Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6/24/1997 - RegularO~ ROANp,~~ ~ p 2 ,.. ~ G) ~ a ov a, 1838 C~.a~~x~t~ .off ~.~~~.~~e WORKING DOCUMENT-SUBJECT TO REVISION ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION AGENDA JUNE 24, 1997 ~~~~~ 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 may be made. PLEASE NOTE• THERE WILL BE AN AUDIT COMMITTEE MEETING PR/OR TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING AT 2:15 P.M. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 P.M.) 1. Roll Call. HCN ABSENT AT 3:01 P.M. 2. Invocation: The Reverend Joseph Lehman Our Lady of Nazareth Catholic Church i 3. Pledge of Allegiance to the United States Flag. B. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF AGENDA ITEMS BRUCE WELCH, ATTORNEY FOR JOE BLACKSTOCK REQUESTED THAT THE BOAR^v REFER ITEM T-2 BACK Tn THE P( ANNING COMMISSION. BLJ ADVISED THEY WOULD REFER THE ITEM BACK DURING THE EVENING SESSION. C. PROCLAMATIONS, AWARDS RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND 1. Certificate of contributions Manager. Recognition to Angela McPeak for her to Roanoke County as RVTV Station PRESENTED TO ANGIE MCPEAK BY BLJ LBE MOTION TO APPROVE CERTIFICATE -JRC WITH HCN ABSENT D. BRIEFINGS NONE E. NEW BUSINESS 1. Request to accept and appropriate funds from the Virginia Juvenile Community Crime Control Act and adopt resolution prioritizing the Expenditures of the Grant. (John Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator) F-062497-1 FM MOTION TO APPROVE RESO AND APPROPRIATE FUNDS ~~RC WITH HCN ABSENT 2. Request to transfer funds from the Court Service Unit to Youth Haven II as maintenance of effort for VJCCCA Monies (John Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator) a A-062497-2 ~ BE MOTION TO APPROVE TRANSFER OF FUNDS -~RC WITH HCN ABSENT 3. Request to award contract and transfer money for professional consultant for needs assessment for Juvenile Detention Facility. (John Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator) A-062497-3 BLJ MOTION TO AWARD CONTRACT AND TRANSFER FUNDS URC WITH HCN ABSENT 4. Request to adopt a resolution to abandon a section of an unopened road known as Castle Rock Mining Road in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District. (Arnold Covey, Director of Engineering 8~ Inspections) R-062497-4 LBE MOTION TO APPROVE RESO ~~RC WITH HCN ABSENT 5. Request for appropriation of State Compensation Funds and additional County funding for two emergency-funded positions in the Sheriff's Office. (Gerald Holt, Sheriff) A-062497-5 BLJ MOTION TO APPROVE ADDITIONAL FUNDS FROM BOARD CONTINGENCY FUND AND APPROPRIATION OF STATE COMP BOARD FUNDS ~~RC WITH HCN ABSENT F. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS ECH WILL SCHEDULE WORK SESSION ON STORMWATER DETENTION FOR 718/97 G. REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS NONE 3 H. REQUEST FOR PUBLIC HEARING AND FIRST READING OF REZONING ORDINANCES -CONSENT AGENDA FM MOTION TO APPROVE 1ST READING 2ND AND PUBLIC HEARING - 7/22/97 URC WITH HCN ABSENT 1. Ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to expand the existing facility, located at 4608 Brambleton Avenue, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Saint John Evangelical Lutheran Church. Z. Ordinance to rezone 1.0 acre from I-2 to C-2 and obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a facility for minor auto repair, located in the 3300 block of Shawnee Drive, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of Gary Ellis. 3. Ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to expand the existing facility, located at 4873 Brambleton Avenue, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Cave Spring Baptist Church. 4. Ordinance to rezone 0.94 acre from C-1 to C-2 and obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a convenience store, located at the southwest corner of Rosecrest Road and Route 221, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Stephen D. and Marie Freeman. 5. Ordinance to rezone 9.77 acre from R-1 Conditional to R-1 to construct single family residences, located at the south side of Woodhaven Road, approximately 0.5 mile east of its intersection with Green Ridge Road, Hollins Magisterial District, upon the petition of Ernest Clark. 6. Ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to allow a private kennel, located at 1529 Dalmation Drive, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of Sara Cole and Kit Davis. 4 I. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance to exercise an option with Koppers Industries, Inc. to obtain two sanitary sewer easements and to purchase approximately 0.226 acres of right of way on the west side of the private portion of Garman Road as part of the Kroger Project. (Timothy Gubala, Economic Development Director) FFH MOTION TO APPROVE 1ST READING 2ND - 7/8197 URC WITH HCN ABSENT J. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance authorizing the renewal of a lease of real estate for a public safety radio tower site on Tinker Mountain. (William Rand, General Services Director) 0-062497-6 BLJ MOTION TO ADOPT ORD URC WITH HCN ABSENT 2. Ordinance authorizing acquisition of 0.368 acre parcel of real estate in Montclair Estates Section 9. (Arnold Covey, Director of Engineering & Inspections) 0-062497-7 FFH MOTION TO ADOPT ORD URC WITH HCN ABSENT COUNTY IS NEGOTIATING WITH CITY FOR THEM TO PURCHASE THE LAND K. APPOINTMENTS 1. Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission. 5 BLJ NOMINATED RICHARD COX TO ANOTHER 3-YEAR TERM EXPIRING 6/30/2000 CONFIRMED ON CONSENT AGENDA 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-062497-8 FM MOTION TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA AFTER DISCUSSION OF I EM -4 ~JRC WITH HCN ABSENT 1. Approval of minutes for May 13, 1997. 2. Confirmation of appointments to the Board of Zoning Appeals, the Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals, the Clean Valley Council, and the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission. A-062497-8.a 3. Appropriation of Federal and State Funds for reimbursement of expenditures related to Hurricane Fran. A-062497-8.b 4. Authorization for write-off of Utility Bad Debt. A-062497-8.c 5. Request from School Board to accept $2500 grant from Howell's Motor Freight, Inc. for Writing Workshops. A-062497-8.d 6 6. Appointment of George G. Assaid as Alternate Subdivision Agent for Roanoke County. A-062497-8.e 7. Acceptance of water and sanitary sewer facilities serving Triple Crown Estates -Section 1. A-062497-8.f 8. Approval of resolution amending the Vehicle Utilization Policy to increase mileage reimbursement for use of personal vehicle for County business. R-062497-8.a M. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS Supervisor Harrison• (1) Announced there was a severe flood throughout Salem area particularly in Montclair Estates Thanked the Utility Department staff for their assistance (2) Advised that a work session will be held on 718/97 on stormwater detention and also requested that the issue be discussed at the ioint meetina with Roanoke Citv Council. (2) Asked whether the County had a~11 control over the horse areas at Green Hili Park because the area needed mowing badly Pete Haislip will contact the ~pp~ropriate people .(4) Announced his star player had four wisdom teeth removed and wished him a speedy recovery. Supervisor Eddy• (1) Congratulated Supervisor Harrison for his state championship softball team ~2) Asked staff about the new recycling program ECH responded program should be in place by 718!97 meetina and the current~roaram will continue until new program begins. LBE suggested active communication to residents about the changes. (3) Asked about progress on the Policy Manual PMM advised there had been no progress BLJ asked that PMM have manual complete in 6 months. (4) Asked whether PMM had checked on whether Planning Commission is required b~/ law to review the Comprehensive Plan PMM responded that he is surveying other localities on how they handle and should have responses back in Julv (5) Asked why Roanoke County was not requested to adopt a reso on the closing of Woodhaven Arnold Covey responded that VDOT staff said that County does not have to adopt reso because it was a maintenance project not a construction project (6) Asked when report would be brought back on the improvements to the Courthouse parking lot which previously resulted in tie vote. ECH responded that judges and courthouse personnel are looking a~ t long range solutions. PMM also responded that tie votes should be brought back to next meeting. and if still tied, issue is deemed to have failed. (7) Attended tour of nark facilities and was impressed and found the trip enjoyable. Supervisor Minnix• X11 Announced that the Audit Committee met today and auditors expressed that every„ thing is as it should be They will next be looking at Treasurer's area and final report will be complete by October. Supervisor Johnson• (1), Expressed sympathy upon the death of Police Chief David Hooper and requested that staff send an appropriate ~•emembrance from the Board (2) He attended the ground breaking at Valley_pointe for ITT Asked when the Glenmarv property would close. ECH responded will be brought back to the Board in Julv. FFH also announced there would be a report from the citizens committee that was established in the community N. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS CLAIRE ENGLISH FROM GOODWILL INDUSTRIES SPOKE AND REQUESTED THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS PARTICIPATE IN A CITIZENS TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE THAT IS BEING DEVELOPED AND THAT A BOARD MEMBER SERVE AS A LIAISON. BLJ AGREED AND ANNOUNCED THAT THE BOARD HAS ALSO ESTABLISHED A TASK FORCE TO LOOK AT ISSUES AFFECTING THE DISABLED AND SENIOR CITIZENS AND ASKED FOR HER INVOLVEMENT IN THE COUNTY'S TASK FORCE LBE SUGGESTED THAT JOHN CHAMBLISS SERVE AS LIAISON TO COMMITTEE. O. REPORTS FM MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILE AFTER DISCUSSION OF ITEM 7 -UW WITH HCN ABSENT 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance. 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance. 3. Board Contingency Fund. 4. Accounts Paid -May 1997. 5. Statement of Revenues and Expenditures as of May 31, 1997. 6. Review by Planning Commission of acquisition of 34 acres on Green Ridge for compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. 7. Report on revisions to the National air quality standards dealing with levels of ozone and particulate matter. LBE REQUESTED SUPPORT FROM OTHER BOARD MEMBERS TO FAX PRESIDENT CLINTON WITH OUR OPPOSITION TO STRICTER EPA STANDARDS THERE WAS NO SUPPORT FROM OTHER BOARD MEMBERS. P. WORK SESSION Q. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.1-344 A (1) Personnel matters; evaluation of County Administrator and County Attorney; and appointments to Committees, Commissions and Boards. BLJ MOTION TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION AT 4:25 P.M. URC WITH HCN ABSENT EVENING SESSION (7:00 P.M.) R. CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE SESSION R-062497-9 BLJ MOTION TO APPROVE RESO AT 7.01 P M 9 URC WITH HCN ABSENT S. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS. 1. Presentation by the Roanoke Moose Lodge of $2500 donation to be used by the Police Department for a laptop computer for their criminal/traffic investigations. PRESENTED BY DAVID SIMMON~., ROANOKE MOOSE LODGE TO FFH. CHIEF RAY LAVINDER AND OFFICER TIM WYATT. T. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance rezoning 17.5 acres from R-3 to C-2 and obtain a Special Use Permit with conditions to construct a home for adults, located east of Airport Road, north of the terminus of Woodbury Street, Hollins Magisterial District, upon the petition of Shenandoah Homes Retirement Villages. (CONTINUED FROM JUNE 10. 19971 (Janet Scheid, Planner) . HCN REQUESTED CONTINUANCE BECAUSE HE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO ATTEND THE MEETING. CONTINUED TO 718/97 2. Ordinance to rezone 35.69 acres from R-3 & I-1 to R-1 to construct single family residences, located between Merriman Road and intersection of Starkey Road and Buck Mountain Road, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Joe R. Blackstock. (Janet Scheid, Planner) FM MOTION TO REFER BACK TO PLANNING COMMISSION SO PETITIONER CAN RESPOND TO PC'S CONCERNS. URC WITH HCN ABSENT . 3. Ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to allow a private kennel, located at 1905 Mayfield Drive, Vinton 10 Magisterial District, upon the petition of Coy L. And Deanna H. Weaver. (Janet Scheid, Planner) 0-062497-10 LBE MOTION TO ADOPT ORD WITH FOLLOWING CONDITIONS• (11 LIMIT OF 5 DOGS, f21 SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR 5 YEAR PERIOD' (31 PERMIT LIMITED TO CURRENT OWNER ONLY. URC WITH HCN ABSENT 4. Ordinance to rezone 1.231 acres from C-1 Conditional to C-1 Conditional to expand an existing parking lot, located at 3390 Colonial Avenue, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Dr. William F. Ball and Eugenia H. Ball. (Janet Scheid, Planner) 0-062497-11 FM MOTION TO ADOPT ORD URC WITH HCN ABSENT 5. Ordinance to rezone approximately 2.75 acres from R-2 to C-2 to construct a drugstore, located at the corner of Route 419 and Brambleton Avenue, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of C&C Development, L.L.C. (Janet Scheid, Planner) 0-062497-12 FM MOTION TO ADOPT ORD URC WITH HCN ABSENT 6. Ordinance amending the Roanoke County Code by amending Section 21-73, General Prerequisites to Grant of Division 3. Exemptions for elderly and disabled persons of Chapter 21, Taxation, to increase the allowed total combined net worth. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) 0-062497-13 BLJ MOTION TO ADOPT ORD ~JRC WITH HCN ABSENT U. CITIZEN COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS NONE V. ADJOURNMENT :BLJ ADJOURNED AT 7.50 P M TO JULY 7. 1997 AT 12.15 P M AT THE VA MUSEUM OF TRANSPORTATION FOR JOINT MEETING WITH ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL. ii O~ ROANp,~.~ ~> . ~ z c> 1838 ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA JUNE 24, 1997 /~1RT cr nie ecuE Rmr,E RQAAC~ 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. PLEASE NOTE• THERE WILL BE AN AUDIT COMMITTEE MEETING PRIOR TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING AT 2.15 P M Individuals with disabilities who require assistance or special arrangement in order to participate in or attend Board of Supervisors meetings or other programs and activities sponsored by Roanoke County, please contact the Clerk to the Board at (540) 772-2005. We request that you provide at least 48-hours notice so that proper arrangements may be made. A. OPENING CEREMONIES (3:00 P.M.) 1. Roll Call. 2. Invocation: The Reverend Joseph Lehman Our Lady of Nazareth Catholic Church 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, AWARDS 1. Certificate of contributions Manager. D. BRIEFINGS E. NEW BUSINESS RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS, AND Recognition to Angela McPeak for her to Roanoke County as RVTV Station 1. Request to accept and appropriate funds from the Virginia Juvenile Community Crime Control Act and adopt resolution prioritizing the Expenditures of the Grant. (John Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator) 2. Request to transfer funds from the Court Service Unit to Youth Haven II as maintenance of effort for VJCCCA Monies (John Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator) 3. Request to award contract and transfer money for professional consultant for needs assessment for Juvenile Detention Facility. (John Chambliss, Assistant County Administrator) 4. Request to adopt a resolution to abandon a section of an unopened road known as Castle Rock Mining Road in the Cave Spring Magisterial District. (Arnold Covey, Director of Engineering ~ Inspections) 5. Request for appropriation of State Compensation Funds and additional County funding for two emergency-funded positions in the Sheriff s Office. (Gerald Holt, Sheriff) F. REQUESTS FOR WORK SESSIONS s 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 4608 Brambleton Avenue, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Saint John Evangelical Lutheran Church. 2. Ordinance to rezone 1.0 acre from I-2 to C-2 and obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a facility for minor auto repair, located in the 3300 block of Shawnee Drive, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of Gary Ellis. 3. Ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to expand the existing facility, located at 4873 Brambleton Avenue, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Cave Spring Baptist Church. 4. Ordinance to rezone 0.94 acre from C-1 to C-2 and obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a convenience store, located at the southwest corner of Rosecrest Road and Route 221, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Stephen D. and Marie Freeman. 5. Ordinance to rezone 9.77 acre from R-1 Conditional to R-1 to construct single family residences, located at the south side of Woodhaven Road, approximately 0.5 mile east of its intersection with Green Rtdge Road, Hollins Magisterial District, upon the petition of Ernest Clark. 6. Ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to allow a private kennel, located at 1529 Dalmation Drive, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of Sara Cole and Kit Davis. 3 I. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance to exercise an option with Koppers Industries, Inc. to obtain two sanitary sewer easements and to purchase approximately 0.226 acres of right of way on the west side of the private portion of Garman Road as part of the Kroger Project. (Timothy Gubala, Economic Development Director) J. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance authorizing the renewal of a lease of real estate for a public safety radio tower site on Tinker Mountain. (William Rand, General Services Director) 2. Ordinance authorizing acquisition of 0.368 acre parcel of real estate in Montclair Estates Section 9. (Arnold Covey, Director of Engineering & Inspections) K. APPOINTMENTS 1. Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission. 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 for May 13, 1997. 2. Confirmation of appointments to the Board of Zoning Appeals, the Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals, the Clean Valley Council, and the Parks and 4 Recreation Advisory Commission. 3. Appropriation of Federal and State Funds for reimbursement of expenditures related to Hurricane Fran. 4. Authorization for write-off of Utility Bad Debt. 5. Request from School Board to accept $2500 grant from Howell's Motor Freight, Inc. for Writing Workshops. 6. Appointment of George G. Assaid as Alternate Subdivision Agent for Roanoke County. 7. Acceptance of water and sanitary sewer facilities serving Triple Crown Estates -Section 1. 8. Approval of resolution amending the Vehicle Utilization Policy to increase mileage reimbursement for use of personal vehicle for County business. M. REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS N. CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS O. REPORTS 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance. 2. Capital Fund Unappropriated Balance. 3. Board Contingency Fund. 4. Accounts Paid -May 1997. 5. Statement of Revenues and Expenditures as of May 31, 1997. 5 6. Review by Planning Commission of acquisition of 34 acres on Green Ridge for compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. 7. Report on revisions to the National air quality standards dealing with levels of ozone and particulate matter. P. WORK SESSION Q. EXECUTIVE SESSION pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.1-344 A (1) Personnel matters; evaluation of County Administrator and County Attorney; and appointments to Committees, Commissions and Boards. EVENING SESSION (7:00 P.M.1 R. CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE SESSION S. PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS. 1. Presentation by the Roanoke Moose Lodge of $2500 donation to be used by the Police Department for a laptop computer for their criminal/traffic investigations. T. PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance rezoning 17.5 acres from R-3 to C-2 and obtain a Special Use Permit with conditions to construct a home for adults, located east of Airport Road, north of the terminus of Woodbury Street, Hollins Magisterial District, upon the petition of Shenandoah Homes Retirement Villages. (CONTINUED FROM JUNE 10, 19971 (Janet Scheid, Planner) 6 2. Ordinance to rezone 35.69 acres from R-3 8~ I-1 to R-1 to construct single family residences, located between Merriman Road and intersection of Starkey Road and Buck Mountain Road, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Joe R. Blackstock. (Janet Scheid, Planner) 3. Ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to allow a private kennel, located at 1905 Mayfield Drtve, Vinton Magisterial District, upon the petition of Coy L. And Deanna H. Weaver. (Janet Scheid, Planner) 4. Ordinance to rezone 1.231 acres from C-1 Conditional to C-1 Conditional to expand an existing parking lot, located at 3390 Colonial Avenue, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Dr. William F. Ball and Eugenia H. Bail. (Janet Scheid, Planner) 5. Ordinance to rezone approximately 2.75 acres from R-2 to C-2 to construct a drugstore, located at the corner of Route 419 and Brambleton Avenue, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of C&C Development, L.L.C. (Janet Scheid, Planner) 6. Ordinance amending the Roanoke County Code by amending Section 21-73, General Prerequisites to Grant of Division 3. Exemptions for elderly and disabled persons of Chapter 21, Taxation, to increase the allowed total combined net worth. (Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) U. CITIZEN COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS V. ADJOURNMENT c-~ CERTIFICATE OF RECOGNITION AWARDED TO ~~ ~~~ fOR CONTRIBUTIONS TO RO~t1VOK£ COUNTY~#.S RYI'YFIRST STATION ift~tlV~tS£R ~ UNDER fl£R L£AD£$Sfll!' TII£ fOLLOi~N!r ACTIVI'TI£S ~Y£R£ ACCO~ifPLlSfI£D AND AIYARDS R£C£IY£D: OY£RSAFl~CONSTI?UCTION OFSTUDIO, fIIRINEi OFSTAFf, AND PROSRA~fINEi SCfIEDULK ~ T££NC£NT£KfRO.fLOTION~4LSPDT-SILYL'RCIRCL£~#H~i4RDFROrf(SC~TIA~~#&~~tRDOFDLSTINCTION fRO~ Tfl£ CO.~UNICATION; AND AWARD Of EXCELLENCE fROiT[ Tf!£ NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF COUNTYINFORdlATION OFFICERS ~ CAMP ITOANOK£ YtD£O - X£RIT AIrARD fRO~{! TH£ NATIONAL ASSOCIATION Of COUNTY LNFORJfIATION OFFICERS ~ SFOTLISIIT ON CI7'YSCfI00LS - SU~fiiflT AWARD fRO~ BLUE RIDS£ CIIAPT'£R OF Tfl£ PUBLIC R£I.k TIONS SOCI£TYOF A~£RICA ~ ROANOK£COUNTYTODAY-CO~fiffUNIC~#TIONS~tCfll£Y£d!£NT~4IYAfRD " esented this ~~T~ day of rUN£ y99~ Signature Bob L Johnson Chairman, Boanoke County Board of SuperNsors Title ~- AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER HELD ON JUNE 24, 1997 RESOLUTION 062497-1 APPROVING APPROPRIATION AND PRIORITIZING THE EXPENDITURES OF FUNDS FOR FY97-98 FROM THE VIRGINIA JUVENILE COMMUNITY CRIME CONTROL ACT WHEREAS, the County of Roanoke has been advised that it will receive monies from the Virginia Juvenile Community Crime Control Act for $511,617 for FY 1997-98, and WHEREAS, these monies must be used to fund services for the target populations identified in the Act which include CHINS (Children in Need of Services), CHINSUP (Children in Need of Supervision), Delinquent, Diverted, and First Offender children, and WHEREAS, the County staff has coordinated with the Director of the Court Service Unit and the Judges of the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court to determine the services necessary to address the needs of the children appearing before the Court and before the intake officers, and WHEREAS, the services of Electronic Monitoring, Intensive Probation, Community Services programs, Probation Aide Services, and the purchase of services for Outreach Detention, Crisis Intervention, group residential care, non-residential services, and a supplement to Youth Haven II have been identified as the highest priority needs for the targeted population of Roanoke County appearing before the court and the intake officers. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County that the VJCCCA monies are hereby accepted in the amount $511,617 for FY 1997-98 and are hereby appropriated for the above referenced programs. On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Johnson NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Nickens A COPY TESTE: Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File John M. Chambliss, Jr., Assistant County Administrator Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance Mike Lazzuri, Director, Court Services 2 ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER ~ "' AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUN'~`YbtGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: June 24, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Request to Accept and Appropriate Monies from the Virginia Juvenile Community Crime Control Act and Adopt Resolution Prioritizing Expenditures COIINTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: •,e~ ~ 4r~°'" ~ BACRGROIIND: The General Assembly approved a new program called the Virginia Juvenile Community Crime Control Act (VJCCCA) during fiscal year 1995-96. This replaced the block grant programs of the Department of Youth and Family Services. Previously, block grants funded part of Youth Haven II's operating costs and reduced the flat, per diem fee charged to all of its clients, regardless of their place of residence or placement criteria. VJCCCA monies must now be tracked based on specific children who meet eligibility criteria of the five categories of target population. Each community receives some VJCCCA money which can be used to purchase the services needed for their children or to establish community programs to meet their local needs. The loss of block grant monies resulted in an increased per diem rate for Youth Haven II which had a negative impact on the number of referrals that came from other agencies. The 28 Day program of Youth Haven II for evaluation and crisis intervention, which the Board of Supervisors established and approved this year, is a popular alternative now being used by the community. Youth Haven II has it of the licensed 12 beds filled, and other applications are being processed. Funding for the VJCCCA is based on Juvenile Crime statistics as reported by the Virginia State Police document Crime in Virginia. Roanoke County received $399,799 for FY 1996-97 and is scheduled to receive $511,617 for FY 1997-98. We must return any unspent monies at the end of the biennium (June 30, 1998) to the State. The Act requires the plan to be reviewed by the Director of the local Court Service Unit and the Judges of the local Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court. Staff has met with the Director of the Court Service Unit, the Manager of Youth Haven II, the Community Policy and Management Team (CPMT), representatives of the Department of E-~ Juvenile Justice, and has reviewed the concept with the judges of Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court concerning the proposed use of these monies. The programs suggested for funding for FY 1997- 98 include are listed on Attachment #1. VJCCCA monies cannot be used to purchase Secure Detention for these youth or to supplant other funding sources. In the past, the services for the targeted population have been provided through placements at Youth Haven II, Comprehensive Services Act monies for non-mandated cases, monies budgeted for the Court Service Unit, or the purchase of other outside services as parental placements. This proposal should improve the level of services being provided to our youth. Roanoke County is scheduled to receive $511,617 for the 1997-98 fiscal year to serve the targeted population in the categories shown on the attachment. We may carry forward monies remaining at the end of the first fiscal year of the biennium to the second year. However, unspent monies at the end of the second year must be returned to the State. a • ~ ~ ~l~~~~~~ Staff recommends adopting the attached resolution which will accomplish the following: (1) accept the grant monies from the Virginia Juvenile Community Crime Control Act for FY 1997-98. (2) authorize the three part-time positions (described in paragraphs B, C and D in Attachment #1). (3) appropriate the monies for the target population using the categories outlined in the Attachment #1. The monies will be administered through the Court Service Unit and the Community Policy and Management Team (CPMT)of the Comprehensive Services Act. Respectfully submitted, «~ --~-~ ohn M. Chambl s, Jr. Assistant County Administrator Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ACTION Motion by: Appro ed by Elmer C. odge County Administrator cc Diane Hyatt Mike Lazzuri Eddy Harrison Johnson Minnix Nickens VOTE No Yes Abs 2 E- ~ ATTACHMENT #1 A. B. C. D. E. ELECTRONIC MONITORING Purchase of services for the electronic monitoring of juveniles before the court. This program could also be used as a step-down program for those previously in detention. This program would serve 30 youth per year for up to 30 days using the services of an Outreach Detention program. It would be used as an alternative to secure detention placements. The Court Service Unit will supervise this program. $16,488 INTENSIVE PROBATION Implementation of an intensive probation program to include the classification of cases, strict supervision, and a levels program including some restrictive movements by using electronic monitoring. This program would use $25,200 for the purchase of services for the rental of electronic monitoring equipment and a Part-time grant- funded position based upon 32 hours per week ($33,000) to monitor the youth. The Court Service Unit will supervise this program. $58,200 COMMIINITY SERVICE Community service program which could help coordinate the juveniles with a job site that will improve the possibilities of job placement. This program would use a part-time grant-funded employee based upon 20 hours per week to assist in matching the youth with service opportunities. The Court Service Unit will supervise this program. PROBATION AIDE $9,360 This aspect involves a probation officer aide to assist in handling of case supervision requirements and the gathering of information for the completion of court ordered investigations. A part-time grant-funded position would provide these services based upon 32 hours per week ($29,000). The Court Service Unit will supervise this program. OPERATING EBPEN3E3 $29,000 Operating expenses for the part-time positions include rent of space, telephones, office equipment, etc. The Court Service Unit will supervise this program. $14,500 3 ~-i F. PURCHASE OF SERVICES - NON-RESIDENTIAL Either the Court Service Unit or the CPMT may administer these programs. 1. Expenses necessary for the treatment of youth which may include certain testing, treatments, or programs that do not result in the residential placement of the youth. $20,000 2. Outreach Detention. $35,405 G. PURCHASE OF SERVICES FOR THE RESIDENTIAL PLACEMENT OF YOIITH: Either the Court Service Unit or the CPMT may administer these programs. 1. Crisis Intervention programs (such as the 28 Day program of Youth Haven II or Sanctuary). $81,000 2. Group residential care per diem rates (like Youth Haven I, Youth Haven II, Drug and Alcohol programs, etc.). $143,664 H. SIIPPLEMENT TO YOIITH HAVEN II A supplement to Youth Haven II for VJCCCA cases regardless of the locality involved. This cost reducing contribution will be available to youth meeting the VJCCCA eligibility criteria. Total Any unspent VJCCCA monies from the FY 1996-97 budget must be rolled forward in the same categories for use during the FY 1997-98 programs. Any monies remaining at June 30, 1998, (the end of the biennium) must be returned to the State. The VJCCCA grant program funds the part-time positions referenced above. Should this type of funding be eliminated, the program will cease and the positions will be terminated. 4 ~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER HELD ON JUNE 24, 1997 RESOLUTION APPROVING APPROPRIATION AND PRIORITIZING THE EXPENDITURES OF FUNDS FOR FY97-98 FROM THE VIRGINIA JUVENILE COMMUNITY CRIME CONTROL ACT WHEREAS, the County of Roanoke has been advised that it will receive monies from the Virginia Juvenile Community Crime Control Act for $511,617 for FY 1997-98, and WHEREAS, these monies must be used to fund services for the target populations identified in the Act which include CHINS (Children in Need of Services), CHINSUP (Children in Need of Supervision), Delinquent, Diverted, and First Offender children, and WHEREAS, the County staff has coordinated with the Director of the Court Service Unit and the Judges of the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court to determine the services necessary to address the needs of the children appearing before the Court and before the intake officers, and WHEREAS, the services of Electronic Monitoring, Intensive Probation, Community Services programs, Probation Aide Services, and the purchase of services for Outreach Detention, Crisis Intervention, group residential care, non-residential services, and a supplement to Youth Haven II have been identified as the highest priority needs for the targeted population of Roanoke County appearing before the court and the intake officers. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County that the VJCCCA monies are hereby accepted in the amount $511,617 for FY 1997-98 and are hereby appropriated for the above referenced programs . • A-062497-2 ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER ~'~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: June 24, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Request to Transfer Monies from the Court Service Unit Budget to a Youth Haven II Account to Fund the Maintenance of Effort Requirement for the Virginia Juvenile Community Crime Control Act Program COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~~ ~~~ r~ ~~~ SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The General Assembly implemented the Virginia Juvenile Community Crime Control Act (VJCCCA) during the 1995-96 fiscal year and replaced block grant programs which funded programs such as Youth Haven II. VJCCCA monies may now be used to purchase residential care, special treatment programs, or other community-based services and programs for youth meeting certain eligibility criteria. Before VJCCCA, many of these costs and services were paid for through monies included in the Court Service Unit budget. One requirement of the VJCCCA program is that the grant monies could not supplant other State monies. In addition, we could not reduce the local maintenance of effort (use of local monies to fund services) to obtain the grant monies. The maintenance of effort identified by the Department of Juvenile Justice for Roanoke County for the current fiscal year is $102,447. Through the loss of the former block grant monies, the per diem rate required for Youth Haven II was significantly increased. This increase resulted in a reduction of participation and use of the Youth Haven II program for the current fiscal year. We request ,, . ~"'"" .~ that $102,447 be transferred from the Court Service Unit budget to a Youth Haven II account to offset their operating shortfall for the current fiscal year and to fulfill the maintenance of effort requirement. We have modified the per diem rate for Youth Haven II for the 1997-98 fiscal year to reflect the loss of block grant funding and the use of VJCCCA monies to lower the per diem costs. No new appropriation of monies from the general fund is required. FISCAL IMPACT• Staff recommends transferring $102,447 from the Court Service Unit budget previously used for the purchase of residential services to a Youth Haven II account to serve as the maintenance of effort to qualify for VJCCCA monies. No new appropriation of general fund dollars is required. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the establishment of a Youth Haven II account for the maintenance of effort and the transfer of $102,447 to that account to qualify for the FY1997-98 VJCCCA monies. Respectfully submitted, ohn M. Chambliss, Jr. Assistant County Administrator Approved by, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator E-2 ---------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved (x) Motion by: Lee B. Eddy motion No Yes Absent Denied ( ) to ~pgrove transfer of funds Eddy ~ Received ( ) Harrison ~ Referred ( ) Johnson _~ To ( ) Minnix ,~ Nickens ~ cc: File John M. Chambliss, Jr., Assistant County Administrator Mike Lazzuri, Director, Court Services Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance i. ..~ A-062497-3 ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER ~~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANORE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: June 24, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Award of Contract for Professional Consultant Services to Develop a Needs Assessment for a Secured Detention Facility for Juveniles to Serve the County of Roanoke, City of Salem, and Franklin County COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: In November 1996, Roanoke County and the City of Salem were advised that the City of Roanoke's Detention Home would limit the number of youth that they would serve to the number of beds licensed by the Commonwealth of Virginia. Since then, the City of Salem and Roanoke County have been operating to find juvenile detention beds on a space available basis at the 18 detention facilities across Virginia. The County of Roanoke and City of Salem now faces the decision making process of determining how to provide appropriate detention bed space. This may be accomplished by: A. Building our own facility. B. Seeking a privatized facility to meet our needs. C. Seeking a cooperative venture with an existing detention facility to expand and/or purchase bed space to meet our needs. r ~, ~~~ D. Continuing to seek bed space on a space available basis. There may be instances when no beds are available to accomplish our need. Regardless of the methodology chosen, there are certain steps required by the State Department of Juvenile Justice before we can accomplish any assignment of bed space. The Department of Juvenile Justice must review and approve each step. The first phase is to develop a needs assessment to determine the actual number of beds required by the locality. The second phase is an additional study for the program and design of the facility and the services to be offered. The third phase would be any architectural and engineering work for the design of the specific facility to be built. The final phase is actual construction. Should a new facility be constructed, the State will assist up to 50% in the construction costs with a maximum of $52, 000 per bed space, and share operating costs. From a time perspective, if the decision was made today to continue with the development and building of a separate detention facility for Roanoke County, it would be at least three years before the bed would actually be available. This schedule does not consider potential difficulties and time-consuming efforts for approval of the various plans, site selection, or obtaining funding mechanisms to develop the facility. To comply with the Phase I study for the needs assessment, the County has issued a request for proposal for professional consulting services to develop a needs assessment for Roanoke County, City of Salem, and Franklin County. Staff recommends the award of the contract to MMM Design Group for $8,500 plus the cost of printing the reports. We will share this cost with the City of Salem. Franklin County has recently participated in this type of study; therefore, their information will be updated. Once our total needs are determined, we will consider other options in the design and program phase that Franklin County, Roanoke County, and the City of Salem will share under a separate agreement. 2 .~ ~• i FISCAL IMPACT• It is suggested that $6,000 be transferred within the budget of the Court Service Unit to a Professional Services Account for the payment of the County's share of this contract. No new appropriation of monies is required. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the contract be awarded to MMM Design Group and that the above-referenced transfer of monies within the Department of the Court Service Unit be approved to allow the needs assessment study to be done. Respectfully submitted, l^' `~Yl - Cl~ v hn M. Chambliss, Jr. Assistant County Administrator E-3 Approved by, ~~~~ ~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ---------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved (x) Motion by: Bob L. Johnson No Yes Absent Denied ( ) motion to award cont act and Eddy _~ Received ( ) transfer funds Harrison ~_ Referred ( ) Johnson _~ To ( ) Minnix _~ Nickens ~- cc: File John M. Chambliss, Jr., Assistant County Administrator Mike Lazzuri, Director, Court Services Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance Elaine Carver, Director, Procurement 3 . , E-y AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JUNE 24, 1997 RESOLUTION Q§~~497-4 ABANDONING A SECTION OF AN UNOPENED ROAD IN THE WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT OF ROANOKE COUNTY CROSSING TAX PARCELS 76.16-2-2, 76.16-2-3, 76.16-2-4, 76.16-2-5, WHICH ROAD WAS TO BE KNOWN AS THE CASTLE ROCK MINING ROAD WHEREAS, Radford & Company, the Petitioner, has requested the Board of Supervisors to abandon a portion of an unopened road in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District known as the Castle Rock Mining Road pursuant to Section 33.1-164 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and to authorize the conveyance of the same to the Petitioner pursuant to Section 33.1-165 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended; and WHEREAS, Radford & Company is the Contract purchaser of Tax Parcels 76.16-2- 2, 76.16-2-3, 76.16-2-4, and 76.16-2-5 over which a portion of said unopened road passes. Radford & Company will be acquiring fee simple title to the property on both sides of said unopened road. WHEREAS, that said unopened road is not a part of the Virginia Secondary System of Highways and may be abandoned pursuant to the provisions of Article 12, Chapter 1, Title 33.1 of the Code of Virginia and that all of the properties which could have been served by said unopened road are presently served by the present highway Route 419. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County as follows: 1. That pursuant to Section 33.1-164 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, that portion of the unopened road known as the Castle Rock Mining Road crossing Tax 1 Parcels 76.16-2-2, 76.16-2-3, 76.16-2-4, and 76.16-2-5 be, and hereby is, abandoned; and 2. That pursuant to Section 33.1-165 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, that portion of the unopened road known as the Castle Rock Mining Road crossing Tax Parcels 76.16-2-2, 76.16-2-3, 76.16-2-4, and 76.16-2-5 is deemed no longer necessary for the public use and the conveyance of said portion of unopened road to the Petitioner is hereby authorized. 3. That pursuant to Section 33.1-163.1 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, a certified copy of this resolution of abandonment shall be recorded and indexed in the Circuit Court Clerk's Office. 4. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions on behalf of Roanoke County as are necessary to accomplish the conveyance of said property, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. Supervisor Eddy moved to adopt the resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Johnson NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Nickens A COPY TESTE: 'n't~ur 1d• Q.LCa-.~- Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors 2 cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Virginia Department of Transportation Edward A. Natt, Attorney at Law W E-~ +r< 7a Y B'v .wra CCft+rf SiYI ~o ern .i0 ~vr.Wtl.N~' ~~ y} ,y~T~ M1 o.v'K~i Qy~ 7yyw~(KQo oM1 ~ ~ ~~NMVbNtl OO ^M1b~b h~'1'~5 ~ Q 4 O~ ~~ ui ^Ob. Ob.w~n'f.a h0 bqh ~h~ ~ ~b11 t ~ h 1 , I Q O ~ V~O o ' gg I _~ Y ~_ ~ O ~ ^h'ltinbnbNO~~~~~b. m ~ ~ Q i~ V C ' j~~ ~~~~~~~ ~ Y~~b~ig~l 5i~:~ tlx~~'~yl bc~S1~~^SY' ~o ~ ~ ~ a j ccss a o ~ ~jqr r ~i ~n u `+Y ~`a 4~<vv02 6 ~ G µ~ N~ tl 1 i ~ ]]• I G t ! ~~ ~~ ~ ; ~g ~ °s = r ~< I ~~ -$~ i3 ~~~~ ~~ ~yc '~ `}uoa d t ~zo $y i~ u#u ~ ;~ wz~ is - ~ ~<~< d 'z ~~~r. d ~ ~ b Y ~ ~ ~ d'C~ ei~ h ! yr/p F' ~ , / J ~~ O \ -. o !~ "ao~a 1 1 H V Q W a~=^ -. a _^ O i,~ xa- h ~.. a~~ ~ / c°s ~~ ~ (rn~ r 3~~~Nry ~ .N .OO,8L9p 5 \ 4700 + o ~~~~~,'^ BOZ a r I 3 ~~ ~' a ~ p., ^~'a"f~ a~ "10~'i ~ o 2 O~'.Y .bjO ~ k~ +f00 QO tp ~~'l.` ~h~0 `(2~~¢¢ ~` ~bCy VO ~ ~~ 2 u Y h~ ~ Co N ~t~ i NV M12i Z~?b ~~~., •`d2 „[OO `oa;fi ~~~ a 1 ' ~~ ~~ ~- I p 2x~ i ~~ N QUO a 1 J..O {(D~ is `i'O ~~ ~ V2 ~ ~ ~ ~ ; a ., ^. v` 1 ^°° Q U V ~:._ ~. N ~ ~/ ~'~~~~o ~/ t ~N1 ~, ~~; ~'' _ ~ 1~`~ cam, 3~2 h~ ~ r ~ p ,--t .. ~ -- - - - I /"" 'a„ \ N of h \ / -~ ~ Rr ~ ~ s L ..._ 2 0~~^ ~" ~- ~ 23.322 ~ ~~i4R i~ a . a y 0 3' ` a ~/ ; < o '~~ f a I 1 .~ ~~ .Q~V n ~ \Nt~ ~ 4v }'~~ q do V ~- ! ^ r a m ~ o ~ ~ g pp ~N - ~ ~ i a. 1 Y O~ o ~ - ~ j Z < ~ ~ ,y = a ~ + - - NO ~rOa Q U R ~ i ~ $.i C C~ _ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ N ~ ~~ ~" ~ as ~~ ~ W o tea. 1\ ~y~zak ~~r r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~g 3 ~~ ~ a'= h a N a / g°$~~ ~~ $ =$higeti ° $ ~ ~z~ ~ C ~O 4^~~~ _' i~ ~. 3 kG~~e ~s ~~~~~¢p~ ? i CS o 3 a ~~ :~ 3 x`ss e~ V `a ~ a b~ ~~~ k~e ~,`~Q Zoayx~~c'~ O ~'~ 2 ~ a~ ~h ~~ m~ ~~ ~~~~~~1* ~ ~ ~~ ~. o ¢ .~ 2 .• -, • ~ v W ~ W .~ ~ f c ~3 J. qT~l, t le~s `:(G~O :a J^Zn ~ ~~ ~ o n i~ `v ~a3o~ ay~. Z y<~~ W d~0<~~a~~±p~~~0 00~)xz ~O1 IV 2V~< ~~ ~$ a ~'~- iu~x -R~ '~ ~ "?tea W o~ t~C Q ~o;N ~ ~ ''~~a a~ 3groj~~li'yyba JI< ~~ ~~ a ~ F+.~ ~n3.. ~y'. ~'ki g~~ ~$i~.~ m ~ i ~~ i Y ^~...c~42r~e~M1j~~' 3~xjV ~ I 4 x i, Z -~~ uNtti z~ x~ ' ~ G W ~3yo°i~„~` 3o~Qa u`~`T ~ ' j ° y¢ ~ ~ f3' ; O~q ~~'~~, O Q ,y i W o (~ :~~-•~ R axe^C~' ~h2 ~ C O Z '~` J c~W `,,~ ` ,~y ~ o F V~ . ~J .~-^ (` Q U y Z ~ gJ U Qi N ~ ~^ Z d U3 V1 tC7 ~ a < N z ; _ .vr ~ ~ ...~ ~ ~ _ ~ Z ~ ~ .d = Z ¢ N Nav ~~q ~= = ~ cr o~ w ~` w ~ a`~§ o s ;o cc , ~ '~' .7 a ? ~ Zcv '~ ~> _ 1~ ~ dam ; c~ Q O i~ W V ~ Q •--~ 4 `~ ` ~ ^ pV ~ W O ¢ ~ 2 ' r"i„ ~ v Q W ~ U Np Cl' c ~p x Z o wpm i _ .~'r"' ~' a Q Z O :,, r d ~ a' O~ o II V7 Z ~ - d --~ S z ~ z :~ Z Z c J n .C 'Q I i W 3 a AT A RE( COUNTY, VIRG' MEETING DATt: jLa ~D ~e~ JUIIC G•+, i~a~ ITEM NUMBER C"~ BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE EKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER AGENDA ITEM: Adoption of Resolution to abandon a section of an unopened road in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District known as Castle Rock Mining Road. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Staff requests that the Board of Supervisors abandon Castle Rock Road pursuant to Section 33.1-164 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, and authorize the conveyance of the same to the contract purchaser. BACKGROUND: Radford and Company, a Virginia Corporation, are respectfully requesting the Board of Supervisors to abandon a portion of the unopened right-of-way in the Windsor Hills Magisterial District known as Castle Rock Mining Road (refer to attached map). Radford and Company, the contract purchaser of Tax Map Parcels 76.16-2-2, 76.16-2-3, 76.16-2-4, and 76.16-2-5 will be acquiring fee simple title to the property on both sides of the unopened road. By instrument dated July 9, 1948, Mary W. Youmans and others donated aright-of- way to the Board of Supervisors for a road to be known as Castle Rock Mining Road. The original desire of the parties donating the right-of-way was for the establishment of a new proposed road to become a part of the State Secondary Highway System. 1 In June of 1948, the Board of Supervisors did request the Commonwealth of Virginia to accept the road as part of the State Secondary System. The Department of Highways later rejected their request. Since their request, the County has taken no further action regarding this right-of-way. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: County staff has no objections to this request. Route 419, constructed after 1948 by VDOT, presently serves all properties that this unopened road could serve. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Roanoke County staff is requesting that the right-of-way be abandoned pursuant to Section 33.1-164 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended and authorize the conveyance of the same to the Petitioner herein pursuant to Section 33.1-165 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. Instruct the County Attorney to prepare the appropriate resolution. U MITTED BY: r,,, Arnold Covey, Director" Engineering and 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 c: Paul Mahoney, County Attorney r r ~ ^~~ t~ t+ ,x"% itC ^O 'C B'J .kry GClrw: SsYJ ,p am Wo yy ,~,~+i wpe ,e~ uw+gYv~o,~7C+~°~~ t ~ ~ n~lbbb MObbV'u3~f Y1 N ;•: w-.ww $y~•n Q a `, <h f U 11 Sila~~~~' ~'+j~ `~ ~ ~ I: f ~ 1~04~tv~6a ~ 10 N~ W ~' a! L;l v b Y .•• p eoh ! p ~ry~ ' ~~ H ~ I ;~ / ~L Boa ^a~ 1( s'\ s ~~~~4h ~£~Mq V~V`Vb C ~ ~ ~ i/ ~ ~ f +~ +o Z O X '1, Y~~ °"x~i ,'c ;y1 y<<~ i as h2 ..y ~~, ~Ny~ q 1y~ /` - `Q1 ~ ,J- i ~ 3yJ 0 ~ n o '°~~ / ~, ~ , y V `~ ti~ i ~R~a . O W O 5 d a t 1 1~ i , ~o ~ ~ ~ 3- ~ ~ ~~ ' ~~ ~~ ~ '~ O ~ ~ :~ I; ~~ 1~ - ~ ~~ '; Sag, ~~ ;uQ ~~ ~y u ~ o~°~ ;~ ~ v~ u ~ i ~=o bzo ' g i~ .#_ ~~c ~ i NNE ~ i ~ W t ~ s I ~ N o m .. i ~ u1pi - ~~s~ ~ ?5=- - l\ ~ d ~~ey Oc i' o / •'O ° y'~ `cam o- ~ ~Y of \ m t II I N} / I ~ 1 4 b I Y :.~ ~ O 1 ~ ~O nRo/ 40 ~D ~~ ~ / 1 - h ~\ i V,~ ~e Za Sa] G~~tA ~ z?~ s2 C: > SS j~ - » n i ~ tZ _ z_ < ~ ~ Q ~ I d'N = C - ~~-07 U R x 4- O v~~~ / C q ~o b ~~~ __-_.__ a m ~ / 3N~3'~ :gig c ag~il''<~, tea., ~ >`a~cg x~ ~2~~~ ate. v.. / -~ -_ ~ ` O ~ ox 7 p ..Sig ~~ .a o. ! ( d~ ~ r ~ v a a ~• ., ~.. ~~~~ ~~ - J ~ ~ ~~'" ~ ~ ~ Kati. .~ ~_ " " -_ 1 ---- - i . C a ' ' i n `1 ~ .,~ O S ° / l ~ s -- ! - _- s-4~_s N ^~ ~. ~ . ~ .~i. i Q~ /1 '~ o /~ o ``~ ~ 'n ~' ~~ // ` 'Z ~ /' y \'S ~} ~~ as `.ox"'. o~:i ~ ~3 aYV•~ ?a. V '~a'~t'<a ti T~;i_ 5, 4 ~ S>2~~.,•~ Y ;~ ~`''~'g~>> i W e~4 ~44~5'jC~+Tt ~i3 Z ~ ~~n J z~~`i. ir. Gr x o`~~~ Lj2:,~G ~ o.. r ~" ~,~ $ as :v O XY~~}i~~ ~< ~2~~n Y ~~ w ~<<~ o~v3; ?E 01 ~o. 1Y aa~ o..~C2 °• ~" W i ~ ~.. ,~ a a3 4=2yi~ , _ J ~ Jvt Y _ GD 3J'eq~2~ ~2;1~ ~~~~n ^ 4C W a J~,. 02 Q S"2 ~ ~3 ~ V'~ji V`~ ~ ~ ~J } 2.3o4L~~~R~X~R '~~~~ ~. .+,,. ~ o. W ~3~~~~r3~,: VN.Q $+V Z.¢ ~~ ~ ,Ha« ~= 1k V2'J%>Z =~ ~ '=~~~~,i.'sJ~tbo3 Ji 2. ••-• r-. Q ~ L Z Z ~ y J ~ _ W o3 ~ :V ;/; v d~ ~ Q d~ r.. ~ 5 s W ~zCaW~N .~ O <~ N~ '~ U o~ s ¢ 4t a JNCS~y.] J 3~ _` ~ o ° ' .~ J~u ~ n¢ : -Z y ,-. hi~ Z p ..7 < ... ~ ~ r d 5 z z J r ~ ~ ~ . ter; =~ z ~ z ~ Zl 2 00~ ~ ~ °~~ e i3 3 g ~ ~ 2~~ ~i Z 'a` ~ < a g 3 :~v y p . ~ ~~ 3 s Z > ;i ; ~~. o a ~ ~a U ~ ~ 4v ~a~ ~ ~z z Rc °~ ~~~ ~ i~ m i= ~ 3hy' ~ ~ r „ + ~a ' i~~ 'L ~ C[ ~'1 '• f ~ S ~ X~. ~• a W _ W xs` ? 2 a v ~ 3 , Y ~ Z h a 1 .. < •''. ~ < '?`e < <+ ' ` ~ _~ i J ¢ ; ~ ' ' ~ ~ ' ~i a O _ c W ~~< Z p. ~ ! ~ ITEM NUMBER -~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: June 24, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Adoption of Resolution to abandon a section of an unopened road in the Cave Spring Magisterial District known as Castle Rock Mining Road. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~, EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Staff requests that the Board of Supervisors abandon Castle Rock Road pursuant to Section 33.1-164 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, and authorize the conveyance of the same to the contract purchaser. BACKGROUND: Radford and Company, a Virginia Corporation, are respectfully requesting the Board of Supervisors to abandon a portion of the unopened right-of-way in the Cave Spring Magisterial District known as Castle Rock Mining Road (refer to attached map). Radford and Company, the contract purchaser of Tax Map Parcels 76.16-2-2, 76.16-2-3, 76.16-2-4, and 76.16-2-5 will be acquiring fee simple title to the property on both sides of the unopened road. By instrument dated July 9, 1948, Mary W. Youmans and others donated aright-of- way to the Board of Supervisors for a road to be known as Castle Rock Mining Road. The original desire of the parties donating the right-of-way was for the establishment of a new proposed road to become a part of the State Secondary Highway System. 1 ~- `~ In June of 1948, the Board of Supervisors did request the Commonwealth of Virginia to accept the road as part of the State Secondary System. The Department of Highways later rejected their request. Since their request, the County has taken no further action regarding this right-of-way. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: County staff has no objections to this request. Route 419, constructed after 1948 by VDOT, presently serves all properties that this unopened road could serve. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Roanoke County staff is requesting that the right-of-way be abandoned pursuant to Section 33.1-164 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended and authorize the conveyance of the same to the Petitioner herein pursuant to Section 33.1-165 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. Instruct the County Attorney to prepare the appropriate resolution. ITTED BY: Arnold Covey, Director 1 Engineering and Inspections Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred To ACTION Motion by:_ c: Paul Mahoney, County Attorney APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy Harrison Johnson Minnix Nickens 2 •+I 7d 't A'v :.erd GG(~i S.iY> ~O ern ,o .vr.r+yin ~~~~~~. b rr by ~^„,~`~qyg v~N~^O ^M1 ~~ 7 R~9~e~~$8.~o<~n$o~.~ b ~ , ~~ o01°+h~~~~b1wgO~ q ` 1 y <i ~ 1~ 1 p I0~ ~ ^h'lyvf'O^bAO~~`.~~b^ !w b d \ ' V ~' ~ a bo~ Q ~ ¢ i~3~ ~ 1 I `~ ~ I ; ~~ ~? h ' ~~, ~a r ~a°~WQ~ ! ~~ .r M.Ofc ~yyV',~VM "<v C ~ r W ~2~ V ~~'p ~m 2 y ~ 4 < h~~~ ~Q O ~ q ~3 ~~~ Q' 3 ~~~ f ^~~o o'A ~ o ~ a 'c` 2`~n ~^n ~ :~ a ~ ymm, p q ~ ~ a~ ~ o \r e J- _ ~4 Vp O, \C~ I <Va (O ~~ ~~ i~ W ~~ O ;z Q d 'z < ~~ 1-- r t,_ 3= s o~ '~ 2 ' ~~ ' !c~ ~~~ u~~~ i -uW j rya ~VOV ~F~a ' 2 0 #N ~ a ~~~ i < z NN , N W.t..~ ' ~tOi . ~~r N z 5~_ .- 6, -sue z a I ~ r/~ 1, ° ~ ya o~yS~ ~ J \ Qi .rJO~ i Q /~~ BL9p S i}'` 'i'' ° c^> ~Q I~ ~1 W4 ~1/V'~•S 1~/ ~- ~~1 i a ~ h j.~ ~~ O 1 ~ `g noo o°~p ~i~l `a i'0~„~ ~ V O H ^~ i `,~ V. ~ ~~, m m ~' ~ i ~O3 h 4Q ~l y„ a~NO / r H~ vN ~~ ~ m ~1 "m 3 ,, cn'Q , ;~~ ~n ~~Y ~ ~Ca '/ L."... ~ ho ca ~" .F ~ ~~ ~g~ F // e~ U\4 `: :Cl` j./~/~ / zm3 yr` ~ - ti% +O~ ~' i$ // ~ '' r aq =,, o o. I ~~ ` . + ~ 7 v 1 ~ c ~x ` SZ ~~ 3 ~ , ? ~> y / V ' ~ p , ~ ~ ~Ah .\~n ,~ N 2. m _ ~ ~j 6 .~ ~ V /7~ _ o, c V+ fq ~ ., ~ ~ o, i ~/! J . `ti `~ 0ry ,~ K h o ,t s °. N '~ i ~0: ti0 ~~ ~~ ~ _~ k 0~~ ~~o--- '~ C, ,?_ ^~R r p UU ~ ~ h0. '~ ~.!~, ~. ~--- i ,~+(,1 z1 ~ .gig ~ ~ ^i ~G S ~ e Ca m ~ } nk O / •' ~~ ~ ~ ~ +, ~G~rilA ~ J o J g m ~+ ~ v > ~ S < S z c j ~ ~ i ,ra C,. a _ ~ d 8 ' d.~ _ ~ °~-o~ ~ R R / 1/ ~ ~~ ~ ~ 'J'4V :ag a~,~ ~o ~a~~$ x~ ~ ~~ ~ y ~ g ag~~~a7 ~ 3 3 & $ N ~ x~~ ~~Z~d ~Q ox^~~Q ~~~ ~ = i~ Z M1 ~ < x~ <- aa~WC ~ ~~dog ~ ~ a k ~i`'~~~a~^` ~~~: ~'~ ~ = o$ 3g ~ O = p ° ; ° <~ ~~o j oo~ko~~~ ~7~<°~ Q oh g~$~, =i ~ ~~ ~~~ F ~ ^` b~ _ ~ '` ~ akaa~ 3~ ~ ~ N ~~ ~. RR am s ~ m'~ :Y -- O i c ~ a F O Z .. -, .., W - W S 8 -a~x~zW ,~o~ _ F z ~ o~S„ mWO < ~2 R °x ~ ~ ? F' y, ~ ~ ?~~ W~p Y~<V~ ~ <7^~ - 2 ~ i ~ upy0 J tll m k 0 m ~} O o2 , i .. J~ W j .. 2Up Y. p 3?~ 3-i'~ ~'~ J`~'~ ~~ ~ ~Q ~\ 0 ~ r~ ~°~ ~g ~,. a x` `~` ~ °z~2 t ~~~ i 1 i ~ ~ 3 °p x 5{ n ^ H $< ~a ~3rz m <`<;i e a ~ ~n 2gxa~~ph`y4 ~ Vi1 ~ V ~ `s ~" 3 J Y y ~ ~~~p2 ~O^~61k <Y J ZO >a Y~"E Yr i~ I LL O H~,\ r ~ °° ° n N . 11 ,. . 1 ~ }y~{ ~jlpp ~ V ~ jamj~(( V .O h~~~N~S y~~ h ~..~Y blx ¢4 ~~ qY ' ,Si 9ia~~~~a$~ `~ ~a l~C~ '. J i) { ~~ ~y y~~` y ' ~ ~04 ivyOZ ~ S 0~ i "~ ~ 8 ~ ~'~ - n Q J ~ `~ ~j d ~, y ¢ ~? ~ Z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ c~ 3 :v ;~; d> u ~dd°.~ v~ ~s a~z ^ y Z ~1 W N NW..~ ~mg4~= O av Q cv ~ ~> ~~ F ` Uog ~ v ~' < a W < ~ O ~ ~ O i.~ _~ l W ~ ~ ~ J a ~ Q a N _~~ O ~ < "L ~ ~ '~V~ ~ ~s° =z ~~ d ~.] ~ ~ 3 '~ u r (,dd ;zl ~ '~ 7 z J Y ~`~ ROAD IN CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT ) OF ROANOKE COUNTY WHICH ROAD WAS TO BE ) KNOWN AS THE CASTLE ROCK MINING ROAD ) PETITION CROSSING TAX MAP PARCEL 76.16-2-2, 76.16-2-3, ) 76.16-2-4 AND 76.16-2-5. ) TO: THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA IN RE: ABANDONMENT OF A SECTION OF AN UNOPENED ) Comes now your Petitioner, Radford & Company, a Virginia corporation, and respectfully requests the Board of Supervisors to abandon a portion of the unopened road in the Cave Spring Magisterial District known as the Castle Rock Mining Road pursuant to Section 33.1-164 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended and to authorize the conveyance of the same to the Petitioner herein pursuant to Section 33.1-165 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, and in support thereof would state as follows: 1. That your Petitioner is the Contract purchaser of the above described parcel of land over which said unopened road passes. The Contract Purchaser will be acquiring fee simple title to the property on both sides of said unopened road. 2. That by instrument dated July 9, 1948, Mary W. Youmans and others donated a right-of-way for a road to be known as Castle Rock Mining Road; said instrument being attached as Exhibit "1". 3. That a portion of said road crosses the property to be acquired by your Petitioner as shown on the plat attached hereto. 4. That it was the original desire of the parties donating OSTERHOUGT, FERGUSON, NATT, AHERON & AGEE ATTGRNEYS-AT-LAW ROANGKE, VIRGINIA 24018-1699 the right-of-way that the same be made a part of the Virginia Secondary Road System. 5. That pursuant thereto, the Board of Supervisors did, in June of 1948, request the Commonwealth of Virginia to make said E-'~ road a part of the State Secondary System of Highways. A copy of said request is of record in Supervisors Order Book 11, Page 214, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "2". 6. That the Department of Highways advised the Board that it would not accept said road into the State Secondary System; said action being shown from the records in the Supervisors Order Book 11, Page 256, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit ~~ 3 ~~ 7. That no further action has been taken in regard to said road and therefore said road is not a part of the Virginia Secondary Systems and may be abandoned pursuant to the provisions of Article 12, Chapter 1, Title 33.1 of the Code of Virginia. 8. That all of the properties which could be served by said road are presently served by the present highway Route 419 which was constructed after 1948. WHEREFORE, your Petitioner requests that the Board of OSTERHGUDT. FERGIlSGN. NATT. AHERON & AGEE ATTGRNEYS-AT-LAW RGANGKE, VIRGINIA 24018-1699 Supervisors adopt a Resolution pursuant to Section 33.1-164 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, declaring that portion of the Cave Spring Mining Road crossing Tax Parcels 76.16-2-2, 76.16-2-3, 76.16-2-4 and 76.16-2-5 to be abandoned and further that pursuant to Section 33.1-165 of the Code of Virginia 1950, as amended, to certify that said road is no longer necessary for public use and ~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JUNE 24, 1997 RESOLUTION ABANDONING A SECTION OF AN UNOPENED ROAD IN THE CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT OF ROANOKE COUNTY CROSSING TAX PARCELS 76.16-2-2, 76.16-2-3, 76.16-2-4, 76.16-2-5, WHICH ROAD WAS TO BE KNOWN AS THE CASTLE ROCK MINING ROAD WHEREAS, Radford & Company, the Petitioner, has requested the Board of Supervisors to abandon a portion of an unopened road in the Cave Spring Magisterial District known as the Castle Rock Mining Road pursuant to Section 33.1-164 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, and to authorize the conveyance of the same to the Petitioner pursuant to Section 33.1-165 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended; and WHEREAS, Radford & Company is the Contract purchaser of Tax Parcels 76.16-2-2, 76.16-2-3, 76.16-2-4, and 76.16-2-5 over which a portion of said unopened road passes. Radford & Company will be acquiring fee simple title to the property on both sides of said unopened road. WHEREAS, that said unopened road is not a part of the Virginia Secondary System of Highways and may be abandoned pursuant to the provisions of Article 12, Chapter 1, Title 33.1 of the Code of Virginia and that all of the properties which could have been served by said unopened road are presently served by the present highway Route 419. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County as follows: 1. That pursuant to Section 33.1-164 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, that portion of the unopened road known as the Castle Rock Mining Road crossing Tax Parcels 76.16-2-2, 76.16-2-3, 76.16- ~~ 2-4, and 76.16-2-5 be, and hereby is, abandoned; and 2. That pursuant to Section 33.1-165 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, that portion of the unopened road known as the Castle Rock Mining Road crossing Tax Parcels 76.16-2-2, 76.16-2-3, 76.16- 2-4, and 76.16-2-5 is deemed no longer necessary for the public use and the conveyance of said portion of unopened road to the Petitioner is hereby authorized. 3. That pursuant to Section 33.1-163.1 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, a certified copy of this resolution of abandonment shall be recorded and indexed in the Circuit Court Clerk's Office. 4. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such actions on behalf of Roanoke County as are necessary to accomplish the conveyance of said property, all of which shall be on form approved by the County Attorney. C:\OFFICE\WPWIN\WPDOCS\AGENDA\REALEST\CASTLE.ROC A-062497-5 ACTION N0. ITEM NO. ~'""' AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: June 24, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Request to appropriate funds for two emergency-funded corrections deputy positions, to be partially funded by the State Compensation Board for FY 97-98. This request also includes an amendment to the County Classification and Pay Plan to temporarily accept these positions into the plan. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: Recommend approval. These positions are not included in the budget for the Sheriffs Department. The State Compensation Board ie-evaluates emergency positions on an annual basis and allocates funds accordingly. BACKGROUND: On several occasions, the Sheriff has updated the Board on staffing needs at the Roanoke County-Salem Jail due to an increased inmate population. For FY 95-96, the State Compensation Board granted and funded Roanoke County four temporary positions to deal with overcrowding in the jail. These positions were to be funded by the Compensation Board for a period of one year, with additional funding to be evaluated on a yearly basis. For FY 97-98, the Sheriff's Office received funding from the Compensation Board to continue the employment of two emergency-funded corrections deputies for jail overcrowding. These positions are designated for FY 97-98 and would be reevaluated in FY 98-99. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: By accepting these two positions, we are still down two positions in the jail from FY 95-96. I am requesting that the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors accept the state funding for these positions and include them in the Roanoke County Classification and Pay Plan. FISCAL IMPACT: The total fiscal impact is $61,579. The State Compensation Board will be responsible for $45,980, leaving a difference of $15,599 to be supplemented by the county. The county supplement is needed because the Compensation Board does not cover all fringe benefits and also recognizes a lower salary reimbursement rate for corrections deputies than is paid by Roanoke County. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends appropriation of $45,980 in revenue reimbursement from the Compensation Board and the related expenditure increase in the Sheriff's personnel budget. Staff also requests a transfer of $15,599 from the Board's Contingency Account to the Sheriff's personnel budget to cover unreimbursed costs of the two positions. Respectfully submitted, Gerald S. Holt Sheriff Approved by, " Elmer C. Hodge, Jr. County Administrator ACTION VOTE Approved (x) Motion by: Bob L. Johnson to No Yes Denied ( ) ~b2prove additional funds from Eddy ~_ Received ( ) Board Contingency Fund and Harrison ~_ Referred ( ) appropriation of State Johnson __X_ To ( ) Com~~nsation Board funds Minnix .~ Nickens cc: File Gerald S. Holt, Sheriff Joe Sgroi, Director, Human Resources Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance Absent FS WORKSHEET Countv 23,919.00 Base 2, 824.83 VRS 11.81 % (.1181) 83.72 VRS Life (.0035) 1,829.80 FICA 7.65% (.0765) 1,992.00 Health Ins. 140.00 Dental Ins. -------------------------- -------------------------- 30,789.35 $30,789.35 X 2 $61,578.70 $61,578.70 - 45,979.76 $15,598.94 State 20,430.00 Base 982.68 VRS 4.81 % (.0481) 14.30 VRS Life .07% 1,562.90 FICA 7.65% (.0765) ------------------------ ------------------------ 22,989.88 $22,989.88 X 2 $45,979.76 C"~ ~ O W 50U Q w O O » m m W ~ a £da d o¢~ U O F J Q W O > O Z e~f V- - Q z r3 - V U b C J Q Q W F- Y JO W O 2 F• U 2 Q Z O Ww W •y. U£ W t/1 - a o Ww W- > °`= o oa H Q C Z W Z W Q J W 2 O Q U N C U O W W J UN - Z W W W a O X w rn a fns >(nN W C' W W U ~ Q W - O QO Qe j O O Q S 3 d J J Z Q O W £ d Q -OQ JZ W£tn O m- J~ F W z z a -~ -z- >oc~ wc~ - S N Z y W F-- 2- W O Q> W O W- tA d2 LL C W M-W O W HJ N a£O OQ Vi W O £ Z W ZU ¢> V fF ~ 2 Q Q5> O~ a J M U Q U M Q- U- J iqW ZWQ - W tq C C O O a W N m N OQ ~ J U - Z W £ Q Z r .- d 7 y Q Q y m m v r v 01 M M \ 5 O W ^ '1 £ J d ? '7 d ~ o z N O O~ ~ p. O b O O~ O~ N O O O O O N N p ~ p~ en .7 O N O. r r u1 O~ O~ O~ r r ao O~ O~ «~ O~ N N O~ en _r u1 rn en aD W N O~ W CO W N OG N d 00 ~ Cp OD W CD N ? ? O~ O ~ erg ~ O r O ~ ~ r O O O O ~ O~ O~ O N ~ r b O N N e+7 N N N N N tri eh N N N N N N N N N N t+7 M e+] N b r r r r r r r r r r r r r r r o r r r co a~ a a~ ~ U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U £ U U U U U U U W 3 J C ¢ N C (G W 7 2 p J O O 2 Q Q C7 O U d J !n U D Q N (A Y - ~ U 3 3 £ Q '7 Y Q '~ tQ d ~ Z fn O] W 2 _H C Z W Q N O > Z C ¢ Z J Z W O O O O 5 W Z U W W V1 W - ~ 3 in W Q W O ~ F- H H i- W J O Q O li Z J F N J J J 5 U fn V- p lL J J J 2 p F J W J W 2 J W C H U - J_ O C F- X S - W W W U O C J W > 2 ~ Y J f f f E £ f Z a a a U N N y 3 3 D 3 x H f _O ~+f b r O b b en b b e+f u1 ~ '• 'n ~n N N r O b N b b t!1 O~ .7 ~ ~ N b i!1 O ~ ~+f [O ~ O O ? ? tf~ ~ tf1 ~ ? e~f ~!1 e+f O~ ? to ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~f1 tt1 tt1 t11 O~ b CD N OG b N CO N b O~ aD en b M ~ ~ ? ~ N O .7 CD N N iD N O~ OD ? b b r r b a0 ? ? ? b N N r r b ap ap aD u~ o~ m b a r - ~ ~ .., ~ ~ r rn N ~ ~ b m o~ ~ ~ ~ ~ s r b en ~ ? rn rn rn ~ en N N N N N r N N N .n N N rn N N N N e+f M N 'n ~'1 N N N N N N N tf1 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N t!1 N N ? 1t1 b ~ b ~ eh t[1 O O~ e+> W N N r e+> ? r O~ en en ~ N U1 .- p, ? N t11 en CO C~ M7 r ~ O tt~ b O~ ap N 00 r O ~O o° 0 0 0 °o o° °o o° o °0 0 0 0 0 0 0° o0 00 0 00 0 0 o io 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o r .. 3 ~ a :~ 3 ,. ~ W ~^~ QWO O » 0]000 W d J d d Ua0 r J Q W ~ zU OZ ~ ~ Q F O ~ ~D U Q Q W F Y J O U S Q W O W W .S U£ W y - d O W W W- \ O W Y W ~ Y J- O OC3 F- QC Z W C' W Q J W S O Q U y K U y O W W J U y - 2 W W W d OX W y Q~ y ~ Y y y W d'WW U QW- an `~ d~ J x ; = Z p Q ~ W£ y Um- J~ 1-W C Z Q'7 - Z - >00 WO - C y Z W WF-- Z- O > _ y dZ li C' S Z ~ X W Q Q F- W O W ~' J y 6£ O O Q y W O £ Z W 3 U 2 G Y Z U Z U awC fa < OH Jy -UQ U y 6 Z y W W - W y 5 C O O d W y O J U - 2 W £ Z M ~ d ~ Q Q CD LO m m r UU O~ y N M £ J a o~ 0 Z y y C W of ~z r O N O O~ O~ r LL1 N m O M ~ 1t1 00 O ~ M ~O ~D N 1!1 ~D ~O ~ O~ ~D l0 O ~ O y O O ~ M O ~ m O N r .- in r- Q~ ~ O~ N O M O~ N ~ N O N ~ M ~ N co tf1 p~ ~D ~ O ~ N O O O N ~ ~ ? ? b ~ r U W U U U U U O aC U O £ EO U D £ o7 U O £ 07 U O £ r U U ^ £ -_ U W y W = y Q ~' O J Q y £ Y 5 p J y O W > U Q ~ O J C CO ~ Q £ 4 Y J O N O y O ~ j ~ Q = U ~ O ~ J Q Z W N Y 5 W Q y C C 2 W W 2 N Z W Y U £ Y W J C7 Y W Z Z ~i U Z J Y Z Q y W d' O £ d' W J J £ ^ S Q 2 U O H J = O~ ~p If1 M 0~ M N O M O r O~ N N OD M O N y N N N ~ r ~D r N N ~G lt1 ~ M aD N N ? N ? l~ r N N O ~D m c0 N N 0~ r ~ I1'~ ~0 N N ~ N N ~O O M N r ~ O. r ~ ? N ~ M M ~ c0 N N "~ N O~ t!1 N N O~ r m r r .7 o o ? 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 N ~~ °o o y o o c O ~ °o o ~ o o 0 ~ ~ °o 0 ~ ~o °0 0 m rn 0 0 ~ r 0 0 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: June 24, 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 July 22. 1997. The titles of these ordinances are as follows: 1) An ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to expand the existing facility, located at 4608 Brambleton Avenue, Cave Spring Magisterial District, upon the petition of Saint John Evangelical Lutheran Church. 2) An ordinance to rezone 1.0 acre from I-2 to C-2 and obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a facility for minor auto repair, located in the 3300 block of Shawnee Drive, Catawba Magisterial District upon the petition of Gary Ellis. 3) An ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to expand the existing facility, located at 4873 Brambleton Avenue, Windsor Hills Magisterial District upon the petition of Cave Spring Baptist Church. ~~ W 4) An ordinance to rezone 0.94 acre from C-1 to C-2 and obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a convenience store, located at the southwest corner of Rosecrest Road and Route 221, Windsor Hills Magisterial District, upon the petition of Stephen D. and Marie Freeman. 5) An ordinance to rezone 9.77 acre from R-1 Conditional to R-1 to construct single family residences, located at the south side of Woodhaven Road, approximately 0.5 mile east of its intersection with Green Ridge Road, Hollins Magisterial District, upon the petition of Ernest Clark. 6) An ordinance authorizing a Special Use Permit to allow a private kennel, located at 1529 Dalmation Drive, Catawba Magisterial District, upon the petition of Sara Cole and Kit Davis. 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 July 22, 1997. (2) That this section of the agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth as Items 1 through 6, 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, ~/~ Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney Action No Yes Abs Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Motion by Eddy Harrison Johnson Minnix Nickens ~- COUNTY OF ROANOKE DEPT. OF PLANNING AND ZONING 5204 Bernard Dr. P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 ( 540' 772-2068 FAX (540) 772-21 08 For staff use only date received:' received by: application lee: PC/BZA date: placards issued: BOS date: Case Number: Check type of application I ed (check all that apply): D REZONING ~ SPECIAL USE ^VARIANCE Applicant's name: Saint John Evangelical Lutheran Church Phone: 774.0712 Address: 4608 Brambleton Avenue, SW Zip Code: 24018 Owner's name: Same Phone: Address: Zip Code: Location of propertYBetWeen Brambleton Ave (U S Rte 220) & Merriman Rd (V Rt Tax Map Number: 86.08-3-29 . . . . e, a. 613), approx. ~/2 mi. South ofi Va. Rte. 419. Magisterial District: Cave S rin Community Planning Area: Windsor Hills Size of parcel (s): Existing Zoning: C-2 ' 5.69 acres Existing Land Use: Church Facility sq.ft. :Y~ :~~ Proposed Zoning: llnChanged ................... .......... For SraN use oily Proposed Land Use: Unchanged use Type: Does the parcel meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requiremen ts of the requested district? YES X NO IF N0, A VAnIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for the requested Use Type? YES )( NO IF NO, 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 orc~r to: Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WILL f~OT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. ws v ws v Consultation 8 1 /2" x 1 1" concept plan Application ~'~~ Metes and bounds description Justification ~~~ Water and sewer application ws v Application fee Proffers, if applicable Adjoining property owners l hereby certify that l am either the owner o/ the property or the owner's agent or contract purchaser and am acting with the knowledge and conseny6t~pe owner. Owner's Signature: t~- i For Staff Use Only: Case Number Applicant Saint John Evangelical Lutheran Church - 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. The proposed land use conforms with the purpose of the zoning regulations in that the subject .property is facing a major arterial thoroughfare (U.S. Route 221) and is bounded by a secondary roadway (Merriman Road, Va..Route 613), in an area of moderate commercial development. The current and future use of the property is compatible with adjacent land uses and will serve the community in Southwest Roanoke County in general. Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan. The issuance of a special use permit for the subject property is not in conflict with the comprehensive plan of the County in that it will allow the expansion of an existing religious facility, currently at that location. The use of the land will not change. Churches are a vital portion of the communi#y, and the expansions included in this application will enable this facility to better serve the people of that community. Please describe the impact(s) of the request on the property itself, the adjoining properties, and the surrcunding area, as well as the impacts on public services and facilities, including water/sewer, roads, schools, parks/recreation, and firelrescue. The proposed expansions will not significantly increase the current demands on the water and sewer systems in that the mufti-purpose building will not be in simultaneous use with the existing Sanctuary. In addition, the parking lot expansion and the Columbarium / Memorial Garden will not impact the public utilities at all. The property is in very close. proximity to the Cave Spring Fire Station and Rescue Squad buildings. Due to the direct access to Brambleton Avenue .and Merriman Road, as well as the non-simultaneous use of the various functions, there will be minimal impact to the traffic patterns. N /~ 01 N ~ z r~i ~ O Z O. ~: 5 ~ r U~ ~jQ z a az n ~ m ~ H a' ~ s ~ W"< ~.. ~G~') zo ~ ~ 00 W aid O F ~ac~ ~O z ~ ~ F ~$ p ~ w W ~ o ~ ~ ~ <7 ~a~ ~~ E" v~ a" ~' ~ _.sS QNZ ~ O N~ E..y F N V {a7 q N z X O z i p Q Q ~ O m v,a n ~6 a (f~ a ~ ` a' ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~~W ° U ~ aw W! C, W ~~~r.n 9 }al 6 ~~ Y >M.,. ~ Z m ~ a ~~ U 4~ >~ `~ ~ j 3,4~h' ~~ hp -:a ~,~ i '" a'= ~=_~~ ti ~ o 3 D .~ _ v ~n I N Z ~ ~V ~ ,Ky~n ww ao~aa / ,cb o w ~ ~ ~~ / l7n !r N CO ~ / 8R a ~3Z~ / V ~ / x~a0°. ~QQ° / O U 1 / I $ = / r 6r ` / I ^e / Q ^ N ~ ry /\ g ~'(^~ V ! \ \ / f \ I ¢¢ ~ Q ~ ~~ W U a oQ cO p ~a o I s~ A o Q~ M~JZ ~ (n V Y1~.LL09N , i ly _ fL ~ 1~f/ Q w a m Z az~u / I I IH 1~ rU2~ ~ / ~ ~-J I I ~ a / " ~ ~ ~ * n / 118V ~ Z ~ f-a~°ma s`~/ I ~ ~~Op rr J ip ~ ~ II / 3M;~~ m ~ / ~ ~ ~ zoZ_Q Z J m ~ / , ~ _ ~ ~ x_ ~ ,np~~~~ ~uui / ~~ \ ~ \ ~~~ /s/ e , r ~. ~~ .~~ 11 I ~ ty~ ~~- i ~ o I i` I r ' ~ Is ~ Sip's O 'TrT~~ ~,J ''tjll'QIT~~ luul ` o Fl` ~ Mr , ~~f• 4x` I ~ IqWq~~~ ~ ~. n I _ ~ • 1 ` = I I 6 IWS9 ''• I R a,,p ~4. ~, s ` . -I ~ pro. \Qaf 4 ~~ I I ' "R f.~ ~~ L ~ ~ I ~~~ M F ? ~ ~ I W s~ ~ F j i W ~~ N ~~ i ~- - ~` ~ ~x O~ ~~g ~~s i~~ B t~~s ~~ ~~ ~ ~\~~ ~ ~~ d d Sf' Ru11fA vM9 1 S s aaii a~ c Z ~Q 6621 'Jd 'L4'Zl 'B'0 I ~ NVW332i~ 3Nllfl'dd AiIVW 1 \ O£-£-80'98 # XVl ~ •~` f \\ ~ ~ I Z-~ 8Z l 'Od 'LCS 'B'0 l3aNOM 3NIl0aV0 ~8 132f?!OM 'S SbWOHl Z£'-E-80'98 # XVl Y O C b O ''f~ ~ O ~~ ~- ~(~~(~ z VJ J z fl- Z '~^ v J Q ~' W !~ ~o ~ ~ nO i. -. U DL Z U Z d w 2 J U N J [n W ' C~ o Q ~ ~ L W ~ Z -n ~ z ~ ~ l~ N Z~cN C~ Fes-- J 4 PROPOSED SEQUENCE OF IMPROVEMENTS The following is a projected sequence of construction and miscellaneous improvement activities included in the Master Planning Study recommendations submitted in this Special Use Application. The dates noted for completion of each item are preliminary estimates, which may vary depending on a number of variables (i.e. interest rates, fund raising priorities, construction cost variations, etc.): Construction of Play Structure: A fenced play area, including an activity structure will be constructed adjacent to the East elevation of the original structure. This is to replace the structure removed in 1996, due to unsafe deterioration. This work is expected to occur in the Summer of 1997. Columbarium and Memorial Garden Construction: Masonry columbaria internment niche walls will be constructed, surrounding a paved exterior gathering space. The construction will be surrounded and accented with landscaping. This construction will be located adjacent to the Southwest end of the existing Sanctuary. This work is expected to commence in the Summer of 1997, with completion expected in November. Parking Lot Expansions: This improvement is generated by the current need for additional parking spaces created by recent membership growth. This work will occur to the Southwest of the existing building and parking lots. The addition of spaces, along with the loss of several existing spaces, will result in a net addition of 20-22 spaces. This work is expected to commence in the Spring of 1998. Landscape Improvements: These improvements will greatly improve and enhance the overall appearance of the property. This will benefit both the Church and the community. It is anticipated that this work can be undertaken in the Fall of 1998. Multi-Purpose Building Addition: This building project is necessary due to the fact that the original Sanctuary, converted to a Fellowship Hall, is greatly undersized for activities required by the current, as well as projected, membership size. In addition, a new facility could incorporate space for indoor physical activities, beneficial to youth and community outreach. This project is expected to reach aground-breaking in the Spring of 2000. c~ ~~ N- U° _~m as Q= N Q U Q 6 ~ m O w Z Y ^` VQ C /W O ~ O V/ z C ^N Q O ~ ` ~ ¢ O ~ n tag =qm J ~~~ Z O U ~ Z W ~ H J_ J m aZj ~ (~ W z ~ O O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ iL ~ \/ ~~ i _ ~,~ ~\~; ~;: f-, r-s ~_` --L ~ a~ .. i.,f~ .T, ) N i .. .~µr ' ? ' ~=~` 1T1~ `~ ~~~~ f~_` - ~,__ ,~ty~ _~~ ~' • ~ _ %' 1 .. '.C~i.!' ~ ~«~ 't;: ... }~~ -, ~~~ i~ T~ ~ T- ~ _ _ 1~ v" tZ ~t: ;,, ~, i4~ ~r ~i ~ .~ :Q~./~ W J U '~'^ VJ Q Q~ i~9j H-I L. W. Degen, AIA, CSI ARCHITECTURE / PUNNING / CONSTRUCTION AMNAOEI.IENT 3630 Menlnell Avenue, Roanoke, VA 2e018 Telephone 703 / 772-0500 Z O H w w Q m J U ;6 CaNT~/~1R. 4P~` CANT~HB~IRY HILLS C L ~„- ~oLc~, ~C~~~ W m J~~ ._ .`1\C~N~B`~FR11i O U ~ W.. 2 a l ~/% ~ z °C c 0 r~ l ! `/Noc/A Cruu ~1 \p •~ ~ ScA°°~ ~" I t'C~ ~ AL •~ ~ ~`~~ G~~ ~~^~F ~~ 1,~4~ g~VO R~ ~ 687 ~/ ~ ~ ~ O~ C YO~ ~I hP v ~ 143 \ _! O, 0 KENtiy~~ TRA1l~~ :S _k~~~fs... ~(° r 33 b -v 1 • ~ / ~ i c~ ~, ~ obi ~~ »~ 32 µ ~, v ~ 31 ~ L24 Ac ~ ~-t ~ Est ~ Sri i ~ f~ c ,~,a s' ~ ~+~'+ ~ a~ 1 ~ o ~ o`er ~ ~so0 • ~ L ti~ t2 '' ~on9e ` r ~, ~ cV +~~ ~n• :or v A i~ • 16.7 '+b~ : Rr! / ± °16.3 ",~ '~J ~ c 16.6. 93J = ~ ~'' // b~ y ~~ +~ o a,r •sii i,11164~ // ~* ~ +, 163 ~ 1 , + I J • I ~ 'r+ ~ f / n .npri' ~' 16.8 P' 16:2 t ~ / ia+ c Lo A< N / e` i c ~m i . F M ~ ~ ~+' O `y . , `~ 3~ ,~ 4,, i la ~~ I I6Ac Y / ~ ~. 8~4 i -~ / , ~~ ~ QC °' 27 'y `~ 18.1 ~' /~~ L39 Ac `° •L F \ r +. ~ ~\~ `!. ao r ,n b `~ "° ~ ~' -Z + C ~ Z ..~ 23.! \ ~s~ ~ \ • M1 . acts 24,1 xis ~ 120 Ae ,6 ~6SS a a.. rr i t ~ ~ ~ • 63 AC otie 232 / 24.2 >,. ~ Loo Ac _> Loz Ac r - 24 Q~~ J 1 II ` o0 ~~ 7 a\ p~~ ' D° C•i y o\ h ~ h _~ ST. JOHN EVANGELICAL LU~'HERAN CHURCI _ ~ * DEPAF?'I', iF,\IT OF PLP.P7NIhG SPECIAL USE PERMIT '- p~ Zp~1ING ~ 86.08-3-29 ., . .,. C~ '~ 1' d tt 19 '' ' j+ /~`~ 3ti J`r . ~ / 18 6 l20~ ~ ,+q ~ Q r ~t,~ X ,~ 17 b f3 'rte .^° ~ ~ ~~ R1.16 J ~ t .• ~. 'J~ ~ ~~' IS ~: y v ~3+ ` b >~oi. I I4 D J, > ` . o° ~ rr~ •o cr c ~ ~~:* 8 19 ~ \ IO/J O~ -1~ ~ Q /.~ 18 .o \ ~4, ril h0' 17 r °~ ~~' Belle 4 n ~~~ ~ ~~+ xs. ' a 16 ' ISO //~ For staff use only U COUNTY OF ROANOKE DEPT. OF PLANNING AND ZONING 5204 Bernard Dr.~ _ P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 (540 772-2068 FAX (540) 772-2108 date rece•ved:' ~,~ ~ received by: "/ u'' ee: ~{ applicatior PC/HZA dat>: •~; ~l T/'~ placards issued: l L7 BOS date: ~ z~ f~ Case Number: ,C,~~h,ec~~k type of application file (check all that apply): Ltd'REZONING L14 SPECIAL USE ^VARIANCE Applicant's name: Gerry •~ • F/~iS Phone:3~o -aPBb Address: 3 3G E+ Zip Code: ''~ ~ .~Ctih .~7~ : ~S ct ~e i~ v2i`iS.~ Owner's name: G ~ r y ,~ .~/ /Js Phone: 3~v-~~~6 Address: / / Zip Code: Location of property: Tax Map Number: Jt-'S Oo2 _~ _ ~ ~"17~ w/~e e ,~ri ve ~,lagisterial District: ~ ~ Community Planning Area: Size of parcel (s): Existing Zoning: .X h c1 crs~ ~-%~ ~ -~ "• ~• QrV acres Existing Land Use: (/gGcznf ex~p~f ~'ai- B/cam-lc ~- °''`"h e ~' sq.ft. ,fie-{'-f L't~ar ~ai l~%nl s~Pp/j~s ,.lr ~7~ ,dy ~/-Prr~aLrS L~GLHe~L-- .~ zi~j Proposed Zoning: Cc J~ J rn p K i ~r I l~. ~ ~ L' j For Staff Use Gniy Proposed Land Use:,l'~,..a~f fu 11 ~;/~ a Bar /~1;~> fm C/e /vlrn ar• use Type: ~u~c ~Trpa;I^ G>n~ l~H~~• !~~-Y`ti/~i~~ f~,- rtil~S~% My s~%~ d2cCrag .ter .Ze71' ~ c' ltis f ~ hQ Ji<« r~ % I G'c~ f c• ~ ~vvn Cl,~" ~~.Q. ~s 7-LG t:0.C' ~ E~ r .................. Does the parcel meet the minimum lot area, ~victh, and frontage requirements of the requested district? YES /l- NO IF N0, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. ,l/ -'7 Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for the requested Use Type? YES ~~NO IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. If rezoning request, are conditions being proffe'ec' with this request? YES ~ NO ~ /~ ~~'~., Variance of Section(s) _ __ of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in cr;:~r to: ~! Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING Oft INCOMPLETE. ws v ws v ws v / Consultation / 8 1 /2" x 1 i " concept plan Application fee .~Metesi3and bounds description Proffers, if applicable Application ~<~'.;~ ,~- .. ,,.~, Justification >r~s 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 dent of the owned ~ . Owner's Signature: ~jt~L-~~-~ ~ ~-''~ ~h 1„y e~iS7~i p, J ,Q«ejtiPS~ wl,~°< <i ' -- has o~,fyc-a«-~, ~h~e ~~ra % h eve, ~h~ ~~`t/vp me:1 ~ c~' ~h~s ~ i~o~~~~y +,+,•tii~~ %S oh~y b~~'~~cl--P wdulC~ huge ~o /h~Pt-ov~e ~~lae ~o~/n«~~ i~~'`J.- .~7~ .L 6o ~S ~i~t~ Ct C'oj~;S~~-lip ~i a., ,atir~,f, s ire J~OIv ~.~~ `Jo~.s ~of• ~-~-.p ~ ~.pT ~" P ~z ~ P c1 /--:1, ,0~ ,~ ~-~' 3 c, nod Gr /1 u.S u d l-e ~~ a 7~r i ~ ~z ~ /C a~jt~ e <-- ~h r e e f-=ou<-rt b ~•1 ~ ~' ~h e /o / • ~ T .~ c°t~ J' T i T f/~ o [e ~G/ ,fJ E C %e~~ ~e cc~ Gj~ , . S`jn n> ~G/ ~2~ ~ ~dS ~- r. H b R hJ :S' !r f r6 n s~/ nj ~~, Gt G{ a 6i~ /1 P<:f ~ 7 rl ~ a1 ~ ~-~~ ~•n P S ~ `J~.v< ~Q/k~c~ ~d tQ h ~ G~~~ T °r ~~~• ~~l P y 'S ~ y ~/7 r' f~/•h~ /~-G~~GI ~ P la~J / iYJ~/-o 6~ ~ ~~, ° ~+'~ O b--~~• <yl/IU ~ h ~ J ~c~' L~~j • i• i• ~'~ ~ -~_ a ~ '" o -- - _ - .i ~~ ~ f _~._- W ~_ . ~ ..`` W ~ W Z . LJ~ ~ •~ -` ' vjc~r~~T~r ~~~~ SCALE I~ = 200 i• F~~~ G ra hic ~ ~1 _.___ p Consultants { DESIGNED REVIEWED AS NOTE D SCALE ~ ~ DRAwN JEM DATE 5- 15 ~ $7 '' ,~ APPROVED CHECrED COMM. NO. REFERENCE ~ ~ /~ AUTO MART sue nTLE CATAWBA MAG. DtSTRlCT r E ROANOKE CO. , VA. II ~~ ~ PERMANENT FILE NO. DWG C ~ ~ ,DF ~ i i • N z Q ~- W W. ~: F- N W 3 1 I O W oW W ° _ i a ~-~. s 3 N • I ~ a~ v _ o fn w z ~ ~ I ~ o a O = a O -- w '~' Z n . ~ _ y a .,,J J i Q {a, ~o H J Q W Z> ~ O O~ N Q W O O W O fY a 0 Q O p a ~ \D N ~ z O a a 3 a LL~ n a ~ O 0 \a ~ a a i ~ z J o ¢ _. O = ~a _ 1 ,,, ° •~~ .~ ~ ~ ~~ t t 1 tf~ `f`,t `t i' `t ~ t ' ~ ; ' •1• y ~ ~ ~ , ~, ~ i 1 }~~ ; ~ ~ ti • ~: ~ \ ~ ~t ~ , ~) t •, j 1 F- t:~4 I ., ~, O lL t ~;', ~ t ~ I I~ t ~ J nz ~i 1 11 :1;" 1W a ~ J mZ 1~ ~ , { ~~` \ I I ~. ~ c 1 I.. t E !. I I " ^ ' ,. ~ \ ~~ >- a ~ a N m ~ V;.~, . •o ~ f` J W f- a~ N a ~•~ a' `~-- n o ~ ~ f70t ° ~~~\r' a 1. ~ ~~- Z `~.N r, ,. - 1N3W3sb3 o~dv ~ St y''6 ;' ~~ • _ - - _ i~ • ~ i . ~~ t ! M!2! ~ I. -a-q 33-N~I, ~-~--t ~ % ~ - - ~ - -~- ~- Z F- O ~ Q m ~ w ~ ~ Z ~ O a 0 W ~ ~ ~ a° ~ O a dS a Z / . .a a~j' t ~ N~ r , zN + . o ~ ` / e /- Q ~ Z + IWV t- rf b - ~ ~ ~; • ~ ; • oo ~ j. ~ ~ N rr'~'h ;~ ~ ~ .n r ' • ~ , l. 1~. ~ 2 . ,Iff r • ~ ~ ? ' i . Q. ~ y ' N . . ~-'. { ~ ~. „t7W ~.• ~ .~ , ~ ~ to \~ ~3 ,~•, o .. ~. 1. z Q ...J W H WI ~; W' a' z 0 V • s ~_ LL ~ t Z ~ ~ } ~ . 0 F ;a . W a ~~ W J Q / `; ,DU,SI~ 1 ~- J 1._--._ --- - --~----- ~ M/a ~"u~. __ ~ F- • _ nn is , t ~ 1 _~ ._ - -- ; - --`- - ~ -- N) I ~ i \ ~' 4 I ~~' ~ 'f'~ :I ~ .~ . ; f ~ ;; .,; 1 :I M 1 ~.' N t ~ I 1:. ~~ N ~ J N I aN I O ,: i l fL ~a° , ~ ~ ~ I : . J ~~ J J G f i 4 ` Q ~ `Z Q . V ~, ~, % t a• . , . 1 ~ I 1 aQ W m~ ~ ~ t ~. ; a •~ ~~ 1 ~',~ c ~ ~ f ~ ~ \ .• \ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ 1\ ~. .,_ 1 . _ i , , ~ ~ t f O W J Q U ~ N N ~~- L39Ac y } •~ ~ 3lZ~ 3!1 5 ~•l ~ •° 3~ w. y ~ 6 ~ ~1 6 ~ ~ ~ ''~~ 9 o y9' ~~> + »~ ~ n 'b !!09 •, FO ~~ La 21 ~ 9 ~ ~ Ri. 1210 ~ . 2 i• '~ ,~v' ~ ~ 7 lt39 "~l L •i ~ 'O •Ltti ri ~. ~1 ~ O ~0,7- 1'. 2'~ ~ .• ~ r Ge,,.ry Sr•wi ses~ eI ~ O See Map 55.10 ~p G, ~ Y ~ .~ ~ !, Rww.•• Cwnry '~ I"^ 100 ~ +r"1.O~Ac 38 G~9~ i!!s !!43 M 1,4SAc fa Tl•~i• flMw••ro7 R.C.B.S. MQ,n ST f!! 1 l,~7 . Jcaael~p~9 6 s 1 '• ~ 36a 37 39. 460 ~ ~ c _ 32 ~ ~p Rt. ~ ~ 8` c~~ cn v•., ~ also ~ \ 3 ~ !! ~? S- 2 3/70 !!!2 ~. Z,7 ~~~ ~' ~ 8~ p 101 Ac (0~ 1.~ o \ o 33p6 14 °. N3' •„ L08Ac LI2Ac~ ,~ _ i*"i3'SZ 4 A ~'\~ ? a +~" ~ ~~' 2.18 Ac lI1C ~ ~~q~ A ~ A \ I Y13.( (11 ~ ~ ~~ \ •~ {I \\ ~-Z o s.13A~ ~\ ~~ ' ' ~~ J ~.. ~ ~ N ~-~. 13 .~~ .~12 ~,II ~ _ ...1 .. ~ ~ 3~3~ h s+e,co~a // i/ IS3~ ~_ ~~ ~ ~~ ~/ GARY D. ELLIS _ ~` * DEPAR'II~N'I' OF PLANNIr'G I-2= TO C-2 & SPECIAL USE PERMIT " Arm zorrrrrc 55.02-2-10.1 .i .,, COUNTY OF ROAiVOKE DEPT. OF PLANNING AND ZONING 5204 Bernard Or.~_. P.0. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 (540' 772-2068 rr.X (540) 772-21 08 ~ sl.z/ti, For staff use only h(/~ l date rec v receive G` application (ee• ?C/EZ:. da• ~ placards is "'O date: Case Number: / Check type of application filed (check all t..at a??ly): ~ REZONING C~ SPECIAL USE ^VARIANCE A licant's name: 540Phone: 342-4002 PP Hughes Associates Architects Zip Code: Address: p.0. Box 1034 VA ~ 2400-10 Roanoke , , A ent Owner's name: Cave Spring Baptist Church Phone: 989-61 36 Address: 4873 Brambelton Ave. , SW, Roanoke, VA Zip Code:2401 8 Location of propery: (Tax Map Number: 86.12:3-4 5148 Roselawn Road `!,;egister'lal District: Windsor Hills f Community Planning Area: Windsor Hills Size of parcel (s}: Existing Zoning: R-1 1 . 08 acres Existing Land Use: Residential sq.ft. :'::: f.:::::: 1 ~y~ '7 2 .. :' ~ ~ f ~.•:?::~~::'::i:::::iii:~::::~::::::':':"=:::'=::;::''::':;: Proposed Zoning: R.1 I ~~ scar; uSP c.:;;. Proposed Land Use: Religious Assembly use Type: Does the parcel meet the minimum lot area, ~•+:d_•`•, and frontage requirements of the requested c:s;:;c;: YES _~ NO IF N0, A `.'.;=.='~CE IS REQUIRED FIRST. Does the parcel melt the minimum criteria , _. :-= request=_d Use Type? YES _ /~_ NO IF N0, A VARIANCE IS REQUIPcED FIRST. If rezoning request, are conditions being pry:;=-_- •.vith ,;pis request? YES NO ::~a ~ ~':: Variance of Section(s) of tine Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance i- c.z~. ;;,: Is the application complete? ?lease check if _-_.csed. A??LIGATION V~IILL rtOT EE ACCEPTcD 1= ~.,;\Y 0- THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPL= lI =. nrs v wi ~ v ws v Consultation ~ 8 1 /2" x i i " concept plan Application fee Application '' Metes anc ~^,unds description Proffers, if applica~le Justification Water and s=wet application ~ Adjoining propery o~vn=_rs l hereby certify that l am either the owner of ti:e rroperty or the owner's agent or contract purcnas~r and am acting with the know/edge and copse of t:~_ owner. e, i~- Owner's Signature: i" r 4 Fri Start Use On/y: Case Number applicant D. jEFr~~~ 4~/~2K.1+1Lt.. /~i/~ }~~~'i{NES' A~5oGiDi1=~ ~?Ci-t~T~CiS ~-r-c~.- C-~ V t/ S f c? i tv G~ Pj ,~ r~T I S ~ C c-ku ~G ~-} ` The Planning Commission will study rezoning and sY°cial use permit requests to determine the Head anc justification for the change in terms of public health, safety, and general welfare. Please answer the feflc•.~ing questions as thoroughly as possible. Use additional space if necessary. Please explain how the request furhers the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance (Section 30-3) as well ~s t;.e purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoni~~g district classification in the zoning ordinance. This project is an expansion to an existing religious assembly facility located on 8.1 acre C-1 site and a 1.0 acre R-1 site. This request is for a special use permit to allow the expansion of the facility across the common C-1/R-1 property line. The proposed expansion will contain approximately 23,700 SF in a 2 story structure to house classrooms for the existing daycare and a family life center. This facility is a continuation of a long time existing use which is and has been harmonious with the community. Special use permit is being requested in lieu of rezoning due to a life lease estate on the subject property. Please explain how the project conforms to the c=_::=ral guidelines and policies contained in the PioanCC= Ccunty omprehensive Plan. Religious assembly facilities are permitted by the ordinance by special use permit and is generally consistent with the comprehensive plan. The church has been at this location since 1954, before many of the adjoining neighborhoods. The visual mass of the building will not change for the adjoining neighbors or from Brambleton Avenue. Please describe the impact(s) of the request cn t~•e propery itself, the adjcining properies, and the s;:,-:c;:ndirg area, as well as the impacts on public services arc :=~;Iltles, including Wat°_r/se`Nef, roads, SCiIOOIS, parks/recreation, and fire/rescue. This project will have minimal impact on the adjoining properties with regard to water, sewer, schools or fire rescue. Traffic will not be affected during peak hours. Additional on site parking is planned to expand parking and replace parking lost to the expansion. Adequate land is available for on site storm water detention and open green space and buffers. Type C buffer yards are planned between the existing C-1 lot and the adjoining R-1 neighbors. ~ ~ T~ ro ~ ~~ U ~ ~ ~2 s ° U ~ ~ hi ; q,g~i<€€:; H ~ N ~ is'~.:r.. .?i ~ .:. ~ ' ~ '""~ii:t ~::;::'~•,v; ~ \ \ `°' ° r~ [ r'~ ~ ~ °,~ ~ . \ o~\ ~ \ -. q~ ~ ~ ~ ro ~ ~ Q Q N W `~ \ ,~, ~ L V _ o \ `~ ~ ~~ Z~ O o- ~ ~ ~ ~~v22~s"~ "~ \ \d~ ~ ~. ~ ~ 2 " ~ ct- ~ ~O ~\ . ~ ~ ~~c, ~,sJ ~J G v~ O ~ \ Q ~ ~Nnd~ ~- ~ H o / v ~sz \ 3/ ~ ~ J .( ;.~4: ~ - _ . N ,- - 3 ~ ~ . ~ o ~ Zo \~ i ~ _ ~ u d o~ o ~ . ~ .. te , 0~ Z r ~ ~ 10. p,E. ~6 ~ ~ 1 ~ O ~5'' ~ o H 3 \ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ r Y O- .sue O p,~a, v 2Z~m, ~~ O O- ~ X~ t- :~ d~ O ~\V ~Z\ O~ ~0 ~~ i \~\ 1~- `~J , cl. o~ o~Z~ Z~e~ ei ~.'I ~:. .: v i ~:. ..m L Z' ~: ~: dl i \:: ~ r N li.. III ~1 :'jam -. O V ~. .::W ~ S ~ ~ w ~ Z ~ ~ ~ ~ i i ` ~ \~O _~ ~ N-3 NORTH rl. Ol y' ~ ~ ~ i r.. ~y ~ j ^ nll ~ .y ' I 1 ~ liar ~~ °FJ • 1 ,~ - `"/ zs "+ ~ T 20 „ a ~ l:r, ~ ,l,l ~ - ~n .. ~ ~RL {at! ~- Ref. N.w~ROM t ;tiq 1 / / d'•r ~~ !r~ mot, I•-~es/ / O ~ \ ~ ~ ?G _ 1 ~// w~ u u 2 y ° ' r... P° ~ .T (~yy of / \ ~ 0. r ~~~RL pey'~ ~I ~ ? \ 1 e ( M ` ~ ,n La :. \ 16 ~ 10 \ Y 1 / w,s~ a izrx ae•. v 7 ,. !s a ~ fe~~I a , j ~~// C.a.r.a.0 IT r i. ~.~ f ~~ In } ____-~ 5 4 ~ fefr~ 3 e _ ~'/ ~ ~ O , ~1! O w ~ S O" I I 4' ~ J ~ (Y r .~ ,~ a .. •1 •.~• 10 2 ' Mfrlf / w // ~- 2.21 ~ • ~ AeeO; dr ••~rS/lsss Re ~ ° R` ,}~/ 2 bf ^ / Lv.. ...18 1 c~..ry s<,..a s...r e n•1 d . I p 1DO.. d _ / ` ._ 'ti ~ r / zo ~\ /~/ 7 Is : • t.fe.e . //// f• T R C V S y ~ ~+•r/ SrASr/msI •/ ,~ ^ // ~wvl. moil ~ ~ .' s / ,~ J'dx ~ . DEPAP.2'I~i~1'P OF PLPI~INII~G PND 7ANrNG T i :s •.r ~ \ ]6 ~~-~ ~\ ~~/ • y \ ~ \ ~ ~~ X ~ ~\ \ oh \\ ~ \ ~~ ~) e... ,rw \ \ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~\ ~ ~~ \ ~ ~ i ~ ~ i . ~ .11. i . ,.- f~0` / \ CAUE SPRING BAPTIST CHURCH SPECIAL USE PERMIT 86.12-3-4. • • COUNTY OF ROANOKE DEPT. OF PLANNING AND ZONING 5204 Bernard Dr. .. P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 ( 540 772-2068 FAX (5401 772'2108 ~~~ For staff use only ;~ dajps~ ~ . / received by' licat n e• a p p CrBZA date: placards i sued: P S ~ ~Z7 ~t7 BOS date: Case Number: .-- / ~ y Check type of application filed (check all that apply): ® REZONING L7 SPECIAL USE ^VARIANCE Applicant's name: Stephen D. and Marie Freeman Attn: Edward A. NattPhone:774-1197 ~ Box 20068Zip Code: 24014 Address: 3539 Peakwood, Roanoke, Virginia P.O. Roanoke, VA 24018 Owner's name: Stephen D. and Marie Freeman Phone: 774-6500 Address: 3539 Peakwood, Roanoke, Virginia Zip Code: Location of property: Tax Map Number: 86.12-3- 14_. & 15 Southwest corner of Rosecrest Road 221 R Magisterial District: Windsor Hills oute and Community Planning Area: Cave Spring Size of parcel (s): Existing Zoning: C-1 0.94 acres Existing Land Use:Vacant sq.ft. ::::: ~ PfOpOSed Zoning: C-2 For Staff Use Oniy Proposed Land Use:Convenience store Use Type: Does the parcel meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? YES X - NO IF N0, A VARIA~~CE IS REQUIRED FIRST. Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for t~~ requested Use Type? YES X NO IF N0, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. If rezoning request, are conditions being prof~e~°~ with this request? YES X NO t~~'.:~~ Variance of Section(s) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in orcer to: Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. ws v ws v ws v Consultation X 8 1 /2" x 1 1" concept plan Application fee X Application X ~/£ Metes and bounds description Proffers, if applicable X 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 con f t~h~e owner. Owner's Signature: ~!„/ /~''--~-~~'""`-"= ~ For Stall Use Only: Case Number ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~:::::::':::i::::::::i:;:::i;?i::::::~:':i::::::::is~~+:+EE::E:EEEyE:~::fER;i?EFE.fEEEE:E~:+::::::;::~~:~'~:''.:E:E:E:~:E7::E:E:::;:: ~ f T~f .~ Syr y~ ~ :..~' •:(:Yl'.~~~77YCI, ~~i:J~-i~lrrl`~7L;is~J,~F:;~~f;t:~~.~;6;t........~ :.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:~:.:.:.:.:.: ~pplicant Stephen D. and Marie Freeman The Planning Commission will study rezoning and special use permit requests to determine the need and justification for the change in terms of public health, safety, and general welfare. Please answer the follo~.ving questions as thoroughly as possible. Use additional space if necessary. Please explain how the request furthers the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance (Section 30-3) as well as the purpose found at the beginning of the applicable zoning district classification in the zoning ordinance. The rezoning will further the purposes of the zoning ordinance in that it will provide the ,neighborhood with a convenience store on a major highway. While the property is included in the neighborhood conservation district, the general nature and intent of the r_eighborho conservation district would indicate that residential use on a major road such as Route 221 is not appropriate. The property is already zoned commercial and the proposed use would simply be a change of commercial zoning classifications. It is important to note that prior to the widening of Brambleton Avenue, there was a similar convenience store approximately two (2) blocks to the north which was removed as a result of the widening. i That former convenience store was a significant landmark and provided a needed service ~, to the community. Please explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County comprehensive Plan. The existing zoning of the property is commercial. The requested change is a chance from a one (1) commercial district to the other. The Comprehensive Plan recognized that commercial uses are appropriate on major highways even in a neighborhood conservation district. Thus, it is submitted that~the proposed use is appropriate for this property. Please describe the impact(s) of the request on the property itself, the adjoining properties, and the surrcunding area, as well as the impacts on public services and facilities, including water/sewer, roads, schools, parks/recreation, and fire/rescue. The proposed use will net` have a negative impact on public services and facilities. There will be no substantial increase to the water and sewer service,:~the roads, the schools or fire and rescue. The typical customer is a "drive-by customer"-this is not a destination business. The people utilizing the business will be those people already utilizing Brambleton Avenue. + ~~ N '~ PROFFERS 1. The property will be developed in substantial conformity with the Concept Plan prepared by Shanks Associates, dated May 20, 1997 attached to the zoning Petition. 2. The construction shall be in substantial conformity with the photographs filed with the Petition. Z:\WP50\LISA\SPRING.PRO:laf05/22/97 • • J,YI.YOZSX aTOd AfY7d ZdBJAIOJ 8xoi~ ,~ ~r.~xn oo z - a asst-5rs (arsJ arY~ ~s-ss (oast a~os¢ v,Mtxu ~wt~ an vx»~ sis ~ ~~3i~li~Y~7d - SF~®.L3/1 ~11~5 - S~33fy/J~l~ - ~ d `S31 b7~+USSb' S~6iyb~S ~3o a a; ~~~ ~q ~~ ti oa~ ~K ~ j3 Z aEY i X30 fi'~ O ~ z c d~u ~~ ~ ~ ~~ z ~$< au $ a m ~~~ ~ '' es~~ ~ ° M~ 8 a~~ o~~g ~ d ~m ~ ~- ~~~ s= 3' .C ~y~ ~3 ~ E~ ~` tl~~ ~`<b 5= a~ _ ~ r--- - a:: ~~ ~g£ ~a ~~ 's, ~ r 5~ [3 Aef ~^I ~$s ~~~ a-<a ~'- ~3 ~i= gx ~~ ~~ (ovoa ~vn,aa> sss~ ~noa - odoa ls3ao3soa fl ~~ 's ~~3 ~}~ ~y~ a I I ~' I ~~ I i > I I ~ ~s~ ~p;i - - I ~ I „~ ~~w YY ~ ~ x ~ 10 .t ~ ~~ ~' ~ a :. ,•e/ s ~ // j ~ ~~I? 3 ~ ~ ~ k '%~~-yl JJ--~~ ~ • ~ ~~ Z b W ~ O ~ ,~ ~ _ C x a 8 ~ _ ~ _ _ --_~- II I f- ~ ~ ~ I~ i ` ~ ~~ _.~ Q ~ I ~ 7< ~ ~ ' ~ - t xc ~-~ ~I ~, h ~~ I I :.: <:;:: .~ a .::..,. ~:::. ... ~>:: 2:;;;~: ~ I e .:2 ~ ~ I I ~ SY r , b~§a ~ ~~ ~~9~ ~i8 I I eb•~ ;~ 7~ i ~~ _ € ~ I. I I _.~. %~~ 3NY1 NbA21 -, ~~~~ I i 3 I I ~~ ~5 3~a ~~$ ~~x ~~° S SS Sot ~~S Hq _ --~ --~~ `~RL 669 ~ Ror.le.n--Rood ~ i »» ~~ Lt. • r . ~ .ue , i '4~i 1! ` ` ~ ' ~ ' • a je.a ,' 1~ \ X6.1 ; I.IZ 4 f 10 \ 16 ~ \ •6 In r ml a , f ]7,.r ~'e ]e .. rc fd i br`md 17 1 ~„, s L J =~ / ` \ a O /i \ ..~ t I~ : \ \ ~. ~" ~ f' 1 u» ~..:. \ wCti ~J4. Rorrcr z ? a / / ~ \ t ~ ~ H • ~ / Rl / C.r..l SsA./ h.•I d\ 'Por / ~ i8 \ ~ • 6 '•„ • ~ ~ .j,J~ •r rc'•r• R°°o ~/ \\ tiRY KI \\\ lze a< ~''o eea .,sJ w ~ \ 2 i9 < < Cw..7 Sde./w...ed \ ~• .)N \~ 200K ~ ~ ._ .1 \ 19 wr•~ I ~ a" _ • r• it uft 2 •• `// /~is.• /l/ ice::: ~ ~ n 9: •5 ~,,~~~ 3 r 3a v ' 16 .. •a / e ! ('`'• .. 23 ••$4 ~ r ••~ _ s ~,, y', \ - ~~ ,,,' fJOf f, •e _- ~` '~\ V -2 9~iyw 25 {~3 `' i8 .i 7 , ''a, ,=e~ -ii \••r• _ _ ~ •. _ ..~ X• ,f X ,•13 ~ `~ `_- Si l -~, ~~ X17 ~~0~ i•:i\~ /\y: _ x , 5• ~ff.a d / f, 00+ ~ - '16 OQ 9 Y ~, v» fJ•• Id .~ // / 63 .9+ _ 27 •i ~ ° O, 9 1 Z / ' ° _ Je /~ ~ ~ .• r~igl • 29 a.. is • / 14 .. ~ Y. - •~ _~ STEPHEN & MARIE FREEMAN DEP~x2TMFlti'T OF PLANNING C-1 TO C-2 & SPECIAL USE"PERMIT -. P.ND 7ANIIVG 86.12-3-14; ~-15 .~ .,, For staff use only ~ p '~ COUNTY OF ROANOKE DEPT. OF PLANNING AND ZONING 5204 Bernard Dr.•. P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 ( 540 772-2068 FAX (540) 772-21 08 date i received b applicatio e• PC/BZA date: /~~ -/ placards issue ~r ~/a~~97 BOS date: Casa Number: t • • Check type of application filed (check all that apply): ® REZONING ^ SPECIAL USE ^ VARIANCE Applicant's name: Ernes. Clark Phone:563-5605 Address: 6821 Ardmore Drive Zip Code:24019 Roanoke, VA Owner's name: Ernest Clark Phone: 563-5605 Address: 6821 Armore Drive Zip Code: 24019 Roanoke, VA Location of property: ~ South side of Tax Map Number: 37.05-1-1 & 37.05-1-2 Woodhaven Road approximately on Magisterial District: Hollins halfmile east of its intersects Community Planning Area: Size of parcel (s): Existing Zoning: R-l, Conditional 9 • 77 acres Existing Land Use: One single family home sq.ft. ............................................................................................. . ................................................................................ .... . . }-r. Proposed Zoning: ; R-1 For sraN Use Cn/y Proposed Land Use: Single Family Residential Use Type: Does the parcel meet the minimum lot area, 4vid~h, and frontage requirements of the requested district? YES x _ NO IF N0, A VA=1~.NCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for ;`__ requested Use Type? YES x NO IF N0, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. If rezoning request, are conditions being prof: _: ~~ with this request? YES NO '~. Variance of Section(s) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in c•rd~r to: i Is the application complete? Please check if enc:csed. APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMFLE T E. ws v wi v ars v X Consultation x 8 1 /2" x i s" concept plan Application fee x Application X J:: Metes and bounds description Proffers, if applicable x Justification x ~~~~~ Water and sewer application x 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~d-5~e and con ,ent of the owner. ,~ , _~ Owner's Signature: ~ / ,\f` Foi StaN Use On/y: Case Number ~ .. plicant Ernest Clark 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. 1. The rezoning reduces the density of~possible development on the property 2. The rezoning will reduce the amount of traffic and possible development on the prope rty. 3. The rezoning will reduce the demands on water and sewer for possible dev elopment on the property. 4. .The rezoning will establish consistent zoning in the area. 1. The rezoning reduces the density of possible deve.l~opment on the property 2. The rezoning will reduce the amount of traffic for possible development on the prope rty. 3. The rezoning will reduce the demands. on water and sewer for possible dev elopment on the property. 4. The rezoning will establish consistent zoning in the area. - 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 describe the impact(s) of the request on the propeRy itself, the adjoining properties, and the surrcunding area, as well as the impacts on public services ant facilities, including water/sewer, roads, schools, parks/recreation, and fire/rescue. ~" io ~. C~ ~_~ . F- -; ,, ,~ , Q /~,; `\ ~ ~~ ~ r N ' ~jjr ~ ~ / ~ W ~ N T ,- - ~ U . ~ ~ ~' Q /~ ;' V ~ ~ / /~ <Ni ~ I I ,. ~ ,% / _ /./ ' ~~- -~ 1 1 I ~~ ~ ~ ~\ m ~ ~ ~ M ,' ~ / -' ~ ~ .. ~; , ; .` ~ Q ~-' l / f ~ ` ,//~ ~ r----_~ ~~ i. '\ n' ~' .. / /' / o - ii ~ -- -~'~ ~ ` ~\ ~/ ~~~~~~ ti .o- ~~ ~ d f ~ _,~ ~- ~ I r • ~N ~ ROANOKE COUNTY Ernest Clark, r DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT Rl Conditional to R-1 ~,~ „~„~ ~~ ~~-S~ '+~side J ~. ~. ` RPR 28'97 10 23 FR UPS NEWPORT NEWS CSC 757 591 6182 TO 915407746396 P.05 ` F I L.E No . 478 44fz5 ' 97 09 =53 I D :I`YCB REAL.TQRS 5d077d6396 PA~c 5 RPR-25-97 FRl OS;50 s~• • • RI{E CQ Eli/PlA~1I E1G EAR( t~0. 7037722108 P. 03 far s[eff usr on/y n- ~ p S/? ~ ~ s 7 C~UiVTY OF ROA~t~KE DEPT. OF PLANNi(YG ANfl ZONING S201t 8srnard Or,• . P.O. Rox 2gR 00 RnsnoKs, VA 24018 ( 5~a ?72.2o8a FAx (541 ~7Z~z)o8 dit. r~caN~d: Its 'vad Dv: z-r o r.~ n appifaau ~c • u+: ~ i v . ~ ~ ~ aocaro• ~csu.d: eas ~ Z Z ~j 7 /~ ri31. ~tt2 y J ~ - ' ~ i~• Che~Jc tyx,.. or appncation ~(~ tctwCit ap tnat ~ovJyl: L7 RQONING ~ SP£C(AL USE O VARIANCE Applirar-t't nanse: Phor~a: ~ \ _ j ~`~ ~v~ ZiP Cflde: . Address: S ~ (G . ~- Ann Phase: 757 Owflar•s rsar:;e: C ~ Zl s ~ ~mG r ~K ~la~ r Addrasa: \, /~ ll~- S+• / ~~6j . ~,~Gl.•GG~-- ~'~1. 23~s~ Zip Coda: 7~~-f-I / t_ocnioc~ of psapartv:; Tax Map Number: j ~.~ r iJ 3 - ~ ~` F! 152x1 ~~-\iwa~•~K~•v~ ),,sags~eria) District: C'ryTAw ~3Q ~4r, uA 2.115 3 , . Co:s-munity Pbnning Area: ~~c~s C.eFc--z Size of parcai (s): f:xlstlnp 2anitro: ~ - 1 3 • rJ acres E~cisztnq land Use: sq.it. ~_ i Pro ssd Zarin wyd^ ~? ~:. a c doyS Rw s Gam. °~ r,.u~.. r' fl• ~K.~ti~7NttitL S ~~`~~~ (jr~bO~~d iNl~s~"~ i-~ fC/$1Jlr{~Jf Oi1~Y Y ~ u s. yo.: Proposed Land Use ~ ,~,.~. si Dogs tfis paictl mast the nvntsiwm bt erns, wiG~s, and frontage requlramanu o• tt~s requested diatr"sct? YES ~~ NO IF N©, A VPR~~~ +CE ES REaUtRED FlRST. Dons the psrcci rne:et th4 rr-)n;cnum criteria for ,`~e requested Usa Type? YES NO iF N0. A VARIANCE SS Rtc4tJIRED FIRST. Ef rezatanQ raqusct, era conditions bang proi~zrsd wht- this requests YES NO ~u ...~i~.t.x V~riancQ of Ssetiorsts) of the Raanoka County Zarsing Ordirtant2 in ardor to: //~~sz~i • 1/0.1~•4'~'jw ~a leti Vii. L~li~ (s thn appEFcatbn cempiota) Please check if eRCtosad. APPl1CAT(4N Wll,t, NOT t3E ACCEPTED 1F ANY 4F YNESE t7t:MS ARE Ml&4iN13 QR tNCOMPL.E?1E. R!i V l,A V IVY V Consultation 8 1/2" x 1 1' tancept plan Avpllcation fee Ap~J:cat;en Metes and baund~ duacripi+en Fraffart, .f i~licab=. .lustifieatian Water end sawn sppitestton Adjoining property owner /AsraOy cert!!y dh~t / am u?hai [ha ownai of the ~vauty o~ the owns/'s afl,¢Rt o~ canrract purch•dsei and arrr ac[rnq with the knavrledpa and eons o/ rhr owner, vwnar't Sigt•aRlra: for StaN Use On/y: Case Number 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. Please describe the impact(s) of the request on the Yropery itself, the adjoining properies, and the s;.~rrccnding area, as well as the impacts on public services and facilities, including water/sev~~er, roads, schools, parks/recreation, and fire/rescue. (°Y ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .: ~-1~- ~,ti`,GJ~" ~ 3~ s~ ate- ~-~-- ~ ~~~ ~~ . ~~ The Planning Commission will study rezoning and special use permit requests to determine the need and justification for the change in terms of public health, safety, and general welfare. Please answer the follo~:~ing questions as thoroughly as possible. Use additional space if necessary. • I ~JJ ~_J • , ` ~, ~ ~ ~` rf . ~' 7 ~C 1 a ~ 4 r ~"[ ((` 11~ , i a ( } ~ j I ~ ~ ~ . .- _ 1` ~ •. ~ ; ~~ \n \ +~ , (~ ~ / / ~ e 3 V ~- O'I /y , ~ ti/~ t ~ J ~_ p ~ Y ' , ~~ ` i j/~ ~ !~1 l . i { 1i ~ . ~: S ~ ' v ~ 1~J ~ < V8 ~ w•Z j ~1 ' ~ - ~' .~ ~ o a e ~ ' ~L ~ . v~ 0 O ~ ~1 ~+ o' p ~ K • ~ a M ., ~ ,~ `y W ~ ' ~~ w ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :. i -:. ~ ~ -i--~ , rf w ~ - ` ` 4y n N ~ \ 1. ~ t ~ ~ ~ `,[V~i >, 3 ~ ~,_\~r ~ ~t ri , ~ ' ~.` ~ ~ ; .q ~ , -r : r ~ L ~ ~ ' ' - ~ ~ ~ • sr 1 .r i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ' ~ fr ;• iYr; y , t T 4j+ 1 . ~ • ~ p ~~~~ ^; ir` r ,~°° ~ ,, ~ ~ ~ ' f .r.~ .~,.~ , ~ V • -~ f '~, __ •~..r- - , 1 ,___ ,... .___ .__ - ~~ ~ Z9"d 9~9ibLL20L >I~I2! 113~QJlR! ~0'd 96~9bLL0bSt6 Ol z8ti9 T6S LSL OSO S~18N 12~Od~1SN Sdfl dd ~Z:BT L6~8z 2~dd t ~s ~ Y i tt> r 02 ~ >~ i &~ i Y O r ~ a t I~ • i ~i~ ~ :~ :3 y- Q- ~ ~' ` ~ 4 ~ I r ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ., . . :_ ~~ ~ _ i '; V . ~1 .~ I - d~ 9 ~ T ~' ~ r2 ~9 Q ii rv 1.~ N ,, N P Y, n ~ C ~~ P ~ ~- 1 ~ ` A } Z ~ v Q~ ~~ y L...._ ~-~ fi ~ ~ ~ ~ /b •m -{.- ~ ~ ~ f~ ~~ S' ~ A .~' ~ rrr-y n. ~ ,~" `" ~ _ ~- M X I ~___. _i d a Va /~ 2 N / - i o; ___-~ s z: -; ~ : M r-1 ;- S' ~ ' 1Y ti . ~ zz `L y, e. ~~ ~~ 1 ~ i .~ ~ i ! r ~ N-b NORiN __ 3~OA~ ~ / ~ X22 Myo ~ ~ 1.93Ac{Dl / e ~ ~ ~ ~ t67AdC1 1.83 /k ~ee a 4.1 ~ ~ o~ a ~ ~ X24 l~ ~ ~e~ ~.C2?c ~ / e ~ 0~4 Ti ~ ~~ ~ \ 1 ~ b31 ~ /~ ` ~°~ 25 ~ a, 1 , I ti~5 ~°° ~ ~ u / ~ J 26 1.08Ae 1e~ ~~ `eel ~ f ~ ~ 1 0}>>1 o S 8.77 Ac 1 ^ .e ~' y n .... --~ ` ~ ~ ~ 15 Lo~r~l woods ~!n ~~ 1ey0 ~ ct,, 61 s.,~ clue ~Ja ~ ~ i ~ ~~ /6/z .,,, R ~Y O ~O7! ~ N.V ~.n Wp u 9JL ~a Q\. 2.52 Ae ? ~ ` ~"' s~S . 1 ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ 2 RSV 55 1L~~ ~ EO s 4 ' .~ ~~ 11.47 Ac(01 \ _/338/ 13.8 Ac(CI ~ 32.22 Ac /176 ~ J~~ \~'y! _ 1 ' / i~J~ 133J ~~ O 32 ~~~ ~ ~6Ae ~ I ~~~ 3$9AC ~2C8Ac ~ \"~~ ~\ 6.70 Ac ~~a /~~/ ~~Ro~a ~'' ...~--..._.--__ ys O~~ c~ ~~440 o~~ F ~I~~ 1309 ~ 1511 13 ~J Commonreo/1A o/ Viryln/o 3234 39 ~ 2.64 AC 6.75Ad D) 139.1 Ti. a/ /M 5.31 Ac(C 1 ~ Sdsm PoX! Glib ~OOAc 40 i 1.06 Ac 1,30 /33~ 41 rJI~ l~JB 1.36 Ac 42.E ' ?>1 43 42.1 ~~ ~ boo L63AC(Dl ,o "~00~ ' Z- .8~ L o/ ~ _~ SARA COLE & KIT DAVIS _ ~ * DEPARTMFlti'T of PLA.NNII~G SPECIAL USE PERMIT " A.ND 7ANINC 36,03-I-30 .~ , .,. 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: June 24, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Ordinance to exercise an option with Koppers Industries, Inc. to obtain two sanitary sewer easements and to purchase approximately 0.226 acres of right of way on the west side of the private portion of Garman Road (being a portion of Tax Map 55.03-2-11) as part of the Kroger project. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~,wN~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Roanoke County is assisting the Kroger Co. with an expansion of their Mid Atlantic Distribution Facility in the Glenvar area. Koppers Industries, Inc. own a 0.226 acre tract upon which Roanoke County proposes to conduct road improvements to reconstruct Garman Road so that it may be eligible for acceptance into the Virginia Secondary Highway System. Roanoke County has negotiated an option to purchase agreement with Koppers Industries, Inc. Kroger is desirous for the County to exercise the option so that they may acquire the property for road construction purposes. The Board of Supervisors approved a resolution authorizing the option to purchase agreement at its meeting on March 11, 1997. Staff has contacted Koppers Industries about amending the option to purchase agreement in order to obtain two sanitary sewer easements and an additiona10.056 acres of land for the Garman Road right of way. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The subject property is necessary for the reconstruction of Garman Road. Koppers Industries, Inc. own this parcel of land at the end of Garman Road. The property is described in the legal description in the attached ordinance and is shown on the attached plat. The County's independent appraiser has determined a value of $2,800 for this 0.17 acre parcel. Koppers Industries has advised the County staff that they will amend the option agreement and grant the two sewer easements and sell the additiona10.056 acres for right of way at no cost to the County. The Board of Supervisors previously approved an option to purchase agreement for this property at its March 11, 1997 meeting. Staff has obtained an environmental assessment of the property that shows no environmental hazards ~-{-~ present on the property that requires mitigation or cleanup. Staff recommends that Roanoke County acquire the 0.226 acre tract and the two sewer easements in accordance with the performance agreement with the Kroger Co. for the reconstruction of Garman Road. FISCAL IMPACT: The Board of Supervisors appropriated funds for the Kroger expansion project at their January 27, 1997 meeting. They included funds for $2,800 for land acquisition costs from Koppers Industries, Inc. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors adopt the first reading of the proposed ordinance approving the exercise of an option to purchase agreement with Koppers Industries, Inc. Respectfully submitted: 11 V v ~"~ Timothy W. Guba a, Director Department of Economic Development ACTION Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Motion by: Approved: •rw.~/ `" 1 Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator No Yes Abs Eddy Johnson Harrison Minnix Nickens Attachment 0~ ~~ AY ~) ~ `" N~TERN RA 2,~ Q4,~.~rA ~p ~. .pIEJ~ o~ ~~ ~~ ~ n~, ~ w 1 "p ~Q ~ ~ 1 ~Q q " " s ~g6 ~ W y ~ W = Q `` ~ ~o ~~ ~~ v a~~~~ 11. 1 ` / ~ ~ 1 ~~~~ V ~ ~ ~~` 1 ~p 1 Z ~ m~Q O~~ W~4 ~a~ ~Up' a ~ >, ~~ ¢ ~ W `' _~ ~ k 1 W ~I ~hg`~ ~ ~~~~~ ~ 2 ~ 1 ~ ~ y''~ 1~ ~ ~y . ~ ~ ~' o b N ~ 1 iy a 0 0 0 ~ O o w ^ ~ ~ ~ W W W ~ ~ w ~ ~ o Q ~ p ~ o •. ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ ry ~ o ~ ~ ~ •. qq N ~ If Q ~aV~ y '~ y 2 2 2 ~ v ~ e m ~ o w ~ S 6978 S ~~ R~ 0 Q Q ~o Z~ ~~ Y I ~m ~ ~~~ ~~~ N~~ ~~ ~~ V~~~~ ~~h `' o ~ Q 1 ~. h ~ ~rS-ice` S 1 ~C7~ ~Q ~~ ~ I ~oQ~~n~~~ ~ ~~~~ ~~~ ~~~~ ~~~A~ ~' ~~J ~~+j p~m QQ~ p~W to ~0 ry Qv]~, _~~~ ~~~ ~ .gym ~ ~~/ W ~~o~~~~m ° 1" ~ ~~~~~~~e `~ ~~ w QW~eZ~~~ 56979~01~ o~~~°~>.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ y ~ +~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~°C~c,~ _.--OHU 1y 65 Y~J~~ii~N~ +~ U1 ~ ~' ~~Q~~~== ' N pR~~ AND "i " Q '^ ~, Q z ~ 3 . ~> Z Z ~' ~ p ~ U ~ CV cn Z o ~ W oz a cn~ rn z moo ~ oz~~s.ae~,o O d' U] '~ Q ~ p.Z~Z Q d'~ ~ >. cn W ~ ~r~q cnFO~ Q ~o aNz 1Q- O o o Z oo''-Q o dc' zNo J ~ ~ C7 1--1 Qn.~C9 ~ g~ °o Q~s wZ U1 WQ0 0 ¢~ ~Z5 ~ .~ z ~ W W m° w ~w a ~~ .° 3~ Zi , U1 W ~ V.. D W V Q Wm Q cyi x ~ ~ ' a ry ~t N N W ~ ~ ~ ~ ^ W A o ~~ ~ a ~ ry ~ ~ r ry ~ ~ Q y y 2 2 ~1 2 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ h ~ y Z \~ 1 N~~$ti 3 1 ~~~ °1 ~~~,~ N ~~~w~ 2~ e ~ p ~° 2aa 12~ ~~~ nn' E 0 J OZ 00 mW o z Z W ~m Q S ~ ry v: ~o ~ N ory', ~a W 3 ~ W 0 ~ O ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~S ^ ~ ~n 2 2 ~ ~ H ~ ~ Z 0 0 No~~ti i ~~;~ ~~j~W hWp~V ~. acC~^~ Q a~ ~o 1 N~ i W~ ~~ WES~RN .RA~LwAY ~~ ~~ t AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, NNE 24, 1997 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING EXERCISE OF AN OPTION TO PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH KOPPERS INDUSTRIES, INC. TO OBTAIN TWO SANITARY SEWER EASEMENTS AND TO PURCHASE APPROXIMATELY 0.226 ACRES OF RIGHT OF WAY ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PRIVATE PORTION OF GARMAN ROAD (BEING IDENTIFIED AS A PORTION OF COUNTY TAX MAP PARCEL 55.03-2-11) FOR ROAD IMPROVEMENTS AS PART OF 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 Resolution #031197-4, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County approved the Option to Purchase Agreement dated March 3, 1997, with Koppers Industries, Inc., for 0.17 acres of proposed right of way and 0.15 acres of grading, slope and construction easements on the west side of the private portion of Garman Road, being further shown on the Roanoke County land records as Tax Map Number 55.03-2-11 ("the Property"); and, WHEREAS, under the terms of said agreement, the purchase price for the Property is $2,800 and the option must be exercised on or before July 31, 1997; and, WHEREAS, the agreement provides for settlement within 30 days of the notice of exercise of the Option; and, 7-.- f WHEREAS, the property is necessary for construction of a cul-de-sac at the terminus of the improved Garman Road, and the funds are available in the Kroger Project account as appropriated by the Board on January 28, 1997; and, WHEREAS, as construction plans have progressed, it has been determined that revisions to the "the Property" are necessary in order to comply with the requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation for acceptance of the improved Garman Road into the state secondary road system; and, WHEREAS, by Amendment to Option to Purchase Agreement dated June 19, 1997, Koppers Industries, Inc. agreed to the changes in the proposed right-of--way and easements to be acquired in connection to the road improvement project at no additional cost to the County; and, WHEREAS, Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter directs that the acquisition of real estate interests be accomplished by ordinance; the first reading of this ordinance was held on June 24, 1997; the second reading was held on July 8, 1997. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the Amendment to Option to Purchase Agreement dated June 19, 1997, between Koppers Industries, Inc., 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 2. That the County Administrator is hereby authorized to exercise the option to purchase from Koppers Industries, Inc. the following described real estate, to-wit: All that certain lot or parcel of land, together with any improvements thereon, rights incident thereto, and appurtenances thereunto belonging, situate in the Catawba Magisterial District of the County of Roanoke, Virginia, containing 0.226 acre, more or less, and being shown and designated as "FUTURE AREA TO BE DEDICATED FOR GARMAN ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY" upon the'Plat Showing New 20' Sanitary Sewer Easements Being Dedicated To The County of Roanoke, Virginia, By Koppers Industries, Inc. and Showing A Future Portion of Property To Be Dedicated For The Right-Of--Way Of Garman Road', dated June 5, 1997, prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C., Engineers-Surveyors-Planners, a copy of which is attached hereto and made a part hereof. This being a portion of the same real estate conveyed unto Koppers Industries, Inc., by deed dated December 29, 1988, from Koppers Company, Inc., recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, Virginia, in Deed Book 1298, page 1003. TOGETHER WITH the perpetual RIGHTS and EASEMENTS, twenty feet (20') in width, to construct, install, improve, operate, inspect, use, maintain, remove, monitor, repair or replace a sanitary sewer line or lines, system, or facilities, and related improvements, together with the right of ingress and egress thereto from a public road, upon, over, under, and across a tract or parcel of land belonging to the Grantor, acquired by deed dated December 29, 1988, and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 1298, page 1003, and designated on the Roanoke County Land Records as Tax Map No. 55.03-2-9, No. 55.03-2-6, and No. 55.03-2-11. The location of said easements are shown and designated as "NEW SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT "A"" and "NEW 20' SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT "B"" upon the 'Plat Showing New 20' Sanitary Sewer Easements Being Dedicated To The County of Roanoke, Virginia, By Koppers Industries, Inc. and Showing A Future Portion of Property To Be Dedicated For The Right-Of-Way Of Garman Road', dated June 5, 1997, prepared by Lumsden Associates, P.C., Engineers-Surveyors-Planners, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein; and, TOGETHER WITH temporary construction easements of an additional ten feet (10') on each side of the permanent easements hereinabove described for use as a temporary work space and to allow for necessary grading during any phase of construction, reconstruction, or maintenance of the sanitary sewer facilities or related improvements. 3 3. 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 acquisition of the property 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. c:\...agenda\econdevVcopper;.ord 4 i ~i AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JUNE 24, 1997 ORDINANCE 062497-6 AUTHORIZING THE RENEWAL OF A LEASE OF REAL ESTATE FOR A PUBLIC SAFETY RADIO TOWER SITE ON TINKER MOUNTAIN 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 Charter of Roanoke County, the acquisition of any interest in real estate, which includes a lease of real estate, shall be accomplished by ordinance and pursuant to the authority found in §§ 15.1-262 and 15.1-897 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended; and 2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Charter of Roanoke County the first reading of this ordinance was held on June 10, 1997, and the second reading was held on June 24, 1997, conneming the lease of real estate for a public safety radio tower site on Tinker Mountain; and 3. That this lease is with Lee C. Hartman, Jr. for a parcel of land described on Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part of this ordinance, together with anon-exclusive right of access to and from the premises by way of the private road connecting with Frontage Road, said lease commencing the 1st day of July 1997, and ending the 30th day of June, 2000, for an annual rental of $2,300.00 payable on the first day of each yearly period during the term of the lease. 4. That the lease agreement setting forth the terms and conditions of this lease •~ r is incorporated herein by reference. 5. That the County Administrator, or an Assistant County Administrator, is authorized to execute this lease on behalf of the County of Roanoke and to execute such other documents and take such other actions as are necessary to accomplish this transaction all of which shall be upon form approved by the County Attorney. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Johnson NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Nickens A COPY TESTE: ~--. .7~. Cwt-l.-yxJ Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File John D. Willey, Property Manager William J. Rand, III, Director, General Services Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney 2 II/ I, z Q Q~ ~~ .9~ O~ W 2 0 3 Q N ~ ~ ~ <7 OQ W l7 C s .~~~ ",: '~. '~. J ~ ~ .4 ~ ,. a W ~. i• ~ ~ ~ S`S ~ Q to ~ .~ ~ C~'~ "ti O ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ N W v ), ~ ~ `~ o~a % ~~ % ~ ~`~~ . ~, P / O ~W O F- N N~ W Q J N ~ ~ .~ '. .8~ t Q7 u] Q Z r W Z N 4 ~ W ~- u 4 ~' ~ ~ Z~W ~ N oa= ~ w ~ .ZI .OZ _ .8f ., .. Z Q o Z_ W Y p Z O _.J 2 QI ~- _ ~I - - ~0~~ ,, ~ u ZY~Z 33 ~h VO ~ ~~ ~O~vi ~up0~ ti~ti~ ~~~~ W 4~1t~t1W 0~~~ H H N I ~ ~- t• 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: June 24,1997 AGENDA ITEM: Approval of an Ordinance authorizing the renewal of a real estate lease for a public safety radio tower on Tinker Mountain COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~~ BACKGROUND: Roanoke County has a 911 site located on Tinker Mountain the Hollins Magisterial District. The site was leased for three years and the lease expires on July 1, 1997. Staff has negotiated a new lease. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The 911 tower site located on Tinker Mountain is an essential part of the emergency coverage for the Roanoke County Police, and Fire and Rescue. This site is held through a lease that is due to expire on July 1, 1997. The present lease had a payment of $2,000 per year for each of the past three years. To provide uninterrupted emergency response coverage this site must be retained. Roanoke County staff has negotiated a new lease with the landowner that provides for a three year term and a two year renewal option. An escalator clause for the renewal period is part of the lease terms. The Roanoke County Attorney's Office has prepared an ordinance approving the lease of this site. ALTERNATIVES: 1) Approve the new lease through adoption of the prepared ordinance. 2) Direct staff to re-negotiate the lease terms. 3) Deny the prepared ordinance. z-i FISCAL IMPACT: $2,300.00 per year for the first three years ending June 30, 2000 and $2,600 per year for the following two years ending on June 30, 2002. Funds are available and to be paid from the E911 account. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative one, approval of the prepared ordinance and the lease. Staff will contact American Electric Power to explore the possibility of co-locating antennas on existing powerline structures. Respec fully su , 6~ John D. illey Property Manager ACTION Approved ^ Denied ^ Received ^ Referred To Motion by: Approved by, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy Harrison Johnson Minnix Nickens -2- s ~.l ~ 1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JUNE 24, 1997 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE RENEWAL OF A LEASE OF REAL ESTATE FOR A PUBLIC SAFETY RADIO TOWER SITE ON TINKER MOUNTAIN 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 Charter of Roanoke County, the acquisition of any interest in real estate, which includes a lease of real estate, shall be accomplished by ordinance and pursuant to the authority found in §§ 15.1-262 and 15.1-897 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended; and 2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Charter of Roanoke County the first reading of this ordinance was held on June 10, 1997, and the second reading was held on June 24, 1997, concerning the lease of real estate for a public safety radio tower site on Tinker Mountain; and 3. That this lease is with Lee C. Hartman, Jr. for a parcel of land described on Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part of this ordinance, together with anon-exclusive right of access to and from the premises by way of the private road connecting with Frontage Road, said lease commencing the 1st day of July 1997, and ending the 30th day of June, 2000, for an annual rental of $2,300.00 payable on the first day of each yearly period during the term of the lease. 4. That the lease agreement setting forth the terms and conditions of this lease is incorporated herein by reference. ~" 5. That the County Admuustrator, or an Assistant County Admuustrator, is authorized to execute this lease on behalf of the County of Roanoke and to execute such other documents and take such other actions as are necessary to accomplish this transaction all of which shall be upon form approved by the County Attorney. I,' n z ~~ Q .~ _ O~ W ~~ I o°~ til ` J +~Q O W a W .. ~• ~ ~ ~;S ~J~ V .Q ~ ~~ ~~ 0. ~ F- o ~~ O ~~ ~ J I ~ 7 ~ ~~ • W ~ ~ 0 ' ~ ~ 0~ ~' h~ ~% ~ ~~~~ . •. P / 0 ~ ~ ti~ h~ / 2 0 ~, 3 Q Nm ~w ~o W U ... O C !' C .~~~ '~: . , •. W t- J N ~ ~ ~_ .~ ~W O ~- r N~ .~ .8~ t ~ Q W Z W Z ~ 0.W ~ UQ J a m 2~W N oa= U W J1 .ZI .D2 . .8~ N Z Q W u O W L. Y ~ JI -~ Z O ~°°° ,~ ~ ,~ u Zz~Z . .... .. ~~ ~. ~~3~ ~oo~ ~ti~ tt1 t~1 ~ to 41 W W W ~~~0 I • ~. E H CC H Z J " ~''. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, JUNE 24, 1997 ORDINANCE QC2497_7 AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF CERTAIN REAL ESTATE FOR DRAINAGE PURPOSES FROM DAVID A. THOMPSON, TAX MAP N0.36.19-1-1.2 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 Charter of Roanoke County, a first reading on this ordinance was held on June 10, 1997; and a second reading was held on June 24, 1997. 2. That the purchase of this real estate from David A. Thompson for One Hundred Dollars ($100) for drainage purposes is hereby accepted. Said real estate is more particularly described as a .36-acre parcel of real estate identified as Tax Map No. 36.19-1-1.2. 3. That the County Administrator is authorized to execute such documents and take such actions on behalf of Roanoke County as are necessary to accomplish the conveyance of said property, all of which shall be upon form approved by the County Attorney. Supervisor Harrison moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Johnson NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Nickens i A COPY TESTE: .~• Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney MUTES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTIONS .SHOWN ON THIS PLAT REPRESENT A COMPOSITE OF DEEDS, PLATS, AND CALCULATED INFORMATION AND DO NOT REFLECT I~ lRJ ACCURATE BOUNDARY SURVEY. Paoc~Tr cF / ~ CHARLES. C. HARRIS \ TAX MAP No. 36.15-1-10 N ,/~ / \ PROPERTY OF ' ~ DAVID A. THOMPSON ,/ TAX MAP No.36.19-1-1.7 PARCEL °A° (Montclair Estates) / ~ ~ 0.36 Ac. \ ~^ TAX MAP N0. 36.19-1-1.2 ~ /' ~/ ' '` ,. PROPERTY OF ~ ~~. / \ ~ \ \ COWAN C. d: DORIS K. EDWARDS • ~ '~ <v \ ~ , TAX MAP No.38.19-1-1.6 o ~ _--- Z >^ ~ 1___- ~ pF 1 1 ~?,. a t~NE do CAROL 8. TUTTLE~ PROPERTY DF d'j, TAX MAP N0.36.19-1-3 / KIMBERLY D. DUDLEY ~ TAX MAP N0.36.19-1-1.5 \ ~ ~ / - --' ' _ - - - - PROPERTY OF\ ~ 1 1 /~ TAX MAPR N0.36~18-4 \/ I TAX MAP No.36.19-1-1.4 \ /! ~/ I ( TAX MAP No.36.19-1-5 ~ ~ / ~"' 7 1 ~~ ` ~ / o /' 1 ~ TAX MAP No.38.19-1-1.3 ~/\~ MAP No.36.1 \ 6 ~ ~~ ^/ \ ~~' Poo/, ~~ , '/'~\ ~~ \ ,/ ~\AX MAP No.36.11~1-7 '/ ~Q. / .s ~ , P~ '/.~ `\ ~" `fAX MAP Na36.19-1~~/ /~ / ap ~ ~/ ~ / i v i TAX MAP N0._36.19-1-1.2 SCALE: _ 1 "=100 ____ 0.36' ACRE TRACT TO BE CONVEYED TO ROANOKE COUNTY BY DAVID A. THOMPSON PREPARED BY.• ROANOKE COUNTY' ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT DATE: 0.6 _OS =97 G:\CAD\PLATS\36191A ITEM NUMBER ~'"" AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VHtGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: June 24 1997 AGENDA ITEM: ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE ACQUISITION OF A 0.368 ACRE PARCEL OF REAL ESTATE IN MONTCLAIR ESTATES SECTION 9 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: ~-~---~ Pazcel "A" was recorded as a stormwater management pazcel in Montclair Estates Section 9 in Mazch 1983. Due to a lack of maintenance and nonpayment of real estate tax on the pazcel by the homeowner's association the pazcel was sold at an escheat sale in December 1996. This pazcel has been maintained sporadically by Roanoke County over the past several years due to inattention by the homeowner's association in Montclair Estates. It came to our attention, after the fact, that the pazcel had been sold for delinquent taxes in December 1996. This pazcel contains a small two-yeaz detention pond that is directly adjacent to the proposed Montclair Regional Pond. The pond is undersized by our current standazds, will have a negligible impact with respect to the proposed regional facility, and has been a source of complaints from the neighborhood for many yeazs. Staff has discussed acquiring this pazcel from the current owner for a sum of one hundred dollars ($100.00), his purchase price at the escheat sale. The current assessed value of the pazcel is $700.00. Staffrecommends the purchase of this pazcel for the purpose of (a) conveying it to the City of Roanoke for use in the regional facility, or (b) abandoning the detention pond and conveying the pazcel to adjacent property owners. Attached is a copy of the map showing the referenced parcel. 1 ~~ Funds in the amount of $100.00 are available in the Drainage Maintenance budget for the purchase of this parcel. No additional funding is required. 1. Purchase the site. 2. Do not purchase the site at this time. Staff recommends Alternative 1 after second reading of the ordinance on June 24, 1997. APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ACTION Approved () Motion by: Denied () Eddy Received () Harrison Referred Johnson To Minnix Nickens VOTE No Yes Abs 2 veorge w . ~unpsvn, ui, r.~. Assistant Director, Engineering & Inspections • ~ ° METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTIONS SHOWN ON THIS PLAT REPRESENT A COMPOSITE OF DEEDS, PLATS, AND CALCULATED INFORMATION AND DO NOT REFLECT AN ACCURATE BOUNDARY SURVEY. ~~ / ~ ` N /~ \~ /' \ ~ i/, TAX MAP No.36.19-1-1.7 ~~ ,/ ,/ /~ ~`. ~~ ~ .,~`~ ~~ k~ ~ pF GENE Ac CAROL 6. TUTTLE~ PROPERTY OF B~, i \ TAX MAP No.30.19-1-3 KIMBERLY D. DUDLEY ~ ~ TAX MAP N0.3fi.19-1-1.5 \ ~ - -'-' - - - -- PROPERTY OF\ ~ / ~ SHERRY J. WEBS / PROPERTY OF '~ \ \ COWAN C. de DORIS K. EDWARDS ~ , TAX MAP No.36.19-1-1.fi O '! ' ~ .. Z _~ . I ~ ~? ,s ~ ~ / TAX MAP Nas8.1s-1-4 \ / I TAX MAP No.3fi.19-1-1.4 \ /! ~ ( TAX MAP No.36.19-1-5 ~ / I ~ ---~ ~ y _- / o j' ~ `TAX MAP No.36.19-1-1.3 ~/\~ MAP No.38.1 \ 6 ~ '/'~\ ~~ \ // ~\AX MAP No.38.19-1-7 -~ ~' /~ /. ~\ ~ ~1AX MAP Na36.19-1~~/ '/ ' TAX MAP N0. 36.19-1-1.2 SCALE:_1 "=100____ 0.36' ACRE TRACT TO BE CONVEYED .. TO ROANOKE COUNTY BY DAVID A. THOMPSON PREPARED BY.• ROANOKE COUNTY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT DATE: 0.6 _05 =97 ~"` ~-' PROPERTY of CHARLES C. HARRIS TAX MAP No. 38.15-1-10 PROPERTY OF DAVID A. THOMPSON PARCEL "A" (Montclair Estates) 0.36 Ac. - TAX MAP N0. 36.19-1-1.2 ~~~P/ /~~P ~/, P / i G:\CAD\PLATS\3fi191A `~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, JUNE 24, 1997 ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF CERTAIN REAL ESTATE FOR DRAINAGE PURPOSES FROM DAVID A. THOMPSON, TAX MAP N0. 36.19-1-1.2 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 Charter of Roanoke County, a first reading on this ordinance was held on June 10, 1997; and a second reading was held on June 24, 1997. 2. That the purchase of this real estate from David A. Thompson for One Hundred Dollars ($100) for drainage purposes is hereby accepted. Said real estate is more particularly described as a .36-acre parcel of real estate identified as Tax Map No. 36.19-1-1.2. 3. That the County Administrator is authorized to execute such documents and take such actions on behalf of Roanoke County as are necessary to accomplish the conveyance of said property, all of which shall be upon form approved by the County Attorney. C:\OFFICE\WPWIN\WPDOCS\AGENDA\REALEST\THOMPSON.DED 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: June 24, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Appointments to Committees, Commissions and Boards ~"OL~'1'Y ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: STfl_uIMARV OF INFORMATION ~ PA13R8 & RECREATION ADVISORY COMMI33ION The three year term of Richard H. Cox, Hollins District will expire 06/30/97. Supervisor Johnson is nominating Mr. Cox to another three year term and has asked that his confirmation be placed on the Consent Agenda. SUBMITTED BY: Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred ( ) To ( ) ACTION Motion by: APPROVED BY: ~~ ~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator VOTE No Yes Abs Eddy Harrison Johnson _ Minnix _ Nickens _ c./_ g AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JUNE 24, 1997 RESOLUTION 062497_8 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM L CONSENT AGENDA BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for June 10, 1997 designated as Item L -Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 8, inclusive, as follows: 1. Approval of minutes for May 13, 1997 2. Confirmation of appointments to the Board of Zoning Appeals, the Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals, the Clean Valley Council, and the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission. 3. Appropriation of Federal and State Funds for reimbursement of expenditures related to Hurricane Fran. 4. Authorization for write-off of Utility Bad Debt. 5. Request from School Board to accept $2500 grant from Howell's Motor Freight, Inc. for Writing Workshops. 6. Appointment of George G. Assaid as Alternate Subdivision Agent for Roanoke County. 7. Acceptance of water and sanitary sewer facilities serving Triple Crown Estates -Section 1. 8. Approval of resolution amending the Vehicle Utilization Policy to 1 increase mileage reimbursement for use of personal vehicle for County business. 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 Minnix to adopt the Consent Resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Johnson NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Nickens A COPY TESTE: .mod • ~~e..t.~,c.•~.~ Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Vincent K. Copenhaver, Finance Manager Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance Dr. Deanna Gordon, School Superintendent Lorraine S. Lange, Supervisor of Language Arts Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Gary Robertson, Director, Utility John M. Chambliss, Jr., Assistant Administrator 2 ., r ~_ .~... May 13, 1997 zrl5 Roanoke County Administration Center 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, Virginia 24018 ~- May 13, 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 May, 1997. N RE: CALL TO ORDER Chairman Johnson called the meeting to order at 3:03 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 Dr. Michael Nevling, Colonial Avenue Presbyterian Church. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all present. May 13, 1997 277 2 Proclamation declaring Mak18 - 24 1997 as Emergency Medical Services Week in Roanoke County_ Chairman Johnson presented the proclamation to Richard Burch, Fire & Rescue Chief, and Career and Volunteer members of Fire & Rescue. Supervisor Eddy moved to approve the proclamation. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None IN RE: NEW BUSINESS 1. Request for authorization to enter into a contract for County- wide drop-off recycling. William Rand, General Services Director, A-Q51397-1 Mr. Rand reported that in October 1987, Roanoke County began a pilot program to study curbside collection of recyclables. In 1989, the program was expanded into another area of the county. The participation rate for this program has averaged between 25-35%. In the early 1990's, the County began automated commingled collection. Participation has ranged from 70% to 80%. The cost for 1995/96 was $81,370. At the March 25 work session, the Board was presented with three options: (1) commingled recycling to the entire county at a cost of $1:14 million in capital and May 13, 1997 279 2. RecLues# for approval of a Counter-State agreement with the Virginia Department of Transportation for industrial access relating to Valley Gatew~. (Timothy Gubala. Economic Development Directorl , R-051397-2 Mr. Gubala reported that the VDOT Commonwealth Transportation Board approved the County`s request for industrial access road funds on February 20, 1997. Staff is preparing the road plans, in accordance with VDOT standards, and road construction is scheduled to begin in July 1997 and to be completed in late 1997. Mr. Gubala requested that the County Administrator be authorized to execute a County-State Agreement with VDOT for the industrial access road in Valley Gateway. Supervisor Johnson moved to adopt the resolution with paragraph 8 corrected as Supervisor Eddy suggested. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None RESOLUTION 051397-2 FOR APPROVAL OF COUNTY-STATE AGREEMENT FOR INDUSTRIAL ACCESS RELATING TO VALLEY GATEWAY WHEREAS, Title 33.1-221, Code of Virginia, provides for the availability of state Indus#rial access funds for implementing approved improvements to public streets to enhance and promote industrial development and continued public safety along public streets; and May 13, 1997 281 requested that Roanoke County use these savings to start on the second part of the incentive package. T. P. Parker and Sons has prepared a grading plan for the rear portion of the site at a total cost of $731,600, and the bid expires soon. Mr. Duncan advised there are several advantages to proceeding at this time with the grading and requested $731,600 from the economic development account to proceed. Supervisor Eddy announced that he would oppose this request because he did not feel it was sound use of public funds. Supervisor Harrison moved to approve $731,000 funding. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: Supervisor Eddy 4. Ret.~uest for $100,000 advance funding to construct the neighborhood park in Mayflower Hills. (Joyce Waugh. Economic Development Specialist A-051397-4 Ms. Waugh explained that on January 14, 1997, Roanoke County requested funding from the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority for a neighborhood park in the Mayflower Hills Community. .The resolution stated that Roanoke County Parks and Recreation would be responsible for design and construction of the neighborhood park. On March 17, the Resource Authority notified Roanoke County that consent letters had May 13, 1997 283 of services and provides a framework for the management of the department's facilities. Ms. Pitts advised that Section IV of the manual provides that all sanctioned organizations must provide general liability and directors' insurance. The County Attorney strongly recommends that the policy require sports organizations to have this insurance. The Risk Manager advised that there is no insurance available from the County for this because the County is self-insured. Currently, seven of the ten recreation clubs have some type of liability insurance and another two have expressed interest in obtaining it. There was a lengthy discussion on whether the County could be involved in any litigation if an organization had no insurance. Mr. Mahoney responded that there was no exposure. An individual could still file a claim, but it would have to go through the organization first, before going to the County. Supervisor Nickens moved to approve the manual with the incorporation in the manual of Mr. Hodge's comment "if user chooses to operate without liability insurance, this is a decision that can be made by each user." Supervisor Eddy offered an amended motion to approve the manual with all references to insurance deleted and addressed at a later time. The motion was defeated by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisor Eddy NAYS: Supervisors Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson Supervisor Nickens' original motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson May 13, 1997 285 ~.__ _ _ ,_ _ ____.u_ _____._ _.. ~ ~ _~ _____ and County Employees (Diane Hyatt. Finance Director) A-051397-7 Ms. Hyatt advised that last year during the renewal process, the retirees premium was segregated and increased to reflect their high claims experience. The current year renewal reflects a 27.5% increase for retirees and a 7.4% decrease for active employees. The decrease in the premiums will result in a savings of $30,000 and staff recommends that the savings be placed in the Employee Suggestion Program. Supervisor Nickens moved to approve the dental insurance contract with the $30,000 savings appropriated to the genera! fund unappropriated balance. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens NAYS: Supervisor Johnson 8. RecLuest to appropriate reserve for future School Capital. (Diane ~1vatt, Finance Director) A-051397-8 Ms. Hyatt advised that the 1996-97 Debt Fund budget contains $670,000 in funds that will not need to be expended during the current fiscal year. They include: (1) $365,000 for temporary borrowing for a potential bond issue for a new South County school; (2) $230,000 set aside for future debt payments; and (3) $75,000 interest expense on the Cave Spring Junior High Literary Loan. May 13, 1997 287 AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None 10 Preliminary approval of citizens' requests to file a complaint with the F.C.C. to review increase in cable _proq_ramming services rates of Cox Communications. (.Joseph Obenshain, Sr. Assistant County Attornevl A-051397-10 Mr. Mahoney advised that Roanoke County has received 12 complaints from citizens requesting a review of the intentions of Cox Communications Roanoke, Inc. to increase the rates for its cable programming services (CPS) effective March 1, 1997. Roanoke County, as the franchising authorizing, must make an initial determination that not more than 90 days have elapsed from the date the rate increase went into effect until the subscriber complaints were received, and that such rate increase pertains to the CPS tier. These criteria appear to be satisfied. If the County intends to submit a complaint to the FCC, it must first send a written notice including a draft FCC form 329. Staff recommends sending the draft form 329 and requesting a response by certified mail within 45 days. Supervisor Eddy moved to approve sending draft form 329 to Cox Communications. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison NAYS: Supervisors Nickens, Johnson May 13, 1997 2S9 WHEREAS, Section 22.1-93 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended, provides that the governing body of the County shall prepare and approve an annual budget for educational purposes; and WHEREAS, said budget shall be prepared and approved for informative and fiscal planning purposes only. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia: 1. That there is hereby approved the annual budget for Fiscal Year 1997- 98 for the educational purposes of the County School Board for Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: FY 1996-97 FY 1997-98 FUND School Operating Fund $79,912,607 $83,928,863 Cafeteria Fund 3,017,000 3,195,000 Grants Fund 1,498,253 1,661,603 Textbook Fund - 814,526 914,822 TOTAL $85,242,386 $89,700,288 2. That the preparation and approval of this budget is for informative and fiscal planning purposes only. On motion of Supervisor Minnix to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None 2. Resolution adopting the Capital Improvements Program (CIP) for fiscal years 1998-2002. (Brent Robertson Budget Manager) R-051397-12 Mr. Robertson advised that the proposed CIP for 1998-2002 was submitted for the Board of Supervisors' review and discussion at several work sessions, and a separate work session to discuss the Utility CIP. The proposed CIP represents an May 13, 1997 291 . NOW THEREFORE be it resolved by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That the County capital improvements program for FY 1998-202 is hereby adopted and approved. 2. That this capital improvements program shall not be considered a portion of the Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan. On motion of Supervisor Nickens to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: Supervisor Eddy 3. Resolution approving the fiscal year 1997198 budget for Roanoke County. (Brent Robertson, Budget Manager R-051397-13 Mr. Robertson reported that the resolution is detailed by fund and includes unappropriated balances for the General Government, Capital, Water and Sewer Funds. The School budget is also included. The proposed budget was submitted to the Board on April 8 and a public hearing was held on April 22. Mr. Robertson pointed out that discussion and direction from the Board of several items could cause some figures to change, but the total County budget would not change. There was discussion on the Virginia Western Community College site construction, part-time employees for Fire and Rescue, Youth Haven II funding, Fire and Rescue equipment, emergency medical dispatchers, low band radio system on the Blue Ridge Parkway, and expansion of CORTRAN. Mr. Hodge advised that he is working with the Chiefs Board on equipment replacement, that he would bring back a report on emergency medical dispatchers, and would have more details on expansion of CORTRAN by the second reading, and that the low band radio system on the Blue Ridge Parkway May 13, 1997 • • Adogted k'V t 99~-98 Progosed Expenditures General Fund: General Government: General Administration - $ 2,256,866 Constitutional Officers 6,413,215 Judicial Administration 530,095 Management Services 1,936,202 -~ .Public Safety 11,099,744 Community Services 8,247,044 Human Services 9,441,365 Non-Departmental 3,166,537 Transfers to School Operating Fund 45,517,498 Transfers to Debt Service Fund - 6,193,037 Transfer to Internal Services 880,826 Transfer to Comprehensive Services 654,840 Txansfer to Capital 2,b34,500 Other .. 293,000 General Government 99,264,769 Youth Haven II 427,646 Law Library 41,980- Recreation Fee Class 726,369 Comprehensive Services Act 1,451,110 Internal Services 1,768,837 Garage II - 283,794 Total General Fund 103,964,505 Debt Service Fund ~ 9,408,677 Capital Projects Fund ~ - ~ - - 2,634,500 Internal Service Fund ~ - 880,826 Water Fund -~ ~ - 11,489,461 n Sewer Fund ~ - - 5,684,703 Unappropriated Balance ~ _ - 1,278,009 . - - ~ 6,962,712 School Operating Fpnd 83,928,863 School Cafeteria Fund . - 3,195,000 School Grants Fund 1,661,603 School Textbook Fund .. - 914,822 s Total Expenditures All Funds 225,040,969 Less: Transfers (64,911,•614} Total Net of Transfers ~ ~• $ 160+129,355 • May 13, 1997 ~~ Adopted ~ FY 1997-98 In addition to the above revenues and expenditures, the following begisming balances will be appropriated to the Unappropriated Balances of the respective funds; General Fund $ 9,500,000 Capital Projects Fund $ 1,000,000 ' • Water Fund $ 1,883,446 i' Sewer Fund $ 2,789,689 ~ 2. That the preparation and approval of this budget is for informative and fiscal planning purposes only. 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 4. First reading of ordinance appropriating the funds for the fiscal near 1997/98 budget. (Brent Robertson Budget Manager) Mr. Robertson reported that this year's ordinance includes projected Fund Balances which were not included i~n prior ordinances. The total County budget is $225,040,969, and includes all interfund and intrafund transfers. The budget net of transfers is $160,129;355. Staff recommends approval of the Budget Appropriation Ordinance and the 1997-98 Employee Classification P{an. Supervisor Johnson moved to approve the first reading and set the second reading for May 27, 1997. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None May 13, 1.997 297 Mr. Gubala reported that Roanoke County is assisting the Kroger Company with an expansion of their Mid Atlantic Distribution Facility in the Glenvar area. James C. and Arline B. Epperly own a 0.50 acre tract upon which Kroger proposes to locate a portion of their new Vehicle Maintenance Facility. Staff has negotiated a purchase price of $25,000 and will pay the Epperly's $3,000 for replacement of a private.well. Staff has also obtained an environmental assessment of the property which shows that there are no environmental hazards present on the property that require mitigation or cleanup. Mr. Gubala requested that the Board adopt the proposed ordinance and authorize assignment of the contract to the Industrial Development Authority for conveyance to the Kroger Company. Supervisor Harrison moved to approve the first reading and set the second reading for May 27, 1997. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None 3 Ordinance au#horizing the acquisition of a 17 825 acre parcel of real estate in conjunction with the cleanu.~ of the Dixie Caverns Landfill. (George Simpson, Assistant Director of Engineering ~ Inspections) Mr. Simpson reported that the Dixie Caverns Landfill was, operated by Roanoke County from 1965 to 1976. During the operation,~-municipal waste was May 13, 1997 299 f -~ ~.~.f _......_.._-~.~. -- - - _, _, direction to the Board and to the public in the acceptance and use of donations of environmentally sensitive properties. In addition, the Board should authorize the County Administrator to execute an agreement with the anonymous donor to limit the future use of this real estate to ridge line and viewshed protection; limited passive, recreational use; and preventing any future high intensity uses or development, ~' Mr. Mahoney advised that there are transaction costs~associated with the donation that should not exceed $5,000. He recommended appropriation of the funds from the Board Contingency Fund. Supervisor Eddy _ asked if the Planning Commission should review the ordinance and guidelines. Mr. Mahoney advised he would ask them to review them on May 20, prior to second reading. Supervisor Minnix moved to approve the first reading and set the second reading for May 27, 1997. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None IN RE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance amending and reenacting Section 2-17 Dissemination of criminal history record information of applicants for.~ublic emalovment. permit or license of Article II Organizational Structure of County Administration of Chapter 2 of the Roanoke May 13, 1997 301 placed on-the May 27, 1997 Consent Agenda. IN RE: CONSENT AGENDA R-051397-14 R-05139714 h• R-051397-14 I Supervisor Nickens moved to adopt the Consent Resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy; Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None RESOLUTION 051397-14 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM K CONSENT AGENDA BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: - 1. That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for May 13, 1997 designated as Item K -Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 13, inclusive, as follows: 1. Approval of Minutes -March 25, 1997 2. Appropriation of state funds for public assistance for the Department of Social Services. 3. Acceptance and appropriation of grant from Roanoke Valley Resource Authority for recycling program. 4. Acceptance of water facilities serving Wayburn Drive Extension. 5. Acceptance of water and sewer facilities serving Summerfield, Section III. May 13, 1997 303 WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision treet Requirements. grid BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills arid drainage, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy, of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Recorded Vote Moved By: Supervisor Nickens Seconded By: None Required Yeas: Supervisors Eddy. Harrison, Minnix Nickens, Johnson Nays: None Absent: one RESOLUTION Q51397-14.1 REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF A PORTION OF WARWOOD DRIVE INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY SYSTEM. WHEREAS, the streets described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(a), fully incorporated herein by reference,'are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Roanoke County, and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation, and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision treet Requirements. and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Recorded Vote -- Moved By: Supervisor Nickens Seconded By: None Required May 13, 1997 305 shortly. (3) He noted that there was an article in the newspaper stating that U. S. Cellular Corp will be placing antennae on power line towers in the future. Mr. Mahoney advised that it is doubtful that this will have an impact on the litigation against the County. (4) He also noted that another newspaper article stated that a federal court in Baltimore upheld an ordinance prohibiting smoking ads aimed at young people. Mr.-Mahoney responded that he would get more information. (5) He asked for an update on the Blue Ribbon Committee implementation efforts. Chairman Johnson advised that he and Mr. Hodge met with Dr. Gordon and School Board Chair Mike Stovall and they have begun the process. They will attend another meeting later in the week. (6) He advised that at the Volunteerism Conference held in Philadelphia, corporations were asked to allow employees time off to volunteer and he asked if there is a similar policy in the County. Mr. Hodge responded that the County has no policy but he would be willing to look at the possibility. There was no consensus to consider this. fN RE: REPORTS Supervisor Johnson moved to receive and file the following reports. The motion carried by a unanimous voice vote. 1. Several Fund Unappropriated Balance ~. Caaita! Fund Unappropriated Balance 3 Board Contingency Fund 4. Accoun#s Paid -March 1997 May 13, 1997 307 RESOLUTION 051397-15 CERT1FYlNG EXECUTIVE MEETING WAS HELD IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CODE OF VIRGINIA WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia has convened an executive meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provisions of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and WHEREAS, Section 2.1-344.1 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that such executive meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby certifies that, to the best of each members knowledge: 1. Only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the executive meeting which this certification resolution applies, and 2. Only such public business matters as were identified in the motion convening the executive meeting were heard, discussed or considered by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the Certification Resolution and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None IN RE: OTHER BUSINESS 1. Reconsideration of request of Shenandoah Homes Retirement Villaaes to rezone 17.5 acres from R-3 to C-2 and obtain a Special Use Permit to construct a home for adults Supervisor Nickens moved to reconsider action taken on Aprii 22, 1997 to deny the Special Use Permit and rezoning request of Shenandoah Homes Retirement Village. The motion passed by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison,-Nickens, Johnson NAYS: None ... ' A-062497-8. a ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER L- 2. AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: June 24, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Confirmation of Committee Appointments to the Board of Zoning Appeals, Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals, Clean Valley Council and the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The following nominations were made at the June 10 Board meeting and should now be confirmed. Board of Zoning~pgeals Supervisor Johnson nominated Carlton Wright to serve another five- year term which will expire June 30, 2002. Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals Supervisor Eddy nominated Larry W. Degen to fill the unexpired term of Buford Butts as alternate member. The term will expire July 28, 1998. Clean Valley Council Supervisor Nickens nominated Vince Reynolds to another two-year term which will expire June 30, 1999. Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Supervisor Johnson nominated David A. Thompson to fill the unexpired term of Tim Hoelzle, representing the Hollins Magisterial District, who has resigned. The term will expire June 30, 1998. Supervisor Johnson has also nominated Richard Cox, Hollins Magisterial District to serve another three-year term and asked that his confirmation be placed on the Consent Agenda. His term will expire June 30, 2000. ,. " t_..~ Supervisor Harrison has nominated Wayne Gauldin, Catawba Magisterial District, to another three-year term and Lonzo Kennedy, Catawba Magisterial District to a three-year term. Their terms will expire June 30, 2000. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that the above appointments be confirmed by the Board of Supervisors. Respectfully submitted, ~1"1~-~c~,..~ Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board Approved by, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ---------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved (x) Motion by: H. Odell Minnix to No Yes Absent Denied ( ) approve Eddy ~ Received ( ) Harrison ~ Referred ( ) Johnson ~ To ( ) Minnix ~,- Nickens ~,_ cc: File Board of Zoning Appeals File Building Code Board of Adjustments and Appeals File Clean Valley Council File Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission .~. . y i A-062497-8.b 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: June 24, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Appropriation of Federal and State Funds for Reimbursement of Expenditures Related to Hurricane Fran COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The County sustained minor damage on September 6, 1996 during Hurricane Fran. Debris removal and cleanup have been completed and total expenditures amounted to $41,877. The County applied for and has received the maximum Federal and State assistance available (94%) totaling $39,364. FISCAL IMPACT: In order to record the budget for the storm damage on the County books for 1996- 97, the Board will need to appropriate $39,364 to County departments. This amount will be offset by $39,364 in Federal and State revenues. County departments receiving appropriations include: Department Purpose Amount Parks and Recreation Overtime, Equipment Usage $12,806 Elections Moving Voting Machines 1,047 Police Overtime 527 Fire and Rescue Overtime 327 Solid Waste Overtime, Equipment Usage, Tipping Fees 24,657 Total $39,364 $2,513, representing the 6% not recoverable from Federal and State revenues, were absorbed by the County departements. M:\FINANCE\COMMON\BOARD\6-24-97C.WPD June 18, 1997 !' • • • ~~ STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends appropriating funds as described above in the fiscal impact statement. SUBMITTED BY: ~~ ~ ~ tiv~ LGcr~`~~../ Vincent K. Copenhaver Finance Manager APPROVED: Cc~~ Elmer C . Hodge County Administrator ---------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved (x) Motion by: H. Odell Minnix to No Yes Absent Denied ( ) apgrove Eddy ~._ Received ( ) Harrison ~ Referred ( ) Johnson ~ To ( ) Minnix ~_ Nickens ~_ cc: File Vincent K. Copenhaver, Finance Manager Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance M:\FINANCE\COMMON\BOARD\6-24-97C.WPD June 18, 1997 .~. • ~ A-062497-8. c ACTION NO. ITEM NUMBER ~ _ T AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: June 24, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Write-off of Utility Bad Debt COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: Each year the County writes off the Utility delinquent accounts that are over five years old. This policy is consistent with the procedures used by the Treasurer for the write off of delinquent personal property accounts as prescribed by law. The following efforts have been made to collect these accounts: 1. Collection letters requesting payment. , 2. Filing with the Department of Taxation Debt Set-off Program. 3. Filing Warrants in Debt where a valid address is available. 4. Continuing to research for delinquent accounts through the DMV, VEC, and Department of Taxation Records. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The delinquent utility accounts to be written off at this time are: Year Amount Number of Accounts 1992 $9,370.49 45 Total Billing $7,801,429.00 of Delinquency 12% • M:\FINANCE\COMMON\BOARD\6-24-97.WPD June 17, 1997 I. ~-4 i~ A comparison of prior year delinquent account write-offs is shown below Year Amount Number of Total Billing % of Delinquency Accounts 1991 $4,605.00 32 $7,472,725.00 0.06% 1990 $4,084.00 42 $6,289,504.00 0.06% 1989 $3,344.00 30 $5,985,833.00 0.06% 1988 $6,839.00 47 $5,897,197.00 0.11% SUBMITTED BY: APPROVED: L~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator . ~n.~~ Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance ~~ STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends writing off the 1992 delinquent accounts. ---------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved (x) Motion by: H Odell Minnix to No Yes Absent Denied ( ) ~~prove Eddy ~L- Received ( ) Harrison ~._ Referred ( ) Johnson ~_ To ( ) Minnix ~._ Nickens _. ~L_ cc: File Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance M:\FINANCE\COMMON\BOARD\6-24-97.WPD June 17, 1997 A-062497-8 . d ACTION ~~~ ITEM NUMBER MEETING DATE: June 24, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Request from School Board to accept and appropriate $2500 from Howell's Motor Freight, Inc. for Writing Workshops COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: /~ BACKGROUND: Howell's Motor Freight, Inc. awarded Roanoke County Schools $2500 for a storyteller to perform and teach writing workshops at Cave Spring Junior High School, Wm. Byrd Middle School and Hidden Valley Junior High School. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Donald Davis, a professional storyteller, performed at three middle schools (Cave Spring Junior High School, Wm. Byrd Middle School and Hidden Valley Junior High School), and he taught writing workshops in those schools. FISCAL IMPACT: none STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends appropriation of $2500 to the School Grant Fund. r , Lorraine S. Lang Supervisor of Language Arts ~~~~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator --------------- ------------------------ ACTION VOTE Motion b u n~A>> Minnix to No Yes Absent Approved (x) y' Eddy _X__ Denied ( ) Harrison ~_ Received ( ) Johnson _~ Referred ( ) Minnix ~C_ To ( ) Nickens ~- cc: File Lorraine 5. Lange, Supervisor of Language Arts Dr. Deanna Gordon, School Superintendent Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance Brenda Chastain, Clerk, School Board A-062497-8 . e ITEM NUMBER ~ ""' AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: June 24, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Appointment of George G. Assaid as Alternate Subdivision Agent for Roanoke County. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: BACKGROUND: The Code of Virginia requires that a local governing body be responsible for the administration and enforcement of the provisions of the local subdivision ordinance. In Roanoke County, the Board of Supervisors has delegated this responsibility to an administrative Subdivision Agent. O. Arnold Covey, Director of Engineering and Inspections, is currently the Roanoke County Subdivision Agent, and is thus authorized by code to approve subdivision plats, Timothy Gubala, Director of Economic Development, and Terrance Harrington, Director of Planning and Zoning currently serve as alternate Subdivision Agents. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Engineering and Inspections Department is continually reviewing existing processes (County services) to improve customer service. During the past year, have assigned the responsibility of subdivision administration to the Development Review Coordinator, George Assaid. I believe this appointment of George Assaid to Alternate Subdivision Agent will improve the efficiency of this service to our customers. Therefore, I am requesting that George G. Assaid, Development Review Coordinator, be appointed by the Board of Supervisors as an Alternate Subdivision Agent for Roanoke County. 1 I e MITTED BY: mold Covey, Director Engineering & Inspections APPROVED BY: Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator L- y ---------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved (x) Motion by: H Odell Minnix to No Yes Absent Denied ( ) bpmr^ye _ Eddy ~ Received ( ) Harrison ~L_ Referred ( ) Johnson ~ To ( ) Minnix ~_ Nickens ~_ cc: File Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Timothy G~bala, Director, Economic Development Terrance Harrington, Director, Planning & Zoning Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney 2 A-062497-8.f 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: June 24, 1997 SUBJECT: Acceptance of Water and Sanitary Sewer Facilities Serving Triple Crown Estates - Section 1 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: (~~~ *K tai SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Developer of Triple Crown Estates -Section 1, Jim Davis with C&D Builders, has requested that Roanoke County accept the Deed conveying the water and sanitary sewer facilities serving the subdivision along with all necessary easements. The water and sewer facilities are installed, as shown on plans prepared by T. P. Parker & Son entitled Triple Crown Estates -Section 1, dated 06/12/92, which are on file in the County Engineering Department. The water and sanitary sewer facility construction meets the specifications and the plans approved by the County on 03/12/93. FISCAL IMPACT: The value of the water and sanitary sewer construction is $32,174.00 and $43,135.00 respectively. RECOMMENDATION: Staffrecommends that the Board of Supervisors accept the water and sanitary sewer facilities serving the Triple Crown Estates -Section 1 along with all necessary easements, and authorize the County Administrator to execute a Deed for the transfer of these facilities. s SUBMITTED BY: Gary Robe son, P.E. Utility Director APPROVED: ~_~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ---------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved (x) Motion by: H. Odell Minnix to No Yes Absent Denied ( ) ag~rove Eddy ~ Received ( ) Harrison ~ Referred ( ) Johnson ~ To ( ) Minnix ~_ Nickens ,~, cc: File Gary Robertson, Director, Utility Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections REQUEST FOR I-~ ~~- L INSPECTION 1 ~I DATE Mr. Arnold Covey Engineering & Inspections Department County of Roanoke P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 Dear Arnold: hereby requests a `~„~A-l _ inspection of („~A-,~--~ ~ -~. 5~~.~ constructed in ? e L d~ plans prepared by So plan or project # --S - `l 6 dated 6 t and approve by the County of Roanoke on ~T~ / 9~ We request to be present during the inspection for F~~~L of the above facilities. Name and address of developer: cs~o ~ 3~~- z3~ Signature of Owner/Principal FOR USE BY ROANOKE COUNTY ENGINEERING & INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT Date request received: Date final inspection completed: The referenced facilities meet the requirements for acceptance by the County of Roanoke: County of 'Ro'an~lke Engineering & Inspections Department Contractor for above facilities: S l~ • / 1 ~7 f' ~ / l~ "V r~'' ~~/ a /J~~V ~~- ~'~ DATE pc: Gary Robertston, Utility Department Construction Inspection, Engineering & Inspections File Contact person and telephone number: ~~~ ~~~~~ +. ~ ~~ ~~ THIS CHATTEL DEED, made this ] 5th day of Nlay , 19 97 , by and between: C & D Builders Inc. a Virginia corporation ,hereinafter referred to as the "Developer," party of the first part; and the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGII~IIA, its successors or assigns, hereinafter referred to as the "Board," parry of the second part. :WITNESSETH: THAT FOR AND IN CONSIDERATION of the mutual benefits accruing to the parties, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Developer does hereby GRANT, CONVEY, ASSIGN AND TRANSFER, with the covenants of GENERAL WP.RR.ANTY OF TITLE, in fee simple unto the Board all water and/or sewer lines, valves, fittings, laterals, connections, storage facilities, sources of water supply, pumps, manholes and any and all other equipment and appurtenances thereunto belonging, in and to the water and/or sewer systems in the streets, avenues, public utility, easement areas, water and sewer easement areas that have been or may hereafter be installed by the Developer, along with the right to perpetually use and occupy the easements in which the same may be located, all of which is more particularly shown, described and designated as follows, to wit: As shown on the plan entitled Trifle Crown Estates ,made by T. P. Parker & Son and on file in the Roanoke County Engineering Department. Page 1 of 3 ~. • ' ~-' The Developer does hereby covenant and warrant that it will be responsible for the proper installation and construction of the said water and/or sewer systems including repair of surface azeas affected by settlement of utility trenches for a period of one (1) year after date of acceptance by the Board and will perform any necessary repairs at its cost. Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby joins in the execution of this instrument to signify the acceptance of this conveyance pursuant to Resolution No. day of Developer: By: As: adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, on the 19 WITNESS THE FOLLOWING signatures and seals: State of: Virginia County/City of: Roanoke , to wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this: ~ ~ ~t ,day of ~~ 19 ~_, By: Samuel Wallace Cundiff Its President Duly authorized officer Title on behalf of C & D Builders Inc. Notary Public My Commission expires: ~'`'~ ~~-~ -5 ~ ~ ~ ~ c1 Page 2 of 3 "Approved as to form: Board of Supervisors of ~--a 1 Roanoke County, Virginia County Attorney State of: County/City of: Rv~ r Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator Virginia ' Roanoke , to wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this: (SEAL) day of 19 , by Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator, on behalf of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. Notary Public My Commission expires: Page 3 of 3 L-7 NORTH ~o rs°~ Rd ,9 3O 9.\2 ~4 ~~ ~ 'iJ, a ./ i~ • tp ,t9 ,9 N 149, 80 ~ ~ ~ m N N m ~ ~~~ A O\ yZ~ ~99~ a~ 189,5~6~ 9~' ~// OWN ." m 421.56 •44t9s9 ~~ ~ ._ N ~ ,4 229.32 ~ y / ~~ o a' F p 3T,7p~ ?F w ` ~ ~ 268,30 ~ a 'h6 g ~~ yy W 404.9 p 8w ~ 287.61 ~ ~ a J~ ~ ~ ~~9 ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ N 29~ ~ 3 ~'u~ cep (~ ~O ~ 357.57 146.52 ~ 80 135.99 ~+ ~ p 93 N ~ 226.52 1 ~ ~ _ i ~ 0+ ~~ $ ~ tT ~ 6~/s> 98.2522./39" o ~ \'S3 AZ m~ 2~ ~ .~Y 64,79 80 .91 9~ ~~ a 6 ~ BP.I nl ~ 6'(59 ~~ `~ ~ 2~0 p~ 65 ~. V .0 632 80 5.5 32.9 ~ ~O / ~ ~ ' 7 8.98 ~ 2a.6a ,°p 4 ti . J m O i [J 62.28 159.93 82.72 80 80 80.11 G/ode ~--~ _~ ~~ A ROANOKE COUNTY ACCEPTANCE UTILITY OF WATER AND SEWER FACILITIES DEPARTMENT FOR TRIPLE CROWN ESTATES , SECTION 1 -Z ~. _ g AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, JUNE 24, 1997 RESOLUTION 062497-8.g AMENDING THE VEHICLE UTILIZATION POLICY TO REIMBURSE EMPLOYEES AT THE RATE OF $0.27 PER MILE FOR THE USE OF PERSONAL VEHICLE IN THE CONDUCT OF COUNTY BUSINESS WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County implemented on June 13, 1988 the Vehicle Utilization Policy as adopted on May 24, 1988 and which determined the number of vehicles to be used by the various departments; and WHEREAS, the said policy established the rate for reimbursement of employees using personal vehicles in the performance of their assigned duties which had been the rate authorized in Section 14.1-5 of the Code of Virginia; and WHEREAS, the rate authorized by the Commonwealth of Virginia was amended during the 1997 session of the General Assembly from a reimbursement rate of $0.24 to $0.27 per mile. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County that the County's Vehicle Utilization Policy is hereby amended to allow reimbursement to employees for the use of their personal vehicle in the performance of their assigned duties at the rate of $0.27 per mile for mileage driven on or after July 1, 1997. Supervisor Minnix moved to adopt the resolution. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Johnson NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Nickens A COPY TESTE: ~c..a.,L..~- ..~ •~e.~-,ti.~ Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File John M. Chambliss, Jr., Assistant County Administrator Don C. Myers, Assistant County Administrator Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance 2 ACTION N0. ITEM NUMBER L.." AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DAT~_ June 24, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Request to Amend the County's Vehicle Utilization Policy to Reimburse the Employee at the Rate of $0.27 per Mile for the Use of Personal Vehicle in the Conduct of County Business r~1tNTV .~MINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS• BACKGROUND: On June 13, 1988, the Board of Supervisors adopted a Vehicle Utilization Policy which defined the number of vehicles to be assigned to the various departments and also which adopted the State's rate for reimbursing employees who must use their personal vehicle in the conduct of County business. At the present time, this rate for the County is $0.24 per mile. The 1997 session of the General Assembly increased this reimbursement rate to $0.27 per mile and staff suggests that the County policy be amended to reflect this change. It is not suggested that the budgets of the various departments be increased, but only the reimbursement rate for mileage traveled on or after July 1, 1997. FISCAL IMPACT: None. The budgets of the individual departments is not being increased, but the rate per mile reimbursed to the employee would increase. L- ~ Staff recommends adoption of the attached resolution so that the Vehicle Utilization Policy of the County may be revised concerning mileage reimbursements to County employees who use their personal vehicle far the conduct of County business by increasing the rate from $0.24 to 50.27 per mile for mileage driven on or after July 1, 1997. Respectfully submitted, Approved by, John M. Chambli~s, Jr Elmer C. Hodge Assistant Administrator County Administrator ACTION VOTE Approved ( ) Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied ( ) Eddy Received ( ) Harrison ,~,.. Referred ( ) Johnson To ( ) Minnix Nickens L- ~' AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER an June 24, 5997 RESOLUTION AMENDING THE VEHICLE UTILIZATION POLICY WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County adopted a Vehicle Utilization Policy on June 13, 1988 which determined the number of vehicles to be used by the various departments and WHEREAS, the said policy established the rate for reimbursement of employees using personal vehicles in the performance of their assigned duties which had been the rate authorized in section 14.1- 5 of the Code of Virginia, and WHEREAS, the rate authorized by the Commonwealth of Virginia was amended during the 1997 session of the General Assembly from a reimbursement rate of $0.24 to $0.27 per mile. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County that the County's Vehicle Utilization Policy is hereby amended to allow reimbursement to employees for the use of their personal vehicle in the performance of their assigned duties at the rate of $0.27 per mile for mileage driven on or after July 1, 1997. 1111111111lllliiiilliiilllll1i11iilililiIlllitli{liii111111ii1i11i111111111i1{{11{il{{{{{{{{{{{{I{{{{{{III{{{{{1{il{I{{{{111111111,0 ° ~ ° s ~ ~ ~~ AGENDA ITEM NO. ° ° 1'i~ P~. ~.~['i ~LQ~~i,~T ° c `_ PUBLIC HEARING ORDINANCE ~ CITIZENS COMMENTS ... ° ~_ ... o SUBJECT: ~~sl~nd~~?~( r `~-~.- ~j~~ ~~ f P~, _, -+-* ° s I would like the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors to recognize me during the s meeting on the above matter so that I may comment. WHEN CALLED TO THE LECTERN, I VYILL GIVE MY NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. I AGREE TO ABIDE BY~ THE GUIDELINES LISTED e ° _. .r BELOW: e ° _. ° ® 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 o~the Board to do otherwise. - ° ° ° ® Speaker will be limited to a presentation of their point of view only. Questions of clarification may be entertained by the Chairman. ° s s ° c ® All comments must be directed to the Board. Debate between a recognized speaker and audience members is not allowed. ° ° asr ea r ® Both speakers and the audience will exercise courtesy at all times. e ° ° ® 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. .:. ° e ° PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND GIVE TO THE CLERK ;, ° ° ° ~. .- i a. 1~ ~~ ° ~~ ° ~~ ° ° ~ ~~ m111111l111i1111i1il1tlilt1111111111111111111111111111IIlllllllillil1111111111111111111111111111111111111111i1111111[111I11111111~ N To: ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS From: Claire G. English, Goodwill Employment Services Date: 6/23/97 I'm here to ask the Roanoke County Boazd of Supervisors to participate with a Citizens Transportation Committee of key stakeholders regazding transportation issues and creative solutions to transportation challenges in our community. This committee of enlightened volunteers will be comprised of those engaged in the community -- who use public or private transportation (other than their own privately- owned automobiles) or those who deal with these issues as a usual part of their work (for example, employment specialists with Goodwill Employment Services who are engaged in job development, and those with The Department for the Visually Handicapped who are committed to assist the visually handicapped of this community overcome obstacles to interdependence, just to name two). The Committee's volunteers will be committed to the common good of the community as a whole, and our mission will be to assume leadership in discovering, defining and promoting the needs of those in this community who deal with the cumbersome complexities of current transportation systems and shazing these findings with all stakeholders, including Valley Metro, RADAR, County Boards of Supervisors, Roanoke City Council, City and County Administration and others in the community through news releases to The RoanokeTimes and World News. The primary intent of the Transportation Advisory Committee is the self-empowerment of all participants toward expanded opportunities for all citizens. The Roanoke County Boazd of Supervisors could provide something crucial in this process by providing a liaison to our committee to answer any questions which might arise regazding local public transportation which falls under the authority of the County of Roanoke. My request from the Boazd -- specifically -- is that a member of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors volunteer or be chosen as liaison to our committee ... and as such, be available to answer questions as they azise. D -- / GENERAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIIZGINIA of General Amount Fund Revenues Beginning Balance at July 1, 1996 (unaudited) $7,176,332 7.92% Add to Fund Balance from 1995-96 operations 1,440,559 Revised beginning balance at July 1, 1996 (audited) 8,616,891 Oct 8,1996 Public -Private Partnership (250,000) Nov 19,1996 Valley Gateway Project (599,250) Jan 28, 1997 Kroger Project (460,083) IJan 28, 1997 Kroger Project - IDA (450,000) 'Feb 11, 1997 Year 2000 - 2 positions (31,850) March 11, 1997 Glenn -Mary property -Option and site analysis (80,000) Apri122, 1997 Republican Primary election (18,040) Balance at June 24, 1997 $6,727,668 7.43% Changes below this line are for information and planning purposes only. Balance from above $6,727,668 Recommended increase in 1996-97 budgeted revenues based upon 6 month review 3,355,509 Reserve for R.R. Donnelly - Phase II (730,700) Reserve for Valley Gateway sewer extension (150,000) Potential Liability (400,000) $8,802,477 9.72% Note: On December 18, 1990, the Board of Supervisors adopted a goal statement to mamtam the General Fund Unappropriated Balance at 6.25% of General Fund Revenues 1996-97 General Fund Revenues $90,565,107 6.25% of General Fund Revenues $5,660,319 Respectfully Submitted, ~ ~. ~ Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance M:\Finance\Common\Board\Gen96.WK4 CAPITAL FUND UNAPPROPRIATED BALANCE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Amount Beginning Balance at July 1, 1996 (unaudited) $648,413.00 (Includes final payment from City of Salem which was received in June 1996) Sale of surplus equipment during 1995-96 46,093.00 Amount added from 1995-96 operations per rollover policy 368,480.00 Revised beginning balance at July 1, 1996 (audited) 1,062,986.00 anuary 14, 1997 Revised rollover amount 50,057.00 Balance at June 24, 1997 $1,113,043.00 Note: $100,000 of these funds have been temporarily advanced to the Mayflower Hills Park project. Respectfully Submitted, 1d~~~,~~ Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance M:\Finance\Common\Board\Cap96.WK4 !~ °.' 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) March 25, 1997 Citizen Satisfaction Survey (8,500.00) May 27, 1997 Recodification of County Code (3,419.00) May 27, 1997 Purchase of Ridgeline (5,000.00) Balance at June 24, 1997 $117,816.55 Respectfully Submitted, ~,LC{fn~z~ ~ ~~l~y,~cc~-/ ,% Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance M:\Finance\Common\Board\Board96.WK4 ACTION # ITEM NUMBER ~ " AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: June 24, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Accounts Paid -May 1997 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: Payments to Vendors: $3,801,133.77 Payroll: 5/2/97 $718,941.89 5/16/97 636,166.61 5/16/97 (429.87) 5/16/97 269.65 5/30/97 657,784.63 2,012,732.91 $5,813,866.68 A detailed listing of the payments is on file with the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors. SUBMITTED BY: GcyresZ~ ~ • ~ c2~ Diane D. Hyatt Director of Finance Approved () Motion by Denied () Eddy Received () Harrison Referred () Johnson To () Minnix i Nickens No Yes Abs ® w N P N O O O •p O O I W W U'h 0. A w d 7 C d ~o d ~~ C tT N .4. 7 r > ¢u yD O N C my O QI ~ v ~ E p ..~ T w ~ W C 7 ~.. 0 0 U Y c d E a m h 41 0 O 4 L 0 a d -. ~ e R c R R C 9 R F i1 0 X I 0 .~ 6 R II I`C V I ,. I I N C a d Q r I f 0 U Y 7 S i 1 r 1 d i ~ I D 1 17 I ~ 1 I 1 1 I ~ 4 I I U 1 c 1 I R I I .+ 1 I 4 1 0. 1 r ~ I 4 I I C I v I • > I ~ I I n V I :ci 4 I > I 1 4 1 " a j 1 r L I`` RI 1 n N N Q .o .a a N 41 rl 0 N .o M 0 c+ w V N c~ V' a d x N W 7 w•i Wi h 0 at o. O 1 /III+ a fJ• -' P M IoM ciao V' YJ N (i+ ma mw i O O SIG M T ' 4'i ~aO tk ~:NM ANN. ~IW •:~I ... ~. V`. N ,- 4+ III try M . !~. ~u Sao vw 'jr .n ~tiN -c0 1111 t- ~'. N ro a rU M '- ~- V 7 INN 0 M 1 M V1 I- to Or' c 4l .- p+ • tT R 1 I O O O G r o o ' o 0 O 4 O O loo oul I ti. 'T o 0 1 m Q M r I!1 ? d q p R1 O ca O w (: }' n•rd I Y +~ e 4 r x 9 O b N - a 4 I- ~ p 4 T • U v w C x Y 4 ~•+ A L U r- 1 •H K! v ~ I w ~ - -: M ~ -+ w • N •~ '~ b L M N d U •1+ E ~ M w1. ~i •.~ 7 n.,a 'low Y~4 loo - 0. 0. J U -NCI I'o 'N fU( ~ O O O o _ x _ d - - ITf Ot er r Y t 0o~f 1 w c I M M • v r- I-u'}~ i P O i d 4l M IO i 4 0J 1 1 .- G+ ~ P W 1 b M i' IM ~O i N ;ate, . ~ 41 O O 0 0 1 O O I O N 1 ~ ~ f .• N d a W a i w A C U A J 1 Iq .~ ~ !- U W L owv n > Y t ~ C ~ A N N ~s.o i LL Z a N N i O O R W :. R X :, H R X P A 1 P P ~r~M I^ V' ~, ... i11 t - a a 1 r -- r- I r`i hl • (b G I N .Q . +o N • 1 rr-Inl 145 N ~.-fTI - a c~ . 45 a _..-a , o; N u 4-1 I rillal i M fi 1 M a M a+ PJ r- I v. G G 0 0 0 0 •ou'I i o N M t<i ul X I roi F- I K i N E l r o of ~~ w I C ~• d a I U r •+ O I ~sr ~- b r I r O ~ S 1 I ~ N f INN f 0 o I 4 P X V ul l 0.1 '1 i ~Nln~ ~V fU IDG~I 1oh R N 1 ~ (n l INt~ 1~ fy I O O ~ 0 0 P O I M tU 1 a N n i w m d ~ ~ Y D O L L Y w r - x O 10 U r- ..a nc.m Y d E < L ••+ a r c - O 4 P Q J 4UM a o a (~ t 4 :, Yf A~: 7 7 7 V 5 C 9 i R r, :I 0 X 8 8 _rJu i ~ - o 0 o D CV f '.~ N ~ o M ~a U N U ru .- f u CU o M + 7 a (U 7 J nJ V CU 7 c+ o N CV G O < 0 o t 0 o s lNC6• 10 c{+ 1 N I w E w L d m ~, (L LL ~ t M M I 0 0 R R R .r G X00+ I a N C o •- 4 i ' IF Lr1f .- V' ~ IN u5f I M ¢ r ~. Ir-Inl 1 r- ar • I RIOT s ~ N i 1q'OI ! o Lf~:~ >oc~ 14 u'A~ V' 6 t? o 0 + O Vi -Or-I r a M V' w d Y 7 U w r ~ d ~~ °4 w N L ~ L O ~ Uu. ~ T'CJ -ac ~ O N U [ O w ' r d aL•.CI eau. -QUP M M ~ O O :, H F 1 o a - o M N I .- J. 3 O 1 r i u'I Al i.- W 1 0~ ! N I r- J o IT _ o, 0 ~i r- G 0 G l M V' >. I V 4 -a i O I L a Ir- w i O W y •+ . w > ~ ~ , d t ~ c O L 4. W O w I I w d W 7 d C Q• I W L ~ N d L . !Y U 1 •- N I Q Q 0 0 % 0 W G o M •- c 1'1 M W 41 r r- •u +0 41< u,w JNO+t m .- U10+ +7 Mi V N U1 OJ f Y •-- O fU ~ 14'. ~t Ul iJ s I ~- P o IJ1 1 V p, ._ V I ~ ~ ._ u~, 1 41 .- - o r- I •t'iw blur-~ Llp~•. Q M I 1.>~-: MpJI M j' ~ '1 G ul i Nc v--1 ~.r~l-' 'ooil I P N m i M } O O N N •ooJ Jlnr- >oO Nf+ 1 fU N -- c~ 1~1- tufn t N l M M M o aEt Y •-+ J W ~N Y w W i 6 L d D ~ > . O 4 a a ~ ~ d w ,U. w A 7 C ac.a oa q G OI x nf=n~ «W Y 1 •+ N D TA W U W - 6'41 1 L 0 •M W C N >IKL ZN u O '- O rlnin em ~ O O O O P % A 9 : V ~M F R A 8 6 8 0 E 5 O f++ - a v vl 1o Q:I ~ O N ~h0~ a} O G r .I 1 O a 1 ~ In li c• I M ~ L .~ G+ . IN PJt • rv o ` I 1 G+ ? N h N ~ Ul < .- f 4'' v c+ r a < M, r 1 N t a• O fA O W ~1 ~I ~~ l/1 N v Q m U d 4 M O i A OI fq N ' I N 'G U 4 N ~ C N 4+ U d~ V tL+ WO' ~ N O O 7 3 7 IMr-I - •J G+ I 1 N ~ I >t_ pJl 1 .- I 7 N I I _ w a 0 r fo m wl a a S P I ~ _~ ~ fU 7 CJ I 4 J A.+ D L L n d V •-~ d m IU LL M D ~ O i 4 OI C t• O N U Y b ~ {- U W L v ~ W O N +o W tq 0 0 i C S .~ 0 8 6~ i R ~ ~- tr' rl. • irl 1 .- } .-. iv • f0 J > r- a~ ~ C a 41 05... J b+ J FI V' P a N 41 - ~ N a N L_, W w C N s- I- fl a Y 8 r I 0 0 X i 5 • , - ~ a Y/ -. - h {U N o o ~ O w7 W W C9 F as N 4 c 4 m 4 c ~ A L 7 .. r > U Q m V s C O W C 7 ~ O 4 K r A I Y- E O ++ r T h r W C ~ 4 O O u r c 4 E ' 4 N N 4 I 7 1 C I 4 r 1 ? 4 I 4 Q~ 1 ~ ~ 1 7 1 O fP I r 1 r i I v 1 u 1 c= A ~ i 9 I W I W 4 7 1 C 1 4 1 ? I 4 1 1 o I V i ~ I G I ~ 1 > 1 4 1 al I 1 1 7 r I r t i Gn I DI' 5 1 m 1 0 t _ I' P 0 M W r' i m ~ W i N 't c+ w I1 W 4 F O D 2 F O A 4 r {. K O CD a 4 _ „ .. • . • R .. A 3 .- i+. nw ~ s p W .L W W 6 R I I I i I I i i :~ _ I. W R :. N .7 d N W .^. W W V G 7 7 9 V B 5 9 R h p 0 7 W R 6 R 8 V o 0 6 7 V B 6 V 6 R ~ C F X F' W N x W u F W W Y 6 W 6 d N W i ., W M. V~ V V i V V V V ~ .w. .. v a n ci x -~ (- `•.-. ~- ~' ~ ~ • ~~ •^ o+ ~ S 3 S S C 9° A F A A g R A A W W F W A A W A F W0 8 7 `1 7 G S 9 Y 5 S :, B B E B S C S B S 0 0 3 0 o 8 6 8 m - - i t- i P ~ O O \ ~ O b O O W W c~ r ¢a as ~ C F p.. W M .q m ifi 1~ c~ lti ~ N .- W Q o t- vi N 4f~ W .- .- RJ w G' o W N ~- O c I a d w .\• 4 l r• 4~ o h t,, o ~- CO M , Q M.. ' N v O x pl c¢m rm wm c, r-er Qom ror o W O V 7 4 h tD H 4 r 4 ~ ~ . ' N 4 N J M aD 0 4 .- ,u M {fi fU 1 P P . o u1 4D - h M [- Y .- T ~ lfl •- 7 N aD .0 Q V F 7 OJ .- ,D , ... v3 0 4 V W u' m ~ M M •f W •- •- •- f- 1 Vl W N ~ Wi Yl - L L . m 7 •~. N P N o .- ~ W r. ,~ t- N •- ci Vl 1 P ' U 9 Lfl W b M M W M ~ UJ !n 1 v ,. ~ C. ~ ~ , a 4 L 7 a a o ql ~ M ,o C M v Vl Yl N tit' h : Q? tit' N v N ¢ p O M .- M y o7 -- W C l u N Vi 0 : 41 W of ~D M ® T f- b' 0 7 .- o e0 V N N -- 4l O W ,O 07 N C U A Q a~ o ~ P o M R N N ~ ~.+ ^ Qp <. - Fl 4?.. cf .- ~:~0 .. N C C t- W> M G ~ N~ I lf~ o cG Ll I~ C M N` 1'- N ~ ,o I+l o Ill V' Di N ~ ~ L1 v~ f1 ~D N u7 N ` m N O N .y li Q to N M t M O 1 r- a I .. u > C Ip CA b [ U a+ N w v P c, ~- N J o .. ~ .+. C Wi o In cU pp N t- l t- o a n O N .t o N N N ,D t- N 1 m E O 7 G: L M. D W 1 P .. hl N N ~ ~ P• Vl C U Y@ ! o O ~ N c 0i - N ~ C E ~ O W V U C C U I I ~- N o a L a Y W o vo f'i N N M m .- J N r F a 7 L N W ~- (.:. m .. M N Ll N o v V V ~'+ 7 Ln M M N W to 0 o .- o M M 7 V L .•~ to b 41 Vl M o .- 4 .- N ~- P O G V V.. M ~0 o W so W N 0 6+N f`i 07 U a G G Ill 111 ~ N M M W a O M x Ti. 4 w x w I ~ O N I19 N o o+ W ~ P ti lA tit - - ~ W N M o W N otn N W c, o o v o oo ' N t-M oN M a ~+ ~ q ,O o5 M F ,O ,O o ,0 7 0 ~ .o b M P N W 4 + ~ ~ ` _ 7 OI M. Po N ch N M.- h vT ~ M41 c,m W 'O y o M~ Ut m-- N vG, M W l(t M MN NN N a 7 ,o N N .o o Vi ,o o 1. M Y M < P -- ~ i ' N . N U . Ll 111 .' W M 1 M t!J W a ~ S o c ~.1 r v O r m v '+ t-. C ~ C a U N ~ E E a. N W ~ ¢ L N c :.. Y! ~ C H Y O' M ~. N O L 4 a [- : N ~~ •, S9 O .p O a c- Q N ! U r l 1 3 U~ Q ~ c ' r ID r c v N z I, c r- u a m m a - tt ~-~ u ~ ~ ... N L ..~ E 7 O .-~ ,-~ ~ M N N .. ~. G v au a a,a ~ ~ . . c ~ W ~ 7 U N Wt C E 7 ~ 7 ill O L X ~~ W t, N ~ "l L a .. O d b a" . N .+ a Ut 4 r N .. O a 3 0 o~ w ~O O t, a N o ' ~ 2 ¢ a• 7 N' ,~ o ..4 ~p o p; c o c ,a G+ W a a o u u v .+ O ~ t- .- r O N W N G Oi V' W w ^' A O .p a 1? t- E O a G 7 ~+ t0 O ~+ .+ N q Cl' C 7 E 2 L b b- IA L' C D D N U p ~ 4 0 0 ~ N -~ t- m G W N 7 7 C O ~O UU J W LL ~ WC7. . S0. . ~^~ (n ~ p 0 0 .LN 0 0 .-{U l - o o .-N M N o N dyl MM o N NN 4l o MC o, I i 1 O. N N M M M V a V' Ut IfY N N l f1 a G O O O O O p O O d O O O O o K , p n+ ..• ~.+ S ~. 7 3. . . A 6 G A F W W P W W A 5 B A x A W A W ri R. C Y 7 9 W C it i1 0 { ~~ C I +~~, k 0 0 3 :1 n ti • a r~ .. .. e~ _ c R S_ Y S C S R s p g S N 8 A Y N N :; A N d N N P 8 N 9 y 7 Y Y 9 'v Y g 8 s 8 8 d 8 8 6 8 N 6 s 8 8 d 8 8 6 8 8 R~ Y F ~ ~ k h P N h O .- O \ O .p O O ',. W W ~ E- ¢ 4 ao I V h J up c, ~' ~ 7 ICY •-. _.CU 4l . o o G N m o C O ~+•-- W ~ q•o N41 yoo o V ~O p d a v ri a ~. vi -- .q' r) wq' 4l0 -~ •rn G • x IT Q+ P W 0+ O r M N N Oq l W i 4 ~ A W m F 4 Y S ~ 1 1 N p.. T N 4 G mlll. o uY V?. 1o 4~ .-N w ao 0 W ) Itl C (..a h J ~o .c .n oN o «-41 )om c,u, m ~ v r) O m U h W -- ~D.. N U1 0 m N U1 V o N N rl V' P W o) IP A C !- ~ ~ ' ~ N N +a M 4l N 41 41 -- U1 h l m N ~ N ~ ^ ~ o P! m 0~ 41 N NI rl 4'~ O+ 7 V v7. U 4 I N i .- h h ~- ap •b N W til L C G1 - L ~ U ~. ~ I D a m I r4 m ICr - c, to N r'~ v M G 41 c. 4y lA 4l ¢ II h ~Q N m W .- h c~. ~o V• o m m ~ h N t- ~ h a(~ N If1 f- .- .G P N V' O CJ G ~t T G, i L ~ F ~ ~ N C U q N Ul ap c, 0s 6+ I- N 7 Ul -- ~- 1 Ifi CU i~J -~ @ C F- W l N h 1 u .- h.. m rT N 41 .> ~ .- !~- r- w W. ?- O ~ ~ N ) N M1 P N N CJ tT N M 41 - N ~ U I 7 V > C Qi y N/ ~ U. D+ ~O P O G ) W p d D f'ki @ ICt 'i ~ - N W m sr o x E C L V- ' c u r e ) ~ i ru ri ~ r- ,Q ~ '~ @ c N u i ~ o w . z s c ~ taw ~- N . . ~ O a :. E I L a N 1 m P O - N ~G N N ~( K! W ~ V m c~ >- 7 L N , Op T o ~ Q1 4y st vp i7 P a '1 W m M 1 f+ r >+ 7 V f l 7 N ) 111 Oro In N V' M 4'i o N N C ..~++ ~ - ` •. V J: •~+ m R+ 4) W ` P 4y .- . N G+ 41 4l W W U ~ ~ 41 . M m ~ o J a C C N <h N n o m x t d p y' W x W 0. O T yO CV N J O 760 Q .-~o G ~OJ Q O ~ W 4'i r CT Q 41 ~- O P• W O o y', m ~- h p U N a r .p m N o ~ .o W t• Q o o t` ~ v, c+ o W a a ` - - 7 G 0+ O+ N ? ~ i(1 K1 N V' o y o N W ~7' In P N F, U ~ T J d' M 0+ N 9' h N (~i fD J- m .n F W Q ~ v7 N 7. 4 ~- N W h 41 ~ .- F N o .- h c, L 04 _ - U rO I .- r... .- .- rn I N N m a E ~ ~ ~ 7 C C I 2 W @ 1 E ~ N L a d a '~ O O U L _ m a _• ,. a «. a s ~ r t) a c v ir: d ~ a N l Y C ++ A w O C @ E Y1 W O 3 i C ) F a r D v W i r L L' l a P E@ ~• C ~ d @ 41 L : a a.. N w i E E C 0.N r @ x W'.~ @ !4-K L F L O G J > W - U CL '-tA N d L i ¢ U C ti 0 C O ~~+ 6 C C ~- Y , ~, O a n. ~ UI to w a a > Cl @ @ N I G L.. N 5 b E G 7 '. ~+ L 1 LL C @ i U C d C E L Q U D D W C 1-. f @ a ', W ~b q@ O a s d@ +~ N O L +~ L U > C L d F Z L D !- N o @ ~ @ C .a o U L O m o a ~: G ¢ a o r L E U o d 7 4 C o Y. ~ W F Vi N '„1' C O .ti W a a N D O. G. P L i0 P O = c ~ C C -~ o -+ U 7 E R a o y 4 0 f- Q UI -. N W a ~ s ~~ - G C J¢ ... a P L 2. M ¢ L qo G 41 lno rn 4't ou, Nri y .-N s n me w ~ N4 .-N a v U14y am ca Mh h ro _ o7 vo o•Ct+ ~P PG, PP a Q O G 0 0 0 o O 0 0 G O G p K p -.. •.• ••• 8 S p S] 9 Y I_ _ S N s N 8 A N N P N N W S N N i{ 8 8 F N N Y L V 8 7 Y Y 8 Y 8 :: N d J :.t % :.. 1 ACTION NO. ITEM NO . V'- AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINIS~'RATION CENTER MEETING DATE: June 24, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Review of public acquisition of 34 acres on Green Ridge for compliance with Roanoke County's Comprehensive Plan pursuant to Section 15.1-456 of the Code of Virginia C'_(~TTNTY ADMINISTRATOR' S COMMENTS Roanoke County has been approached by an anonymous donor with a proposal for the donation of private funds far the acquisition of real estate. The specific real estate to be acquired is 34 acres along Green Ridge. This acquisition would protect and preserve an environmentally-significant ridge line and viewshed. Under the provisions of Section 15.1-456 of the Code of Virginia the Planning Commission is required to review and approve the acquisition of this property. ST7NlMARY OF INFORMATION On June 3, 1997 the Planning Commission reviewed and approved the acquisition of 34 acres on Green Ridge. The Planning Commission found this acquisition to be fully compatible with the Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission expressed their appreciation for the opportunity to conduct this review and their optimism that there will be future opportunities of this nature. a-~ 2 Respectfully Submitted, ~~ ~ Ja et Scheid, Planner Department of Planning and Zoning Approved, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator Action Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Motion by Eddy Johnson Kohinke Minnix Nickens Vote No Yes Abs D-b MEMO To: Planning Commission From: Janet Scheid , Subject: Sec. 456 Review of Green Ridge Acquisition Date: May 30, 1997 Roanoke County has been approached by an anonymous donor with a proposal for the donation of private funds ($45,000) for the acquisition of real estate. The specific real estate to be acquired is 34 acres along Green Ridge near the intersection of Interstates 81 and 581. This acquisition would protect and preserve an environmentally-significant ridge line and viewshed. Under the provisions of Section 15.1-456 of the Code of Virginia the Planning Commission is required to review the acquisition of this property . Section 456 specifically requires that the Planning Commission review and approve all public facilities and improvements prior to their authorization, establishment or construction in order to insure that these improvements are consistent with the County's Comprehensive Plan. Background As a result of this donation proposal and in anticipation of future donations, the County Attorney asked staff to develop a set of guidelines to be followed by the Board in evaluating these types of proposals. Please see the attached "Guidelines for Acquiring Environmentally-Sensitive Property". The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors held their first reading of an ordinance authorizing the acquisition of approximately 34 acres of real estate on May 13. At their second reading of this ordinance on May 27 the Board approved the acquisition of this property and adopted the Guidelines. Please see the attached staff report . Information about Green Ride Green Ridge is located just north of I-81 and Loch Haven Road. See attached location maps. This 34 acre tract of land at the top of the ridge appears to be land locked. A survey has not been done yet. Pedestrian access across private property is possible from the Loch Haven Lake side of the property. The property is highly visible when traveling on I-81 and is a significant ridge line in the Valley. Green Ridge was thrown into the public psyche several years ago when property to the north of ~~~ Planning Commission Page 2 May 30, 1997 this site was clear cut. During the Visioning Process and subsequent community meetings mention was often made of this clear cut and the resultant negative visual impacts. The donor and the County are currently in the process of writing an Agreement that will restrict and clearly define the future use of this property. Although this document is not finalized, based on draft documents that I have reviewed it is clear that the donor is interested in public access to this property for passive recreational uses such as walking, jogging, bicycling and horseback riding. Use of the property by motorized vehicles will be prohibited. The County will be prohibited from constructing any building, sign, guardrail or other structure on the property except fences and gates for control of access and security. The County will be able to erect trail markers, litter receptacles and bridges. Potentially, the County in cooperation with the Western Virginia Land Trust may place a conservation easement on this property. The advantages of this action would be two-fold: the property would have an additional layer of protection and stewardship responsibility would be transferred from the County to the Land Trust. Comprehensive Plan This parcel is identified in the Comprehensive Plan as Rural Preserve - a designation that identifies rural areas that are to be preserved. This designation delineates outlying areas which are primarily undeveloped and stable. A high level of protection is necessary to preserve existing agricultural, recreational, and forestal resources. Policy RP-4 encourages the establishment of parks and outdoor recreation areas for the permanent preservation of the County's most valuable and irreplaceable natural resources. This proposed acquisition conforms with the following goals of the Resource Protection Guide of the Comprehensive Plan: 1)Protect Roanoke County's finite natural and cultural resources from the potentially detrimental effects of urban growth and development; 2)Maximize the public benefit, enjoyment, and responsible use of Roanoke County's protected resources; and 3)Enhance the quality of Roanoke County's valuable environmental resources. Conclusion Based on the above information, staff concludes that this proposed acquisition of 34 acres on Green Ridge is in conformity with the Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan. ,~ ~ _, J~ ,,,~ { M - ~~1:'' it Yf•.\~ :r'.y: Vii: i.'ta' ~r:i 1~~\ ~%~~~~~.'~j~ i'T,'.l~•i ~:r'~•~~: 'a.. .y ..~.'~,'~'~+v `'.:~,~ ,'`;J ..~• 1•r ter. 'r •r•,: :.Y.: `..;~: r.: •r r~ ~ ~•' ` ~••~'il •.• ,;•' •t tit. •~.:•i •/ ' tLt 4 . , l ' ~~ ~ i • ~ ~>< ~ ~ • . ~ ~ 171tY ~1• 17, l I At SL1 ~~ • itrt p» Ltl Is 1-+e X11 j 19.1 ~ .~ ,~ • M.I yH Jf 1}~lA>t 1.ss Jr • \ 1 M.] • ~ w,YNli Meld 1 i• .... .r t5 • •'• ilfl QriAa , • • t n r ~ 1 . ~',' a1R tffi 26.11 t 1ti100' ~ r • ~ • • '• 7A3( JsX7 i ILDAa (+,~r { ~ lalf I. ,~ a '.• ~' t. ~ •~, • ', 'a ' t`tNO .. fntf T RXTIfTG -.~~~~~~•MIIiTT lM 'i?`:~. ~•~~ /YOii ~itMMTr{ ;`,~ j; CSOKIiiO -ORM[ , ~.l ~A•yyyy~~~ •~~{{ Tfi~ 1.>R ~~~".•{. ;rte •~~ lt7x /Mif p, i2,r RL iHf Aft 1 '•R.f A( ~- @f7 1111[ 11'f ~, • r ...~~ Wfi•bft lt.., :ft~. fYLii ~'1 . C-~ afaa u~f -sll - wen 11s. +ra n .~ ftu t+Raww ..; •JS>taf. ' --4--~.- wrrsan s~t.•-ai•._....--. ~+. ~+,w tt~ "`''• ' ~~' ~osw.An ua•rwril.. .. • >~a, s1.t~' t +, .. .: D.. 1,~ .; .... _ I •.4w i .~~ .~.' 1. r .,,'f ~ .•~' .. :.~... i. F- '•'• .:. .~~. ..: ~... ~r._. .: •1.! .rte. . ..+.~•• ..~~~.:r_+ '3.-f4a/~6Cv~'•~w~.~/i tiff rf•:}:t!Y.i:+~.ra.!>;. .4c~.:.Ra:ir+» t.t~-[~i..:.. ~•~_-- -- :--r.' `~.C'L:..:i.::.c.::.:;r~~:~u::i :~`n%:_:-:..,•r. • Q ~ ~ W VO V O ~~yt~A ~-• Z Ot `.~ 8'j1r,M 3 .~i '•.~'Lj~ T4T ?1 awr ~o 0 ~ ~ Ala' Wes'/n •• - a~ gtscu ~ _ , a„ ~Y A. ~` -~ oyy `r' Y~ , ,,, rf (r ,y ~ ~ tC1 ~3~1 11 i 3 3d0 4 3yy~ ~7'~6,'TS_•~i~~ = b~-3'J_O,y Cti ' 7 ~ •. ~a ~~.,s~+~yor qd ` _~~"' ~_~v~ ~ 2 a MC~•, `` a`~~U St N F~ L ; ~ ~{' ddI,. V" j~b c =K' ~I~~ W ~~p~ C`e~l;{,~,t a i.o J ;4. ` o ~ p. iZ ~ ~NP> I S o ~yt '" ~~ y r y,~ ~ ^d l.-' ~ x"00 y~ot' L``` ms44, ~ ~J~~'s N Y ~U W~~ a\ ~~ ~ - ~ Q7 O_i l io ~~~'' Y .. F~~~ i ~ ~./ ° m a~ ~ R _ ~ ~ a ~ //~~_yy,}r \ ~ 1, ao •: ~~° ~o~ O' pig-{`~9-t,~ C\~,'.a\~"M .N 1 a\..-J ~, ~i W 2 \//ESN '1.'` ~ 3 ~ ~.=•"Gf~v ~l $L?~~N =lftl 3 ~y(y~~ :~V ~Q~~'WF'•6y1 \ ~ Q m OWi O ~ O ~ ~~ v(~~ Lsr'~1y3~'y~l~ SLAW ~ Q .CL.~ IIe (,'yC ~7 it iI b ~ ~N 1rV a' y W. ~!~ ~ Y~~VI o P Qb Oo 3~ ~ ~ Y'~Y \ a . o ~ 3 ef,S~~.S'~,"_3"S~c ~ 6 o~L ~i ~+~ ~ r ~c 8 ?. ~ ~ _ C \ ~'• l.. ~~Q ~` ].y` y ?~: m ,'spy GI a C ~ O Jj 4d~ ~~~ ~~si7'~.~ /1/~d~, ~, c • d ~~ boyJ m ~. ` O ~ ~a~ V i ` / ~ A ~ ~~ ~ .~' t "1i~~,~,aR 60 ~ C I (T~ ~ ~ _ d ~ ~ ~.r ( .?~ goo- a `La°t'~ ~ l 1~~ was : a ~~ ~` _ \ ti\ y~7 _ `\f ~~ ~`\ c' \ ~ tM act `2 /b ~ . c~ 3 I` •. Yd W1 - ~ ~~ Y~ \~ ~\ .~\ 4 ~ I \ _ k' I ~` i I _$~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~_ ~\ II ` c/ t Rio it ^ `~'~ ia~• ~ ~,'~ ~c• OPp S a, a ,p ""'_~ -~ 0 S.c ~ ~` J>; ~``L~,.,,,~i ai Q ~~ FF rl `~; 5~ ~~ pt 4 .' ~ z h.. ~' ._ d ~~~ ~'~ ~ flN pf n ~~~ ~~~ ~~i 7L C It Jy ? 3 4 ~`' ~_ ' ~' E ; ~; r - -.~ ~,~ ~.: t ~ s~ ~( ~~_ A~ ~E ` I ~ ~~~~ ~~ / Q ~ / • J~ ~ ~' aS.S~ ~'•,I '~=yay' ,,.~ - b ~ I G r ~; iC~ ~ x~: \' h 'a~_~" \ ~ ~` ` I m~ - 4 \ „i'~,, ~! < Qrl yti, ~ yu'~ ~ ~Cr.. a '~F ~ r ~ ~. y.. ~i \ u ®(J ~~~-~ o '•• t~T~~~ ~1p, ~~ ~, .:. o ~ ~~~` •' rv'a c`''. Ica :. i:1 ~ L ~ 4 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: June 24, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: Report on Proposed EPA Revised Air Quality Standards for Ozone and Particulate Matter. rnrTNTV ADMTNTS'i'R_A'1'OR' S COMMEN`1'S: At your meeting on June 10, 1997, the Board requested additional information on the proposed revisions to the EPA Air Quality Standards for Ozone and Particulate Matter. This request was stimulated by correspondence received from the Air Quality Standards Coalition which is encouraging the County to oppose the implementation of the new standards for ozone and particulate matter. A copy of this correspondence is attached for your information. This issue was previously discussed by the Board of Supervisors at your meeting on January 28, 1997. At that time staff had distributed a written summary of the proposed environmental regulations, a copy of which is also attached. Since the discussion in January none of the basic factors affecting the implementation of the revised standards nationally or locally have changed. According to Bob Saunders with the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, Air Quality is monitored at Herman Horn Elementary school. The levels of ozone and particulate matter recorded to date are within the limits of measurement EPA is now proposing to set. In addition, As the attached written summary from January indicates, if the area was determined to be a non- attainment area the implications and exact requirements are widely varied. No further local action may be required due to regional and national initiatives to reduce ozone and particulate matter. v-7 2 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends as follows: 1. That the Board receive and review the enclosed information. Respectfully Sub~d, nathan Hartley, AfICP sist. Dir. of Planning & Zoning Approved, Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator Action Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Ref erred to Motion by Vote No Yes Abs Eddy Harrison Johnson Minnix Nickens 06/05/97 THtT 17:0 FAX 800 641 2255 ~~~ AIR QUALITY ~ STANUARpS C O A L t T 1 O N June 5, 1997 Dear Supervisor: i~oo2 ~-~ F,nclosed you will find the information packet we mentioned we would be sending you regarding the YJ.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) proposed new air quality standards. If enacted, the EPA's proposal could have a drastic impact on communities throughout the C~'nited States, even those that have never experienced serious air quality problems before. By July 19, the EPA will finalize their new standards for ozone and particulate matter. Qnce the new standazds have been, authorized, American communities such as yours will be faced with implementing costly federal mandates that aze uzdikely to produce any significant health benefits, but may have dxamatic negative consequences for the economies of those cornznunities. The enclosed materials provide background information about the air quality issue, as well as commentary by other officials, scientific and industry experts, and the media. I will be calling you shortly to discuss the air quality issue with you a>;>;d answer any questions you may have about these materials or the efforts of the Air Quality Standards Coalition to fight the EPA's unreasonable new regulations. Thank you for taking the time to review these materials. I look forward to the opportunity o:f speaking vYith you soon. In the meantime, if you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (80Q) 257-1292. Sincerely, j G~C~~ ~; L AQSC Crrassroots Mobilization Office 1.131 Pennsylvania AvenuE. NW Suite iSOU -North Tgwcr Wash{nE[on, Ik Z0004-1790 (1.ff001 Z57-1292 Lix i1-800}641.2255 06%05/97 THU 17:04 F~ 800 641 2255 /'~f~~.100a 1~.~ The struggle to stretch frztite resources to meet a seemingly intiinite array of goals, challenges, anal needs in Amerirx'a communities is one faced by elected officials on a daily basis. The difficulty of that challenge is only intensified when Washington ot~'icials, guided by impractical legislative mandates, shaky scientific assessments, and a focus that sees only one small piece of the overall picture, increase environmental regulations to levels that are, for all intents and purposes, 'virtually unattainable. The proposed new N,A.AQS standards will haws drastic human and economic consequences for state and local officials and their constituents. Even at the BPA's owti estimate ch' $6.5 billion to $S.5 billion ayear-An Petimats that most experts believe to be significantly low-individual communities will be forced to spend millions of dollars each year to respond to: the impacts of the new standards. T)E~ COST5 pF THE NFW REGYJLA'><'ICENS Dared on current monitoring data and the F.PA's definition of compliance, about one in four countries will be immediately out of compliance with the uew standards. That's more than 800 counties natinnaily, or $ye times number cu er~ntlt~ a„t of att~i_n_ment. However, because the ziew standards are based largely on a.,sumptroris about ozone and PM that. cannot be accurately monitored with existing technology, the federal government really can't say liuw uia.ny communities will fall into non-compliance; manor P,~pe. a be level .. _1 :~ -..~....~*l.n rronr eY471t~ATf1! A, whole riew regimen of pollution controls will have to be imposed. Plants, factories, te.Ciueries, and utihtics will have to reduce emissions. 1/ven anal) businesses like restaurants, bakeries, and dry cleaners innon-attainment areas wilt have to caul C,tiissions~at a potential cost of thousands of dollars per establishment ThP ?^rQe ClltS in amleatnng n ded to set the new standard _~ - -_ ~• __ .~. ._- _.L .. ..~-..~ww nt~~ ons enis 1 ,uia ••• and services. They will pay more fen cols, gasoline, electricity, and virtually all products shipped to market. They could face mandatory driving restncavns and carpool Hiles. They would must likely have to have their cars inspected more frequently and more stringently, and face paying far expensive repairs and upgrades. Additionally, use of wuudstaves, beats, and outdoor power equipment could be restricted or eliminated. v In u + will have to revise or abandon current "imglementation plans" tl~a~ the federal government required them to prepare and submit for the current NAAQS;Iett~ considerable cost :IS7r~S tnabie to date and imRlement~glan at~ula~_ • Because the federal government won't be paying for the proposed changes, . .. .. _ z__~ _~.._~ ....tee.,, ,.r,.,r,h., educa ' n n ~,n to the rerluiremettl5_ 06/05/97 THti 17:04 FAa. 800 641 2255 f~ 004 tw/ '~ (liven the haste with which the EPA has tried to pwz~xulgaLe thcsc proposed regulations, the dearth of reliable data, and the lack of consensus within tl~e scientific cornmunity, even among the EPA's own scientific advisors, the EPA should ret~LX"zuu the current standards and continue research before imposing such costly and burdensome measures as they have proposed. Together, industry and government have reduced emissions of major poll,.~tantc by nearly 30 percent Aver the last quarter century. Auto emissions alone have been reduced by 95 percent. Using ttie EPA's own figures, The Raad Inforniataon Program (TRIP), a Washington-paced nonprofit researcb~ group, has reported that the number of poor air-quality days has dropped 60.7 percent since 1986, despite a 32 percent increase in vehicle travel in the past decade. Ancl significantly more progress remains to be made under the current regulations. New stanriarcls are not going to enhance the effectiveness of the Clemr Air Act; in fact, it's possible that they may "overload the circuits" and backfire, undermining the progress that has already been xx,.adP Relnw are examples of the concerns legislators, experts, and the media have expressed related to the potential impacts of the proposed standards. Comment from representatives of these gro»pc consistently addresses three serious shortcomings in the EPA's proposed changes: • The EPA has not justified its proposed changes with sound scientific evidence. • The proposed changes will be inordinately expensive; requiring Gtate and local governments and cor~amunities to bear a significant financial and lifestyle burden while providing little, if any, measurable health benefits. • Chenging the standards now could jeopardize the significant progress that has already been achieved and continues to result from the current Clean Air Act standards. WASHIATGTON OFFICYAY.S "I llaieik ihat there is far koo much scicmtifie uncertainty to justify what may well prove to be a regulatory solution in search of a problem.'' Congressman Mike Doyle (D-l 8-PA) Testimony before Congress March 12, 1997 "The science supporting EPA's proposed standards for fine particulates-ghat ls, soot is limited. There are only a few inconclusive studies linking fine particulate pollution to adverse health effects....Weak science is certainly not a solid foundation on which to build a complex set of burdensome new government regulations... . "As a prirrle author of the Clean AirAct, I believe the law's credibility is critical to its continued success, P'or tl~i, reason, Y am conc~rneci that imposing tougher, more stringent pollution- standards now will further discourage states and localities-all while they are struggling to reach current standards on air quality." Senator John H. Chafee (R-ltt) Opinion Editorial fhe Providence ,lournal February 23, 199^ 06/05/97 THU 17:05 FAb 800 641 2255 "Cubt,s axC I~iSli a-id the [Regulatcny Lu}racl A.~-alyais] uutlcislates the true costs of stricter [ozone) standards by orders of magnitude.... CEA estimates that the cost of full attaiui~xc~it Luulcl be up lu $GO l~illiun [aauually]." Alicia Ivlunnell Member, President Clinton's Council of Economic Advisors Letter to the Office of Management and $udget "These new standards, if implemented as proposed, will also extend the patent nonattainment provisions of the (Clean ,~irJ ,pct to most of the country's urban areas, with the disastrous consequence of driving much of the remaining industry from our nation's cities... . For existing nonattainment areas, the new proposals will create a dizzying tangle of new regulatory requirements ....In such circumstances, the standards may pose an impassible challenge, thereby sentencing areas to a future of aggravating sanctions and economic decline." Congressman John Dingell (D-16-MI} Letter to Carol Browner (EPA.) December 13, 1996 ST.~LTE A?!TA LOCAL OFFiCL~iLS "I have argued to U.S. EPA., to Congress and others that the federal government has not taken sufficient care to assemble enough scientific evidence that such job-threatening, economy- altering revisions are necessary or will significantly improve human health or the environment ..Among the likely, womsome results could be a required expansion of o:ae of the more controversial cozatxol strategies: enhanced automobile emission testing....Ohioans may also face higher utilzty bills and gasoline prices, limits on new industries, and sticker shock when they purchase products such as lawnmowers and house paint. In all Ohioans will pay huudreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars to comply with a new standard, without realizing a commcn.surato cnwiroamcntal or health benefit." "Clearing the Air" Ohio Governor Cxeorge V. Voinovich (K) Opinion Editorial The C'ir-cin~ali ,~,rquirer December 8, 1996 "Mr. President, I vigorously support the adoption of necessary, defensible environmental standards f'or protecting the nation's health. But I must just as vigorously object to unilateral, insupportable changes in the current ozone standard at tremendous cost to our econonuc progress, when the very agency proposing more stringent standards recognizes that continuing significant progress is already being made and acknowledges that no demonstrable improvement inhuman health would result from the change." Kentucky Governor Paul E. Patton (D) Letter to President Clinton rune 12, 1996 "While I fully agree with taking reasonable measures to ezasuxe clean air and a healthy environment, going too far too fast poses a serious threat to the economic well-being of the city of Kansas City, Missouri....Given the uncertainties and the lack, of any real health benefits, I must question the wisdom of proceeding now with efforts to set more stringent standards in these area; ." Ivlayor Emanuel Cleaver II (D) City of Kansas City, MO Letter to President Clinton September 19, 1996 IQ 005 o -~ 06/05/97 THU 17:06 FA.~ 800 641 2255 "The revisions to the ambient air standards that FPA is proposing could have a profound economic impact qn North Carolina. I am told that anywhere from 22 to 44 of our 100 counties could be classified as ztvn-attainment. If that xs the case, I aui greatly concerned because this would affect rural areas that are not likely to be the sources of pollution. The ability of our citizens to find decent paying jobs would be greatly reduced. 'UVithout the prospect of jobs in these areas we cannot hope to provide adequate health care, education or the other essentials to a healthy and productive future." North Carolina Governor 3ames S. Hunt, 7r. (D) Letter to Carol Browner (EPA) March 11, 1997 ",gr,rh a. `raising of the bar' could make the task of attainment currently mandated either completely impossible or so burdensome as to have extreme negative impacts upon the economy." Philadelphia Mayor Ed G_ Rendell (D) Letter to Carol Browner (EPA) October 11,1996 "I believe revising the standard now would have a detrimental impact on Missouri's ptug,iess. We arc just mow obtaining accessary legislative and community support to implement the most difficult controls. To `move the target' at this point would upset a fragile coalition. A new ozone ataudat'd would have immense consequences for 1Viissouri at a time wher. we are shriving to bring our communities into compliance." lvfissouri Governor Mel Carnahan {D) Letter to Carol Browvner (EPA) September 24, 1996 "Tla~e City of Indianapolis is very concerned about the effect a more stringent ozone attainment standard ~vvould have upon its small businesses and citizens. The city has wprked hard to reduce air pollution aztd meet clean air requirements....Now, U.S. EPA is proposing to lower the standard and potentially make us start all over again. Lowenng the ozone standard could expand the number of nonattainment areas and result in emission controls in additional areas, thus imposing significant economic, administrative, and regulatory costs on more citizens, businesses, and local governments in Indiana." Mayor Step.h.Pn J. C..o{rlcmith (R) City of Indianapolis, IN Letter td Carol Browner (F.PA) May 14, 1996 "The depressive effects on loco] economies coupled with increasing cost of compliance may accelerate a downward spiral of non-compliance. Widespread non-compliance may undermine public support for the Clean Air Act and breed increased public cynicism about the govcrnrn,cnt's abilities to effectively administer progrFUns." State Senator Paul Muegge (D-OK) Testimony before Congress vm behalf of The National Conference of State Legislatures ~ oaa ~~ 06/05/97 THL~ 17:07 F~ 800 641 2255 ~ 007 ~.. 1 "Many municipalities have made Herculean efforts to come into compliance with the National Ambient Air t~uaSity Standazds. To learn. now that instead of some recognition of accomplishment, these efforts were inadequate, inappropriate, or ineffective is dismaying....Yt is not~ust our credfbtltty that is at stake; ttae federal government has a similar interest In assuring the wise use of our limited resources." Mark Schwartz, Councilmember, Oklahoma City, OK President, National League of Cities Testimony before Congress 1vJarch 3,1997 "While the City [of Chicago] supports the goal of improving air quality as a means of improving public health, the City does not support EPA's proposals an their ourrent form simply hP.ea.iise we d~ not believe they will achieve their intended result. l:n fact, the City is seriously concerned that, far from improving public health, the adoption of EPA's proposals may even hxvP nPgativP effe~:tc nn pnhlic health and crther environmental goals." City of Chicago Comments filed with EPA BC~N'Y'Yp'IC ~4c INbUS'rRY EXPERTS "We cau place burdens on our ccomvmic institutions that do not pass acost-benefit tort, but we cannot do so without sa.erificing other worthy ob~ecdves. Tt doesn't matter whether it is government 5pencliu~; ur ~z~tu~dated private spending that is involved; policy-makers must not spend more resources on any particular problezza Haan it is wozth to the public. Only then is public policy truly compassiUnatC." "Toting Up Costs and Benefits" Kenneth W. Chilton, director of the Center for the Study of American~Business at Washington University and Stephen. B. Huebner, Jeanne and Arthur Ansehl Fellow Center for the Study of American $usiness Opinion Editorial The ,journQl of G'O»rmeTCe N1azch 5, 1997 "The lack of consensus on many of these issues can be partially attributed to the accelerated review schedule. The deadlines did nut allow adequate time to analyze, integrate, interpret, and debate the available data on this ~ver~ complex issue." lJr. Georse T. ~V'oiff Chairman, Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee Testimony before Congress February 5, 1997 "The studies upon which EPA is basing its proposed standards are `ecological' in design; in these studies, the unit of observation is a population rather than az~ individual. Such studies are inadequate for the purpose of demonstrating a causal relationship between PMZ.S exposure and increased mortality and morbidity. While they may bt valuable for generating hypotheses that can be further tested using more rigorous approaches, they are entirely inappropriate to serve as ll,c 1~asis Cur regulatory action." American Council on Science and Health Letter to LYA March 7, 1997 06/05/97 THU 17:Oi FAl 800 R41 2255 f~J008 r~ "It should also be considered that a greater overall ~heal~ Ucuefit might be derived by first using the nation's resources to achieve coimpliance with the present standard, than by enforcing nationwede compliance with a stricter standard." Dr. Xoe L. Mauderly Lovelace Respiratory l,nstitute, Albuquerque, NM CA,SAC Member, Testimony before Congress March 1l, '1 yy"/ "Everyone acknowledges that we have greatly improved air quality, but dunng the same period in which air quality has been improving, asthma deaths have done up. it's difficult to make the argument that we should exert greater control over air quality to diminish asthma incidence. We've done that and the rates have gone in the opposite direction. The facts strongly suggest that we don't really understand what's going on." J.7.r.. T7. A, HenclPrs~n Johns T~oplsans U~aiversity January 7, 1997 THE MEbYA "Nationally, 126 cities and metropolitan areas-home to most of the U.S. populatiom- would be in `noncompliance.' That would be triple the current total of cities not meeting >vT'A requirements. The EPA itself estimates the expense to industry at $8.5 billion, certainly a stimulus for a further e~codus of manufacturing from America to foreign shores. For such a vast expansion of sanctions over the ziational populttliuu, lLc EPA sLuula VC forced to meet a high standard of proof' as to the need and the certain benefits. The country also deserves to be informed of the economic implications. Instead, the agency has tried to slide these changes through on aquick-release schedule apparently designed to limit public awareness and debate." "1?ederal $arbecue Police?» Detroit Free Press Editorial February 16, 1997 "There is hardly scientific consensus an this issue. Indeed, the EPA's own Clean Aar Scientific Advisory Cocamittee saw its findings slighted when the 1~,PA drew up the new stanriar~ls `T don't think the standards that have been chosen reflect the advice the CASAC has given,' says George Wolff, an atmospheric scientist who headed the committee....Tn setting a never standard for particulate matter, ~nl~r fair of the panel's 21 members supported the EPA's guidelines." "Whiter than White" The Wall Street Journal Editorial February 1~, 1997 "`Huw ~:al~ we be asked to make a decision that costs so much when the evidence is shaky?' EOklahoma Governor Frank] Keating said. "~Ve appose receiving maadates based on questionable sciencC aziel cl-ivCn by unelected officials in'VVashington..' "Tulsa Mayor Susan Savage also aired concerns about the proposal, saying that the country is ill prepared to moziitor the proposed particle matter change because tew monitors exist. `Additionally, there are not guidelines foe their placement and evaluation, leaving community leaders unable to construct a workable strategy,' she said." "Revised Air Standards Called Threat to State" 7"ulsa YYorl~l March 4, 1997 Od%05/9 7 THU 17:08 F.~~ 800 641 2255 lQ 009 U-'~ "Denying E.pA.'s call to virtue is no small watter~ ...since few metnbcrs of Congress arc ready tv be seen as runniag dogs of coal, oil, and auto interests. Indeed, the proposed standards znay have easily slid into the lute books were it not fat tlic skepticism in internal Administration documents. "An analysis by the Council of Economic Advisers is particularly troubling. The E.P.A. estimates that the costs of compliance would run from $6.b billion to $8.5 billion annually, while the benefits would be vi+orth $51 billion to $112 billion. Alicia l~. Munnell, a member of the [CEA], demurred. "By her estimate the costs of the ozone standard alone would run between $11.6 billion and $60 billion a year. And the benefits, she ar~nied, would be modest, with hospitalizations for asthma in New York City falling by less than a h~.alf percent. Translating health benefits mto dollars, she estimated that for the nation the annual benefit would run to less than $1 billion... . "The rz~uch bigger question here is whether Congress will ever rewrite the law, allowing the E.P.A. to weigh dnlltus against lives. Some day, sonic way, Americans will have to come to terms with the fact that they can't have it all." "When the benefits are mostly modest, what price clean air?" 7fee New York rmes Editorial April 3, 1997 r" ~- ~. A BRIEF SUNIl~SARY OF PROPOSED ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATIONS In November 1996 the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed revisions to the current ozone and particulate matter (PM) regulations. There has been some confusion about whether the Roanoke Valley would become a "nonattainment" area under the new regulations and, if so, what that would mean to our ability to attract new businesses. With the following questions and answers I have attempted to give you some background information about the pollutants and proposed regulations and answer some questions about nonattainment issues. What is ozone? It is the prime ingredient of smog. It is not emitted into the air directly but is formed when nitrogen oxide gases and volatile organic compounds react with oxygen in the air. Ozone is considered a summer time problem because the formation of ozone is exacerbated by strong sunlight and high temperatures. The volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides that form ozone are primarily emitted from cars, industrial, chemical and utility plants. What is particulate matter? The type of particulate matter that the new regulation is concerned with is called "fine particles" - those smaller than 2.5 micrometers in diameter. These fine particles are emitted directly into the air from activities such as industrial combustion and from vehicle exhaust. Why are these 2 pollutants harmful? Though it acts as a protective layer high above the earth, ozone can be harmful to breathe. When inhaled, ozone can damage the lungs and relatively low levels of ozone can cause chest pain, coughing, nausea, throat irritation and congestion. Healthy people as well as those with respiratory problems, experience breathing problems when exposed to ozone. Children are most at risk from exposure to ozone because they are active outside, playing and exercising, during the summertime when ozone levels are at their highest. Repeated exposure to ozone can aggravate preexisting respiratory diseases such as asthma. Fine particles can become deposited deeply in the lungs and cause increased respiratory disease and decreased lung function particularly in children and other individuals with asthma. ~-~ What are the proposed revisions to these 2 standards? Ozone: EPA is proposing to lower the ozone standard from its current 0.12 parts per million (ppm) to 0.08 ppm. particulate Matter: EPA is proposing to revise the current particulate matter standard (which regulates "coarse" particles) by adding two new "fine particle" standards. The annual arithmetic mean standard is proposed at 15 micrograms per cubic meter. A 24- hour average standard is proposed at 50 micrograms per cubic meter. When will these proposed rules be final? After public comment and review the rules will become final in June 1997. When will these proposed rules go into effect? The year 2000. What is the attainment status of the Roanoke Valley? The Valley is currently in attainment with both the current ozone and PM standards and would remain in attainment under both of the proposed regulations. Our current ozone readings are slightly below the 0.08 ppm proposed regulation. How is the attainment status determined? The Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) monitors ozone and fine particle levels at a site located at Herman Horn Elementary School in Vinton. These monitors are continuous 24-hour monitors and comply with the annual monitoring plan that DEQ submits to EPA for approval. What are the consequences if the Valley was nonattainment for either regulation? There may be nothing additional that would have to be done on a local level if the Valley moved into nonattainment status. This is due to the fact that many regional and national initiatives, such as negotiations among 37 eastern states to adopt stricter power plant control strategies and the acid rain control program, may eliminate the need for any additional local controls for either ozone or fine particles. If local control strategies became necessary, they could range from mandatory auto emission inspection programs and tighter controls on vapor recovery at gasoline stations to new industries being required to use "lowest achievable emission rates" rather than "best available control technology". K AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON JUNE 24, 1997 RESOLUTION 062497-9 CERTIFYING EXECUTIVE MEETING WAS HELD IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CODE OF VIRGINIA WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia has convened an executive meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with the provisions of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and WHEREAS, Section 2.1-344.1 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that such executive meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby certifies that, to the best of each members knowledge: 1. Only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the executive meeting which this certification resolution applies, and 2. Only such public business matters as were identified in the motion convening the executive meeting were heard, discussed or considered by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia. On motion of Supervisor Johnson to adopt the Certification Resolution and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Johnson NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Nickens A COPY TESTE: Mary H. Allen, Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors cc: File Executive Session 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: June 24, 1997 Presentation by $2500 donation Department for investigations the Roanoke Moose Lodge of to be used by the Police a laptop computer for their David Simmons with the Roanoke Moose Lodge has asked for time on the agenda to present a donation of $2500 to the County for use by the Police Department to purchase laptop computers for their investigations. Respectfully Submitted by: ~~~~~ Elmer C. Hodge County Administrator ---------------------------------------------------------------- ACTION VOTE Approved ( ) Motion by: No Yes Abs Denied ( ) Eddy Received ( ) Harrison Referred ( ) Johnson To ( ) Minnix __. _ _ Nickens ACTION NO. ITEM NO. ~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: June 24, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A 17.5- ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED EAST OF AIRPORT ROAD NORTH OF THE TERMINUS OF WOODBURY STREET (TAX MAP NO. 38.14-1-5) IN THE HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF R-3 TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C-2 WITH CONDITIONS AND TO GRANT A SPECIAL USE PERMIT WITH CONDITIONS TO CONSTRUCT A HOME FOR ADULTS, UPON THE APPLICATION OF SHSNANDOAH HOMES RETIREMENT VILLAGE, INC. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: This proffer (4.F.) is an improvement. However, it representsabout 58% of market value. We had expected something more in the range of 70% if not full value. This is acceptable to me though I prefer the 70% range. I suggest that the dedication of land for the T-turn-arounds (3.D.) be dedicated now rather than at time of construction. This allows everything to be included in the first recordation of the plat. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This ordinance is before the Board after the successful motion to reconsider of May 13, 1997 and after the continuation of the public hearing from June 10, 1997 to June 24, 1997 so that the following issues could be addressed: (a) time line projections for construction of Phase I, II, and III (See Exhibit 1); (b) revision of estimated real estate tax to be generated by the project (See Exhibit 2); (c) statement of the policy of Shenandoah Homes Retirement Village regarding treatment of residents with financial hardships (See Exhibit 3); (d) language regarding the T-turn-arounds (See Proffer 3.D.); (e) construction of emergency entrances into the facility (See Exhibit 1 - Phase 1 construction). BACKGROUND: On April 22, 1997, this ordinance to rezone this 17.5 acre tract of real estate to the zoning classification of C-2 and grant a special use permit to construct a home for adults was denied. On May 13, 1997, a motion to reconsider was made and passed, which rescheduled a public 1 ~~ f hearing and reconsideration of this application by Shenandoah Homes Retirement Village, Inc. This matter was advertised, and public notice provided, as required by law. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: The Board has expressed its concerns with the steady erosion of the County's tax base to tax exempt uses. Almost 10% of the overall assessed value of property in the County is tax exempt. Section 15.1-489 of the Code of Virginia lists the purposes of local zoning ordinances. One listed purpose is "(vii) to encourage economic development activities that provide desirable employment and enlarge the tax base." Taking appropriate action to prevent the erosion of that tax base is a valid purpose of local zoning power and authority. Section 30-19-3 (C) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance addresses conditions which the Board may attach to special use permits. "Any such conditions shall be related to the design, scale, use or operation of the proposed special use." With respect to this application the Board raised questions concerning the proposed tax exempt uses of this development, the corporate structure and organization of this development, and management and development contracts with a profit-making corporation. The applicant and representatives of HCMF and ConstantCare-Shenandoah, Inc. have provided the County Attorney with documentation to address some of these concerns, which have been distributed to the Board. The applicant is not exempt from local taxation by classification, nor is it exempt from local taxation by designation. Similar uses in other jurisdictions have been determined to be taxable, both by the Virginia Supreme Court and through an opinion by the Attorney General. This ordinance includes a condition attached to the special use permit that "(6) [T]he use and operation of this development shall not be exempt from local taxation." FISCAL IMPACTS: It is anticipated that this development has the potential to generate local real estate taxes of approximately $130,415 per year; however, once tax exempt status is granted to the Assisted Living portion of the development the property owner will pay a service charge of 20% 2 ~+ C in lieu of real estate taxes on that portion of the project and full real estate tax on the Congregate Care and Independent Living facilites. The project's Total Estimated Real Estate Tax will be reduced from about $130,415 to $75,590. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board hold the required public hearing, and thereafter, favorably consider the adoption of the proposed ordinance. Respectfully submitted, ~~ Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney Action Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Motion by Vote No Yes Abs Eddy Harrison Johnson Minnix Nickens 3 .. ~.,.- LAW OFFICES OSTERHOl1DT, FERGUSON, NATT, AHERON £~ AGEE A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION CHARLES H. OSTERHOUDT 1919 ELECTRIC ROAD. SUITE I TELEPHONE MICHAEL S. FERGUSON P. O. BOX 200G8 540-774-1197 EDWARD A. NATT MICHAEL J. AHERON ROANOKE. VIRGINIA FAX NO. G. STEVEN AGEE 540-774-0961 MARK D. KIDD 24018'0007 KRISTEN KONRAD JOHNSTONE June 17, 1997 Chairman and Members of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 Re: Shenandoah Homes Retirement Village, Inc. Gentlemen: In an effort to provide further documentation regarding the above rezoning, I would offer the following for your consideration: 1. Attached please find a revised cost estimate indicating that it is anticipated that the project could generate approximately Seventy Five Thousand Five Hundred Ninety Dollars ($75,590.00) in real estate taxes for the County. This figure has been adjusted upwards from the original estimate because of several principal factors. The first of these is that the original estimate did not include the value of the land. The second factor is that the original estimate did not include the development costs associated with the entire project. When these factors are included, the net result would be the amount of real estate taxes set out above based upon payment of the full real estate tax on the congregate care and the independent living facilities and the 20% service charge on the assisted living facilities. Of course, the final assessment is determined by the Commissioner of Revenue. 2. Insofar as retail uses in the galleria are concerned, my client would be willing to agree that if any retail uses exist in the galleria, real estate taxes would be paid on 100% of the value of the prorata share of space utilized by the retail business. Such tax would be paid in lieu of the 20% service charge on that prorata share. We do not anticipate any retail uses in the galleria. 3. The Conceptual Site Plan presented indicates the construction of an entrance for direct access from Airport Road to the existing Shenandoah Homes facility. This entrance will be constructed during Phase 1 of the development. 4. The Conceptual Site Plan indicates the phased construction of the entire project. I am providing with this letter a time line projection for the entire project. ` "` Chairman June 17, 1997 Page 2 5. There was initially some concern regarding the method of payment of the residents. I am attaching correspondence from Shenandoah Homes Retirement Village relating to the method of payment and the provision of space for people who, initially are able to pay for care but, during their stay become financially unable to provide for the required payments. Shenandoah Homes' past history and future intention is to ensure that if an individual is able to pay for space upon entry but later becomes unable to pay for care, they will not be required to leave solely because of their financial inability to pay. Obviously there are situations where the facility will not provide the level of care necessary for an individual (such as total nursing home care) in which case the resident would obviously be required to leave. 6. Shenandoah Homes does not use life care contracts. Residents pay on a monthly basis. 7. I have discussed the existing Proffer regarding the turn- a-rounds with Terry Harrington. I realize that Terry has left on vacation but he indicated to me that the Proffer which my client has previously signed is acceptable to him. Hopefully, this addresses all of the concerns raised by the Board. We will be present at the meeting on June 24 to answer any additional questions and provide any further documentation. We certainly appreciate the Board's attention to this matter. Very truly yours, ~~C~~~ Edward A. Natt EAN/laf Enclosure cc: Mr. Ottis Burgher Paul M. Mahoney, Esq. Roanoke County Planning & Zoning T-1 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, JUNE 24, 1997 ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A 17.5-ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED EAST OF AIRPORT ROAD NORTH OF THE TERMINUS OF WOODBURY STREET (TAX MAP NO. 38.14-1-5) IN THE HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF R-3 TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C-2 WITH CONDITIONS AND TO GRANT A SPECIAL USE PERMIT WITH CONDITIONS TO CONSTRUCT A HOME FOR ADULTS, UPON THE APPLICATION OF SHENANDOAH HOMES RETIREMENT VILLAGE, INC. WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on March 25, 1997, and the second reading and public hearing were held April 22, 1997; and WHEREAS, this matter was reconsidered by the Board of Supervisors on May 13, 1997, and a public hearing and reconsidered second reading of this ordinance were held on June 10, 1997 and June 24, 1997; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on April 1, 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 17.5 acres and located east of Airport Road north of the terminus of Woodbury Street, designated as Tax Map Number 38.14-1-5, in the Hollins Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning 1 ~i classification of R-3, Medium Density Multi-Family Residential District, to the zoning classification of C-2, General Commercial District. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of Shenandoah Homes Retirement Villages, Inc. 3. That the owner of the property has voluntarily proffered in writing the following conditions which the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby accepts: (A) Development of the property shall be generally in accord with the conceptual site plan entitled "The Village at Shenandoah" prepared by E. T. Boggess and dated 6/9/97. The conceptual site plan indicates the phased construction of the project and Exhibit (1) sets out the time line projections for each phase. Minor revisions to the concept plan shall be allowed to accommodate zoning compliance and storm water management needs, provided such changes do not fundamentally change site circulation, or the overall development concept that is depicted on the concept plan. (B) Public vehicle access to the property shall be limited to only the Airport Road access as shown on the conceptual site plan; which public access will be constructed during Phase 1 of the development. Restricted emergency vehicle access shall be provided from either Woodbury Street or through the existing Shenandoah Homes property. (C) Storm water runoff from the site shall not be directed toward Santa Anita Terrace or Sierra Drive. No storm water from the site shall be directed such that it ultimately discharges into the existing 2 ~i detention area at the intersection of Sierra Drive and Fenwick Drive. All storm water runoff from the site shall be discharged into an adequate receiving channel. (D) At such time as Roanoke County has approved and funded the construction of "T-turn-arounds" at the terminus of Sanita Anita Terrace and Sierra Drive, the Petitioner, its successors and assigns, shall dedicate sufficient land to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County for the purpose of construction of the turn arounds, and the cost thereof, shall be borne entirely by Roanoke County. The land to be dedicated shall be limited to that property within the 25' buffer yard required by Section 30-92-4 of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in existence on the date of the adoption of this Ordinance. The County shall not require the dedication of any additional land other than that contained within the 25' buffer yard as set out by said Section. Should any land be dedicated pursuant to this Proffer, the Petitioner shall not be required to provide any additional buffer yard. 4. That the Board finds that the granting of a special use permit to construct a home for adults located east of Airport Road north of the terminus of Woodbury Street (Tax Map No. 38.14-1-5) in the Hollins Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the general purpose of promoting the health, safety and general welfare of the public by encouraging economic development and enlarging the tax base, and 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, 3 i""_~ and said Special Use Permit is hereby approved with the following conditions related to the design, scale, use and operation: (A) Development of the property shall be generally in accord with the conceptual site plan entitled "The Village at Shenandoah" prepared by E. T. Boggess and dated 6/9/97. The conceptual site plan indicates the phased construction of the project and Exhibit (1) sets out the time line projections for each phase. Minor revisions to the concept plan shall be allowed to accommodate zoning compliance and storm water management needs, provided such changes do not fundamentally change site circulation, or the overall development concept that is depicted on the concept plan. (B) Storm water runoff from the site shall not be directed toward Santa Anita Terrace or Sierra Drive. No storm water from the site shall be directed such that it ultimately discharges into the existing detention area at the intersection of Sierra Drive and Fenwick Drive. All storm water runoff from the site shall be discharged into an adequate receiving channel. (C) Architectural styles of the proposed assisted living units, independent living units and Galleria shall be as generally depicted in the submitted plans, elevations and renderings dated 12/7/96. (D) Public vehicle access shall be prohibited to Woodbury Street, Hearthstone Road, Darby Road, Abney Road, Sierra Drive, and Santa Anita Terrace. Restricted emergency vehicle access shall be required and 4 ! '~ allowed from either Woodbury Street or through the existing Shenandoah Homes property. (E) A fire suppression system shall be installed in all residential units. The developer shall be responsible for all costs associated with providing the adequate fire flows required for this fire suppression system. (F) The property owner shall pay real estate taxes on that area of the property designated on the conceptual site plan as Independent Living (9.75 acres) and that area of the project identified as Congregate Care Facilities (1.75 acres). The area of the project designated as Assisted Living (6 acres) shall be tax exempt with the provision that the property owner shall pay a service charge in lieu of taxes on said portion of the project at the rate of 20%; except retail areas in Galleria, which area shall be taxed at 100% of the value of the prorata share of space utilized by the retail business. Payment of said service charge in lieu of taxes shall be conditioned upon the adoption of a resolution by the Board of Supervisors and the enactment of legislation by the General Assembly to provide for such pursuant to Section 30-19.04. (Exhibit 2 - Total Estimated Real Estate Tax Generated by the Project.) (G) Letter from Ottis L. Burgher dated 6/17/97 stating Shenandoah Homes Retirement Village Mission Statement regarding "providing housing and health care options for the elderly of all race, creeds, and financial positions" is attached as Exhibit 3. 5 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. G:\ ATTORNEY\SHEND02.FRM 6 -r-~ I Exhibit 1 5bena>adoah Time Line Projections September, 1997 June, 1998 December, 1999 Phase I *Begin Certificate of Occupancy Fill-up period to 86% occupancy Construction ^ 32 unit ALF Level ^ 20 unit CCRC ^ 10 Independent units tt 1~ Phase of Galleria Phase December, 1999 November, 2000 May, 2002 II $egin Certificate of Occupancy FfiI up period to 85% occupancy Construction ^ 32 unit ALF Ievel ~ 20 unit CCRC ^ 7 Independern units ^ 2e° Phase of Ga~leria Phase May, 2002 April, 2003 June, 2004 Ill Begin Certificate of Occupancy Completed project with Construction ^ 32 unit AI,F (16 Stabilized occupancy of 85% Alzheimer) ^ 6 Independent Gazden Homes s 5 Independent Patio Homes . 'The first phase is expected to begin with the construction and installation of the initial - _ road ways and main gate at the entrance on Airport Road. The road will be extended from the front entrance around to the emergency gate connected to the existing facility at Shenandoah Homes. The Galleria will be constructed with a downsized kitchen and dining area large enough to accommodate the residents in the first and second phases. _ The Independent Garden $omes will be buzZt in sub-phases throughout each phase. For example, tour units will be both immediately and as they fill up, additional units will be brought on as the demand warrants. The fill-up of :assisted Living Pods and Congregate Care Pods will dictate the continuation of development through completion. On s national level, private pay facilities can take up to 18 months before reaching a stabilized occupancy census, therefore, as these~pods reach stabilization, the next phase will begin. •- .s Exhibit 2 Cost Estimates Assisted T~iviag; Total Amount of Land Allocated: 6 Acres or 34 %: 5136,~s00 Estimated Cost of Construction: 1. Six buildings consisting of 10,282 Sq. Ft. each at a cent of :53,555,504 2. Site Work and Design: 5425,518 3. Walkways connecting the buildings to the common arcs: 5168,975 4. The Galleria Building consisting of 24,874 Sq_ FL ~ S1,778,630 a) Kitchen, Dining and Administrative Savie~ fa the Assisted Living Resident. b) Crafts Workshops, Computers, and RacreaQaral Services for the Assisted Living ltasident c) Pharmaceutical and Personal Care Services far the Assisted Living Resident. d) Chapel and Therapy Rcwms for the ?,ssisoed Living Resident e) Congregate Living Residents are eligible far sll meals as included in their monthly ter fj Iadepeadent T.iving Residents arc eligible fot; one (1) meal per day as includes! in their monthly fee. Total Estimated Cost of Assisted Living inclusive of land: 56,064,627 Estir~ted Real Estate Taz ad 20 '/. Serr~ier Fet :513.705 Congregate Living: Total Amount of Land Allocated: 1.75 Aera or IO%: S39`.600 Site Work and Design: S123,900 • Estimated Cost of Construction: t. Two Buildings consistit>S of 18.100 Sq. Ft. each as a cost of 52,024,400 2. Walkways connecting the buildings to the comraan area: 5112,640 • Total Estimates! Cosi of Congregate Living inclusive of the land: 52,300,540 • Estimated Real Estate Tax (non-e:anpt) :525,996 Independent Living: r - Total amount of Land Allocated: 9.75 Acres or 56•/.: 52.'d.000 • Site Work and Dcvcloprncnt: S70Z,lOd • Estimated Cost of Construction 1. Five 2 SR Patio uniu at a cost of S474,690 2. Eighteen 2 BR Crsrden Units at a cost of 51,45i..~08 3. Six I BR Garden Units at a cost of S 380,730 • Total Estimated Cosa oClndependeat Living inclusive of?sad: 53,176,036 • Estimated I:ieyi ?r.siate Tax (nos-exempt) :535,889 Total Estimated Real Estate Taz Generated by the Project: X75,590 -.s June 17, 1997 Chairman ~ Members Roanoke County Board of Supervisors ~~ ;; .; .; ;~ Gentlemen: Exhibit 3 The Shenandoah Homes Retirement Village Mission State- ment states that our ministry is to serve God and fellowman by providing housing and health care options for the elderly of all race, creeds, and financial positions within the context of Christian service. The residents of the village community will have a lease agreement on a month to month basis. If a resident moves in after the first of the month his real will be pro-rated based upon arzival date. Subsequent rent will be due and payable on the first of each succeeding month. vo entrance fee or monthly maintance fee, or life care endowment will be offered or available to the resident. -~-- ~ It has been the policy and the unique ministry of the Church of God to help any resident rho experiences financial reversals. The Church has never evicted or brought legal action against a resident for nonpayment of zent. We do not intend to do so in the future. We will minister to the individual using all of the resources available in the community and the church to resolve the residents financial hardship. I .; .~ .~ If you have any other questions, please feel fret to phone me at my number. Sincerely, Otcis L. Burgher 5300 Howthome Road. NW Roanoke. VA 2Q0~ 2 7.03-362-SQ ~ 2 ~~~ PETITIONER: Joe R. Blackstock CASE NUMBER: 12-6/97 Planning Commission Hearing Date: June 3, 1997 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: June 24, 1997 A. REQUEST Request of Joe R. Blackstock to rezone 35.69 acres from R-3 and I-1 to R-1 to construct single family residences, located between Merriman Road and intersection of Starkey Road and Buck Mountain Road, Cave Spring Magisterial District B. CITIZEN COMMENTS Mr. Bruce Welch, representing the applicant spoke to the Commission. He commented on the higher density allowed by the existing zoning, Dr. Blackstock's intention to preserve as much vegetation as possible, the county's ability to use the new public road to access the water tank site; the proposed single access to the development, the proposed stormwater detention area on the site and the stable seven percent increase in traffic that could be expected from this development. Mr. Welch introduced Mike Webb, from Lumsden Associates, who was available to answer questions regarding the engineering of the site. Mr. Webb commented that the proposed sewer was within 500 feet of the site, and that the acquisition of private easements might be necessary to get the sewer to the property line. He said that grading calculations were done to try to balance the cut/fill on the site so that it was a feasible design for the developer. He did not/was not able to provide the Commission any specific information on road grades or the amount of cut and fill necessary to provide public road access to the site. Dr. Blackstock confirmed his desire that the property be served by public sewer. Mr. Welch said the roads would have curb and gutter and that the intent was not to allow the proposed Starkey lots to have access on Starkey C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION Mr. Witt had many questions for Mr. Welch. He asked about the grades of the roads and the amount of grading required to achieve state standards. Mr. Webb said the roads would meet state standards. Mr. Witt asked about managing stormwater, and Mr. Welch said a detention pond would be constructed. Mr. Witt asked if the developer wished to provide any type of pedestrian access, and Mr. Welch said the intent was to provide curb and gutter, and the residents would walk in the road. D. PROFFERED CONDITIONS No proffers were formally made but Mr Welch indicated that his client would be willing to proffer a maximum of 29 lots, each served by public water and sewer. He also would be willing to proffer that the lots with frontage on Starkey would not have access to Starkey '~ "" ~.,, • ' E. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Mr. Witt indicated that he was uncomfortable with the rezoning request because of lack of information about the development pertaining to grading required, road grades, information on downstream drainage design, and the lack of knowledge about the sewer design/practicality. Mr. Witt and all of the other members of the Commission also expressed strong reservations about the suitability of the single family land use given the high intensity industrial and commercial uses in the area. Mr. Witt said he believed the county will receive many complaints about the dust and noise from Rockydale, and that future residents will not be aware that the vacant land adjacent to the property and across the street is zoned commercial and industrial. Mr. Ross and Mr. Witt both said that the small I-1 area proposed for rezoning should remain I-1 because of the suitability for industrial uses. Mr. Witt indicated he was willing to make a motion to table the request for 30 days to give the applicant time to prepare additional information to address the Commission's concerns or he was willing to make a motion to recommend denial of the request. Mr. Welch said his client would prefer a recommendation of denial. Mr. Witt moved denial of the request citing all of the concerns expressed during the Commission's discussion. Motion to recommend denial was approved by a roll call vote. AYES: Witt, Hooker, Robinson, Thomason, Ross NAYS: None F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. G. ATTACHMENTS: _ Concept Plan _ Vicinity Map _ Staff Report _ Other ~~ Terrance Harrington, Secre ry Roanoke County Planning Commission ~'°~. • • STAFF REPORT PART I PETITION: Joe R. Blackstock PREPARED BY: T. Harrington A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Case # 12-6197 DATE PREPARED: May 26, 1997 B. DESCRIPTION 1. This is a petition of Joe R. Blackstock to rezone 35.69 acres from R-3C (Residential Multi-family Conditional) and I-1 (Industrial) to R-1 (Single Family Residential). Approximately four acres are industrially zoned, with the residual zoned residential. The purpose of the rezoning petition is to allow the petitioner to develop the property for up to twenty-nine (29) single family homes. Two new public streets are proposed as part of the development. 2. The property is located on the south side of Starkey Road near Merriman Road in the Cave Spring Magisterial District C. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS 1. The R-3 portions of this property were conditionally rezoned to this multi- family designation in 1987. At that time an apartment project was proposed for the site. Conditions proffered and accepted at that time require that the property be developed for apartments in accord with the proffered concept plan, and that a single access be provided to Starkey Road. Although the R-3 district allows the construction of single family homes, the conditions on this property prohibit such uses. 2. The I-1 portions of this property that front on Starkey Road have existed since at least the 1970's. This I-1 designation was placed as part of a general rezoning of the County and was retained in the 1992 general rezoning. 3. Section 30-41 of the zoning ordinance contains the permitted uses and development standards for single family residential development in R-1 zoning districts. With public water and sewer service, the minimum lot size allowed in the district is 7,200 square feet with a minimum of 60 feet of frontage. 4. A subdivision plat will need to be approved by Roanoke County prior to the s p "~ sale of any lots in the proposed subdivision. Road development and utility plans will need to be approved before the construction of these facilities, and erosion control and stormwater management plans will need to be approved before any grading is begun on the property. 5. VDOT will need to also approve all plans for the proposed public roads, including the proposed connection to Starkey. • • z ~~ PART A. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS 1. Topography The 35 + acre site, which rises sharply above Starkey Road, is a significant land form that is highly visible in this portion of SW county. The property is characterized by several ridges and steep slopes. In the immediate area, views of the property are most prominent from the Starkey Road, Commonwealth Drive, Meadowlark Drive, and Merriman Road areas. 2. Vegetation The site is forested; completely covered with significant vegetation. The Virginia Department of Forestry has advised that merchantable timber is present on the site. 3. Existing Physical Development The only apparent development on the site is a private road constructed by Roanoke County to provide access to a water tank lot at the top of the property. Although two public water lines/ access easements converge at this tank site, no tank has been constructed on the property to date. 4. Access Access to the property is only from Starkey Road (Route 904). The 1994 traffic count for this section of Starkey between Merriman Road and Crescent Heights Blvd. is approximately 4,000 vehicles per day (VPD). Site visibility along this section of Starkey appears to be excellent. This section of Starkey Road is used heavily by industrial vehicles from the surrounding industries. 5. Surrounding Neighborhood/Zoning A mixture of land uses and zoning are in the surrounding neighborhood. Closest to the property are industrial and heavy commercial uses such as the Rockydale Quarry site, and the Lionberger Construction and McNeil Roofing properties. (I-1 and I-2). A +/- five acre vacant commercial site is west of and adjacent to the site along Starkey. Penn Forest school (C-1) and the industries along Merriman Road grid in the SW Industrial Park (I-1) are in the immediate r~ 3 File No.: T-~.. area. Residential uses in the immediate area include the Branderwood Subdivision near the intersection of Starkey Road and Buck Mountain Road, and homes within the Crescent Heights subdivision. (R-1 ~ 6. Public Utilities Public water is available at the site. A 20" water line, within a public easement traverses the property. There are currently no public sewer lines at the site, but a sewer line is located in the general area. The closest sewer lines are located behind Lionberger Construction, near the SW Industrial Park and the Rockydale Quarry Site. Information pertaining to the adequacy of these lines, or plans for extension have not been provided the staff. 7. School Capacity Property is located within the Penn Forest Elementary attendance zone. The 1.997 Roanoke County Public Schools ComorehenSivP Facility Stud~C indicated this school was 66 students over capacity, based upon a four year growth projection. The report recommends that 80-100 Penn Forest Students be transferred to the Clearbrook district upon the completion of the recommended improvements at Clearbrook. B. AN ALYSIS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 1. Site Layout Twenty-nine single family lots are proposed ranging in size from one-half acre to_approximately six acres. The lots are arranged along two proposed new cul-de-sacs that would be public streets within the VDOT system. Five of the lots also have frontage, and potential access to Starkey Road. A stormwater management lot is proposed for the lower SW corner of the site. Information on the resultant topography of these lots is not available. The two public roads will extend toward the higher elevations of the property, but will not extend to the ridgeline. The Department of Engineering and inspections has expressed a concern about the steepness of the proposed roads. Although no grading information has been provided significant grading will be needed to construct these roads. Staff expects, that because of the topography of the property, significant grading outside of the R/W's will be required. • 4 File No.: . 3. Traffic Generation and Access The twenty-nine lots proposed can be expected to generate approximately 290 vehicle trips per day. Based upon the 1994 Starkey Road traffic volumes, this would represent approximately a 7 percent increase in Starkey Road traffic volumes. If the property was developed under its existing R-3/I-1 zoning, significantly higher volumes could be expected. VDOT has advised that access to the site may require that the developer construct right and left-hand turn lanes on Starkey Road. In addition, any existing private right-of-way or access easements on the property must be abandoned, if they are located within the proposed public road right-of-ways. 4. Amenities No site amenities have been incorporated into the conceptual plan. The recently adopted green way plan encourages the provision of pedestrian walkway systems within and between proposed residential developments. 5. Utilities • Ten of the proposed lots will be encumbered by the existing public water line easement. Because of the size of the proposed lots, it appears that the easement location will not affect a building site on any lot. As a result of this development, portions of this easement may need to be relocated to ensure continual access to the tank site. Additional water and sewer easements will be necessary to provide these services to each lot. At this time, no information is available on the location of these easements, or how they might affect building on any lot. Any new water or sewer easement/line that is outside of the proposed road right-of-ways will necessitate the removal of additional vegetation. As stated above, water is available to the property, but sewer service is not available. 6. Fire/Rescue Fire and Rescue has advised that the development of the property will not affect the provision of fire and rescue services to the area. • 5 File No.: f 7. Economic Development Issues The Department of Economic Development has recommended that the I-1 portions of this site (" 4 acres) not be rezoned to residential. Their recommendation is based upon the limited supply of industrial land in the County, and the continual suitability of the frontage property for small light industrial users. 8. Drainage The proposed stormwater management area will be designed to address on site drainage issues in accord with County regulations. The Department of Engineering and Inspections has advised that downstream drainage systems may be inadequate to accommodate the runoff from this development. C. CONFORMANCE WITH COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 1. The 35 + acres are designated Development in the current Comprehensive Plan. This designation advocates residential development but contains many policies and land use determinants that advocate clustering, preservation of environmental resources and appropriate densities based upon the natural capacity of the land to accommodate development without adverse environmental impacts. Development within these areas is encouraged when public utilities are available, and public facilities such as fire and rescue and school services are available in sufficient capacity to accommodate the service needs of the additional population. D. CONFORMANCE WITH COUNTY SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS 1. The proposed conceptual plan shows lot sizes that greatly exceed those required in R-1 zoning districts. Prior to subdivision approval, the developer will need to demonstrate the developability of the proposed lots based upon water and sewer capacity, and the resultant topography of the lots. In addition, road designs will need to be submitted that comply with VDOT standards for public roads. PART III STAFF CONCLUSIONS This proposed development is located within a mixed use, area characterized by a range of land uses from heavy industrial to residential. If developed as proposed, residents of the subdivision are likely to experience the noise, dust and traffic associated with these industrial uses. The future development of the 6 File No.: T adjacent five acre commercial site has the potential to further impact these future residents. The Department of Economic Development's recommendation that the . four-acre industrial site be excluded from this request, will preserve a small industrial site in Sw county. Conversely, the industrial development of this site will create the potential for industrial impacts for the future residents of this development. Staff is concerned about. the lack of information regarding the proposed road grades, and the amount of grading that will be required on-site to accommodate the public roads and the creation of developable home sites. Necessary grading may result in significant loss of trees on the property, and the resultant viewshed impacts on the surrounding community. Similarly, information is needed on how public sewer service will be provided to the site. If sewer is not technically feasible, septic service may be necessitated with the further impact on the vegetation on the site. Also, information is needed on the adequacy of downstream drainage systems, and how such systems will be designed to accommodate this development. Finally, information from the developer on any type of proposed pedestrian system in the development would be helpful to ensure the project conforms to the __ adopted greenway plan. The staff recommends that the Commission review this request at your June meeting and continue the request to July to receive information on specific grading proposals, road grades, lot contours, water, sewer and stormwater designs. This information will assist the staff and Commission in more adequately evaluating this proposal for the intended use, vis-a vis its location in a mixed use area. ~ t. 7 File No.: Bruce E. Welch Attorney at Law 302 Second Street S.W. ~uthwest Virginia Savings Bank Building Suite 4A Roanoke, Virginia 24011 (540) 344-1902 • Fax (540) 345-8936 I~ j ROANOKE INNING AND ZONING )r.~ 018 j FAX (540) 772-2108 For staff use only ~` date received:' received ,,~/ - ' applicatd e:i PC/BZA ate: ll 3 -AA yt~3- Fr placards is ued: BOS date: Y ~ 1~i.~ Case Number: / ~ ~y ` "r / / Check type of application filed (check all that apply): ® REZONING ^ SPECIAL USE ^VARIANCE Applicant's name: Joe R. Blackstock Phone: 774-4507 Address: 2405 Carolina Avenue, S. ?d. Zip Code: 24014 oanok te'n' Owner's name: same as above ~ ~ Phone: Address: Zip Code: Location of property: Va. Sec. Rte. Tax Map Number: 97.01-1-5 904 between Merriman Road a d n intersection of Starkey Road an Magisterial District: Cave- Snrin Buck Mountain Road Community Planning Area: Cave Spring Size of parcel (s): Existing Zoning: R 3 & I _.- 1 X5.69 acres Existing Land Use: Vacant and undeveloped sq.ft. Y ~.;: :: ~:: ,~. .~ Proposed Zoning: R1 For scat! uSe o~ry Proposed Land Use: Single family loT~r density residential Use Type: Does the parcel meet the minimum lot area, wicth, and frontage requirements of the requested district? YES x NO IF N0, A VA=:ir.NCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for t.~: requested Use Type? YES x NO IF N0, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. ~ If rezoning request, are conditions being proffer~~ with this request? YES _ NO t~~ Variance of Section(s) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in orcer to: Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WILL N'OT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. ws v wa ~. v ws v Consultation 8 1 /2" x 1 1" concept plan x Application fee x Application x -'%~ Metes and bounds description '%;;: Proffers, if applicable x Justification x 'w:<. Water and sewer a lication x Ad'oinin PP ~ g property owners ._ /hereby certify that / am either the owner of the property or the owner's agent or contract purchaser and am acting with the kn Owner's Signature: v ~'~ For Stall Use Only: Case Number Applicant Joe R. Blackstock 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. The project will be located with an are a. of residential development designating up to three (3) units per acre. Summer Place will provide twenty-nine (2g) lots in an area of 35.69 acres. Consequently, Summer Place will be significantly less dense than the maximum allowable number of units per acre. The R1 designation will allow the controlled-and orderly development of the rural setting. The property is presently zoned R3 but is undeveloped and taxes in the land use program. se explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County mprehensive Plan. The project is a conventional residential development of~single family i detached housing on conventional lots. There are twenty-nine (2g) individua'~ lots ranging from 0.51 acre (Lot 15) to 6.04 acres (Lot 23). The project will not impact on an existing local street network of an adjoining neighborhood, having direct access to Starkey Road. The project will protec the integrity of existing natural amenities with low impact on environmental resources. 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 project will not interconnect into existing neighborhoods. Two new roadways will be constructed from Starkey Road into th~e..project. Presently Roanoke County maintains a water tank and lot on the top of the property. Construction of the new roads within the project will allow easier access to the County's site. The project will require water and sewer hookups to ch lot. project would not significantly impact the existing schools, parks/ recreation and fire/rescue. i i ~ ' '_ J ~,- i i t .o, _ S Y a ~ I I - ~' ss - I ~ I _ ~~ ~1N_ ~' ~-ri~ I' - ^- i ~., o s :~ _i _ rn ~_ ! ~O< it I I. Y~ 3~ ~ '~~_ ~'-- 2 F'- -wr 1 \ ~ / / sr :7==~§S ~ r`: zr~ c3_~- ~`~ ~@ \\ \ ~~': \r /\~ a O V r 7 O 5 U W N i xC 7 ~~ O G -x Y W Y 6 -Y N ..r e ~ _ _ _ _ _ 3 1"'T 92 a '~ \ _~ ± ~ ~~ :'_Z°i ,''1, S M' tom" Yet I ._ `~ a~ `~ _ 'W '\, ~. ~ ~`a'--- - ---- .~., .....,,wad-- -----~a.. ----- .,..~, ~- z __ t . ~ ~_ I _- I e•Y.Y -x -4 ~ L-~-uss . NL "!• L'6Y QYY'Ii9~J . YL. •N. Yi 1 ~~ l 9 ~ ~ S t~ ~' o o~ Lti ~ ~ ~) ~ ~~ ~, ~ ~~_ z ~ ~ £Fs ~ aas$~a~aa,~"ssio ^- OW am ILb uu3;uWU3;3uu3 WV ":n^n~o~i: nrai Ria °i ^' V J oo WW ZZZ22ZZZN2NZZN U~ W c ~ o muhOl.OI- a?O i imci u.J~uiS iY Uai f..- o~^ w.1 =RaR OW ~ WS 3l#uWu 3W ^^:^H WM Np!r'.R =V hwonn N N NN N U< aoaNu pue.s oaor 0 oz W ~« ~N= _< ~i 8 2 ~$ <asag < N h O a b~ NNE 5-~ ~~e ~~a _;~a _ u u¢i 9in m3WUu WjG~ TWO an OO bOo C33ai~~L'S - <oQqq~z~'T~7mm ~d~Aoo~h~ec ~`°~=="'gym N<....NLguo~ n ~dWgsff ~'zd c ~~~~b~~$~i~ 2 _. r r + ++ lGC '7d •6 'Y'd 1 q1 MOi1~35 ~ OOOntl30~rcaB_ A MYKIp3~ 1 J •d$~ i - ~h=$~~ N ~>~aV^W o`z ri R 21 R `1 H 1~ „ y ~ { ~ yz ~~8~~6~ as^_x \ ~ 4t ~ 2S t N . ~ 6 .Z ~ y~j $ °~ ox +,~ ~~a~,~ ~ R `~~ O N ~ .: ry _ ~ ° ,o ry ' W / 7.. rn - - `~` ..~ t itl ~ : \, Ali - ~c.J ° ~ ~ ,.~ ~_ o 8 ~ `3=' o ~'bhY~ Rod I ~ ~ a ~~ a n 1 N ~ f - ~~ __ _ d~ - 4 - o .~ N 5t ~, -~ ~° . iZ ~ \ ~ .- f u _ _.1_ _ - .. 1 .. _ ._. ... _ .. ~ f -- .... _ - _ _.. ~ _ - ~~~ 1 \ > `oo ~ moo ~ moo ~ ivo I J J J g~ ~ ~ la;s o ~ I ^h8g o~m^ `~ _ ~ ~ ~ e ~ Y:~~° R / occ 'oa 'a ev a~n,rnlo. lo~tN nn av~ ~g,;~ o ~'"~- o ~ ~' ~ ~ '~ / MY ~ : } ~ u ~j a U ~v ~ ~ p" p Z rn t [ C"' ~ w n ~ < v l ¢ Cn y o ~ I _ z Cs7 v O ~ Z Q ~~ ~ ~' Z ~ a S QmU o W a ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~"" ° W .- ~z Uo~ ~- O ZO ' n-y m ~ U 7 6 O j U U •• ~ W QNO Z Z o~ r~ V1 a G U Z ~ a z o Z z i a in N L4 ~j C7 N p ~ CV O W VJ Lr / o ~ ~~ a o ~Z ~ ~ -' aW a N U ~N1 i~~ ~ ~_~ o ~_ a \S ~~ Hp` S9~e bib i ~~„5$: ~ _s .cY° ~$ zf 4 0 eE ,;¢¢F~Rm5R=R9Yi}~}:.~t^~~af'Ra~~}_?~=: itl a6 a 55 «~$~'aaa ~s~R ' 8 ta.$f.~~fr$ { :.$5 5 F ~e~~ a;, -e a $~ Y"S g~ a: R! ~ 'ysyu 5~.^,:'aabi..~ a~$;~.z_ ~_ $YCS ae~eb -~ '6esg~, -n--d-}$.6 gag"55.~~= a~it a :~ ~-" bad°R'=c$~,;_RaSsY~R~eC$.C: ~ ~~SC„.s _ °ag ;a: =tom a .~ Fg~~~~~~.~~s3~~~$~i~~$5:.~$8~$z-3a U -: W 5 [o L~a~S g Enb ~ 9. ~-_ aa ~. n~ j ~ 9.y~ `~.c~.^l.~y.4nb~~~$~oY~?yy~954'~~~~-_° ~RA~ppj. p i.vo il~at of ~~'a gy~~~~='iaaycg gN=ei~=RiE m ~A s YY~„TF'FR! ~u~~g~D.e.y~}RFa'^$- a ~: f~ ~s~~s'33a8aL eso•R~~sRYeR~`~"'`6~ Y~ a ~-aSi~n°a~S°~8~~RRRRS~=~^oR^ n - 5 < _ o WW..~...a-WI~W ,..:s;s~sW;s3„~uu^~ Q < a' < OI1 ^• Nn °~~ R a$ S$$F RRraorno~e=~R=A3~C ~ < , Z Z Z Z Z N N Z Z Z Z N Z Z N Z Z N N N N M Z 2 Z Z Z m PO-nnvN°nOPnnhnM1eN.,M1 ~- O _d ~~ _. P sr.~,4xFY \/ ~' r~ ~ 1 i ><1300 ~ ~ ~ N ..' G ` . y .o ~ •:~ ... ti4 ~¢ ll)' O • 3 a e z . L_ ~ tit r <Ctl • R:,, ~ .. ~ .. ;~ ' / ~ ~ ~ _~• . C_~~. ~ ~: OR ~ ~ J w6 1--s < C ]( ~ ~~\e RTS ~ ~ x 1300 os s [`~ ~0 A v1 R (~ 4. G\P 1610 ? '•,~ h '' ~' ORTH . ~~ i N 1 ~ 4 yp~ ~ i ~ i 41 .-p.. __ c y .:... . p-. ~ \. ..~ ... ~i ,~. } ~ R - ~ _ ~ I ~. \ H M . ~ \ ~ !] - ... ~ ~ = ~ ~ _ ptl ~ . , ` ~ ~ r n r ..-~ _~ . ~_,.i ~ r . ` _ C+.z __ . , ,1 .. C ~ ~ /~ \ p 734 /s i V ~. _ sC ~b . 1 ' S1 / 1 1 I ~~~ ~ C Leo • _ ./ / _ ~ / ~_ _ ,y '' a JOE R, BLACKSTOCK _ _ ~ ~ = DEPAP.T- 4~IT OF PLA.NNIr'G 9 7.01-1- 5 ' AND ZONING ~ R-3 & I-1 to R-1 .~ . ... ~` AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, JUNE 24, 1997 ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A 35.69-ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED BETWEEN MERRIMAN ROAD AND THE INTERSECTION OF STARKEY ROAD AND BUCK MOUNTAIN ROAD (TAX MAP NO. 97.01-1-5) IN THE CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF R-3 AND I-1 TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF R-1 UPON THE APPLICATION OF JOE R. BLACKSTOCK WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on May 27, 1997, and the second reading and public hearing were held June 24, 1997; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on June 3, 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 35.69 acres, as described herein, and located between Merriman Road and intersection of Starkey Road and Buck Mountain Road, (Tax Map Number 97.01-1-5) in the Cave Spring Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of R-3, Medium Density Multi-Family Residential District, and I-1, Industrial District, to the zoning classification of R-1, Low Density Residential District. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of Joe R. Blackstock. 3. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: BEGINNING at Corner #1, said said 35.69 acres, property of as recorded in DB 1263, page line of Starkey Road (Virgin, the line common to said 35. following courses and distanc Corner #2; thence N. 70° 40' ~ N. 75° 05' 04" E. 99.40 feet 1 350.00 feet to Corner #5; th Corner #6; said Corner #6 be acres, property of Eugene B. x and the southerly right-of-w along the line common to said Knighton the following course: arc of a curve to the right, angle is 63° 41' 15", whose to and distance is S. 20° 09' S1 S. 52° 00' 29" W. 20.54 feet t 108.18 feet to Corner #9; the Corner #1 being the corner common to Rodney W. McNeil and Norma M. McNeil 1311 and the southerly right-of-way a Secondary Route 904); thence along 59 acres and said Starkey Road the s: N. 60° 30' 52" E. 233.44 feet to ~" E. 191.71 feet to Corner #3; thence o Corner #4; thence N. 78° 00' 29" E. nce N. 80° 39' 47" E. 25.02 feet to ing the corner common to said 35.69 iighton, recorded in DB 1328, page 731 y line of said Starkey Road; thence 35.69 acres and property of Eugene B. and distances, 236.21 feet along the chose radius is 212.50 feet, central igent is 131.98 feet and chord bearing W. 224.23 feet to Corner #7; thence ~ Corner #8; thence N. 78° 00' 29" E. ice N. 80° 39' 47" E. 211.54 feet to corner x#10; thence N. 71° 58' 27" E. 160.07 feet to Corner #11; thence N. 75° 30' 29" E. 67.70 feet to Corner #12; said corner #12 being the corner common to said 35.69 acres, said property of Eugene B. Knighton and property of G.H. Board as recorded in DB 1038, page 240; thence along the line common to said 35.69 acres, said property of G.H. Board and Graceland Subdivision as recorded in PB 9, page 350, the following course and distance, S. 03° 25' 40" E. 1203.54 feet to Corner #13, said Corner #13 being the corner common to said 35.69 acres, said Graceland Subdivision and property of T.R. Hackley and recorded in DB 291, page 214; thence along the line common to said 35.69 acres and property of T.R.Hackley, the following courses and distances, N. 88° 03' 12" W. 100.50 feet to Corner #14; thence N. 68° 46' W. 264.00 feet to Corner #15; thence S. 85° 28' 11" W. 237.60 feet to Corner ##16; thence N. 72° O1' 49" W. 330.00 feet to Corner #17, said Corner #17 being the corner common to said 35.69 acres, said property of T.R.Hackley and property of the County of Roanoke, as recorded in DB 1288, page 1003; thence along the line common to said 35.69 acres and said property of County of Roanoke the following courses and distances: N. 48° 46' 49" W. 150.00 feet to Corner #18; thence S. 41° 13' 11" W. 150.00 feet to Corner #19; thence S. 48° 46' 49" E. 150.00 feet to Corner #20, said Corner #20 being the corner common to said 35.69 acres, said property of County of Roanoke and said T.R.Hackley; thence along the line common to said 35.69 acres and said property of T.R.Hackley the following courses and distances: S. 41° 13' 11" W. 180.00 feet to Corner #21; thence S. 69° 58' 11" W. 313.50 feet to Corner #22; thence S. 80° 58' 11" W. 211.20 feet to Corner #23; thence N. 12° 13' 11" E. 211.20 feet to Corner #24, said Corner #24 being the corner common ?'" to said 35.69 acres, said property of T.R.Hackley and said property of Rodney W. McNeil and Norma M. McNeil; thence along the line common to said 35.69 acres and said McNeil property the following courses and distances: N. 81° 58' 11" E. 52.14 feet to Corner #25; thence N. 15° 04' 13" E. .845.49 feet to Corner #26; thence N. 27° 55' 30" W. 158.62 feet to Corner #27; thence N. 17° 29' 56" E. 59.78 feet to Corner #1, the point of Beginning, containing a computed acreage of 35.69 acres. 4. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be, and the same hereby are, repealed. The Zoning Administrator is directed to amend the zoning district map to reflect the change in zoning classification authorized by this ordinance. C:\OFFICE\WPWIN\WPDOCS\AGENDA\ZONING\BLACKSTO.REZ ~=3 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JUNE 24, 1997 ORDINANCE 062497-10 GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO COY AND DEANNA WEAVER TO OPERATE A PRIVATE KENNEL AT 1905 MAYFIELD DRIVE (PART OF TAX MAP NO. 79.03-5-59), VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, Coy and Deanna Weaver have filed a petition to operate a private kennel located at 1905 Mayfield Drive (Part of Tax Map No. 79.03-5-59) in the Vinton Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the .Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on June 3, 1997; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on May 27, 1997; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on June 24, 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 operate a private kennel on 11.74 acres located at 1905 Mayfield Drive (Part of Tax Map No. 79.03-5- 59) in the Vinton Magisterial District is substantially in accord with the adopted 1985 Compre- hensive 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 condition: (1) The private kennel shall be limited to five dogs over the age of six months. (2) The Special Use Permit shall be in effect for five years beginning June 25, 1997, and ending June 25, 2002. (3) The Special Use Permit is for Coy and Deanna Weaver only and is not transferable to any other property owner. 2. 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. Supervisor Eddy moved to adopt the ordinance with three added conditions. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Johnson NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Nickens A COPY TESTE: y .~. Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the 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 fv ` e::::::; 60 ~ HILLS `.flri~ ° ° 116 ~ F`~`~"" ~ c MT.PLEASA T HC ~,0' ~ • ` `~~ MAYFI R L~00~ o ~ ~~~r '~''`~',~~ E l0 ~f.~ G rT~~ E~k~''"•~ ~ 4y ~ xti00 •~ I.~ ~S ~^'Rb.l \~ 0 N ~~ ~~ ~~ N D NORTH, + 38 j t 1 79 Ac ..1 ~. 37.• ~9 W .. ~~ ~' !9 w ».~ u w I, a 90 1 44 Ar P~Rxw~y ~~ 3 ~--~~-~- _ ' * DEPARTT~NI' OF PLANNIh*G AND 7ANING • COY & DEANNA WEAVER SPECIAL USE PERMIT 79.03-5-59 (p!o) ~-3 PETITIONER: Coy and Deanna Weaver CASE NUMBER: 13-6/97 Planning Commission Hearing Date: June 3, 1997 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: June 24, 1997 A. REQUEST Request of Coy and Deanna Weaver for a Special Use Permit to operate a private kennel on 11.74 acres of land located at 1905 Mayfield Drive in the Vinton Magisterial District. B. CITIZEN COMMENTS Mr. Weaver spoke, presenting his request. He said he has had his five dogs for eight years and they have not been a problem to the neighborhood. He has no interest in getting any more dogs. He did tell the Commission that he might watch his neighbors dog for a few weeks this summer, so he would temporarily have more than five. A neighbor, Ms. Clark, spoke to the Commission saying that Mr. Weaver's dogs had not been a problem for her or the neighborhood. She did ask that the permit be limited to Mr. Weaver, so that a future owner of the property would not be able to take advantage of the permit to have five dogs. C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION The Commission agreed that the permit should limit the number of dogs to five and that the permit would be issued to Mr. Weaver and would not be transferable to any other property owner. The Commission inquired about "vacationing" dogs. Mr. Harrington asked the Commission not to address temporary animals in the permit. D. PROFFERED CONDITIONS None E. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Mr. Robinson moved approval of the request with the following conditions: (1) the private kennel shall be allowed a maximum of five dogs. (2) the Special Use Permit shall be issued to Mr. Weaver, as current owner of the property, and shall not be transferable to any future property owner. The motion to recommend approval passed by the following roll call vote. AYES: Witt, Hooker, Robinson, Thomason, Ross NAYS: None • F. DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE ~r~ None. G. ATTACHMENTS: _ Concept Plan _ Vicinity Map _ Staff Report _ Other Terranc Harr' gton, S retary Roanoke C my Planning Commission STAFF REPORT PETITIONER: COY & DEANNA WEAVER PREPARED BY: TIM BEARD PARTI A. Executive Summary ! ~ ,~ CASE NUMBER: 13-6/97 DATE: JUNE 3, 1997 This is a Special Use Permit request to operate a private kennel on 11.174 acres, located at 1905 Mayfield Drive, 0.4 mile west of Jae Valley Road in the Vinton Magisterial District. A private kennel license is required to keep three or more dogs over six months of age in the R-1 district. The applicant intends to keep five dogs. A variety of rural residential and agricultural uses comprise the general area. The site is designated Rural Village by the 1985 Comprehensive Plan. The proposal is generally consistent with Rural Village guidelines. Historically, the property has been used for agricultural and woodland purposes. B. Applicable Regulations The R-1 district permits private kennels by Special Use Permit. The ordinance defines private kennel as the keeping, breeding, raising, showing, or training of three or more dogs over six months of age for personal enjoyment of the owner or occupants of the property, and for which commercial gain is not the primary objective. Use and design standards for a private kennel are as follows: 1) Minimum lot size of one acre; 2) Permitted only when accessory to a single family dwelling; 3) Exterior runs, pens and other confined areas designed to house four or more animals shall be set back at least 25 feet from any property line. Perimeter fencing of a yard shall not be considered a confined area. PART II A. Analysis of Existing Conditions This section of the Mount Pleasant Community Planning Area is characterized by single family and scattered manufactured housing, agricultural and open space uses including a cemetery and the Blue Ridge Parkway. Currently, the site slopes gently west to east and includes groves of deciduous and evergreen trees and partially fenced pasture and a riding ring. Cattle and chickens are kept on adjoining properties (not owned by the applicant or his family). Before the 1992 countywide rezoning, the applicant's property and adjacent sites were zoned residential estates; a rural residential category which permitted private kennels by right. The majority of the eleven-plus acres being conveyed from other family members to Mr. and Mrs. Weaver reflect the ordinance requirement for a minimum one acre on which to keep three or more dogs. Mr. Weaver has stated that the dogs would be housed indoors. He does not plan to construct a pen and has received no complaints of barking. STAFF CONCLUSIONS PART I I I The applicant's request complies with use and design standards described above (ordinance section 30-82-4). If approved, staff suggests a condition limiting the maximum number of dogs to five be considered by the Commission. 23 k~~i Q~. ~ y! % ~.Gp vl2s?e % ~; For staff use only COUNTY OF ROANOKE DEPT.. OF PLANNING AND ZONING 5204 Bernard i)r.•.; P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 ( 540' 772-2068 FAX (540) 772=2108 date received:' rece' ed by: Z -'I app' atio n f e6e: PClB 3 te: O ` ~ . placards issued: BOS d te: ~S 3 l6 2 ~ Case- Number: ~ ~,,, )_ Check type of application filed (check all that apply): ~ REZONING ®SPECIAL USE ^VARIANCE Applicant's name: Coy L. and Deanna H. 4Jeaver Phone: 427-5152 Address: 1905 Mayfield Drive SE Roanoke, Va Zip Code:24014-60 PA ~ 5'~-'2~IZ Owner's name: Coy L. and Deanna H. Weaver ~ _ Phone: 427-5152 Address: 1905 Mayfield Drive SE Roanoke, Va. Zip Code:24014-60 Location of property: Tax Map Number: -7~, p~_ ~ _ 5~ 1905 Mayfield Drive SE State Rte #659 Magisterial District: Vinton Community Planning Area: r,-, ~ . p/~af4r+-~- Size cf parcel (s}: Existing Zoning: R-1 11.174 acres Existing Land Use: Agricultural (Pasture) sq.ft. .Y~~•: Proposed Zoning: R_ 1 .. ........................... For staff Use on;y Proposed Land Use: Private Kennel-Agricultural use Type: Does the parcel meet the minimum lot area, wic:h, and frontage requirements of the requested district? YES ,fit NO IF NO, A VA:;IANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. Does the parcel meet the minimum criteria for t`~a requested Use Type? YES x . NO IF N0, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? YES NO t~~ Variance of Section(s) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance in orcar to: N/A Is the application complete? Please check if enclosed. APPLICATION WILL I~FOT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR.INCOMPLET E. ws v wa v nrs ~ Consultation 8 1/2" x 1 1 " concept plan Application fee Application ~~ Metes and i;ounds description 'a~,r Proffers, it applicable Justification "~~ 'Water and sewer application Ad}oining property owners .` ,. /hereby certify that l am either the owner of the property or the owner's agent or contract purchaser and am acting with the knowledg nd consent of th owner. Owner's Signature: C~ ,~.!~~~~-l~~ .. . 7 7 • E ""'. Fv~ Sfatf Use On/y: Case Number Applicant Coy L. and Deanna H. Weaver 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 furthers the purpose of •the Zoning Ordinance as it is a premitted use under Sec. 30.41-2 with a special use permit. It does not request a incompatible or prohibited land use in this zoning district. use explain how the project conforms to the genera! guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan. ~4ount Pleasant isdesignated as "Rural Village" in the Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan. Land use types include residential development and agricultural production and services supporting the surrounding agricultural community. .Policy for future development is to encourage rural settlements and preserve limited farm land. Land use as a private kennel will not be out of character for the area as there are two (2) private stables and a neighbor with cows that adjoin the property for which the private kennel land use is requested. Please describe the impacts} 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 request will not impact the property itself, adjoining properties, the surrounding area, public services and facilities including water and sewer, roads, schools,parks/recreation flr fire/rescue. ~_ .L,._ .. m I ,crwravd 3~aua .erne W ~, -oaom ~o s~vls ¢3cwn a ~~~. io ,uaadoad . Z m m^ .« .zl.rs~s N :rL'sfz ~~ ®d `\ e .: ~~ . t ~~ I ? n ~ o g ~ ¢~ , o~ ~O ~ o ~~ 1 0 h 3 .Of.Sf9B 5 auroral 7e a avn .Z6' .00'SL 3~i Q o n O 4 1C ~ ^ N la h ei f~ N N S R~~ ~ O 1~+~ >, ~~~ ® ~ ~? ~p^~ 1 ~I 1 I !r•li h ._. - _~ 1 ~ ~1 s~s1 ~ .00'SL 1 ~ O i .os•ftz /~ 11 ~~ . r .or ~~~ j ~3 a ~~~~~ ~ ~~~~~ W 00k ~ ~~ 1 ~^ n ~~ o~~~~ W ~~ '~ tv~ o W P, ~ N A \= N 6fl I ~ 1 I Il3N 1 I I 1 ' ~ 1 W ~~ C{ ` ~ i 11 O w ~ I ~ _ C I 1 i 1 _ . ~ 1 I 1 1 3 ~,, I 1 I li `Z ~~ ~ I 1 1 I ' Z 1 -- 1 1 I 1 .as•ssl I I ~ p I a .or.s~9e s q ~~~ CAy O 1 ~\ a a ~~cc n n .~. ~ a ~o~ ~i<I ~~~ boa 3 ~` ~ ~ 8q~^ N I W ~ ~ 3;~~~~ a 9 6..~ aff ~ ~~ ~~~~~~~ c~~ ~«~ ~~O` Yl ~~~I¢.~~O~~O~ FYI S~ ~~~ ~ FO~ C ~ ~W qpW ~ ~ a0 Q Nh D ~ ~~ C ~ ~ n~~~ ~ ~ ~! o ° Y tic. y 11~ ; ~\\ ~ H ~ `\ \\Z .~ ~~Nt/. a ,, ~ ~ Y r 6 J ~~~ ,1~~ ~~~ ~\` ~11~ ~\!` f} / \ \~ \, Zo :, ~~\ ©- a ~~ ~~ ~\ \``\ 1`\ ~ Onm `\ 3 ~µ~ _ \ n n\~ ~ o C. ~~ QO ~ W"' a o"i~ ~~ \~ \ ~ s ~ ~~~~ ~a ~ ~ ~ :~~ c~~' i m~ ~O T b n m~~ a o° ~RR1h O~y?~' ~~ K ~~' ~ ~ ~ . Ltd N ~ W N 0 ~~ 3 O N J Q ~~~ ®~~ ~i Z~ ~ \ d o1 x ~ ; z~Y1~u \`~ '8 d ~~ \~_ W ~ ~\` Z H e~ ,\ ` 2 \h ; ~Y ZZ ~ Oo N O~ ~ 1 ~g'ff ° ~ 1~ 3 ,OO,sE ~ ~ ~o ~Oo Qo ~2=I ~vv;, ~ O`='_ ~j n ~~ ~~ d 0 bb I~ 8 ~j o~ U N ~ Z^^ $ vv~~~ `~ 3 b ~ o ~~ 6S9 j 3[b ~3S Y~ 3 s '~i~o m~,~,cd~v 8 °o O W U a o a n 1 ~p 3 OC.SY98 S I I s ~ 1 , I n ~ ~00'SC l6'sfl I l 3Mli M3N ~ DI '~' °.d nI W ~~ nl ~ '~ n ~ 1 ~ ~ a3 ~~ ~ ~~ 1 h Ill ^~ °I IIh =]~ ~II ~ ~ 1' ~ ° ~ ~ h 4Q a- ~~~m .,c aei I , ~ i 2 l ~ l ~ ~ a ~~ _ I 00'SLI ..~ III ~ 1 .OS'B9l I }'a ~ .OS'HL 3 .OC.S19B S ~ 0 g ~~ 4 ~ NORTH •~~~ P 1.02 Ac 20 ' .•o. ..e .oo 4.43 Ac ~ `I IS _ °s 2.00 AC ~~ isoJ 13 (~ ~ e t~: ,~ ~ ~ a ~ is,s (~ 1.17 Ac ~ 9 ~ ~ (` _ ~ .,o ~. t a ' ,r ,stf .~ to ~ :oos : ~ riffs a 12 _2 ~f4 isro ° ~~ ~~ _. .. r• ' Rt. 659 r,i~ , ,, 'ql ~ ~-. °, 52 `,sos ,soy ~~ ,so, ,s ~61 ~s62 ;, 2013 :are toss ` ' !P~ ~ _ piss =~S ' iso, ~' S3 - 54 C~mr ~ ~ , =73 .74 75 _ 75.. 77 _78 79 d 80 ~ L I 43 1.26 Ac ~ „ '' L00 Ac _ ~ +'~•% 3 'c . 56 ' .. ..... z J' L 10 Ac ~° 63 ~~ ~ •: '`` 116 Ac y ,~ a6 ,roe. k, ,.,, .~~ ''37.` ~ 44~ to ~ ~~ 72 ~ ~; .r 5 5 ~ ~ r,,, ~ .~ ° 2. Ac .,. , 64 ~ Jsu ' ,. 5i y 81 m ''g• .OOActD) r.13 Ac ~ : 71 3.B3Ae 82 ~`~ ~~ 45 t {. 63 Ac (G) ~ 65 a 1 ., oa n = 2.00 AC a '~a ' z *,e, ~J ,.... o °, • 'f ~• 50 66 - ~ 46 " 2.00 Ac '~ '~' ~ g ~ i 70 , ` 85 ~ u o ~ 2.00 Ac ~ 67.1 I Ac ;, a ~ I.50 c » A ,s„ ~ .NZS ssoe s a 49 rj ~ u: •,• 87.1 `' 2 X069• ~ ~• 2.46 Ac I1 798Ac 2.00 Ac '~ Ufi81 ~ 87 1.o6x U .~: ~ M 4 e1 ;~• zoo ac ~ ' 27~ 26 ~.; s~o': 25 ; •: ' 2.00 Ac ~ ~ 11.69 Ac lD) , r ,~~'~•~ 4 • •,i' ,~ , 9.12 Ac (C) - i89 W 1 - 3~ ,. • u o ~ •, a ~ • 57 68 ,,,t w 8 ~ ~,~ ~-~ ~ • ~:, „~- 12.97 Ac (D) 9.17Ac ',' ' ~Or .- • I =' 20: .s'•, 15.20 Ac lG) •` .4 19 90 10 .• ~i ~' r, ~ ,,eft a 1.44 Ac ' 1 I + ';,~ ,, R ee ,a, •J •' Y ~ • w I ~e~ ~,~ •• ~ rp' a •5~+' 15q 17 3 `°• ~_,~ i ac .. P1~RKc~,~y AG 3 ~~ COY & DEANNA WEAVER _ ~~ * DEPARTl~IT OF PLANNIT'G SPECIAL USE PERMIT -• AND ZOHnvG 79.03-5-59 (p!o) .i . .,, s ~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JUNE 24, 1997 ORDINANCE GRANTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO COY AND DEANNA WEAVER TO OPERATE A PRIVATE KENNEL AT 1905 HAYFIELD DRIVE (PART OF TAX MAP NO. 79.03-5- 59), VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT WHEREAS, Coy and Deanna Weaver have filed a petition to operate a private kennel located at 1905 Mayfield Drive (Part of Tax Map No. 79.03-5-59) in the Vinton Magisterial District; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on June 3, 1997; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, held a first reading on this matter on May 27, 1997; the second reading and public hearing on this matter was held on June 24, 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 operate a private kennel on 11.74 acres located at 1905 Mayfield Drive (Part of Tax Map No. 79.03-5-59) in the Vinton 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. 2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days after its final passage. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in ~. 1 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\WPWIN\WPDOCS\AGENDA\ZONING\WEAVER.SUP 2 r- y AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, JUNE 24, 1997 ORDINANCE 062497-11 TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A 1.231 ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED AT 3390 COLONIAL AVENUE (TAX MAP NO. 77.11-1-57) IN THE CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C-1, CONDITIONAL, TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C-1, CONDITIONAL, UPON THE APPLICATION OF DR. WILLIAM F. BALL AND EUGENIA H. BALL WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on May 27, 1997, and the second reading and public hearing were held June 24, 1997; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on June 3, 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 1.231 acres, as described herein, and located at 3390 Colonial Avenue, (Tax Map Number 77.11-1-57) in the Cave Spring Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of C-1, Conditional, Office District, to the zoning classification of C-1, Conditional, Office District, with amended proffers. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of Dr. William F. Ball and Eugenia H. Ball. 3. That the owner of the property has voluntarily proffered in writing the following amended conditions which the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, 1 Virginia, hereby accepts: (A) The rezoned parcel will be used for the construction and operation of medical offices for the practice of medicine. The current building on subject property will be retained and an addition built in the same style will be added to the rear of said existing building. (B) The medical practice will be limited to no more than three (3) physicians. (C) The development of the property will be in substantial compliance with : :....:...:.::.:::::>::tc~:::s1~.ow:::~~d~t~ona~>::.a >::~r~d;~~~f~»~~~> the concept plan r~ts~~l.:;~at~A3~C9!~` ::::::::::::::::::.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.::p!.::::::::.:................................................................ ~''~~:> ....tK?~?! .................. ~ . (D) The "small evergreen trees" shown as part of a 'Type 'C' Buffer" will be at least five (5)feet in height at planting. (E) The "fence" shown as part of the'Type'C' Buffer" will be constructed of wood and will be at least six (6) feet in height, and will be in place prior to the commencement of construction of the site. (F) The "small evergreen trees" will be placed in a staggered manner on each side of the "fence." (G) All trees and natural vegetation will be saved as possible. (H) Outside lighting at the building will be residential in appearance, and the lights and poles will not exceed ten (10) feet in height. (I) Parking lot lighting will not exceed five (5) feet in height. (J) Signage will be limited to fifty (50) square feet and will be substantially 2 as shown on Exhibit "A" attached. 4. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the north side of Ogden Road, SW, corner to the land of the Knights of Pythias of Roanoke, VA; thence with the north side of Ogden Road, SW, N. 74° 09' 07" W. 83.36 feet to a point; thence continuing with the north side of Ogden Road, SW, N. 63° 34' 45" W. 153.52 feet to a point; thence N. 16° 15' 50" W. 67.92 feet to a point on the east side of Colonial Avenue, SW; thence with the east side of Colonial Avenue, SW, N. 29° 43' 19" E. 174.08 feet to a point on the east side of Colonial Avenue, SW, corner to Lot 5, Ogden Hills; thence S. 51° 27' E. 294.05 feet to a point; thence S. 32° 28' W. 147.37 feet to the Place of Beginning, containing 1.231 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. Supervisor Minnix moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Johnson NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Nickens A COPY TESTE: .~ G-' -e_.~~ Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Terry Harrington, Director, Planning 8~ Zoning Arnold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections John W. Birckhead, Director, Real Estate Assessment Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney 3 ~i NORTS 7J ~ ~ W~ll~s,,..t ~ EJ~Et,ItA 8A[1 , COMMUNITY SERVICES AND DEVELOPMENT ~~ ~ ~~ PETITIONER: WILLIAM & EUGENIA BALL CASE NUMBER: 14-6/97 Planning Commission Hearing Date: June 3, 1997 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: June 24, 1997 A. REQUEST Petition of Dr. William F. Ball and Eugenia H. Ball to rezone 1.231 acres from C-1 conditional to C-1 conditional to expand an existing parking lot, located at 3390 Colonial Ave., Cave Spring Magisterial District. B. CITIZEN COMMENTS Frank Caldwell, representing the property owner, presented the request explaining that additional parking was needed on the site to accommodate the demands of the medical practice. C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION Mr. Witt asked how the people visiting the doctor would get from the new lower parking lot to the front door of the building. Mr. Caldwell said that the new lower lot will be for employees, and that steps will need to be incorporated into the design. They have not been designed at this time, but will need to be located to provide access and avoid the large 40" tree. D. PROFFERED CONDITIONS The development of the property will be in substantial compliance with the concept plan revised on 4/23/97 to show additional parking and submitted with the application for rezoning to amend proffered conditions. Proffered conditions 1-2 and 4-10, which are attached, will remain the same. E. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Mr. Witt moved to recommend approval of the petition with proffered conditions. The motion carried with the following roll call vote: AYES: Thomason, Hooker, Witt, Robinson, Ross NAYS: None ABSENT: None F. G DISSENTING PERSPECTIVE None. ATTACHMENTS: _ Concept Plan _ Vicinity Map _ Staff Report _ Other Terrance Harrington, ~cretary Roanoke County Planning Commission T-~ VIRGINIA: BEFORE THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY A 1.231 acre parcel of land, ) generally located on the North ) AMENDED side of Ogden Road at ) PROFFER 3511 Ogden Road within the ) OF Cave Spring Magisterial District, ) CONDITIONS and recorded as parcel 77.11-1-57 ) in the Roanoke County Tax Records. ) TO THE HONORABLE SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY: Being in accord with Section 15.1-491.1 et seg. of the Code of Virginia and Section 21-105E of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance, the Petitioners, William F. Ball and Eugenia H. Ball, hereby voluntarily proffer to the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia the following conditions to the rezoning of the above-referenced parcel of land: 1. The rezoned parcel will be used for the construction and operation of medical offices for the practice of medicine. The current building on subject property will be retained and an addition built in the same style will be added to the rear of said existing building. 2. The medical practice will be limited to no more than three (3) physicians. 3. The development of the property will be in substantial compliance with the concept plan revised on 4/23/97 to show additional parking and submitted with the application for rezoning to amend proffered conditions. 4. The "small evergreen trees" shown as a part of "Type ~~ 'C' Buffer" will be at least five (5) feet in height at planting. Ty 5. The "fence" shown as a part of the " Type 'C' Buffer°° will be constructed of wood and will be at least six (6) feet in height, and will be in place prior to the commencement of construction of the site. 6. The "small evergreen trees" will be placed in a staggered manner on each side of the "fence". 7. All trees and natural vegetation will be saved as possible. 8. Outside lighting at the building will be residential in appearance, and the lights and poles will not exceed ten (10) feet in height. 9. Parking lot lighting will not exceed five (5) feet in height. 10 . Signage will be limited to fifty ( 50 ) square feet and will be substantially as shown on Exhibit "A" attached. Resp `, - submitted, WILT,~IAM F. BALL `r_,;: EU IA H. BALL • T-~ County of Roanoke Department of Planning and Zoning Memorandum TO: Planning Commission FROM: David Holladay DATE: May 27, 1997 SUBJECT: Petition by William F. Ball & Eugenia H. Ball to rezone 1.231 acres from C 1 conditional to C 1 conditional, in order to amend proffered conditions. In 1989, this property was rezoned from R1 to C1 with conditions to develop a medical office. In the same petition, the Future Land Use Guide of the Comprehensive Plan was amended from Development to Transition. Ten conditions were proffered for the development of the property. These conditions limited the number of practicing physicians to three, guaranteed retention of the existing home as part of the office, directed the design of buffer yards and screening, directed conservation of existing vegetation where possible, limited signage, and limited outside lighting. The conditions also required substantial compliance with the concept plan submitted with the rezoning. The site was developed in compliance with the site plan, and except for some screening trees which have died, appears to continue to conform with all of the proffered conditions. A third physician will soon join the practice, and the owners have decided that they will need more parking spaces. The proposed parking lot expansion is not in substantial compliance with the original proffered concept plan. Thus the purpose of this petition is to amend proffered condition #3. If the rezoning is granted, proffered condition #3 would read: "The development of the property will be in substantial compliance with the concept plan revised on 4/23/97 to show additional parking and submitted with the application for rezoning to amend proffered conditions". Proffered conditions 1-2 and 4-10, which are included in your packet, will remain the same. The concept plan shows 4 new pazking spaces to be added to the existing parking lot. Anew parking area would be constructed in front of the existing lot. Seven spaces are shown in the new parking area, with a possible expansion area of 8 spaces. The total proposed number of spaces is 45, including the possible expansion area. The driveway to the new parking area would be • connected to the existing driveway. No new entrances would be created from either Ogden Road or Colonial Avenue. ~~~ Landscaping would be required in the interior of the pazking azea, as well as where the new parking area adjoins the public right of way. In addition, one new handicap parking space will be required based on the total number of pazking spaces. While the construction of the new parking area would require removal of several trees, a 40-inch red oak is shown to remain. The new parking area appears to be designed in order to preserve this significant mature tree. All of the vegetation designated °to remain" on the original concept plan is likewise designated on the revised concept plan. No new parking spaces are proposed adjacent to residential properties. Staff has noted that some of the screening trees have died and have not been replaced. This can be corrected during site plan review. The proposed pazking lot expansion conforms with the policies and guidelines of the Transition land use designation of the Roanoke County Comprehensive Plan. No negative impacts aze anticipated. Staff recommends rezoning with amended conditions. • COUNTY OF ROANOKE DEPT. OF PLANNING AND ZONING 5204 Bernard ~r.~. P.0. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 ( 540' 772-2os8 FAX (5401 772-2io8 u : yJaa(4z Fnr ctaf{ use only '1,-.an y (ZS(~~ Q_ date received:' r ceived by: ~I zs ~ 1 ~- ~ -- applica ' ~ F /8ZA date: placards issued: oy date: ~/ B ff Case Number: 1~,7 ,- Check type of application filed (check all that apply): ® REZONING ^ SPECIAL USE ^VARIANCE William F. Ball Dr & Eugenia H. Ball Phone: 387-1153 Applicant's name: . T. P. Parker & Son, Frank B. Caldwell, III, Agent Zip Code: Address: P. 0. Box 39, Salem, VA 24153 Owner's name: Dr. William F. Ball & Eugenia H. Ball Phone: 772-0555 Address: 3390 Colonial Avenue, S.W. Zip Code: Roanoke, VA 24018 Location of property: ~ Tax Map Number: 77.11-1-57 Southeast corner of intersection of Magisterial District: Cave Spring nial Avenue d C l d o o an Ogden Roa Community Planning Area: Cave Spring , Size of parcel (s): 1.231 __ acres sq.ft. Existing Zoning: B-1 Conditional Existing Land Use: Medical Offices Proposed Zoning: Revise Proffered Site Plan Fvr staff use only Proposed Land Use: Revise existing parking lot to provide Use Type: additional spaces. Does the parcel meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? YES X NO IF 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 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 t~OT BE ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. tvs v ws v Rrs v X Consultation X 8 1 /2" x 1 1" concept plan X ~ Application fee X ~~u p X >~;>;~ X Application ::<>.;- Metes and bounds descri lion .. < Proffers, if applicable N~ ''"" Water and sewer a lication X Adjoining property owners .Justification ~'•.":•.` pp /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. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -T=~ Owner's Signature: C~~ For Stall Use Only: Case 1Vumber Applicant Dr. William F. & Etiigenia H. Ball 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. The property was Zoned B-1 Conditional for Medical Offices on March 28, 1989. This zoning allowed up to three Doctors and the Conceptual Site Plan by T. P. Parker & Sori dated January 26, 1989 was proffered. Parking shown on the Conceptual Plan was adequate for the operation of the office for approximately eight years. The practice is receiving a third Doctor in July, 1997. Additional parking is needed to accommodate the residents of this community who have come to depend on this office for their medical needs. The attached revised Conceptual Plan is proffered to show requested parking additions to meet the needs of the Medical Office. se explain how the project conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the Roanoke County ~prehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan shows this property as Neighborhood Conservation. This request has no impact on the Comprehensive Plan. This request does n.ot provide for, or request, any change in zoning or request any change of use for. this property. 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 revised Conceptual Plan provides for the expansion of parking facilities only. The expansion does not impact any adjoining residential areas. No additional entrances on Odgen Road or Colonial Avenue are requested. There are no impacts on public services, facilities, water/.sewer, roads, schools, parks/recreation, or fire and rescue. Final configuration of the additional parking is sub1ect to requirements of Site Plan approval by Roanoke County. ~TPP&S ENGINEERS SURVEYORS PLANNERS ....R T. P. Parker, P.E., L.S. (1919-1989) John T. Parker, P.E., L.S. Frank B. Caldwell, III, P.E., L.S. 25 April 1997 County of Roanoke Department of Planning P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 ATTN: Mr. Terry Harrington Dear Terry: RE: Amendment of Proffers Dr . William F . Ball & Eugenia H . Bal l Colonial Avenue and Ogden Road Roanoke County . Please find enclosed an application to amend the original proffered Conceptual Plan for the Medical Office of Dr. William F. Ball at the intersection of Ogden Road and Colonial Avenue. The original rezoning provided for a proffered Concept Plan with parking thought to be adequate for the practice. The rezoning allowed up to three (3) doctors in this office. Due to the community response to Dr. Ball's practice, there has been an increase in demand for both medical services and as a result parking spaces for this property. A third doctor, which is the maximum allowed under the original rezoning, is scheduled to begin practice at this location in July. The attached Revised Concept Plan requests approval by Roanoke County to add additional parking spaces on this property to accommodate both the present demand and the demand to accommodate the additional doctor. Our concept does not request any additional entrances off of Ogden Road or Colonial Avenue. Under the original rezoning, the only concerns exhibited by the surrounding properties were those of the neighbors on the upper side of the clinic. Dr. Ball constructed a buffer along this property line and has maintained it. The addition of the parking, which we have proposed, will not in any way impact those residents who have homes adjoining this property. This doctor's office serves a significant need of the neighborhood and is consistent with the use of the properties in this immediate area. The addition of this parking does not reflect any change in the use of this parcel and will alleviate inevitable • congestion on this piece of property if parking is not expanded beyond the scope of the original Concept Plan. - T. P. Parker & Son - 816 Boulevard • Post Office Box 39 • Salem, Virginia 24153 • Telephone 703-387-1153 • FAX 703-389-5767 -..~:.== ~~F County of Roanoke Department of Planning ATTN: Mr. Terry Harrington 25 April 1997 Page 2 Thank you very much for your consideration and, please call if you have any questions regarding this request. Very truly yours, T. P. PARKER & SON ~~ `" `,. _~i2:~"C Frank B. Caldwell, III, P.E., L.S. ~' FBC/msc Enclosures cc: Dr. William F. Ball • • ,a O ~' 8 .F.. ~T ~i _ ~ 1 .. O 0.'i R8 _. , :. o ~ a ~,-~~ =,- ~ r a ~4 T -•~- ~ ~~7 ~8G?, g9~ ~ WN ~~' H :"Y 1 U '~u ;';: • .'~ ~~ U ESE E~7~~ ""* 3~. ~ U ~zN'<'W ~~ I~I ~., . ...... ~: o~ ~~M ~ a `n ~ a ~; a t h ~,~ • ~ O 3 QQQ il~ ~ ^ \ Q I ~ ~ ~ ~~ . ,; ~ ~ ~ W a o ~ W e r ry v ,~ [k ~~ ~._ _ .~ _' ~-}•-nor. ~ ~ ONV~ _- i ++,c ~~ ~. ~ > ~• ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~:,... Y titi c ~ .~~ ~~I ~ ¢ * I ,' 7 ~ y ;~ V 0 4M. ~ Y ~ a 1 ,, ~ , g~J ~ ~`' - -:j ~~ iii. O ~y r• il~~'~ . G i ti jT to ~ i ~ I~ ~J 'Q 4pp~"tiL: V .4 ~ ~ Q ~~ . ^~_ ~ ~: aft."~,r: QW ~ •~~ ~ ~~~ a N V ~ i. `I ~ ~ I 9 ~ ~_' ~ '° _ i og O ~ ~~ <7 ,.e ~~ a ~~ /J/ y~ • , , QTV ~e / _ ~ .~ ~ ,~. .~ ~ _ nary - ~ ~ .. ' .. UE .F~-w• ~ ;. AVEN. i ~ ~ . . 'I ~~CO1.ON1A1--- - VA. SEG R?E. T20.• ~ t. ~ YAfla~~ %r .. ~ L tF~: ~ • ~ .T,, r L. ~. . ~~.. • • ~_ NORTH - _ W~l1.a,,-~ ~ EJ~Et~ItA 6A11 ~ COMMUNITY SERVICES AND DEVELOPMENT ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ S 7 T-'I AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, JUNE 24, 1997 ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A 1.231-ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED AT 3390 COLONIAL AVENUE (TAX MAP NO. 77.11-1-57) IN THE CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C-1, CONDITIONAL, TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C-1, CONDITIONAL, UPON THE APPLICATION OF DR. WILLIAM F. BALL AND EUGENIA H. BALL WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on May 27, 1997, and the second reading and public hearing were held June 24, 1997; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on June 3, 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 1.231 acres, as described herein, and located at 3390 Colonial Avenue, (Tax Map Number 77.11-1-57) in the Cave Spring Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of C-l, Conditional, Office District, to the zoning classification of C- 1, Conditional, Office District, with amended proffers. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of Dr. William F. Ball and Eugenia H. Ball. 1 7 ~ 3. That the owner of the property has voluntarily proffered in writing the following amended conditions which the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby accepts: (A) The rezoned parcel will be used for the construction and operation of medical offices for the practice of medicine. The current building on subject property will be retained and an addition built in the same style will be added to the rear of said existing building. (B) The medical practice will be limited to no more than three (3) physicians. (C) The development of the property will be in substantial compliance with the concept plan revised on 4/23/97 to show additional parking and submitted with the application for rezoning to amend proffered conditions. (D) The "small evergreen trees" shown as part of a "Type 'C' Buffer" will be at least five (5)feet in height at planting. (E) The "fence" shown as part of the "Type 'C' Buffer" will be constructed of wood and will be at least six (6) feet in height, and will be in place prior to the commencement of construction of the site. (F) The "small evergreen trees" will be placed in a staggered manner on each side of the "fence." (G) All trees and natural vegetation will be saved as possible. (H) Outside lighting at the building will be residential in appearance, and the lights and poles will not exceed ten (10) feet in 2 height. height. -1= ~{ (I) Parking lot lighting will not exceed five (5) feet in (J) Signage will be limited to fifty (50) square feet and will be substantially as shown on Exhibit "A" attached. 4. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the north side of Ogden Road, SW, corner to the land of the Knights of Pythias of Roanoke, VA; thence with the north side of Ogden Road, SW, N. 74° 09' 07" W. 83.36 feet to a point; thence continuing with the north side of Ogden Road, SW, N. 63° 34' 45" W. 153.52 feet to a point; thence N. 16° 15' S0" W. 67.92 feet to a point on the east side of Colonial Avenue, SW; thence with the east side of Colonial Avenue, SW, N. 29° 43' 19" E. 174.08 feet to a point on the east side of Colonial Avenue, SW, corner to Lot 5, Ogden Hills; thence S. 51° 27' E. 294.05 feet to a point; thence S. 32° 28' W. 147.37 feet to the Place of Beginning, containing 1.231 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\WPWIN\WPDOCS\AGENDA\ZONING\BALL.REZ 3 C 0 ~~ U C_~ a ~~ ~~ ~,. ~> ~~ ~~ 0 o ~~ a ~~ ~~ / P r~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~. ~J ~a ~n \~~-, ~ ll 1~---~ ~ ~\, ~~ ~~ o C% l L" I G C~ ~ ~'~1 ~~~ ~~ -_~ ~~ L, ~~ ill -~ C~,! T 4 -~8~-y z o~ S v - 15 - T- 5 AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, JUNE 24, 1997 ORDINANCE 062497-12 TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A 2.75 ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF ROUTE 419 AND BRAMBLETON AVENUE (PART OF TAX MAP NOS. 77.13-5-37, 77.13-5-40, TAX MAP N0.77.13-5-38) IN THE CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF R-2 TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C-2 WITH CONDITIONS UPON THE APPLICATION OF CSC DEVELOPMENT, L.L.C. WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on May 27, 1997, and the second reading and public hearing were held June 24, 1997; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on June 3, 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 2.75 acres, as described herein, and located at the corner of Route 419 and Brambleton Avenue (Part of Tax Map Numbers 77.13-37, 77.13-5-40, Tax Map Number 77.13-5-38) in the Cave Spring Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of R-2, Medium Density Residential District, to the zoning classification of C-2, General Commercial District. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of CSC Development, L.L.C. 3. That the owner of the property has voluntarily proffered in writing the following conditions which the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby 1 accepts: (A) The Property which is the subject of the rezoning will be developed in substantial conformity with the revised rezoning site plan dated April 16, 1997, revised May 21, 1997, subject to any modifications required or agreed to by Roanoke County. (B) The hillside that remains after the necessary grading and excavation will be planted in some type of vegetative cover. 4. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: BEGINNING at the true point of beginning, said point being the point of intersection of the northeastern right-of-way line of Virginia Route 419 and the southeastern right-0f--way line of Brambleton Avenue; thence proceeding along the right-of-way line of Brambleton Avenue N. 23° 36' 20" E. a distance of 16.74' to a point; thence N. 13° 30' 20" E. a distance of 281.51' to a point; thence N. 85° 33' 38" W. a distance of 5.75' to a point; thence N. 18° 41' 11" E. a distance of 55.23' to a point; thence N. 05° 43' 36" E. a distance of 22.20' to a point; thence N. 14° 33' 46" E. a distance of 89.16' to a point; thence leaving the right-of-way of Brambleton Avenue and running S. 80° 26' 46" E. a distance of 168.15' to a point; thence S. 75° 06' S6" E. a distance of 39.15' to a point; thence S. 75° 06' 56" E. a distance of 62.85' to a point; thence S. 04° 40' 01" W. a distance of 130.02' to a point; thence S. 04° 40' 01" W. a distance of 147.56' to a point; thence S. 84° 19' 25" W. a distance of 171.87' to a point; thence S. 15° 13' 30" W. a distance of 116.17' to a point; thence S. 00° 00' 30" E. a distance of 111.57' to a point lying on the right-of-way of Virginia Route 419; thence running along said right-of-way N. 63° 04' 20" W. a distance of 24.62' to a point; thence N. 49° 10' 35" W. a distance of 168.35' returning to the true point of beginning, and containing 2.753 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. Supervisor Minnix moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion carried by the 2 following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Johnson NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Nickens A COPY TESTE: .~ Ce Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the 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 3 Q'E'D 3900 ~ C Q1 3 ~ ~ ~b.,, a f .w9 ~~ uO t. f 12 b ! ~ \~~ ~ _ C-2 - ~ __ ~~ ,_., ~ 1 ' I ,t 32C / r j ` I ~~ ~ ~~ ~,,, '` , 4.22 ~il Ac / ~ C~, / ~ ~ ' 1.•IAc ,6~ L / ' ~~~o .. F ~~ ~ ~ ~~ * DEPART~~IT OF PLANNI~*G AND ZONING .; .,, C&C DEVELOPr1ENT, L,L.C. . R-2 •TO ~ C-2 p/o 77.13-5=37; p/o 77.13-5-40 77,13-5-33 ' I ~"`~ i° NORTH .,o 3AY~ 6b ~ ~, Amy ~ ~ 1 ' i b ~ ~y o i / o ~'~ ~ b r • ~ 4013 ~, K 3Q b ~ ~' N ~~ • ~ O ~ S~tI 3~1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ ~ 7 s.:, I ~ 3~rf/ $ \ . ~~~ b ~~ Y ~~ 1 ~r PETITIONER: C&C DEVELOPMENT, L.L.C. CASE NUMBER: 15-6/97 Planning Commission Hearing Date: June 3, 1997 Board of Supervisors Hearing Date: June 24, 1997 A. REQUEST Petition of C&C Development, L.L.C. to rezone approximately 2.75 acres from R-2 to C-2 to construct a drugstore, located at the corner of Route 419 and Brambleton Avenue, Cave Spring Magisterial District. B. CITIZEN COMMENTS No citizens spoke. C. SUMMARY OF COMMISSION DISCUSSION Mr. Witt expressed concern about the amount of excavating and grading that will need to take place on this site and how the remaining hillside will be treated. Mr. Thomason asked if the second retail building would definitely be constructed. Petitioner's response was affirmative. The second building is essential to the viability of the overall project development. D. PROFFERED CONDITION 1. The hillside that remains after the necessary grading and excavation will be planted in some type of vegetative cover. 2. Petitioner will develop the site in substantial conformity with the revised site plan dated 5/21197, subject to any modifications required or agreed to by Roanoke County. E. COMMISSION ACTION(S) Mr. Witt moved to recommend approval of the petition with 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 ~ ~ ~ .c==-,,,~.. ~ Terrance Har-+~ngton, esr`etary`~x -~ Roanoke County Planning Commission ~-5 STAFF REPORT Case Number: 15-6/97 Applicant: C&C Development, L.L.C. Prepared by: Janet Scheid Date: June 3, 1997 PART I B. DESCRIPTION The petitioner proposes the redevelopment of an existing site with challenging site features. The applicant proposes to purchase the existing AMOCO service station in addition to 6 parcels of property located immediately northeast of the Brambleton Avenue/Electric Road (Route 419) intersection. The applicant plans to construct a Rite-Aid drugstore and second retail building on this site. The petition requests the rezoning of one parcel and portions of two other parcels from R-2 to C-2 in order to accommodate these plans. This property is in the Cave Spring Magisterial District. C. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS 1. Site plan review will be required. 2. Petitioner obtained a variance on May 21, 1997 from Sec. 30-54-3(B)3.a of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance. This section requires a 15-foot rear yard setback. 3. The Roanoke County subdivision ordinance requires that no additional lots be created without road frontage. Therefore, petitioner will need to combine two or more of the residual lots. 4. The Springwood Associates property has a proffer on it requiring that the cross-easement between that property and the adjoining American Oil Company (AMOCO) property be retained. It appears that this easement is now on VDOT right-of-way. Clarification of this situation will be required at time of site plan review. • 1 ~5 PART II A. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS 1. Lot Area - The petitioner is requesting that 2.75 acres, consisting of one parcel and portions of two other parcels, be rezoned. This property slopes steeply to the northeast. 2. Surrounding Area - The properties directly to the north, south and west are commercial. The property directly to the east is residential. 2. Location - This property is located just north of the intersection of Rt. 419 and Rt. 221. 3. Buildinc,~s/Structures - There are three houses on the property to be rezoned. Petitioner proposes to raze all of them. 4. mess - Although these parcels front on Brambleton Avenue the driveways enter from behind the Package Store and from the Springwood Associates property. B. ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 1. Use and Design - Petitioner proposes to remove the gas station, 'canopies and pumps of the AMOCO station and raze a total -of 4 houses (3 of which are on the property being rezoned and build a 11,060 square foot Rite-Aid drugstore with a prescription drug drive-thru window at the corner of Rt. 419 and Rt. 221. To the far north of this site petitioner proposes to build a 6,000 square foot retail building possibly to be leased to a video rental business. The total area to be purchased by the applicant is 5.4 acres. The total area requested to be rezoned from R-2 to C-2 is 2.75 acres. The residual acreage not being rezoned is either currently C-2 (the 2 lots at the corner of Rt. 221 and Rt. 419) or are to remain R-2. The majority of the parking on this site will be located in between the two buildings with handicap parking and a small number of spaces in the front. Substantial grading and excavation will be required on this site. The Roanoke County Department of~ Engineering has expressed concern regarding the possibility of blasting on this site and impacts that activity may have on existing surrounding structures. • 2 -t =5 Both retail buildings are oriented towards Rt. 221, as shown on the proffered concept plan. The back and side of the Rite- Aid building will be oriented towards Rt. 419. This side will include the drive-thru window, service door and the garbage dumpsters. Due to the lack of an adequate rear yard, and hence the variance request, the petitioner has entered into an easement agreement with the adjoining property owners (Springwood Associates). This easement agreement covers a temporary construction easement for the purpose of constructing the necessary retaining wall and a permanent easement to maintain the retaining wall and install and maintain appropriate landscape buffering and screening. With this easement and other appropriate landscaping the negative visual impact of the side and rear of this building, when approaching from Rt. 419, should be substantially mitigated. In a later section of this report suggestions will be made on how this could be enhanced. There are three houses on the property to be rezoned and an additional house exists on one of the lots to be purchased but not rezoned. If this rezoning request is successful all of the houses will be demolished. Access to Site - Access to this site will be from both Rt. 419 and Rt. 221. Two existing entrances on Rt. 221 will be closed. A new entrance, constructed north of the existing median on Rt. 221, will allow turning movements in both directions. One access on Rt. 419 will be closed and the access to this site from the Springwood Associates property will be closed. 3. Circulation - Circulation is adequate. 4. Traffic Count - There are approximately 55,000 vehicles per day that pass through the intersection of Rt. 419 and Rt. 221. The proposed use would only marginally increase this traffic load. 5. Public Services - This site is served by public water and sewer. 6. Amenities - In addition to the petitioner's proffered concept plan showing the majority of the parking to the sides of the two buildings the petitioner also shows a substantial amount of landscaping that is not required by the zoning ordinance. These two design features will increase the visual appeal of this site. 7. Signaae - As per the Roanoke County zoning ordinance. Petitioner is pr-.oposing a sign on Rt. 419 and one on Rt. 221. a C. CONFORMANCE WIT$ COIINTY COMPRE$ENSIVE PLAN This property is designated Core in the 1985 Comprehensive Plan. General retail and retail convenience activities are encouraged with high compatibility in Core areas. Policy C-1 advocates intensive, mixed use urban development in core areas and Policy C-2 specified serving core areas with arterial highways (Routes 419 and 221). Petitioner has proffered conformity with the revise modifications required or STAFF CONCLIISIONS PART III to develop the site in substantial d site plan dated 5/21/97, subject to any agreed to by Roanoke County. Due to concerns regarding the rear and side of the proposed Rite- Aid building oriented towards Rt. 419, staff recommends that the garbage dumpster area be landscaped, as well as stockade fenced, to provide a visual buffer from Rt. 419. Staff recommends that substantial evergreen trees in addition to evergreen shrubs be planted in this area. Care will need to be used when designing this landscaping to take into consideration sight distance and on-site traffic circulation. Staff recommends that the petitioner take great care to preserve the two large existing deciduous trees in the Rt. 221 Virginia Department of Transportation right-of-way. These two trees have achieved substantial size and appear to be in excellent health. Petitioner will be given credit for these trees in the overall landscape plan for the frontage areas. PREPARED BY: JANET SCIiEID DATE PREPARED: May 29, 1997 4 .~ ° ~ { COUNTY OF ROANOKE DEPT. OF PLANNING AND ZONING 5204 Bernard t7r. . P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 i 540' 772-2068 FAX (5401 772-2108 ~ ~ y~2& f `tT ~.. n~ y~2y~5) For staff u~e only cL. date recei ed:' zS 4~ rec ived by: ap lication fee: P EZA date: plac~~,p ~ aos ~~zY~ Case Number: Check type of application filed (check all that apply): ® REZONING ^ SPECIAL USE ^VARIANCE Applicant's name: C&C Development, L.L.C. Phone:(747)340-4104 Address: 2604 Barrett Street Zip Code: 23452 Virginia Beach, VA Owner's name: See Schedule 1 attached for names and Fhone: Address: addresses of owners Zip Code: Location of property: Tax Map Number: See Schedule 1 Corner of State Route 419 and Magisterial District: Cave Spring Brambleton Avenue Community Planning Area: Cave Spring Does the parcel meet the minimum lot area, width, and frontage requirements of the requested district? YES X NO IF N0, A VARIr,f~CE IS REQUIRED FIRST. See Schedule 1 See Does the parce( meet the minimum criteria for t~~e requested Use Type? YES NO Schedule 1 IF NO, A VARIANCE IS REQUIRED FIRST. attached If rezoning request, are conditions being proffered with this request? YES X 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 6E ACCEPTED IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS ARE MISSING OR INCOMPLETE. Res 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 kno~vled and co of the o:vner. (see attached signature page also) Owner's Signature: Counsel for C&C Develo meet L.L.C. 'T 5 STATE OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF ROANOKE BEFORE THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: IN RE: REZONING APPLICATION OF C&C DEVELOPMENT, L.L.C. ROUTE 419 AND BRAMBLETON AVENUE PROFFER OF CONDITIONS: TO THE HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FOR THE COUNTY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA Being in accordance with Sec. 15.1-491.1 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, the Petitioner, C&C Development, L.L.C., hereby voluntarily proffers to the County of Roanoke, Virginia, the following conditions to the above-referenced rezoning: 1. The Property which is the subject of the rezoning will be developed in substantial conformity with the revised rezoning site plan dated April 16, 1997, revised May 21, 1997, subject to any modifications required or agreed to by Roanoke County. 2. The hillside that remains after the necessary grading and excavation will be planted in some type of vegetative cover. C&C DEVELOPMENT, L.L.C. June 18, 1997 By: `_ G. Michael Pace, r. Gentry Locke Rakes Moore Counsel 7157\14\364417.1 _ ~ ~'=5 SCHEDULEI TO APPLICATION OF C&C DEVELOPMENT, L.L.C., FOR REZONING TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA Application is hereby made for rezoning of seven (7) parcels of land located at the corner of State Route 419 and Brambleton Avenue, pursuant to Section 30-54-3(B) of the Roanoke County Zoning Ordinance. A. APPLICANT Name: C&C Development, L.L.C. Address: 2604 Barrett Street, Virginia Beach, VA 23452 Telephone Number: (804) 340-4104 Interest in Property: Contract Purchaser B. OWNERS: Name: Martha D. Beane Address: 3857 Brambleton Avenue, SW, Roanoke, VA 24018 Telephone Number: Not Available Tax Map Number: 77.13-5-35 and 77.13-5-37 Name: William L. and Shirley H. Beane Address: 3962 Brambleton Avenue, SW, Roanoke, VA 24018 Telephone Number: (540) 774-2207 Tax Map Number: 77.13-5-38 and 77.13-5-39 Name: Heirs of Mary E. Wright Address: c/o Catherine West, 2403 Durham Street, Roanoke, VA 24012 Telephone Number: Not Available Tax Map Number: 77.13-5-40 Name: Workman Oil Company Address: c/o Amoco Food Stores, P.O. Box 566, Forest, VA 24551 Telephone Number:. Not Available Tax Map Number: 77.13-5-41 and 77.13-5-42 7157~14~350856.1 Z Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors Page -2- Applicant: C&C Development, L.L.C. C. LOCATION OF PROPERTY: 3206 Brambleton Avenue, Roanoke, VA 24018 (Corner of Route 419 and Brambleton Avenue) consisting of the following parcels: Tax Map Number 77.13-5-35 77.13-5-37 77.13-5-38 77.13-5-39 77.13-5-40 77.13-5-41 77.13-5-42 D. ADJOINING OWNERS: (see attached list of adjoining landowners). E. PERTINENT INFORMATION: 1. Area of property in square feet: 119,910.6 s.f. to proposed new subdivision line 2. Net retail floor area: 10,672 s.f. 3. Gross building footprint: 11,060 s.f. 4. Zoning classification of property: C-2 and R-2 5. Public sewer/water available: Yes 6. Served by public sewer/water: Yes 7. Legal description: See Schedule A attached hereto F. VOLUNTARY PROFFER: The owners of the properties affected by the rezoning and C&C as contract purchaser thereof, each hereby voluntarily proffer the following conditions, which are made a part of this application: 1. The Property will be developed in substantial conformity with the revised site plan dated May 21, 1997, subject to any modifications required or agreed to by Roanoke County. 715T14~35U856. I -Z ~~._.~, Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors Page -3- Applicant: C&C Development, L.L.C. 2. The hillside that remains after the necessary grading and excavation will be planted in some type of vegetative cover. G. PROPOSED ACTIVITY OR USE: C&C Development, L.L.C. ("C&C") is the preferred developer for Rite Aid of Virginia, Inc. C&C is responsible for locating appropriate land in the Roanoke Valley and elsewhere for development by Rite Aid for its new neighborhood drugstores. Rite Aid intends to establish a number of its neighborhood drugstores in the western part of Virginia, with several locations intended for the Roanoke area. Several are in operation or in the process of being constructed, including the ones on Hardy Road in Vinton, at the corner of West Main and Chestnut Street in Salem, and at the corner of Brandon and Edgewood in Roanoke City. C&C has contracted to purchase several parcels of land (collectively, the "Property") located at the corner of Route 419 and Brambleton Avenue for the development of a Rite Aid neighborhood drugstore and other retail uses. This partit.ular site is comprised of seven separate parcels owned by a number of different individuals and an entity, which are zoned C-2 and R-2. C&C has filed this application to rezone a portion of the Property currently zoned R-2 to C-2, General Commercial District, as shown on the Rezoning Plan attached hereto. The granting of the requested rezoning is a condition precedent to the closing of the purchase of the Property. C&C and Rite Aid intend to develop the Property in substantial conformity with the Rezoning Plan submitted with this application, subject to any modifications required or agreed to by Roanoke County. The development of the Property in this manner is intended to make the proposed use compatible with the existing uses of properties in the surrounding areas, in keeping with Rite Aid's philosophy of designing and operating its drugstores consistent with the character of the neighboring area. The Property at the corner of Route 419 and Brambleton Avenue has been selected for development as a Rite Aid neighborhood drugstore because of its proximity to the residential neighborhoods near and along the Route 419/Brambleton Avenue/ Route 221 corridor. The Property is particularly well suited for development as proposed by C&C. The portion of the Property located immediately at the corner of Route 419 and Brambleton Avenue is zoned C-2 and is currently being operated as an AMOCO retail petroleum facility. The remainder of the Property is zoned R-2. Immediately adjacent to the Property are other properties which are currently being put to a variety of mixed 715T14~350856.1 _Z T~ Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors Page -4- Applicant: C&C Development, L.L.C. commercial uses, including Springwood Park adjoining to the east, fast food and other restaurants, banks, office complexes, Cave Spring Corner Shopping Center, and a post office, among others, as well as single and multi-family residences. The Comprehensive Plan designates this area for land use as Core, and the proposed use of the Property is in conformity with such designation. The Core designation delineates suburban centers that provide a focus of activity and identity to surrounding communities and that compliment the central business districts in downtown Roanoke, Salem and Vinton. The proposed use is consistent with the permissible land use types, principles and Policies C-1 through C-7 for urban core development as set forth in the Comprehensive Plan. At present, C&C intends to develop the remainder of the site as shown on the Rezoning Plan in a manner consistent with the commercial uses permitted in a C-2 district and the principles and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. It is contemplated that the space will be leased to a video rental business such as Moovies, or other similar retail establishment. Parking for the combined retail uses has been designed in such a manner as site conditions will permit and for the convenience of the public. Additionally, the design for the project will eliminate all but two of the existing entrances onto the adjoining public streets, which will promote the safety and welfare of vehicular and pedestrian traffic in the area. Because (a) the area in which the Property is located is already heavily developed with a variety of commercial uses similar to the proposed use, and therefore will not cause an adverse change in the surrounding area, (b) the proposed use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the general purposes of Section 30-54-1, et. seq. of the zoning code, and (c) the development of the Property as shown on the Rezoning Plan would be a positive physical improvement to the corner of Route 419 and Brambleton Avenue. the existing R-2 zoning designation for that portion of the Property to be rezoned is unreasonable. These factors clearly support the reasonableness of a C-2 zoning designation for use of the property as a Rite Aid neighborhood drugstore and related retail space. C&C, Rite Aid and we believe that a neighborhood drugstore on the Property would provide a substantial benefit to the residents and other property owners in the area. A Rite Aid neighborhood drugstore is consistent with and is a less intensive commercial use than others permitted in the C-2 zoning classification. In addition, the Rezoning Plan includes substantial landscaping and buffering that meets or exceeds the County's requirements in order to minimize or eliminate any adverse impact the proposed 7157\ 14350856.1 _ ._ ""-.-,~ Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors Page -5- Applicant: C&C Development, L.L.C. development may have on the adjoining properties. Significantly, C&C and Rite Aid have also entered into a written agreement with Springwood Associates with respect to issues related to the common boundary between the Property and the Springwood Associates property. Accordingly, Springwood Associates, which is the property owner most affected by the proposed development, is not opposed to the project. C&C has filed a separate variance request with the Roanoke County Board of Zoning Appeals with respect to one aspect of the Rezoning Plan. The necessity of the variance request arose due to the County Administrator's determination that the orientation of the proposed Rite Aid building as shown on the Rezoning Plan requires that the side nearest the Springwood Associates property be considered a "rear yard" pursuant to Sections 30- 28(c) and 30-54-3(B)(4) of the Roanoke County zoning code. A 15-foot rear yard setback is required for properties located in a C-2 district. There is a 0-foot setback requirement for side yards in the same district. As designed, the rear of the proposed Rite Aid building is on the side closest to Route 419, where the dumps:er, drive through window and service doors are located. The interior layout of the storage also confirms that the rear of the building is located nearest Route 419. Accordingly, we believe that the applicable zoning ordinances could reasonably be interpreted so as to make the side of the building closest to Springwood Associates a side yard having no setback requirement. If so, we question whether a variance is required at all, and that the determination as to the applicability of the rear-yard setback requirement in this instance be reconsidered. In any event, we believe that sufficient justification exists for the granting of a variance because of the ordinary topography and the irregular shape of the Property. The rear portion of the Property consists of a steep hill of dirt and rock that limits the developable portion of the site. Development of the Property as proposed will require significant excavation into the hill to the proposed new subdivision line as shown on the Rezoning Plan. In order to construct the improvements to fit on the developable portion of the Property, and to provide for the requisite parking facilities, the rear of the Rite Aid store is required to be located closer than 15 feet from the property line of Springwood Associates, even after excavation. Accordingly, the strict application of the 15-foot rear yard setback requirement will impose an unnecessary and undue hardship on C&C and Rite Aid by requiring significantly more excavation than should reasonably be required, especially in view of the minor impact on the adjoining property. The Board of Zoning Appeals initially considered the variance application at its meeting on April 16, which was continued until its next regularly scheduled meeting on May 21. Accordingly, the variance application will be acted upon prior to the public hearing on June 3 before the Planning Commission at which this rezoning application will first be considered. As you may know, Rite Aid consistently has a strong positive economic impact in the communities where it does business. Rite Aid will invest more than $1.5 million per store 715TI4'350856.1 - .i ~' Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors Page -6- Applicant: C&C Development, L.L.C. to meet its strict quality control guidelines for design and construction of its neighborhood drugstores. This money will be spent on local architects and contractors during a 16-week construction process. Each new store will also create 15-2~ full-time pharmacy, stock and cashier jobs. Rite Aid does all of its hiring on-site, encouraging local residents to apply. Additionally, Rite Aid drugstores generate several hundred thousand dollars in local corporate, sales, payroll and personal income taxes annually. Rite Aid's new drugstore concept brings needed services closer to where its customers live by building neighborhood drugstores near residential areas. The store's enhanced design provides for greater convenience for customers, such as wider aisles and easy access to checkout stations. Its design also includes a private pharmacy waiting area, a full line of brand name cosmetics and fragrances, aone-hour photo processing center and a Rite Express station which offers fax, photocopy, package and postal services. Convenience to customers is the focal point of the design and development of the property. Rite Aid's priority is serving the unique needs of each community, and C~?: C and Rite Aid will work diligently to provide a store which meets the needs of the surrounding area. Despite the additional services offered, Rite Aid pharmacies are moderately-sized, typical 11 square feet or so, and are regarded by its customers as their neighborhood drugstores. Since the founding of the first Rite Aid pharmacy in 1962, Rite Aid has established a universal reputation as a corporate good neighbor. Rite :did operates over 2.700 drugstores in 21 states, and is steadily growing. At each of these locations, its pharmacists, store manager and associates have a strong commitment to the community. They participate in outreach programs, health fairs, educational programs and diagnostic screenings, and counsel seniors on their special needs. In addition, Rite Aid makes donations to help high-valued social and philanthropic efforts in the community. In view of the foregoing, we ask that you act favorably upon the request, and recommend approval of the proposed rezoning in order to permit the development of the property as a Rite Aid neighborhood drugstore. Respectfully submitted, C&C DE ELOPMENT, .L.C. By~ f Counsel 71 ST~14~.i50856.1 Z • n p p N vj 400~n ~O I }2=C7 ~"7 .-UUd ~~K ~m~ •-p - . xawam ~ UZp T-~ V 1~ k~ v~ m ~~ V~ m ~ Q ~~Q .~' ~Q ~ } 0 ~ ~ 1 I Z I~ m V V . n a o ~~ ale I o~- ~O ^4CiQOi ! ~ O ~~~?~^ ~ hH Ua /I I~ W Z cD kC~00 ! no.pn - X03 ~~°o^ ~~6 O~ J%~~ o~ J~~~ ,..T..,.. _ ~ .~J gym., N V j ~~. ~`Yl~ % j \O=a~o ~ j ~ yq % ~cR~1 1j h~p^ % w ~ ~m ~~Vy~e O ~ 100 ~ ' ~l02~r~0 I ~/ n~aa I ti~~m -y~pY I ~~ / xaU ~ ~ J 8 / ~ Zp I ' a rn ~ /~~/' I Q .~~ -~~ ~ a '/• ( 0 ~~' I 3 '~' ~ i ~' x ' ~ ~ ~~Nh I m ~ ~ ee jj h t~ R ~ 9i1 ^~.~.yCaQ i Qo i i !~ ^Re~~q~ ~ ~y~, ~ ;4 y~0~'~y~.,: I ~ W ~33~ ~~ I 1'; n 4ib~ ~ I^V ~ ~ ~Wm '~ ~Qh1 '? 4ie~ ,~p2W"~ 4j ~mCi V r^' h~e~ti i ~WmtiV ^~ .ale vJ I ~. ~uOyV ^~m ae nW~vS `n J nW.i~.hH W I \O~WQO ~O~e~of0 Q~QmO '~i 2h~ ~~Wh~ ~ h 0 ~ ^V Q a \~ ~ h ~ Q Q m m • %' / ~ ~. % % T.'\. % % .r % % % % % ,r % I % / % ~ % / .r % r / % ~ ~ 1 ~ / / .r % % ~ ~ I / % ,r ~ ~ j ~ i _ 1 ~ , xa= -<- ~ m p n~~,n 1 o n } < I }~-ti nn~.<a ~~ p^a~aG ~ i O H N K~•- <at''R; 1 '°° i• i• • ..... _- en/nv cesn ~oN aaoas s~uo^ ~ ion awuo,nu3. spot ~ / ~. d"asp ~ ~~ im ~~ ~ NOIIVi10 IilOl t11V 1118 ~ - '~'d 'p~suo4oW pus ~(a~6us~ ~~ ~ .,,, ;>"„ - "~'' 'NVId ~MN0288 ! ---- - k~~~°t ~-a,c€ ` h„ ,:~'~:. 1'. -___- - _ ~ ... ~ _. ~~~ i~ ~. a ,_ wW,,, ;;i _..__ ,,,; , I ~,~, 3 t f ,r a'T`rx ,3 \ ~I• eS, ~~ 9 ! .,~ _ _ - ~ e i ^ - _ -- r ~6 1 I ~ 1 I '' i r l I I. I - I ~' _ ~~ ~ ~ - _ ~ -~ ' ~4 co VVV ~ -+ II, ~ I - Y- F ~ y ~ ~ / e I ~ ~ ~ 1 I` I 1 ~ i 1 I. F 1 " ~ `' 1 - - F. 4 ~~ ~/ '' ~ p ~= S ° ~~~ 34 1 I I I ~~I ~ Iz ~a Fd ~ 22, :, 2:~ ,~ I , ~. 5 ~I. ~ I~ ; ~, p ^ ~ j i ~ F ~.~, 6 ~ ,s ~ ~ a ~ ¢ ~I ~ ~ ~ ~ \ _ _ _ _ . ~, I ti -~ - ~~~ i. ~Ye ~ W O h H s f ~ ~ a ~ a 5„ ~ ~ d e \ •~ h a ~ ~ I / ~` ~~ ~.I NORTH _ _ - -_~ -- ....._ .. ._ ~ to 3~/ ~ N ~ • ~, it/ al'! ai •000 ~*y Q ' a b z /'~ - - _ _ _ ~ Co/ ` ~•~, • ~ / w !fir ~por ~ v ~ n Z! ~' M Z d r.cr y `C. 42 b ~ ~ •O~~ ~, g 3916 ____,~ ~ ` ~ ap ~ • 4d ~-. 1 ~ ~ 41 u i ots ~ . _.. ~ 1~ ~ asie ~' ~ Jam= '.'~ / ~~s »°° c m tO4=` ~ i~g~ ~~4~0 ~ 3~ 38~ ri 3 ~ ' / +ta 7 u JIOI ?f ~ U J'*~ ~ ~ e i 24 ~ - •T 37 i~o.as ~ ~'~ b \ 7111 ` Ouse ~ .~ .9d AL to) // ~ 21 S4 ~ ~,d'' ~+o. ~ + inn ~+.ro I.t3 AelCl f. t • ~ 12 ~+~ s i 1 ,~ L4O dt JIJr ~.. ~ I t r, R ~.r ~7 +.: ~j ~ I 47 ' L91 Ae R- ~; • f ~.n ~ ` ~ • I ~! stos -43.1 !~ a / y l98 ~ ~.n r~ ,,, r '~ '~ .~:e eo ~ Q~.y~ IO2• ~ ~ I ~ 4.22 AC ~ ~. ~ C~ ~ / r a~ ~ 1 > / / r 2 ~ ' to 1.~IAe s.g d ~~ west ~ya~ M" ,7!!O ~~ _ ~~ IO =, N J7W R~ t653 + _ et, ~ •- G- ~ • C&C DEVELOP~~1ENT, L, L. C, ' * DEPART~`~N'I' OF PLANNIA'G R- 2 ~ TO C- 2 p-~ ZONING '~ p/o 77013-5=37; p/o 77.13-5-40 .s .,, '~ 77,13-5-33 • 62 / ' ~ ~"` AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER, TUESDAY, JUNE 24, 1997 ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF A 2.75-ACRE TRACT OF REAL ESTATE LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF ROUTE 419 AND BRAMBLETON AVENUE (PART OF TAX MAP NOS. 77.13-5-37, 77.13-5-40, TAX MAP NO. 77.13-5-38) IN THE CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FROM THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF R-2 TO THE ZONING CLASSIFICATION OF C-2 WITH CONDITIONS UPON THE APPLICATION OF C&C DEVELOPMENT, L.L.C. WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on May 27, 1997, and the second reading and public hearing were held June 24, 1997; and, WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on this matter on June 3, 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 2.75 acres, as described herein, and located at the corner of Route 419 and Brambleton Avenue (Part of Tax Map Numbers 77.13- 5-37, 77.13-5-40, Tax Map Number 77.13-5-38) in the Cave Spring Magisterial District, is hereby changed from the zoning classification of R-2, Medium Density Residential District, to the zoning classification of C-2, General Commercial District. 2. That this action is taken upon the application of C&C 1 Development, L.L.C. 3. That the owner of the property has voluntarily proffered in writing the following conditions which the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby accepts: (A) The Property which is the subject of the rezoning will be developed in substantial conformity with the revised rezoning site plan dated April 16, 1997, revised May 21, 1997, subject to any modifications required or agreed to by Roanoke County. (B) The hillside that remains after the necessary grading and excavation will be planted in some type of vegetative cover. 4. That said real estate is more fully described as follows: BEGINNING at the true point of beginning, said point being the point of intersection of the northeastern right-of-way line of Virginia Route 419 and the southeastern right-of-way line of Brambleton Avenue; thence proceeding along the right-of-way line of Brambleton Avenue N. 23° 36' 20" E. a distance of 16.74' to a point; thence N. 13° 30' 20" E. a distance of 281.51' to a point; thence N. 85° 33' 38" W. a distance of 5.75' to a point; thence N. 18° 41' 11" E. a distance of 55.23' to a point; thence N. 05° 43' 36" E. a distance of 22.20' to a point; thence N. 14° 33' 46" E. a distance of 89.16' to a point; thence leaving the right-of-way of Brambleton Avenue and running S. 80° 26' 46" E. a distance of 168.15' to a point; thence S. 75° 06' 56" E. a distance of 39.15' to a point; thence S. 75° 06' 56" E. a distance of 62.85' to a point; thence S. 04° 40' O1" W. a distance of 130.02' to a point; thence S. 04° 40' O1" W. a distance of 147.56' to a point; thence S. 84° 19' 25" W. a distance of 171.87' to a point; thence S. 15° 13' 30" W. a distance of 116.17' to a point; thence S. 00° 00' 30" E. a distance of 111.57' to a point lying on the right-of-way of Virginia Route 419; thence running along said right-of-way N. 63° 04' 20" W. a distance of 24.62' to a point; thence N. 49° 10' 35" W. a distance of 168.35' returning to the true point of beginning, and containing 2.753 acres. 5. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty 2 . ~~~ (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\WPWIN\WPDOCS\AGENDA\ZONING\CCDEV.REZ 3 7e AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JUNE 24, 1997 ORDINANCE 062497-13 AMENDING THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE BY AMENDING SECTION 21-73, GENERAL PREREQUISITES TO GRANT OF DMSION 3. EXEMPTIONS FOR ELDERLY AND DISABLED PERSONS OF CHAPTER 21. TAXATION TO INCREASE THE ALLOWED TOTAL COMBINED NET WORTH WHEREAS, Section 21-73 of the Roanoke County Code establishes a restriction on the total combined net worth allowed for the exemption from or deferral of real estate taxes for certain elderly or permanently and totally disabled persons; and WHEREAS, the 1997 General Assembly for the Commonwealth of Virginia amended Section 58.1 X211 of the 1950 Code of Virginia by increasing this total combined net worth from $75,000 to $100,000; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on June 10, 1997; and the second reading and public hearing was held on June 24, 1997. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That Section 21-73. General prerequisites to grant of Division 3. Exemption for elderly and disabled persons of Chapter 21. Taxation be amended to read and provide as follows: Sec. 21-73. General prerequisites to grant. Exemptions provided for in this division shall be granted only if the following conditions are met: **«~ (2) That the owner and his spouse did not have a total combined net worth, including all equitable interests, exceeding f er 31 0 ecemb f~ree~? o~ ~~c~ ~u~~~~ ~11~'~.:1~~~~~,~~~}~ as of D the immediately preceding calendar year. The amount of net worth specified herein shall not include the value of the sole dwelling house and up to one acre of land. 2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect with the 1998 tax year. Supervisor Johnson moved to adopt the ordinance. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Eddy, Minnix, Harrison, Johnson NAYS: None ABSENT: Supervisor Nickens A COPY TESTE: ~ _~4 . ~ Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors cc: File Paul M. Mahoney, County Attomey Circuit Court Roy B. Willett, Judge Clifford R. Weckstein, Judge Diane McQ. Strickland, Judge Richard C. Pattisall, Judge Robert P. Doherty, Jr., Judge Steven A. McGraw, Clerk Juvenile Domestic Relations District Court Joseph M. Clarke, II, Judge Philip Trompeter, Judge John B. Ferguson, Judge Joseph P. Bounds, Judge Ruth P. Bates, Clerk Intake Counsellor General District Court John L. Apostolou, Judge George W. Hams, Judge William Broadhurst, Judge Vincent Lilley, Judge Julian H. Raney, Judge Theresa A. Childress, Clerk Skip Burkart, Commonwealth Attomey Paul M. Mahoney, County Attomey Magistrates Sherri Krantz/Betty Peny Main Library Ray Lavinder, Police Chief Richard Burch, Chief of Fire 8~ Rescue Roanoke Law Library, 315 Church Avenue, S.W., Rke 24016 Roanoke County Law Library, Singleton Osterhoudt Roanoke County Code Book Gerald S. Holt, Sheriff John M. Chambliss, Jr., Assistant County Administrator Don C. Myers, Assistant County Administrator Diane D. Hyatt, Director, Finance O. Amold Covey, Director, Engineering & Inspections Terrance L. Harrington, Director, Planning & Zoning Gary Robertson, Director, Utility Michael Lazzuri, Court Services William J. Rand, III, Director, General Services Thomas S. Haislip, Director, Parks & Recreation Elaine Carver, Director, Procurement John W. Birckhead, Director, Real Estate Assessment Alfred C. Anderson, Treasurer R. Wayne Compton, Commissioner of Revenue r ACTION NO. ITEM NO. f -- AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER MEETING DATE: June 24, 1997 AGENDA ITEM: ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE BY AMENDING SECTION 21-73, GENERAL PREREQUISITES TO GRANT OF DIVISION 3. EXEMPTIONS FOR ELDERLY AND DISABLED PERSONS OF CHAPTER 21. TAXATION TO INCREASE THE ALLOWED TOTAL COMBINED NET WORTH COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR'S COMMENTS: dt~c~~ _,/~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This ordinance increases the total combined net worth criteria for the exemption from property taxes for certain elderly and disabled persons. BACKGROUND: The 1997 session of the General Assembly adopted legislation increasing the "net combined financial worth" criteria to be eligible for an exemption or deferral from local real estate taxation from $75,000 to $100,000. Chapter 704 of the 1997 Acts of Assembly. SUMMARY OF INFORMATION: At its meeting of May 27, 1997 the Board directed the County Attorney to prepare an ordinance implementing the provisions of this recent General Assembly legislation. This ordinance was last amended on August 27, 1991, by increasing the "total combined income" to $30,000. 1 1 '~ FISCAL IMPACTS: Unknown at this time. Currently $400,000 is budgeted (FY 97- 98) for this program. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board consider the adoption of this ordinance at second reading. Respectfully submitted, Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney Action Approved ( ) Denied ( ) Received ( ) Referred to Motion by G: \ ATTORNEY\ PMM\ ELDTAXEX. RPT Vote No Yes Abs Eddy Harrison Johnson Minnix Nickens 2 r ~~ AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JUNE 24, 1997 ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE BY AMENDING SECTION 21-73, GENERAL PREREQUISITES TO GRANT OF DIVISION 3. EXEMPTIONS FOR ELDERLY AND DISABLED PERSONS OF CHAPTER 21. TAXATION TO INCREASE THE ALLOWED TOTAL COMBINED NET WORTH WHEREAS, Section 21-73 of the Roanoke County Code establishes a restriction on the total combined net worth allowed for the exemption from or deferral of real estate taxes for certain elderly or permanently and totally disabled persons; and WHEREAS, the 1997 General Assembly for the Commonwealth of Virginia amended Section 58.1-3211 of the 1950 Code of Virginia by increasing this total combined net worth from $75,000 to $100,000; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on June 10, 1997; and the second reading and public hearing was held on June 24, 1997. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That Section 21-73. General prerequisites to grant of Division 3. Exemption for elderly and disabled persons of Chapter 21. Taxation be amended to read and provide as follows: Sec. 21-73. General prerequisites to grant. Exemptions provided for in this division shall be granted only if the following conditions are met: (2) That the owner and his spouse did not have a total combined ~~V1 net worth, including all equitable interests, exceeding a~c~o=c~3~~z~c~~~iva~sxra -ccvrl "' ; Y'' ~ , ^ ^ ^ ` one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) as of December 31 of the immediately preceding calendar year. The amount of net worth specified herein shall not include the value of the sole dwelling house and up to one acre of land. 2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect with the 1998 tax year. C:\OFFICE\ WPWIN\ WPDOCS\ AGENDA\CODE\21-73.ORD O~ (tOANp,I.~ ~ A z c> ~ 2 ~ a~ 1838 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE (540) 772-2004 C~~ix~#g .off ~a~x~~~e P.O. BOX 29800 5204 BERNARD DRIVE ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 FAX (540) 772-2193 June 25, 1997 Mr. Michael L. Walthall 417 Goodwin Avenue Salem, VA 24153 Dear My~a~aii: (540) 772-2005 The members of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors have asked me to express their sincere appreciation for your previous service on the Parks & Recreation Advisory Board. Allow me to personally thank you for the time you served on this Board. Citizens responsive to the needs of their community and willing to give of themselves and their time are indeed all too scarce. Roanoke County is fortunate indeed to have benefited from your unselfish contribution to our community. As a small token of appreciation, we enclose a Certificate of Appreciation for your service to Roanoke County. Sincerely, Bob L. Johnson, Chairman Roanoke County Board of Supervisors bjh Enclosure cc: Pete Haislip, Director, Parks & Recreation BOARD OF SUPERVISORS BOB L. JOHNSON, CHAIRMAN HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS, VICE-CHAIRMAN VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT LEE B. EDDY WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FENTON F. "SPIKE" HARRISON, JR. CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT H. ODELL "FUZZY" MINNIX CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT ® Recyded Paper OF ROANp,I.~ G ti ' ; r. 9 2 ~ ~ 2 v' a~ 1838 COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ELMER C. HODGE (540) 772-2004 C~o~ix~#g ~~' ~o~xt~~e P.O. BOX 29800 5204 BERNARD DRIVE ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 FAX (540) 772-2193 June 25, 1997 Mr. Tim Hoelze P. O. Box 20669 Roanoke, VA 24018 ~ c~ Dear ze: (540) 772-2005 The members of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors have asked me to express their sincere appreciation for your previous service on the Parks & Recreation Advisory Board. Allow me to personally thank you for the time you served on this Board. Citizens responsive to the needs of their community and willing to give of themselves and their time are indeed all too scarce. Roanoke County is fortunate indeed to have benefited from your unselfish contribution to our community. As a small token of appreciation, we enclose a Certificate of Appreciation for your service to Roanoke County. Sincerely, Bob L. Johnson, Chairman Roanoke County Board of Supervisors bjh Enclosure cc: Pete Haislip, Director, Parks & Recreation BOARD OF SUPERVISORS BOB L. JOHNSON, CHAIRMAN HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT HARRY C. NICKENS, VICE-CHAIRMAN VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT LEE B. EDDY WINDSOR HILLS MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT FENTON F. "SPIKE" HARRISON, JR. CATAWBA MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT H. ODELL "FUZZY" MINNIX CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT ® Recycled Paper O~ FtOANp,1.~ ~ . ~ ~ z y~ raas P.O. BOX 29800 5204 BERNARD DRIVE MARY H. ALLEN, CMC ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 CLERK TO THE BOARD (703) 772-2005 FAX (703) 772-2193 June 25, 1997 Mr. Carlton Wright 6939 Woodhaven Road Roanoke, VA 24019 Dear Mr. Wright: BRENDA J. HOLTON DEPUTY CLERK The members of the Board of Supervisors wish to express their sincere appreciation for your previous service to the Board of Zoning Appeals. Citizens so responsive to the needs of their community and willing to give of themselves and their time are indeed all too scarce. am pleased to inform you that, at their meeting held on Tuesday, June 24, 1997, the Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to reappoint you to the Board of Zoning Appeals representing the Hollins District for another five year term. Your term will begin on June 30, 19976, and expires June 30, 2002. State law provides that any person elected, re-elected, or appointed to any public body be furnished a copy of the Freedom of Information Act. Your copy is enclosed. We are also sending you a copy of the Conflict of Interest Act. State law requires that you take an oath of office before the Clerk of the Roanoke County Circuit Court. This oath must be administered prior to your participation on this Board. Please telephone Steven A. McGraw, at 387-6205, to arrange to have this oath administered, and Mr. McGraw has asked that you bring this letter with you. On behalf of the Supervisors and the citizens of Roanoke County, please accept our sincere thanks and appreciation for your willingness to accept this appointment. Sincerely, Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors bjh Enclosures cc: Tim Beard, Secretary, BZA Steven A. McGraw, Clerk, Circ~l~,. ~ ROANp~~ ti~ y z c> ~ z °v a 1838 MARY H. ALLEN, CMC CLERK TO THE BOARD P.O. BOX 29800 5204 BERNARD DRIVE ROANOKE. VIRGINIA 24018-0798 (703) 772-2005 FAX (703) 772-2193 June 25, 1997 Mr. Larry W. Degen 3639 Martinell Avenue Roanoke, VA 24018 Dear Mr. Degen: BRENDA J. HOLTON DEPUTY CLERK I am pleased to inform you that, at their meeting held on Tuesday, June 24, 1997, the Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to reappoint you as an alternate member of the Building Code Board of Adjustments to complete the unexpired four year term of Buford Butts. Mr. Butts was appointed June 10, 1997 to serve as a regular member. This term will begin as soon as you have taken the oath of office and expires on July 28, 1998. State law provides that any person elected, re-elected, or appointed to any public body be furnished a copy of the Freedom of Information Act. Your copy is enclosed. We are also sending you a copy of the Conflict of Interest Act. State law requires that you take an oath of office before the Clerk of the Roanoke County Circuit Court. This oath must be administered rp for to your participation on this Board. Please telephone Steven A. McGraw, at 387-6205, to arrange to have this oath administered, and Mr. McGraw has asked that you bring this letter with you. On behalf of the Supervisors and the citizens of Roanoke County, please accept our sincere thanks and appreciation for your willingness to accept this appointment. Sincerely, 7' ~,/. Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors bjh Enclosures cc: Joel Baker, Building Commissioner Steven A. McGraw, Clerk, Circuit Court C~~~xx~#~ a~ ~.~~x~~~e ~ Ae~yaed P~ O~ ROANp,I.~ ~;, z c> z v a rasa 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 June 25, 1997 Mr. Vince Reynolds 4229 Toddsbury Drive Vinton, Va 24179 Dear Mr. Reynolds: BRENDA J. HOL70N DEPUTY CLERK The members of the Board of Supervisors wish to express their sincere appreciation for your previous service as a member of the Clean Valley Council. Citizens so responsive to the needs of their community and willing to give of themselves and their time are indeed all too scarce. This will inform you that, at their meeting held on Tuesday, June 24, 1997, the Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to re-appoint you as a member of the Clean Valley Council for another two year term. Your new term will begin June 30, 1997, and expires June 30, 1999. State law provides that any person elected, re-elected, appointed, or re-appointed to any public body be furnished a copy of the Freedom of Information Act. Your copy is enclosed. We are also sending you a copy of the Conflicts of Interest Act. On behalf of the Supervisors and the citizens of Roanoke County, please accept our sincere thanks and appreciation for your willingness to accept this appointment. Sincerely, ~• Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors bjh Enclosure cc: Ms. Ann Masters, Executive Director Clean Valley Council P. O. Box 523 Roanoke, VA 24003 C~.oixx~~~ .~~ ~.o~~~.a~e Re~.yaea Paper O~ POANp~.~ ti p Z G7 ~ 2 ov a~ 1838 MARY H. ALLEN, CMC CLERK TO THE BOARD P.O. BOX 29800 5204 BERNARD DRIVE ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-0798 1703) 772-2005 FAX (703) 772-2193 June 25, 1997 Mr. Richard H. Cox 5714 Capito Street, NW Roanoke, Va 24019 Dear Mr. Cox: BRENDA J. HOLTON DEPUTY CLERK The members of the Board of Supervisors wish to express their sincere appreciation for your previous service to the Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission. Citizens so responsive to the needs of their community and willing to give of themselves and their time are indeed all too scarce. I am pleased to inform you that, at their meeting held on Tuesday, June 24, 1997, the Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to reappoint you as a member of the Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission for another three year term representing the Hollins, Magisterial District. Your new term will begin on June 30, 1997, and expires on June 30, 2000. State law provides that any person elected, re-elected, or appointed to any public body be furnished a copy of the Freedom of Information Act. Your copy is enclosed. We are also sending you a copy of the Conflict of Interest Act. On behalf of the Supervisors and the citizens of Roanoke County, please accept our sincere thanks and appreciation for your willingness to accept this appointment. Sincerely, ~~ Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors bjh _ Enclosure cc: Pete Haislip, Director, Parks & Recreation Regded Paper OF ROANp~.~ ~ ~~ A 2 ,~ ~ 2 ov a~ real 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 June 25, 1997 Mr. Lonzo Kennedy 541 Ingal Boulevard Salem, Va 24153 Dear Mr. Kennedy: BRENDA J. HOLTON DEPUTY CLERK I am pleased to inform you that, at their meeting held on Tuesday, June 24, 1997, the Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to appoint you as a member of the Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission for a three year term representing the Catawba Magisterial District. Your new term will begin on June 30, 1997, and expires on June 30, 2000. State law provides that any person elected, re-elected, or appointed to any public body be furnished a copy of the Freedom of Information Act. Your copy is enclosed. We are also sending you a copy of the Conflict of Interest Act. On behalf of the Supervisors and the citizens of Roanoke County, please accept our sincere thanks and appreciation for your willingness to accept this appointment. Sincerely, Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors bjh Enclosure cc: Pete Haislip, Director, Parks & Recreation ®Recyded Paper OF ROANp~.~ ~ .w ~ ~ ~ ~ z J _ a~ 7 38 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 June 25, 1997 Mr. Wayne Gauldin 6032 Newport Road Catawba, VA 24070. Dear Mr. Gauldin: BRENDA J. HOLTON DEPUTY CLERK The members of the Board of Supervisors wish to express their sincere appreciation for your previous service to the Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission. Citizens so responsive to the needs of their community and willing to give of themselves and their time are indeed all too scarce. am pleased to inform you that, at their meeting held on Tuesday, June 24, 1997, the Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to reappoint you as a member of the Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission for another three year term representing the Catawba Magisterial District. Your new term will begin on June 30, 1997, and expires on June 30, 2000. State law provides that any person elected, re-elected, or appointed to any public body be furnished a copy of the Freedom of Information Act. Your copy is enclosed. We are also sending you a copy of the Conflict of Interest Act. On behalf of the Supervisors and the citizens of Roanoke County, please accept our sincere thanks and appreciation for your willingness to accept this appointment. Sincerely, ~/ C~,,~ Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors bjh Enclosure cc: Pete Haislip, Director, Parks & Recreation (~~~xx~#~ ~~ ~..~~~.~C~e ® Recyded Paper 0~ p~OANp,`.~ ~ "< A o 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 June 25, 1997 Mr. David A. Thompson 8160 Waterfall Drive Roanoke, VA 24019 Dear Mr. Thompson: BRENDA J. HOLTON DEPUTY CLERK I am pleased to inform you that, at their meeting held on Tuesday, June 24, 1997, the Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to appoint you as a member of the Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission representing the Hollins Magisterial District to complete the unexpired thre~;~ear term of Tim Hoelzle who recently resigned. This term will expire on June 30, 1998. State law provides that any person elected, re-elected, or appointed to any public body be furnished a copy of the Freedom of Information Act. Your copy is enclosed. We are also sending you a copy of the Conflict of Interest Act. On behalf of the Supervisors and the citizens of Roanoke County, please accept our sincere thanks and appreciation for your willingness to accept this appointment. SincQrely, Mary H. Allen, CMC Clerk to the Board of Supervisors bjh Enclosure cc: Pete Haislip, Director, Parks & Recreation ® Reayded Paper June 26, 1997 Father Joseph Lehman Our Lady of Nazareth 2505 Electric Road, S W Roanoke, Va 24018 Dear Father Lehman: On behalf of the Board of Supervisors, I would like to thank you for offering the invocation at our meeting on Tuesday, June 24, 1997. We believe it is most important to ask for divine guidance at these meetings and the Board is very grateful for your contribution. Thank you again for sharing your time and your words with us. With kindest regards, Bob L. Johnson, Chairman Roanoke County Board of Supervisors o~ POANp,~~ I DA ti,w`; c~ o ~ Industrial Development Authority v a 1838 of Roanoke County, Virginia Memo To: Chairman and Members, Board of Supervisors From: Tim Gubala, Secretary/Treasurer ~M Subject: Residency issue regarding Guy Byrd Date: June 16, 1997 Billy H. Branch, Chairman (540)774-1208 Timothy W. Gubala, Secretary-Treasurer (5401 772-2069 Edward A. Natt. Counsel (5401 774-1197 ~ ~ . t- . , , ~_~- L - Z. ,. Authority member Guy Byrd (Cave Spring District) has established a residency in the City of Roanoke with the express purpose of seeking public office as a candidate for the Commissioner of the Revenue in the November 1997 election. Billy Branch asked Ed Natt, Counsel for the Authority, to give his opinion regarding Guy Byrd. Ed researched the Code of Virginia (Section 15.1-1377) which states; "Every director shall, at the time of his appointment and thereafter, reside in the municipality or municipalities with respect to which the authority is organized; however, any person residing within any municipality adjoining the boundaries of the municipality or municipalities with respect to which the authority is organized shall be deemed a resident of such municipality for the purposes of this chapter. When a director ceases to be a resident of the municipality or any adjoining municipality with respect to which the authority upon which he serves is organized, such director's office shall be vacant and a new director may be appointed for the remainder of the term so vacated." Ed indicated that Guy Byrd has not violated any provision of the Code by his actions; however since he is seeking public office it may be appropriate that he resign as a director of the Industrial Development Authority. I talked with Guy Byrd today and advised him that Ed and Billy asked that I advise the Board about his residency and candidacy for office in the City of Roanoke. Please advise me regarding this matter. Thank you. c Elmer Hodge Paul Mahoney Bill Branch P.O. Box 20068, 1919 Electric Road. Roanoke, VA 24018 (540) 774-1197 FAX (540) 774-0961 ~~ P ~~~ ____, . __ ._...~F. _.,. ~ ~~~~ , , r a~~ _~ C _r ~ ~ ~ 7;~ ~ 3 ~ ,~ ,_ ~~l ~ + i ~i s {~ ~t 1.~h.s - --°°°..uue_.d .. __ . .. 2(;17 ,pane Dr~,ve Roanoke, VAS 24019 June 3, 1997 Mr. Bob Johnson Board of Supervisors 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, VA 24018 Dear Bob: Due to increased business and family obligations, I regretfully resign from the Roanoke County Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission, effective July 1, 1997. Very truly yours, L~- Timothy Hoelzle TH:mgs Copy to: Mr. Pete Haislip Printed by Brenda Holton / ADM01 6/26/97 9:26am --------------------------------------- From: Janet Scheid / ADMO1 To: Brenda Holton / ADMO1 Subject: Conditions for Weaver --------------------------------------- ===NOTE====------=====6/26/97==9:26am== The following conditions to the Special Use Permit apply: 1. Private kennel shall be limited to 5 dogs over the age of 6 months. 2. The Special Use Permit shall be in effect for 5 years beginning June 25, 1997 and ending June 25, 2002. 3. The Special Use Permit is for Coy and Deanna Weaver only and is not transferable to any other property owner. Page: 1 • LEGAL NOTICE The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, June 24, 1997, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of Joe R. Blackstock to rezone 35.69 acres from R-3 & I-1 to R-1 to construct single family residences, located between Merriman Road and intersection of Starkey Road and Buck Mountain Road, Cave Spring Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Planning and Zoning, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: June 6, 1997 ~ Mary H. Allen, Clerk Please publish in the Roanoke Times Tuesday, June 10, 1997 Tuesday, June 17, 1997 Direct the bill for publication to: Joe R. Blackstock 5148 Canter Dr Roanoke, VA 24018 (540) 774-4507 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: ROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT P.O. BOX 29800, ROANOKE, VA 24018 LEGAL NOTICE The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, June 24, 1997, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of Coy L. And Deanna H. Weaver for a Special Use Permit to allow a private kennel, located at 1905 Mayfield Drive, Vinton Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Planning and Zoning, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: June 6, 1997 ...9~ - Q Mary H. Allen, Clerk Please publish in the Roanoke Times Tuesday, June 10, 1997 Tuesday, June 17, 1997 Direct the bill for publication to: Coy & Deanna Weaver 1905 Mayfield Dr, SE Roanoke, VA 24014 (540) 427-5152 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: ROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT P.O. BOX 29800, ROANOKE, VA 24018 • LEGAL NOTICE The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, June 24, 1997, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of Dr. William F. Ball and Eugenia H. Ball to rezone 1.231 acres from C-1 conditional to C-1 conditional to expand an existing parking lot, located at 3390 Colonial Ave., Cave Spring Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Planning and Zoning, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: June 6, 1997 .3~ • C' Mary H. Allen, Clerk Please publish in the Roanoke Times Tuesday, June 10, 1997 Tuesday, June 17, 1997 Direct the bill for publication to: William & Eugenia Ball c/o T. P. Parker & Son PO Box 39 Salem, VA 24153 (540) 387-1153 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: ROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT P.O. BOX 29800, ROANOKE, VA 24018 • • LEGAL NOTICE The Roanoke County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing at 7 p.m. on Tuesday, June 24, 1997, in the Board Meeting Room of the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA, on the petition of C&C Development, L.L.C. to rezone approximately 2.75 acres from R-2 to C-2 to construct a drugstore, located at the corner of Route 419 and Brambleton Avenue, Cave Spring Magisterial District. A copy of this application is available for inspection in the Department of Planning and Zoning, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, VA. Dated: June 6, 1997 Mary H. Allen, Clerk Please publish in the Roanoke Times Tuesday, June 10, 1997 Tuesday, June 17, 1997 Direct the bill for publication to: C&C Development, L.L.C. c/o Gentry Locke Rakes & Moore PO Box 40013 Roanoke, VA 24038-0013 (540) 983-9328 SEND ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO: ROANOKE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT P.O. BOX 29800, ROANOKE, VA 24018 • TERRY STEER-Roanoke Tirnes 06l06r97 ~,, Acct: 7722065Roan Ph: 7 ~ 2-?065 PO Box 29800 '0'(540) 981-3415, Phone 981-3416 ail June 6.1997 08'24AM 1212 The Roanoke Times Name: Roanoke County Bd. of Superv?.s Class Rate: Disp Rate: CreditStatus: Roanoke VA 24018 Paytype BL Rate LE Le~als Source F~ Class 10 Legals Start 061 1019? Issues 2 Rate Iss Words....... Lines........ Depth....... Columns..,... Graphic..... St Words. ^ Boxed Ad Copy Line PUBLIC NOTICE Plea SortStrin~ ^ Manual Sort TearSheets Reply Request Rep: 31 ^ TFN 2 Stop 06;1719? 1 ~ Price 40 Discount 3.49 FreeDay 0 Net 0 St Tax 0 FedTax Total Payment App Cr. Balance 128.00 0.00 0 128.00 0.00 0.00 128.00 0.00 U. UO 0.00 ProductCode PO # ^ Receipt ^ Movable ^ OnHold ^ Kill Ad Comments Reason for Discount PUBLIC NOTICE Please be advised that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, at its meeting on June 24, 1997, at the Roanoke County Adminis - tration Center, 5204 Bernard Driva, Roanoke, Virginia, a[ the evening session beginning at 7:00 p.m, will bold a public hearing on the following: ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE 6Y AMENDING SECTION 21-73, GENERAL PREREQUISITES TO GRANT OF DIVISION 3. EXEMP - TION5FOR ELDERLY AN D p5 - ABLED PERSONS OF CHAPTER 21. TAXATION TO INCREASE THE ALLOWED TOTAL COM - BINED NEi WORTH All members of the public inter- ested in the matters set forth above may appear and be heard at the time and place aforesaid. A copy of the full text of the ordinances is on file and is available for public inspection in the office of the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors whose office is located a[ 5104 Ber- nard Drive, Roanoke, Virginia. Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney Roanoke County, Virginia (575615) Adid: 575615 Editions DC, n u From the TelePort of Date: Friday, June 6, 1997 TERRY STEER-P.oanoke Times Number of Pages: 2 To: Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, ATTN: Mary H. Allen, Clerk Fax Number: 772-2193 Memo: PUBLIC NOTICE Please be advised that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, at its meeting on June 24, 1997, at the Roanoke County Administration Center, 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, Virginia, at the evening session beginning at 7:00 p.m. will hold a public hearing on the following: ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE BY AMENDING SECTION 21-73, GENERAL PREREQUISITES TO GRANT OF DIVISION 3. EXEMPTIONS FOR ELDERLY AND DISABLED PERSONS OF CHAPTER 21. TAXATION TO INCREASE THE ALLOWED TOTAL COMBINED NET WORTH All members of the public interested in the matters set forth above may appear and be heard at the time and place aforesaid. A copy of the full text of the ordinances is on file and is available for public inspection in the office of the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, whose office is located at 5204 Bernard Drive, Roanoke, Virginia. ,~ ~~~ Paul M. Mahoney County Attorney Roanoke County, Virgini Publish on the following dates: June 10, 1997 June 17, 1997 Send invoice to: Board of Supervisors P. O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018-0798 ATTENTION: MRS. MARY ALLEN AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, HELD AT THE ROANOKE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER ON TUESDAY, JUNE 10, 1997 ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE BY AMENDING SECTION 21-73, ('FNERAL PREREOUISITES TO GRANT OF DIVISION 3. EXEMPTIONS FOR ELDERLY AND DISABLED PERSONS OF CHAPTER 21. TAXATION TO INCREASE THE ALLOWED TOTAL COMBINED NET WORTH WHEREAS, Section 21-73 of the Roanoke County Code establishes a restriction on the total combined net worth allowed for the exemption from or deferral of real estate taxes for certain elderly or permanently and totally disabled persons; and WHEREAS, the 1997 General Assembly for the Commonwealth of Virginia amended Section 58.1-3211 of the 1950 Code of Virginia by increasing this total combined net worth from $75,000 to $100,00; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on June 10, 1997; and the second reading and public hearing was held on June 24, 1997. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That Section 21-73. General prerequisites to grant of Division 3. Exemption for elderly and disabled persons of Chapter 21. Taxation be amended to read and provide as follows: Sec. 21-73. General prerequisites to grant. Exemptions provided for in this division shall be granted only if the following conditions are met: * * * ~ (2) That the owner and his spouse did not have a total combined net worth, including all equitable interests, N exceeding :. hzndre;cl thousand dollars .~$z„OO,OClQj; as of December 31 of the immediately preceding calendar year. The amount of net worth specified herein shall not include the value of the sole dwelling house and up to one acre of land. 2. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect with the 1998 tax year. C:\OFFICE\ WP WIN\ WPDOCS\ AGENDA\CODE\21-73.ORD June 17, 1997 (9:30am) MA ECH said to pull Gerald Holt's item about master deputy from agenda. He thinks that it can be done administratively such as reclass. He said to research what we approved the last time on deputies. Brenda Printed by Mary Allen / ADMO1 6/16/97 1:35pm From: Merry McKissick / SHFO1 To: Mary Allen / ADMO1 Subject: fwd: Consent Agenda Items --------------------------------------- ===NOTE====------=====6/16/97=12:47pm== Mary, would you please put the following three items on the consent agenda for our dept. for the June 24th board meeting: 1. Emergency State Compensatin Board funding for two deputy positions for jail overcrowding 2. Inmate Education Development Program 3. Acceptance of Master Deputy Program as provided by the State Compensation Board Thanks! Fwd=by:=Mary=Allen=/___________________ Fwd to: Merry McKissick / SHFO1 ....................................... Got them...can I get the reports by Wednesday? Page: 1 Printed by Mary Allen / ADMO1 6/12/97 1:50pm From: Diane Hyatt / ADMOConfirm receipt To: Brenda Holton / ADMO1, Mary Allen / ADMO1 Subject: fwd: Audit Committee --------------------------------------- ===NOTE====------=====6/12/97==1:20pm== There will be an audit committee meeting on Tues, June 24, 1997 at 2:15 in the Board conference room. Please make the necessary notation on the Board agenda and reserve the Board conference room for this meeting. Thanks. Fwd=by:=Mary=Allen=/___________________ Fwd to: Diane Hyatt / ADMO1 ....................................... Will do... --------------------------------------- Page: 1 s LAW OFFICES OSTERHOl1DT, FERGl1SON, NATT, AHERON £~ AGEE A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION CHARLES H. OSTERH OUDT 1919 ELECTRIC ROAD. SUITE I TELEPHONE MICHAEL S. FERGUSON 540-774-1197 p. O. BOX 2DOG8 EDWARD A. NATT MICHAEL J. AHERON ROANOKE. VIRGINIA FAX NO. G. STEVEN AGEE 540-774-0961 MARK D. KIOD 2401 S~OOO7 KRISTEN KONRAD JOHNSTONE June 17, 1997 Ms. Mary Allen Clerk, Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 Re: Abandonment of road-Castle Rock Railroad Mining Company Dear Ms. Allen: Attached is the revised Petition in the above matter to include the correct tax numbers. Please include this rather than the original Petition. I have not sent revised copies of the exhibits. Very truly yours, Edward A. Natt EAN/laf Enclosure cc: Ms. Sue Bane Roanoke County Attorney's Office Mr . Frank Radford LAW OFFICES OSTERHOl1DT, FERGl1SON, NATT, AHERON £~ AGEE A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION "/~ CHARLES H. OSTERHOUDT 1919 ELECTRIC ROAD, SUITE I ~ w _ uII`n~ /~ TELEPHONE MICHAEL 5. FERGUSON G.. ~i 540-774-1197 EDWARD A. NATT P. O. BOX 200G8 /'~ MICHAEL J. AHERON ROANOKE. VIRGINIA (,,,~.a/e y FAX NO. G. STEVEN AGEE 540-774-0961 MARK D. KIDD 2401 5,0007 KRISTEN KONRAD JOHNSTONE June 4, 1997 ~_ - The Honorable Chairman and Members of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County P. 0. Box 29800 Roanoke, VA 24018 Re: Abandonment of road-Castle Rock Railroad Mining Company Gentlemen: Enclosed please find a Petition on behalf of my client, Radford & Company, to abandon a portion of the Castle Rock Mining Road crossing the property which my client is purchasing. This Petition is filed pursuant to Section 33.1-164 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended. I would appreciate the Board's consideration of this matter at its June 24, 1997 meeting. My client's request is that the Board adopt the Resolution required by Section 33.1-164 and then authorize the conveyance of the property to my client pursuant to Section 33.1-165 of the Code of Virginia. The provisions of Section 33.1-165 of the Code require that notice be given by the governing body to the owners of the property adjacent to the road and who may use the road of the intention to convey the property. The Contract purchaser of said property, hereby acknowledges the provisions of Section 33.1-165 of the Code and hereby accepts the notice of the intention of the Board to convey said property in order to comply with the provisions of Section 33.1-165 of the Code of Virginia. We will be glad to appear at the Board of Supervisors meeting if necessary or to provide any additional information required. Very truly yours, ~~DC~~~ Edward A. Natt EAN/laf Enclosure cc: Paul M. Mahoney, Esq. Mr. Frank Radford EXHIBIT "2" :3ay .,. ;9r '9: ]:... .:a1@~ .:^~ ~.^- ..-3 __~~~ •i. "-- --e-1 3:... ~~'^.@S .~:. •~~. ':'~a~~i, .a3 •:ia; ~:. ~_J:.... n~3 i::_ ~i3 il. ~~..:@..^.~5, -•_9 J~n9; r+n' fish JC10.:31'dr, ~1.i.ZiA~9t~...tOr 1..:.n.c.t..°.. '.~~ • ~~-~~.^. ~•aGt3. ::c:C033Ct.; ~ArtZ^1C:9 Le@ •.:z ~ ~.~, Jy .:r..~1~3h S:lO~Nai`.@r. rl ~tOr ::8~ in ~ aC t; ~C3_'1 •~ • J ~aJid3,'J ;: A-lon .i. Stapl•cs, :lttorney in ?act; Abra.^.. ?. ~:aplas, 'cy ~?1@n :i. Stapi@::, ~ttor.^.@y in 'act; i:llen C. ~.latts, •iillia~ .facts snd :.liaatat.'~ o. ••atts, t•.:e la.Zd ovrr:ers along sai, recd dona;.irt, t::e r! cht-of-ws-r, and :raivin~ any claim °or da.^sa~es to t:io rc3idue c: Weir tracts, ~e raccrded by '~'~e Cler)t of t^is 3oard in the Deed JOOk3 in th@ Clorl.'s Cffica ~f ~:•:e ~ircu_t ::ourt of :ioanoke CourtB. ~lnd it is further C..°,I]1::Z:.J that t::a peticicnors, or tha parties for whose :;erefit t'as road is estacl,saod, 30 ~a~r All costs incident to th@se proceedin;,s, tnd tact ;.i.~ 9n;.c~ toed be con:.'.r~.:ted .a nd -:air wined at t:^.u ex^ense of the carti@3 rOr :r.;03@ 08nBf it i. t ~ 1 03 ~:1J1~3:18c1, ~1nt11 ..=°°.Ch ti,-.18 13 t:'.i 3 3oard sha11 recorsmend `.hat two 3rIIIl0 DA tai:an into .,.:C Sacc :~ a ,; S~ ~t°;: O1' .~ ~3t9 -:.t'::Ta~S. :+nd it is :`..u~thor Oi'.Jl::i~.J t::ac 3 C3I'ti__ed cony of ,.._.3 ordor, to ret~:@r ~~ ~` --1 . 't vrith th@ duplicar~ :ieport of :i@'.•re:•s, co :tainirr a,l -j:h~i.ts t::o:'~~to attcc @r, oe :wailed to th@ Sistrict iar-in@e:~ ~: ~.a S>: `o '_-`.::ray :?e~ ._ .,....,..,, o: ':ir~Lzia, having- sup@rvision of .~aintoi:ar:~:o 'nd cont. :lion cf :zip ::a;; s _.. ?cario::e Cot:.zty. `1'he fore~-oinc Order :ras adopted on ~oticn o, Suparrisor ::asc^ y. :co;; a.Zd seconded by supervisor ::. a. `i's; foe and on a : ecordec. vota, :hd Supervisors voted as follovrs, to-wit: ayes: :~ason L. Cook, ii. A. Tayloe, :i. :i. Slaskey and :•:ir:or H. i`~ffar. :lays : iione. U~~~ s~ . l/ 'Z/ This day tye ~ieivers '_Zerelo,'ora ~ppcir.lac ~: ,...~ :o~^ . :c __ . ...., :ollowirg roads, and t::o location ..:~a:ao., :o-:ri.,. Castle Sock :anir.~ iioad _roca Saia-:-~3ve .;T?^ _. .~03i.1, •.. _. _ ? __. ~1 %3^ :Mountain Hoad, Houle 221. Care _ _ _ ~ _.. ~. _ _ .. .•:onday and ::anon :boa.. _ _ o::, S s ~ -..... _- .. . _ - , _ ~ _' ~ _ _.. . Cave ~pri.:c ~' si;rict ~. .,ha_-e'.:^on, on notion, aul;; ~~conced sn~ cy rind, said vie.:ers ^ppor is are 3r. DI`G Vpd, and it is fu.^ther ordered t~:at said roadg, as described brie_*ly aove, be, anti t py are, ilprpiry 93t3i)liSilBd as public rca;3, to bocc::e a cart of t!:p State ~ 5econcicsy Syste:l of :~i~h.~..ys of :~oanoke County; and, it is further .rdered t:~at a certified copy of this resolution be :`arnisned to the District ~r.~-inoer of the St to :~i-h~ray i~ppart:aer~ haviz~ the supervision and :anintennnce of State ~pconda.^y •toads in ~oanokc Cowzty. Adopted by t::a follotirin~- rocor~ied vote: A~ es : Tuner v i Fors :i . A. ''a~ lop, .. '.; , S tar::p;: , :.;iror R. i{©ff ar 3nd : mason L. Coot. ::ays: :;ono. and tj':p ':OUnt~j' 3oolckaeopr On ~oti~n, duly .:econcipd, it .s ordered t.':at *.,a '±reas~;re= .,. :~oazoke County,~,~,„. i. be aut::oriopd to transfer by Journal ontry, '.^.p su.'7 of 'iirty-ii•~~ ::u:.dreu and ~;r*),~ men Dollars (,3510.00), as set an in t:e bud._-et for the jpa^ ~.?r8-i949, as n `~~ +•..~r_ Library :Wand, fro:a ti:e Gpnaral County ?anti tc t::e Cour+ty o; .-;or.,~:o::p Library ?and ~~`r on „ulyl, ~P48. .:, ~.~... CL~ . adopted by the .^ollotiri:u- recorded vo tp Ayes: Supervisors a. .., Starkey, ;.Iason .. Cook, i. A. Ta;-loe a.^.c :.anor 3. Kefer. tJays: ;tone. v dp^ort of audit as of Decor:dor Cl, ..:47 0. . aa. , , ^v_e;~ :tae, o^c,t3: ~,. _ . y,,.~ ~. ~i'. :r .a(:::, .ul~~ .~ '. nit:.. ~~~.~ - .. ~U. _ ~. - '_ ~ ._ _ ._. _ ~. - .. •• ,..." ,~~. ..,~ 'J:', EXHIBIT ..3.. ,,,;,.pad .~~~ „le follo'~+i.,;~ rycor~'e~.t veto: .~~-os: Su~ervi~orr ."ason L. ~oott, .:. A. a:,-loa, .:. .7. Sta:•;ce;; and :,anon .t. ::ai ;'ar. . :.:o Jail Coruaitteo, il9retofore appointed 'oy tais Board, r,;:_s day subrsitted nreli;~inar•,* pl^ns dral:n ~y i'aul 3. i.iattilelvs, County %nc-ineer, for reosirs to the County Jail; Joon consideration thereof, on :::caun, ::ay ~ocor,dod, t!:e aa{ =. County ,.nrineer is auttloricod to ~reparo stsndai•d ~la:lc a^3 snecificatiolls aad to asst f-~r bids for ttlo re;:odolin~ of tiro :l,~i~i fail. Copy of t'as order to bo Corti, iJCi to : aul 3.:.:a;;t::e•:rs, cunt;; 3n-lneer. Adopted ~y til~~ :ollowinv, recor~ted vela: r~;JAS. Supervise:9 .•. .i. .ila:.:J", .:i::C: • iu%l.ar, :•iaII011 L. I.COii and - . A. .ayloo. :.a ;-s : .:one. ' ~ '.~'s::.r:.15, _. ~. ?errill, :~es~~o;:t i:.. _.:ao~, ~o •~: ,.°ont o~ _-...;~,-s, ilas advised t`_as 3oard, under date oi' ih><~us ~.; ...~, , ..... ~ -:. .,a ' :~ ..... _e o 9~t~:iiy3Z, a3 n.^.rt Of w19 $ta%9 SOCOri~:ar• :i~3~8:'1 Of .~ .:•JafII, 3 CAI ..1:. .0~.~., :-~lo:m ss "t'!:e Castle itoc:t '~;ini;u; :load" ~rorl Salen-Ca.•e .i~~rtn- road, tos~o llc3 to ;e:~t ::ou.•Itain .3oad, i.outo C~1, C. 5. District, a:ld :ILS requested t`:is 3oard to :•esciad its or3or of Ju:.o 21, 1~J•=~, ~~sta. 1i3::i:1~- sa .d road ^s a ; : rt of tae 5ocondnry Systerl of 'iichways; and '.;^.:r'.i~:.~S, it is the sense of t':is 3oard t}Iat said road s:lo.:ld ~e esla~~iishod as a ?art n1' the i'ri:~ary Sys ~o:•: c:f .iouaoi:c Co~tanl~ , ~ ~i :^de a :3art _ :'r?:1ar'7 i3oato i.l^, ^or t:e .~.ti•~c::o ~1' a--:-1Lna~i::`. ~~•. ..:d _^n~_ro,.;, :•.u•ve at r'O ?I.03an` Tnlor~ect_on u: __? :~ ~~1, ..~ .o. l!:a '•sr ~.:c: _. :~rc•~e:....:~. ~_ ~__ . .o'.. ~ ;or :;.._C:1 ~ ,r•rJ _.. _a: "e ...... , .: , 2 ._ - . ; s i : Soar.- :e Couzt~•, ...... ^.::o•:e ;~:,c: _~e : ro~~, :r::~„il :~s :er ato_ore es :a'~1'she3 as a dart o: ,. :o :;aco.^.dar,~ O~sto:^ .n :?oanoke Cou.-l~, ; ^nd r, __ _.._ ..... .L..,O..,Ya:.D :...., :10 _.Ct'_O JA ta::@.^, 'S'_JO^.`.t:@^AC::33t J~ t.^.A Depart^~ent Or :.~'h.r;. ~ t0 re:iCi .lG tale Ord@r .:0 :'9 tOlOr@ @.^.tArod On uuri@ 21, 1'?4~, at t'.:e present tire; and _:,:. ,i : L:i:`r~Z -',._,riuJL'L'~, t:lat Paul ~. .:at,.:lo::s, Cou.:~;; :. _,ineer, b@, and i:e !~ereu~ is, requested co .rrito ~aA Stato ::ac:wf Co:.;~i~s{oner setting °orth t e s:'.vantr:g@3 .'r'.~Cil '::ill ac^r::e ~~: reaso:-l ta@ Llcl,aion o. ti:o a~oresaid roar in ti:@ Pri::~ar;; ~;•ste::l o. roars in .~ocnoi:e .ou^.t;~; CODs@S Oi t•:i$ Order t0 }JA c0:'t~";Od t0 ~~.:9 Jtate _":1~7w.1 `~O^^i33iOner and to Paul 3. '•;atthe~rs, Count;* ~n~ine@^. UAOn tti18 r@CC^:'@n~atiOn Ji ..• - ~:OU:':1, ~.::lair':.a::, .3oan0:.@ JOUnty ,IAliare Coarc:, on :notion, :iul~ socended, _„ i.; order@d t^at tae salaries of the ;olhwin~ a^ploye@s o: t'e ao :rol:o Court; ~el:~_•3 ~o~:.r~, ~e_::cr@~c~_ ., S~:re::.ntor.c?ent :ro:a •jL', _::u.JC to ,:~,JOO.CO Case ::orker " :~O,lOC.CJ to O,C50.J0 Case ~~rorker " 1, ~~0. ~0 to ~, 010. JO Case ~.~orker " 1, ='•U. JC to _, 960. JO Cillld '.:ol+arA ~Ic,rwer ~ror.. 3, IOO.JO to 2,'J~0.00 CL :Ld '.re? fare ,~ori;er " i, X00. JO to 1, 90.00 3ook'.~es~er trop 1,7r0.J0 to 1,00.00 S tenogi•aoh@r " 1, 70.00 to 1,'~0. )0 Sterol rapiler • I, 500.00 to 1,050.00 retry-active to Sep~_~s5er 1st, 1:; C. ,a tt@r addre:,seZ to ':~3rbert ~: lce, C::a;.:^•:an, ?oard of su~e::~3ors ordflr9d ~lec; :doateu '.~^ t:~@ _ c_lo:• __ _ ... ., _ . 'n~' •ro ~~ A;;e~. ,;u~erv_sors ~'. ,". J _ ._ -_^^_ .. .:..=: ~~, ~.aso : ~ . ., .. _._ ~.._ .~. =a;;loa. :. ~ ~ : :;one. C^"? M a.. ~~ ~n~~=~ ' ~, ,~~ P.c~c.r E.,i_ ? ! ~ 'r IN RE: ABANDONMENT OF A SECTION OF AN UNOPENED ROAD IN CAVE SPRING MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT OF ROANOKE COUNTY WHICH ROAD WAS TO BE KNOWN AS THE CASTLE ROCK MINING ROAD CROSSING TAX MAP PARCEL 76.16-2, 76.16-3, 76.16-4 AND 76.16-5. PETITION T0: THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY, VIRGINIA Comes now your Petitioner, Radford & Company, a Virginia corporation, and respectfully requests the Board of Supervisors to abandon a portion of the unopened road in the Cave Spring Magisterial District known as the Castle Rock Mining Road pursuant to Section 33.1-164 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended and to authorize the conveyance of the same to the Petitioner herein pursuant to Section 33.1-165 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, and in support thereof would state as follows: 1. That your Petitioner is the Contract purchaser of the above described parcel of land over which said unopened road passes. The Contract Purchaser will be acquiring fee simple title to the property on both sides of said unopened road. 2. That by instrument dated July 9, 1948, Mary W. Youmans and others donated a right-of-way for a road to be known as Castle Rock Mining Road; said instrument being attached as Exhibit "1". 3. That a portion of said road crosses the property to be acquired by your Petitioner as shown on the plat attached hereto. 4. That it was the original desire of the parties donating ©STERHOUDT, FERGUSON, NATT, AHERON & AGEE ATTORNEYS-AT-LAW RDANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-1699 the right-of-way that the same be made a part of the Virginia Secondary Road System. 5. That pursuant thereto, the Board of Supervisors did, in June of 1948, request the Commonwealth of Virginia to make said road a part of the State Secondary System of Highways. A copy of said request is of record in Supervisors Order Book 11, Page 214, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "2". 6. That the Department of Highways advised the Board that it would not accept said road into the State Secondary System; said action being shown from the records in the Supervisors Order Book 11, Page 256, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit ~~ 3 ~~ 7. That no further action has been taken in regard to said road and therefore said road is not a part of the Virginia Secondary Systems and may be abandoned pursuant to the provisions of Article 12, Chapter 1, Title 33.1 of the Code of Virginia. 8. That all of the properties which could be served by said road are presently served by the present highway Route 419 which was constructed after 1948. WHEREFORE, your Petitioner requests that the Board of Supervisors adopt a Resolution pursuant to Section 33.1-164 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, declaring that portion of the Cave Spring Mining Road crossing Tax Parcels 76.16-2, 76.16-3, 76.16-4 and 76.16-5 to be abandoned and further that pursuant to Section 33.1-165 of the Code of Virginia 1950, as amended, to certify that said road is no longer necessary for public use and OSTERHGUDT, FERGUSON, NATT, AHERON & AGEE ATTORNEYS-AT-LAW ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-1699 to authorize the conveyance cf the same to the Petitioner herein. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, RADFORD & COMPANY (~ BY ~ ~ ~ I 1 a.~_. Of Counsel Edward A. Natt, Esquire Osterhoudt, Ferguson, Natt, Aheron & Agee, P.C. 1919 Electric Road, SW Roanoke, VA 24018-1699 (540) 774-1197 Z:\WP50\LISA\RADFORD.PET:laf06/13/97 OSTERHOLIOT. FERGUSGN, NATT. AHERGN & AGEE ATTORNEYS-AT-LAW ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24018-1699 1:44 m:l; l~M•4^ ,,.,.,,,,,,. . !! : 3 ~!= e ~~~~ . ,.i, ~''~~` ~ '~y°~ J~ '~"' ;K. ~f EXHIBIT ~~1~~ Printed by Mary Allen / ADM01 6/16/97 2:55pm --------------------------------------- From: Mary Allen / ADMO1 To: Subject: ABANDONMENT OF ROAD --------------------------------------- ===NOTE________________________________ Did you talk to Paul about a request from Ed Natt to abandon a portion of Castle Rock Mining Road crossing? Ed said that you were aware of it and were going to do board report and reso for the June 24 meeting. I thought these had to be advertised. Sue Patterson-Bane / ADMO1 Page: 1 Arnold: Attached is the request to abandon a road from Ed Natt that I talked with you about on the phone. I called and left a mesage for him to contact you as far as what has to be done. If you don't hear from him, you might want to call him, because I'm NOT putting this on the June 24 agenda. Mary Allen 6/16/97 O~ ~OANp~~ ~ p ~ ~ z ~ 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 June 17, 1997 Father Joseph Lehman Our Lady of Nazareth 2505 Electric Road, SW Roanoke, Va 24018 Dear Father Lehman: BRENDA J. HOLTON DEPUTY CLERK Thank you for agreeing to present the invocation at the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Meeting on Tuesday, June 24, 1997 at 3:00 p.m. Chairman Johnson will call the meeting to order at 3 p.m., which will be followed by the invocation and pledge of allegiance. This is an open meeting so please feel free to stay or leave as your schedule permits. For your information, the meeting is televised Five on the Cable Television Government Access Channel (Cox Channel 3). The meeting will be shown again Thursday night, June 26th, starting at 7 p.m. The Roanoke County Administration Center is located at 5204 Bernard Drive directly behind Shoney's off Route 419. The Board Meeting room is on the first floor opposite the elevators, and visitors' parking is in front of the building. I appreciate very much your willingness to be with us on June 24th. If you have any questions or concerns, please call me at 772-2005. Sincerely, ~. Brenda J. Holton, Deputy Clerk Roanoke County Board of Supervisors ® Recycled paper Mr. Hodge: 9,~ . ~ ~~ ~ S David Simmons with the Roanoke Moose Lodge has asked for time on the June 24 agenda to present a check for $2500 to the Roanoke County Police Department to purchase a laptop computer for their criminaUtraffic investigations. Spike Harrison said to just call here and we would put them on. Just wanted to let you know. Mary Allen 6/17/97 June 16, 1997 Message to Bob Johnson From Brenda Holton RE: Richard Cox ~rJ ~k, Bch ~.. i G".~" Mr. Cox called and asked me to tell you that his appointment to the Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission, representing the Hollins District, expires June 30, 1997. He would like very much to be reappointed. He left his work number in case you want to talk to him, 362-9717. or~. ~~lr'P! ~a:17 ~~ ~o /"q,. G~..d ~`'~' ~~~ ~ ~ ~,. Cod/. ~~zy Printed by Mary Allen / ADM01 6/18/97 1:57pm From: Diane Hyatt / ADMOConfirm receipt To: Mary Allen / ADMO1 Subject: fwd: Board Report --------------------------------------- ===NOTE====------=====6/18/97==1:38pm== Vincent will be bringing you one last board report this afternoon. It should go on the consent agenda and the title is: Appropriation of State and Federal Funds for Reimbursement of Expenditures Related to Hurricane Fran. Fwd=by:=Mary=Allen=/___________________ Fwd to: Diane Hyatt / ADMO1 ....................................... Thanks - I'll add to agenda Page: 1 ' ~ ~ ~ ~ C ~~ ~ r, ~,G ~ ~,~ ~~ ~, s Ems, n ~ ~ (~f ~~..;t ~rf MEMO - 6/9/97 , ~ , , ' ~ ~. ~ ~_,,y +- ~ -,~< ~. ~ Y ~~ ~ ~ <.. i To: Supervisors From: Lee B . Eddy ~"_, ~ ' ~ ~~ ~`~~ = ~ Subject: Proposed Air Quality Standards l~ Last week I received a call from a representative of the Air Quality Standards Coalition asking if Roanoke County would fax the White House stating our opposition to EPA' proposed revision to the national air quality standards dealing with levels of ozone and particulate matter, As a follow-up she faxed to me the attached information which I had not previously seen. I am not sure why I was chosen as a Roanoke County person to contact. Also, the board and staff discussed this issue some months ago and concluded that the Roanoke area was not in danger of being affected by the proposed new strict standards. However, I remain somewhat nervous about this issue and, even if we are not in immediate danger of being affected, I recommend that we prepare a message for President Clinton's attention opposing the new standards. Tf you have time, please read the attached information, and during the board meeting on 6/10/97 I will ask your concurrence to request the staff to draft an appropriate statement for our formal approval on 6/24/97. I understand the decision time on this issue by the national administration will be early July. attach: 9-page message from the AQSC copy: Elmer Hodge (with copy of attachment} ~./~ l~l ~ a a~, -~ ,.r., r c ~ ~ -~-- '~ `~ ~- 2-- ~ ?- .~ S -~- c.l~ 04 G ~ j ~~ ~ _J -~-. 6 ~ `r fi ~ ~l ~ ` s~ ~~' AI R Q U ALI T Y S T ,A N D A R D S CO A Li T I C1 N P A K e O V~ R S H E E P DATE: ~ ,.,t, f y t'ROM: ~ 5 " Mobilization ~i"iice dumber of pagas ii7ciuciing cover sheet: Message: FAX: ~' (~ ' 7TeL„-,~.~q PHONE: 8Q0 - 257 - 1292 ~'AX: 800 ~ 64 ~ - 2255 Thank you for eeviewing this important information. As you know there is aniy a brief window of opportunity Por elected officials i;o express their concern about the increased bur~Ieu dnd aciditionai costs that will be imposed upon your community should these new EPA regulations take effect as proposed. We arc urging you to register your viCwS directiy with Gh0 The Waite House by Faa~ing directly to: President 1~~iiliam ~. Clinton The Office of the President FA)C: 242 - X56 - 2889 ~'Xease Idx a copy off' your letter to our vtlt=Yces sv we are better able to dirPrt ttlQSe efforts. ~di~~,~ ~. ~ r~.cc~c~. ~r r m.~~ ~~e~~.~r'ar~ (~' c~ ~ ~ -~ ~~ ~- ~ ~~~ ,~2~:~~~~ ~ ~ ~ AiR QUALITY ~ STANL)ARDS c o A ~ t r i ca N June 5, 1997 Dear Supervisor: Enclosed you wll1 find the information packet we mentioned we would be sending you regardi>r~g the YT.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) proposed new air quality standards, If enacted, the EPA's proposal could have a drastic impact on communities throughout the L7nited States, even those that have never experienced serious air quality problems before. By July 19, the EPA will finalize their new standards for ozone and particulate matter. Qnce the new standards have been authorized, American communities such as yours will be faced with implementing costly federal mandates that are unlikely to produce any significant health benefits, but may have dramatic negative consequences for the economies of those communities. The enclosed materials provide background irxformation about the air quality issue, as well as commentary by other officials, scientific and industry experts, and the media. I will be calling you shortly to discuss the air quality issue with you and answer any questions you may have about these materials or the efforts of the Air Quality Standards Coalition to fight the EPA's unreasonable new regulations. 'T'hank you for taking the time to review these materials. I look forward to the opportunity o:f speaking with you soon. In the meantime, if you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at ~SOp) 257-1292. Sizicerely, ,- ~ _ - ~.~-~I_..~ , AQSC Crrassraots Mobilization Office l .la 1 Pcnnsyfvan+a AvenuE, NW • Suite t 50U -North Tgwcr .Washington, I)(; 20004-1790 • (7.800! 257-1292 • fax i1.8001 641-22 55 The struggle to stretch fanite resources to meet a seemingly izstinite array of goals, challonges, anal needs ir- Amerira~'s communities is one faced by elected officials on a daily basis. The difficulty of that challenge is only intensified when Washington officials, guided by impractical legislative mandates, shaky scientific assessments, and a focus that sees only one small piece of the overall picture, increase environmental regulations to levels that are, for all intents and purposes, virtually unattainable. The proposed new N,A.AQS standards will have drastic human and economic consequences for state and local officials and their constituents. Even at the EPA's owr~ estimate of $6.~ billion to $S.5 billion ayear-sr+ Patimate that most experts believe to be Significantly law--individual communities will be forced to spend millions of dollars each year to respond to the impacts of the z~ew standards. THE COSTS OF TSF. NF,W REGULA'~'IUNS based on current monitoring data and the F.PA's definition of compliance, about one i.n four counties will be ir~nmediately out of compliance with the ue~vr standards. That's more tl~aa 800 counties nati nnally, or fiYe $nnes~ nu her ct~~r o t of attainmment. However, because the zlew standards are based largely on ~rsumptians about ozone and PM that. cannot be accurately monitored with existing technology, the federal government really can't say li~w uiaaiy communities will fall iato non-compliance; man~-,gx~rts believe A. whole new regimen of pollution controls will have to be imposed. Plants, factories, ICl'iueries, and utrhtice 'will have to reduce emissions. 1/ven small businesses like restaurartts, bakeries, and dry cleaners in non-attainment areas will have to cut Omissions-~at a potential cost of thousands of dollars per establishment T~h t~a_rg~ ~~~ in fissions n ded to eet the new standa~ and services, They will pay more fui ~iu's, gasoline, electricity, and virtually all products shipped to market. They could face tz~andatory dnving restnchons and carpool rules. They would uaast li~kcly have to have their care inspected more frequently and more stringently, and face paying far expensive repairs and upgrades. Addttsonally, use of wuudstoves, boats, and outdoor power equipment could be restricted or eliminated. will have to revise ar abandon current "implementation plans" that the federal government required them to prepare and submit for the current NAAQS, at considerable cast ~~P~ ~~++~ le +~ ~~, - a cement: a plan a~Z to 1e to • Because the federal government won't be paying for the {,liven the haste with which the EPA has tried tc~ pwz~xulgaLe these proposed regulations, the dearth of reliable data, and the lack of consensus within the scientific coxztmunity, even aanang the >/PA's own scientific advisors, the EpA should rcislX'za., a the current standards and continue research before imposing such vastly and burdensome measures as they have proposed. Together, industry and govet't~nent have reduced ernrssaons of major po1..i.,.~tanta by nearly 30 percent Over the last quarter century. Auto emissions alone have been reduced by 95 percent. Using the EPA's own figures, The Road Information Program (TRIP), a Washingtnn-hs.ced nnMprofit researcb~ group, has reported that the number of pear air-quality days has dropped 60.7 percent since 1986, despite a 32 percent increase in vehicle travel in the past decade. Anil significantly more progress remains to be made under the current regulations. New stan.tlarcls a.re not going to enhance the effectiveness of the Cleary Air Act; in fact, it's possible that they may "overload the circuits" and backfire, uzzdennining the progress that has already been zn.adp Relnw are examples of the concerns legislators, experts, and the media have expressed related to the potential impacts of the proposed standards. Comment from representatives of these grrnirc ennsistently addresses three serious shortcomings in the $~'A's proposed changes: • The EPA has not justified its proposed changes with sound scientific evidence. The proposed changes will be inordinately expensive; requiring state and local governments and cvwmunities to bear a significant financial and lifestyle burden while providing little, if any, measurable health benefits. Changing the standards now could jeopardise the si~a,ificant progress that has already been achieved and continues to result from the current Clean Air Act standards. WASHIlVCTON QFFTCTAY.S "I llaiuk that tlierc is ~Ar koo much sciczatifie uncertainty to ju3ti~y what rriay well prove to be a regulatory solution in search of a problem." Congressman Mike Doyle (D-18-PA) Testimony before Congress March 12, 1997 "The science supporting EPA's proposed sta.*idards for fine particulates-that is, soot is limited. There are only a few inconclusive studies linking fine particulate pollution to adverse health effects....Weak science is certainly not a solid Youndation on which to build a complex set of burdensome new government regulations... . "As a prir~ne author of the Cleary AirAct, I believe the law's credibility is critical to its continued success. For this reasoq 1 am cnnrernsd that imposir~ tougher, more stringent pollution standards now will further discourage states and localities-all while they are struggling to reach current standards on air quality." Senator John H. Chafee (R-RI) Opinion Editorial the Providence ,Tourrial Februcuy 23, 1997 ``Cual.a~ ace lcigli a.ud the [Regulatcrcy Itupact Accaly~i~] uuelCCSlates the t~~ posts ~r stricter [ozone] standards by orders of magnitude.... CEA estimates that the cost of full attaiuicaac-~ cuultl br up to $GO villivn [accuually]." Alicia Munnell Member, President Clinton's Council of Economic Advisors Letter to the Office of Management anal budget "These new standards if impplemented as proposed, will also extend the potent nonattainment provisions of tie (C'Ieari Air] Act to most of the country's urban areas, with the disastrous consequence of driving much of the remaining industry from our nation's cities... . For existing nonattainment areas, the new proposals will create a dizzying tangle of never regulatory requirements ....In such circumstances, the standards may pose an impossible challenge, thereby sentencing areas to a future o£ aggravatiztg sanctixons and economic decline." Congressman John Dingell (D-16-MI) Letter to Carol Browner (EPA,) December l3, 1996 STA'JT AtVD LOCAL OFFICIALS "I have argued to U. S. EPA, to Congress and others that the federal government b,as not taken sufficiemt care to assemble enauglt scientific evidence that such job-threatening, economy- alteringrevisions ere necessary or will significantly improve human health or the envixozccneat ....Among the likely, womsome results could be a required expansia~a of one of the more cozttroversial cazttrol cbrategies: enhanced automobile emission besting....ahioans may also face higb~er utilzty bills and gasoline prices, limits on new industries, and sticker shock when they purchase products such as lawnmowers and house paint. In all Qhioans will pay huadreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars to comply 'with a new standard, without realizing a commensurate crcwironmcntal or health benefit." "Clearing the Air" Ohio Governor George V. Voizxovich (K) Opinion Editorial 2-he C'irtcinr~ri ,hrrquirer December 8, 1996 "Mr. President, I vigorously support the adoption of necessary, defensible environmental standards for protecting the nation's health. But I must just as vigorously object to unilateral, insupportable changes in the current ozone standard at trenciendous cost to our economic progress, when th.e very agency proposing more stringent standards recognizes that continuing significant progress is already being made and acknowledges that no demonstrable improvement inhuman health would result from the change." Kentucky Governor Faui E. Pattoxc (D) Letter to President Clinton rune 12, 1996 "While I fully agree with talring reasonable measures to ezcsure clean air and a healthy environment, going too far too fast poses a serious threat to the economic well-being of the city of Kaasss City, Missourt....Given tha uncertainties and the lack, pf an.y nasal health benefits, I must question the wisdom of proceeding now with efforts to set more stringent standards in these area,,." Mayor Emanuel Cleaver II (D) City of Kansas City, MQ Letter to President Clinton September 19, 1996 "The revisions to the ambient air standards that ERA is proposing could have a profound economic impact on North Carolina. I am told that anywhere from 22 to 44 of our 100 counties could be classified as r-an-attainment. ]Tthat as the case, I am greatly concerned because tlals would affect rural areas that are not likely to be the sources of pollution. The ability of our citizens to find decent paying jobs would be greatly reduced. 'VVlthout the prospect of jobs tits these areas we cannot hope to provide adequate health care, education or the other essentials to a healthy and productive suture.,' North Carolina Governor James B. Lunt, 7r. (17) Letter to Carol Browner (EIaA) March 11,1997 "Sur..h a. `raising of the bar' could make the task of attainment currently mandated either completely impossible or so burdensome as to have extreme negative impacts upon the economy." Philadelphia Mayor Ed G. Rendell(D) Letter to Garol Browner (EPA) October l i,1996 "I believe revising the standard now would have a detrimental impact on Missouri's piu~iess. We arc just now obtaining necessary lagislativc and community support to implement the most difficult controls. To `move the target' at this point v~rould upset a fragile coalition..A. new ozone st~wdaxd would have immenst consequences for 1Viissouri at a time whero we are stziving to bring our cozzamunities into compliance." Missouri Governor lviel Carnahan (D) Letter to Carol Browner (EPA) September 24, 1996 "~'he City of IndianapoJ.is is very concerned about the effect a more stringent ozone attainment standard 'would have upon its small businesses and citizens. The city has worked hard to reduce air pollution and meet clean air requirememts....No~uv, U.S. EPA is proposing to lower the standard and potentially make us start all over a ain. Lowering the ozone standard could expand ttie number of nonattatnment areas and result in emission controls in additional areas, thus imposing significant economic, administrative, and regulatory costs on mare citizens, businesses, and local governments in Indiana." Mayor Ste~liPn J. C*nlAsmith (R} City of lndianapalis, IN Letter to Carol Browner (EPA) May 14, 1996 "The depressive effects on total economies coupled with increasing cost of compliance may accelcratc a dowrmward spiral of non-compliarce. Widespread non-compliance may undermine public support for the Clea» Air Act and breed increased public cynicism about the ~,overnnacnt'a abilities to effectively administer programs." State Senator p'aul Muegge (D-4K) Testimony before Congress on bekiaif of The rational Conference of State Legislatures 06/05/9 . "Many municipalities have made l<ierculean efforts to come into compliance with the National Ambient Air (luality Standards. To learn. now that instead of some recognition of accomplishment, these efforts were inadequate, inappropriate, or ineffective is dismaying....Tt is not~ust our credibility that is at stake; the federal government has a similar interest in assuring the wise use of our lim.ated resources.» Mark Schwartz, Councilmember, Oklahoma City, OK president, National League of Cities Testimony before Congress 1VJarch 3,199? "'While the City [af Chicago] supports the goal of improving air quality as a means of improving public health, the City does not support EPA's proposals in. their current form simply hP.c:a~ise we do not believe they will achieve their intended result. Yn fact, the City is aeziously concerned that, far from improving public health, the adoption of EPA's proposals may even havr.. nPgativP ~ff~:tc nn public health and ether environmental goals." City of Chicago Comments filed with ~'A 5CIEN'Y'Yp'IC cot INDUSTRY EXPERTS "We can place burdens on our cco~,on~ic institutions that dc- eat pass acost-bencf'it text, but we cannot do so without sacrificing other worthy objectives. It doesn't matter whether it is government spcndiu~; ua xxa~u-daced pnvate spending, that is involved; policy-makers iuust not spend more resources on any particular problerxa Haan it is worth to the public, Only then is public policy truly cornpas5innt~,.lx." "Toting CJp Costs and benefits>' Kenneth W. Chilton, director of the Center for the Study of American Business. at Washington University and Stephen. B. Huebner, Jeanne and Arthur Ansehl k'ellow Center for the Study of American Business Opinion Editorial Zhe Journal of C'dnrmerce 1~Iarch 5, 199? "The lack of consensus on many of these issues can be partially attributed to the accelerated review schedule. The deadlines did not allow adequate time to analyze, integrate, interpret, and debate the available data an this very complex issue" 17r. George T.'W'olff Chairman, Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee Testimony before Congress February S, 1997 "The studies upon which EPA is basing its proposed standards are `ecological' in desi~m; is these studies, the unit of observation is a population rather thazi an izldividual. Such studies are inadequate for the purpose of demonstrating a causal relationship between PMZ,S exposure and increased mortality and morbidity, Whitt thty may be valut~ble for generating hypotheses that can be further tested using nraore rigorous approaches, they are entirely inappropriate to serve a~ Elie Vasil Cur ragulatory actioia." Araaerican Council on Science and Health Letter to RYA March 7, 1997 "It should also be considered that a greater overall hedllh Uc«efit might be derived by first using the nation's resources to achieve compliance with #h,e present standard, Haan by enforcing nationwide compliance with a stricter standard." Dr. Joe L. Mauderty Lovelace Respiratory J.ristitute, Albuquerque, NM CA,SAC Member, Testimony before Congress March 1L, '1yy'! "Everyone acknowledges that we have greatly improved air quality, but dunng the same period im which air quality has been improving, asthma deaths have done up. it's difficult to make the argument that we should exert greater control over air quality to diminish asthma incidence. We've done that and the rates have Rorie in the apposite direction. 'fhe facts strongly suggest that we don't really understand what's going on." J.7r. T}. A. HenclPrsnn Johns 1-Topkins Umiversity 7anuary 7, 1997 "~~ T~ 1Vi~bYA "Nationally, 12~ cities and metropolitan arr~2s-home to most of the U.S. populatiom- would be in `noncompliance.' That would be triple the CtirCent total of cities not meeting EP.A. rcquircmonts. The Ep11 itself estimates the expenses to industry at $$.5 billion, certainly a stimulus for a further e~codus of manufacturing from America to foreign shores. For such a vast expansion of sanctions over the ziatipnal populrsduu, ~C EPA ShuulJ VC forced to meet a high standard of proof as to the need and the certain benefits. The country also deserves to be informed of the economic implications. Instead, the agency has tried to slide these changes through on a quick release schedule apparently designed to limit public awareness and debate." ")Federal $aibecue Police?" 17etroit Free Press editorial February 16, 1997 "There is hardly scientific consensus on this issue. Indeed, the EPA's own Clean Air Scientific Advisory Gonamittee saw its findings slighted when the EPA drew up the new stanrlarcls `i don't think the standard$ that have been chosen rellect the advice the CASAC has given,' says George Wolff, an atmospheric scientist who headed the committee....Yn setting a nevc~ standard for parti~:ulate mstter, hnly frnir of the panel's 21 members supported the EPA's guidelines." "Whiter than White" The Wal! Street Journal Editorial Fcbruarq 1~, 147 °"~uw cn~l we Ua asked to mal~c a decision that costs so much wherx thG cvidc~ncc is shaky?' [Oklahoma Governor Frank] Keating said. "fie oppose receiving mandates based on questionable science aztci cl~ivCU by uuclected officials in'VVaslungton.' "Tulsa Nlayor Susan Savage also aired concerns about the proposal, saying that the country is ill prepared to moziitor the proposed particle matter change because tew monitors exist. `Additionally, there are not guidelines for their placement and evaluation, leaving community leaders unable to construct a workable strategy,' she said." "Revised Air Standards Called Threat to State" Tulsa World March 4, 1997 "Denying E.pA.'s Gall to virtue is no Sniz~ll 4uatter ...since few membcra of Cpngrc~ arc ready to be seen as ructning dogs of coal, oil, and auto interests. Indeed, the proposed standards may have easily slid into the rule books were it not fui tl~G skepticism in in.tcrnal Administration documents. "An analysis by the Council of Econacn~ic Advisers is particularly troubling. The E.P.A. the benefi~would be worth $51 b~llion tou$11~ bf lli n~ AlicialH lvlunnellb,lalme beuofthe ale [CEA], demurred. <~y her estimate the costs of the ozone standard alone would run between $11.6 billion az~d $60 billion a year. And the benefits, sloe ar~~pd, w~ul d be modest, with hospitalizations for asthma in New York City falling by less than a half percent. Translating health benefits into dollars, she estimated that for the nation the annual banPfit wrnild run to less than $1 billion... . "The much bigger question here is whether Congress will ever rewrite the law, allowing the E.P.A, to weigh dc~llttrb dgaitlist lives. SoaYa dmy, some way, Americans wilt have to come to terms with the fact that they can't have it s11." "When the benefits are mostly modest, what price clean air?" The New fork Ames Editorial Apri13, 1997 The Clean Air Act and 1990 Amendments stipulate that EPA must determine and report annually the quality of the nation's air. EPA uses six "criteria pollutants" as indicators of air quality, and has established for each of them a maximum concentration above which adverse effects on human health may occur. These threshold concentrations are called National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Areas of the country where air pollution levels persistently exceed the standards may be designated "nonattainment." This report summarizes the current status and recent changes in nonattainment designations for two criteria pollutants, ozone and carbon monoxide. Ozone Ground-level ozone is a primary constituent of smog. The ozone threshold value is 0.12 parts per million, measured as 1-hour average concentration. An area meets the ozone NAAQS if there is no more than one day per year when the highest hourly value exceeds the threshold. (If monitoring did not take place every day because of equipment malfunction or other operational problems, actual measurements are prorated for the missing days. The estimated total number of above-threshold days must be 1.0 or less.) To be in attainment, an area must meet the ozone NAAQS for three consecutive years. In 1991 EPA designated 98 areas as nonattainment for ground-level ozone. These areas were classified as Marginal, Moderate, Serious, Severe, or Extreme nonattainment areas based on air quality monitoring data. Since then, EPA has removed the nonattainment designation for 22 areas and added it for one area (Sunland Park, NM), leaving 77 ozone nonattainment areas in 1994. During the three years 1992-94, 44 of the 77 areas met the ozone NAAQS. During the same time period, three additional areas, not designated nonattainment, failed to meet the ozone NAAQS (Mono County, CA; Imperial County, CA; Warrick County, Ili. EPA is reviewing the air quality status of these areas to determine if further changes in nonattainment designations are warranted. The table below summarizes ozone nonattainment designations. A complete list of nonattainment area names and "design values" is available. Ozone Air Quality Update - 1992-1994 98 Nonattainment Areas as of 1991 22 areas redesignated to Attainment 1 area designated Nonattainment 77 Nonattainment Areas as of 1994 Nonattainment Areas meeting ozone Classification Yes No Extreme 0 1 Severe 0 9 Serious 1 11 Moderate 15 8 Marginal 28 4 NAAQS in 1992-1994 Total 1 9 12 23 32 44 33 77 3 additional areas did not meet the NAAQS in 1992-94 Carbon Monoxide 1 of 3 06/10/97 10:36:40 Ozone and Carbon Monox...lity Fact Sheet - 1994 http://www.epa.gov/oar/agtrnd94/facts94.htm1 The main source of carbon monoxide is motor vehicle exhaust. The threshold value for carbon monoxide is 9 parts per million, measured as 8-hour average concentration. An area meets the carbon monoxide NAAQS if no more than one 8-hour value per year exceeds the threshold. (High values that occur within 8 hours of the first one are exempted. This is known as using "nonoverlapping averages. ") To be in attainment, an area must meet the NAAQS for two consecutive years and carry out air quality monitoring during the entire time. Of the 42 areas that were designated in 1992 as nonattainment for carbon monoxide, all were classified as Moderate nonattainment areas except Los Angeles, which was classified as Serious. Since 1992, five areas have been redesignated to attainment (Cleveland, OH; Duluth, MN; Memphis, TN; Syracuse, NY; and Winston-Salem, NC), leaving 37 carbon monoxide nonattainment areas in 1994. During the two years 1993-94, 28 of the 37 areas met the carbon monoxide NAAQS, and 9 areas did not (Anchorage, AK; Fairbanks, AK; Phoenix, AZ; Los Angeles, CA; Denver, CO; Las Vegas, NV; New York, NY;EI Paso, TX; and Provo-Orem, UT). In 1994 two additional areas, not designated nonattainment, failed to meet the carbon monoxide NAAQS (Imperial County, CA, and Detroit, MI). The table below summarizes carbon monoxide nonattainment designations. A complete list of nonattainment area names and "design values" is available. Carbon Monoxide Air Quality Update - 1993-1994 42 Nonattainment Areas as of 1992 5 areas redesignated to Attainment 37 Nonattainment Areas as of 1994 Nonattainment Areas meeting NAAQS in 1993-1994 Classification Yes No Total Serious 0 1 1 Moderate 28 8 36 28 9 37 2 additional areas did not meet the NAAQS in 1994 Changing Nonattainment Designations The summaries above noted that some nonattainment areas met the NAAQS for the required number years. These areas will not automatically be redesignated to attainment. Many of these nonattainment areas have begun the process toward redesignation. The Clean Air Act and 1990 Amendments state that an area can be redesignated to attainment if the following conditions are met: 1. the area has complete air quality data meeting the national air quality standards 2. the area has a fully approved State Implementation Plan meeting Clean Air Act requirements 3. the area has an approved maintenance plan, including a contingency plan, showing attainment for 10 years 4. the improvement in air quality is due to permanent and enforceable reductions in emissions all applicable Clean Air Act requirements have been met 2 of 3 06/10/97 10:36:40 Ozone and Carbon Monox...lity Fact Sheet - 1994 http://www.epa.gov/oar/agtrnd94/facta94.htm1 OAR Home EPA Home November 6, 1995 http://w~w~w.epa.=ov/oar/agtrnd94/facts94.html 3 of 3 06/10/97 10:36:40 USA Air Quality Nonattainment Areas http://www.epa.gov/Indicator/aboutair.html USA Air Quality Nonattainment Areas The Clean Air Act and Amendments of 1990 define a "nonattainment area" as a locality where air pollution levels persistently exceed National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Designating an area nonattainment is a formal rulemaking process and EPA normally takes this action only after air quality standards have been exceeded for several consecutive years. This is a simplified listing of nonattainment areas derived from Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, part 81 (40 CFR 81), as published in the Federal Register. Unclassified and transitional nonattainment areas are not included. Areas are listed in alphabetical order by state. Population estimates are included to indicate the extent of the problem. Letters in parentheses refer to notes at the end of the list. Pollutants are: 03 =ozone, CO =carbon monoxide, SO2 =sulfur dioxide, PM10 =particulate matter smaller than 10 microns, Pb =lead, NO2 = nitrogen dioxide. Effective date of this list: May 16, 1995 This is a simplified listing of Classified Nonattainment areas. Unclassified and transitional nonattainment areas are not included. In certain cases, footnotes are used to clarify the areas involved. For example, the lead nonattainment area listed within the Dallas Fort Worth ozone nonattainment area is in Frisco, Texas, which is not in Dallas county, but is within the designated boundaries of the ozone nonattainment area. Readers interested in more detailed information should use the official Federal Register citation (40 CFR 81). Please send comments about this page to Last modified on: April, 1996 1 of 1 06/10/97 10:39:45 National Ambient Air Quality Standards ,(NAAQS) http://earthl.epa.gov/airs/criteria.html ~~~~~~~s~r ~,`~~, F~~~ r ~~ National Ambient Air ~~ _~~~~: : .: ~ ~~~ Quality Standards (NAAQS) The Clean Air Act, which was last amended in 1990, requires EPA to set National Ambient Air Quality Standards for pollutants considered harmful to public health and the environment. The Clean Air Act established two types of national air quality standards. Primary standards set limits to protect public health, including the health of "sensitive" populations such as asthmatics, children, and the elderly. Secondary standards set limits to protect public welfare, including protection against decreased visibility, damage to animals, crops, vegetation, and buildings. The EPA Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS) has set National Ambient Air Quality Standards for six principal pollutants, which are called "criteria" pollutants. They are listed below. Units of measure for the standards are parts per million (ppm), milligrams per cubic meter of air (mg/m3), and micrograms per cubic meter of air (µg/m3). 1 of 2 06/10/97 10:42:07 National Ambient Air Quality Standards ~(NAAQS) http://earthl.epa.gov/airs/criteria.html National Ambient Air Quality Standards POLLUTANT STANDARD STANDARD VALUE TYPE Carbon Monoxide (CO) 8-hour Average 9 ppm 10 mg/m3 Primary 1-hour Average Nitrogen Dioxide (N02) Annual Arithmetic Mean Ozone (03) 1-hour Average Lead (Pb) Quarterly Average 35 ppm 40 mg/m3 Primary 0.053 ppm 0.12 ppm Particulate < 10 micrometers (PM-10) Annual Arithmetic Mean 24-hour Average Sulfur Dioxide (S02) Annual Arithmetic Mean 0.03 ppm 24-hour Average 0.14 ppm 3-hour Average 0.50 ppm 100 µg/m3 Primary & Secondary 235 µg/m3 Primary & Secondary 1.5 µg/m3 Primary & Secondary 50 µg/m3 Primary & Secondary 150 µg/m3 Primary & Secondary 80 µg/m3 Primary 365 µg/m3 Primary 1300 µg/m3 Secondary EPA Announces New Proposed Standards On November 27, 1996, EPA announced proposed new ozone and particulate matter air quality standards. For further information, see our Air Links page. EPA Home Page ~ OAR Home ~ OAQPS Home ~ AIRS Home Comments? http: //www. epa. gov/oar/airs/criteria. html May 6, 1997 2 of 2 06/10/97 10:42:07 http://frwebgate.acces...+0&WAISaction=retrieve http://frwebgate.acces...+0&WAISaction=retrieve [Code of Federal Regulations] [Title 40, Volume 3, Parts 53 to 59] [Revised as of July 1, 1996] From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access [CITE: 40CFR58] [Page 154-231] TITLE 40--PROTECTION OF ENVIRONMENT CHAPTER I--ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY PART 58--AMBIENT AIR QUALITY SURVEILLANCE Subpart A--General Provisions Sec. 58.1 Definitions. 58.2 Purpose. 58.3 Applicability. Subpart B--Monitoring Criteria 58.10 Quality assurance. 58.11 Monitoring methods. 58.12 Siting of instruments or instrument probes. 58.13 Operating schedule. 58.14 Special purpose monitors. Subpart C--State and Local Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS) 58.20 Air quality surveillance: Plan content. 58.21 SLAMS network design. 58.22 SLAMS methodology. 58.23 Monitoring network completion. 58.24 [Reserved] 58.25 System modification. 58.26 Annual SLAMS summary report. 58.27 Compliance date for air quality data reporting. 58.28 SLAMS data submittal. 58.30 NAMS 58.31 NAMS 58.32 NAMS 58.33 NAMS 58.34 NAMS 58.35 NAMS 58.36 Syst Subpart D--National Air Monitoring Stations (NAMS) network establishment. network description. approval. methodology. network completion. data submittal. em modification. Subpart E--Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations (PANS) 58.40 PANS 58.41 PANS 58.42 PANS 58.43 PANS 58.44 PANS 58.45 PANS 58.46 Syst network establishment. network description. approval. methodology. network completion. data submittal. em modification. Subpart F--Air Quality Index Reporting 1 of 2 06/10/97 11:12:21 http://frwebgate.acces...+0&WAISaction~retrieve http://frwebgate.acces...+0&WAISaction=retrieve 58.50 Index reporting. Subpart G--Federal Monitoring 58.60 Federal monitoring. 58.61 Monitoring other pollutants. Appendices to Part 58 Appendix A--Quality Assurance Requirements for State and Local Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS) Appendix B--Quality Assurance Requirements for Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Air Monitoring Appendix C--Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Methodology Appendix D--Network Design for State and Local Air Monitoring Stations (SLAMS), National Air Monitoring Stations (NAMS), and Photochemical Assessment Monitoring Stations (PANS) Appendix E--Probe and Monitoring Path Siting Criteria for Ambient Air Quality Monitoring Appendix F--Annual SLAMS Air Quality Information Appendix G--Uniform Air Quality Index and Daily Reporting Authority: Sections 110, 301(a), and 319 of the Clean Air Act as amended (42 U.S.C. 7410, 7601(a), and 7619). Source: 44 FR 27571, May 10, 1979, As amended at 59 FR 41628, Aug. 12, 1994. Subpart A--General Provisions Sec. 58.1 Definitions. As used in this part, all terms not defined herein have the meaning given them in the Act: (a) Act means the Clean Air Act as amended (42 U.S.C. 7401, et seq.). (b) SLAMS means State or Local Air Monitoring Station(s). The SLAMS make up the ambient air quality monitoring network which is required by * * * * * * NO SUMMARY FOUND -- VIEW "TEXT" TO SEE COMPLETE FILE 2 of 2 06/10/97 11:12:21 June 17, 1997 Chairman ~ Members Roanoke County Board of Supervisors Gentlemen: The Shenandoah Homes Retirement Village Mission State- ment states that our ministry is to serve God and fellowman by providing housing and health care options for the elderly of all race, creeds, and financial positions within the context of Christian service. The residents of the village community sill have a lease agreement on a month to month basis. If a resident moves in after the first of the month his rent will be pro-rated based upon arrival date. 'Subsequent rent will be due and payable on the first of each succeeding month. No entrance fee or monthly maintance fee, or life care endowment will be offered or available to the resident. It has been the policy and the unique ministry of the Church of God to help any resident who experiences financial reversals. The Church has never evicted or brought legal action against a resident for nonpayment of tent. We do not intend to do so in the future. We will minister to the individual using all of the resources available in the community and the church to zesolve the residents financial hardship. If you have any other questions, please feel free to phone me at~my number. Sincerely, Ottis L. Burgher 5300 Hawthorne Rood, NW Roanoke. VA 24012 703-362-5412 Cost Estimates Assisted Living; Total Amount of Land Allocated: 6 Acres or 34 %: $13G,400 Estimated Cost of Construction: 1. Six buildings consisting of 10,282 Sq. Ft. each at a cost of :53,555,504 2. Site Work and Design: $425,518 3. Walkways connecting the buildings to the common arcs: 5168,975 4. The Galleria Building consisting of 24,874 Sq. l~t. @ 51,7'18,630 a) Kitchen, Dining and Administrative Services for the Assisted Living Resident. b) Crafts Workshops, Computers, and Recreational Services for the Assisted Living Resident. c) Pharmaceutical and Personal Care Services for the Assisted Living Resident. d) Chapel and Therapy Rooms for the Assisted Living Resident. e) Congregate Living Residents are eligible for all meals as included in their monthly fee ~ Independent i.iving Residents arc eligible for one (1) meal per day as ineluclecl in their monthly fee. Total Estimated Cost of Assisted Living inclusive of land: 56,064,627 Estimated Real Estate Tyx aQ 20 % Service Fee :513,705 • Congregate Living: • Total Amount of land Allocated: 1.75 Acres or l0%; 539.600 • Site Work and Design: 5123,900 • Eslinlated Cost of Construction: t. Two Buildings consistitts of 18,100 Sq. Ft. each at a cost of: 52,024,400 2. Walkways connecting the buildings to the common area: 5112,640 • Total Fstimatccl Cost of Congregate living inclusive of the land: 52,300,540 • Estimated Real ]Estate Tsx (non-exempt) :525,996 independent Living: • Total Amount of Land Allocated: 9.75 Acres or 56%: 5224,000 • Site Work and Development: 5702,104 • Estimated Cost of Construction 1, Five 2 BR Patio units at a cost of 5414,690 2. )eighteen 2 BR Garden Units at a cost of 51,454,508 3. Six I BR Garden Units at a cost of 5 380,730 • Totat Estimated Cosl oC independent Living inclusive of land: 53,176,036 • F.stirrwted Keal ):state Tax (non-exempt) :535,889 Total Estimated Real Estate Taz Generated by the Project: $75,590 Shenandoah Tune Lu><e Pro "ei Ctions September, 1997 June, 1998 December, 1999 Phase I *Begin Certificate of Occupancy Fill-up period to 8~% occupancy Construction ^ 32 unit ALF level ^ 20 unit CCRC ^ 10 Independent units ^ 1~ Phase of Galleria Phase December, 1999 November, 2000 May, 2002 II Begin Certificate of Occupancy Fill-up period to 85% occupancy Construction ^ 32 unit ALF Ievel ^ 20 unit CCRC ^ 7 Independen units ^ 2nd Phase of Galleria Phase May, 2002 April, 2003 June, 2004 Ili Begin Certificate of Occupancy Completed project with Construction ^ 32 unit AI,F (16 Stabilized occupancy of 85% Alzheimer) ^ 6 Independent Garden Homes ^ 5 Independent Patio Homes . * The fiirst phase is expected to begin with the construction and installation of the initial _ road ways and main gate at the entrance on Airport Road. The road will be extended from the front entrance around to the emergency gate connected to the existing facility at Shenandoah Homes. The Galleria wi,U be constructed with a downsized kitchen and dining area large enough to accommodate the residents in the first and second phases. The Independent Garden Homes will be built in sub-phases throughout each phase. For example, four units will be built immediately and as they fill up, additional units will be brought on as the demand warrants. The fill-up of Assisted Living Pods and Congregate Care Pods will dictate the continuation of development through completion. On a national level, private pay facilities can take up to 18 months before reaching a stabilized occupancy census, therefore, as these pods reach stabilization, the next phase will begin. facsimile TRANSMITTAL COUNTY OF ROANOKE COMMUNITY RELATIONS to: Judy St. Clair fax #: 853-1145 re: Angi McPeak date: June 19, 1997 pages: One, including this cover sheet. Angela J. McPeak began working for RVTV on February 2, 1993. Prior to that, she was the station manager at the government/educationaUpublic access station in Blacksburg. She was the first station manager for Roanoke Valley Television, a regional facility operated jointly by the City, the County and the Town of Vinton. She started with a small office at Patrick Henry High School, and oversaw the purchase of capital equipment, the construction of the studio at the Jefferson Center, and the hiring of full and part time staff. RVTV now has four full time staff members, a programming schedule, and produces three monthly television shows and many departmental videos, and cablecasts city council and board of supervisors meetings live, in addition to other special events and press conferences. Under her supervision, she and her staff have received the following awards: Silver Circle Award from 3CMA (City-County Communicators Management Association) for Teen Center Promotional Spot Award of Distinction from The Communication for Teen Center Promotional Spot Award of Excellence from the National Association of County Information Officers Teen Center Promotional Spot Merit Award from the national Association of County Information Officers "7~ Camp Roanoke Video 3 Summit Award from the Blue Ridge Chapter of the Public Relations Society of America Spotlight on City Schools Monthly Program Roanoke County received the Communications From the desk of... Achievement Award for the monthly show Roanoke Anne Marie Green County Today. Director, Community Relations County of Roanoke P.O. Box 29800 Roanoke, Virginia 24018 540-772-2010 Fax: 540-772-2089 ,r.-.~ ~~ „"' LAW OFFICES ERGl1SON, NATT, AHERON f~ AGEE A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 1919 ELECTRIC ROAD. SUITE I TELEPHONE P. O. 80X 200G8 sao-77 a-1197 ROANOKE. VIRGINIA FAX NO. 540-774.0961 240180007 June 10, 1997 and Members of the Board anoke County Roanoke, VA 24018 Re: Rezoning request-Shenandoah Homes Retirement Village, Inc. Dear Chairman and Members: The above matter is scheduled to be heard at the 3:00 p.m. session of the Board of Supervisors to be held on June 10, 1997. I have received and reviewed a copy of the Staff Report together with the proposed Ordinance rezoning the property and granting the special use permit. The provisions of the Ordinance are satisfactory to my client with two (2) exceptions. These exceptions are as follows: 1. In lieu of Paragraph 3 (D) of the Ordinance which is the Proffer relating to the dedication of land for turn-a-rounds, attached please find a suggested Proffer signed by an officer of Shenandoah Homes Retirement Village, Inc. This Proffer is substantially the same as Paragraph 3 (d) but includes some additional language. We would request that this paragraph be substituted for Paragraph 3 (d). 2. Insofar as Paragraph 4 (F) is concerned, we would suggest the language set forth on the attachment entitled "Shenandoah Homes Retirement Village's, Inc.-Special Exception Conditions". In this proposal, we are offering to pay full real estate taxes on the independent living and congregate care facilities and, in addition, paying a 20% service charge in lieu of taxes on the assisted living area. I am enclosing a plat which identifies those areas and further enclosing a summary of the tax benefits to be received by Roanoke County if this proposal is accepted. We appreciate the Board's reconsideration of this entire matter and would hope that the proposals set out in this letter would be satisfactory for the Board to adopt the suggested Ordinance with the revisions contained herein. Honorable Chairman and Members of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County June 10, 1997 Page 2 We will be present at the Board meeting this afternoon at 3:00 p.m. to address any questions which the Board may have. Very truly yours, Edward A. Natt EAN/laf cc: Shenandoah Homes Retirement Village, Inc. ~ 1 N - 6- 9 7 F R I 1 4 1 5 P r o T e l P_ E4 3 SI-I1:~NAhDf}~1.~I HC~M;E:S RP.Z'I~2,1~;NIFNT VILLAGE' S IIJC. PKO~~~'ERS ~.. The L~nder_~~i,gnc~d. does lz~reby voluritaz•y proffer a four:,h pzofger in rzl,atiari to the a.be~v~e ~~ilin.g: 4. At such tirri~ ~&t3 Rr,an,oke County has approved ar~d funded thy: cotYStruction of °'~-turn-grounds" at the terminus of Santa Ar'iita Terracw a.r~cl g,i~sr;ra Drive, trig Petitioner, its suecesso~rs anc~ assigns, she'll dedicat~~ sufficient land to the Board of Supez•vigox's cif Raanol~e County. for the pu.rpps~ of constr~uctian of said turn a rounds. :'t'he obligation for construction of thy: tux'n s,rotinde, and tht~ cost thereof, shat.]. be borne entirEly by the County of Roanoke. The land to be dedica.tec3 ,:hall be li,mit~,cl to that px'operty within the ?.5' buffer yard r,e~uired by Section 30-92-4 o.f the k,c~~~riokc~ County vonj.nc3 Ordinance in existence on the date of the adoption of thin Ordinaric-p . The CoutZty sha1.1 not r'equi.re tht dedic3tiioil of aziy add.itian.al land other than that contained witriin the 2~' buffer y~.rd as set out by said, Section. Should any land hP dtdica.ted pursuant to this Prof.;fer; thy: Petitioner shall not be required to provide arty add.~.'t1o'ilr~~ bL1ftE.'r yard. - SHFNAr(I)OAFi Hn1~ES kET REri'IEIv'T Vl'.LLAC3ES, zNC . a~ 2.~~ie A~c° Z:\~F'541115A\WCMF.PRSS:~LfOG/C16/97 ~•., h Tr,~-rc~~. ~ . ~~ SHENANDOAH HOMES RETIREMENT VILLAGE'S, INC.- SPECIAL EXCEPTION CONDITIONS The following conditions shall apply to the Special Exception granted by the Board of Supervisors for the Shenandoah Homes Retirement Village's Inc., rezoning and Special Exception permit: 1. The property owner shall pay real estate taxes on that area of the property designated as Independent Living; (5.48 acres and 3.04 acres) and that area of the project identified as Congregate Care Facilities (1.75 acres). The area of the project designated as Assisted Living (6.0 acres) shall be tax exempt with the provision that the property owner shall pay a service charge in lieu of taxes on said portion of the project at the rate of 20%. Payment of said service charge in lieu of taxes shall be conditioned upon the enactment of legislation by the General Assembly to provide for such. Z:\WP50\LISA\HCMF.SEC:laf06/09/97 Cost Estirxtates • Assisted Liviuag: • Total Amount of Land Allocated: 6 Acres • Estimated Cost of Construction: l . Six buildiuags consisting of 10,282 Sq. Ft. each at a cost of : $3,555,504 2. Walkways connecting the buildings to the common area: $168,975 3. The Galleria Building consisting of 24,874 Sq. Ft. ~ $1,778,630 a) Kitchen, Dining and Administrative Services for the Assisted Living Resident. b) Crags Workshops, Computers, and Recreational Services for the Assisted Living Resident. c) Pharmaceutical and Personal Caze Services for the Assisted Living Resident. d) Chapel and Therapy Rooms for the Assisted Living Resident. e) Congregate Living Residents are eligible for all meals as included in their monthly fee fl Independent Living Residents are eligible for one (1) meal per day as included in theix monthly fee. Total Estimated Cost of Assisted Livizig non-inclusive of lazad: $5,503,109 Estix~aated heal Estate'~xx @ 20 % Service Fee : $11,004 • Congregate Living • Total Amount of Land Allocated: 1.75 Acres • Estixztated Cost of Construction: 1. Two Buildixags consisting of 13,100 Sq. Ft. each at a cost of: $2,024,400 2. Walkways connecting the buildings to the common area: $112,640 • Total F,stimateci Cost of Congregate Living noz~-inclusive of the land: $2,137,040 • Estimated Real Estate Tax (non-exempt) : $21,370 • Independent Living • Total Amourn of Land Allocated: 8.52 Acres • Estimated Cost of Construction l . Five 2 BR Patio units at a cost of $414,690 2. Eighteen 2 BR Garden Units at a cost of $1,4S4,S08 3. Six 1 BR Garden Units at a cost of $ 380,730 • Tota] Estimated Cost of Independent Living non inclusive of land: $2,249,928 • Estimated Real Estate Tax (non-exe~apt) : $22,490 Total Estimated Read Estate Tax Generated 6v the ~xoiect: $54,856