 ' ~ r S tt ~ ~ '„" ~ S rp J2/I ~ sa ~ • ~ IT • ~ SS ~ • ~¢ , • Baas rv 34 + C n ch 9 +~ /: 12\ S~ / ~ ~ 12 " e ~ , b Y 1 ~ 49 ac 8 + I '',, O`. ,, ~ 4 rf ,~ - ~ti I ' 8 rs ~ d~• • ~ . 13 - Jrrr ~ JJ , ,+ q y r , 6+ o w • 8 ySJ' •/ y9' 36 Jr rs ~'' 33 v _ !! ~{pr~My eo Q 4 J r36 M Y ~ ~1 / ~ ' n 37 ~~, ~a ~ ra Jtrt Jt~ ~ c "~...~.w J ~ ~ ~ 31 ~ + a ~o '7~ - '~° 3t r ~ 21 i a 37 G s+ ran $ -'• ' •~` .~4r 30 ~ i • ~~ ~ ~ ~ + • ..t t+ ~t0 ~ 20 R - ' n J ~+ - r . e~' ~!__ ~•'r ',~~ ~~ I7 t 191 ~ ~ ~ ~ / 9 ~ °39 ~ ~~ N Q ~ ~ syls a ~~ ~y . ~ w ' ~~ \~o >>~18 ~~ . .sr SJJ7 ~r / • + K ~ ~ t ~ ~ rsa s c >• 1 6 ~° ~4 d S ar to• o D9 + • : ~ ~ ~ r a 43 ~ ~ a ~'~ ~ y~° 19 F ' Z 24 Y ~.~ s 3 -J r Y s ~ ~~ -41 ~ A ~ 331J ' • ~~Y e ~ Ctl7 •~OJ/ .e...- ._ ~ + ,raw . r ~~r DEPAR~~IT OF PLANNIrG PENN FOREST CHRISTIAN CHURCH - SPECIAL USE PERMIT -• PND 7ANI~1G 87.06-3-28, -29, -30, -31 .~ .,, I K: .~z<~'.F 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 ~~~ P ~'~" For staff use only IJZ.~ i~ ,~~~~ date r~ ,Ff ( received applicati e PC/BZA dPC/BZA d p a BOS date: Case Number: Check type of application filed (check all that apply): R/~~~rJ~/ ~ ' ^ REZONING ®SPECIAL USE ^VARIANCE f l% Z ~ Applicant's name: Balanced Care Corporation Phone:717-796-61 Address: 5021 Louise Drive, Suite 200 `~p Code: 17055 Mechanicsbur PA Owner's name: J. Patton Webb Phone:8 6 4- 2 2 9-7 7 Address: P . O . Box 10 9 5 , Greenwood , SC Zip Code: 2 9 6 4 8 Location of property: Tax Map Number: 77.09-40, `- ~l 41 ` ~'O ` `may Brambleton Avenue Magisterial District: Windsor Hills Community Planning Area: ll%,~lso~ rh l/s Size of parcel (s): Existing Zoning: C-2 3 . 8 8 acres Existing Land Use: None 16 9 , 012 sq.ft. Proposed Zoning: For Staff Use On/~ "Proposed Land Use: Home for Adults Use Type: Does the parcel meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested distric;? YES NO IF N0, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for the requested Use Type? YES NO IF N0, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? YES NO Variance of Section(s) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in or;'~r to: Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WILL I~tOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. y 0 7 ass v ws v ws v Consultation 8 1 /2" x 1 1 " concept plan Application fee Application <<~?K Metes and bounds description >« Proffers, if applicable Justification %`: Water and sewer application Adjoining property owners l hereby certify that l am either the owner of the property or the owner's agent or contract purchaser and am acting with the know/edge/d eonse t of the owner. ~C\ .- Owner's Signature: -- ~~~ ~, ... ,< <~ .-~ ~ :;~ ~~ , ~~.~, „-. ~{-a Justification for rezoning or special use permit request Applicant.: Balanced Care Corporation l) Our project furthers the purposes of the zoning ordinance (Section 3Q-3} by promoting the health, safety, and general welfare of the public. We address the purposes of the zoning regulations as follows:. 1 } We provide adequate light and air in the design of our building, a single story residentially designed dwelling with brick veneer, attractive open spaces and an interior courtyarr. 1/ach resident room will have a large, comfortable living space with a window. The buildinb also }gas plenty of common areas, living roams, ]~lorida rooms, etc., that provide open, airy environments for our residents enjoyment Our site is conveniently located offBrambleton Avenue by a private drive to be maintained by us. Our building provides for the safety of the residents through a smoke detection system and a fully sprinkled building. Our staff, nn duty ?~ hours a day, is trained to handle emergency situations in our buildings and the evacuation cif our residents. Our site is not located in the Hood plain. ?) Uur use is not a tragic generating use. With an average age of R2 years old, our residents do not maintain nor drive cars. We will be providing; for all of the residents transportation needs. The traffic generated by our use is from employees, occasional visitors, and vendor delivered {food and trash removal}. 3) Our location offBrambleton Avenue is convenient for family members and friends to visit our residents. The location is also convenient. to medical, shopping, churches, and other professional services. The design of our building is very residential and will work as a transition use between the conunercial/retail uses on Brambietan Avenue and the existing residential neighborhoods nn Pinevale Road. nor buildins~ is single slaty with a residential hipped roof, dormers, residential asphalt shingles, and brick veneer. The building grounds and open space will be beautifully landscaped. The topography of ocrr site, however, shields the homes on Pinevale Road from any direct views of our building from their homes, The townhomes on Oakcliff Drive which cweriook our site, will see our residential designed bui}dinl;, beautiful landscaping and open, space. Our design will complement and be harmonious with the existing neighborhoods arld create a positive atmosphere from the commerciaUretail uses on Brambletvn Avenue. 4} We facilitate the provision of emergency public services (police, fire, disaster, and ci~. it defense) by providing a secure environment for our residents with 24 hour professional stalling trained from emergency situations. Our building is also equipped vvith a smoke detection system and is completed sprinkled. Public transportation is not burdened because we provide transportation for our residents. Because we are caring for older adults, 82 years old on average, we will not burdened public schools, playgrounds, nor parks and recreation. Landscaped open space and an interior courtyard will be provided for the enjoyment of the residents. Very few of our residents will use the airport or the forests. Uur site is not located in the good plain. 5) Our site is nut located in a historic district nor does it have any current improvements. Jan-23-97 03:21P Balanced Care Corporation 804-971-1086 ... 6) We are protecting against the overcrowding of'land by having ample open space and an interior courtyard for the enjoyment of the residents. Our use is also single story so the density of the site is not compromised. The grounds will also be beautifully landscaped. Our residential design and open space protects against the obstruction of light and air. Our residents do not drive so we are protecting against tragic congestion. We will be providing transportation to our residents so we will not burden the need for more public transportation. We are protecting from the loss of life, health, and property by providing a smoke detection system, a fully sprinkled building, and providing a staff trained f'or emergencies. We are not located in the flood plain. 7) Our $3.5 million project will provide :i5 to 4(~ full time and part time jobs to the conunttnity. The building will increase the value of the assessment and raise more tax revenue for the county without unduly burdening services. $} The site is not currently agriculture and only has a few shn~b pine trees so tive will not be destroying mature forests or agricultural land. 9) Our building will be only one story and will not afi'ect the flibht patterns of the airport. 14) Our site will protect surface and ground water by managing our own storm water runoff' tour use meets the purposes of the C-2 general commercial district ofthe zoning ordinance by providing a needed service for the older adults in the community as well as their children who may be needing these services for their parents. Our use will serve a community of several different neighborhoods as well as most of the county. Our use is located on a major arterial thoroughfare, Brambleton Avenue. Our use, defined as a home for adults, is allowed by special use peer„it in the C'-2 district. 2) Otir use complies with the comprehensive plan Core guidelines as an institution and is a desirable rise within the Core. Our project conforms to all of the land use determinants as follows: Accessibility: Our site will have direct access to a major arterial thoroughfare, Brambleton Avenue, via a private driveway to he maintained by us. P~-pulation Centers Our site is located within a mature, existing area, central to the count_y'~ population concentration. i.and t?se Pattern: Ot~r site is located between established commercial/retail on Brambleton Avenue and existing residential neighborhoods behind our site. The residential homes directly behind our site frorit on Pinevale Road and do not have direct visibility of our site from their homes. Several townhomes located on at the end of Uakcliff Drive will be able to see our residential designed building and beautifiilly landscaped grounds. Jan-23-97 03:21P Balanced Care Corporation 804-971 1086 ~{- a Existing Zoning: The site is currently zoned C-2 and allows our use by a special use pernut. There are existing eommerciallretail establishments in front of ,and beside our site on Brambleton Avenue. t_%rban Sector: (?ttr site is located within an existing urban service area. Our use, institutional use, is a desirable land use type in the Core area. Our use complies with the following policy guides for the future use and development of Core areas: C- t : We are encouraging the development of intensive mixed use urban development by being an accepted institutional land use. V4'e are part of the intent of multifamily housing (i'or• the elderly) by c;oe;cisting with commercial uses. We also meet the intent of fiscal balance by being a transitional use between existing cortunercial/retail uses and existing residential neighborhoods. We also are creating a higher tax revenue for the county by building a $3.5 million building and creating new jobs. Finally, we meet the intent of efficiently delivering high-capacity public utilities and services by being located where there are established public: utility lines with the capacity to handle ottr use. C-2. Our site is served by an existing arterial grade street, Brambleton Avenue. Uur use is also part of the Land use type, institutional, wfiich is desirable for this land use application. Our use meets the intention of not creating traffic congestion by providing transportation to our residents because they do not drive, The only trafric to our use is employees, occasional visitors, and vendors (food and trash removal). Brambleton Avenue has more than adequate capacity to handle our use. C'-5: Our site will provide separation screening and buffering along the edge of the less intensive residential uses. Because of the topography of the site, we will he above the existirte commercial/retail on Brambleton Avenue. but below and out of site from the homes that front on Pinevale Road that have property lines that back up to our site. Those tow~nhomes at the end of Oakcliff Drive will be able to see the root top of our building as well as the beautifully landscaped open spaces at vur site. The topography of the site, our buffering, screening. and landscaping will help to protect the adjoining neighborhoods from our use. Our use is the ideal transitional use between the commercial/retail uses on Brambleton Avenue and the residential neighborhoods helund our site. 3) .The site is currently vacant with minimal small shrub pine trees. The development of the property to our use will greatly enhance the commercial/retail neighborhood on Brambleton Avenue and provide a buffer or transition use for the residential neighborhoods behind our site Our use will have minimal irrrpaet on the adjoining residential uses behind our site. Because of the topography ofthe site, being below the ridge where the homes are located, will shield us front their view from their homes. The townhomes on Oakclit~ Drive will see the residentially designed roof top of ot,r building as well as t.lte beauiifiri landscaping around our buildinb. The Jan-23-97 03:21P Balanced Care Corporation 804-971-1086 P_06 /{- cc~. commercial/retail cases in front of our site „gill not be impacted by our site because we are also located aboti•e there sites. As a use that creates little traf~'tc, we will not create traffic congestion problems for their corrunercial/retail uses on Brambleton Avenue nor the residernial neighborhoods in the area. The surrounding area will be enhanced by our X3.5 million residentially designed building and landsr•aped grounds. We are also providing a much needed service to the older adults of the conul~unity and their family members. Uur use will not negatively impact the school systems nor parks/reereation because of the advanced age of our residents. Emergency services (fire/rescue} will not be negatively impacted because our building; is equipped with a smoke detection system, a fully sprinkled building, and a professionally trained sta4~ on duty 24 hours a day to handle emergency situations in our building. There are existing adequate public utilities in the street to handle our water and sewer needs. We also provide transportation for our residents because they do not drive. Subsequently our use ~~-ill not create tragic problems on Brambleton Avenue nor need public transportation for our residents. - _ ~ ~' 0 5 \\ ~ z ~ ' _ c `~ ~ ; A~ '~ ~``gA. a'0, ~~+'~ YbrS ~ r ~l1\~ O ~ `" r- c w W\ ~'~, r~I s Q131.iJNW1 '0 'wM S 1 a9.-'" fo \;~ 7~~g\\ F- ~ W Z Cz. W ~ ~ `~I ~ ~ ~o ua3doad ~~ ~ `~ ~~ \4, ~.\\ w ~ Z 5 O ~ ~ o a d ff-40-60'LL~ Xvl 'y ~ ~~ ~- \~~ ~m\~ U ~ a Q' J 1 C .-ter' ,~ ` \ ~ O ~ ~ ~ Y < ~ Z~3Z - - - - ; ~-`ro `~` U 0.1 Q = z `~ a ~n ~ tr I ~ f ~ ~ ` ~ \\\ x E--I W o O ° ~ ~ i ` ~ \\~ O U~ z z ~ .~ ~ SOaVM03 'd .1a00321JZ I ~ v'~,~ ~'y ,-,-;- ~ ~ ~ d 30 .l.La3d0ad o t~ ~~,0 Zf-40-60'LLA XVl o a I z ~ \\` \ ~ I ~a ap.~,k0 y •------- -~ m •~ ~ ~ O~ _ ~ - l-a 03NOZ --- --- I /~ ~ ~ crn • d ~ ~ 63JH10a v SIf10l N I SSRy1~~ ~~ ~ \~~ Z161 2138n1~0 z N a 30 Ala3d0ad I pC a31v0 TKS 3 tl3~2lvd ~ ~'~ ~ 'd'1 AB NO$(>3il3i -1'0 1i0! v x ri l£-b0-60'LLiI Xvl o o I ~k 'rr f A3nans NO 035Y8 NvgW31t o ~ m -- ~- ~~ ~ I ~~ ~ ~ R~ ~~ Yf J k ~ a L-a 03NOZ < ? \ ~ ` a~ 09,0 ~'o ~\ 830H10a v SIfIOI n ~ ~<` ~~1. ~ ~ .~'~ 30 .11a3d0ad o ~ ~' 2 O O q~ ~ ~A ~ ~~, y6~~y Of-ti0-60'cci XV1 • • ~ k3 ~ X01 ----------------'--- ~ \ .:- ~ k' cy ~~ ________ _____ W 0 l-a 03NOZ 91` ~\q ,~~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ABaI~ 'v SVWOk1 ~ ~ ~ r~' ~A~ ~ kk n j0 Al a3d0ad ~- - ^~ q''~ , Qk~ 6Z-40-60'cL>w Xvl ~ ~ ~ ~ / ~~ ~~ ~ kg ll?MX03 'S NHOP :; . ,r, .~0 .lia3d0ad ---------------------- -- ~~ `i~`~ ~ ~ k6 8Z-40-60'LL/ Xvi --- ------- k~ o ~A,E,Q ~t~ G~,~G~~1 ~-a o3NOZ ~ ~ StA ~,o J ~'~:l' a3ovaHavH •M NHOr z - ~ ~ ~~~. ti0<` ~o ua3doad ~. ~., cZ-tio-so•LC~t xvl ~ ~ . I-a o3NOZ ~ ~g s~ooae 'd NO1lav0 ~ o k~k~ ~o ua3doad ° _ ~o < 9Z-ti0-60'LL/ XVl `~ O9 Ck G~' w W N'~' o ~ SZ-40-60'LL~/ Xvl ^- '~~ 1~5~ A~'Q~OQ~GD`~G'1' < < « J r _. _ _ ~. _ vs ~S 5s ~S ~ o ~ r 17 , '` ~~ N 1(7 J N t-a o3NOZ ~ W ;:, _ '~rP ` ~ ` Q ~ n I I ~ o N G N 'n. ~ -Cb ` ~ N ~ 1 Aa3WO01NOW 'W OlvNpa = ~ ~~ ~ ~` n c ~W z = ~ jo xta3doad ~, ~~ ~4' ~ ~ ~ s h ~ ~~ : I I ~ ~ v ~ bZ-fO-so'LLI XVl ~ ~ < °_~ ~5` $~, w~~ n \ ~v~ NW ~a I owe u d ~~ Z \y O N I pwI03~C7 ~~I~ Y pppl~~ ~ ~ 8 O 2 0 O Q, c umd t-a 03NOZ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ` "'~~ m ~ \ I <~c~z~~ aa~ m ~ SHatlW '0 Hd3SOr a o; i ~ w ~ ~ < a ~ N ? I 19 ? c``~ cwi 7F ~ z ~ ~o ua3doad o ,~ +~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ` `" m ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ S ~ ~ m fl-fO-BOLL/ Xvl J W "' I te a= V W o o W o a ~ `~p~~ ~~~~~~~ ~3 ~ <a ~ ~ oo<oo ~ ~ `' ~ o gg~~= < < < aa&5a~ ~ 7 ~ 3 / B'S'I ` ~ ~ y 8 r ~ e-°~ of ~5 ' ~~ ~ ~h W ~ Z w w ~ ~, .J ¢ 0_ U L-a a3NOZ `" ~++~\ o\o~°'~~ ~ ~ \~ ~' a ~ Z U N ~ u ~ o ~' Ol3Li0NLM 'O 'WM 8 on~~ ~~~ ~ ~~o> a, \~\ ~~ ~`p~ i-- o E-, ~ ~' W a ~ ~ ~ vii z do ua3doad ~$ ~ ~~ ~~~~~ 1!/ / `o ~ • ~ 1 ~4' ~t.`~ w ~- ~--~ ~ ~ ~ o z d ~ x ££-b0-60'LL# Xdl H ~~ I ^ ~~ ` /d/ / ~ti~o ~..• " ~~ ~t~~ c~ Z ~1 d N ~ J ~ Z ~ z ~I l a 03NOZ w I { ~/f'~(~~~\L~• 1 p~po~,~7 ~ a~ ,.~ 3 soavMo3 • ~ ~ .~( ~~\ .a ~ ~+ d .~aoo3aoZ ~{ x'(II i~ \\,`~ \\~ ~ ~ ~~,o .2 "'•~,~.~, ~ ~ d d I do ua3doad ~ Z£-b0-60'LL# XVl ~ '~ ~{ ~ III I +\ / ~ \t ,~o~r+. a Q Z _ I o `$ ~ I I III ~sut ~~'_• ~~ -~ ~~ ~\ ~ \ Q / ~ o ~ ~11 -~-'` X10 ,, ,' -- ~ --- r ~~ ~+// v~ L \\ e30FUOa v S~nOI , l ~o~%~~\ ~.-. ~ . '" a •$ ZL6L a~ol0o ~ / 1 ~~~ I ~ ~ / •$`~` oc a~LVo 'NOS a a3radd l£-40-60'LL# Xdl o o { / ~/~J- `4~~ ~ ~ ~ 'a•1 xa NoSroa.'i~ ~'a a0e ` -"" """ J 3 ~~/~/~ cP ~ ~ a1 s'd~ .~3nars r,o mJsra ro,aca3n i L-a Q3NOZ < z ~ j It~l~( r' ~ ~ % 09'0°` ~,o ~ 83oFUOa v sino~ N o { I 11}IIj~I ~<` \ ~,~~' / ~o .~y~ .~o ~la3doad o { I 111 .~ ` tP~ rf y~°~, 0£-b0-60'LLN Xdl ~~J ~i11 e \ ~ ~ a ~ / ~ AO d~~ ~ r ---------------- ------ .~ ~ 1 ~ i OA' do, pd l-a 03NOZ w { 14 '~ ` I I ~ ~~. ~~ ~ ~ "~d ~.aai~l v svwoFU n ~ 1 o Illj 1~ ' 9 ~ ~~~ ~~~ )~ ;, ,~P~ ~` / ,a ~`' 6Z-b0-60'LL# XVl ~ ~~ 1~ ;I;~ I `+ ~ / ~ 09' A5 `1 ~ ~ ~ / a Z , ~ 11 , I I~ I ~ ~ / 9-~ of '`~ 'I ----- z { m 1,11 I II C ~ ~P' o ~,~ L-a o3NOZ o ' N '1111 ~ ~ I 1 ~ 1 \~ / ~ ~~oQ~R ~ ~"P 2 . ll3MX03 'S NHOf ; n 11 111 ~ 1 I I ~ \\\~ ~P P Q03~•~0 G' / .iO.l.La3d0ad 1 1 ~\ 'y ~~~5 -~0~ / ----------------------- - { ` 111, 111 ~~~~~ '$\ \ '4i ~ 6 8Z-b0-60'LL# Xb'1 ------ I 111111 1 1 ~~ ~~,~ ~ •gj / n'A ' ~ { `~ 11111 ~ r\~ \~\ \~ ~ ~ ~ N~~e~-~`~~ ~~~G~ l-a Q3NOZ Z \ ~\ i ~\\ 1 ; 1\11`; ~ ~ i ) \ ~\ ~ ~~ \ t~~QSOPO O G'r a3QVaXa`/H 'M NHOf I / I \ ~ 30 ~1a3d0ad LZ-40-60'LL# Xbl o ~ ~ \ ~"`~ 1 ~ ~ b~ L-a a3NOZ ~ 1 \ ~ 1 ~ X0611 ~/ ~ ' / ~1 '~~ ' SHOOaB 'd NOllaVO ~ - ~ _~ ~ w d0 ~lLa3d0ad ~ ~_ ~ 4i~~ ~ I I ~ 1 1 ~ ~/r' ~ OAF < < 9Z-b0-60'LL# Xd1 `~ l _ ~'r4 I I I aE ~ ~§' tQ 1~09~ O GO. w to ww ~ w I _o ~_ ~ I I1 ~ ~5- ~ ~~ ~G v v v v ~ a SZ-40-60'LL# XVl ~- I I{ I I ~ _ I } 1 ~I~ , ~ ~P~P~~ d"OQ G'ry ~ ~ v~iv~"i a o / / 1 I l I~ ~// '0° ~ ~ ~ o u ~ i i o c L-a 03NOZ ~ i f~ • ~ / / III / ~a% ¢ r, cc A213w001NOw 'w QlYNOa z ~ / ~ ~ / w n ~ ww o p w 30 .11a3d0ad ~ u~ / ~% / „' $i ( `'' \ / c~ h ~ ~ p .n a o r bZ-b0-60'LLtY XVl O ~ ;z ~ ~ Y ~ L~ w o c~ c / ~ Z ti o N i o car v Qcn,•~ ,~.pCA F ~ M}-zU N~UQw00 ZUC ~O O ~1" Q ~+ \ ~ W O c \ <jNa~c~a ~Y3 >OUO // ~/ ~ n d ~ w in a0<Q ~ <K O OKa^- L-a 03NOZ ' `V ~ < \ ~a ~ zo \ ~anZ~\\ ~aa oaca m N V sravw 'o Hd3SOf ~ a s `o° o o a a Z~~ ~? U U ~ x o ~ 30 .lla3d0ad o ,t i o z N~~ ~ m o N c Y a a cv ~ ~ £Z-b0-60'LL# XVl J w~ ~ n a "~' o `z \ o o~ o a N N ~ i m ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ww~wa-^ ~ ~ ~ xd ~ ~~UN~ » < m ~ as°Qa~ ~ ~ ~ '- a < oo~oz a a a ~ c ~~_~_ o aawa~ ~ ~ ~ r N C . ~ _ ~`~ ~~ ~O a ^ ~""y E~ 1 ~ 4~> iR : ENr o?' ~ILF S 1 ~ ~-e pr-rr n ~-,, ' ~~ NORTH la ' xf. I Lw ~ ~ ~ t +• lrii g+ _ !+ ~ s ~ t mf I 3 ~, 3' ze ' ='r , Ysf I tfN t ' 2 9 1 .sN ~ • - .. _ ~ _. _ _ I ' `i Jf1I ~ ~ 2 p _ _ I ~. n - SNP/ +' ' sia I XffO ~ ~ ~ ! I t e 9 t 12 XII Z ~ 24 m n I , II stA a tw + 7D r • ~ M ~ y II _ ~ srtf ~ >es~ ~ ~ X ast ~ ~w a :tl ~ 7 ~ _~ _ t2 i : ~ I ~ trt. L ~ LCO}c szJt I I , un $ ~ 17 t $ L3 s t9 s • y too ~ t Q J~II f L +~i ~j J171 I w I uaa ~ w ~ ~ ice. „ ~ p µ m „~ _ I 22 `~ ~6pr \ ~ >~ ~ ° ~ q a t ~aef. J ~ - la R t t t "M4.1 ~ sta+ LOOec p•q s77o / y.,\ wv ,, w !S = I 3 16 ~ w t ly ~ ~ r~ arrt Y t+of str 21 ~~ >ai I4 ' 2 ~ 77/f20 ~~ Fin~vGlt .~~ ~~ .~~ ~~, 1` rorr lN. JiW ~_~ . ~ ~aa n •ao to n Road ~. •.. / .a •.a w.aa n n ~~ t r 13 12 7 sta O I Ixot ss,,f 36.I II I i ~ mf i. ~ I 3p 3r . 32 as~r y 'tto. ~ saa aso ~," n?1 23 7 24 ~ ~ ~ ~ L X - Looac 33 ~ `~ `~~c, ~ Rr. Ist4 1 '' ~ G/ ~ r,. -.. i• _ 8 e 9 n• ~ f ~ I I I .~ +-. ~ ~•"° ne. 3T• Jso1. a '~ a ~4 '~ ~ 3ZI ~ 1. tart ' s+b ~4f " ~~ '~ salt 4 ~, _ 6 ~ ~ o r- ~ ~~ s -i i'~9 ~ ~ C~ ~ ~'L. ~ Jdt1 ~ •P 0 4 s s \ , J}I 3 y r ~o a ~ M.M ~ LOI ~ . , t ~ 10 JJ.fI `- l • ~' 24 Ji ~~ ,a A . \ ~, 20 / '~~ 49 ~t~ \\ 4b \ sfl3 0 Sri,. `,, ,,,~ a• N' t9 ` . `` v ~ 0 •' 52.1 ~ \ 47 S\ \ .'' ~ ~toa aN " - ~.. \ \ st .. "\~~~SS ~,\ . IOIAC ~ , 48 ' \ • ~ ~ ~ \ ` ~~ sr'v6 7?It '' J.7o •~ SI xo ~ ~ •• \ ,?D• / ~ Jtf. ~~ S . /d ~ l 1 ]ala ~ 6 - .~ ti :~ _ ~' * DEPARTI~\I'T OF PLANNIi~'G BALANCED CARE CORP. _ P1,~ ZONITVG .: SPECIAL USE PERMIT .~ .. 77.09-4-40, 41 . ~. ~ .\ I.- ~ ~ ~ N x _, Q ~,, ~ 1 ~: o ' L ~ Y ~ M x V 't w z '` ~ ~~. j~- ~ h ' t Q ` m ,~ ~~ ~= 1 - o.~ U Q ~ _ ~ i ~~ 0 U ,.. w O VJ 1 ' N, ~Q~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ Q ~}~ ~ ~. w ~a~ N J ~ 0. ~ a~ ~~ '~~~ ~ - ~// to ~~• `` / /!I ~ r, ~~~., ~(~ o \ ,~ 0 a ' t \O ~s% ~~ C ~ o ~° O ~ ~? ~ ) ~' ~~ ~~ i °'- \~'; ~ ~ O l ~ ~~ ~ ~~. ~ < J ,~ ;o .;~' . , ,% ~ ~~ ~~r."j B~ .' , , t~' ~ ~~ ' ~• ~~~,~ ••.~~ U { !' ~ v { ~' ~~i~~ -`~ ; f _.~ > .° , ~' /s _ d- ~/ ~ ` ~ ', v ~, ~ N ~ ~ ~ . ` s ... ~ , D/. ~ ~ ` Y, ~ `. ~~;`\ . s ~+ XYi X Y ~ I ~ f- r - _ _ .~-. - ~ / ` ~/' i 4 - 1 ~ - ` ,~ .. ti 'E ,- O ~ ~ ~ Z ~ r ~ ~ ~ O Q ~ F g~ ~ r.. ~ U ~ ~ ~ ~ `~ '~ ~ ~~ ~., O \ ' 6 ~ w Q ~ ~, M Q C ~ ~ ~~ ~ r I oi\ i . ; ~ ~~ O. _ \ ~ ~. _~ ~ ~ ~ `s - ~~ ~ c s~~ ~\ Q. COUNTY OF ROANOKE DEPT. OF PLANNING AND ZONING 5204 Bernard Dr.~._ P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 l 540 772-2os8 Fax (540 ~ 772-2 ~ 08 For staff use only ~p ~~~~. -d" l ~r dater eive •' received b ~. ~ ap licat~ n fee PC/BZA dale: ` `' 3 - ~ placards issued: BOS das°;~ ;/ , C 9 7 . ~ Case Number: Proposed Zoning: C---.( Proposed Land Use: (,(j, j/; "I ..L Cr`- ~'r`~'~tr~~ For Staff Use Cniy Use Type: Does the parcel meet the minimum lot area, v~iGth, and frontage requirements of the requested cistrict? YES _~~ NO IF N0, A Vr=.Ir.~1CE IS REQUIRED FIRST. Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for :~;~ requested Use Type? YES NO IF N0, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRS1. If rezoning request, are conditions being proff~: ~~ with this request? YES NO ~'i~f~1 f-~ ~~~~l~~"J~iII ~i~~' ~`1€fT:~:~€ ~ ~~~~~~'';;;'~`;_;~;~;~~~~;~'i`i~~~':~` Variance of Section(s) ~ of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in crier to: `~ Owner's Signature: Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WILL i`t0T BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. ws v rvs v ws v Consultation 8 1 /2" x 1 1 " concept plan Application fee :z.:; ~.r Application :~. Metes and bounds description ~ -- Proffers, if applicable ~~, Justification ::x~:< Water and sewer application Adjoining property owners ~' , l 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 of the owner. JONES & JONES ARCH TEL~1-703-366-3613 Jan ?4,97 16 31 No .001 P.OL _f- EXI5TIN6 PARKING _~~ - --- , _-- ~ ~~ f~, _1- --~-_-. ~-3 0 0 .~ e rt ~~d~NE5 I!~J.l~ E5 aeeint.a GONGEPTU,41. 51TE PLAN W I L LY' S ICE CREAM 24 .lAH Iq n ~~3 JM~/daoA 4(/n/tMrr ,lrx~c O I f ~Jro /O/ .{//II/1h(ff AlA'1G 79 Ac ' R-1 SMno/wtwA bbplh! P 18~ ,Y/n/rfri~~ Assoc ~, , - / a C~Z~ AC -2 g •'~ b L~ ` f - n O Clubhouse Dr. p ~woas~a MOi1TM 775. TOw1 MOVStS Y .;~ a ': •, z• ~ ~ v /IZ (l9-J z i Q ~ ~ 1~6 (JJ-~ de (13-J.I 6~zs iso 6.z1 ~l,eJ y125 J IJ~ 13.1 s~z • ~si9 rs ~ -.. ~ ,. o<~ ~, ,,, ~D~ubh~~ ~ ~ , ~sj 6 ~• Asa S1 - ~ ~.~~ x• vMp~ ~~~ ~.s.*°`~ F~ytO ssis 643 6,1.9 6 6,15 13 3.08 Ac 6~J~ c~Z 1 ~`~' I ~ ~ 3.54 Ac .y C.~ ~. ~. ~ +T .. ~~ ~• t`~~ ~ / T II .,,, . ~ __ 5 `, ~ , n~ s . ~° ~a4 ' 1 .I zs~ ~ zi ~T All/I 7/J-l// 1CV 7C/ f T ~$ _ 2 / ~ \\. ~, ~ ~ ~ `` t `: 1 ~ s r r 1. ~~ `~ \ i ~ ' ~ s~ P I, ~.~~~p 1 /S~ ~ 238Ac b I ` ~ ~ `~ ~ ~ ( 2 ~ ` ~ 1266 Ac \ ~":' _,, ~ f ~ r MCCLUNG ENTERPRISES T/A WILLY'S _ ~`T DEPART~NT OF PLANNING .SPECIAL USE PERMIT -~ AND ZONING 27.18-3-13.2 :~ MI6/1~! 3. 7A~ ~." f- 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: February 25, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Ordinance approving the transfer of 3.00 acres, being Lots 15, 16 and the western 70 feet of Lot 14 of Fort Lewis Estates (Plat Book 3, Page 51), to the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County for conveyance to Kroger as part of the Kroger expansion project COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~L ,~,.~ aT~~ BACKGROUND• Roanoke County is assisting the Kroger Co. with an expansion of their Mid-Atlantic Distribution Facility in the Glenvar area that will require a relocation and improvement of Garman Road. Richfield Retirement Community exchanged 3.00 acres for County land upon which Richfield is constructing an Alzheimer's Center. Kroger is requesting the County to donate this 3.00 acre tract for their expansion project. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The subject property is necessary for Kroger's expansion project. This land is owned by Roanoke County, and is more particularly described as: All of those certain lots, parcels or tracts of land, together with any improvements thereon, rights incident thereto, and appurtances thereunto belonging, situate in the Catawba District of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, designated and described as all of Lot No. ~~ Fifteen (15), all of Lot No. Sixteen (16), and the western seventy (70) feet of Lot No. Fourteen (14), as shown on the recorded Map of Fort Lewis Estates, of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Plat Book 3, at page 51, reference to which is hereby made for further description of said property; said real estate being further shown and designated upon the Roanoke County Land Records as Tax Map 55.03-1-18, 19 and 20; and, BEING all of the same real estate conveyed to Roanoke County by deed of exchange by and between Richfield Retirement Community and the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, dated October 11, 1996, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 1529, page 1299. The County Assessor has determined that these 3.00 acres are valued at $121,700. Kroger is requesting that these 3.00 acres be conveyed to them so that site grading and development may occur. Staff recommends that the 3.00 acres be transferred to the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County for conveyance to the Kroger Co, upon the execution of a performance agreement with the County, Authority and the Kroger Co. FISCAL IMPACT: Roanoke County has appropriated funds for the Kroger expansion project at their meeting on January 27, 1997. A sum of $450,000 was appropriated to the Industrial Development Authority for land acquisition and related legal and recordation costs. ALTERNATIVES• 1. Adopt the proposed ordinance approving the transfer of 3.00 acres owned by the County to the Industrial Development Authority for conveyance to the Kroger Co. after execution of the performance agreement. 2. Do not transfer the 3.00 acres to the Authority nor convey the land to Kroger. 2 ~=1 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve Alternative No. 1 for the benefit of the Kroger expansion project. Respectfully submitted, Approved by, ~ ~ Timothy W. Gubala Elmer C. Hodge Director, Economic Development County Administrator ---------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved ( ) Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied ( ) Eddy _ Received ( ) Harrison _ Referred ( ) Johnson _ To ( ) Minnix Nickens 3 TEL~15403876145 ~ l Po.: r ~ •~' Sto.a Y w 7 N ~ ti h w ~z. Jul 15 96 837 '•r• ~E~~RrC ~~ QQ;~~~~ i~~~~y o ~~~~~ ~a ~~~ xs tna~~* i~ ~ ~ R ~ ~0 ~xoa~ ~~~ g:~~~ ~ ~yso. eb• ~.• ~~~~~a I ~~`~~ .~ r~ '1 p { b ~~ ~ i S t j I ~F 1 ~Jl N C a q ~'R aMN~ r ~~ ^r ~~ 0 7I t ,,. ~'y ti rs~ •k N 1 l ~~ F a }~ ~ ~~~ ~~ ^~ a; ~R ~~ ~0 4 e ~~ ~o o `~~ ~b so s t _~~~_~ ~~ ~^ ~. h~~ ~7 ~^~~~ ~s' ~~~~ ~•~ y~`4i ~~~ ~~~~: 9a__ y n o ~~ o ~ y Xy ~1 ~ ~~2~ ~~°~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ C~ ~ a~ 4 lm ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~'TOany~~ ~ 4~ ~~, Wptb ~,a~4 .,a aozC~Anh; e y~ ~a~ ~a'~A~ 4~ \Z~~~4~~ Y ~~a~* C; , p }} ~~: 4 &~A~ 1 ~dq~l pap ~OK:HwiO o ~u~pe~~~~j a m°~j,~~,44°F -0 e o~ V~ s~c~,~ ~ ~„ 3 n •~i4~0 V ~ {, ~. _~ s Ea PJo .001 P . 04 I- AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1997 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING CONVEYANCE OF LOT 15, LOT 16, AND THE WESTERN 70 FEET OF LOT 14, FORT LEWIS ESTATES TO THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF ROANOKE COUNTY IN CONNECTION WITH THE KROGER PROJECT WHEREAS, by Deed of Exchange dated October 11, 1996, and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Deed Book 1529, page 1299, the Board of Supervisors acquired Lot No. Fifteen (15), Lot No. Sixteen (16), and the Western 70 feet of Lot No. Fourteen (14), as shown on the recorded Map of Fort Lewis Estates, of record in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Plat Book 3, at page 51, said real estate being further shown and designated upon the Roanoke County Land Records as Tax Map No. 55.03-1-18, 55.03-1-19, and 55.03-1-20; and, WHEREAS, by Resolution #012897-12, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County authorized and approved an economic development project, known as the Kroger Project, and authorized execution of a Performance Agreement with the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, Virginia, ("IDA"), and the Kroger Co.; and, WHEREAS, the terms of said agreement provide for conveyance to the IDA of the above-described real estate in connection with the Kroger Project; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to §15.1-511.1 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended), the Board of Supervisors is authorized to donate said real estate to the IDA, in order for the IDA to fulfill the County's and the IDA's obligations under the above-described performance agreement in furtherance of the purposes for which the IDA was created; and, S-/ WHEREAS, Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter directs that the conveyance of real estate be accomplished by ordinance; the first reading of this ordinance was held on February 25, 1997; the second reading was held on March 11, 1997. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That conveyance of Lot No. Fifteen (15), Lot No. Sixteen (16), and the Western 70 feet of Lot No. Fourteen (14), as shown on the recorded Map of Fort Lewis Estates, of record in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Plat Book 3, at page 51, said real estate being further shown and designated upon the Roanoke County Land Records as Tax Map No. 55.03-1-18, 55.03-1-19, and 55.03-1-20, to the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, Virginia, is hereby authorized. 2. That upon conveyance of the real estate to the IDA, the IDA shall assume all obligations and responsibilities of the County provided for in the Agreement in connection with said property. 3. That the County Administrator or Assistant County Administrators are hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions as may be necessary to accomplish this conveyance, all of which shall be approved as to form by the County Attorney. 4. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption. ACTION # -L" ITEM NUMBER AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 25, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: First Reading of Ordinance Granting a Private Water Line Easement across Property owned by Roanoke County to Neysa M. Luckado COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~ ~ s~~ ~~ BACKGROUND: Ms. Luckado is in the process of constructing a dwelling on Tax Parce176.01-1-28.1. The property has an existing well that was to be utilized with the new dwelling. Ms. Luckado has stated that the well is contaminated and desires public water (see enclosed letter). SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Prior to construction of the South Transmission Line and a 1-million gallon water storage tank, public water was not available to this area. Although public water is still not immediately accessible to Ms. Luckado's property, there is a 24-inch water line located on the adjoining property owned by Roanoke County. Ms. Luckado has submitted a proposed plat (copy enclosed) and has requested that Roanoke County grant an easement across this property for the purposes of installing a private water lateral. Because the subject property is located at a higher elevation than the existing water storage facility, Ms. Luckado was notified that she will need to install a booster pump in order to have adequate water pressure. Because of the elevation and the fact that only three properties could benefit, a County-owned water main is not feasible. ~- ~ FISCAL IMPACT: Roanoke County will obtain one additional water customer and collect the normal off-site fees. Ms. Luckado is responsible for all surveying and construction costs. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that an easement be granted Ms. Luckado following the second reading. SUBMITTED BY: Gary Rob son, P.E. Utility Dir for APPROVED: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ACTION VOTE Approved () Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied () Eddy _ _ Received () Harrison _ _ Referred Johnson _ _ _ to Minnix _ _ _ Nickens . ~ - .. ~. ~ - r - ._ N ~~ . .. a <. e ~. .. , p . ~ - ~ ~:- -: .r _~ ~ . .t I3'' 24 s~'' - J.7~ 1 - ~ ~•~ ~0 is ,v _ _ - . 791 Ac (C) •''~ e ' _ - r'S t O 1 i _ _ S . - 136• Ae/ ~ ~ '- _ - ~ •~ - ?T- ~ , ~• See ~~ ', .. - . .~ 1~ ~, > t9s9•ac , S:IT$ ' ~ - ; - J RGSS ~ . ,, - .• II s~ ?ass ':I ~""~~' 2.54 is ~ .. ' J i ~~ - -_ 10.. rr _ . _ r - " 4 26 Ae - _., y .. ~ 28,! - ,__ _ 4.16 Aa (' •~ 1'r ~ D a t `•-n ~ r a 6~ 12.58 Ae ~ t -.. t'' O~ ..l-~ " r,.,~{ ` lf,r f r Wis..-} ~ s6S0. .J r. ~ r i ,. s •t j T i, • ~ r' , Y i .~ - j y Qty 4 ; , rs r s; - j > _ p ~ ~ r' '/ •~~ Y i- f ~'' a ~} '' ~ r'~`e ~ ~~ r ~ ~7`F r'ir~ l -j- li ~ ~ fj> Sly ~ j~ 1 ~p ~ .. ' ~ }: a `.. ~ ~ i r ~ lt.,~. ~ v Ys -r {. •rr jh4 J1 i J x ~~ i !'T ~YiG ~ - ~D v - ,. -. ' 4 ry' '} - 1- -. '' '+C .. ~.. ~„ r ,r a~ ~ f ~ ,f' f ti ' t - ... ~, 1~ r p r .i~ r , a ~ '~~ } t( ~T ~_ r ~ Vn,f 1 ~+ ~ ~ ~ ~ . 1•• X1.'4 Y./ t ~ N3 S ~•"'.~-X i~...y'.+ ~.! ~-- y i~ ~~'rti .fd i .1'. ~•+, p ~ ~ j' ('r• • ? i ,•. r. r •,;r ~:;k i ~~ ~~ f\...~ 1iyy'fv4 ~_;...~+~r tY ~j~rl J i i t ~ ri,. :.•'~J.~ f } ~. _ Y .r t. N G- / Y' y.~ / L . ~t~ . J'-i. f N S ~.y. r A ~e • r Y -+ <1: ~-~4~ 4 ~ .ate ~.f',.r , ti~ ~ r?, r. ~r 4 ` •j' ~~ i. ~~.~; Yy ;, ~, y^,~ : s ry a'~ ~.('•a 1;;::.rJ is ~r~ i; r~'l at:. -r ~ ~ ~~~ JT~. ~ )' ,~ ~ .>:w ~ p ~~; i. ' Y.. ~., ` Z~~rf ~E~: }S ''~ t 7 'f ~:;+ ~ '• •': rr •.yit •~ :: ~+y~ 2 ~, ~ .t. 'L'.~ i{ ~. +C n - t • n J.= .-~ 1 .. t ! ti" ! .Y:,i ;a~.i'.°P ~ l ~~~:•%-,:, .'. ."`fF~ "t / f J i t ~y, ~ f •t y'N t r ` . -~ r t J ~ 1 ~ r ` ~ ,i rr ,~)- ,} t 3 ,i.. ~. J r R ~ 1 ~: y+r -/} /~.y4:' `:tC'~~t C4 -'~'" :r~I,~.f t t: i .'~<~ G ~~+Zyr,~.rftir ~~q' > J;Ey. f + '•.+.: ..~i {'. r f. L .y t~ T: ~ ..t . ^ < <. F t ~ l'~.i t i`~ t. ~ t sir-a .3:• _ ~~ v OCTOBER 12,1995 DEAR MR. FRANK, ~1'~a Y~, HERE IS MY APPLICATION TO CONNECT UP WITH THE COL1N'I'Y WATER FACILITIES. I AM BUILDING A HOME ON SUGAR LOAF MOUNTAIN, AND I HAVE FOUND OUT THAT i HAVE A CONTAMINATED WELL. ACCORDING TO WATER CHEMISTRIES ANALYSIS, I HAVE VERY HIGH LEAD CONTENT (0.19 HIGH PESTICIDE LEVEL (0.20), AND PETROLEUM DISTILLATES. BECAUSE THERE I5 NO SYSTEM THAT WILL TAKE THESE CHEMICALS OUT FOR MY WHOLE HOUSE CONSUMPTION, I NEED TO CONNECT UP WITH THE COUNTY. THIS CONTAMINATION HAS BEEN VERY DEVASTATING FOR 11IE. I HAVE FUT 56,000 INTO MY WELL (PUMP AND DRILL WORD. I NEED CLEAN WATER, AND THE COUNTY IS THE ONLY PLACE WHERE I CAN MAID SUCH A REQUEST. THE COUNTY IS IlY THE FROCE58 OF BUILDING A WATER RESERVOIR TOWER WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY Sa8 FEET AWAY FROM MY HOUSE. BECAUSE THI5 RESERVOIR IS SO CLOSE, I HOPE YOU WILL BE ABLE TO GRANT ME MY REQUEST, AND I HOPE IT WILL NOT COST TOO MUCH TO CONNECT UP WITH THIS NE'W RESERVOIR. THANKS FOR YOUR HELP. r 4.~"'~/ HERE) 5650 MIDWAY DRIVE (BUILDING HERE) P.O. BOX 21422 (MAILING ADDRESS) ROANOICE, VA 240 1 WORD NUMBE~t 982-Z~63, ExT, aS~~/IIOME-774-ss7s -a o~ s~~ '~0'"Iw g m pS ...y.. nn qqOr N ~ ^ ~ n W ~ ~ ~ rr~ .1<*;W z N~ ~~~~~m ~~ F fG'~ 7~T13n$ ~ ~u ~~=~ < J ~~~d~~~~~ ~{ _ ~ ~ o Z~,t~~~ afiv~Ku ~ raS `tSoaaWl,uid ~~ay,~ro ~#`~~ ~~ ~~ ~~~ 1 ,~,.. ~Q „z -~~ Yg ~~gh9d a ~s~;: v::~ a C 3:' LI ~'.',I ,~ G I'.'~.i Ii:i:l i`)I ~:: ;I; I I.;i '.I r.; ~:.~ti 1 .i: I;;j;' t. i:i i ~; i I!~ 6~I i ~> I'la I:~,.I ~~ I~ f •;:~:: I. ,I,: /).'. 1 /, ~:/ ;~ b ~. R~~~~ _ ~~ ~ ~1 i~.~ f ~; ~~~6 ~~:., .y i ~~~/ , ~ /~',.. r /:~ /: / !I ~~ S Y W 7 ~°a ' ~ I ` o W ~ ~'~ • • ~ >• V Q W a a o, z ~ a z ~.,~ AN m s ~•aw W 4 Na . z~~ ~OC3~wia R:NOV~~ F z ~~ iz ~ N ~ ~60W-o ~ s a rd.,`ao~e n 1~ ~a ~ r , ~0~ ~ < b Z F OW `ewW~N~ s ~ a ~z~i U O w¢u~ m ~ Q ~ - a ry O X a 0~ m~ J W Z ~ DAv Y' ~ o Wn~x Q7 # ~~`~ ~ ~ w ~z a am U ~j~j 1~' X111 A W a • z y ®~ o ~ x ~~ ' _ ti ,;r ~ g' 9~ ~KF 'Y ~ Ni 1 1 A L~~~~ss oe ~ ~ I~ i ! ~ ~a a is ~ d x s~ ~k~~al i ~ ~ e b~ ~ ~ ~ v SSp ~Si[ ~ F p 1 S µy ~y I y 33 O ~ y y ~ I C G y~ a CB' k' f ~z~Y ?~d ~_ £~F ~~~ g<Z ZZ~~SZ ~=;gd~goY~ 1~ A s° <=b$mg ~js ~~W ~WwU~~~~gg~ _~< <~~ :~ jT~ art$$Rya°R 1~t< n WK ~ ~`. `~ /~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1997 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING CONVEYANCE OF AN EASEMENT TO NEYSA M. LUCKADO TO EXTEND A WATER LINE OVER CERTAIN PROPERTY OWNED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, (TAX MAP NO. 76.01-1- 27) WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County is the owner of property along Sugar Loaf Mountain Road (Route 692) in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, Neysa M. Luckado requires a twenty foot water line easement across said County property (Tax Map No. 76.01-1-27) in order to provide water service to her property (Tax Map No. 76.01- 1-28.1) as shown on a plat prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C., dated 4 February 1997; and WHEREAS, the proposed water line easement will serve the interests of the public and is necessary for the public health, safety, and welfare of the 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 February 25, 1997; a second reading was held on March 11, 1997; and 2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Charter of Roanoke County, the interests in real estate to be conveyed are hereby declared to be surplus, and are hereby made available for other public uses by conveyance to Neysa M. Luckado 1 ~'~ for the extension of a water line to serve Ms. Luckado's property; and 3. That the donation of a water line easement for extension of a water line, and related improvements, along County property as shown on a plat prepared by Lumsden Associates, dated 4 February 1997, to Neysa M. Luckado is hereby authorized; and 4. That Neysa M. Luckado's offer 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. This conveyance is subject to the following conditions: (a) This easement is a non-exclusive easement so that other property owners may use and benefit from this easement. (b) The County reserves the right to relocate this easement and water line at its expense. (c) Should Luckado or her successor in interest ever ceases use of this easement, it shall revert to the County. (d) Luckado shall comply with all County development rules and regulations during the installation and maintenance of the water line in this easement, including erosion and sediment control measures. (e) Luckado agrees to restore and repair any actual damage to the County property which may be directly caused by the construction, reconstruction, or maintenance of said water line. 6. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to 2 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 7. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption. C:\OFFICE\WPWIIV\WPDOCS\ AGENDA\REALFS"I'~LUCKADO.EST 3 ~O~m~~~ZL>~~ $~N~"'y~~~y >~~^~~~m of raz>mo~ ~~ ~~ fI~{aJ,opr~,~t~vzx T N ~ ~ ~ ` N m~~~~~m~ Atit y ~~ rZi~~r~i pn~ ~_. ~ ~~ N 4 ~ ~ rn m N > N _ fZ~1 '+N~p~ Z S • ~tI ~%(~j I N ~ ~ m u a ~py Sz N NA~J YYii ~1I 1~ rrTT ' O ' ~y Iy~X • ~ z I O1N r i IN ~~ ~~~a "_ $ _ a a ~ o~~~ .~ o pe :~ ~ g Qa ~ I i m~~ n i ~ ~~~ i ~ y Ri qa Cr+7 Fi ~nn'~ ~ = j I A ~ ~I 1 ~ ~ ppp I I I I I =~ I I ~ _ n I i ~' ~ _ "s . ~: 0 ~ =x • Crj Y 111 n a ~ r M ,-. NF7 ~~~~ \1~ ~y P? ^ .. wmi~~a'i gS F~~.~~ ~~~~~a f'~ J_ /~ ~. ~: f~/;~ ~l. / „~ / ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _~ /~ ~_1/~ ~~~ i / s ~ : f:~ ~ ~s . i / u ~~~ ,~ lU y Q ~ ~' ~/ ~ ~~" ~~ /~~' s ~~ /~.1 Z~ 1 , i g +'] ~( '~ 1 .~ , a; ~ ~ ~; ~ tIi s~ R ~.~ k'_ I~' I_ I { ~ `, r, I a~ '° s ~~ 7 °w7~ ~'.f ~ ~ ; ~ ;~ v~:;vjcv~°~ I _~: i N_ ~,, C ~. ~- .I Q 1 ~ I i I ~ !~ O ( A ~ m ~O! ~~1-'I NNVIN4IZO ~S i~~OtS~~.m.~(3 .:, . --~- ~i AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1997 ORDINANCE 022597-6 APPROVING AN OPTION TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH EVA M. BURRITT FOR FIVE FEET OF LOT 14, THE EASTERN 25 FEET OF LOT 14, LOT 13, AND LOT 12 ON MAP OF FORT LEWIS ESTATES (PLAT BOOK 3, PAGE 51), AUTHORIZING THE EXERCISE OF SAID OPTION, AND AUTHORIZING ASSIGNMENT OF THE CONTRACT TO THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF ROANOKE COUNTY IN CONNECTION WITH THE KROGER PROJECT WHEREAS, by Resolution #012897-12, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County authorized and approved an economic development project, known as the Kroger Project, authorized execution of a Performance Agreement with the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, Virginia, ("IDA"), and the Kroger Co., and appropriated the sum of $1,780,000 to pay for the County's and the IDA's performance obligations under the Agreement; and, WHEREAS, by Option to Purchase Agreement dated January 27, 1997, Eva M. Burritt granted unto the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, an option to purchase portions of lot 14, and all of lots 13 and 12 on the map of Fort Lewis Estates (Plat Book 3, Page 51), being further shown on the Roanoke County land records as Tax Map Numbers 55.03-1-17, 55.03-1-16, 55.03-1-15, and 55.03-1-14 ("the Property"); and, WHEREAS, under the terms of said agreement, the purchase price for the Property is $315,000 and the option must be exercised on or before February 28, 1997; and, WHEREAS, the agreement provides for settlement within 30 days of the notice of exercise of the Option, but possession by the County (or its assignee) is subject to the condition that Eva Burritt will be entitled to retain possession of the buildings for storage of personal belongings and property until May 31, 1997, with access thereto, unless the County/IDA, at its expense, moves the personal property to a bonded storage facility and bears the cost of storage through May 31, 1997, if possession of the buildings or commencement of construction is necessary prior to that date; and, WHEREAS, the property is necessary for relocation and construction of Garman Road, and the funds are available to the IDA in the Kroger - IDA account as appropriated by the Board on January 28, 1997; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to §15.1-511.1 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended), the Board of Supervisors is authorized to donate and assign its rights under said Option to Purchase Agreement to the IDA, in order for the IDA to fulfill the County's and the IDA's obligations under the above-described performance agreement in furtherance of the purposes for which the IDA was created; and, WHEREAS, Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter directs that the acquisition and conveyance of real estate interests be accomplished by ordinance; the first reading of this ordinance was held on February 11, 1997; the second reading was held on February 25, 1997. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Option to Purchase Agreement dated January 27, 1997, between Eva M. Burritt, Grantor, and the Board of Supervisors 2 of Roanoke County, Virginia, Grantee, and the terms and conditions provided for in said agreement, is hereby approved and the execution of said agreement by the County Administrator is hereby authorized and ratified. 2. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to exercise the option to purchase from Eva M. Burritt the following described real estate, to-wit: All those certain lots or parcels of land together with any improvements thereon, rights incident thereto, and appurtenances thereunto belonging, situate in the County of Roanoke, Virginia, on the south side of U.S. Route 11/460 being designated and described as 5 feet of lot 14, the eastern 25 feet of lot 14, lot 13, and lot 12 on the map of Fort Lewis Estates recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Plat Book 3, Page 51, reference to which is hereby made for a further description of said property, said real estate being further shown and designated upon the Roanoke County land records as Tax Map Numbers 55.03-1- 17, 55.03-1-16, 55.03-1-15, and 55.03-1-14. 3. That, upon exercise of the option, the County Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to assign the County's contract rights under said Agreement to the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, which shall proceed with purchase of the Property for the sum of $315,000, subject to the terms and conditions provided in the Agreement, and the IDA shall assume all obligations and responsibilities of the County provided for in the Agreement. 4. That the County Administrator or Assistant County Administrators are hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions on behalf of Roanoke County in this matter as are necessary to accomplish the exercise of the option and assignment 3 of the contract to the IDA, all of which shall be approved as to form by the County Attorney. 5. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption. On motion of Supervisor Harrison to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Y'YL .-~ Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Timothy W. Gubala, Director, Economic Development Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney 4 i• • • O a ~~ ti ~a ~~~ !ay ~i~~ h ~~ ti~ ~ ~ ~ 3~ k €'"~~~ o b •c uy ~s9 ~ ~ ~YkFe ~xyx g~~ ~ ~ ~~'6d~~i~ R6 rj~ 4 or ~ ~ K 4 y ' nrr ~~~' ~y~ 999 ~~°u o ~- ! iy s ~ 1. ~ y1 ]~ .i v N L ~ ~ ~ r /1./iN _ ~~ ~ V ~-. o " ~~ ~ ~~ ~~~~ ~ U w ~ 0.~ J ~o ~•.~ ~ a 'o ~ ~ o ~~ U q ~.1,,. 4 4 W r y ,. . ~~ ~~ ~•e. ~°'~!!~~ b0'd ZOG'aN ZS~8 96 ST Int f OiyhM)9Z V i eq~ y;ti~ ~ 7 {{ ~bb~2~0~4 ~a .t s9yyn~ly w ~ ~~ w Sq,yh i'~ ti~4~RR~ ~ }4~ ry¢:Q~ N '~~ W ~~ov~i ~ y ~Q i U `s ~;e~ 2¢1 ~~ ~ R 4 4~4MW~pppkZQ Ztt ~~S~~b~W~O t~~ 4Q h ~ ~~i~°rA&h e~ ~fi ~z iu ~ tf' ! ~ w w ~ h ~} C~.~ n . a ~ ~ 4~ ~ j ( ~ M ~ ~~ ~3 t~ / ~ k~ < <~ ..,.:.., ~a Y% 1 •~ j ~ of e a e, ~ ~ °; ~, o . b I ~ ¢ ~ .~~- •~ ~ ~~ ~~• .~ ~ w a ~ "' ~~~~q 1 - M • a°yyy' 1 q ~~,~. ~ :{ .. W iy Y R v ~darw 4 i ~Z' 0 5-1 ~' t ~ , r 0 Z v, ~. ~ ~ A~ ~ ~~ ~~ N versa h`.s-~ ., i, ~ ~ A K 4 I v 9 3°- ~ ~ ~ p b~0~ ~~ a~~ 1 Ml4C2fi~ V ~ ~ d•asa ~'6b t 1 q c ~= t .e Sb~G~8SObSi~~31 ~' alb `•, _~ ! ~ Y ~ N Y Z E N ~, c e ~~p c a w w Action No. 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: February 25, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Ordinance approving an option to purchase agreement with Eva M. Burritt for five feet of Lot 14, the eastern 25 feet of Lot 14, Lot 13, and Lot 12 on map of Fort Lewis Estates (Plat Book 3, Page 51) authorizing the exercise of said option, and authorizing assignment of the contract to the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County in connection with the Kroger project COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~~~~, a~~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Roanoke County is assisting the Kroger Co. with an expansion of their Mid-Atlantic Distribution Center in the Glenvar area that will require improvements to Garman Road and Route 11/460 (West Main Street). Ms. Burritt owns property through which the new Garman Road will pass. She has signed an option and the County is desirous of exercising the option and assigning the contract to the IDA to proceed with acquisition so that planning, design and construction of Garman Road can proceed. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The subject property is necessary for the relocation and improvement of Garman Road. This parcel of land is owned by Eva Burritt, and is more particularly described as: All those certain lots or parcels of land together with any improvements thereon, rights incident thereto, and appurtenances thereunto belonging, situate in the County of Roanoke, Virginia, on the south side of U.S. Route 11/460 being designated and described as 5 feet of lot 14, the eastern 25 feet of lot 14, lot 13, and lot 12 on the map of Fort Lewis Estates recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Plat Book 3, Page 51, reference to which is hereby made for a further description of said property, said real estate being further shown and designated upon the Roanoke County land records as Tax Map Numbers 55.03-1-17, 55.03-1-16, 55.03-1-15, and 55.03-1-14. 1 S ~ Staff has obtained an independent appraisal of the estimated fair market value for the proposed acquisition from Appraisal Consultants, Associates. The appraiser's opinion is that the estimated market value of the proposed acquisition is $250,000. In an effort to reach a settlement, a written offer of $315,000 was extended to and accepted by the owner. Staff offered the higher $315,000 figure in order to meet the property owners price and comply with a VDOT request to have the new Garman Road intersect with the existing traffic signal at Allegheny Drive and West Main Street. The option agreement provides that, as a condition of the sale, construction and use of the property after purchase is subject to Eva Burritt's right to retain possession for storage of personal property until May 31, 1997. The executed Option to Purchase Agreement dated January 27, 1997, requires approval and ratification by the Board. It provides for exercise of the option on or before February 28, 1997; therefore, staff is also requesting authorization to exercise the option and to assign the contract rights to the Industrial Development Authority for acquisition of the property, within 30 days of the notice as provided for in the agreement. The Board approved the first reading of the Ordinance on February 11, 1997. FISCAL IMPACT: Roanoke County has appropriated funds for the Kroger project at their meeting on January 27, 1997. The sum of $315,000 for the purchase price along with related legal and recordation costs is included within this appropriation. ALTERNATIVES: Adopt the second reading of the proposed ordinance approving the Option to Purchase Agreement with Eva M. Burritt authorizing the exercise of the option, and authorizing assignment of the contract to the IDA for acquisition. 2. Decline to exercise the option. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative No. 1 for the benefit of the Kroger project. Respectfully submitted: ~ IN . Timothy W. Gubala, Director Department of Economic Development Approved: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator 2 ~/ ACTION Approved () Motion by: Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Attachment No Yes Abs Eddy Johnson Harrison _ _ Minnix _ Nickens 3 ~ .~ ~~ . ~ i ' W ,o i ,r n 0 2 ~w h ~ 4 Zow~vyai ~ ~ $ o ~Oq~ti!~2y 0 ~~i~h ~ 3 4 tiy~+ 42QWQ4W~ ~n;~ : ~ Z 1 R`I.oll i~li~VQ W°~ ~ ~k~~~n ~~#, 4 ~'".,N 6 e ~~ M~~Z~ ; ~ ~,~~ ~w r4 88~ ~~~~~s~'3 ~~' ~Zv a~ ~~ ~ q ~a~~w~w~fiaC ~~ ,~y~~'~~a Wg~~ ~ o, 4 W, 2 ~ ~ ~ 0 A Z 2o Zy f.~ a e¢~ ~d,~a ~ + W W 0~ ~ 4R ~ C e ~q,~Qae W~~ R4 ti ~' Mu•:+~iu~A~h ~W 3z~~o R ro ~ o~ " Q ~~ ~ W~ ~~~~ 1. ~~~~ 4 V a~ 0. i ~ Q J C L ~ ~ -Q 4 0 U u y ~~ 4 4W W ~~ ~ ~ ONW Y4 N v`~~ r '3` yo ~3~ ~S~ ~~ y` ~~~ ~M4 *~Y ~I/i io °v.t. bo • d Zoo • or~a z~ : 8 96 s i t pr r~ a w w rr C i yy~o ~ ~ a a j 1~ r ~~ ~~, ~~ Z `~ r 3 ~ 0 ~~ ~i ~~ I $~ ~' ~ d 5~ ~ ~ ~ ~ + ~~` h aQ~o 1 q `~7 h ~~rw: ~ '~ ~ g •W~Y. ~~~$~ G n ~ 1 `f yyi y, 's . ~~ ~~ ~ p r ~~t~~~ o ~ ~~}~~~} t a V yC ~ l n N •4 ~4bL{1--~ ~ ti 1 ~• b C ~ .~ d O! S i SbZ9Z8S ObS~:~~l ~` 1~ T J~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1997 ORDINANCE APPROVING AN OPTION TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH EVA M. BURRITT FOR FIVE FEET OF LOT 14, THE EASTERN 25 FEET OF LOT 14, LOT 13, AND LOT 12 ON MAP OF FORT LEWIS ESTATES (PLAT BOOK 3, PAGE 51), AUTHORIZING THE EXERCISE OF SAID OPTION, AND AUTHORIZING ASSIGNMENT OF THE CONTRACT TO THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF ROANOKE COUNTY IN CONNECTION WITH THE KROGER PROJECT WHEREAS, by Resolution #012897-12, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County authorized and approved an economic development project, known as the Kroger Project, authorized execution of a Performance Agreement with the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, Virginia, ("IDA"), and the Kroger Co., and appropriated the sum of $1,780,000 to pay for the County's and the IDA's performance obligations under the Agreement; and, WHEREAS, by Option to Purchase Agreement dated January 27, 1997, Eva M. Burritt granted unto the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, an option to purchase portions of lot 14, and all of lots 13 and 12 on the map of Fort Lewis Estates (Plat Book 3, Page 51), being further shown on the Roanoke County land records as Tax Map Numbers 55.03-1-17, 55.03-1-16, 55.03-1-15, and 55.03-1-14 ("the Property"); and, WHEREAS, under the terms of said agreement, the purchase price for the Property is $315,000 and the option must be exercised on or before February 28, 1997; and, WHEREAS, the agreement provides for settlement within 30 days of the notice of exercise of the Option, but possession by the County (or its assignee) is subject to the condition that Eva Burritt will be entitled to retain possession of the buildings for storage of personal belongings and property until May 31, 1997, with access thereto, unless the S-/ County/IDA, at its expense, moves the personal property to a bonded storage facility and bears the cost of storage through May 31, 1997, if possession of the buildings or commencement of construction is necessary prior to that date; and, WHEREAS, the property is necessary for relocation and construction of Garman Road, and the funds are available to the IDA in the Kroger -IDA account as appropriated by the Board on January 28, 1997; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to §15.1-511.1 of the Code of Virginia (1950, as amended), the Board of Supervisors is authorized to donate and assign its rights under said Option to Purchase Agreement to the IDA, in order for the IDA to fulfill the County's and the IDA's obligations under the above-described performance agreement in furtherance of the purposes for which the IDA was created; and, WHEREAS, Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter directs that the acquisition and conveyance of real estate interests be accomplished by ordinance; the first reading of this ordinance was held on February 11, 1997; the second reading was held on February 25, 1997. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Option to Purchase Agreement dated January 27,1997, between Eva M. Burritt, Grantor, and the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, Grantee, and the terms and conditions provided for in said agreement, is hereby approved and the execution of said agreement by the County Administrator is hereby authorized and ratified. 2 J-/ 2. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to exercise the option to purchase from Eva M. Burritt the following described real estate, to-wit: All those certain lots or parcels of land together with any improvements thereon, rights incident thereto, and appurtenances thereunto belonging, situate in the County of Roanoke, Virginia, on the south side of U.S. Route 11/460 being designated and described as 5 feet of lot 14, the eastern 25 feet of lot 14, lot 13, and lot 12 on the map of Fort Lewis Estates recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Plat Book 3, Page 51, reference to which is hereby made for a further description of said property, said real estate being further shown and designated upon the Roanoke County land records as Tax Map Numbers 55.03-1-17, 55.03-1- 16, 55.03-1-15, and 55.03-1-14. 3. That, upon exercise of the option, the County Administrator is hereby authorized and directed to assign the County's contract rights under said Agreement to the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, which shall proceed with purchase of the Property for the sum of $315,000, subject to the terms and conditions provided in the Agreement, and the IDA shall assume all obligations and responsibilities of the County provided for in the Agreement. 4. That the County Administrator or Assistant County Administrators are hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions on behalf of Roanoke County in this matter as are necessary to accomplish the exercise of the option and assignment of the contract to the IDA, all of which shall be approved as to form by the County Attorney. 5. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption. c:\...agenda\econdev\burritt.ord 3 ,S-~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERV*SORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1997 ORDINANCE 022597-7 AOTHORIZING CONVEYANCE OF A SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT TO THE TOWN OF VINTON ACROSS STONEBRIDGE PARR PROPERTY OWNED BY THE BOARD OF BUPERVISORB WHEREAS, the Town of Vinton has requested an easement for sanitary sewer purposes across property owned by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, one parcel being located southwest of Tulip Lane (Va. Route #1017) and three parcels lying northeast of Tulip Lane and south of Mountain View Road (Va. Route #651), said property being known as Stonebridge Park in the Vinton Magisterial District of the County of Roanoke, Virginia; and, WHEREAS, the Town of Vinton requires the easement to extend sanitary sewer service to existing and future residences in the general area, and initially to the subdivision of Wolf Creek; and, WHEREAS, the location of the proposed easement would not interfere with organized activities at the Park and would have little or no impact on future use and development of the Park; 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 Town of Vinton and of the County of Roanoke. 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 February 11, 1997; and a second reading was held on February 25, 1997. 2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Charter of Roanoke County, the interests in real estate to be conveyed are hereby declared to be surplus, and are hereby made available for other public uses by conveyance to the Town of Vinton for the provision of sanitary sewer service. 3. That donation of an underground easement, twenty feet (20') in width, for sanitary sewer purposes across and through the properties known as Stonebridge Park, the location being shown and designated as "NEW 20' SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT" and "NEW SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT" upon the plat showing 'New Sanitary Sewer Easement Being Granted To The Town Of Vinton By Roanoke County Board Of Supervisors,' dated August 8, 1996, prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C., Engineers-Surveyors-Planners, is hereby authorized. 4. That the County Administrator or an Assistant County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such further actions as may be necessary to accomplish this conveyance, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. 5. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption. On motion of Supervisor Nickens to adopt the ordinance with editorial change suggested by Supervisor Eddy, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None 2 A COPY TESTE: %'~Yl-Q~tc~• Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Pete Haislip, Director of Parks and Recreation Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Gary Robertson, Director, Utilities Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney Terry Harrington, Director of Planning & Zoning 3 ACTION NO. ITEM NO. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 25, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING CONVEYANCE OF A SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT TO THE TOWN OF VINTON ACROSS STONEBRIDGE PARK PROPERTY OWNED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~ry~ /f~~~ ~~ .~,~C EXECUTIVE SUrIlKARY This is the second reading of the proposed ordinance to authorize donation of an easement to the Town of Vinton for extension of underground sanitary sewer service through the County's Stonebridge Park properties (Tax Map Nos. 61.02-1-51, 61.02-1-53, 61.02-1-54, and 61.02-1-55). SUNIlKARY OF INFORMATION: The Town of Vinton has requested an easement, twenty feet (20') in width, for sanitary sewer purposes across the Stonebridge Park properties in the Vinton Magisterial District of Roanoke County. The location of said easement is shown and designated as "NEW 20' SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT" and "NEW SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT" upon the plat showing 'New Sanitary Sewer Easement Being Granted To The Town Of Vinton By Roanoke County Board Of Supervisors,' dated August 8, 1996, prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C., Engineers- Surveyors-Planners, partial copies of which are attached hereto. The Town of Vinton requires the easement to extend sanitary sewer service to existing and future citizen residences in the general area, and initially to the new development in Wolf Creek Subdivision. Roanoke County staff has checked the proposed easement and has determined that it would not interfere with organized activities at the Park and would have little or no impact on future use and development of the Park. Staff recommends that the requested S- ~. easement be granted to serve the interests of the public, subject to the following conditions which have been incorporated into the proposed easement agreement: (a) That the Town of Vinton agrees to restore and repair any damage to the County's property which may be caused by the construction, operation, or maintenance of said easement, including but not limited to grading the easement area to a smooth and level contour, reseeding the area, and otherwise restoring the area to a stable condition, in connection with any construction, operation or maintenance activities. (b) That all construction, operation and maintenance activities be in compliance with Erosion and Sediment Control laws, regulations and guidelines, particularly for protection of the stream water quality. (c) That the Town of Vinton shall coordinate scheduling and construction with Roanoke County Parks and Recreation Department to minimize impact on recreation activities in Stonebridge Park. FISCAL IMPACTS' Consideration for the proposed easement is the sum of $1.00. ALTERNATIVES' (1) Adopt the proposed ordinance authorizing the County Administrator to execute the necessary documents for donation of the sanitary sewer easement to the Town of Vinton. (2) Decline to authorize donation of the easement and request from the Town of Vinton the fair market value as consideration for the purchase of the easement. (3) Decline to authorize donation or conveyance of the easement. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board adopt the proposed ordinance as provided in Alternative #1. Respectfully submitted, Pete Haislip Parks & Recreation Director Approved by, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ~~~ ------------------------------------------------------------------ ACTION VOTE Approved ( ) Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied ( ) Eddy Received ( ) Harrison Referred ( ) Johnson To Minnix Nickens t ~ 1 '.\ J' usale>yT .02-1-Si• AND (61.02-1-54 I DISTANCE N 106.19 M 71.89 64.38 W 277.61 153.08 W 93.96 W 19.32 W 289.95 • _ / y ~'. \ • / _ •• i •/ 12 ~ it '\.* ~~ s, ~ •. ~', i / ~ 13 / ; ~ ~ r i r ~ r. \ r r `• ~ •• , ~ _ EDGE-10NT ~ •, , i . OF 14 ~: ~ ~ TAx • WNTON ~ ~ •~ ~ \ GROSS ' SECnON 1 ~ _ _ _ _ ~ ~ .y D.B. CUAYE TABLE TANGENT CHORD BEARING DELTA 52.54 99.06 548'36 10 E 39'15 11 33.64 65.60 541'49 40 E 25'4210 103.06 140.00 507'19 03 W 45'37 47 188.30' 21 .91' 502'10' 7' 87'5 '46' 1 4 239.91 503'51 13 w 1555 28 BLOCK 1 - ' ~ P.B. 16. PG. 41 1 i ~ C •• r 13 ~ ~` ~~ • ~ . ~ ~. • ~ ~ ,~ r.:. / ~ ~ ~ Iz° i i .. PARCEL ~F• / ~ ~ .. ... ~ ~ TAX/ 61.02-1-33 ~ 16 ~ .•.~ ; R.C.8.5. P.B. 9. PG. 204 • / / ~ ` • ; 'tii ~ ' ~. D.B. 1176. PG 93 ~ '. ~ 10'.TYPICAI' . ' 17 \ ~ ~ , r i i ; r , . ~ •, i ~ / z r r ~• i 1$ ~ r r i ~ • r ' ' ~ i ~ • ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ` ~ r r .. r ~ / '. ~, 1 '. • ,p~~j9 i i• TA,X/ 61.02-1-S1 / ~ ; R.C.8.3. • • ~ ~ D.B. 867, PG. 801 • PARCEL 'G' ~ ~ F TAXJ 61.02-1-52.1 ~ i \ i r •. - • ROANOKE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD ~ ~>~ •i i ' P.B. 9. PC. 191 4. r ' ' D.B. 1184, PG. 1520 ~ ~ ~ ' ' ~G • `83.'1 ~ ~ 7 ...i 'a ~ \~'y .~ 281 ~ ~ ~ i ~~~~~`.. ~, .' .:.:•~.: ,'~ •. . ' ~ •~ / / ~r~glo` ~ \ • . TAX/R.C.B.S.1-34 •• a• : • . t ~ • 4 ' \ . / / ~ ~ ~~ ' .P.B. 9, PG.: 204 ~ •: .` +•, : ~. ` EXISTING ~~~ i~/~ i 1'. n n ------ ;--••Ew Tw • ~ `~• A •` ~y9 13' S.S.E ~ ~ ~ I ~, . i S C D E. .. =~ ~(.~ ~ ~ ~ P.H. 9, PG 281 ~ ~ O • . P.B. 9. PG 281 r i ~ ~ ~ ~ ------' .::'~ ~ ~ i ; AIMr /AAf~'A111' n ' :~ ~ ~ LU TAX/ 61.02-1-55 ~ ~ ~J~(r'M u : ~ .~ ., .... ''. v • ~ , ~ ~~~JJJJJ t- TAX/ 81.02-1-32.2 R.C.B.S ~ , f Ew571NC D.E. l - COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD .01' ROANOKE CO. ~ ,' P.B.. 9. PG 204 ~ ~ _ P.B. 9. PG 281 S~ 0.8. 1184, PG .1320' No. '• ~ ~ .. • ~ TAX /61.11-1-47J~ ~ e. . • . , •. n n -n nr we. , ~w~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1997 ORDINANCE AIITHORIZING CONVEYANCE OF A SANITARY SEWER EASBMENT TO THE TOWN OF VINTON ACROSS STONEBRIDGE PARR PROPERTY OWNED HY THE HOARD OF SIIPERVI80RB WHEREAS, the Town of Vinton has requested an easement for sanitary sewer purposes across property owned by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, one parcel being located southwest of Tulip Lane (Va. Route #1017) and three parcels lying northeast of Tulip Lane and south of Mountain View Road (Va. Route #651), said property being known as Stonebridge Park in the Vinton Magisterial District of the County of Roanoke, Virginia; and, WHEREAS, the Town of Vinton requires the easement to extend sanitary sewer service to existing and future residences in the general area, and initially to the subdivision of Wolf Creek; and, WHEREAS, the location of the proposed easement would not interfere with organized activities at the Park and would have little or no impact on future use and development of the Park; 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 Town of Vinton in the County of Roanoke. 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 February 11, 1997; and a second reading . Sa was held on February 25, 1997. 2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Charter of Roanoke County, the interests in real estate to be conveyed are hereby declared to be surplus, and are hereby made available for other public uses by conveyance to the Town of Vinton for the provision of sanitary sewer service. 3. That donation of an underground easement, twenty feet (20') in width, for sanitary sewer purposes across and through the properties known as Stonebridge Park, the location being shown and designated as "NEW 20' SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT" and "NEW SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT" upon the plat showing 'New Sanitary Sewer Easement Being Granted To The Town Of Vinton By Roanoke County Board Of Supervisors,' dated August 8, 1996, prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C., Engineers-Surveyors-Planners, is hereby authorized. 4. That the County Administrator or an Assistant County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such further actions as may be necessary to accomplish this conveyance, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. 5. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption. c:\...\agenda\parks\vinton.ord 2 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: February 25, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Appointments to Committees, Commissions and Boards c"OUN'1'Y ADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS: ~ Leag~,~e of Older Americans - Advisory Council The one year term of Frances R. Holsinger will expire March 31, 1997. Ms. Holsinger has moved to Roanoke City and is not eligible to represent Roanoke County after her term expires. ~ Teaque of Older Americans - Advisory Board The three year term of Murry K. White will expire March 31, 1997. Mr. White has advised the LOA that he does not plan to serve another term. The League of Older Americans will make a recommendation for this appointment which is then confirmed by the Board of Supervisors. They will contact the County when they have a recommendation for the vacancy. ~ social services Advisory Board The unexpired four-year term of Mary Anderson. Ms. Anderson resigned in January. Her term will expire August 1, 1997. SUBMITTED BY: /b` Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board APPROVED BY: ~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) Motion by: ACTION KI-3 VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy _ Harrison _ Johnson Minnix _ Nickens L-~ AT A REGIILAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SIIPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COIINTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TIIESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1997 RESOLIITION 022597-8 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS 8ET 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 February 25, 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 Item 1, as follows: 1. Approval of Minutes - January 14, 1997. 2. That the Clerk to the Board is hereby authorized and directed where required by law to set forth upon any of said items the separate vote tabulation for any such item pursuant to this resolution. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the Consent Resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None COPY TESTE: ~/ . G-f.L~e--~.-~- Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File L-/ January 14,1997 ~ Roanoke County Administration Center 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, Virginia 24018 January 14, 1997 The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, met this day at the Roanoke County Administration Center, this being the second Tuesday, and the first regularly scheduled meeting of the month of January, 1997. IN RE: CALL TO ORDER Chairman Johnson called the meeting to order at 3:00 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 Gardner W. Smith, Director of Development Services. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all present. January 14,1997 1 -~ FOR HIS SERVICE AS 1996 CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WHEREAS, Bob L. Johnson served as Chairman of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors during 1996; and WHEREAS, during Mr. Johnson's term as Chairman, the County achieved a variety of accomplishments, including: ~ Conclusion of the first phase of the Spring Hollow Water System, including dedication of the Water Treatment Plant and completion of the southwest County transmission lines. ~ Announcement of construction of the $102 million R.R. Donnelley and Sons printing facility in west County, projected to employ 310 people by the end of 1999 ~ Recognition from several state and national organizations, including two Achievement Awards from the National Association of Counties and the Communications Achievement Award from the Virginia Municipal League ~ Completion of the County's Visioning Process and beginning of the update to the County's Comprehensive Plan, designed to provide citizen input into the future development of Roanoke County ~ Beautification of the gateway areas of the County and specifically to the Williamson Road corridor through plantings, design guidelines and incentives to private citizens. WHEREAS, Mr. Johnson also served as Chairman of the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission during 1996; and WHEREAS, Mr. Johnson also worked diligently during his term to represent all the citizens of Roanoke County and to promote regional projects which would benefit all the residents of the Roanoke Valley. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, does hereby extend its deepest appreciation to Bob L. Johnson for his service as Chairman during 1996 and for his belief in democracy and participation by citizens in local government. 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 January 14,1997 -~ 2. Request that the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority fund a neighborhood park in Mayflower Hills community (Elmer C Hodge. County Administrator] R-011497-3 Mr. Hodge presented the history of the proposed park dating back to the 1970's, when the land on Rutrough Road was chosen as the most suitable site for a new landfill. At that time, the residents in the Mayflower Hills neighborhood were strongly opposed. In 1973, a comprehensive plan for a park that would be created after the landfill was closed was presented to the residents in the community. Plans included an ice skating rink, horse stables, extensive recreation fields, a boat dock and a marina. However, this park was never built after the landfill closed. The residents in Mayflower Hills have agreed not to pursue these original plans, and are instead requesting a smaller neighborhood park located between the church and the landfill entrance. Construction costs are estimated at $100,000. Roanoke County supports their request and is requesting that the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority agree to fund this park. Mr. Hodge requested that the Board adopt a resolution requesting that the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority provide the funds for the Mayflowers Hills neighborhood park. There are funds available set aside by the Authority to close out the Rutrough Road Landfill. Supervisor Nickens suggested amending the resolution that the January 14,1997 -~ 5 including: amulti-use ballfield with backstop; kiddie toys/swings area; picnic shelter with a water fountain, tables, restrooms and grill area; security lighting; and a half court basketball play area with one or two hoops; and WHEREAS the estimated cost of the neighborhood park is $80,000- $100,000; and WHEREAS commitments made during the siting of the former landfill are as important as current commitments made during the recent siting of the existing landfill; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia as follows: 1. That the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority is hereby requested to provide the funds for the Mayflower Hills neighborhood park in the amount of $80,000- $100,000 from funds set aside by the RVRA to close out the Rutrough Road landfill, and 2. That the Roanoke County Parks and Recreation Department will be responsible for design and construction of the neighborhood park, and 3. That the County Administrator and his staff are directed to meet with the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority to provide information and assistance in the implementation of this resolution, and 4. That the Clerk to the Board mail copies of this resolution to the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority, and 5. That the Clerk to the Board forward copies of this resolution to the City of Roanoke and the Town of Vinton. On motion of Supervisor Nickens to adopt resolution as amended and to forward copies to the City of Roanoke and Town of Vinton, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None 3. Request from Social Services for approval of a Welfare Reform Position. (Betty McCrary. Director of Social Services A-011497-4 January 14,1997 -~ r' space if the County constructs the counter that is necessary. The cost of the counter, cable and wiring is approximately $7,000, and staff is requesting appropriation of the funds from the Board Contingency Fund. Supervisor Nickens expressed support for the request but suggested that the funds be taken from the two departments, and that they be allowed to overrun their budgets. In response to a question from Supervisor Eddy, Mr. Hodge advised that Roanoke City is also paying a share of the expenses. Supervisor Nickens moved to approve construction of the counter with funding to be divided between Treasurer and Commissioner of Revenue's existing budgets; and that Board of Supervisors would allow them to overrun their budgets by $3,500. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None 5. 1997 Appointment of Board Members .to Committeess Commissions and Boards. (Mary Allen Clerk to the Board) A-011497-6 Ms. Allen advised that at the beginning of each year the Board of Supervisors makes appointments of the supervisors to various committees, commissions and boards. Since the chairman and vice chairman will remain the same and there are no new Board members, ~no specific changes have to be made at this January 14, 1997 -~ 9 ~~ H. ODELL MINNIX -- Social Services Advisory Board (4-year term expires 8/1/98) -- Audit Committee -- Metropolitan Planning Organization -Alternate (3-year term expires 7/1 /99) HARRY C. NICKENS -- Court Community Corrections Policy Board (3-year term expires 12/31/97) -- Roanoke Valley Regional Cable Television Committee -- Roanoke County Cable Television Committee -- Legislative Liaison to Virginia Association of Counties (As Vice- Chaiirman- -- Metropolitan Transportation District Study Commission 6. Request from the Fifth Planning District Commission to establish a Regional Alliance under the 1996 Virginia Regional Competitiveness Act. (Elmer C Hodge, CountkAdministratorl R-011497-7 Mr. Hodge reported that in 1996, the Board appointed Supervisor Lee Eddy and him to serve on the Fifth Planning District Commission Steering Committee to examine the process of developing a regional partnership for the 1996 Regional Competitiveness Act. The steering committee has recommended the formation of a Fifth Planning District Regional Alliance to act as the partnership to carry out the provisions of the Regional Competitiveness Act, and recommended the appointment of the chief elected official and the chief administrative official to serve as members of the organizing Board of Directors. This Board will be responsible for nominating other January 14, 1997 ~ 1 will also serve as a member of the Organizating Board of Directors. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, understands that: (1) The Organizing Board of Directors will nominate and select other Board members to carry out the provisions of the Regional Competitiveness Act. The Board of Directors will prepare and adopt the organization's bylaws; and (2) Specific recommendations for determining distribution of Regional Competitiveness funds must be endorsed by each governing body. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the Resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None 7. Request for resolution authorizing renewal of a lease of real estate for parking facilities at the Roanoke County Courthouse and Jail. (Elmer C Hodge, County Administrator) (CONTINUED FROM November 19, 19961 A-011497-8 Sheriff Holt presented a survey showing the number of vehicles currently using the parking lot and explained that are no other public parking facilities available in the City of Salem. Supervisor Nickens advised that he recognized the need for additional parking but felt it would be more appropriate for the users who visit the jail/courthouse to pay the cost and would not support the request. Supervisor Minnix agreed but said that he would support the request. January 14, 1997 Z~ ~~e~ ~~~,_-_~~~ _. m ~__ ~~~ _ ~_ ~_ _ __ ~_. _~~m~. _ ~ ~_ operates within three-fourths of a mile of the fixed route for buses within the boundaries of Roanoke city and riders pay $2.50 per one-way trip. RADAR also operates the Red Line service for the County with funding from the State and Federal government as a feeder service operating on a deviating route system. This program has had limited use. Mr. Hodge advised that staff recommends the following to minimize the impact to Roanoke County: (1) Eliminate the Red Line Service effective February 1, 1997 and apply any unspent money to the CORTRAN program; (2} Impose a fare of $2.50 per one-way trip effective July 1, 1997 to help offset the cost of this service which could generate $12,250 annually; (3) Purchase an additional 7 hours of service from CORTRAN which will cost $15,435 for the balance of the current fiscal year ($37,044 annually) to serve some of the riders displaced by the loss of the STAR service; (4) notify Valley Metro that we do not plan to subsidize the STAR service because it does not benefit the entire County. In response to a question from Supervisor Minnix, Mr. Chambliss advised that the changes would enable all citizens to be served by CORTRAN. Supervisor Eddy summarized a memo he sent to the Board members expressing his concerns and offering other suggestions. He suggested further research and development of a program to begin July 1, 1997. Supervisor Johnson moved to approve the staff recommendation as out lined above. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson .January 14,1997 RESOLUTION 011497-10 APPROVING THE SUBMISSION OF AN ISTEA TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM APPLICATION FOR THE HANGING ROCK BATTLEFIELD TRAIL, PHASE II BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia: WHEREAS, in accordance with Commonwealth Transportation Board construction allocation procedures, it is necessary that a request by resolution be received from the local government in order that the Virginia Department of Transportation program an enhancement project in the County of Roanoke, Virginia. WHEREAS, a public hearing was duly advertised and held on January 14,1997 to elicit citizen comment on this project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the County of Roanoke, Virginia, requests the Commonwealth Transportation Board to establish the following improvement project: Hanging Rock Battlefield Trail, Phase II BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the County of Roanoke, Virginia, is assured that the Hanging Rock Battlefield and Railway Preservation Foundation has identified a match of 20% of the total cost for planning and design, right of way, and construction of this project with donated land and easements, private funds, and in-kind services. And, if the County of Roanoke, Virginia, or the Hanging Rock Battlefield and Railway Preservation Foundation subsequently elects to cancel this project, the County of Roanoke, Virginia, and/or the Foundation, hereby agrees to reimburse the Virginia Department of Transportation for the total amount of the costs expended by the Department through the date the department is notified of such cancellation. 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 IN RE: FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance authorizing the creation of and financing for a Local Public Works Improvement Project, Eanes Road sanitarx sewer extension..~Ganr Robertson, Utility Director) January 14, 1997 7 ~ AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None Z. Qrdinance 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~..Utilit Director Mr. Robertson advised that the County owns a 0.52 acre lot fronting on Hunting Hills Drive and that Bell Atlantic has requested an easement on the property to install and maintain an above ground cabinet. It will be installed at the rear of the booster station and Bell Atlantic agreed not to remove any existing shrubbery during installation or maintenance. Supervisor Eddy asked that Mr. Robertson provide photographs of the cabinet at the second reading and get assurances from Bell Atlantic that the site will be adequately screened. Supervisor Minnix 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 January 14, 1997 Supervisor Eddy (1) He was pleased with the article showing that the dropout rate had decreased in County Schools. (2) He asked about the plans to meet with Congressman Bob Goodlatte. Chairman Johnson announced that a meeting is set for January 28 at 4:30 p.m. (3) He received a notice from the Fifth Planning District Commission abou# a seminar on wireless communication and plans to attend. He suggested that the staff attend also. (4) He advised that giving taxing authority to the School Boards was discussed by the School Boards Association. Mr. Hodge advised that John Chambliss attended that meeting and will prepare a report. (5) He advised that he received a letter from the Department of Environmental Quality about a discharge permit for Marathon Oil. Mr. Hodge responded that the staff has reviewed this and received no comments back, but he will check further. (6) He noted that the Roanoke Valley may be named a "non at#ainment area" because of air quality standards. He asked that staff research this and report back. (7) He asked about the request for a posted speed reduction on Twelve O'Clock Knob Road. Mr. Hodge responded that he met with VDOT and asked them to review again. VDOT has agreed to reduce the speed limit to 45 mph and add curve warning signs, and VDOT is also working to resolve speed problems on Bandy Road. (8) He sent out a memorandum on December 23 about the Total Quality Management books he requested staff to order and recommended that other Board members read them. (9) He was pleased to see the editorial about the Year of the Mountain endeavor and urged support for the effort. Supervisor Johnson: (1) He was pleased to hear that Governor Allen January 14,1997 ~ ~ ~ww_ _--___u~w~wv_~ _~~_.x_.~ _~~_~a~~~ ~ ~~.~~..~~..~_ ~~~~.m~ _._w . ~_ , ~ ~_ ~ ».~. e~~. _ . __ .~.~,.~~~m ~:.~-- _ ~w~__.~ ~ .~_ had agreed to accept the Goals 2000 money from the federal government. (2) He responded to Supervisor Eddy's memorandum on the expansion of I-81, stating that he felt the issue had been studied enough and that staff should conduct community meetings. (3) He noted that AMP will be closing their operations in Roanoke County and emphasized the importance of broadening our economic base. He requested a report in February or March on the subject. IN RE: REPORTS Supervisor Minnix moved to receive and file the following reports. The motion carried by a unanimous voice vote. 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance 3. Board Contingency Fund 4. Statement of Revenues and Expenditures as of November 30, 1996 5. Statement of the Treasurer's Accountability per Investments and Portfolio Policy as of December 31, 1996 IN RE: WORK SESSIONS 1. Six-vear Secondary System Construction Plan and Revenue Sharing Priority List. GENERAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Amount Beginning Balance at July 1, 1996 (unaudited) $7,176,332 Add to Fund Balance from 1995-96 operations 1,440,559 Revised beginning balance at July 1, 1996 (audited) 8,616,891 Oct 8,1996 Public -Private Partnership Nov 19,1996 Valley Gateway Project Jan 28, 1997 Kroger Project Jan 28, 1997 Kroger Project - IDA Feb 11, 1997 Year 2000 - 2 positions Balance at February 25, 1997 (250,000) (599,250) (460,083) (450,000) (31,850) $6,825,708 Changes below this line are for information and planning purposes only. Balance from above $6,825,708 Recommended increase in 1996-97 budgeted revenues based upon 6 month review 3,355,509 Reserve for R.R. Donnelly - Phase II (570,000) Reserve for Valley Gateway sewer extension (150,000) Potential Liability (400,000) $9,061,217 7.92% 7.54% 10.01 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, ~~~. Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance D'-/ of General Fund Revenues M:\Finance\Common\Board\Gen96.WK4 -~ CAPITAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIIZGINIA Amount Beginning Balance at July 1, 1996 (unaudited) $648,413.00 (Includes fmal 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 February 25, 1997 $1,113,043.00 Respectfully Submitted, Q,~.a,.,.. ~. ~~ Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance M:\Finance\Common\Board\Cap96.WK4 V-" RESERVE FOR BOARD CONTINGENCY COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Amount From 1996-97 Original Budget $305,313.00 August 27, 1996 Public-Private Partnership (105,220.00) 'October 22, 1996 County share of Sheriffpositions (11,842.00) October 22, 1996 Outside legal counsel for Sheriff (20,000.00) November 19, 1996 Environmental testing at Courthouse (14,015.45) December 17, 1996 Urban Partnership membership (5,000.00) January 14, 1997 Travel Assistance Grant Program (2,500.00) January 28, 1997 Masterplan for SW County Park (12,000.00) Balance at February 25, 1997 $134,735.55 Respectfully Submitted, ~~. ~. ~,~ Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance M:\Finance\Common\Board\Board96.WK4 d ACTION #. ITEM NUMBER ~- / AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 25, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Accounts Paid -January 1997 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Payments to Vendors: Payroll: $3,724,713.54 1/10/97 $634,278.43 1/24/97 $626,461.74 1/24/97 245.38 1,260,985.55 $4,985,699.09 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: y Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator . ~ ~ o- t/ Approved () Motion by No Yes Abs Denied () Eddy Received () Harrison Referred () Johnson To () Minnix Nickens • K ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER V S AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 25, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Update on Low Band Radio System for the Roanoke Valley COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: For several years, there has been discussion among the local valley governments, the Roanoke Valley Convention & Visitors Bureau and the Virginia Department of Transportation about the possibility of installing a low band radio system for tourist information and highway advisory bulletins. While all parties agree that this may be helpful to travelers driving through the Roanoke Valley and could potentially increase tourism, no decision has been made on whether to go forward with the project. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: On January 30,1997, the Virginia Department of Transportation held a meeting of local governments and business representatives to discuss the possibility of establishing a low band Travelers Information/Highway Advisory Radio System. The system would serve two purposes: (1) encourage travelers on Interstates 81 and 581, the Blue Ridge Parkway and Route 220 to participate in activities in the Roanoke Valley; and (2) provide information concerning unusual traffic conditions to motorists using the highways. The equipment would consist of low wattage AM broadcast units with a range of about 2.5 miles. Signs would be placed along the major highways to advise motorists of the broadcast. The Virginia Department of Transportation has indicated a willingness to provide its share of initial and maintenance costs to install the system in exchange for use of the system to broadcast unusual traffic situations. They also suggested installation on the Blue Ridge Parkway at a later date. The Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau has agreed to be responsible for maintaining the tourism-related messages. One of the local governments would have to be responsible for obtaining the FCC license. VDOT estimates the cost of installation at between $50,000 and $90,000. Annual maintenance costs are estimated to be approximately $10,000 which could also be shared between the local o-j governments. Issues that have not yet been addressed include: 1. VDOT recommends sharing these costs between all participating local governments and VDOT, but do not propose a formula for allocation of the costs. 2 Until it is determined which governments are interested in participation, the actual cost is unknown. Only the Cities of Roanoke and Salem have expressed a willingness to consider this project. 3. Does the $50,000 to $90,000 total cost include placing units on the Blue Ridge Parkway? 4. VDOT suggests placing the units on existing facilities owned by the local governments. The only facility in the County located within the 2.5 mile radius of the interstate is the Public Service Center. Therefore, this would rule out use in the County unless additional land were purchased. 5. If the Blue Ridge Parkway is not included until later as VDOT has suggested, the radio system would provide little benefit to Roanoke County. Our primary tourism activities are the Blue Ridge Parkway and Explore Park, accessed from the Blue Ridge Parkway. If the Board of Supervisors supports participation in the low band radio system, funding should be considered during the budget process, contingent upon the participation of the other localities in the Roanoke Valley. However, this project has not been a high priority with any of the local governments in the past. Respectfully Submitted by: / ` ~~.- Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ---------------------------------------------------------------- Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) ACTION Motion by: VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy Harrison Johnson Minnix Nickens d4 /~~Qda/ glef'Y'J. ~9 (I ~ ~~~,ti . c~Pyha 1Y~~` DAVID R. GEHR COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1401 EAST BROAD STREET RICHMOND, 23219-1939 February 5, 1997 Mr. Elmer C. Hodge Roanoke County P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 Dear Mr. Hodge: o-~ JAMES S. GIVENS S7ATE SECONDARY ROADS ENGINEER The enclosed report contains a list of all changes to the Secondary System of State Highways in your county approved by the State Secondary Roads Engineer in January 1997. All additions to and abandonments from the Secondary System are effective the day they are approved by the State Secondary Roads Engineer. This date appears in the far right column of the monthly report. These changes will be presented to the Commonwealth Transportation Board at its monthly meeting on February 20,1997. If you have any questions or comments about this report, please call Martin Law at 786-7399. James S. Givens State Secondary R ds Engineer JSG/MII TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY n ~O vi 0 'Z~Q w '~ O Oa w w d U `~ ^O W a~ U W W W ~ ~ 0 r+ a Ca O ~ ~ Q ~i y ~ ~ ~ ~..i C. /r a Q F C O i. ~I ~i s z w i C O .~ .; a u ~o ~. a, o~ n s v 8 ''^~^ VI o 0 0 0 0 N M M M M M ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C~ 01 ~ o~ ~ O~ T of ~ ~ O~ ~ .-. O~ ~ ~ r. 01 ~ ~ .-r T ~ .--i O\ ~ .-. O~ ~ ,~ ~ ~-+ O O O ~--~ M O O O O O O O O ~ 'C v a. .r L ~ N o ^. ~ d (Y. ~ O y ~i C Z ~ U on o ~ o N ~ ~ d M 00 00 N 7 o0 [~ l~ ~ ~ ,y M "~"' \O 00 00 ~ .--~ r ~i ~i Qi Qi Qi O ~i N M rh ~ _ N N ~ ... Y ~ Y QC QQ a + CQ r-I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~r y y .~ .L~i y Y ~ y ~+ ~ ~ 3 3 z 3 N ~ N N ?? N ~ N N . a~ M ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ , r O O o . . 0 C O O ~. O O O l~ l~ N M N ~O O l~ ~O ~ ~ ~ 00 ~ N N fA Y N -- ~ 5 tr ~ '~ N ~ ~. o taV ~ b " ~ s ~ ^' a ~, a a s > d Q s 3 `~ 0 0 0 o c C7 C7 C7 ;: U U [ a ~ 0 0 ' 0 ' .o w ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a a a w a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 .y .~ .Y .Y .Y .Y b b b b b d a 0 3 0 .~ b b o-~ Action No. Item No. ~L *_ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 25, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Conveyance of property to Hanover Direct ~OIINTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: The conveyance of this 1 S acres to Hanover Direct has already been agreed to by the Board, and staff has been authorized to execute any necessary documents. I am bringing this information to you because of the time that has elapsed and because of the recent layoffs made by Hanover. This parcel is located behind the existing building and does not have easy access by anyone other than Hanover. I am also pleased to note that the project has exceeded and continues to exceed the payback that was agreed to . This has been a good project for Roanoke County. E = 1 ; L ~~ ~~ , ICI ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I # Hanover Direct, Roanoke County and its Industrial Development Authority (IDA) entered into a Performance Agreement in February of 1994 for their Hollins Road project. The Performance Agreement stipulated such items as expected investment and employment levels, incentives and time lines. Regarding employment and investment by Hanover, please note The following: Date Hourly 12/01/96 468 12/31/96 370 FTE Employment Salaried Total 38 33 Required 506 325 403 325 Land & Building Other Investment Required $7,000,000 5,000,000 Actual $11,040,200 5,488,874 Based on this information, Hanover Direct has exceeded their obligations as stipulated under the Performance Agreement. Therefore, as agreed, Hanover Direct has requested that The County/IDA convey the fifteen (15) acre site described in the Performance Agreement as the "Hinman Estate Site" to Hanover. d-? SUNIl~IARY OF INFORMATION: Hanover Direct has met the investment and hiring levels as required by the January 1994 Performance Agreement and has requested the County/IDA to convey the fifteen (15) acre site to Hanover for potential development. As agreed to under the terms and conditions of the Performance Agreement, the property will be conveyed to Hanover Direct. Respect ully submitted: Approved: ~~ Brian T. Duncan Elmer C. Hodge Assistant Director, Economic County Administrator Development ---------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION No Yes Abs Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Motion by: Eddy Johnson Harrison Minnix Nickens V J~ Mr. Timothy W. Gubala Director of Economic Development Roanoke County Economic Development Office Post Office Box 29800 5204 Bernard Drive, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24018-0798 Re: Hanover Direct, Inc. Dear Mr. Gubala: February 12, 1997 ~~1~~616~t8~9?~ O ~ry ~ ,N w N O W ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ms ~ ~ti a ~ ti ~' ~~l `~ L£0£6Z Pursuant to the Revised Performance Agreement (the "Agreement")between The County of Roanoke (the "County"), the Industrial Development Authority of Roanoke County, Virginia (the "Authority"), and Hanover Direct, Inc. ("Hanover"), this is to request that the fifteen (15) acre site described in the Agreement as the "Hinman Estate Site" be conveyed by the Authority to Hanover. We understand this letter will serve as notice to the Authority that Hanover has satisfied all of its obligations under the Agreement. Thank you for your assistance. Please call me if further information is required. Very truly yours, ~~, - ~~ ~~ /~` I Michael G. Lutz Executive Vice President, Operations ~-" This Revised Performance Agreement, made and entered into this 22nd day of February, 1994, by and between the COUNTY OF ROANOKE (hereinafter referred to as "County"); and THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA (hereinafter referred to as "Authority"); and HANOVER DIRECT, INC. (hereinafter referred to as "Company"). - , , WITNESSETH WHEREAS, the County, the Authority and the Company have entered into a Performance Agreement dated January 7, 1994; and WHEREAS, in said Performance Agreement, the Company agreed to purchase 38.04 acres of real estate known as the "Friendship Manor Project" and the Authority agreed to purchase fifteen (15) acres of real estate known as the "Friendship Manor Site"; and WHEREAS, soil conditions on the Friendship Manor Site have rendered it unsuitable for the development as planned by the Company and the Authority has not purchased the "Friendship Manor Site"; and WHEREAS, the Company still intends to develop its project on the Friendship Manor Project; WHEREAS, the parties have located a fifteen (15) acre site adjacent to the Friendship Manor Project; and - WHEREAS, the parties wish to modify the Performance Agreement dated January 7, 1994, to provide for the new site; and b-~ WHEREAS, by these actions, the County and the Authority desire to promote and encourage the economic development of Roanoke County, Virginia and the Roanoke Valley by the recruitment of new industry for 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 Company desires to support these economic development efforts of the County and the Authority by relocating and establishing corporate facilities in the County. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the covenants and obligations herein contained, the parties covenant and agree as follows: 1. The County hereby agrees to appropriate the sum of Two Hundred Seventy-Five Thousand Seven Hundred Thirty-Five and 00/100 Dollars ($275,735.00) to the Authority in order that the Authority may meet its obligations to the Company as provided herein. The obligations of the Authority under this Agreement are contingent upon the appropriation and receipt of funds to it by the County to cover the cost of acquisition and all other costs of the Authority involved with this transaction. 2. The Authority shall purchase fifteen (15) acres of real estate for Two Hundred Seventy-Five Thousand Seven Hundred Thirty-Five Dollars and 00/ 100 ($275,735.00) known as the "Hinman Estate Site." This site is further described as a portion of tax map parcel 38.16-1.3-1, and is generally identified on the map attached 2 ~-~ hereto. The Authority will retain ownership of this fifteen (15) acre tract of real estate subject to the rights of the Company under this Agreement. The Authority shall convey said real estate to the Company, at no cost to it, if the Company satisfies all of its obligations under this Agreement. ("No cost" is defined to include costs for acquisition of land, recordation taxes, and fees for recording the deed.) Each party shall be responsible for its own attorney fees. The Company represents to the County and the Authority that it shall acquire approximately 38.04 acres of real estate adjacent to the Hinman Estate Site described above for the construction of its proposed warehousing and distribution facilities, known as the "Friendship Manor Project". The County agrees that it will bear the cost of all subdivisions required to effect these transactions. The Authority agrees to bear all costs and fees associated with the closings of the Hinman Estate Site transactions, excepting the Hinman heir's responsibility to pay recordation costs applicable to Grantor and costs of preparing the deed. The Parties understand from the owners of the Hinman Estate Site that an abandoned cemetery is located on said property. The Company requires the cemetery to be relocated to another place on the fifteen (15) acres comprising the Hinman Estate Site. The Authority agrees that it will be responsible for all legal fees and costs associated with the relocation of said cemetery, with the Company being responsible for all necessary costs associated with the physical relocation of said cemetery. 3 a~ The Company agrees to bear all costs associated with any geotechnical and environmental testing desired by it on the Hinman Estate Site. In no event shall any conveyance of the real estate identified as the Hinman Estate Site by the Authority to the Company occur until the Company has constructed its proposed warehousing and distribution facilities for the Friendship Manor Project; and until (a) the Company has achieved its proposed investment and employment goals, as contained herein, or (b) the Company has paid to the Authority the loss of anticipated tax revenues as provided in paragraph 9. The Company shall notify in writing the Authority that it has satisfied all of its obligations hereunder, or that said obligations have not been satisfied and that the Company is tendering the payment of the loss of anticipated tax revenues, and by such notification, request the conveyance of the real estate to it from the Authority. Such conveyance shall occur within thirty (30) days of such notification and receipt of lost tax revenues (if any). The Authority reserves the right to extend such time period for an additional thirty (30) days in order to verify that the obligations have been satisfied. The mutual obligations of the Company and the Authority to acquire the real estate described herein are contingent upon each party entering into a contract for the purchase of the real estate described herein with the current owner, upon compliance with all County subdivision requirements, and upon receipt by the Company of opinions of counsel from the County and the Authority, in form and substance acceptable to the Company, as to the enforceability of the obligations of the County and 4 V the Authority undertaken by this Agreement. The County agrees to provide the Company with written verification that the Friendship Manor Project and the Hinman Estate Site tracts of real estate comply with County subdivision requirements and that the Friendship Manor Project fronts on a State secondary road. Closing on the Hinman Estate Site to be acquired by the Authority shall occur within 45 days of the date of the closing by the Company on the Friendship Manor Site. 3. The County and the Company acknowledge that certain improvements to the public road system are necessary for the future economic success of this project. To assist the Company in achieving its goals and to improve the overall economic development and public infrastructure goals of the County, the County shall make its best effort to accomplish the following: a) With respect to the improvements to the intersection at Plantation Road (State Primary Route 115) and Hollins Road (Secondary Route 601), it is the County's understanding that this highway project has been approved as a primary road project for the current fiscal year, and the Virginia Department of Transportation will construct the necessary improvements to this intersection; b) , With respect to secondary road improvements to Hollins Road (Secondary Route 601), the County shall commit a portion of its allocation of secondary road funds over the next two fiscal years to improve and widen that portion of this road necessary for providing improved road access to the Company's site; 5 o-? To assist in these road projects the Company agrees to donate to the County or to the Commonwealth of Virginia real estate as may be necessary to accomplish these public road projects, either from the acreage identified in paragraph 2 of this • agreement, or from other acreage owned by the Company. 4. The Friendship Manor Project is zoned. I-1C and the Hinman Estate Site is zoned I-l. A copy of the ordinance adopted by the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors rezoning the Friendship Manor Project, including a copy of the proffered conditions is attached hereto. Based upon the representations by the Company as to its proposed uses for the Friendship Manor Project and the Hinman Estate Site tracts of real estate, the zoning of this real estate allows for the uses of the Company warehousing and distribution facilities. The Authority shall extend the public water line to the Friendship Manor Project and the Hinman Estate Site. It is estimated that this water line extension project will cost One Hundred Eighty Thousand Dollars ($180,000). This water line extension project shall be at no cost to the Company. Utility connection fees (water, sewer, and fire), if any, shall be credited to the water line extension project in accordance with County policies. It is estimated that utility connection fees (water, sewer, fire) shall not exceed Fifty Thousand Dollars ($50,000). These utility connection fees (water, sewer, fire) shall be at no cost to the Company. 5. The County shall apply to the Virginia Department of Economic Development for a Three Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollar ($350,000) grant from the Governor's Opportunity Fund for site improvements. 6 c~-~ 6. The Virginia Department of Economic Development/Work Force Services Division has represented to the County and the Authority that it will fund full time job training for employees of the Company in the amount of Five Hundred Dollars ($500) per FTE (Full Time Equivalent -- where an employee works thirty (30) hours or more per week, with eligibility for benefits), not to exceed Three Hundred Thousand Dollars ($300,000). 7. Within three (3) years from the date of the closing on the real estate to be acquired by the Authority, the Company agrees to invest a minimum of $12,000,000 in plant and equipment associated with the Friendship Manor Project, as follows: Land and buildings $ 7,000,000 Capital equipment 3,000,000 Computer & telemarketing equipment & related software 2,000,000 Total $12,000,000 The Company agrees to erect a building of at least 450,000-square feet as its warehousing and distribution facility at the Friendship Manor Project. If the computer and telemarketing equipment and related software is located at the Company's facility in Botetourt County, then the land and buildings and capital equipment investments will be increased by the Company so that the total investment in Roanoke County is $12,000,000.00. 7 o-~ 8. The Company agrees to hire a minimum number of employees at the Friendship Manor Project for the purposes and within the time limits specified as follows: 1995 1996 FTE 276 325 An FTE (Full Time Equivalent) is an employee scheduled for thirty hours of work per week with eligibility for Company benefits. 9. If the Company does not meet both the investment and employment goals within the timetable set forth in this Performance Agreement, then the Company agrees to reimburse the Authority for a pro rata share of all items included in the County's and Authority's inducement package. A. The formula for calculating this reimbursement for investment is based upon the Company's percentage of completion of the project investment and the County's projected loss of anticipated tax revenues (assuming a three year return on public investment as shown on the attached Exhibit A), based upon the difference between the Company's proposed investment goals contained herein and the actual investment of the Company. The loss of anticipated tax revenues shall be deemed to be the purchase price for Hinman Estate Site. For example, assuming the Company constructs a building in the middle of FY 1994-95 with a value of $4,725,550 (75% of the proposed $6,300,735 value building); installs capital equipment valued at $2,250,000 (75 % of the proposed 8 a~ $3,000,000); and installs computer equipment, computer software and telemarketing equipment valued at $1,500,000 (75% of the proposed $2,000,000) in FY 1994-95. Then the reimbursement to the County shall be $44,500 for loss of anticipated real estate taxes for the building, $25,312 loss of anticipated personal property tax/machinery and tools, and $26,250 loss of anticipated personal property tax on computer equipment. This payment would occur at the end of FY 1996-97. Notwithstanding the foregoing, however, if the County receives the full amount of its anticipated tax revenue associated with the Friendship Manor Project, then a failure by the Company to meet the minimum investment in one or more category(ies) will not trigger the reimbursement mechanism of this Agreement. B. If the Company fails to meet its FTE projections by more than ten percent, the Company will reimburse the County fifty percent of its per job investment amount. For example, if the County provides incentives totaling $507,778 or S1,840 per FTE as projected for 1995, and in turn the Company creates 210 FTE jobs, the Company would pay the County $34,960. A) 276 -28 248 -210 38 B) $507,778 276 $ 1,840 x 50% $ 920 1995 projected FTE 10% forgiveness 1995 adjusted FTE Actual FTE Lost FTE County investment 1995 projected FTE Per FTE investment amount Reimbursement rate Per FTE reimbursement amount 9 ,~ (~-'~1 C) $ 920 Per FTE reimbursement amount x 38 Lost FTE $ 34,960 .Amount owed County Should the Company fail to meet its goal for either or both years, then the reimbursements shall be paid to the County for each year the Company falls short of its employment goals. 10. The Company may .assign its obligations to acquire the real estate described herein to another entity or person controlled by it. Should that occur, the Company agrees that it shall remain responsible for the achievement of the investment and employment goals within the timetable described herein and payment of any reimbursements required by a failure to met said goals. 11. This Revised Performance Agreement supersedes and replaces that Performance Agreement between the parties dated January 7, 1994. 12. This Agreement shall be governed by and all disputes related hereto shall be determined in accordance with the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA By _ ~_ its .. THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA By ~ _ its ~ G - - /di~t,A.t/ 10 o-~ HANOVER DIRECT, INC. By its 11 ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: AGENDA ITEM: February 25, 1997 Service Awards Presentation COUNTY ADMINISTRATORS COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: The Board of Supervisors recognizes employees for their years of service to the County. Employees are recognized for five years of service and successive five-year intervals. Employees are presented with a certificate of recognition at the Board of Supervisors' meeting and may select a service pin or other appropriate award through the Department of Human Resources following the ceremony. The list of 1996 service award recipients is attached for the presentation of service certificates. Following the presentation, a reception will be held to honor service award recipients and their families. We congratulate these dedicated employees. Respectfully submitted, S oseph J. Sgroi Director of Human Resources ACTION Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) Approved by, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator Motion by: .............. VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy Johnson Harrison Minnix Nickens SERVICE AWARDS -1996 5 Years Harold O. Minnix Board of Supervisors Mary K. Gardner Commissioner of the Revenue Donna B. Schaffer Clerk of Circuit Court Sue H. Hill Clerk of Circuit Court F. Robert Saul Clerk of Circuit Court John R. Emery Utility Nicholas E. Saunders Police Riley M. Shrewsbury Police Scott H. Smith Police Nancy R. Brown Sheriff -Prisoners Kevin C. Carroll Sheriff -Prisoners Alan L. Perdue Sheriff -Prisoners Dallas L. Nolen Sheriff -Prisoners Emily B. Totten Police Communications Garry R. Basham Police Communications Harold C. Chrimes Fire Joel C. Barfield Fire Nancy L. Hartberger Custodial Services Edith M. Jones Custodial Services Roger L. Holdren Buildings Maintenance Anthony H. Grubb Grounds Maintenance Jane S. Conner Library Sara S. Logan Library Karen J. daCosta Parks and Recreation Phyllis W. James Social Services -Social Workers Mary T. Hollingsworth Social Services -Social Workers Betty P. Shockley Social Services -Clerical Rosa M. Tingler Social Services -Clerical Melaine C. Haynes Social Services -Clerical 10 Years Richard H. Martin Vincent K. Copenhaver Kevin T. Newcomb Carol J. Reynolds Kenneth C. Hall Rebecca F. Mahone Clementine L. Cole Richard A. Dulaney Dean A. Wood Wayne A. Kingery Larry A. Boone Harry E. Karnes Brian K. Cook Daniel W. Foster John M. Williams A. Duane Palmer Thomas W. Kincaid David G. McMillan Sherlyn A. Matz Carl L. Booth Steven R. Martin Reva J. Adams Susan M. Fore Sharon L. Reynolds Scott C. Morgan David M. Hafey William D. Duff Michael W. Unroe Claude C. Pullen Jeffrey A. Lawson Joey T. Stump Thomas J. Bier Troy A. Gray Gary D. Huffman David W. Hogan John F. Murphy Cecil D. Showalter Priscilla D. Johnson Diana L. Rosapepe William L. Thorne Michael A. Metz Thomas G. Kerfoot SERVICE AWARDS -1996 Management Information Systems Central Accounting Utility Billing Commissioner of the Revenue Real Estate Assessment Clerk of Circuit Court Clerk of Circuit Court Utility Utility Utility Utility Utility Utility Utility Police Police Police Police Sheriff -Prisoners Sheriff -Prisoners Sheriff -Prisoners Sheriff- Prisoners -RETIRING FEB. 28, 1997 Police Communications Police Communications Fire Fire Fire Fire Fire Fire Fire Fire Fire Fire Fire Development Services Solid Waste Library Library Parks & Recreation Youth Haven II Social Services -Social Workers SERVICE AWARDS -1996 15 Years Harry C. Nickens Board of Supervisors Richard L. Rock Radio Communications Margaret E. Carver Procurement Linda P. Powell Commissioner of the Revenue Louise R. Eakin Real Estate Assessment Danny E. Spangler Utility Donald R. Carroll Utility Francis W. Burkart Commonwealth Attorney Michael J. Warner Police Paul B. McElvein Police Jeffrey M. Swortzel Police Linda C. Bolen Police Walter L. Delaney Sheriff -Civil Barry L. Tayloe Sheriff -Prisoners Floyd D. Sweetenberg Sheriff -Prisoners N. Geneva Wallace Sheriff -Prisoners Rodney P. Ferguson Fire Oather A. Covey Engineering Jean K. Clinevell Library Assistant -RETIREE Polly L. Yeager Parks and Recreation Donald E. Ford Parks and Recreation Paul E. Nester Parks and Recreation Starlena S. Patton Parks and Recreation Barbara G. Cosgrove Social Services -Eligibility Workers Barbara S. Bangura Social Services -Eligibility Workers SERVICE AWARDS -1996 20 Years Edna F. Lawson Darlene H. Adams R. Wayne Compton John W. Birckhead Mason W. Ferris Charles R. Hart Vickie G. McCorkle Stephen P. Huff Michael J. Simpson Dallas W. Parrish Billy H. McDaniel Phillip W. Carper Fannie S. Bolden Freddie L. Cooper Elizabeth B. Dennis William R. Hammond 25 Years Management Information Systems Procurement Commissioner of the Revenue Real Estate Assessment Utility -RETIREE Sheriff -Civil Sheriff -Civil Sheriff -Civil Sheriff -Prisoners General Services -RETIREE Buildings Maintenance Grounds Maintenance Library Library Parks and Recreation Social Services -Social Workers Linda S. Hogan Police Communications Ernest R. Miller Solid Waste Charles L. Paitsel Solid Waste Edward E. Burford Custodial Services 30 Years Joan A. Nelson Social Services -Social Workers 40 Years Mary E. Hicks County Administrator's Office ACTION NO ITEM NUMBER ~'~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADNIINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 25, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Budget Work Session on the Upcoming Annual Budget for FY 1997-98. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS SLTIvIlVIARY OF INFORMATION: This time has been set aside for a budget work session to discuss the FY 1997-98 budget. Respectfully submitted, Brent Robertson Budget Manager Approved by, ~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ACTION VOTE Approved () Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied O Eddy _ - Received O Harrison _ _ _ Referred O Johnson _ To O Minnix -- Nickens _ _ _ County of Roanoke Budget Work Session FY1997-98 2/25/97 Previous Board work sessions combined with team budget presentations have given staff a basis to begin formulating the County's expenditure budget for FY1997-98. As final requests are reviewed, a number of significant items and issues will have to be considered by staff and the Board before final adoption of the budget. Notable funding issues and contingencies that will warrant consideration are as follows: Known Increases (Decreases): Fiscal I Net Increased Debt Service-School Projects $140,000 Increased Tipping Fees (Based on 37,000 tons): Reduction of Participating Locality Credit 74,000 County's portion of revenue loss @ RVRA 111,000 VRS increase (pre-funding for COLA provisions): County Increase 150,000 School's Increase 600,000 Payroll/Human Resource System-Year 2000 project 150,000 BPOL revenue loss--General Assembly action (75,000) Issues for Consideration Reserving Current Revenues for Future School Capital $1,000,000 Economic Development Investmern 1,000,000 Salary Increases: County - ~ 0'7 O 260,000 Schools - ~ ~T p 640,000 Health Insurance increase (10%) $110, 000 Youth Haven II -state block grant no longer available $200K $320K m:~buciget~worlceee~\ws2-2s.97 5 AT A REGIILAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SIIPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COIINTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TIIESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1997 RESOLUTION 022597-9 CERTIFYING EBECUTIVE MEETING WAS HELD IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CODB OF VIRGINIA WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia has convened an executive meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provisions of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and WHEREAS, Section 2.1-344.1 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that such executive meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby certifies that, to the best of each members knowledge: 1. Only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the executive meeting which this certification resolution applies, and 2. Only such public business matters as were identified in the motion convening the executive meeting were heard, discussed or considered by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the Certification Resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Brenda J. Holton, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Executive Session 7= / ~~~~~.~ u~ ~ ~~,~~~~ CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION AWARDED TO ~~~~~~~~~~~ ~t. ~~~irr FOR BEING AWARDED THE LOCAL PLANNING OFFICIAL OF THE YEAR FOR 1996 BY THE VIRGINIA CHAPTER AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION ~ Mr. Watt has served on the Roanoke County Planning Commission since 1984 and served as Chairman in 1986, 1989, and 1993. ' ~ Mr. Witt has been instrumental in initiating several projects of local, regional and statewide significance and has been a vocal proponent of new and Innovative approaches to sohring problems and mitigating conflicts. ~ Mr. Witt was a key committee member in developing voluntary design guidelines for private properties bordering a National Park -the Blue Ridge Parkway. ~ As Chairman of the Commission, Mr. Witt created and promoted the Route 419 Development Plan - a corridor study of a heavily traveled major roadway in Roanoke County. ~ AM: Witt has been instrumental in the County's Comprehensive Plan revisions beginning with serving as a committee member on the Vsioning Steering Committee. Presented this 25th day of February i 1997 Signature Bob L. Johnson riff a~nnan, oano a oun oar o uperv~sors 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: February 25, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Report from the Economic Development Partnership of the Roanoke Valley on 1996 Activities ~ Ifs I V ~ 1.i ~ 1 ~ YIY ~ V! This time has been set aside for the annual briefing from the Economic Development Partnership of the Roanoke Valley to report on their 1996 activities. Executive Director Beth Doughty will make the presentation. Respectfully Submitted by: ~~~ Elmer C. Hodg County Administrator ---------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved ( ) Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) Eddy Harrison Johnson Minnix Nickens February 6, 1997 _ .. _ _ ._ .. _ Ms. Mary Allen Roanoke County Post Office Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 240 i 8 Dear Ms. Allen: In appreciation of the support Roanoke County provides, the Roanoke Valley Economic Development Partnership would like the opportunity to present to your Board of Supervisors the 1996 Report of Economic Development Activity for Roanoke County and the Greater Roanoke Valley. As you may remember, the Partnership has made this annual report for several years to your Board of Supervisors. The report for 1996 is a good one that we would like to share with your elected officials at their next available meeting. Please call me to let me know the date for the presentation. Thank you for your consideration of this request. 'Elizabeth Doughty Executive Director 111 FRANKLIN PLAZA, SUITE 333 ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24011 5 4 0- 3 4 3. 1 5 5 0 1- 8 0 0- L O C A T E 2 FAX: 540-344-6096 ~- / ~-i ` w .~~ Comments to Roanoke County Board of Supervisors February 25, 1997 by Beth Doughty Roanoke Valley Economic Development Partnership Thank you for the opportunity to serve Roanoke County in 1996. I am pleased to bring you this report of activity for the Partnership overall and for its work specifically for Roanoke County in 1996. First Overall .. . The Greater Roanoke Region experienced a good year in industrial development. * 33 prospects visited the region; a 22% increase from 1995 * 900 inquiries were filled by Partnership staff * Of the 33 prospects to visit the region; 2 1/2 leads were generated by the Partnership for every one that came from the Virginia Economic Development Partnership. * 12 companies announced new and expanded locations with assistance from the Partnership. These 12 companies represent $188 million in investment 955 new jobs for residents from the entire region and new corporate names such as RR Donnelley, York International, Dynax America, First Citizens Bankcard, and Meadville Forging. * These projects represent $23 million in payroll that will be spent in Roanoke County and throughout the region. * The average hourly wage for all jobs created in 1996 is $10.35. That's significantly above the so called "living wage" goal and above the Partnership's goal of double digit wages. ~~ Roanoke County's current annual contribution of $107,000 (or $1.2~per capita) was leveraged into an overall marketing plan of $600,000 that benefits Roanoke County and the other 6 jurisdictions in our Partnership. But how did Roanoke County benefit most directly in 1996? J s .~ * The Partnership started working with RR Donnelley in March of 1995 and worked closely with the county to bring about the announcement in February 1996 that Donnelley was coming to Roanoke County. That's $102 million in investment and 310 new jobs. * The Partnership also worked with Cloverdale Companies which built a new facility in Roanoke County representing 10 new jobs and $1.6 million in investment. * So the total is: jobs created in Roanoke County in 1996: 320. Or ... 34% of all jobs created in 1996. And remember, you're only paying 18% of the total marketing budget. * Total investment created in 1996: $103.6 million. Or ... 55% of all investment generated in 1996. And remember, you're only paying 18% of the total marketing budget. * All 899 inquiries received information on Roanoke County * Roanoke County was considered by 9 of the 33 prospects who visited Overall, the Partnership produced 69 to 1 return on investment in terms of payroll ($23 mil.) and local expenditures ($19 mil.) generated as a result of its 1996 marketing program. The Partnership has been and will continue to be of assistance in whatever way we are called upon by Roanoke County. Thank you for your support. And thank you for the privilege of working and learning from you. 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: February 25, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Petition of Radford & Company 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. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: I have several concerns about the request for this rezoning of 11.05 acres from R-1 to R-3 at McVitty Road and Electric Road. First, there will be an increase in traffic with an additional entrance on Route 419. As proposed, left turns out of the project will not be allowed. This will result in U-turns being made at the 419 Library and at McVitty Road. It might be possible to master plan several parcels and the County Library entrance to improve the traffic flow. The flood plain will be preserved but timber now on the property will be removed for construction. If we are going to lose an attractive open space, I would like to see more consideration given for a greenway. Respectfully Submitted by: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ---------------------------------------------------------------- Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) ACTION Motion by: VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy Harrison Johnson Minnix Nickens V- PETITIONER: RADFORD 8~ COMPANY CASE NUMBER: 3-2/97 Planning Commission Hearing Date: February 4, 1997 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: February 25, 1997 A. REQUEST Petition of Radford & Company 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. B. CITIZEN COMMENTS Ed Murray asked about the residual 1.5 acres along McVitty. Staff said that it is not part of the rezoning request, so it will remain R-1. Roger Dixon expressed concern with water runoff onto his property on McVitty and with increased traffic both from this proposed development and the new Harris Teeter opening this spring. C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION The Commission requested that Ms. Scheid elaborate on the letter dated February 4 from Mr. Harrington to Jeff Echols, VDOT, regarding the requested crossover median cut on Route 419. Mr. Scheid responded by listing the reasons for denying the median cut as outlined in Mr. Harrington's letter: the importance of using desirable as opposed to minimum standards in evaluating this cut due to the high volume of traffic and high prevalent speed; the proposed median cut could never serve any other development; design decision should not be made for the purpose of mitigating the potential of unsafe practices--signage prohibiting unsafe practice could be installed; the existence of a median cut would create unsafe conditions by encouraging residents to turn left and head north on Route 419; denial of the median cut may result in increased traffic on McVitty Road--an acceptable consequence of prohibiting this cut. Mr. Thomason discussed the idea of using the median cut at the library and constructing a frontage road through the adjoining one acre parcel (the Clements' property) to access petitioner's property. He inquired about using the old Castle Rock railroad bed for this purpose. The Planning Commission emphasized that the requested rezoning is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan designation of Transition and inquired about alternative uses for this site that would also comply with the Comprehensive Plan and the Route 419 Plan. Ms. Scheid stated that the site could be developed as single family residential (approximately 50 single family residences) which could generate less traffic than the proposed use. Any commercial development on this site would in all likelihood generate more traffic than the proposed use. ~,~ D. PROFFERED CONDITIONS Proffers were offered in the following general areas: 1) concept plan; 2) access from Rt. 419 only; 3) stormwater management facilities and easements; 4) greenway easements; 5) vegetative/fence buffering. E. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Mr. Thomason commented that he is concerned with the access but overall it is a good project. He moved to recommend approval of the petition with the proffered conditions. The motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Thomason, Hooker, Witt, Robinson, Ross NAYS: None ABSENT: None F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. G. ATTACHMENTS: -Concept Plan -Vicinity Map _ Staff Report ~ _ Other _ , Terrance~Harnn on, Sec~ary Roanoke Cou ty Planning Commission 0~ ~OANps.~ ~~ ~ ~ C.~~a~xx~~ ~#~ ~~x~~.~.~e z J _ a 7835 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING TERRANCE L. HARRINGTON, AICP DIRECTOR OF PLANNING ~_1 PLANNING COMMISSION BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS February 4, 1997 Mr. Jeff Echols Resident Engineer VDOT 714 S. Broad Street Salem, VA 24153 RE: Requested Median Cut; Route 419 (McVitty Forest) Dear Jeff: I would like to offer Roanoke County's perspective on the requested Route 419 median cut to serve the proposed McVitty Forest condominium development. It is our understanding that you received a request for this new median cut from an agent representing Radford & Company, developer of the proposed condominiums. We believe that it is of paramount importance to preserve the safety and capacity of Route 419, This road is the only major north/south arterial serving this side of Roanoke County. The proposed cut further reduces the ability of this road to serve its primary function. In a letter dated December 31st to Arnold Covey, your office recommended denial of a median cut in a similar location, as it did not meet minimum standards. You have stated that this proposed median cut should meet VDOT desirable standards. we agree. We support your conclusion to recommend denial of the median cut and have considered the following: 1. We agree that it is important that desirable, as opposed to minimum standards, be used in evaluating this cut. Minimum standards are not appropriate for this location given the high volume of Route 419 traffic, and the high prevalent speed of vehicles using this road. 2. The proposed median cut would-never serve any other development. The Colonnade development directly across Route 419 currently is served by a signalized intersection at McVitty. Proffers on the Colonnade development prohibit future/additional access to Route 419, notwithstanding the steep cut slope that aligns with the proposed cut. P.O. BOX 29800 • ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 • (540) 772-2068 • FAX: (540) 772.2108 Primed on Recycled Pa~2r V-~ 3. We recognize that the denial of the cut may result in some unsafe drivers choosing to make. U-turns at McVitty or at the median cut at the Library. We do not believe, however, that this design decision should be made for the purpose of mitigating the potential of unsafe driving practices. If U-turns become prevalent, signage prohibiting this unsafe practice may become necessary. 4. We believe the existence of a median cut will create unsafe conditions by encouraging/allowing residents of the condominiums to turn left and head north on Route 419. This is also a dangerous turning movement, given the high volume and speed of vehicles on this road. 5. We recognize that the denial of the median cut may/will result in increased traffic on McVitty Road as residents are likely to °circle the block" to arrive/leave home. We believe that this incremental increase in McVitty traffic is an acceptable consequence of prohibiting this cut. The proposed condominiums are a good land use for this location. Mr. Radford has indicated that, if rezoned, he intends to proceed with the development even if the cut is denied. Please consider these comments as you continue with any further review of this request. If I can be of any further assistance, please let me know. Sincerely, ~'~-- -. _ /, ~_-~~ i~ Terrance L Harrin on, AICP Director f Planning c: Arnold Covey Ed Natt `I..., STAFF REPORT 1V/ Case Number: 3-2/97 Prepared by: Janet Scheid Applicant: Radford & Co. Date: February 4, 1997 PART I B. DESCRIPTION This is a request to conditionally rezone 11.05 acres from R-1, Low-Density Residential to R-3, Medium-Density Multi-Family Residential. The following proffers have been made: 1) 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) access to the condominium development will be from Rt. 419; 3) the condominium development will be limited to ninety (90) units. The concept plans shows 90 residential condominium units in five buildings. Since access to the property is proffered to be from Route 419, petitioner is requesting approval from VDOT for a median cut on Rt. 419 to facilitate ingress and egress. This property is in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District. C. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS 1. The R-3 District of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance allows multi-family dwelling with additional use and design standards that specify lot size, setbacks, density and common open space. 2. A cross-over median cut request is being reviewed by the Virginia Department of Transportation. 3. All site development regulations are applicable. 4. Federal Emergency Management Act floodplain regulations are applicable. • \/~ PART II v A. ANALYSIS OF EBISTING CONDITIONS 1. Lot Area - The property consists of four separate parcels totalling 12.55 acres. The rezoning request if for 11.05 acres. The remaining 1.5 acres, zoned R-1, has frontage on McVitty Road. The petitioner has indicated that he intends to purchase this 1.5 acres and that it will be left in reserve for future development. 2. Location - The property to be rezoned is located along Route 419 and McVitty Road with approximately 1000 feet of frontage on Rt. 419 and 380 feet on McVitty. This site is just east of Winterberry Pointe, a medium-density residential development. It is across Route 419 and south of the Colonnade Corporate Center and west of the Roanoke County Headquarters Library. This site is north of the well- established, stable single-family residential neighborhood of Crestwood Park. The property is bordered on the northwest corner by an existing single-family residence, built in 1910, and zoned C-1, Commercial. The site is dissected on the western side by Mudlick Creek and the accompanying floodway and floodplain. In the late 19th century this site was used by the Castle Rock Branch railroad which followed and ran adjacent to the current Rt. 419, crossed McVitty Road and ran along what is now Castle Rock Road for a distance of 2.8 miles to an iron ore deposit. The railroad right-of-way can still be seen on the northern portion of this property adjacent to Rt. 419. 3. Buildincts~Structures - A single-family residential house, built in the 1950's, is currently on the site. 4. Access - Access to the existing residence is from McVitty Road at the far southwesterly point of the property. B. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 1. Use - The petitioner proposes to build five three-story buildings each housing 18 condominium units for a total of 90 condominium units. This results in approximately 8 units per acre. Each building would have 34 parking spaces underground with elevator service to the floors above . Additional overflow and guest surface parking will be provided. • v- i Reviewing the proffered concept plan, the closest a condominium building comes to an existing property line is thirty feet: This is the undeveloped parcel that separates the library property from the petitioner's property. The closest a condominium building comes to a developed site is approximately 45 feet. The existing Lazarus residence, built in the early 50's, will be demolished. 2. Access to Site - Petitioner is proffering that access to the site will be from Route 419. Petitioner has requested that VDOT approve a cross-over median cut to allow westbound Rt. 419 traffic to make a left hand turn and access this site, and allow residents exiting from this development to turn left on Rt. 419 towards Salem. In a letter dated December 31, 1996 from Richard Brammer to Arnold Covey, VDOT recommends that this cross-over request be denied on the grounds that it does not meet minimum cross-over spacing criteria for a design speed of 55 mph. The petitioner's engineering firm has revised the entrance design and resubmitted the request for a cross- over. In a meeting with staff, representatives from VDOT expressed concern with the number of cross-overs on this stretch of Rt. 419 and the impact on traffic flow. There is an existing cross-over at Winterberry Pointe serving both that residential . development and McVitty Road on the northside of Rt. 419. There is a traffic light on Rt. 419 where it intersects with southbound McVitty Road and Colonnade Drive and there is an existing cross-over at the Roanoke County library that also serves Postal Drive. The petitioner's request for a cross-over would only service this proposed residential development. Across Rt. 419, from the requested cross-over, is Colonnade Corporate Center. This site already has access, at the traffic light to the west, and could not utilize an additional cross-over. Due to alignment and existing zoning proffers, the two vacant parcels of land, between Colonnade Corporate Center and Signet Bank, could not be serviced by the proposed median cut either. This site has frontage on McVitty Road but access to the site from McVitty is hard to achieve due to Mudlick Creek and the floodway. 3. Circulation - Petitioner proposes one access road from Route 419 to serve the 5 condominium buildings. ~ The access road enters the property and continues to the south. The first building is to the west of the access road. The road continues and culminates in a circle with the remaining 4 buildings arranged around this circle. 3 ~_ • 4. Traffic Count - An estimated 31,000 vehicle trips per day occurred on Route 419 in 1995.. McVitty Road carried approximately 7,000 vehicle trips per day, up from approximately 2,500 prior to the installation of the traffic light at McVitty and Rt. 419. Much of this additional traffic on McVitty is through traffic, going to and from Old Cave Spring Road, to avoid the intersection at Cave Spring Corners . This high traffic volume on McVitty creates delays for traffic entering McVitty from Castle Rock Road. The proposed use would generate an additional 700-800 vehicle trips per day. If the request for a cross-over median cut on Rt. 419 is granted then most of this additional traffic would fall on Rt. 419. If the cross-over request is not granted, and traffic can only make a right hand turn in and right hand turn out of this proposed development, then several things may occur: 1) Some of the traffic generated by this new development may use McVitty Road. People travelling from the Cave Spring Corners area may access McVitty via Old Cave Spring Road than turn right on Rt. 419 at the light, to access the entrance to the proposed development; 2) Alternatively, people travelling on Rt. 419 from the Cave Spring Corners area may make a U-turn at the light at McVitty Road/Colonnade Drive and come back around to make a right hand turn into this proposed development or use Colonnade Drive to turn around and come back out with a left hand turn at the light onto Rt. 419; 3) In addition, people exiting the proposed development and wanting to turn west, towards Salem, may make a U-turn at the Library/Postal Drive median cut. No matter what VDOT's decision is on the request for a cross- over median cut on Rt. 419 there will be residual traffic impacts on Rt. 419 and McVitty Road. The extent of these impacts is not known at this time and additional information would be needed to adequately analyze them. McVitty Road has been placed on the County 6-year secondary construction plan but funding for construction has not been allocated. 5. Public Services - Both public water and sewer are available to this site. The Roanoke County Headquarters Library is to the east of this site and separated by a one acre parcel of land. This library facility serves approximately 350,000 visitors a year. While there are currently no concrete plans for expansion of this facility there has been some assessment of the need to expand both the building and the parking lot. • 6. Storm Water ManagementJFlooding Issues - This area of McVitty Road is subject to periodic flooding from Mudlick Creek. 4 v-~ In reviewing the proposed plans for on-site stormwater management, the Engineering Department recommends that an alternative location be provided for the retention pond, outside of the floodplain area, to minimize construction and maintenance conflicts. The draft Roanoke Valley Regional stormwater management plan has identified the western portions of this property, in the area of Mudlick Creek, as a potential site for a detention facility. This proposed facility has the potential to increase water ponding along the existing floodplain. The County Engineering Department recommends that the finish floor elevations for the proposed condominiums be constructed a minimum of 2 feet above the calculated future 100-year floodplain, as identified in the draft stormwater study. 7 . Grading - Petitioner has stated that grading in the floodplain will occur. Finished site grading will result in the proposed condominiums being at approximately the same elevation as Rt. 419. To achieve this a significant amount of grading, cutting and filling and tree removal will be necessary. Staff expects that most of the existing trees will be removed and some grading will occur within five feet of the surrounding property boundaries. The petitioner's engineer has estimated that the maximum cut will be approximately 30 feet. 8. Greenways - The general area of Mudlick Creek has been identified on the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan as a potential site for a greenway. An off-road trail system on the petitioner's property, adjacent to Rt. 419, could potentially link up to the County library, services on Postal Drive and Cave Spring Corners. 9 . Community Meeting - A community meeting was held on January 21 and attended by approximately 25 citizens. At that meeting the petitioner's attorney stated that an entrance off of McVitty would not be requested even if VDOT denies their request for a doss-over median cut. Citizen's comments included: want a fence to reduce foot traffic between the proposed development and Rasmont Drive; want significant landscaping between proposed development and Rasmont Drive to minimize visual impact from Crestwood Park residences; suggest the need to coordinate this development with the regional stormwater management study; suggest that retention pond area be made attractive and be used as a small park for residents; and stated concerns about finished grading and building elevations. Staff has requested finished grading plans and cross-sections of building elevations for review purposes. • 5 ~~ C. CONFORMANCE AITH COIINTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan, Rt. 419 Corridor Study, has identified this site as Transition. Compatible land use types include: office and institutional, retail, multi-family, parks and single-family. Among the policies to guide the use and development of land in this category are: prevent haphazard commercial sprawl; encourage the development of residential projects with controlled, common access to major frontage streets while discouraging the subdivision of individual frontage lots for single family housing; coordinate vehicular and pedestrian movement among adjacent sites, provide shared access; and provide strict screening and buffering standards along the rear property lines where frontage development backs up to less intensive residential uses. The 419 Frontage Development Plan categorizes this property as Mid-High Density and High Density Residential. PART III STAFF CONCLIISIONS In addition to the proffered conditions staff recommends proffers be considered in the following areas: . 1. stormwater management easements along Mudlick Creek for future, potential regional stormwater management facilities. 2. The on-site stormwater retention pond, shown on the proffered concept plan, be constructed outside of the floodplain area to minimize construction and maintenance conflicts. 3. Greeriway easements along Mudlick Creek and adjacent to Rt. 419 for future greenways. 4. Vegetative landscaping and/or fencing be placed on adjoining residential properties, if desired by adjoining property owners, to minimize the visual and noise impacts of the proposed development and to minimize unwelcome foot traffic. In addition, staff recommends that two of the three proffers that have-been submitted by the petitioner be revised to more clearly state the intentions of the petitioner. It is staff's conclusion that the critical issue surrounding this rezoning petition is one of access to the proposed development and the commensurate impacts on traffic patterns on surrounding streets • s and Rt. 419. As such, staff recommends that action on this • petition be delayed until a decision is reached by the Virginia Department of Transportation on the request for a cross-over median cut. This will allow staff to more thoroughly evaluate the possible impacts of this decision and provide the Planning Commission with more complete information upon which to make an informed decision. It would also allow additional time for the petitioner, staff and the Planning Commission to consider suggested proffers and to resolve the precise wording of accepted proffers prior to the public hearing. PREPARED BY: JANET SCHEID DATE PREPARED: January 28, 1997 • • 7 • • • COUNTY OF ROANOKE DEPT. OF PLANNING AND ZONING 5204 3ernard Or.• P,O. Box 29800 Roanoke. VA 24018 ( 540' 772-2068 FAX (540) 772-2108 ~;: , .%~, ~:::~: ~: i:: t;s- :;%: cii ~. %i~ •f 1.• :111. f . .-t .~t - : `i .~i ~'~• l Vii:......:.=ice . .I.. •:\:. Check type of application tiled (check all that apply): ~~ ~, ®REZONING ^ SPECIAL USE ^VARIANCE 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: nd R t 419 Tax Map Number: 76.16-2,3,4,5 e a ou McVitty Road Magisterial District: Windsor Hills Community Planning Area: Windsor Hills Size of parce! (s): Existing Zoning: R-1 11.05 acres Existing Land Use: Residential and vacant sq.ft. •1 :\ :a:•: :•l:: ::~•. ..r :i: is::=:%:i•`•:=~ :::~•..• :`. ':i:%:..... i;%;;:%~: %:i: •.1• •i . N:• :L . ' L• Proposed Zoning: R_3 F~rsraff use o Proposed Land Use: Residential condominium Use 7yps: Does the parcel meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? YES X NO lF N0, A VARIANCE IS 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 proffered with this requestl YES R NO :i:i: ~:::::::,:: i ~... ;;@~i:r -:,:: •.~.: ~` ~ - Variance of Section(s) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in order to: v/A Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCc?TED tF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. ' as v w= v ws v X Consultation Y 8 1 /2" x 1 1" concept plan Application tee X Application ~ Metes and bcunds description - Proffers, if applicable Justification ~ Water and sewer application Adjoini~~g property owners /hereby certify that I am either the owner of the proQerty or the owner's agent or conriact purchaser and am acting ~.virn the knowledge and consent;of the owner. RADFORD & C MPAI~lY _ is /7 Owner's Signature: ~~~~,~/~~ ~ /~~! ~ __ For staff use on/y ~'~ '" NOV-19-96 TUE 17 30 RKE G For Sts~Y Ure Un/y: Caso N~mbet • Applicant Radford & Company ' The Planning Commission wilt 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~fving 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. Please explain how the project 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. Please describe the impact(s) of the request on the 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. ~~~~ D~'YE~OPNILNT A.PP~XC~.~'ION ~ '° "~ ~. ~D~~~~E APPLXC.4`tT INFORMATI01`I .-- ~' , x~' ...a.., :r..~ ..,~ _ a~ DATE: December' 20, 1996 ^ Basic ^ Comprehensive ^ Subdivision ^ Preliminary . File No. (S[aff Use Only) , APPLICANT: Radford & Company ADDRESS: 2740 Franklin Road P)`IONE: 343-5000 F~_ 343-5135 OWNER: Same as above ADDRESS: PHONE: FAX: ~iGIIVEEIt Lumsden & Associates, P.C. ADDRESS: Roanoke, VA 24014 P.O. Box 20669 PHONE: 774-4411 FAX: 772-9445 Roanoke, VA 24018 SITE INFORt1xA.TION PROPIr'tTYADDRESS• SoutlY-Side of Route 419, 750; East of McVitty Road DEVELOPMb'NTNAIv1E• McVitty 1!orest • PROPOSED USE: DEVELOPED AREA: TAX ti1.4P ~: 76.16-02-02 to OS ~ 11.05 TOTAL WITS: _ ACREAGE Windsor Hills iYIAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: 90 N/A TOTAL LOTS: ryATER FACILITIES: (COUNTY x- CITY - TOWN OF VINTON - PRIVATE - WELL) SEWER F.ICILTTIES: (COUNTY X - CITY - DESCRIPTION OF WORK: CONSTRUCTION OF UNITS EACH. TO~ViI' OF VNTON - SEPTIC SYSTE,~ 5 THREE STORY, BUILDINGS CONTAINING 18 CONDOMINIUM IS BLTILDIi1G TO EE SPRL`tKLERED? No FLUW REQUIR]rD: N/A G.?.tit. BIFZLDL~iG Iii +-FORNT~~'YON (NEW CONSTRliCTION ?u~D RENOVATION 3UII,DING AREA: OCCUPA:tiCY LOAD: CONSTRUCTION TYPE: BUCA USE GROUP: The applic..rtt.requests review s[td approval of a devetopmctt plan r~uircd by Zoning Ordinance. The plans conion with applicable sections of the Zoning Urdirsrtc:. i[ is lndcrstood thst submission of tn2ccurate or incomplete informstion .~zy decay tinal a~oroval of the comprhensivc dcvelopmcnt pla,is. . I do l•.c:cby ccrcify that f fully understand the•provisioru of ehc i::ozion and Sediment Conc:ol Crdinance and program, and ;he abo~•c-rere~nc~a project as approved. 1 funhcr grsnc the right-of--entry co this projr_: as descri;cd above co the desiv~tztcd ptrsor.*tel for the ? ose of inspecirg and moni[oring for compliance with nc~ aforesaid Grdinancc• RAC. FORD &~OMPANA ~ n ~~ MOTE: ~RADP~ AREA• SIGNATURE OF ~? t! BOLD sections of :his application must be filtcd out and tax reap attached prior to issuanec of wac:: and saver availability. ~; a ~~~ ~ ~ \f Tl~~~~ ~~ ~~ I. i• ~ ~ ~~~~s.~ ~~ ~ s e~7 a ~~ I~~ ~~'pp~ 1 ~~~ ~34~ ~jij~~ ~~ ~~ ~;I i~7a4 4 f 1 ~ I~ ~Y~y~ .7~i a! ~ Ski ~i~~! # ~~s~'I~,~~. ~~~ ~)~~ I~ I~~ I~I~ ~1iFt IF ~ ~~#~~~~~~~at~~~ i• i• i• F z ~- ~; ~ ^'n v , D O 1~ ^~ V 1- ~OO t~ 2 1 1-- Q 0 ~ r o ~ ~ ~' X lt! z Z A W W WF ®~OQw F ~ '7 0 t -~ ~ ~ QQ 't~' v ~o ~J~ ~v Z ~ ~ N ~ N O Q Q ~ OC Z ~D tL V F-- E-- ~ i i J ~ 1!_l J \ 1 ~ ~ I O E- N O z ~- s~ m • • - a. 20.. ~, xx ..r ' 21 _ µ .u • ! ~T '- MO LY ano • ` Rt 4J9 ~. 7 CO •~ \ ~~~ `ice' '2~ ~~ : a ~ -_ ~ -- _ _ - .t /~ 7 ~ t~ -~ ~- - v-~ b {1 i 1 q] 1 _ V Z `~~ ~~'~ - -4•~- O ~~_ -- ,w ~ .~,x ~ 132 M \ -• .l• ' i _ " ~ - ~~~~ -vii . PROPOSED RA•DFORD & COMPANY REZONING i• ` ~ PROFFERS TO THE ZONING APPLICATION OF RADFORD & COMPANY 1. That the property will be developed in substantial conformity with the concept plan for McVitty Forest prepared by Lumsden Associates under date of February 24, 1997. 2. Access to the development will be from Route 419 only. 3. That the development will be limited to ninety six (96) residential condominium units. 4. That the developer will grant a stormwater maintenance easement along Mudlick Creek for a potential regional stormwater management facility. The easement will include the area within the 100 year floodway of Mudlick Creek on the property rezoned as established by the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Flood Insurance Study dated October 15, 1993. Said easements will be defined and dedicated at the time of site plan review. 5. That on-site stormwater retention pond shown on the concept plan shall be moved outside the flood plain area if such is feasible according to normal engineering standards. The relocation shall not be required if it conflicts with the development in accordance with the concept plan. 6. That the Developer will grant a variable greenway easement on the east side of Mudlick Creek, extending from the center of the creek to the toe of any fill slope or 50', whichever is less; provided, however, that said easement will be a minimum of thirty feet. A thirty (30) foot greenway easement adjacent to Route 419 shall be granted for future greenway development. The defined greenway easement adjacent to Route 419 may be, as I, determined by the Developer, inclusive of the front setback area as required by Section 30-45-3 (B) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance. Said easements will be defined and dedicated at the time of site plan review. 7. Vegetative landscaping shall be placed on site in those areas adjoining residential properties. If all adjoining property owners concur in .writing, a fence shall be constructed along the property line between the subject property and the adjoining residential properties. If such fence is constructed, the same shall be maintained by the Homeowner's Association of the condominium. Language to such effect shall be included in the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions affecting the condominium development. FC1RT1 ~, (''I~MPANY Z:\WP50\LISA\RADFORD.PRO:Laf02/20/97 v-~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1997 ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A 11.05-ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF ELECTRIC ROAD BETWEEN MCVITTY ROAD (SR 1662) AND ELECTRIC ROAD (TAX MAP NOS. 76.16-2, 3, 4, 5) IN THE WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF R-1 TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF R-3 WITH CONDITIONS UPON THE APPLICATION OF RADFORD & COMPANY WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on January 28, 1997, and the second reading and public hearing were held February 25, 1997; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on February 4, 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 11.05 acres, as described herein, and located on the south side of Electric Road between McVitty Road (SR 1662) and Electric Road, (Tax Map Numbers 76.16-2, 3, 4, 5) in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of R-1, Windsor Hills District, to the zoning classification of R-3, Medium Density Multi-Family Residential District. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of Radford & Company. 3. That the owners of the property, Lloyd J. Lazarus and Lee v-i W. Lazarus, have voluntarily proffered in writing the following conditions which the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby accepts: (1) That the property will be developed in substantial conformity with the concept plan for McVitty Forest prepared by Lumsden Associates under date of February 6, 1997. (2) Access to the development will be from Route 419 only. (3) That the development will be limited to ninety-six (96) residential condominium units. (4) That the developer will grant a storm water maintenance easement along Mudlick Creek for a potential regional storm water management facility. The easement will include the area within the 100-year floodway of Mudlick Creek, of the property being rezoned, as established by the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Flood Insurance Study dated October 15, 1993. Said easements will be defined and dedicated at the time of site plan review. (5) That on-site storm water retention pond shown on the concept plan shall be moved outside the flood plain area if such is feasible according to normal engineering standards. The relocation shall not be required if it conflicts with the development in accordance with the concept plan. (6) That the Developer will grant a variable greenway easement on the east side of Mudlick Creek, extending from the center of the creek to the toe of any fill slope v-~ or 50', whichever is less, providing a minimum greenway easement of 30'. A thirty (30) foot greenway easement adjacent to Route 419 shall be granted for future greenway development. The defined greenway easement adjacent to Route 419 may be, as determined by the Developer, inclusive of the front setback area as required by Section 30-45-3 (B) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance. Said easements will be defined and dedicated at the time of site plan review. (7) Vegetative landscaping shall be placed on site in those areas adjoining residential properties. If all adjoining property owners concur in writing, a fence shall be constructed along the property line between the subject property and the adjoining residential properties. If such fence is constructed, the same shall be maintained by the Homeowner's Association of the condominium. Language to such effect shall be included in the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions affecting the condominium development. 4. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: BEGINNING at corner #1, said point being the corner common to said 11.05 acres and the westerly boundary of Crestwood Park, as recorded in Plat Book 3, page 214 in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, said corner also lying on the southerly right-of-way line of Virginia Primary Route 419; thence along the line common to said 11.05 acres and said Crestwood Park the following courses and distances, S. 41 deg. 40' 00" W. 151.44 feet to corner #2; thence S. 06 deg. 18' 00" W. 209.98 feet to corner #3; thence S. 11 deg. 47' 00" E. 108.98 feet to corner #4; thence S. 73 deg. 36' 00" W. 206.43 feet to corner #5; thence S. 82 deg. 35' 00" W. 99.20 feet to corner #6; thence N. 78 deg. 41' 00" W. 133.00 feet to corner #7; thence S. 52 deg. 55' 00" W. 133.49 feet to corner #8; said corner #8 being the corner v- ~ common to said herein described parcel and said Crestwood Park, said corner also lying on the northerly right-of-way line of McVitty Road (Route #1682); thence along the line common to said herein described parcel and McVitty Road the following courses and distances: N. 56 deg. 21' 18" W. 84.94 feet to corner #9; thence N. 65 deg. 27' 00" W. 274.50 feet to corner #10; thence N. 57 deg. 54' 00" W. 37.12 feet to corner #10A; thence along a proposed. zoning line the following 2 courses and distances: N. 38 deg. 21' 14" E. 181.27 feet to corner #lOB; thence N. 21 deg. 38' 46" W. 230.00 feet to corner #16; said corner #16 being the corner common to said herein described property and the property of Roger D. Dixon as recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 1421, page 1051; thence along the line common to said herein described parcel and said Roger Dixon property the following 2 courses and distances: N. 21 deg. 38' 46" W. 130.77 feet to corner #17; thence N. 13 deg. 05' 14" E. 65.63 feet to corner #18; said corner #18 lying on the southerly right-of-way line of Virginia Primary Route 419; thence along the line common to said herein described parcel and Virginia Route 419, 5.80 deg. 22' 40" E. 1006.51 feet to the point of Beginning and containing a computed acreage of 11.05 acres. 5. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. 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\WPDOCS\AGENDA\ZONING\RADFORD.ORD ~~uiiuii~ii~ui~ii~iiiiiiiiiiiiiui~~~i~ii~iiiiiiiii~iiiiiii~iiii~~iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiuiiiiiiiiiiuiiiiiiii~~i~~~~ s / ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ^~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ AGENDA ITEM NO. c ... _ _ _ _ APPE CE REQUEST __ __ '~ 'i/PUBLIC HEARING Z~ORDINANCE CITIZENS COMMENTS _. c SUBJECT: I/ ~ ~ c c 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: -_ c c ^ Each speaker will be given between three to five minutes to comment whether speaking as an individual or representative. The Chairman will decide the time limit based on the number of citizens speakin on an issue, and will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority ot~the Board to '- do otherwise. . c .. ^ Speaker will be limited to a presentation of their ppoint of view only. Questions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. ^ All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between arecognized speaker and audience members is not allowed. ~_ _ ^ Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at all times. _ ^ Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments c with the clerk. c ^ INDIVIDUALS SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF AN ORGANIZED GROUP SHALL FILE WITH THE CLERK AUTHORIZATION FROM THE GROUP ALLOWING THE INDIVIDUAL TO REPRESENT THEM. c -_ PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK _ i ~ - _ _ ~ ~ _ ~ - fiiiiiiiuiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiitiiiiiii~ll'i ~. . r., fir ,~~ ~ 1 3 ~~ I~ wy °~ ~ ~~~ s ~~ ( ~ T_"t f~ ~„ ~ti.a~iVi.i:`a~... C.3`J~'er DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION - 714 SOUTH BROAD STREET DAVID R. GEHR SALEM, 24753-5127 COMMISSIONER February 20, 1997 re - McVitty Forest Route 419 Roanoke County Mr. Terrance L. Harrington, Director of Planning Roanoke County PO Box 29800 Roanoke, Virginia 24017-0798 Dear Mr. Harrington: J. A. ECHOES RESIDENT ENGINEER PO Box 3071 Salem, Virginia 2413 Your letter of February 4, 1997, addressed comments from Roanoke County concerning a request for a crossover on Route 419 for this proposed development. A review of this request has been made by VDOT and a new crossover at this location is not approved. Route 419 is classified as an Urban Principal Arterial and the 1996 average daily traffic along this section was 36,889 vehicles-per-day. The desirable crossover spacing for the operating speed is greater than that being proposed with this development. The projected AM and PM peak-hour calculations for traffic exiting this proposed new development to turn left onto Route 419 is a Level of Service F. Delays on the side street and for left-turn movements from northbound Route 419 can be expected. Additional crossovers and traffic signals can have an impact on the traffic flow on Route 419. Your letter notes that the potential for a future access on the north side of Route 419, across from this proposed development, is not anticipated. If any additional information is needed, please advise. Very truly yours, . ~ v J. A. Echols Resident Engineer JAE:es cc - Mr. O. Arnold Covey Mr. Elmer C. Hodge Mr. F. C. Altizer, Jr. Mr. Ed Natt Mr. Michael S. Webb TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY v-~ AT A REGIILAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF BIIPERVISORB OF ROANORE COIINTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANORE COIINTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TIIESDAY, FEBRIIARY 25, 1997 ORDINANCE 022797-10 GRANTING A SPECIAL IISE PERMIT TO JEAN MCDOWELL TO OPERATE A HOME BEAIITY SHOP AT 6187 BENT MOIINTAIN ROAD (TAB MAP N08. 96.01-3-14 AND PART OF 96.01-3-36), WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, Jean McDowell has filed a petition to operate a home beauty shop located at 6187 Bent Mountain Road (Tax Map No. 96.01-3- 14 and part of 96.01-3-36) in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on February 4, 1997; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on December 17, 1996; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on February 25, 1997. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Board finds that the granting of a special use permit to Jean McDowell to operate a home beauty shop located at 6187 Bent Mountain Road (Tax Map No. 96.01-3-14 and part of 96.01-3-36) in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 1985 Comprehensive Plan pursuant to the provisions of § 15.1-456 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and said Special Use Permit is hereby approved with the following conditions: (i) That Jean McDowell shall be the sole provider of hair care services at this location and may only do so as long as she is a full time resident of 6187 Bent Mountain Road; (2) The salon shall be limited to one chair only; (3) The retail sale of supplies shall be prohibited; (4) This special use permit shall be for a period of one year and may be renewed administratively for successive one-year periods provided the applicant has complied with these conditions and the use and design standards and zoning administrator has not received written complaints from adjoining residents. On motion of Supervisor Eddy to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: y ,~ . Mary H. Allen, 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 M _, ;. _ ~ ^ BROGiC : N R y .._ •'., 2 92 ' ~ 400 '~¢O. A ' ESTATES ~ ^ ~ , ~ . ~ NCR R 9 .,~ ° ~;: r ~ ^ ~ : ~::c:::._ ~, BEN ~ M U ~~ p .. . ~ a 5 AGE OGE PO ,~ O MILL ,~~ N y~,. ~N ti'4~ ~ G i Q• 4' XV• P ao. ~ i •~ ~ 6 ~ KW A~ e ~C~' ):.......,I j v. _I NORTH E~.KO.ooo R ~ f ~:e~ z ' ~~~_ ~ ~ ~ 4I )0.51 ac IDI O 1430Ac lCl rj ' a a~ax t9 l L7? _ ,` = DEPARTi~V'I' OF PI:ANIY~i~G JEAN MCDOWELL. AND 7ANIIvG SPECIAL USE PERMIT 96.01-3-14 :j• ~ ~ ~ o/0 96.01-3-36 ,,, »ri PETITIONER: JEAN MCDOWELL CASE NUMBER: 1-1/97 Planning Commission Hearing Date: Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: V-~ February 4, 1997 (continued from January) February 25, 1997 A. REQUEST Petition of Jean McDowell for a Special Use Permit to allow a home beauty shop, located at 6187 Bent Mountain Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District. B. CITIZEN COMMENTS None. C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION Mr. Harrington confirmed for the Commission that VDOT will require a commercial entrance permit for this land use. Site distance and safety will be considered in their evaluation of the permit. Jean McDowell informed the Commission that she is a contract purchaser of the property and intends to locate there near the end of the month. She clarified for the Commission that she intends to use the driveway at the southern side of the property. Use of this driveway will increase sight distance to the north. D. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS 1) That Jean McDowell shall be the sole provider of hair care services at this location and may only do so as long as she is a full time resident of 6187 Bent Mountain Road; 2) The salon shall be limited to one chair only; 3) The retail sale of supplies shall be prohibited; 4) This special use permit shall be for a period of one year and may be renewed administratively for successive one-year periods provided the applicant has complied with these conditions and the use and design standards, and zoning administrator has not received written complaints from adjoining residents. E. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Mr. Thomason moved to recommend approval of the petition with conditions. The motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Thomason, Hooker, Witt, Robinson, Ross NAYS: None ABSENT: None F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. G. ATTACHMENTS: _ Concept Plan _ Vicinity Map _ Staff Report _ Other Terranc Harr' gton, Se etary Roanoke C my Plann ng Commission ~-a STAFF REPORT PART PETITION: Jean McDowell FILE NO.: 1-1 /97 PREPARED BY: Terrance Harrington DATE PREPARED: 12/30/96 REVISED: 01 /30/97 A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This is a request for a home based beauty salon in compliance with the provisions of the zoning ordinance. The proposed location is within a Rural Village area. Rural Village policies generally support limited personal services. Visibility at the driveway and safe access to this site needs to be improved, but the small scale and limited usage of the proposed use should insure that it does not have a negative impact on the adjacent or surrounding properties. B. DESCRIPTION This is a petition of Jean McDowell for a Special Use Permit to allow her to operate a hair care/beauty salon establishment in her home located at 6187 Bent Mountain Road in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District. The property is zoned R-1 Single Family Residential.. C. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS 1. The zoning ordinance permits home beauty salons as a Special Use in R-1 districts provided the applicant can comply with the Use and Design Standards for this use type. The complete text of these standards is attached to this report. In summary these standards require: A. That a Special Use Permit be obtained. B. That the applicant submit documentation that an infirmity exists which prevents the salon operator or the permanent occupant of the dwelling from regularly leaving the dwelling to pursue gainful employment. C. That the salon shall be limited to a single chair. D. That the sale of beauty products is prohibited. E. That the Special Use Permit, if granted, shall be for a one year period and that the zoning administrator may administratively ~/'-~ renew the permit for successive one year periods if no written complaints are received from adjoining residents. 2. Formal site plan review will not be required based upon the type and scale of the proposed use. A conceptual plan will be required prior to the commencement of the use, so that any conditions pertaining to site layout or VDOT access requirements can be formalized. 3. VDOT has the authority to review this use for compliance with commercial entrance permit requirements. • • PART II i A. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS ~~~ The location of the proposed use is a single family home situated on Bent Mountain Road (RT.221). The home sits close to RT. 221 and is landscaped with mature trees and .mature vegetation. A single driveway provides access to the house, and also provides access to a larger house on an adjoining lot located at 6183 Bent Mountain Road. The property is on a portion of Rt. 221 that is relatively straight and flat. Sight distances appear to be good with the exception that visibility of/from this driveway is slightly obstructed by vegetation growing on the site near the right-of- way. The property is relatively flat. The surrounding neighborhood is zoned R-1 and is developed as a rural residential and agricultural area. Nearby residential development consists mainly of large lot single family homes that exist on acreage tracts, as opposed to lots created as part of a formal subdivision. The Poage dairy farm is along Rt. 221, just south of this property. No public water or sewer systems exist in this general area. B. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT/USE The applicant has provided the staff with a statement indicating that she has a medical condition that restricts her from working outside the home. Some medical documentation has been submitted in support of her statement. No physical changes are proposed to the exterior of the building or site. Minor modifications will need to be made to the interior of the structure so that the hair care services can be provided. Traffic generation from this use should be minimal. The requirement that the applicant be allowed only a single chair restricts the level of usage and traffic. Fire and Rescue has advised that the provision of fire and rescue services will not be affected by the approval of this request. 3 File No.: C. CONFORMANCE WITH COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN `~~~ • The property is located within a Rural Village land use designation, and is in close proximity to the Poages Mill Village Center land use designation along Rt.. 221. Although neither designation specifically addresses home based businesses, Rural Village policies do permit limited office and personal services uses. In addition, the Village Center designation encourages retail and personal services to locate at crossroad locations (RT690/221). The applicant has provided some documentation that supports the existence of a medical condition that prohibits her from working outside of the home. By code, the Use and Design standards limit the scale of the proposed use, such that its operation within this home should not affect surrounding or nearby properties. The Comprehensive Plan supports the provision of personal services in Rural Village and Village Center areas. In the staffs opinion, access and visibility for vehicles using the driveway needs to be improved. VDOT will insure that proper access exists prior to issuance of a commercial entrance permit. The staff believes that the use of this property for a home beauty salon is appropriate and suggests that the following conditions be attached to the permit: 1. That Jean McDowell shall be the sole provider of hair care services at this location, and may only do so as long as she is a full time resident of 6187 Bent Mountain Road 2. The salon shall be limited to one chair only. 3. The retail sale of supplies shall be prohibited 4. This special use permit shall be for a period for one year and may be renewed administratively for successive one year periods provided the applicant has complied with these conditions and the Use and Design Standards, and zoning administrator has not received written complaints from adjoining residents. 4 File No.: § 30-82-1.5 ROANOKE COUNTY CODE ~ "` 8. Any special use permit approved by Roanoke County shall run concurrently with the operating permit approved by VDH. Upon expiration or revocation of the operating permit, the special use permit shall also expire or be revoked. No special use permit shall be valid for a period greater than five (5) yeazs. 9. Requests to renew a permit of an existing system shall be considered as though it were a sepazate and new request for a special use permit and shall meet all of the requirements of this ordinance. Recurring request for a permit due to repeated revo- cations of an operating permit or failure to comply with the requirements of the VDH regulations, including failure to maintain a current maintenance contract at all times, may be sufficient grounds for denial of a new special use permit by the board of supervisors. 10. Any violation of the VDH regulations for the construction, operation and maintenance of an alternative dischazging sewage system shall be considered a violation of any special use permit approved under this ordinance. 11. Any variance or waiver approved by VDH shall not automatically be binding on the boazd of supervisors in considering or approving a special use permit. (Ord. No. 42793-20, § III, 4-27-93; Ord. No. 42694-12, § 13, 4-26-94) Sec. 30-82-2. Home BeautyBarber Salon. (A) Intent. Under certain unique circumstances asmall-scaled beauty and/or barber shops may be an appropriate use within a residential dwelling. The standards and procedure for establishing such uses aze intended to limit the scope and nature of such uses and insure capability with the adjoining properties. (B) In the AR district and in all residential districts the following standards shall apply, in addition to obtaining a special use permit from the board of supervisors pursuant to Section 30-19: 1. The applicant shall submit documentation that an infirmity exists which prevents either the salon operator or a permanent occupant of the dwelling unit from regularly leaving the dwelling to pursue gainful employment. 2. The salon shall be limited to one chair only. 3. The retail sale of beauty and barber supplies shall be prohibited. 4. The special use permit shall be granted for a period of one year and may be renewed administratively for successive one year periods provided the administrator has not received written complaints from adjoining residents. (C) In the AV, C-1 and C-2 districts a home beauty/barber salon shall be limited to no more than two (2) chairs. . Sec. 30-82-3. Home Occupations, Type I and Type II. (A) Intent. These provisions are adopted in recognition that certain small-scaled commercial . activities may be appropriate accessory uses within residential dwellings. The character Supp. No. 3 1860.6 COUNTY OF ROANOKE DEPT. OF PLANNING AND ZONING 5204 Bernard Or. rlu~~ ~s- P.O. Box 29800 1?e;s~~~~c/ Roanoke, VA 24018 1L~'`~'~ l 540' 772-2068 FAX (540) 772-21 08 For sta~f use only date re ,iv receive application fee: PC/BZA date: laca c~,s / BOS date: umber: %~ ~ ~ Case r Check type of application filed (check all that apply): D REZONING SPECIAL USE VARIANCE Applicant's name: ~/ ~ •'~'1 `J Address: p,Q ~ X o~Q~L'?~ ~~~e V~ a S/O~ 7~ Phone: '77~ y3y~ Zip Code: ~ (1C~~ Owner's name: Gi~yt~ `~'~~• ~'~'~~-C_., ~~~~~~ Address: ~ ~?Q~ ~G~ (~~ .P /J Phone: Zip Code: Location opert j ~~ ' Tax Map Number: C~d _~ _ 'L~ ~C~,~~-~~~ ~ t Magisterial District: ~ ` `~' ' I ~ Q ' `~ ~~ ~~ Community Planning Area: ~J Size of parcel (s): acres sq.ft. Existing Zoning: ~~~ ~~ Existing Land Use: /~-~'-~<-~-~-~~ Proposed Zoning: R- I s /O ~ Proposed Land Use: ~psn ~ ~ Piz cJ~`y ct-! ............................. For Staff Use Only Use Type: Does the parcel meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? YES NO IF N0, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for the requested Use Type? YES NO IF N0, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? YES NO 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. ars v ws v rvs v Consultation 8 1 /2" x 1 1 " concept plan Application fee Application ''"`~ Metes and bounds description « Proffers, if applicable Justification `'~~f Water and sewer application Adjoining property owners l hereby certify that l am either the owner of the property or the owner's agent or contract purchaser and am acting with the know/edge and consent of the owner. ~ /~ ~ /f' a ~jr Owner's Signature: ~fa ~1~ ~~ ~ ~'~C~~7~~.~~_~~" ~`~~ `~~i~ ,~` ~~ '~- _ ~/c; d by: ;~' Ei`~ ,~. t 4 ~ a ~ 4~._ ' •J \•~~ - ~~ - -_~" Ste. ~' ~~`.~~~~ :(~ - ~ /,,` ` o/~ - - 1 i saw _ - ._ :- _ - ,. - _. - - ,_____ ~~ __-::_ _- . ~ :.; -_ .--- - ---- __ _ - -_ ------ ~ --_ _ Cam-- -_ - - -- i ~~..~~ , ---- --- --- _-~ .. - - - - ~-_ --~ ~ .C~. - - - - - -~~_ - - -, ~~ . _~: ._, . - --- , +•- -.~ ~/) C~,,i~f1 `'~" _- - NCO ~ - - -_ ,_ -,~ `' C --. - - - . G~~lZ~ .~~.~~-~,~~- ~~./ .max -- ---- ----- ---- / - - .. - -- C ~, jam`-" ~~ . _ _ i r~ ~ f .-y F M ~ _ ti. _- - - ... - - - ~ P _~ - ~ _ i ~ ~ r - ~` - _ _ i - ' - - -- r _ ` - __ -t \ ~ - ~_1 i i. ~ ~. __' a ~~ ,_ ,_ j J ~_-_~ _ ._ ~~~~ , ... - - ~ -. ` / -~ ~-~a ., .: ,, - ~ ~l -- -. ., _ ~ J ., .. .. ' ~~ -.-_.. _. ____.c__ __..__. .. _..___._ _._. ~._ .. i ~ ~ __ .. ._ ~} . _.. ._ _. _ .. _ .. _. _..._____ f .. .... _ _ . __.. _ _ ._ _. _ __. .. ..__...__. ___ -. S .------ ---._ _.. _ _ - - -- --- .j~ • ~..-. _ ~ L. -- -.-..__ .. _. __ _ _. __ . __ . _-- _ - _ 1 `- ---- •. _ - _ •. ~\ ~-: ~\ ._____.._____..__ _.._.___... _. ______.___._._.__. _.. __ .__._ _._____ _ _ _ ~ -e >3 • i• ~~..~o E ,/~ ~. ~~ /. /. {~ I i• L) ~ N N 0 b a ~ Q. h ~ ` ry o n ~~ h C~ U_ 1 \~~ ~ 4~r pV~ \` N ~1 ~3 ~~~ 0 ~~ ~ 3 s 4~ ~ $~ ~ Q ~, w ~~ ~ o ~~ o~ ~~ >Q ~~~ ~« ~`~~ t v-~ £0'd 0S08ZLL0t~S 'ONI S31tJI00SSti ~ 2l3Z-1tiS Wti 4S:60 96-ZZ-AON D 1 A ~"'~ ~` x o>_ ~ ;W~~ _, ~ ~n ~_~ ~$ ~ ;tea X ur '~" y~ ~Y~ HS~y o ¢ v F ~ x~ e.e~-.:~^S ~~o o~~T 9 8 N ~ ` K v e !- ~ K v ^~~ ~ \ ~ xW o~ ~- ~~-, ' ` ..~ c 5 m 9c NYo ~ E~~ Q<e ~~,~o~ o ~~~'r~o~~v =~~ ~'e. W ^ ~ ~ W ~ ~ K ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ yi C~ O ~ F Q ~ L ~ ~^~ p 4~ k r .~ y ~ t ~m~ . d 8 LL ~ ~W ~ r°Y a ~ i Ot ~ISC$C~ ~ & 1~ W ~ g ~~ 6 ~~ z;~~g~~ } GO] '~ ~ A! f a i pS F j K 4a~ r i ~. ~~ '^" ~ ~5 W z oi~ ~ ti e r ~ • «r e y N w { ^ _ - 1 A ~~' ~ x ~.:os ~ 3 Li~~ }°y }•i d~' / ~ ~ i \' d jY, ~ -` ~ ~.+ +. e5 i r1 r 1 ~ ~ Y .G ,, i ; / ~ ~ V - or ~e~~ t~ ~-" T ~~ ~ _~, ,~i:Y 8 ~~'e _ -~.~ s ;, tai ~ 4 ~ Li+~"v ~~O T t ~~W2 r'~ x 3 ~~ a~! s ~ i *~:'5 ~e0i$ C ~ 888 k •9~4 i~y~s F~ ~ # ~ Ee O ~- r 7a ~I `x s -+ ,' ,~ a is ~/ ~ 1 /' ~~~~ ~d ~~~~ a~s~ 9 ~< ~aK~ ab~ d 3~a~~ ~~~ "a ~~aY "~:SS ~~~€ j r ~;~~ ~}~~~ _ 7 '~,1~ ~- ~:~a ~~3~~ Fff ~~ •P yy ~~~ J~ ~3FWI ~a~ W =i I ° ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ I` .~ id~~~ a IX ~° i~ ~_ ~~:= i _~,..~. ' .y~P ~~ ~ .r B •o~ r° ,~ ~ ?y~'. I d. •s Zk°6¢ ~ t ~~~~ ~~~E _ ~ 2 tii " 1 ti t "' 1 y ;a ~~ t h i ; ~ i 9: Z ~: W t.) d ~1. H 1 ~ a''1~(S £ R ~x~, _T n 'ILL a ; ;, ,~ -. F G t' I g ~ ~~ ff Ij r z ~ _ ~ ~I~ i { t ~C_, ~ -~ ~ ~`• ~ E _. tM u o`~~ °w 4 ~ ~ u~ ~ti k ti a :~ e i !~ n~ ~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~` ~~ ~~~ Z0 "d 0S08ZZL0bS "ONI S31tiI00SStJ '8 2i3Z"ltifi Wti bS: 60 96-ZZ-AON ~r ~ ~ _ ~` = DEPART.~'I' OF PZ~1'VNI~G JEAN MCDOWELL ~. P.ND 7ANIr;G SPECIAL USE PERP1IT 96.01-3-14 '~• ~ ~/0 96.01-3-36 .,, v-~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1997 ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO JEAN MCDOWELL TO OPERATE A HOME BEAUTY SHOP AT 6187 BENT MOUNTAIN ROAD (TAX MAP NOS. 96.01-3-14 AND PART OF 96.01-3-36), WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, Jean McDowell has filed a petition to operate a home beauty shop located at 6187 Bent Mountain Road (Tax Map No. 96.01-3- 14 and part of 96.01-3-36) in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on February 4, 1997; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on December 17, 1996; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on February 25, 1997. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Board finds that the granting of a special use permit to Jean McDowell to operate a home beauty shop located at 6187 Bent Mountain Road (Tax Map No. 96.01-3-14 and part of 96.01-3-36) in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 1985 Comprehensive Plan pursuant to the provisions of § 15.1-456 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and said Special Use Permit is hereby approved with the following conditions: (1) That Jean McDowell shall be the sole provider of hair care services at this location and may only do so as long as she is a full time resident of 6187 Bent Mountain Road; v-a (2) The salon shall be limited to one chair only; (3) The retail sale of supplies shall be prohibited; (4) This special use permit shall be for a period of one year and may be renewed administratively for successive one-year periods provided the applicant has complied with these conditions and the use and design standards and zoning administrator has not received written complaints from adjoining residents. C:\OFFICE\ WPWIN\ WPDOCS\ AGENDA\ ZONING\ MCDOWELLSPU 2 4 c~-i AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON FEBRUARY 25, 1997 RESOLOTION 022597-11 OF SIIPPORT FOR A VIRGINIA COMMIINITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT APPLICATION FROM TOTAL ACTION AGAINST POVERTY (TAP) FOR A MICROENTERPRISE GRANT WHEREAS, Total Action Against Poverty (TAP) has requested that Roanoke County participate in a regional application on its behalf for TAP's Entrepreneur Training and Microenterprise Loan Program, and WHEREAS, Roanoke County, the City of Salem, and other non- entitlement communities in the 5th Planning District Commission, willingly joins in this application and endorses a regional effort to enhance business startups for low and moderate income persons, and WHEREAS, Total Action Against Poverty is requesting $160,000 of loan money which will be used toward creating two to five new businesses, of which 51~ of the employees, will be low- to moderate-income; and WHEREAS, Roanoke County has provided its citizens adequate opportunities to participate in the development of this application by satisfying the citizen participation requirements, including holding two public hearings on February it and 25, 1997 and has provided legal notice of these meetings, posted notices of the Microenterprise Loan program to advertise its availability; SO THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors supports Total Action Against Poverty's application for Virginia Community Development Block Grant Funds for 1 Microenterprise Loan Capitalization and authorizes the County Administrator to execute all necessary grant application documentation on its behalf and to make such assurances as may be necessary, all on a form approved by the County Attorney. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None A COPY TESTE: Mary H. len, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Timothy W. Gubala, Director, Economic Development Annette Lewis,Total Action Against Poverty 2 Action # Item # (,u-~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 25, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Public hearing and request for approval of a resolution of support for a Virginia Community Development Block Grant application from Total Action Against Poverty (TAP) for a Microenterprise Grant COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: G~ Q BACKGROUND• Total Action Against Poverty (TAP) is requesting that Roanoke County participate with Craig County, the City of Salem and other non-entitlement communities in the 5th PDC in a regional application by TAP requesting $100,000 of Virginia Community Development Block Grant (VCDBG) funds to establish a microenterprise loan program. This program proposes to identify, train and assist low and moderate income individuals to learn about business basics, have a mentor assigned and learn about starting a business. A goal of the program is to have applicants prepare a business plan and to seek microenterprise loan funds in the $10,000 to $25,000 range. TAP has previously administered $100,000 of microenterprise loan funds received from the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development through its Entrepreneur Training and Microenterprise Loan Program. A further program goal is the preparation of a additional grant applications to the US Small Business Administration (SBA) to expand the microenterprise loan program. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: An initial public hearing was held on February 11, 1997 and public comment was received. This second public hearing is held to a- receive public comments on the locality's use of VCDBG funds within the last five years and to review the proposed application. The Board has previously noted that Roanoke County has not received VCDBG funds within this time period. A resolution is attached for approval of TAP's VCDBG application. FISCAL IMPACT• There is no fiscal impact associated with this grant application. ALTERNATIVES 1. Hold the required public hearing and have TAP brief the Board of Supervisors on its regional grant application. Approve the attached resolution. 2. Do not participate in the regional VCDBG application. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors select Alternative 1. Respectfully submitted: ~?~ ~~ ~ Timothy W. Gubala, Director Department of Economic Development Approved: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ---------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION No Yes Abs Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Attachment Motion by: Eddy Johnson Harrison Minnix Nickens 2 r ~-1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON FEBRUARY 25, 1997 RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR A VIRGINIA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT APPLICATION FROM TOTAL ACTION AGAINST POVERTY (TAP) FOR A MICROENTERPRISE GRANT WHEREAS, Total Action Against Poverty (TAP) has requested that Roanoke County participate in a regional application on its behalf for TAP's Entrepreneur Training and Microenterprise Loan Program, and WHEREAS, Roanoke County, the City of Salem, and other non-entitlement communities in the 5th Planning District Commission, willingly joins in this application and endorses a regional effort to enhance business startups for low and moderate income persons, and WHEREAS, Total Action Against Poverty is requesting $160,000 of loan money which will be used toward creating two to five new businesses, of which 51 % of the employees, will be low- to moderate-income; and WHEREAS, Roanoke County has provided its citizens adequate opportunities to participate in the development of this application by satisfying the citizen participation requirements, including holding two public hearings on February 11 and 25, 1997 and has provided legal notice of these meetings, posted notices of the Microenterprise Loan program to advertise its availability; SO THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors supports Total Action Against Poverty's application for Virginia Community Development Block Grant Funds for Microenterprise Loan Capitalization and authorizes the County Administrator to execute all necessary grant application documentation on its behalf and to make such assurances as may be necessary, all on a form approved by the County Attorney. ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER N~ ~ ~~ / AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: February 25, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Public Hearings for Citizen Comment on the following items: • Real Estate, Personal Property, and Machinery and Tools Tax Rates • "Effective" Real Estate Tax Rate Increase • General Comment on the Upcoming Annual Budget for FY1997-98 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SL~'y1MARY OF INFORMATION: As directed by the Board of Supervisors at the January 28, 1997 Board meeting staff advertised the proposed Real Estate, Personal Property, and Machinery and Tools Tax Rates for the calendar year 1997 as follows: Real Estate Tax at a rate of not more than $1.13 per one hundred dollars assessed valuation. Personal Property Tax at a rate of not more than $3.50 per one hundred dollars assessed valuation. Machinery and Tools Tax at a rate of not more than $3.00 per one hundred dollars assessed valuation. The state code mandates that when reassessment of real property in a locality results in a real estate revenue increase of 1 % over the previous year, the locality must either reduce the tax rate, so that the revenues are no more than 101 % of the previous year's or hold a public hearing indicating an "effective" real property tax increase. ~/-a-~-r Also, consistent with past practices, the Board has expressed a desire to hold a public hearing to elicit "general" comment on the upcoming annual budget early in the development process. This hearing gives citizens the opportunity to express their priorities and concerns for the Board to consider during formulation of the upcoming budget. The public hearings scheduled for today are for receiving written and oral citizen comment on these three topics. The public hearings on proposed Tax Rates were advertised on February 11 and 18, 1997, the "Effective" Real Estate Tax Rate Increase was advertised on February 18, 1997, and the General Comment of the FY1997-98 Budget was advertised on February 18, 1997, thereby satisfying state code requirements for public notice. Attached is a memo that highlights specific points of today's public hearings. Respectfully submitted, ~~ W. Brent Robertson Budget Manager Approv d by, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ACTION VOTE Approved O Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied () Eddy _ _ Received O Harrison _ _ Referred O Johnson _ - To O Minnix ._ _ _ Nickens _ _ _ Lea-~-Y I N T E R MEMO O F F I C E To: Members, Board of Supervisors From: Brent Robertson, Budget Manager Subject: Public Hearings on 2/25197 Date: February 19, 1997 On February 25, 1997 the County will hold three public hearings related to the FY1997-98 budget. These hearings will allow citizens the opportunity to comment on various items that impact development of the upcoming budget--assessments, tax rates, funding priorities, increases in revenues, etc. Listed below are comments relating to the public hearing and/or to the composition of the advertisement that appeared in the newspaper: Tax Rates The Board indicated a desire to advertise and set tax rates early during the budget process. This demonstrates the Board's commitment to not increase taxes and to develop a budget within existing means. Adoption of the rates are scheduled for the March 11 meeting. The tax rates were advertised at the County's current rates. The Board may not adopt tax rates above these advertised rates, (without readvertisement and another public hearing), but could adopt tax rates less than the advertised rates. "Effective" Real Estate Tax Rate Increase • The content and composition of this ad is dictated by state code. This ad is confusing and may alarm some citizens who do not understand its intent. • Identified increase in assessments for 1997 (over the previous year's assessments) was 3.32%. Increase assessments in 1996 (over 1995 assessment) was 4.08%. Thus, reassessment increases have slowed. • The average assessment increase of 3.32% (individual properties maybe higher or lower) is approximately the same as other cost of living increases. CPI is currently running at or slightly above 3%. • Total increase in the proposed FY97-98 budget over the FY96-97 budget is 8.7%. This increase is composed of several significant components: True revenue growth represents 4.8% of the 8.7% increase. 3.9% of the proposed increase is due to budget adjustments for projected new construction (real estate .~~~~~' Members, Board of Supervisors Page 2 February 19, 1997 taxes), "catching-up" of under budgeting of revenue categories from the prior year (personal property, state reimbursements, sales tax), and recognizing federal and state welfare funding at the beginning of the budget cycle versus making mid-year adjustments that require additional Board action. General Comment--FY1997-98 Budget This forum provides citizens with the opportunity to comment on maintaining, increasing, or decreasing funding for services and/or programs for the upcoming fiscal year. This hearing affords the citizen a proactive voice (what they would like to see) as opposed to a reactive voice (what the County AdministratorBoard of Supervisors have proposed). 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111~,() ~ - -_ AGENDA ITEM NO. L(J • ~ i ~~ ~r !~ f~ ~ '=_ APPEARANCE REQUEST =_ ~UBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE CITIZENS COMMENTS c -_ -_ ... SUBJECT: ~ -' ~ v ~.~_ I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, I 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 c decide the time limit based on the number of citizens speaking on an issue, and will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to do otherwise. _ _. __ ^ Speaker will be limited to a presentation of their point of view only. a Questions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. ^ All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between arecognized speaker and audience members is not allowed. ^ Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at all times. ^ Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments c nth the clerk. ^ INDIVIDUALS SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF AN ORGANIZED GROUP SHALL FILE WITH THE CLERK AUTHORIZATION FROM THE GROUP ALLOWING THE INDIVIDUAL TO REPRESENT THEM. -_ PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK a ~ ~ ~Iillllillllllllllilllllllllllllllllilllllllill1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111~ y ~v REVISED FUNDING REQUEST AND ALLOCATION FOR GREENWAYS COORDINATOR POSITION February 25, 1997 Revision Explanation In spring 1996 the four Valley governments funded the Greenways Coordinator position for one year. The Greenways Coordinator was hired to begin August 1, one month after the start of FY 96, due to time involved in advertising and interviewing for the position. The funding request for FY 97 is, therefore, being reduced by 1/12, with carryover from FY 96 to cover the month of July. Budget Request Original Budget Request $60,000 Request Reduction (1/12 of $60,000) - 5,000 Revised Budget Request $55,000 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 Original Request Revised Request Roanoke City 96,600 48% $28,800 $26,400 Roanoke County 74,135 36% $21,600 $19,800 Salem 24,200 12% $ 7,200 $ 6,600 Vinton 7.665 4% $ 2,400 $ 2,200 TOTALS 202,600 100% $60,000 $55,000 -.. O z O O U z z 0 O W z w O E~ z ~~~h rv/ V z z a ~ 0 0 v, o ~, ~ ~ O O O ~ N N ~ ~ ~ ~ [ N v1 ~ 00 ~ y 6 9 ~ h V H L i. ~ w ~ b O ~~ o~ v a ~ o o ~ g y O O N v1 r ~ ~ N v~1 bN9 M x 3 a o ° ~ 3 ~ 0 w 0 ~ -n ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ a~ ~. C7 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~"i ~ U O ~ ~ o ~ a 3 ~ ~ ~ cn . ~ ~ U U ~ «i ~ ~ Cl ~ ~ ~" O ~i . . r , U ~ ~ ~ ° > ~ ~ ~ ~, p'~ o z ~ ._ .~ ~o ~ ~~ a C~a°~ c7 ~ w w0 a 0 •~~ A ~, ~ ~ ~., o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .C ~ ~ 3 bo ~ °' a ~N a ~ ~ _ ~ ~O~ o~ ~~ C73 : .o ' ~ F .~ w ~ «i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ v ' ~ S an a •o ti ~° .... a o A .~ •~ ~ ~ a Ova z~c7 >w ~, ~w ~A ~Illllllllllllllilllllllillllllllillllllllllllillllillllllllllllilllillllllllllllllilililllllllllllliililllilllilll11111111111111,11,) __ __ - - AGENDA ITEM NO. ~ ~ .2 c ... APPE CE REQUEST ~_ __ PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE CITIZENS COMMENTS SUBJECT:._SG~jc~r~~ °~ ~r .~~.C~~ ~4 ~s ) ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~,`~ I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. I AGREE TO ABIDE BY THE GUIDELINES LISTED =_ BELOW: ^ Each speaker will be given between three to five minutes to comment whether speaking as an individual or representative. The Chairman will c decide the time limit based on the number of citizens speaking on an issue, - and will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to __ do otherwise. . _. ^ Speaker will be limited to a presentation of their point of view only. Questions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. c ^ All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between arecognized speaker and audience members is not allowed. __ =_ ^ Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at arl times. __ ^ Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments __ vnth the clerk. ^ INDIVIDUALS SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF AN ORGANIZED GROUP SHALL FILE WITH THE CLERK AUTHORIZATION FROM THE GROUP ALLOWING THE INDIVIDUAL TO REPRESENT THEM. PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK c - _ c ~_ e NAME ~ ~. ~ ~ {GC? ~~ - - -- ,= ADDRESS ~~~ ~ G w~ 'v'~,~ (=E ~ ~( ~ ~( -_ PHONE ~ `~ tr1~~a ~~f U ~Q i~~ ~ ^ ~ '~ - ~ - ~ ~G - Illillilllillllllllllllllllllllllllllllllillilllilllllllilll11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111m ~,I~Illilllllllllllllllillllllllllllllllllllllllliillllillllllilllllllllllllllllllllilllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll11111111111111J,1J - - __ __ - - AGENDA ITEM NO. ~~ _ _ APPE CE REQUEST =_ -_ PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE CITIZENS COMMENTS -_ SUBJECT: `'`l`1 ~1 ~ (~~(D ~ ~i t ~U''~-tS c -_ I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. I AGREE TO ABIDE BY THE GUIDELINES LISTED ,= BELOW: __ ^ Each speaker will be given between three to five minutes to comment whether speaking as an individual or representative. The Chairman will c decide the time limit based on the number of citizens speaking on an issue, and will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to do otherwise. _ _ .. ^ Speaker will be limited to a presentation of their point of view only. Questions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. ^ All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between arecognized speaker and audience members is not allowed. ... __ ^ Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at all times. ^ Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments _ with the clerk. -_ c ^ INDIVIDUALS SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF AN ORGANIZED GROUP SHALL FILE WITH THE CLERK AUTHORIZATION FROM THE GROUP ALLOWING THE INDIVIDUAL TO REPRESENT THEM. __ PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK - c - ~ _ c miilllilllllllllllllillllllllliillllllillllllilllillillillllllllllilllllllllllllllllillllllillllllllllllllilllllililllilliliillllm W ~i~~n~~~~~~~~~~~~~1~~~~~~1~1~111~1~~1~~~~111~~1111t111111111111111111111111111111111111111i11111i1i1111111111111111111111111111jJ _ _ __ =' AGENDA ITEM NO. W ,~. = _. _ _ APPE CE REQUEST - _ _ " _ _ - /'PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE CITIZENS COMMENTS c SUBJECT: 1Z ~ ~.;~.~~~ c oard of Su ervisors to reco nize me durin the _ I would hke the Chairman of the B p g g 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 P speaking as an individual or representative. The Chairman will whethe - decide the time limit based on the number of citizens speaking on an issue, and will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to ; do otherwise. - ^ Speaker will be limited to a presentation of their oint of view only. ~ airman. __ Questions of clarification may be entertained by the C ^ All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between a recognized __ speaker and audience members is not allowed. ; ^ Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at all times. ^ Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments _ with the clerk. ^ INDIVIDUALS SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF AN ORGANIZED GROUP SHALL FILE WITH THE CLERK AUTHORIZATION FROM THE GROUP ALLOWING THE INDIVIDUAL TO REPRESENT THEM. PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK ._ _ - -- - _ , . , NAME .; .~. ,- ADDRESS :.S" ~ ~ ~ ~,~~;.-~~.- ~ : ~ ~.:.-; . , fiiiiiiiiiiiiiniiiii~rE~i~tiiiffiiiiiiiiiii~ii~ii~~nliiiiiiiiilfii~fiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiittt~~f~~~rin~tii~~~~~~tt~ii~t~i~iiiiifii I111111IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII1111111IIIIIIIIIIIIIII11II111IIIIIII111IIIilllllllllllllllllllll~~l~l~llllil~~~~ll~~~~~~~~l~lllillll,~,(1 AGENDA ITEM NO. APPE CE REQUEST { - ``~ PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE CITIZENS COMMENTS SUBJECT: ~~~ '~.~ ~~ ~'% _ ~1~~ ~ ~~ ~ l~'g,%~(,'' ~ / i%~-:~ ~'~ ~~ z~'~' =_ - l - I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to reco nize me during the g meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS c FOR THE RECORD. I AGREE TO ABIDE BY THE GUIDELINES LISTED BELOW: -_ ^ Each speaker will be given between three to five minutes to comment whether speaking as an individual or representative. The Chairman will decide the time limit based on the number of citizens speaking on an issue, c and will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to do otherwise. _ _ . ^ Speaker will be limited to a presentation of their point of view only. Questions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. ^ All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between arecognized speaker and audience members is not allowed. ^ Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at all times. -_ ^ Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments c with the clerk. c ^ INDIVIDUALS SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF AN ORGANIZED GROUP SHALL FILE WITH THE CLERK AUTHORIZATION FROM THE GROUP c ALLOWING THE INDIVIDUAL TO REPRESENT THEM. -_ PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK -_ ~ i ~ _ ~ ~ ~ = ~ ~ mlilllllllllllllillllllilllllllillllllillllliillllllllllllll111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111m ~~r~~~~~~uu~uu~~n~~uu~r~tuuuunuuuunuu~~u~~~un~~~m~m~~~~~~~~~n~~~~~~~nmm~mu~~~mmu~~~muw _ ~ ,y - ~ _ _ _ - ~: --_ __ __ _ AGENDA ITEM NO. __ APPE CE REQUEST - - PUBLIC HEARIN ORDINANCE CITIZENS COMMENTS ~, - r - _ SUBJECT: ~ ~ _~- =_ ~--' = I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS __ FOR THE RECORD. I AGREE TO ABIDE BY THE GUIDELINES LISTED BELOW: ^ Each s Baker will be iven between three to five minutes to comment P speaking as ari individual or representative. The Chairman will whethe - decide the time limit based on the number of citizens speaking on an issue, and will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to ; do otherwise. - c ^ 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 AUTHORIZATION FROM THE GROUP ALLOWING THE INDIVIDUAL TD REPRESENT THEM. . PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK _ - -- - ~ _ , : 1~tiII111111111111111111111it1II11111111111111111111111111111111i1111111111111111111ii11111i11Nlltilllllllilllli11111111111111111 .... . ~. - _ ~_ AGENDA ITEM NO. - _ - _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ -_ APPE CE REQUEST - _ _ _ ~ __ PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE " CITIZENS COMMENTS _. - - - - ii - - SUBJECT: ~ ' 1 (` __ -_ I would like the Chairman of the Board of Su ervisors to reco nize me durin the P g g - meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, I WILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS c FOR THE RECORD. I AGREE TO ABIDE BY THE GUIDELINES LISTED = BELOW: __ c = ^ Each speaker will be given between three to five minutes to comment = whether speaking as an individual or representative. The Chairman will decide the time limit based on the number of citizens speaking on an issue, and will enforce the rule unless instructed by the majority of the Board to = -_ do otherwise. - ^ Speaker will be limited to a presentation of their point of view only. Questions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. ^ All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between arecognized = speaker and audience members is not allowed. _ - - - ~ ^ Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at all times. - ^ Speakers are requested to leave any written statements and/or comments - - -_ with the clerk. _ ^ INDIVIDUALS SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF AN ORGANIZED GROUP = SHALL FILE WITH THE CLERK AUTHORIZATION FROM THE GROUP ALLOWING THE INDIVIDUAL TO REPRESENT THEM. c PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK c - - _ - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - = - _ - _ mIIIIIIIII11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111Ullllll1111111m O~ ROANp,1.~ ~ , ? A 2 L7 2 ov 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 March 4, 1997 Mr. Fred Altizer District Engineer Virginia Department P. O. Box 3071 Salem, VA 24153 Dear Mr. Altizer: of Transportation BRENDA J. HOLTON DEPUTY CLERK Attached is a certified copy of Resolution 022597-1 requesting VDOT to continue funding projects currently on the plan and adopt those projects identified as "project not on plan" for inclusion into the 1997-2000 Primary and Interstate Six Year Improvement Plan. This resolution was adopted by the Board of Supervisors at their meeting on Tuesday, February 25, 1997, If you need further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, ~~ Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Attachment cc Arnold Covey, The Honorable and Chairman, Lorinda G. Transportatio Director, Engineering & Inspections Robert E. Martinez, Secretary of Transportation Commonwealth Transportation Board Lionberger, Salem District, Commonwealth n Board c~aea P~ O~ ~tOANp~.~ o a `7838 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING TERRANCE L. HARRINGTOth, AlCP DIRECTOR OF PLANNING TO: Neighboring Property Owners FROM:' ~ Terrance L. Harrington Director of Planning ~: ~`) ~~ ~~ ~ ' I ~~~ .xg ~~ . PLANNING COMMISSION BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS DATE: January 8, 1997 ~; Community Meeting to Discuss Proposed Rezoning on Route 419, Lloyd D.Lazarus Property I would like to invite you to a community meeting to discuss a proposed rezoning in your neighborhood. Radford and Company has submitted a rezoning request to rezone a 11.05 acre tract from R-1 (Single Family Residential) to R-3 (Multi-Family Residential). The stated purpose of the rezoning request is to develop a condominium project of no more than 90 units. The map on-the back of this notice shows the location of the proposed development. ~ communi~~ meeting has been schP~711 Pr3 fer T1lesday January «,sr at 5 30 pm at the Brambleton Center located at 3738 RramblPfOn Avenue. Representatives of Radford and Company wi11 be in attendance to present their development proposal and answer any questions you may have about their proposed project. Representatives of the county planning department wi11 also be in attendance to answer any questions about the rezoning process and procedures. In addition t~ the community meeting on the 21st, the following meetings have also been scheduled to formally review this request: February 4, 1997 - P1arning Commission Public Hearing February 25, 1997 - Board of Supervisors Public Hearing Both of these hearings wi11 be held at the Roanoke County Administration Building located at 5204 Bernard~Drive. I hope you can attend on the 21st : Please feel free to invite your neighbors or other interested persons. If you have any questions, please feel free to ca11 me at 772-2068 or Janet Scheid at 772-2094. P.O, BOX 29800 • ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 • (540) 772-2068 • FAX: (540) 772-2108 ® Printed on Recycled Paper Printed by Mary Allen / ADM01 2/04/.97 1:46pm From: Kathy Claytor / ADMO1 To: Mary Allen / ADMO1 Subject: fwd: SERVICE AWARDS --------------------------------------- ===NOTE====------=====2/04/97==1:44pm== CC: Joe Sgroi / ADMO1 ....................................... As a follow up to our earlier e-mail, we would prefer to do service awards at the Feb 25th BOS meeting. HR will be notifying depts. and employees very soon..pls. let me know right away if there is a prob getting on the agenda. Thanks, kc Fwd=by:=Mary=Allen=/___________________ Fwd to: Kathy Claytor / ADMO1 ....................................... No problem for the 25th. We discussed it yesterday at Agenda staff and I said it would probably be on the 25th. By the way, ECH is still considering looking at other ways to present but wants it on cable access TV. Page: 1 LEGAL NOTICE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, February 25, 1997, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of Radford & Company 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. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Planning and Zoning, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: February 6, 1997 %'~~C,t.~~ ..~/ ~ ~',,2.~e,~~ Mary H. Allen, Clerk Please publish in the Roanoke Times Tuesday, February 11, 1997 Tuesday, February 18, 1997 Direct the bill for publication to: Radford & Co. c/o Ed Natt PO Box 20068 Roanoke, VA 24018-0007 (540) 774-1197 SEND AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: ROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT P.O. BOX 29800, ROANOKE, VA 24018 LEGAL NOTICE ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, February 25, 1997, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of Jean McDowell for a Special Use Permit to allow a home beauty shop, located at 6187 Bent Mountain Road, Windsor Hills Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Planning and Zoning, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: February 6, 1997 ~,1 L~~_~ Mary H. Allen, Clerk Please publish in the Roanoke Times Tuesday, February 11, 1997 Tuesday, February 18, 1997 To be paid on delivery by: Jean McDowell PO Box 20963 Roanoke, VA 24018 (540) 772-4344 SEND AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: ROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT P.O. BOX 29800, ROANOKE, VA 24018 • 0'~ C~O,~G Go~~ ~ a Ro~o~e~ 4~$tii goa~oke Ge'4ti~ ~ ~,o~lc °~ o~ s'd`at~o~ ,,1~01~ a4 ~N o~ v ~ P~~ ~~b, ~e~i°~b ode ~°~ may be .~~~pp fat time °a'~ ~e ~a~~ ~1134~ s 9~ a ~ as 19 eft `S~ ~~ eb so°~~'~ O`~ ~O ~3 Sp o~ ~' ' .vnt;' O~ ~ ~~ ~ia~ ati~ 1°~~sa ~~ ~ GO~~ O~ ~O ~3 pp . ~° P~~' god ,~.~ ~.~ ~o~ ~o~ ~~ o s~~ z~~~ ~04~~ O~ ~.~o~ ~s ~ ~~A ~4 ~~o~ ~~o s~ss~~ ~4~~ ~~`~~°~ Ls~~ co~~ ~ ~o s~~ ~ ~ `~~° O~ ~ss~ t ~g~ ~ god Zpp p~5 G~"" ~~0~~ 4~~' O s~~ ~' ~ ALA P ~ ~5 ti~ Pc'~ 4~g~lpp / ~ls°SS ~e~o~bo~sv4 ~• ~ ~~ ~.°l~°~ e ZOANp,~-~ L ~~ 2 v s 1838 DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE January 30, 1997 C~~~xx~~ .~~ ~~xx~~.~.~ DIANE D. HYATT, CPA DIRECTOR PAUL E. GRICE, CPA ASSISTANT DIRECTOR Ms. Patti Connolly Roanoke Times & World News 201-209 Campbell Avenue, SW Roanoke, VA 24011 Dear Patti, Please publish the enclosed legal advertisement on February 11, 1997 and February 18, 1997. Bill the cost of the publication to: County of Roanoke ATTN: Mary Allen Board of Supervisors P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 I would like to review a draft of the advertisement before publication. My fax number is 772-2186. A copy of the ad from 1995 has been included for your information. I would like these ads to be of the same approximate size as the 1995 ad. Sincerely, W. Brent Robertson Budget Manager c: Elmer Hodge, County Administrator Mary Allen, Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Paul Mahoney, County Attorney Anne Marie Green, Director, Community Relations P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 (540) 772-2023 FAX: (540) 772-2186 ® Recycled Paper ~~~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ti~Cq~~~~ o~'o~ ~e 1q°~e,~e1~ ~ og ~~ b ati p~4~1gq~ , . e'~ ~ b~~ o~ti,~~ea"~'~e, p~ ~~$ es c1~~~eb~ o~e Abe oho ,~~`~ ~~,~~ ~ov~ e ~o~~ eti`~e c1 eiea~ ~~e, S. Gp~tti~1~ ~o~e ti°b tio"~eG soo~'~,~,a'~~ e~,~' GK`S o~go o~ titie~a~~' o f as o~~e . ~e _ ;sods e,~~~b~c oo~;~ eS, 5 ~e~a~ She 10°~~1~~ ~,~. fiGe ~a'~° a a~b o~ o~ ° o'~'~~5,1o~~j s'~t~oe ~~~t ~e~ ~~~efi~~ ~ti ~~~efiss~ o~e~ e~ ~eb ~~ ea cti'~~ ~soal~s~~o~e G eiesti o~~ god P~~ ,~~e~~a. ~~4Si 1ti,`~~ ~4~ ~~ ~~ ~+ ..~y~ • ® Rem P~ ($~~~ ,> 2-2p23 FAX. (54~~ ',2'2186 O~ ROANp,Y~ ti A Z L7 ~ z v a~ 1838 DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE January 30, 1997 Ms. Patti Connolly Roanoke Times & World News 201-209 Campbell Avenue, SW Roanoke, VA 24011 Dear Patti, PAUL E. GRICE, CPA ASSISTANT DIRECTOR Please publish the enclosed legal advertisement on February 11, 1997 and February 18, 1997. Bill the cost of the publication to: County of Roanoke ATTN: Mary Allen Board of Supervisors P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 I would like to review a draft of the advertisement before publication. My fax number is 772-2186. A copy of the ad from 1995 has been included for your information. I would like these ads to be of the same appro~rimate size as the 1995 ad. Sincerely, ~1~`"~` W . Brent Robertson Budget Manager c: Elmer Hodge, County Administrator Mary Allen, Clerk to the Board of Supervisors Paul Mahoney, County Attorney Anne Marie Green, Director, Community Relations DIANE D. HYATT, CPA DIRECTOR P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 (540) 772-2023 • FAX: (540) 772-2186 ® R~~ Paper ~+_ OF ROANp~.~ a i ~ az C~.~~xxY# ~~ ~r~xxY~ ~e DIANE D. HYATT, CPA ~ggg DIRECTOR PAUL E. GRICE, CPA DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR M~ 2 ~ February 12, 1997 Ms. Patti Connolly Roanoke Times & World News Legal Advertisement Department 201-209 Campbell Avenue, SW Roanoke, VA 24011 Dear Patti: Please publish the enclosed public notice as a block advertisement on Tuesday, February 18, 1997. Bill the cost of publication to the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors at the following address: Roanoke County Board of Supervisors ATTN: Mary Allen P. ~. BOX 29800 Roanoke,. Virginia 24018-0798 A copy of last year's ad is attached. This year's ad should be of the same approximate size. I would like to review the proof when completed. My fax number is 772-2186;phone is 772-2021. Thank you. Sincerely, ~~ W. Brent Robertson Budget Manager Enclosure c: Paul Mahoney, County Attorney Mary Allen, Clerk to the Board Anne Marie Green, Director, Community Relations Elmer Hodge, County Administrator M:\finance\budgeNadveitise\pul>~ear.ad Febmary 12, 1997 P.O. BOX 29800 ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 (540) 772-2023 FAX: (540) 772-2186 ® Recycled Paper ., r COUNTY OF ROANOKE PUBLIC HEARING CITIZEN INPUT FOR THE 1997-98 BUDGET The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County invites citizens of Roanoke County to offer written or oral commerrt for items to be included in the budget for the 1997-98 fiscal year. An informational public hearing, to receive citizen comment, will be held on Tuesday, February 25, 1997 at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as maybe heard, at the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, S.W., Roanoke, Virguua. All interested citizens are invited to attend this meeting. M:~msncelbadgedadvectix~pu6heacad Pobmaty 12, 1997 COUNTY OF ROANDKE PUBLIC NEARING CITIZEN INPUT FOR THE 1996.97 BUDGET The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County invites citizens of Roanoke County to offer written or oral com- ment for items to be included in the budget for the 1996-97 fiscal year. An informational public hearing, to receive citizen comment, wilt be held on Tuesday, February 27, 1996 at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as may be heard, at the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, S.W., Roanoke, Virginia. .All interested citizens are invited to .attend this meeting. (326710) ~.~5~ y~-~s ~ ~. Printed by Mary Allen / ADMO1 2/19/97 8:48am From: Mary Allen / ADMO1Confirm receipt To: Terry Harrington / ADMOl Subject: fwd: 2/25 AGENDA --------------------------------------- ===NOTE====------=====2/19/97==8:10am== From the email, etc. I got and the agenda staff meeting yesterday, you are supposed to write an agenda report on amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to require Special Use Permits for all towers. It is under new business. Let me know if you have questions. Also, Don Witt is being recognized at the 7:00 p.m. session for being award the Local Planning Official of the Year. Fwd=by:=Terry=Harring=2/19/97==8:30am== Fwd to: Elmer Hodge / ADMO1, Mary Allen / ADMO1 ....................................... Thanks.... the Commission will have the item on their consent agenda for March 4th, with a PC PH on April 1st In my original note to you and ECH, I indicated that the BOS could receive on 2/25; with adoption on 4/22. To meet this schedule, the BOS does not need to receive until 3/25 consent agenda. I would like to keep this amendment "quiet" for a few weeks, but still keep on the same schedule. There is no need to have this on the BOS agenda for next Tuesday, unless we want to break from our normal routine. Let me know. Terry Fwd=by:=Mary=Allen=/___________________ Fwd to: Terry Harrington / ADM01 ....................................... You probably need to talk to ECH - I think he wants the word out on what is going on. If it's going to be on the 3/25 agenda, he might be O.K. with it, but I really think you need to discuss with him (I will if I get to him before you.) Page: 1 ~~ b~s"~°~al 4~p~~G~ es e~cZ~ Stiyeai G~ ~,~ `~ ~ ti~levl o4~y~ e~ceea o~~'~e~ 110 p4~~ o4e~y f ~e~ ~ o ,~cb~ ~es~ °~ 4g cSease4~ v~°e ° ~~stio a~i~e 4~ ti°ti~ ~Z4 ses'~° ~ sess~° ~ t'• `~e~by ~',~ X109 4~ e,~o4° ~°tia1 ~o~°t ~sc~ e9S~e~~,~~U~ ~3 °~~11~tta~e ~o~ e• o~~b~ ~ 3ti Q,s9~,~~ eve, iatie. ~~~tie e ~ ~yetia~' o ~ c ~ ati ~b ~~ e ti~ °~~ ~, ~e o 4~ to4~~ `mac 1as'~ ye ~ti1°~~ ~~,~ ° a~o4 tatie ~~ time e~ es G°~ ~e~ ~~e ~,e~~ O~~ as ,~s'~ e`1° ses~' t~ ~t'~a ba~~ ~ e 9 tis °~. ~o ~~' o ~ o e~ o c q,. '~ sse~ e4 ~e t`j atie c1`~1 as zoo het ~~ ~~ b~ P~ ess'~ vat ~ esti e~ o~ ,~,e4 e1o tie at s ~ e e o ~ . asp ses~ tie~~ oft ~~,~ ti~~~ °~~°~ e~ ~~ce ~,,~cy e~1~~,y e~ ~o,~~a~e ta~'e °~ti~ ce~ ~ a14~o4"" e~c'l 1j° e ~°~ to tee, ~ e ~ ~ ~°~ , ~, 1ess~b o ~`~. ,~e v~ ~~ .Sb 6~ ~ „~o4p g° s'4~ of 'L• vat ess~ e~ce. °,~~. °~,~e ~ °~ e~~tie ~,~~ aSS e~~ s~v ~10~' God ~3~ eati ~$ecv o~ arse pD~'~ _~~ ~ o~~ 0~'1 `~~' c~^~aQ~e ~ ~ 17, 3 X10 ~~~Se' , a~e~~aZt~b~"~~ ~~e~ a~ a4e~ ti5',9~? . Fe~'uar v,o ~~ $o ego abo4 ase ~ ~,~ys~, os C~O1 Hu, ~o'4°~sev~ G°~ ~°~eve ~~e~~G°v9~~ 4 ~ Ret~ ke imes ` °'~~ ~ 0 0 Adv ~' ~ e~G~ti es~' bed e~°a~ 241 W ert~ul 4 ~ ~~ ati~b C~ g ~ °~ ~, Ro~Oke, Vq ~~ Avg, ~ a~~ ~ ~~~ Dem. C~ 11 ~~~tia~e. X04 ~~~~ ol, "~ bUcb ,be'~a~~~ . ~' Ro closed you P+~~~~ o °~e, S ~. hud eve ~ ib~ t o~ please Pubs ~ Notice o~' t°• s1~ this as a °~. L, ~eg~ / ~,' ~~' ,tea aav. ~ COUnty °f R0~ °~ce s,~e,4~ ~0,~1°'~ .fie. A~ ~ ~4 e ~ ~ eb o4 B0~'d o f arY A~e~ tib b R ~ x 2 8e~. ~ 41~c ~~~. ~4Sb~ oano~e° V ~~ ~°rs be ~ ~~, ~~ a ~a$ oftl1e A 24418'~79a ~ ,4°~ off,. adve~~ement before gv Publ~~ ~ ~ ~s~ator 'ey 1 elati°ns (Cop ~ 8-798 • "' R~Ya•d der 154~~ X72-2p23 • FqX. 154p~ >>2 2j g 6 d by Audrey Bower / ADMOl 2/11/97 8:32am From: Janet Scheid / ADM01 To: Audrey Bower / ADM01 Subject: Radford Transmittal Report --------------------------------------- ===NOTE====------=====2/10/97==3:49pm== In order to move this along I have made the revisions to the transmittal report and saved them on g:planning. Please send to Mary Allen with the following note: The specific wording of the proffered conditions is'being`worked:out with Radford & Co.-`and Ed Natt"and will be finalized by Tuesday 2/18. Page: 1 Printed by Mary Allen / ADM01 2/07/.97 7:39am From: Janet Scheid / ADMConfirm receipt To: Mary Allen / ADMO1 Subject: fwd: Don Witt --------------------------------------- ===NOTE====------=====2/06/97==9:20am== Don Witt was awarded the "Local Planning Official" of the year for 1996 by Va. Chapter American Planning Assoc. I don't think we ever did any type of BOS recognition for that although AMG thinks that maybe we did. Do you remember? If not, do you think it is tooo late to do it now? The 1997 awards are announced in May. Fwd=by:=Mary=Allen=/==2/06/97==9:28am== Fwd to: Janet Scheid / ADMO1 ....................................... I think we did several years ago, but I can't remember who was recognized. We can add to the 2/11 agenda or wait and add to 2/25 agenda at 7 p.m. if that's more convenient for him. We can give him a certificate of recognition, but we'll need some info both about him and the award and we'll need it today to add to agenda for 2/11. Let me know. Fwd=by:=Janet=Scheid==2/06/97==9:30am== Fwd to: Mary Allen / ADMO1 ....................................... I'll check with Don. For the 2/11 agenda would it be afternoon or 7pm? Fwd=by:=Mary=Allen=/==2/06/97==9:31am== Fwd to: Janet Scheid / ADMOl ....................................... It would be at 3 p.m. - there is no evening session. That's why I thought he might prefer the 7 p.m. session on 2/25. It will also give us time to get info and prepare certificate. Fwd=by:=Janet=Scheid==2/06/97==4:48pm== Fwd to: Mary Allen / ADMOl ....................................... Okay - I finally got hold of Don. Feb. 25 will work for him. Do you want me to just give you all the info. and you can do the certificate? When do you need it by? Fwd=by:=Mary=Allen=/___________________ Fwd to: Janet Scheid / ADM01 ....................................... Need info by 2/18. We'll do the certificate. Thanks. Page: 1 i ~`, ~, VIRGINIA CHAPTER AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION ~ ` AWARDS PROGRAM -1996 A. Entry Information (Attach additional sheets if necessary): 1. Name of Nominee (If a joint entry, provide name, address and telephone no. for all parties involved): Donald R. Witt 2. Award Category (Please check. See following page for descriptions): a. Professional Planning Project Award d. Student/Class Planning Project Award ®Local Official Award e. Outstanding Student Award c. Planning Leadership Award f. Journalism Award ; , . 3. Title of Principal Document (If Applicable): N/A 4. Short Description: Mr. Witt has served on the Roanoke County Planning Commission .for t2 years. He has been instrumental. in initiating several projects of local, regional-and statewide significance and has been a vocal proponent of new and innovative approaches to solving problems and mitigating conflicts. 5. Nominee's Address: 3332 Kenw i ck Tra i 1 SW 6. Telephone: (540) 982-2321 , off i c Roanoke, VA 24018 (540) 989-0953, home B. Implementation Status of Entry: N/A C. Attachments Submitted in Support of Nomination: See attached narrative 1. Narrative: Attach a concise statement (no more than 3 pages) of all information relevant to the description and evaluation of the entry. The statement should be organized under the following and/or any additional appropriate headings. Describe why and how the nomination has made significant contributions to planning in Virginia, using the selection criteria shown elsewhere in this brochure. PROJECTS INDIVIDUALS JOURNALISM Title of entry Title of individual Title of entry Short description of entry - Short description of individual Setting Time frame Implementation status of entry and achievement Capacity for continuing impact Setting Time frame Nature of contributions Significance to planning field Capacity for continuing impact Time frame Significance to planning field Significance to planning field Innovations in theory, methodology Publications/accomplishments and/or practice Leadership ~. ... .. w r ~•, •, VIRGINIA CHAPTER AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION AWARDS PROGRAM - 1996. ,:~ i C. Attachments Submitted in Support of Nomination (Continued): 2. Published Reports(s) Entitled: N/A 3. Supporting Material(s) Appropriate for Nomination: Letters of support : . 1) 4Jayne G. Strickland, Executive Director, Fifth Planning District Commission; 2) John R. Marlles, AICP, Chief Planning ~ Community Development, City of Roanok 4. One Page Resume of Nominee. Required for local official, planning leadership and outstanding student awards; optional for other awards. See attached D. Nominator (All nominations, with the exception of the Journalism Award, must be submitted by a member of the Virginia Chapter of APA) I. Name: Janet Scheid 2. Telephone: ~ 540) 772-2094 3. Address: PO Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 I certify that, to the best of my knowledge, all information contained in or represented by this entry is true and accurate. In addition, I have read and agree to the rules governing the Awards Program. Date: Dc~~lcl CO Signature: -T E. Principal Contact For Questions About Nomination (If different from the nominator) I. Name: Same as nominator 2. Telephone: 3. Address: F. Media Notification. If this nomination wins an award, please notify the following local news media after the award has been announced at the VAPA conference. Indicate address and phone number. Roanoke Times, PO Box 2491, Roanoke, VA 24010 (540) 981-3114 Salem Times-Register, 1633 Main St., Salem, VA 24153 (540) 389-9395 The Vinton Messenger, 118 E. Lee Ave., Vinton, VA 24179 (540) 343-0720` AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION 1997 NATIONAL AWARDS FOR PLANNING NAME OF NOMINEE: Donald R. Witt TITLE OF INDIVIDIIAL: Planning Commissioner, Roanoke County SHORT DESCRIPTION OF INDIVIDIIAL AND ACHIEVEMENTS: Mr. Witt has served on the Roanoke County Planning Commission since 1984. In December 1995 he was re- appointed for his fourth four-year term. Mr. Witt served as Chairman of the Planning Commission in 1986, 1989 and 1993. It is indicative of Mr. Witt's professionalism and high standards that he has been appointed to the Planning Commission by members of both political parties. Originality: Mr. Witt was a key committee member in developing voluntary design guidelines for private properties bordering a National Park - the Blue Ridge Parkway. The technique involved - a design charette involving private developers, the National Park Service, local government officials and conservationists - was unique to both the National Park Service and Roanoke County. The County and Blue Ridge Parkway staff have received numerous requests from other National Parks and localities across the country to share the success of this innovative approach to public/private land use conflicts. Mr. Witt's ability to listen to all sides and negotiate a win-win solution was a key element to the success of this committee's work. Transferability: As Chairman of the Planning Commission, Mr. Witt was a leader in the development of a countywide Manufactured Home Ordinance. This ordinance successfully mitigated the siting of manufactured housing in Roanoke County and has become a model ordinance throughout the State of Virginia. Quality: Over a twelve year period, Mr. Witt has not only devoted significant amounts of time and energy to the planning field but he has demonstrated innovation and creativity in finding solutions to planning challenges. By being broad-minded and willing to look at new and different ways to solve problems, Mr. Witt has set an outstanding example for the planning staff, the Planning Commission and Roanoke County citizens. He has contributed both his tangible skills, such as architectural expertise, building construction knowledge and sound planning theories and his more intangible talents, such as evaluating issues fairly, verbalizing decisions clearly and respecting the opposing views. Implementation: As Chairman of the Commission, Mr. Witt created and promoted the Route 419 Development Plan - a corridor study of a heavily traveled major roadway in Roanoke County. This Plan established a framework for future development along the highway, allowing new expansion of various land uses while protecting existing residential and agricultural uses. This Plan, implemented for 10 years, remains relevant and has been effective in managing growth along this major corridor. Comprehensiveness: Mr. Witt has been instrumental in the County's Comprehensive Plan revisions beginning with serving as a committee member on the Visioning Steering Committee. This planning project involved the input of over 800 citizens determining the future of Roanoke County. The work required the balancing of divergent points of view and objectives from home builders, school teachers, chief executives and high school students. 1 MarshWitt Associates Donald R. Witt, CCS, Architect Principal - MarshWitt Associates, P.C. Responsibilities: Project Manager Architectural Production Coordinator ADA Coordinator Specifications and Construction Drawings Asbestos Abatement Roof Analysis and Design Quality Control Review Construction Administration Education: Bachelor of Architecture - 1966 M.S. Architectural Engineering - 1971 Pennsylvania State University Continuing Education: Certified Value Engineering 40 Hour Workshop Blue Ridge Parkway Design Impact Workshop Material Risk Shifting Construction Contract Terms Strategic Planning with Visioning Process Professional Registration: Architect -Virginia National Certification Architectural Registration Board AHERA EPA -Asbestos Inspection, Design and Management Planner Certified Construction Specifier (CCS) Society of American Value Engineers (SAVE) Professional Activities: Construction Specifications Institute Blue Ridge Chapter President 1982 Region Meeting Program Chair 1983 Region Certification Chairman 1986 Region Meeting Vice Chair 1994 Education Chair 1979, 1980, 1992-1995 Technical Chair 1981, 1989-1991 Chapter Director 1995-1996 Teaches construction specifications writing course for architects, engineers and other construction-related personnel. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers Roanoke Chapter President 1978 Homer Addams Award for Outstanding Research in HVAC Region Meeting Chair 1981 Region Award of Merit 1981 MarshWitt Page - 1 MarshWitt Associates Planning Commission Activities: Planning Commission 1984 - 1996. Planning Commission Chairman 1986, 1989, 1993 As chairman.... • Promoted the Route 419 Development Plan, a community-based plan for one of the county's major roads. Plan become a model for other major arterial highways. • Participated in the development of a Mobile Home Ordinance to mitigate siting of manufactured housing in the county. Ordinance became a model throughout the state. • Adopted the Comprehensive Development Plan - Land Use Management Guide. • Sited and mitigated local concerns in the construction of a new regional landfill. Participated in development of new ordinance for Screening and Buffering to mitigate concerns regarding differing land uses between adjacent properties. Participated in the Roanoke County Historic Resources Advisory Committee. The committee guided professional consultants in identifying historic structures and developing guidelines to preserve them. Participated as part of the Policy Advisory Committee for the Roanoke River Corridor Study, an interjurisdictional study to promote environmentally friendly land uses along the river corridor. Chairman of a community-based Sign Ordinance Subcommittee to write a new sign ordinance as part of the new zoning ordinance. Participated in the Blue Ridge Parkway Viewshed Committee, a committee to define viewsheds from the parkway and begin the process of developing instruments to protect them from overdevelopment. Participated in a 2-day planning workshop in designing two proposed developments within the designated Blue Ridge Parkway view shed. Participated in Roanoke County Visioning Steering Committee, a community based committee to define the county's future in 2010 and lay the foundation for a new comprehensive plan. Participated in the development growth management vision in the visioning focus group for Growth Management. MarshWitt Page - 2 MarshWitt Associates Participated in Roanoke Valley and Greenways/Open Space Steering Committee, an interjurisdictional committee to promote greenways within the Roanoke Valley. Promoted the development of landscaped highway entrances at Roanoke County entrance corridors. Attempts to find a balanced solution relative to opposing land use desires. Other Community Activities Participated in Appalachian Service Project for 9 years. ASP is a week long program where teenagers and adults live in Appalachian communities and repair houses, making them warmer, safer and dryer. Participated in Habitat for Humanity 1993 and 1995. Promoted within his company and participated in all cleanups in Adopt-A-Highway program in the past 4 years. Has coordinated repair teams for local house repair for Roanoke Area Ministries. Has donated over 9 gallons of blood to the American Red Cross. Active member of Windsor Hills United Methodist Church, chairing properties committee, evangelism commission, teaching Sunday school, and participating in choir. MarshWitt Page - 3 Printed by Mary Allen / ADM01 2/19/97 4:37pm --------------------------------------- From: Terry Harrington / ADMO1 Confirm receipt To: Mary Allen / ADMO1 Subject: fwd: Change in Agenda Title --------------------------------------- ===NOTE====------=====2/19/97==2:58pm== Mary ....please revise the agenda title for the tower item to the following: Request to the Planning Commission to consider amending the zoning ordinance to require a Special Use Permit for Broadcasting Towers in Industrial Zoning Districts. Terry Fwd=by:=Mary=Allen=/==2/19/97==3:35pm== Fwd to: Terry Harrington / ADMO1 ....................................... Done! Fwd=by:=Terry=Harring=2/19/97==4:04pm== Fwd to: Mary Allen / ADMO1 ....••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• sorry...i have one more change!! Please change "industrial" to "industrial and commercial" thanks T. Fwd=by:=Mary=Allen=/___________________ Fwd to: Terry Harrington / ADMO1 ....................................... GOTCHA! --------------------------------------- Page: 1 Printed by Mary Allen / ADMO1 2/1/97 1O:31am From: Elmer Hodge / ADMO1 To: Mary Hicks / ADMO1, Susie Owen / ADMOl, Terry Harrington / ADMO1 Subject: fwd: Permitting of towers in Ind. zoning ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ===NOTE====------=====2/12/97==8:06am=====__________________________________ The recently instaled GTE tower off Starkey Road makes it necessary to change the ordinance to require a special use permit for all towers. I have spoken with several BOS members and they want to EXPEDITE the change of ordinance for this. Please prepare an agenda item for the Feb 25 meeting for whatever the next step is. Fwd=by:=Terry=Harring=2/12/97==8:41am______________________________ Fwd to: Elmer Hodge / ADMO1, Mary Allen / ADMO1, Mary Hicks / ADMO1 ............................................................................ I will prepare the draft ordinance for the Board's agenda for 2/28/96. Commission will receive March 4th, and hold their Public Hearing on April lst. Board can adopt ordinance change on April 22nd. The committee I have put together to prepare a Roanoke County cell tower policy and ordinance changes meets for the first time this Friday February 14th. Industry representatives from the three wireless providers have agreed to participate along with county staff, and citizen representatives. Reps from the other governments in the area will also be attending, as the companies are trying to create their "net" on a regional basis. It is my opinion that it is unwise to proceed with an ordinance amendment at this time. In addition to such an amendment undermining the committee process, I believe it will weaken our current litigation we have with US Celluar over the Catawba site. US Cellular will use our actions against us in court. Page: 1